Loading...
06/16/2009 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES CITY OF CLEARWATER June 16, 2009 Present: Nicholas C. Fritsch Chair Thomas Coates Vice Chair Jordan Behar Board Member Frank L. Dame Board Member Doreen DiPolito Board Member Brian A. Barker Board Member Norma R. Carlough Acting Board Member Absent: Richard Adelson Board Member Also Present: Morris Massey Attorney for the Board Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Michael L. Delk Planning Director Gina Clayton Assistant Planning Director Patricia O. Sullivan Board Reporter The Chair called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order . C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: May 19, 2009 Regarding the vote for Case FLD2009-02007 on page 7 of the May 19, 2009 minutes, it was stated that Chair Fritsch had voted “Nay.” Member Dame moved to approve the minutes of the regular Community Development Board meeting of May 19, 2009, as corrected. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. LEVEL TWO APPLICATION: (1 Item) Community Development 2009-06-16 1 1. Level Two Application Case: FLD2008-12034 – 20 Kendall Street (Related to DVA2008-00003) Owner/Applicant: Panorama on Clearwater Beach, LLC and Evangeline P. Samarkos, as Trustee of the Evangeline P. Samarkos Revocable Trust UAD 3/27/06, Michael A. Samarkos, Victoria Harkey 106 Midway Island, Clearwater Beach, FL 33767-2313. Agent: Ed Hooper, Consus Group, LLC (P.O. Box 4268, Clearwater, FL 33758; phone: 727-458-4751; fax: 727-461-4942). Location: 0.60 acre is located between the south side of Avalon Street and the north side of Kendall Street, approximately 150 feet west of Mandalay Avenue. Atlas Page: 258A. Zoning: Tourist (T) District. Request: 1) Flexible Development approval to permit an 88-room overnight accommodation use in the Tourist (T) District with a reduction to lot width along Kendall Street from 150 feet to 100 feet (south side), a reduction to the front (south) setback from 15 feet to 10.8 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed sidewalk), a reduction to the front (north) setback from 15 feet to 10 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed pavement), a reduction to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed building), a reduction to the rear (south) setback from 20 feet to five feet (to proposed building), and an increase to the building height from 35 feet to 72 feet (to top of roof deck) and 86.5 feet (to elevator equipment) under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2- 803.I, and approval of a two-year development order; and 2) Increase of the permitted density by the allocation of 58 overnight accommodation units from the Hotel Density Reserve created pursuant to Beach by Design. Proposed Use: Overnight Accommodations (88-rooms). Neighborhood Association(s): Clearwater Beach Association and Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III. See Exhibit: Staff Report Case: FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16. Ann Rooney Quinn requested Party Status. Acting Member Carlough moved to grant Ann Rooney Quinn Party Status. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Joseph Quinn requested Party Status. Acting Member Carlough moved to grant Joseph Quinn Party Status. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. John Grubb requested Party Status. Member Behar moved to grant John Grubb Party Status. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Wayne Phillips requested Party Status. Community Development 2009-06-16 2 Member Coates moved to grant Wayne Phillips Party Status. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Patti Stough requested Party Status. Member Coates moved to grant Patti Stough Party Status. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Michael Samarkos requested Party Status. Member Behar moved to grant Michael Samarkos Party Status. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Member Behar moved to accept Robert Tefft as an expert witness in the fields of zoning, site plan analysis, code administration, and planning in general. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Planning Manager Robert Tefft reviewed the staff report. Ed Hooper, representing the applicant, said negotiations are underway to affiliate with a flag. He said the City created a density pool to encourage construction of midsized, mid-priced hotels after a significant number of beach motel units were replaced by condominiums. He said the project, which abuts two metered City parking lots, meets all Beach by Design conditions for the Old Florida District, including stepbacks on two rights-of-way. He said accessory uses include a small conference room, pool, exercise room, and small in-house restaurant that will not advertise to outside guests. He said the hotel will be three-stars or less, with nightly room rates between $125 and $250. Planning Director Michael Delk said the City does not regulate room rates. Beach by Design changes were intended to encourage construction of midsized hotels. Mr. Tefft said suites set aside for fractional ownership will be considered overnight accommodations. Party Status Holder Ann Rooney Quinn opposed the project’s height, layout, and setbacks, stating that many overnight units on the beach are vacant and additional ones are not needed. She said the project will reduce the value of the Snowflake Inn by blocking gulf breezes and water views. She said the project overburdens the site and provides inadequate space for fire trucks. She said project owners had not offered to purchase her property. To settle her objections, she wanted the City to provide a sworn agreement guaranteeing her the right to construct a similar project. Party Status Holder John Grubb spoke in opposition, stating more beach hotel rooms are not needed, height restrictions should be enforced, and the site is too small for the project, which will be an eyesore and should not be on the waterfront. He said the project will obstruct his view of sunsets and the gulf and lower his property’s value. Party Status Holder Joseph Quinn spoke in opposition, supporting his wife’s remarks. He expressed concerns with plans for a restaurant and conference room. He said the two flat sides of the building will face the Snowflake Inn. He said parking garage openings will ventilate gases five feet from his motel property. Community Development 2009-06-16 3 Party Status Holder Wayne Phillips opposed the project, supporting Mr. Grubb’s remarks. He said the Old Florida District differs from other Beach by Design districts and expressed concerns that the project would set precedents and negatively impact the area. Attorney Andrew Salzman, representing Joseph and Ann Rooney Quinn, objected to not being granted Party Status to make remarks. Party Status Holder Patti Stough said she is an architect and opposed the project, stating the site is not right for room allocations and the Old Florida District is a transition area, between high rise hotels and residences and should feature stepped down building heights. She said the project is too tall, does not meet setback requirements, and will negatively affect nearby property owners. During cross examination by Mr. Hooper, Mr. Tefft did not dispute that Party Holder residents on the east side of Poinsettia live approximately 1½ blocks from the project. Mrs. Quinn said some of her structures are approximately five feet from the property line. She said a representative of the developer had contacted her five or six years ago but never made an offer to purchase her property. Attorney Salzman said property owners have a legal entitlement to a view; Mr. Hooper said that is not the case. Mr. Grubb said the project is beachfront; Mr. Hooper said a metered City parking lot separates the project from the beach. During cross examination by Attorney Salzman, Mr. Tefft said the City has no perimeter landscaping requirements. The project’s garage is not mechanically ventilated. Conditions of approval do not restrict noise. Hotel Density Reserve units cannot be converted to condominiums. The owner of the property adjacent to the project has the ability to submit a similar development application. Mr. Hooper said open parking decks will provide 95 parking spaces, meet natural ventilation requirements, and provide visual screening. Two people spoke in support of the project. Party Status Holder Stough said the project site will be overbuilt and will set an unwelcome precedent in the Old Florida District. She said room rates will exceed $300. She said proposed setbacks are insufficient for stormwater retention. Party Status Holder John Grubb said the hotel would not be mid-priced. He said it should meet development requirements so that north beach doesn’t become a concrete jungle. Party Status Holder Joseph Quinn said two of his structures were grandfathered to be on the rear property line, leaving only five feet between the structures and the new building, making it difficult to repair the rear of those structures. He said no one offered to purchase his property. Mr. Hooper said all hotel entrances will be off a public street; none will be off public parking lots. He said the project meets the special Old Florida District requirement to provide view corridors via stepbacks. He said the hotel will be unable to afford sufficient staff for a four- star rating and cannot charge four-star rates. He said the project meets City criteria, including height, and has two less rooms than the maximum allowed. He said in the lounge/bar, hotel guests will be served continental breakfast and provided the opportunity to order a light dinner or sandwiches for lunch. Community Development 2009-06-16 4 Developer Representative Doreen Williams, of Northside Engineering, said a stormwater vault will meet stormwater requirements. No extraneous pipes under landscaping will be necessary. In response to a question, Attorney for the Board Morris Massey said case law over the years indicates there is no absolute right to a view. Concern was expressed that the Staff Report indicates that the Hotel Density Reserve was developed to encourage construction of mid-priced hotels. Mr. Delk reviewed the history of the Hotel Density Reserve, noting the City never proposed to regulate room rates. The phrase “mid-priced” needs to be removed. The Reserve provides the best opportunity to replace lost mid-priced rooms. He hoped the end result restores the mid-priced niche that was lost. In response to questions, Mr. Tefft said improved site plan landscaping is one criterion for approving reduced setbacks. Access to mechanical equipment will be unimpaired. The Fire Department approved its access. The project has more parking spaces than required by Code; the application was submitted before enhanced parking requirements were contemplated. Discussion ensued with sympathy expressed for lost views and comments that the community had accepted Beach by Design as a beach redevelopment tool. It was stated that Code flexibility provides owners the ability to redevelop their properties and it is unfortunate that redevelopment sometimes adversely affects others. It was stated that the market will dictate mid-range room rates. It was noted that the Quinns would block views if they redevelop their property. It was felt the request is reasonable. Concern was expressed that the Old Florida District was designated as a transition to residential neighborhoods. It was felt the project’s design is cold and modern, features unattractive colors, and does not reflect the district’s historic design. It was commented that it is difficult to meet code and design a historic look. Member Dame moved to approve Case FLD2008-12034 based on the evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today’s hearing, and hereby adopts the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report with conditions of approval as listed. The motion was duly seconded. Members Coates, Behar, Dame, DiPolito, and Barker and Chair Fritsch voted “Aye”; Acting Member Carlough voted “Nay.” Motion carried. LEVEL THREE APPLICATIONS (Item 1-2): Community Development 2009-06-16 5 1. Level Three Application Case: DVA2008-00003 – 20 Kendall Street (Related to FLD2008-00003) Owner/Applicant: Panorama on Clearwater Beach, LLC and Evangeline P. Samarkos, as Trustee of the Evangeline P. Samarkos Revocable Trust UAD 3/27/06, Michael A. Samarkos, Victoria Harkey 106 Midway Island, Clearwater Beach, FL 33767-2313. Agent: Ed Hooper, Consus Group, LLC (P.O. Box 4268, Clearwater, FL 33758; phone: 727-458-4751; fax: 727-461-4942). Location: 0.60 acre is located between the south side of Avalon Street and the north side of Kendall Street approximately 150 feet west of Mandalay Avenue. Atlas Page: 258A. Zoning: Tourist (T) District. Request: Review of, and recommendation to the City Council, of a Development Agreement between Panorama on Clearwater Beach, Evangeline P. Samarkos – Trustee, Michael A. Samarkos and Victoria Harkey (property owners) and the City of Clearwater, providing for the allocation of units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design. Proposed Use: Overnight accommodation use of a total of 88 rooms (150 rooms/acre on total site, including the allocation of 58 units from the Hotel Density Reserve) and approximately 1,482 square feet (1.07 FAR on total site) of amenities accessory to the hotel at a height of 72 feet (to roof deck) and 86.5 feet (to elevator equipment). Neighborhood Association(s): Clearwater Beach Association and Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III. See Exhibit: Staff Report Case DVA2008-00003 2009-06-16. Mr. Tefft reviewed the staff report. Fractional ownership allows stays up to one month or less. Mr. Hooper said agreement language is boilerplate. One person spoke in opposition to the development agreement. Member Dame moved to recommend approval of Case DVA2008-00003 based on the evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today’s hearing, and hereby adopts the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report. The motion was duly seconded. Members Coates, Behar, Dame, DiPolito, and Barker and Chari Fritsch voted “Aye”; Acting Member Carlough voted “Nay.” Motion carried. 2. Level Three Application Case: TA2009-01002 Amendments to the Community Development Code Applicant: City of Clearwater, Planning Department. Request: Amendments to the Community Development Code to bring consistency between the Countywide Plan Rules and the Community Development Code, and address off-street parking for overnight accommodations in the Tourist District, docks, site visibility triangles, site lighting, design standards for parking lots and parking garages, off-street loading and vehicle stacking spaces, hearing officer appeals, and transferred development rights. Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Lauren Matzke, Planner III. Community Development 2009-06-16 6 See Exhibits: Staff Report Case: TA2009-01002 2009-06-16, Code Issues Case: TA2009-01002 2009-06-16, and Additional Amendments Case: TA2009-01002 2009-06-16. Planner III Lauren Matzke reviewed the Staff Report, including new parking requirements. She submitted a memorandum regarding minor amendments necessary to meet consistency with PPC (Pinellas Planning Council) review. It was stated that some residents think dock construction is afforded too much flexibility. It was recommended that instead of the Coordinator, the CDB should consider approval of dock requests when neighbors on both sides object to deviations. Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides said this procedure has been in the Code since 1999. Assistant Planning Director Gina Clayton said docks are approved through the DRC (Development Review Committee) process; the Coordinator is not the sole determiner. Neighbors can participate. Neighborhood feuds sometimes influence objections. . In response to a concern that deviations up to 50% of a dock’s allowable length would be allowed, Ms. Clayton said this change reduces maximum dock lengths and establishes a cap; deviations are not a right. Mr. Delk said not all people request the maximum length. It was felt that people will try to construct to the maximum length if a specific number is established. Discussion ensued with a suggestion that deviations should be halved and comments that flexibility is necessary to meet differing situations, such as sea grass protection or underwater topography. In response to a suggestion that the CDB hear appeals to DRC decisions, concerns were expressed that neighbors would have no standing to appeal and the CDB is limited to determining if the Coordinator followed the rules. Ms. Clayton said neighbors who participate in the DRC process can appeal. In response to a question regarding commercial docks where language subordinates the current use, Ms. Clayton said previous language, “hinder or discourage,” was vague and difficult to administer. Staff prefers the word “preclude.” It was recommended that the City retain current County language. Marine & Aviation Department Director Bill Morris said the County approves all boat dock permits and can overrule City recommendations. Proposed language addresses dock lengths in water bodies historically used for sailing, canoeing, etc. and increases the size of commercial docks to correspond with larger buildings and consolidated properties. Ms. Clayton said changes clarify that approval of deviations must be based on recreation activity areas, navigation issues, marine environment impacts, or water quality. The City is trying to be more restrictive than the County. It was requested that the MAB (Marine Advisory Board) review these dock issues and make recommendations. Mr. Delk said the City does not issue permits for plants nor has the ability to inspect back yards for sight triangle obstructions on waterfront property. Staff does stamp site plans with information that foliage cannot be planted on the rear 20 feet of waterfront property. The City has no enforcement mechanism but deals with regulatory issues as they come to light. It was noted that numerous violations to the sight triangle requirement exist: it was felt the Code is ineffective and frivolous if it includes unenforceable regulations. Attorney Dougall-Sides said the City takes action when a complaint is received and can show that something was planted. It was stated it is hard to prove that a plant, which grows, was not previously there. It was noted that the Code protects waterfront views on land but not at docks, where 100-foot boats can be berthed. Mr. Delk said the City cannot preclude boat lengths. Community Development 2009-06-16 7 recreational boaters, not commercial uses, which carry multiple passengers who park multiple vehicles. Concern was expressed that proposed language enlarges parking garage spaces, adding a foot of width to spaces next to walls or columns. As cars are getting smaller, it was recommended that compact spaces be permitted rather than demanding additional width. Assistant Engineering Director Scott Rice said changes are designed to make public parking garages easy to use and as efficient as possible; currently there are few regulations. It was felt that wider spaces in public parking garages are not necessary. It was stated if columns interfere with vehicle doors, poor planning would be the cause. Member Coates moved to recommend approval of Case T A2009-01 002 based on the evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today's hearing, and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report except that amendments related to waterfront sight triangles, parking garages, and docks are to be removed from the ordinance for further study by City staff and Marine Advisory Board input regarding docks would be appreciated; these amendments are to be resubmitted to the CDB in the future for recommendations. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. F. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 2:46 p.m. ~L'~~ Community Development Board Community Development 2009-06-16 8 ; Clearwater u Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet TO: Community Development Board Members FROM: Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager COPIES: Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney; Susan Chase, City Clerk Specialist; Sue Diana, Assistant City Clerk; /Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter SUBJECT: DATE: Agenda Items for June 16,2009 June 11, 2009 CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items: Agenda Site investigation form Unapproved minutes of previous meeting May 14,2009 I "",,1 Twn .4nnli,.n+innC! (T+"m l' ....~y'--. '...v ,.......,.."-,.....v....,. \.~."'""I. "I 1. Case: FLD2008-12034 / DV A2008-00003 (Level 3) 20 Kendall Street Yes \> No .,I'l'~ \ Level Three Application (Item 1) 2. TA2009-01002 Amendments to the Community Development Code I have conducted a iJersonal investi!!ation on the personal site visit to the followin!! properties. / / "e.>". . _ / J Signa,",,:; ~/~i:t? ~ Date: ~ f4/L1 PRINTN E J S:IPlanning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDBI2009106 June 16. 200911 Cover MMO 06.16.2009.doc ~ Clearwater u Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet TO: Community Development Board Members FROM: Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager COPIES: Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney; Susan Chase, City Clerk Specialist; Sue Diana, Assistant City Clerk; /Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter SUBJECT: DATE: Agenda Items for June 16,2009 June 11, 2009 CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items: Agenda Site investigation form Unapproved minutes of previous meeting May 14,2009 I <:>,,,,1 T",^ AI'\I'\Ii,.n+i^...C! (T+<:>m l' ................ . .....v ,...'"''"'..''-,.....,'''..... \.~I,,","I" .~ 1. Case: ~2008-12034 / DV A2008-00003 (Level 3) 20 Kendall Street Yes No Level Three Application (Item 1) 2. TA2009-01002 Amendments to the Community Development Code Signature: Date: ~ II J~ /9 ;::- [CM/<- L. ~~~ PRINT NAME s: IPlanning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDB\2009\06 June 16. 2009\1 Cover MMO 06.16.2009.doc EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16 CDB Meeting Date: June 16, 2009 Case Numbers: FLD2008-12034 (Related to DVA2008-00003) Agenda Item: D.1. (Related to E.1.) Owner/Applicant: Panorama on Clearwater Beach, LLC and Evangeline P. Samarkos, as Trustee of the Evangeline P. Samarkos Revocable Trust UAD 3/27/06, Michael A. Samarkos, Victoria Harkey 106 Midway Island, Clearwater Beach, FL 33767-2313 Representative: Ed Hooper, Consus Group, LLC Address: 20 Kendall Street CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: (1) Flexible Development approval to permit an 88-room overnight accommodation use in the Tourist (T) District with a reduction to lot width along Kendall Street from 150 feet to 100 feet (south side), a reduction to the front (south) setback from 15 feet to 10.8 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed sidewalk), a reduction to the front (north) setback from 15 feet to 10 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed pavement), a reduction to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed building), a reduction to the rear (south) setback from 20 feet to five feet (to proposed building), and an increase to the building height from 35 feet to 72 feet (to top of roof deck) and 86.5 feet (to elevator equipment), under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-803.I, and approval of a two-year development order; and (2) Increase of the permitted density by the allocation of 58 overnight accommodation units from the Hotel Density Reserve created pursuant to Beach by Design. CURRENT ZONING: Tourist (T) District CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY: Resort Facilities High (RFH) BEACH BY DESIGN CHARACTER DISTRICT:Old Florida Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 FLD2008-12034 – Page 1 of 11 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16 PROPERTY USE: Current Use:Detached dwelling and vacant land Proposed Use: Overnight accommodation use of a total of 88 rooms (150 rooms/acre on total site, including the allocation of 58 units from the Hotel Density Reserve) and approximately 1,482 square feet (1.07 FAR on total site) of amenities accessory to the hotel at a height of 72 feet (to roof deck) and 86.5 feet (to elevator equipment). EXISTING North: Tourist (T) District & Open Space /Recreation (OS/R) SURROUNDING District ZONING AND USES: City parking lot and Attached Dwellings South: Tourist (T) District Overnight accommodations and Automobile service East: Tourist (T) District Restaurant, Retail sales & services & Attached Dwellings West: Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) District City parking lot ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 0.60 acres is located between the south side of Avalon Street and the north side of Kendall Street approximately 150 feet west of Mandalay Avenue. The site is comprised of eight parcels. The eastern parcel on the north side of Kendall Street currently is developed with a detached dwelling with the remaining seven parcels being vacant. On April 19, 2005 the Community Development Board approved Ambiance on White Sands (FLD2005-01007), a 15-unit condominium project to be constructed on seven of the eight subject parcels with setback reductions and a height increase. Due to changes in the real estate market following the approval, the proposed project was not marketable and the development approvals expired. To the west on the Gulf of Mexico a City surface parking lot exists. The Sand Dollar Vacation rentals and another City surface parking lot are located to the north of subject property. A restaurant, office and retail use with dwellings above exists to the east of the subject site. The Palm Pavilion Inn and a metal storage building are located to the south of the subject property. All prior uses on this property have been demolished except for the detached dwelling on the newly acquired parcel. Development Proposal: The proposal is to construct an 88-unit overnight accommodation use at a density of 150 units/acre, which includes the allocation of 58 units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 FLD2008-12034 – Page 2 of 11 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16 by Design. This is the second hotel to be placed on the Community Development Board agenda since the amendment of Beach by Design in July 2008 creating the Hotel Density Reserve as a means to encourage the construction of new mid-size, mid-priced hotels on the beach in response to the loss of hotel rooms since 2002. Also on this CDB agenda is a companion Development Agreement (DVA2009-00003) that must be approved by City Council, which provides for the allocation of the 58 units from the Hotel Density Reserve. This Development Agreement provides for mandatory evacuation/closure of the hotel in the event of the posting of a hurricane watch including Clearwater Beach by the National Hurricane Center, which also complies with Beach by Design criteria. This proposal complies with the Beach by Design criteria to access all rooms through a lobby and internal corridors. The hotel is proposed on a 0.60-acre parcel located between Avalon Street and Kendall Street in the Beach by Design “Old Florida” Character District. The hotel is proposed at a height of 72 feet from the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) to the roof deck. The first three levels of the hotel will provide a total of 94 valet only parking spaces, with driveway access on Kendall Street. There is an entry lobby on the ground floor providing access to the elevators. The main lobby and registration desk is located on the fourth floor, along with the respective hotel offices and hotel pool. The fourth floor also provides amenities for the hotel guests of approximately 1,482 total square feet (meeting room, exercise room and lounge/bar) and eight hotel rooms. The fifth floor provides 25 hotel rooms. Floors 6 – 8 provide both hotel rooms and fractional share units. The sixth floor provides 15 hotel rooms and four fractional share units, and the seventh and eighth floors provide 13 hotel rooms and five fractional share units each. All parking garage levels will be screened with decorative black perforated metal panels. Balconies are provided for 44 guest rooms with the balance not having balconies. The main exterior colors of the building are a light blue (CL 2251W) and a light beige (CLW 1027W). Discussions have taken place regarding alternate paint colors, should alternates be chosen the colors will be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department during the building permit process. Spanish tile roofs are proposed above the balconies on the eighth floor guest rooms along with the elevator equipment room roof. Other architectural features include copper cap flashing, EIFS moulding and “eyebrows”, aluminum railings and impact rated spandrel glass. The building is proposed to be set back 10.8 feet on Kendall Street and 10 feet on Avalon Street. Setbacks of five feet to the building are proposed on the west, east and south (side) property lines. The proposal also includes a 10 foot wide offset, five feet deep on both the north and west façade to break up each of those planes of the building as required by the Beach by Design guidelines. Both the north and south building facades, which front on streets, step back 15 feet at 35 feet above base flood elevation as required by the Beach by Design guidelines. This results in floors 6 – 8 being set back 25 feet on the north and 25.8 feet on the south. The building is proposed to be 72 feet above base flood elevation with the elevator enclosure, 86.5 feet above base flood elevation. The applicant is requesting a two-year development order due to market conditions. Community Development Code (CDC) Section 4-407 specifies that an application for a building permit must be submitted within one year of the date the CDB approves the project, unless otherwise specified under this approval. Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 FLD2008-12034 – Page 3 of 11 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16 Density: Pursuant to the Countywide Future Land Use Plan and CDC Section 2-801.1, the maximum density for properties with a designation of Resort Facilities High is 50 overnight accommodation units per acre. Based on the 0.60 overall acres zoned Tourist District, a maximum of 30 overnight accommodation units are permissible under current regulations. The proposal also requests 58 hotel rooms from the Hotel Density Reserve, adopted as an amendment to Beach by Design under Ordinance 7925-08. The overall density for this project is 150 overnight accommodation units/rooms per acre, which meets the maximum established in Beach by Design for projects that have acquired units from the Hotel Density Reserve. Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to CDC Section 2-801.1, the maximum allowable I.S.R. is 0.95. The overall proposed I.S.R. is 0.83, which is consistent with the Code provisions. Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the minimum lot area for overnight accommodations can range between 10,000 – 20,000 square feet. The overall existing site is 26,076 square feet of lot area. Pursuant to the same Table, the minimum lot width for overnight accommodations can range between 100 – 150 feet. For the northern portion of the site, the lot width along Avalon Street is approximately 200 feet and along Kendall Street the lot width is 100 feet. The lot width reduction on Kendall Street does not produce a building that is out of scale with existing buildings in the immediate vicinity. The existing two-story six unit motel to the southeast is approximately two feet from the west property line and 3.8 feet from the north property line. The existing building to the east appears to have 100 percent building coverage. The proposal is consistent with these Code provisions. Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the minimum front setback for overnight accommodations can range between 0 – 15 feet, the minimum rear setback can range between 0 – 20 feet and the minimum side setback can range between 0 – 10 feet. In addition, Section II.A.2.and 4 Beach by Design “Old Florida”, requires a front setback of 15 feet and rear/side setbacks of 10 feet. The above referenced sections of Beach by Design also allow a maximum setback reduction of five feet if the decreased setback results in an improved site plan, landscaping areas in excess of the minimum required and/or improved design and appearance and a minimum five foot unobstructed access is provided along the entire side setback to ensure that unimpaired access to mechanical features of the building is maintained. The proposal includes a reduction to the front (south) setback from 15 feet to 10.8 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed sidewalk), a reduction to the front (north) setback from 15 feet to 10 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed pavement), a reduction to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed building) and a reduction to the rear (south) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed building). With regard to the proposed development, the building will be set back 10.8 feet and 10 feet from the Kendall Street property line and Avalon Street property line respectively. While the Community Development Code does not require perimeter landscape buffers in the Tourist (T) District, Section II.A.6 Beach by Design “Old Florida” requires a 10 foot landscape buffer along the street frontage of all properties. The Kendall Street frontage will have a 10.8 foot landscape buffer and the Avalon Street frontage will have a 10 foot landscape buffer meeting code Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 FLD2008-12034 – Page 4 of 11 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16 requirements. The building will be set back five feet from all side and rear property lines. All side and rear setbacks have been generously landscaped thereby providing areas in excess of the minimum required. The side (east) setback will also have the required five feet of unobstructed access to mechanical features. The west side is adjacent to a City parking lot on the Gulf of Mexico and set back five feet from the property line. The east side (northern most) is adjacent to a two story development consisting of a restaurant, office, retail and attached dwellings and is set back five feet from the property line. It is noted that the adjacent two story development on the east is at a zero setback. The east side (southern most) is adjacent to a two story motel and is set back five feet from the property line. Finally the south (rear) is adjacent to a one story building and is set back five feet from the property line. All proposed side and rear setbacks are within the flexibility range. Minimum Stepbacks: Section II.A.3. Beach by Design “Old Florida” requires a building stepback (horizontal shifting of the building massing towards the center) on the front side of the building. The required ratio is one foot of stepback for every two feet of building height above 35 feet. Similar to the setback reduction provisions above, the stepback may be decreased a maximum of five feet. The stepback requirement for this proposal is 18.5 feet on both building fronts. On both Kendall Street and Avalon Street the building steps in 15 feet; thereby meeting the reduced stepback requirement of 13.5 feet. Maximum Building Height: This site is located within the Old Florida character district of Beach by Design, which allows a maximum height of 75 feet for overnight accommodations. Beach by Design “Old Florida” is an area of transition between resort uses to low intensity residential neighborhoods. The southern end of “Old Florida” is bound by Rockaway Street and the northern end is bound by Acacia Street. Beach by Design supports the development of new overnight accommodations and attached dwellings along with limited retail and commercial uses on Mandalay Avenue. While the subject properties proposed of height of 72 feet (as measured from base flood elevation) is close to the maximum height it is appropriate as it is located just north of Rockaway Street adjacent to other resort uses. It is envisioned that the district will transition from the greater height north of Rockaway Street to the lower heights near Acacia Street. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the minimum required parking for overnight accommodations is one parking space per room, or a minimum of 88 parking spaces. The proposal includes constructing a total of 94 parking spaces. From an amenities accessory to the hotel standpoint, the proposal includes a meeting room of approximately 740 square feet, an exercise room of approximately 392 square feet and a lounge/bar of approximately 350 square feet, or a total of approximately 1,482 square feet. With such minimal amenities, the provided parking appears adequate for both hotel guests and employees. Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-201.D.1, all outside mechanical equipment must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. There will be mechanical equipment located on top of the flat roof of the building for the common areas of the building. The parapets surrounding the roof are 42 inches above the roof providing adequate screening. Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 FLD2008-12034 – Page 5 of 11 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16 Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the driveways, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20-foot sight visibility triangles. The hotel building is proposed within the sight visibility triangles. These encroachments have been reviewed by the City’s Traffic Engineering Department and been found to be acceptable, given the circumstances of this site. Shrubbery planted within the sight visibility triangles will need to be maintained to meet the Code requirements. Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-911, for development that does not involve a subdivision, all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. Electric and communication lines for this hotel will be installed underground on-site in compliance with this requirement. Electric panels, boxes and meters are proposed to be located on the east façade adjacent to the required five foot ingress corridor and painted the same color as the building. Landscaping: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, there are no perimeter buffers required in the Tourist District; however as discussed previously “Old Florida” requires a 10 foot landscape buffer along the street frontages of all properties. This proposal complies with the minimum 10 foot wide buffer requirement on both Kendall Street and Avalon Street, which will be planted with palms including foxtail, washingtonia and bismark. Along with the palms will be multiple species of shrubs and groundcover. All remaining side and rear property lines have been generously landscaped and exceed code requirements. Landscaping assists with softening and reducing building massing to both pedestrians and motorists. Solid Waste: The proposal will utilize hotel housekeeping staff to remove trash from units and transport the trash to the dumpster(s) housed in a storage room on the ground floor of the hotel. On trash days, hotel employees will place the dumpster(s) outside the building in a trash staging area for truck pickup. After dumping, hotel employees will roll the dumpster(s) back inside the building out of view. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City’s Solid Waste Department. Additional Beach by Design Guidelines: Section VII.C.1 requires buildings with a footprint of greater than 5,000 square feet to be constructed so that no more than two of the three building dimensions in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length. The proposed building footprint is approximately 20,908 square feet. The project’s overall horizontal plane dimensions are approximately 190 feet along Avalon Street and 90 feet along Kendall Street, while the vertical plane is approximately 95.5 feet from grade to the top of the tallest roof. Only two of these dimensions are equal; thus meeting Code requirements. Section VII.C.2 requires no plane or elevation to continue uninterrupted for greater than 100 feet without an offset of more than five feet. The north façade of the building has been designed with a linear dimension of approximately 190 feet. This elevation is interrupted in the center with an offset five feet deep by 15 feet wide. Likewise, the west façade has been designed with a linear dimension of approximately 154 feet. This elevation is interrupted in the center with an offset five feet deep by 12 feet wide. Both the south and east elevations do not exceed 100 feet. Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 FLD2008-12034 – Page 6 of 11 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16 Section VII.C.3 requires at least 60 percent of any elevation to be covered with windows or architectural decoration. The applicant has calculated the west elevation at 71 percent, the north elevation at 75 percent, the east elevation at 65 percent, and the south elevation at 70 percent. Section VII.C.4 provide that no more than 60 percent of the theoretical maximum building envelope located above 45 feet be occupied by a building. However, in those instances where an overnight accommodations use on less than two acres that has been allocated additional density via the Hotel Density Reserve, no more than 75 percent of the theoretical maximum building envelope located above 45 feet be occupied by a building. As the later is the case, the applicant has calculated the overall proposed building mass between 45 – 72 feet at 71.5 percent. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the overnight accommodation use (hotel) with the standards as per CDC Tables 2- 801.1 and 2-803: Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent 2 Density 50 units/rooms per acre 88 units/rooms X 1 (maximum of 30 units/rooms) (150 units/rooms per acre) Impervious Surface 0.95 0.83 X Ratio Minimum Lot Area 10,000 – 20,000 sq. ft. 26,076sq. ft. X Minimum Lot Width 100 – 150 feet North: X Avalon Street: 200 feet 2 South: X Kendall Street: 100 feet 2 Minimum Setbacks Front: 0 – 15 feet North: 10 feet (to building) X 0 feet (to pavement) 2 South: 10.8 feet (to building) X 0 feet (to sidewalk) 2 Side: 0 – 10 feet West: 5 feet (to building) X 0 feet (to pavement) 2 Rear: 0 – 20 feet East: 5 feet (to building) X 2 South: 5 feet (to building) X 2 Maximum Height 35 – 100feet 72 feet (to flat roof) X Minimum 1.0 space per unit/room 1.06 spaces per unit/room X Off-Street Parking (88 parking spaces) (94 parking spaces) 1 Includes 58 units/rooms allocated from the Hotel Density Reserve pursuant to Beach by Design 2 See analysis in Staff Report Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 FLD2008-12034 – Page 7 of 11 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16 COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the overnight accommodation use with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-803.I: Consistent Inconsistent 1 1. With the exception of those properties located on Clearwater Beach, the parcel X proposed for development shall front on but shall not involve direct access to a major arterial street unless no other means of access would be possible. Height: 2. The increased height results in an improved site plan and/or improved X design and appearance. 1 Signs: 3. No sign of any kind is designed or located so that any portion of the sign is X more than six feet above the finished grade of the front lot line of the parcel proposed for development unless such signage is a part of an approved comprehensive sign program. 1 Front setback: 4. X a. The reduced setback shall contribute to a more active and dynamic street life; b. The reduced setback shall result in an improved site plan through the provision of a more efficient off-street parking area, and/or improved building design and appearance; and c. The reduced setback will not result in a loss of landscaped area, as those areas being diminished by the setback reduction will be compensated for in other areas through a Comprehensive Landscape Plan. 1 Side and rear setbacks: 5. X a. The reduced setback does not prevent access to the rear of any building by emergency vehicles and/or personnel; b. The reduced setback results in an improved site plan through the provision of a more efficient off-street parking area, and/or improved building design and appearance; and c. The reduced setback will not result in a loss of landscaped area, as those areas being diminished by the setback reduction will be compensated for in other areas through a Comprehensive Landscape Plan. 1 6. The design of all buildings shall comply with the Tourist District site and X architectural design guidelines in Section 3-501, as applicable. 1 Lot area and/or width: 7. The reduction shall not result in a building which is out of X scale with existing buildings in the immediate vicinity. 1 8. The parcel proposed for development shall, if located within the Coastal Storm X Area, have a hurricane evacuation plan requiring the use close when a hurricane watch is posted. 1 9. A development agreement must be approved by the City Council pursuant to F.S. §§ X 163.3221--163.3243 and Community Development Code Section 4-606 if the development proposal exceeds the base density and/or base F.A.R. established for the underlying Future Land Use designation. The development agreement shall: a. Comply with all applicable requirements of the "Rules Concerning the Administration of the Countywide Future Land Use Plan" as they pertain to alternative density/intensity, and as amended from time to time; b. Be recorded with the Clerk of the Circuit Court pursuant to F.S. § 163.3239, with a copy filed with the Property Appraiser's Office, and a copy submitted to the PPC and CPA for receipt and filing within 14 days after recording; and c. Have its development limitations memorialized in a deed restriction, which shall be recorded in the Official Records of Pinellas County prior to the issuance of any building permit for the overnight accommodations use. 1 See analysis in Staff Report. Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 FLD2008-12034 – Page 8 of 11 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16 COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS: The following table depicts the consistency of the overnight accommodation use with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-913: Consistent Inconsistent 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. 1 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X residing or working in the neighborhood. 1 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X 1 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X immediate vicinity. 1 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. 1 See analysis in Staff Report. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of May 7, 2009, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: Findings of Fact: The Planning Department, having reviewed all evidence submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact: 1. The 0.60 acres is located between the south side of Avalon Street and the north side of Kendall Street approximately 150 west of Mandalay Avenue; 2. The site is comprised of eight parcels, two on the north side of Kendall Street and six on the south side of Avalon Street; 3. The proposal is to construct an 88-unit overnight accommodation use at a density of 150 units/acre, which includes the allocation of 58 units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design; 4. A companion Development Agreement (DVA2008-00003) that must be approved by City Council is also on this CDB agenda is, providing for the allocation of the 58 units from the Hotel Density Reserve; 5. The hotel is proposed at a height of 72 feet from the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) to the roof deck; 6. The first four levels of the hotel will provide a total of 94 valet only parking spaces, with driveway access on Kendall Street; 7. The proposal includes setback reductions from all property lines; and 8. There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property. Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 FLD2008-12034 – Page 9 of 11 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16 Conclusions of Law: The Planning Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law: 1. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Tables 2-801.1 and 2- 803 of the Community Development Code; 2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2- 803.I of the Community Development Code; 3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as per Section 3-913 of the Community Development Code; 4. That the development proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design; and 5. The proposal is compatible with the adjacent land uses. APPROVAL Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends of the (1) Flexible Development approval to permit an 88-room overnight accommodation use in the Tourist (T) District with a reduction to lot width along Kendall Street 150 feet to 100 feet (south side), a reduction to the front (south) setback from 15 feet to 10.8 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed sidewalk), a reduction to the front (north) setback from 15 feet to 10 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed pavement), a reduction to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to proposed pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to proposed building), a reduction to the rear (south) setback from 20 feet to five feet (to proposed building), and an increase to the building height from 35 feet to 72 feet (to top of roof deck) and 86.5 feet (to elevator equipment), under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-803.I, and approval of a two- year development order; and (2) Increase of the permitted density by the allocation of 58 overnight accommodation units from the Hotel Density Reserve created pursuant to Beach by Design with the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. That approval of this Flexible Development case is subject to the approval of a Development Agreement with the City (Case DVA2008-00003); 2. That application for a building permit to construct the approved project be submitted no later than June 16, 2011, unless time extensions are granted pursuant to CDC Section 4-407; 3. That, prior to the issuance of any permit, a Declaration of Unity of Title be recorded in the public records; 4. That the final design and color of the buildings be consistent with the elevations approved by the CDB; 5. That the books and records pertaining to use of each hotel room be open for inspection by authorized representatives of the City, upon reasonable notice, in order to confirm compliance with the Hotel Density Reserve criteria of Beach by Design as allowed by general law; 6. That, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, all utility and communication lines be placed underground and electric panels and boxes be painted the same color as the building; 7. That, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, an easement be recorded in the public records for any encroachments on the subject property; Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 FLD2008-12034 – Page 10 of 11 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16 8. That any applicable Public Art and Design Impact Fee be paid prior to the issuance of any permits; 9. That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits; and 10. That, prior to the issuance of any permit, all requirements of General Engineering, Stormwater Engineering, Traffic Engineering and the Fire Department be addressed. Prepared by Planning Department Staff: __________________________________________ A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Location Map ?? Aerial Map ?? Zoning Map ?? Existing Surrounding Uses Map ?? Photographs of Site and Vicinity ?? S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Staff Report FLD2008-12034 2009-06-16.docx Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 FLD2008-12034 – Page 11 of 11 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT DVA2008-00003 2009-06-16 CDB Meeting Date: June 16, 2009 Case Number: DVA2008-00003 (Related to FLD2008-12034) Agenda Item: E.1. (Related to D.1.) Owner/Applicant: Panorama on Clearwater Beach, LLC and Evangeline P. Samarkos, as Trustee of the Evangeline P. Samarkos Revocable Trust UAD 3/27/06, Michael A. Samarkos, Victoria Harkey 106 Midway Island, Clearwater Beach, FL 33767-2313 Representative: Ed Hooper, Consus Group, LLC Address: 20 Kendall Street CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Review of, and recommendation to the City Council, of a Development Agreement between Panorama on Clearwater Beach, Evangeline P. Samarkos - Trusteee, Michael A. Samarkos and Victoria Harkey (property owners) and the City of Clearwater, providing for the allocation of units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design. CURRENT ZONING: Tourist (T) District CURRENT/FUTURE Resort Facilities High (RFH) LAND USE CATEGORY: BEACH BY DESIGN Old Florida CHARACTER DISTRICT: PROPERTY USE: Current Use:Detached dwelling and vacant land Proposed Use: Overnight accommodation use of a total of 88 rooms (150 rooms/acre on total site, including the allocation of 58 units from the Hotel Density Reserve) and approximately 1,482 square feet (1.07 FAR on total site) of amenities accessory to the hotel at a height of 72 feet (to roof deck) EXISTING North: Tourist (T) District & Open Space /Recreation (OS/R) SURROUNDING District Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 DVA2008-00003 – Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT DVA2008-00003 2009-06-16 ZONING AND USES: City parking lot and Attached Dwellings South: Tourist (T) District Overnight accommodations and Automobile service East: Tourist (T) District Restaurant, Retail sales & services & Attached Dwellings West: Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) District City parking lot ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 0.60 acres is located between the south side of Avalon Street and the north side of Kendall Street approximately 150 feet west of Mandalay Avenue. The site is comprised of eight parcels. The eastern parcel on the north side of Kendall Street currently is developed with a detached dwelling with the remaining seven parcels being vacant. On April 19, 2005 the Community Development Board approved Ambiance on White Sands (FLD2005-01007), a 15-unit condominium project to be constructed on seven of the eight subject parcels with setback reductions and a height increase. Due to changes in the real estate market following the approval, the proposed project was not marketable and the development approvals expired. To the west on the Gulf of Mexico a City surface parking lot exists. The Sand Dollar Vacation rentals and another City surface parking lot are located to the north of subject property. A restaurant, office and retail use with dwellings above exists to the east of the subject site. The Palm Pavilion Inn and a metal storage building are located to the south of the subject property. All prior uses on this property have been demolished except for the detached dwelling on the newly acquired parcel. Development Proposal: The development proposal includes a companion Flexible Development application (FLD2008- 12034) to permit an overnight accommodation use of a total of 88 rooms (150 rooms/acre on total site, including the allocation of 58 units from the Hotel Density Reserve) and approximately 1,482 square feet (1.07 FAR on total site) of amenities accessory to the hotel (meeting room, lounge/bar and exercise room) at a height of 72 feet (to roof deck). Development Agreement: The Development Agreement is a requirement for the allocation of hotel units from the Hotel Density Reserve, adopted as an amendment to Beach by Design under Ordinance 7925-08 on July 17, 2008. A total of 1,385 hotel rooms are available under the Hotel Density Reserve and this proposal requests the allocation of 58 units from it. The City has established the Development Agreement format as a means to facilitate the allocation of the units and to set forth appropriate provisions related to the development of the property. The proposed Development Agreement will be in effect for a period not to exceed ten (10) years, meets the criteria for the allocation of units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design and includes the following main provisions: Provides for the allocation of 58 units from the Hotel Density Reserve; ?? Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 DVA2008-00003 – Page 2 of 4 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT DVA2008-00003 2009-06-16 Requires the developer to obtain building permits and certificates of occupancy in ?? accordance with Community Development Code (CDC) Section 4-407; Requires the return of any hotel unit obtained from the Hotel Density Reserve that is not ?? constructed; For units allocated from the Hotel Density Reserve, prohibits the conversion of any hotel ?? unit to a residential use and requires the recording of a covenant restricting use of such hotel units to overnight accommodation usage; Requires a legally enforceable mandatory evacuation/closure covenant that the hotel will be ?? closed as soon as practicable after a hurricane watch that includes Clearwater Beach is posted by the National Hurricane Center; and The project shall comply with the Metropolitan Planning Organization’s (MPO) ?? countywide approach to the application of concurrency management for transportation facilities. The Community Development Board (CDB) has been provided with the most recent Development Agreement. The City Council may enter into Development Agreements to encourage a stronger commitment on comprehensive and capital facilities planning, to ensure the provision of adequate public facilities for development, to encourage the efficient use of resources, and to reduce the economic cost of development. The CDB is required to review the proposed Development Agreement and make a recommendation to the City Council. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of May 7, 2009, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: Findings of Fact: The Planning Department, having reviewed all evidence submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact: 1. That the 0.60 acres is located between the south side of Avalon Street and the north side of Kendall Street approximately 150 feet west of Mandalay Avenue; 2. That the property is located within the Tourist (T) District and the Resort Facilities High (RFH) Future Land Use Plan category; 3. That the development proposal is subject to the requirements of Beach by Design, the Design Guidelines contained therein as the property is located within the Old Florida character district and the criteria for allocation of units from the Hotel Density Reserve. Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 DVA2008-00003 – Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT DVA2008-00003 2009-06-16 Conclusions of Law: The Planning Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law: 1. That the Development Agreement implements and formalizes the requirements for the construction of on-site and off-site improvements under the related site plan proposal (FLD2008-12034); 2. That the Development Agreement complies with the standards and criteria of Section 4-606 of the Community Development Code; 3. That the Development Agreement is consistent with and furthers the Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 4. That the Development Agreement is consistent with the Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies of Beach by Design and the Old Florida character district; and 5. That the Development Agreement complies with the criteria in Beach by Design for the allocation of units from the Hotel Density Reserve. APPROVAL Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends the , and recommendation to the City Council, of a Development Agreement between Panorama on Clearwater Beach, Evangeline P. Samarkos - Trusteee, Michael A. Samarkos and Victoria Harkey (the property owners) and the City of Clearwater, providing for the allocation of units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design, for the property at 20 Kendall Street. Prepared by Planning Department Staff: __________________________________________ A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Development Agreement with Exhibits ?? Location Map ?? Aerial Map ?? Future Land Use Map ?? Zoning Map ?? S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending Cases\Up For The Next CDB\Kendall S 20 - Ambiance (T) - 6.16.09 CDB - SK\Kendall St 020 Dev. Agree. Staff Report For 6.16.09 CDB.Doc Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 DVA2008-00003 – Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002 2009-06-16 CDB Meeting Date: June 16, 2009 Case: TA2009-01002 Ordinance No.: 8043-09 Agenda Item: D2 CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TEXT AMENDMENT REQUEST: Amendments to the Community Development Code to bring consistency between the Countywide Plan Rules and the Community Development Code, and address off-street parking for overnight accommodations in the Tourist District, docks, site visibility triangles, site lighting, design standards for parking lots and parking garages, off-street loading and vehicle stacking spaces, hearing officer appeals, and transfer of development rights. INITIATED BY: City of Clearwater Planning Department BACKGROUND: Countywide Plan Rules Article 3, Division 3.2, require that land development regulations be consistent with the criteria and standards set forth in the Countywide Rules. In keeping with this requirement, in 2007 the Pinellas Planning Council (PPC) reviewed community development codes of all Pinellas County municipalities to compare their codes with the Countywide Plan Rules. These reviews resulted in consistency reports indicating areas of the Code that may be inconsistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. The Planning Department met with PPC staff to review the Clearwater Consistency Report and come to an agreement as to which amendments were necessary to address the PPC’s concerns. These amendments address those consistency issues as well as other issues identified as part of the annual code update process. Suggested amendments have been collected from the Planning Department, Engineering Department, Marine and Aviation, and the City Attorney’s Office. Staff discussions occurred to make certain that the amendments are workable and not in conflict with other City codes and processes. The amendments improve the administration of the Code or regulations imposed, in order to better reflect City development patterns and improve internal processes. Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 TA2009-01002 – Page 1 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002 2009-06-16 ANALYSIS: The Planning Department is recommending a total of 45 amendments to the Community Development Code. Some amendments present a change in current policy or a new policy. Other amendments are editorial in nature or are refinements to existing Community Development Code sections. Please find below a summary of the most noteworthy proposed amendments organized by Code Article. A brief summary of other amendments is also provided herein, and a complete summary of amendments is attached. Also attached is Ordinance No. 8043-09 which includes all of the specific amendments. Within the ordinance document, text that is underlined indicates proposed language and text containing strikethroughs indicate deletions. Article 2 – Zoning Districts Permitted Uses Location ??(Chart 2-100 of Ordinance, Pages 14,15, 20, 21 and 22) Ordinance No. 8043-09 provides an updated summary use chart, which correctly indicates where land uses are permitted within zoning districts. This chart provides an at-a-glance understanding of what uses are permitted and where they are permitted. The Outdoor Recreation/Entertainment use is proposed to be removed as an allowable Level One permitted use in the Institutional and Preservation Districts. Public Transportation Facilities are proposed to be removed as an allowable Level One permitted use in the Open Space/Recreation zoning district. These proposed changes ensure the districts’ uses are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. Overnight Accommodations in the Tourist District ??(Pages 10 and 12 of Ordinance) These amendments change the parking requirement for proposed Overnight Accommodation projects within the Tourist District. The Flexible Standard Development or Level One parking requirements for Overnight Accommodations use is proposed to increase from 1 space per unit to 1.2 spaces per unit. A range of 1 to 1.2 spaces per unit is established for parking requirements for Overnight Accommodations permitted through the Flexible Development or Level Two process in the Tourist District, and flexible criteria addressing the same are added. The amendments will ensure that overnight accommodations will provide adequate parking for both guests and employees of the hotels, and were based on Institution of Transportation Engineers (ITE) standards for resort hotels. Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 TA2009-01002 – Page 2 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002 2009-06-16 Use Limitations ??(Pages 16 – 20 of Ordinance) This amendment applies limitations to certain uses within the Industrial, Research and Technology (IRT) and Open Space/Recreation (OSR) districts, consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. ?? In the IRT district, office, vehicle service, vehicle sales/display, and major vehicle sales/displays uses in the Industrial General (IG) future land use designation are allowed only as accessory uses. ?? Prior to this amendment the existing size limitation for vehicle services uses in the Industrial Limited (IL) future land use designation applied to vehicle service uses. This amendment will limit size for major vehicle sales/displays in both the IL and IG land use designations and vehicle service in IL. ?? This amendment also amends the size limitations for Restaurants within IL, increasing it from 2 ½ acres to 5 acres. ?? Prior to this amendment a future land use map amendment was required for a utility/infrastructure use in excess of 10 acres. After the amendment, future land use map amendments will be required for utility/infrastructure uses in excess of 5 acres. ?? Manufacturing uses in the IRT district are limited consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. ?? Outdoor recreation/entertainment uses in OSR are limited to golf courses and clubhouses. Article 3 – Development Standards Docks ??(Pages 22 – 24 of Ordinance) This amendment sets forth further restrictions for deviations to length requirements for docks that serve new single-family or two-family dwellings, limiting deviations to no more than 50 percent of the length requirements or 25 percent of the width of the waterway, whichever is less. This same restriction is applied to commercial docks. Additional amendments to the commercial docks section clarify that deviations will only be considered through a Level Two approval process to minimize impacts for environmental, navigational or recreational area issues. Lighting within Sea Turtle Nesting Areas ??(Page 28 and 29 of Ordinance) This amendment establishes lighting standards for light sources on Clearwater Beach and Sand Key. The proposed standards include the consideration of positioning and Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 TA2009-01002 – Page 3 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002 2009-06-16 the use of shielding and low wattage bulbs as ways to reduce potential impacts on sea turtle nests along the beaches. To be in keeping with current evidence that lighting impacts sea turtle nesting areas, the proposed changes expand the existing language to provide better protection, and are consistent with similar ordinances in Pinellas County beach communities. Parking Garage and Parking Lot Design Amendments ??(Pages 29 – 32 of Ordinance) This amendment provides additional design standards for parking garages. The amendment establishes minimum clear heights throughout the garage for parking spaces and ingress/egress drive aisles to these spaces. Minimum lighting levels for garages with public access are set at minimum Illuminating Engineering Society standards. The amendment also addresses parking space design when columns project into a space. The amendment includes stacking distances when barrier gates are used within a garage, and provides standards for the slope of ramps. The amendment removes minimum distances between rights-of-way and the first parking space in a parking lot. Article 4 – Development Review and Other Procedures Hearing Officer Appeals ??(Page 33 of Ordinance) As requested by the Legal Department, this amendment updates the appropriate method of recording Community Development Board meetings from audiotape recordings to streaming video available on the City’s website. Additionally, the time allowed for filing a motion to supplement the record is extended from 10 days to 30 days. Transfer of Development Rights ??(Page 33 and 34 of Ordinance) These amendments expand requirements applicable to the transfer of development rights (TDRs) as set forth in the Countywide Future Land Use Plan. The amendments address consistency of use characteristics between sending and receiving parcel plan categories, restrictions on TDRs associated with the coastal storm area, and development right restrictions on parcels in the Preservation and Recreation/Open Space future land use plan categories. Other Amendments Proposed Ordinance 8043-09 includes a significant number of amendments that the Planning Department believes will assist residents and staff but do not have major policy implications. These amendments include: Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 TA2009-01002 – Page 4 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002 2009-06-16 ?? Providing for an increased level of consistency among the Code, other law or rules, including the Countywide Plan Rules and the Countywide Future Land Use Map; ?? Clarifying the application of the sight visibility triangle by replacing images and removing language that was unclear and applying the sight visibility triangle to all waterfront properties; ?? Establishing a buffer requirement within the Transportation/Utility future land use category when lands are adjacent to another land use category other than Industrial General or Industrial Limited; ?? Replacing graphics to clarify City requirements for site lighting; and ?? Amending the definitions section with regard to “retail sales and services” and “vehicle sales/displays” to allow the sale, retail and/or repair of bicycles within the Commercial District, correcting the definition for “floor area ratio”, and including definitions for “beach access point”, “Clearwater Beach”, “deflected light”, “gross land area” and “Sand Key”. CRITERIA FOR TEXT AMENDMENTS: Code Section 4-601 specifies the procedures and criteria for reviewing text amendments. Any code amendment must comply with the following. 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the goals, policies, objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Below is a selected list of goals, policies, and objectives from the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan that are furthered by the proposed amendments to the Community Development Code. Policy A.2.2.8 All land use categories on the Future Land Use Map shall be consistent with the density and intensity standards and other standards contained in the Pinellas Planning Council Countywide Plan Rules, including criteria and standards for nomenclature, continuum of plan classifications and categories, use and locational characteristics, map delineation, other standards, and special rules. Policy H.1.1.8 The City shall coordinate with Pinellas Planning Council the definition and calculations for mixed uses, strategies regarding infill development, land assembly, land use conservations, and annexations to promote redevelopment. The proposed amendments include the addition of language ensuring the City’s Zoning Atlas will be consistent with the Countywide Future Land Use Map. Additional language is proposed within each zoning district to reinforce Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 TA2009-01002 – Page 5 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002 2009-06-16 consistency with the Countywide Plan Rules. Further limitations to any uses are proposed consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. Objective A.6.6 Tourism is a substantial element of the City’s economic base and as such the City shall continue to support the maintenance and enhancement of this important economic sector. Policy A.6.6.1 The City supports and encourages the continued development and redevelopment of overnight accommodation uses. The proposed amendments provide for enhanced parking requirements for overnight accommodations within the Tourist District, and establish flexible criteria for hotels depending on room size. Objective E.2.1 The City shall continue to protect coastal wetlands, estuaries and wildlife habitats to maintain or increase the acreage for threatened and endangered species populations. Objective E.2.2 Clearwater's barrier islands include natural resources which shall be preserved from encroachment and development. Policy F.1.3.5 Adopt and continue administering regulations providing for the protection of threatened and endangered species and species of special concern. The proposed amendments include lighting standards intended to increase the protection of sea turtles nesting on area beaches. 2. The proposed amendments further the purposes of the Community Development Code and other City ordinances and actions designed to implement the Plan. The proposed text amendments include a broad range of regulations ranging from permitted uses, standards, procedures, and definitions. The proposed amendments are consistent with the provisions of Section 1-103 that lists the purposes of the Code. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The proposed amendments to the Community Development Code are consistent with and will further the goals of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of the Community Development Code. The amendments further those development goals established in the Code, and existing Community Development Code provisions are amended to better reflect City development patterns and improve internal processes. APPROVAL Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends of Ordinance No. 8043-09 that amends the Community Development Code and the Code of Ordinances. Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 TA2009-01002 – Page 6 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002 2009-06-16 Prepared by Planning Department Staff: _______________________________________ Lauren Matzke, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: ??Ordinance No. 8043-09 ??List of Community Development Code Issues S:\Planning Department\Community Development Code\2009 Code Amendments\TA2009-01002 - Code V PPC Consistency\Staff Report\Staff Report 061109 - Code V.doc Community Development Board – June 16, 2009 TA2009-01002 – Page 7 EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16 List of Community Development Code Issues Ordinance No. 8043-09 ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS Zoning Atlas (1) Sec. 1-109.D. Consistency. Adds language providing for an increased level of consistency among the Code, the City Future Land Use Plan and the Countywide Future Land Use Map. [Page 3 of Ordinance] ARTICLE 2. ZONING DISTRICTS District Use Categories Chart (2) Sec. 2 Chart. Delete Outdoor recreation/entertainment use from “I” Institutional and “P” Preservation Districts as it is not allowed. Delete Public transportation facilities use from “OSR” Space/Recreation District as it is not allowed under the Countywide Plan Rules. [Pages 3-5 of Ordinance] Division 1. Low Density Residential District (“LDR”) (3) Sec. 2-101.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the LDR district, as well as acreage and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 5 of Ordinance] Division 2. Low Medium Density Residential District (“LMDR”) (4) Sec. 2-201.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the LMDR district, as well as acreage and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 6 of Ordinance] Division 3. Medium Density Residential District (“MDR”) (5) Sec. 2-301.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the MDR district, as well as acreage and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 6 of Ordinance] Bold indicates major policy issues. 1 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Staff Report TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16.docx EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16 Division 4. Medium High Density Residential District (“MHDR”) (6) Sec. 2-401.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the MHDR district, as well as acreage and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 7 of Ordinance] Division 5. High Density Residential District (“HDR”) (7) Sec. 2-501.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the HDR district, as well as acreage and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page7 of Ordinance] Division 6. Mobile Home Park (“MHP”) (8) Sec. 2-601.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the MHP district, as well as acreage and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 8 of Ordinance] Division 7. Commercial District (“C”) (9) Sec. 2-701.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the C district, as well as acreage and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 8 of Ordinance] Division 8. Tourist District (“T”) (10) Sec. 2-801.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the C district are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 9 of Ordinance] (11) Table 2-802 Flexible Standard Development Table. Increases parking requirements for Overnight Accommodations from 1.0 space per unit to 1.2 spaces per unit in Flexible Standard Development. [Page 10 of Ordinance] (12) Table 2-803 Flexible Development Table. Revises parking requirements for Overnight Accommodations from 1.0 space per unit to a range of 1.0 to 1.2 spaces per unit within the parking requirements for Overnight Accommodations use. [Page 12 of Ordinance] Bold indicates major policy issues. 2 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Staff Report TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16.docx EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16 (13) Sec. 2-803.I Overnight accommodations. Adds flexibility criteria for off- street parking limiting the application of flexibility to overnight accommodations with more than 130 rooms and requiring the proposed development be within a certain proximity of a public parking garage. [Page 12 of Ordinance] Division 9. Downtown District (“D”) (14) Sec. 2-901.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the D District are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 12 of Ordinance] Division 10. Office District (“O”) (15) Sec. 2-1001.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the O district, as well as acreage and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page13 of Ordinance] Division 12. Institutional District (“I”) (16) Sec. 2-1201.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the I district, as well as acreage and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page13 of Ordinance] (17) Table 2-1203 Flexible Standard Development Standards Table. Deletes Outdoor Recreation/Entertainment as flexible standard use for consistency with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 14 of Ordinance] (18) Sec. 2-1203.G Outdoor Recreation/Entertainment. Deletes flexibility criteria for outdoor recreation/entertainment uses for consistency with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 15 of Ordinance] Division 13. Industrial, Research, and Technology District (“IRT”) (19) Sec. 2-1301.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the IRT district, as well as acreage and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page15 of Ordinance] (20) Table 2-1302 Minimum Standard Development Table. Adds footnotes that Offices and Vehicle Service uses in the Industrial General future land use designation are allowed only as accessory uses. Also Bold indicates major policy issues. 3 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Staff Report TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16.docx EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16 establishes limits to the type of manufacturing allowed in the Industrial Limited future land use designation, consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. Existing footnotes are renumbered accordingly. [Pages 16-17 of Ordinance] (21) Table 2-1303 Flexible Standard Development Table. Establishes limits to the type of manufacturing allowed in the Industrial Limited (IL) future land use designation, consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. Amends the size limitation for Restaurants within IL, increasing it from 2 ½ acres to 5 acres. Requires future land use map amendments for Utility/Infrastructure uses in excess of 5 acres. Requires future land use map amendments for vehicle service, vehicle sales/display, and major vehicle sales/displays uses in IL in excess of 5 acres, and limits these same uses in Industrial General (IG) future land use designation to accessory uses. [Pages 18-19 of Ordinance] (22) Sec. 2-1303.D Offices. Adds flexibility criteria limiting Office uses in IG as accessory. [Page 19 of Ordinance] Division 14. Open Space/Recreation District (“OSR”) (23) Sec. 2-1401.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the OSR district, as well as acreage and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page19 of Ordinance] (24) Table 2-1403 Flexible Standard Development Standards Table. Deletes Public Transportation Facilities as flexible standard use for consistency with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 20 of Ordinance] (25) Sec. 2-1403.B Outdoor recreation/entertainment. Adds flexibility criteria limiting Outdoor Recreation/Entertainment uses to golf courses and clubhouses for consistency with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 20 of Ordinance] (26) Sec. 2-1403.D Public transportation facilities. Deletes flexibility criteria for Public Transportation Facilities uses for consistency with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 21 of Ordinance] Division 15. Preservation District (“P”) (27) Sec. 2-1501.1 Maximum development potential. Adds language ensuring uses and development potential within the P district, as well as acreage Bold indicates major policy issues. 4 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Staff Report TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16.docx EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16 and floor area restrictions are consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page21 of Ordinance] (28) Table 2-1502 Flexible Standard Development Standards Table. Deletes Outdoor Recreation/Entertainment as flexible standard use for consistency with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 22 of Ordinance] (26) Sec. 2-1502.B Outdoor Recreation/Entertainment. Deletes flexibility criteria for Outdoor Recreation/Entertainment uses for consistency with the Countywide Plan Rules. [Page 22 of Ordinance] ARTICLE 3. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Division 6. Dock/Marina Standards (27) Sec. 3-601.C.1.g Deviations. Adds restrictions for deviations to length requirements for docks that serve new single-family or two- family dwellings, limiting deviations to no more than 50 percent of the length requirements or 25 percent of the width of the waterway, whichever is less. Reinforces language ensuring that docks will not create navigational conflicts through their design and placement. [Page 23 of Ordinance] (28) Sec. 3-601.C.3. Commercial docks. Corrects capitalization of Community Development Board. [Page 23 of Ordinance] (29) Sec. 3-601.C.3.b Impacts on existing water recreation activities. Current use of a waterway is a consideration in the review of new commercial dock applications. Adds “tie poles” to ensure that tie poles associated with docks would not adversely impact the health, safety or well being of the use of adjacent waterways. Revises language from “hinder or discourage” to “preclude” because the existence of a dock will have some impact, but it won’t necessarily prevent (preclude) the use of the waterway. [Page 23 of Ordinance] (30) Sec. 3-601.C.3.h Dimensional standards. Deletes “extend” and adds “exceed” to make the language consistent with similar language in the Code. [Page 24 of Ordinance] (31) Sec. 3-601.C.3.h Deviations. Clarifies restrictions for deviations to all dimensional standards for new commercial docks must be considered through a Level 2 approval basis and establishes further review criteria for consideration by the Community Development Board. Further clarifies that deviations only be Bold indicates major policy issues. 5 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Staff Report TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16.docx EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16 considered to minimize impacts for environmental, navigational or recreational area issues. Additionally, deviations are limited to no more than 50 percent of the length requirements or 25 percent of the width of the waterway, whichever is less. [Page 24 of Ordinance] Division 9. General Applicability Standards (32) Sec. 3-902.G Submerged lands. Adds “FAR” and “ISR” to clarify which calculations may not use submerged lands. [Page 24 of Ordinance] (33) Sec. 3-904.A Site Visibility Triangle. Delete “distance” and add “visibility” to correct the terminology. Replace graphic with better illustration of sight visibility triangle. [Pages 24 and 25 of Ordinance] (34) Sec. 3-904.B Site Visibility Triangle. Deletes “residential” to extend the application of sight visibility triangles as described in the graphic to all waterfront properties. Replace graphic with better illustration of enhanced views restrictions. [Page 25 of Ordinance] (35) Sec. 3-907 Buffers provided for purposes other than landscaping. Adds new Section 3-907.B. creating a 10-foot buffer on land designated Transportation/Utility on the Future Land Use Map that is adjacent to all other lands other than Industrial, as required by the Countywide Plan Rules. Reconfigures existing language to allow for addition of new Section 3-907.B. and renames Section 3-907. [Page 26 of Ordinance] (36) Sec. 3-1302.A Fixture type. Replaces graphic with better illustration of illumination cut-off angle. [Page 27 of Ordinance] (37) Sec. 3-1302.B Location. Removes existing graphic that did not apply to this section. [Page 27 of Ordinance] (38) Sec. 3-1302.C Height. Replaces graphic with better illustration of Non-cut-off fixtures. [Page 28 of Ordinance] (39) Sec. 3-1302.D Sea turtle nesting areas. Replaces existing section with new language establishing lighting standards for light sources on Clearwater Beach and Sand Key to reduce potential impacts on sea turtle nests along the beaches. To be in keeping with current evidence that lighting impacts sea turtle nesting areas, the proposed changes expand the existing language to provide better protection, and are consistent with similar ordinances in Pinellas County beach communities. Adds requirements for positioning and/or shielding of lights so that there is no direct Bold indicates major policy issues. 6 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Staff Report TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16.docx EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16 illumination on the beach. Minimizes lighting for pedestrian traffic at beach access points, dune crossovers, beach walkways, and piers. Requires compliance of standards prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Addresses existing lighting and publicly owned lighting. [Pages 28 and 29 of Ordinance] (40) Sec. 3-1402.I Design standards for parking lots and parking garages. Replaces existing language with expanded criteria for parking garages. Establishes minimum clear heights throughout the garage for parking spaces and ingress/egress drive aisles to these spaces. Requires minimum lighting levels for garages with public access are set at minimum Illuminating Engineering Society standards. Adds criteria for parking space design when columns project into a space, including new illustrations. Sets stacking distances when barrier gates are used within a garage, and provides standards for the slope of ramps [Pages 29 through 31 of Ordinance] (41) Sec. 3-1406.B Off-street loading and vehicle stacking spaces. Removes minimum distances between rights-of-way and the first parking space in a parking lot. [Page 32 of Ordinance] ARTICLE 4. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND OTHER PROCEDURES Division 5. Appeals (42) Sec. 4-505.A Hearing Officer Appeals. Changes the appropriate method of recording Community Development Board meetings from “board reporter’s audiotape recording of the hearing before the community development board” to “streaming video of the hearing posted on the city’s website” to remove reference to outdated technology. Extends time allowed for filing a motion to supplement the record from 10 days to 30 days. [Page 33 of Ordinance] Division 14. Transfer of Development Rights (43) Sec. 4-1402.3 Allocated Development Rights are Freely Transferrable. Adds provision to require that remaining available density/intensity be included on the special warranty deed and that available remnant use as well as density/intensity be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Countywide Plan Map and Rules and/or governing Special Area Plan. Adds provision that for parcels Bold indicates major policy issues. 7 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Staff Report TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16.docx EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16 within a designated Central Business District or Community Redevelopment District, transfer of development rights may be sent from vacant and/or existing developed parcels. Establishes maximum densities/intensities of one dwelling unit per acre or five percent floor area ratio per acre to be used by the receiving parcel when transferring density from parcels designated as Preservation or Recreation/Open Space. [Pages 33 and 34 of Ordinance] (44) Sec. 4-1403.E Transfer of Development Rights. Prohibits transfers of density/intensity from outside the coastal storm area into the coastal storm area. [Page 34 of Ordinance] ARTICLE 8. DEFINITIONS AND RULES OF CONSTRUCTION (45) Sec. 8-102 Beach access point. Adds definition for beach access point as follows: Beach access point means any access used by the general public or private property owners for the purpose of gaining access to the beach. [Page 34 of Ordinance] Clearwater Beach. Adds definition for Clearwater Beach, including the legal description, as follows: Clearwater Beach means that portion of land lying in the City of Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida, bounded on the north by the City of Clearwater City Limits and the Dunedin Pass Channel; bounded on the east by the Mandalay Channel, which lies between Clearwater Beach and Island Estates; bounded on the south by the Clearwater Pass Channel; bounded on the west by the Gulf of Mexico. [Page 35 of Ordinance] Deflected light. Adds definition for deflected light as follows: Deflected Light means unintentional indirect luminance from structures or objects incidental to the light source or fixture. [Page 35 of Ordinance] Floor area ration (FAR). Deletes “ floor” and adds “land” to correct the method of calculating FAR. [Page 35 of Ordinance] Gross land area. Adds definition for gross land area as follows: Gross land area means the total land area within the property boundaries of the subject parcel, and specifically exclusive of any submerged land or public road right-of-way. [Page 35 of Ordinance] Bold indicates major policy issues. 8 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Staff Report TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16.docx EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16 Retail sales and services. Adds “bicycle stores (sales, rentals and/or repair),” as retail sales and services. [Page 35 of Ordinance] Sand Key. Adds definition for Sand Key, including the legal description, as follows: Sand Key means that portion of land lying in the City of Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida, bounded on the north by the Clearwater Pass Channel; bounded on the east by the Clearwater Harbor; bounded on the south by the City of Clearwater City Limits; bounded on the west by the Gulf of Mexico. [Page 34 of Ordinance] Vehicle sales/displays, limited. Deletes “bicycles”. [Page 50 of Ordinance] Bold indicates major policy issues. 9 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Staff Report TA2009-01002a 2009-06-16.docx EXHIBIT: ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS TA2009-01002 2009-06-16 To: Community Development Board From: Lauren Matzke, Planner III Date: June 16, 2009 RE: Additional Amendments, Ordinance 8043-09 You recently received a draft of Ordinance 8043-09 proposing amendments to the Clearwater Community Development Code. Many of these amendments are proposed to bring consistency between the Countywide Plan Rules and the Community Development Code. The Pinellas Planning Council (PPC) conducted a consistency review of Ordinance 8043-09 and determined that the proposed amendments do not fully address certain issues raised by the PPC in their original consistency report completed in 2007. The following changes to Ordinance 8043-09 address these issues raised by the PPC on June 5, 2009: OS2 (P4) RDINANCE ECTION AGE Further amending CHART 2-100 Permitted Uses to read remove Overnight Accommodations as a permitted use in the Open Space/Recreation District. This use was removed by Ordinance 7926-08, but the chart was not updated at that time. CHART 2-100 PERMITTED USES Use Categories LDR LMDR MDR MHDR HDR MHP C T D O I IRT OSR P CRNCOD IENCOD Nonresidential Overnight accommodations X X X X X X X X X OS10 (P9) RDINANCE ECTION AGE Adding language to Section 2-801.1 in the Tourist District regarding acreage and floor area restrictions included in the Countywide Future Land Use Plan. Similar language is proposed for 1 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Additional Amendments TA2009-01002 2009-06-16.docx EXHIBIT: ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS TA2009-01002 2009-06-16 all other zoning districts, other than the Downtown District where the Special Area Plan regulations apply. Section 2-801.1. Maximum development potential. The Tourist District ("T") may be located in more than one land use category. It is the intent of the T District that development be consistent with the Countywide Future Land Use Plan as required by state law. The uses and development potential of a parcel of land within the T District shall be determined by the standards found in this Development Code as well as the Countywide Future Land Use Designation of the property, including any acreage or floor area restrictions set forth in the Rules Concerning the Administration of the Countywide Future Land Use Plan, as amended from time to time. For those parcels within the T District that have an area within the boundaries of and governed by a special area plan approved by the City Council and the countywide planning authority, maximum development potential shall be as set forth for each classification of use and location in the approved plan. Development potential for the Countywide Future Land Use Designations that apply to the T District are as follows: OS18 (P17) RDINANCE ECTION AGE Further amending Section 2-1302 proposed footnote (3), in the Industrial, Research and Technology District that establishes limits to manufacturing in the Industrial Limited future land use category. The additional language prohibits exterior processing and processing of equipment or materials, consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules limitations of the same. Section 2-1302. Minimum standard development. (3)In the Industrial Limited (IL) land use category, manufacturing shall be limited to a use engaged in the manufacture, predominately from previously prepared materials, of finished products or parts, including processing, fabrication, assembly, treatment, packaging, storage, sales and distribution of goods, and shall not include or allow for any exterior storage or processing of equipment or materials of any kind. OS18 (P17) RDINANCE ECTION AGE Further amending Section 2-1302 proposed footnote (7), in the Industrial, Research and Technology District that establishes use limitations to vehicle service uses in the Industrial General future land use category. The additional language places acreage restrictions in the Industrial Limited future land use category, consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules limitations of the same. Section 2-1302. Minimum standard development. 2 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Additional Amendments TA2009-01002 2009-06-16.docx EXHIBIT: ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS TA2009-01002 2009-06-16 (7) Vehicle service located in the Industrial General (IG) future land use category shall be allowed only as an accessory use, located within the structure to which it is accessory, and shall not exceed 25 percent of the floor area of the principal use to which it is accessory. Vehicle service located in the Industrial Limited (IL) future land use category shall not exceed five acres. Any such use, alone or when added to contiguous like uses which exceed five acres shall require a land use plan map amendment to Commercial General which shall include such uses and all contiguous like uses. OS19 (P18) RDINANCE ECTION AGE Further amending Section 2-1303 proposed footnote (1), in the Industrial, Research and Technology District that establishes limits to manufacturing in the Industrial Limited future land use category. The additional language prohibits exterior processing and processing of equipment or materials, consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules limitations of the same. Section 2-1303. Flexible standard development. (1) In the Industrial Limited (IL) land use category, manufacturing shall be limited to a use engaged in the manufacture, predominately from previously prepared materials, of finished products or parts, including processing, fabrication, assembly, treatment, packaging, storage, sales and distribution of goods, and shall not include or allow for any exterior storage or processing of equipment or materials of any kind. 3 S:\psulliva\Community Development\Exhibit Additional Amendments TA2009-01002 2009-06-16.docx