The URL can be used to link to this page

APP2009-00007 - 321 Lotus Path - Daniel and Sharon MeekJim and Karen Lehrburger 302 lotus Path Clearwater, FL 33756 727-443-4035 lehrburgeri@tampabay.rr.com November 4, 2009 Re.: Application for Flexible Standard Development Approval at 321 Lotus Path (FLS2009-09016) Community Development Board City of Clearwater P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, FL 33758-4748 Dear Members of the Community Development Board: This is in response to your Notice of Appeal by Daniel and Sharon Meek of a Level One (Flexible Standard Development) denial decision related to Case No. FLS2009-09016, for a setback reduction at 321 Lotus Path, Parcel No. 16-29-15-36270-000-1320. ~'Ve live at 302 Lotus Path, across the street acid just a few doors down Toni 32i Loi:us Path. We strongly object to the proposed front setback reduction. Although the proposed variance is only four feet, it would have a significant and adverse impact on the appearance and character of the historic Harbor Oaks community. Please feel free to contact us if you have any question. Thank you. Very truly yours, mes L burger ~~ K en Lehrburger __ .. „ it ~~ ~ n NOV :~~+~~ ~..:.1 ~. ,;~L~~G & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CV rY OF C~EARWATER APP2009-00007 321 LOTUS PATH DANIEL AND SHARON MEEK PLANNER OF RECORD: WW ATLAS # 295A ZONING: LMDR LAND USE: RU RECEIVED: 09/22/2009 INCOMPLETE: COMPLETE: MAPS PHOTOS: S T AF'F REPORT': DRC: CDB: LW CoverSheet CDB Meeting Date: November 17, 2009 Case Number: APP2009-00007 Agenda Item: F_l. Appellants/Owners: Daniel and Sharon Meek Agent: R. Carlton Ward, Esq. Address: 321 Lotus Path CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: An appeal from a Level One (Flexible Standard Development) denial decision, pursuant to Community Development Code Section 4-SO1.A.3, for a front (north) setback reduction from 25 to 21 feet for a garage addition (related to Case No. FLS2009- 09016). CURRENT ZONING: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY: Residential Urban (RU) PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Detached Dwelling Proposed Use: Detached Dwelling EXISTING North: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District SURROUNDING ZONING Detached Dwelling AND USES: South: Institutional (I) District Parking Lot East: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District Detached Dwelling West: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District Detached Dwelling BACKGROUND: The subject parcel comprises 0.199 acres and is located on the south side of Lotus Path, approximately 400 feet east of Druid Road South. On March 30, 2009, a Flexible Standard Development (FLS) application was submitted requesting approval to permit a garage addition to an existing detached dwelling in the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District with a reduction to the front (north) setback from 25 to 21 feet, under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-203B (Case FLS2009-03006). After being deemed complete, the Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application at its meeting on July 2, 2009. A Development Order denying the application was issued on July 6, 2009. Community Development Board -November 17, 2009 APP2009-00007- Page 1 of 5 The appellants and agent continued to have discussions with the Planning Department regarding their desires for the expanded garage and the neighborhood characteristics. The appellants also were unaware of the issuance of the Development Order for Case FLS2009-03006 (it had been sent to their agent), which caused some confusion as to their ability to appeal this decision. Given such circumstances, the applicant submitted a new FLS application on September 14, 2009, in order to be able to meet the CDC time frames for the appeal of the Staff decision. This new request, which is consistent with the original request, was for a Flexible Standard Development application to permit a garage addition to an existing detached dwelling in the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District with a reduction to the front (north) setback from 25 to 21 feet, under the provisions of CDC Section 2-203B (FLS2009-09016). This application was placed on the agenda for the DRC for its meeting on October 1, 2009. A Development Order denying the FLS2009-09016 application was issued on October 20, 2009, based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: Findings of Fact: 1. That the subject 0.199 acres is located on the south side of Lotus Path, approximately 400 feet east of Druid Road South; 2. That the subject property is located within the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District and the Residential Urban (RU) Future Land Use Plan category; 3. That there are no active Code Enforcement violations associated with the subject property. 4. That the request to reduce the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 21 feet requires that positive findings be made with regard to the Flexibility Criteria set forth in CDC Section 2- 203.B;and 5. That the request to reduce the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 21 feet requires that positive findings be made with regard to the General Applicability Criteria set forth in CDC Section 3-913.A. Conclusions of Law: 1. That the development proposal is inconsistent with CDC Section 2-203.B.1.a, in that a determination of the front setback shall consider the extent to which existing structures in the neighborhood have been constructed to a regular or uniform setback from the right-of--way: a. There are 88 existing detached dwellings in the area known as "Harbor Oaks", generally located within the area bordered by those dwellings located on the north side of Druid Road to those dwellings located on the south side of Lotus Path and those dwellings located west of the nonresidential and attached dwellings located on S. Ft. Harrison Avenue to the east side of Druid Road South. It was mutually agreed with the applicant that, due to the size and character of the properties on the west side of Druid Road South, these seven properties would not be reviewed as part of this application. The applicant has submitted documentation from 15 properties (17 percent of the 88 parcels) of the properties reviewed regarding setbacks less than the required front setback of 25 feet. b. The properties developed with nonresidential and attached dwelling uses fronting on S. Ft. Harrison Avenue should have no bearing on the decision for this case, as they are zoned Office (O) District, where dissimilar development standards and criteria apply. c. A front setback variance approved in 1996 for the property at 322 Magnolia Drive was for the replacement of an existing, detached pool screen enclosure damaged by a storm, which is not the same as the proposed garage addition. Community Development Board -November 17, 2009 APP2009-00007- Page 2 of 5 .,i ) d. A variance was approved in 1995 for 316 Lotus Path reducing the front setback from 25 to 20.5 feet for a new detached dwelling. e. A Development Order was issued November 1, 2007, for FLS2007-08041 for 403 Magnolia Drive denying a front setback reduction from 25 to 20 feet for a garage addition. The Community Development Board (CDB) granted an appeal of this decision, reversing the previous development order, on January 15, 2008. The property owner did not apply for a building permit to construct the proposed addition within the Code prescribed time frame and such CDB approval expired. Such CDB approval on appeal does not set a precedent for the entire neighborhood. f. The documentation that has been submitted does not demonstrate that the existing structures in this neighborhood have been constructed to a regular or uniform pattern of reduced front setbacks, rather those dwellings with a reduced front setbacks are scattered throughout, and represent a minority of, the properties in the neighborhood. 2. That the development proposal is consistent with CDC Section 2-203.B.1.b, in that the reduction to the front setback will not adversely affect the adjacent property values. 3. That the development proposal is inconsistent with CDC Section 2-203.B.1.c, in that a determination of the front setback shall consider consistency with neighborhood character. Insufficient documentation has been submitted to show the proposed reconstructed garage at a reduced front setback would be consistent with the neighborhood character {see discussion under Conclusion of Law #1 above). 4. That the development proposal is consistent with CDC Section 2-203.B.1.d in .that a determination of the front setback shall consider whether such results in an efficient house layout. Based on the information submitted, construction of a wo-car garage. at the required front setback of 25 feet would not provide sufficient depth for two -cars {onky approximately 17 feet of depth for the western parking stall in the garage). The CDC Section 3-1402.A requires a minimum stall depth of 18 feet. Insufficient area would exist for pedestrians to also maneuver around the parked vehicle in the garage. Sufficient stall depth .and. pedestrian. maneuvering area would be provided in the proposed garage with the reduced front setback, allowing for interior access to the living areas of the dwelling from the garage. It is noted that the CDC does not require any garage or carport for any dwelling in the City. 5. -The provisions of CDC Sections 2-203.B.2 and 2-203.B.3 relating to rear and side setback reductions are not applicable to this request. 6. CDC Section 3-913.A.1 requires a determination of the proposed front setback is in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties. The subject property is developed with a single-story detached dwelling. This neighborhood is developed with one- and two-story detached dwellings. The existing dwelling is consistent with the scale, bulk, coverage and density of adjacent properties, but the development proposal is inconsistent with this criterion in that insufficient documentation has been submitted to show the proposed reconstructed garage at a reduced setback would be consistent with the character of the adjacent properties. 7. CDC Section 3-913.A.2 requires a determination that the proposed front setback will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of, or significantly impair the value of, adjacent properties. The reduction to the front setback is not consistent with any regular or uniform pattern of reduced front setbacks and could set a precedent for the neighborhood. The proposal would not significantly impair the value of adjacent properties. Community Development Board -November 17, 2009 APP2009-00007- Page 3 of 5 ~r 8. CDC Section 3-913.A.3 requires a determination that the proposed front setback would not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. The development proposal would be consistent with this criterion. 9. CDC Section 3-913.A.4 requires a determination that the proposed front setback will minimize traffic congestion. The development proposal would be consistent with this criterion. 10. The development proposal is inconsistent with CDC Section 3-913.A.5, in that a determination of the front setback shall consider consistency with neighborhood character. Insufficient documentation has been submitted to show the proposed reconstructed garage at a reduced setback would be consistent with the character of the adjacent properties. The variance approved in 1996 for 322 Magnolia Drive was for the replacement of an existing pool screen enclosure. A variance was approved in 1995 for 316 Lotus Path reducing the front setback from 25 to 20.5 feet for a new detached dwelling. Insufficient documentation has been submitted demonstrating the other existing structures in this neighborhood have been constructed to a regular or uniform pattern of reduced front setbacks. 11. CDC Section 3-913.A.6 requires a determination that the proposed front setback would minimize visual, acoustic and olfactory adverse impacts on adjacent properties. The development proposal would be consistent with this criterion. It is noted that. the CDC does not require any garage or carport for any dwelling in the City. , An appeal from the above Level One (Flexible Standard Development) decision-was filed by the property owner on October 26, 2009, consistent with the timeframe established for an appeal to be initiated in° CDC Section 4-502.A. Pursuant to CDC Section 4-SO1.A.3,, the Community Development Board (CDB) has the authority to hear appeals from Level One (Flexible Standard Development)' decisions. Pursuant to CDC Section 4-504.A, the CDB shall review the application, the: recommendation of the Community Development Coordinator, conduct a quasi judicial public hearing on the application, and render a decision in accordance with- the provisions of CDC Section 4-206.D.5 granting the appeal, granting the appeal subject to specified conditions, or denying the appeal. It is noted that pursuant to CDC Section 4-504.B, in order to grant an appeal, overturning or modifying the decision appealed from, the CDB shall find that based on substantial competent evidence presented by the applicant or other party that each and every one of the following criteria are met: 1. The decision appealed from misconstrued or incorrectly interpreted the provisions of this development code; and 2. The decision of the CDB will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this development code; and 3. The decision of the CDB will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare. Prepared by: Planning Department Staff Wayne .Wells, AICP, Planner III Community Development Board -November 17, 2009 APP2009-00007- Page 4 of 5 r i ATTACHMENTS: ^ Development Order issued on October 20, 2009 ^ Aerial Photograph of Site and Vicinity ^ Location Map ^ Future Land Use Map ^ Zoning Atlas. Map ^ Site Photos ^ Resume S:IPlanning DepartmentlCD BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cases! Up for the next CDBILotus Path 311 Meek (LMDR)1009.11 - CDB !1.17.09 - WWILotus Pnth 311 APP Staff Report.docx Community Development Board -November 17, 2009 APP2009-00007- Page 5 of 5 Wayne M. Wells, AICP 100 South Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756 Phone: 727-562-4504 ~ Email: wayne.r~~ells~~~nvclearwater.com PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE ^ Planner III Planning Department, City of Clearwater, FL November 2001 to Present As part of the Development Review Division, prepared and presented staff reports for Flexible Standard Development (staff-level cases), Flexible Development (public hearing cases) and Plats before the Development Review Committee and the Community Development Board and Development Agreements before the City Council; Reviewed building permits for Code conformance; Prepared and/or assisted preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, email, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). ^ Zoning Coordinator Zoning Division, City of Pinellas Park, FL March 1989 to November 2001 Acting Zoning Director; Represented the Zoning Division on cases and issues before the City Council, Community Redevelopment Agency, Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Adjustment and outside agencies; Prepared and presented staff reports for land use plan amendments, rezoned, planned unit developments, conditional uses, variances and site plans; Reviewed final site plans and building permits for Code conformance; Prepared and/or assisted preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). ^ Program Manager, Zoning Branch Manatee County Dept. of Planning and Development, Bradenton, FL June 1984 to March 1989 Trained and supervised three employees; Prepared and presented variances and appeals to the Board of Zoning Appeals; Coordinated final site plan and building permit review for Code conformance; Assisted in preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). Interim Code Enforcement Manager- Managed the Code Enforcement Section; Supervised six employees; Prosecuted cases before the Code Enforcement Board; Investigated and prepared cases of alleged violations of land use and building codes. Planner II, Current Planning Section -Prepared and presented staff reports for rezones, planned developments, special permits, plats and mobile home parks to Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners; Reviewed final site plans and building permits for Code enforcement; Assisted in preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). ^ Planner I Alachua County Dept. of Planning and Development, Gainesville, FL June 1980 to June 1984 Prepared and presented staff reports for rezones and special permits to Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners; Reviewed site plans and plats for Code conformance; Assisted in preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). Intern -Compiled and coordinated the Alachua County Information and Data Book; Drafted ordinance revisions; General research. r ~ ^ Graduate Assistant University of Florida Dept. of Urban and Regional Planning, Gainesville, FL 1979 to 1981 Coordinated downtown study for Mayo, FL; Coordinated graphics for Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. ^ Planning Technician Planning Division, City of St. Petersburg, FL 1977 to 1979 Primarily prepared graphics, for both publication and presentation; Division photographer for 1 %2 years; Worked on historic survey and report. EDUCATION Master of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning (Degree not conferred; course work completed, thesis not completed), University of Florida, 1981 Bachelor of Design in Architecture, University of Florida, 1976 LICENSES & CERTIFICATES American Institute of Certified Planners American Planning Association, Suncoast Section ~- SR-60 ~) f > _ Q RY.RId EY I z a yl L I ~ CHESTNUT ST ' R = 2 ROGERS ST ¢ ROGERS as Q rs w .. ~ ~ a ~ O sp , z wed ~• T+S ~oQ, >aea~ o PIfdE PINE ST ~ ~ F, cr ~ r txsscan 0 0 0 ~ 4 E 1 ~ y DRUID RO ~ W DRUID RD PROJECT ~ JASINiNE WAY JASM SITE MAGNA DR h LO S PATH LO 0 JEFFORDS ST j Q o~ _~_, ~ ~ . ~ 4 _...~..---"' - - '.-' ~ ~ GRAND CENTRAL -,r, .: . .. .; . .r ..o •. •.: • - ' a . ., .. ,.,.: a •,3" . } ~ PlNELLAS ,~ Rj~R:. .: r ?' m ~+ . ~ ~ :.. :•. {~ :. ~ ~ ~• ;. • . e#z~~' '. ~ _ ST . . '• ~ •.. ;:.. ~ . ... ST e ' ,: ..•- ..:: - LAKEVIEW i - - _ ~ :.. - - -- - ~ ,:.. ~. : . LOCATION MAP Owner: Daniel and Sharon Meek Case: FLS2009-09016 Site: 321 Lotus Path Property Size: 0.195 acres PIN: 16-29-15-36270-000-1320 Atlas Page: 2958 --- ----- ~3 I I ~1 ~I I N "' I I ~ 1 I~ (183) E ~O ~ JASMINE WAY ~ ~, a (184) F sb? ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~, I ~ 9oa I ~ I z ~i 1 68 (185) G 1 64 62 60 58 56 I 54 I 52B 152A I 50 1 48 I I I 99 I I 7 1 95 I 91 89 93 I 87 85 83 I 81 I 79 1 (166) H I ~ l I~ ~ a I~ Szb ~ " I I I R I ' I ~ ~ g I l a I LMDR MAGNOLIA DR R I (187) I 'OOH I "' I '" I I hl I ~ I ~ I 1 1 I I ~ - - ~ ~ - - - 102 i 100 I 98 I 1 I 92 90 I 88 88 I 84 1 I 2 1 80 I (168)J 10?O I I I _ _ _ I 1 I 1 1 - - - - - - 139 I 1 13 I I 133 I 131 1 1 I 129 1 I 127 125 I 123 I I ( 1218 121A 11 I 1 117 I it N O I ~ I ~ I~ I ~ N ~ I 1 I~ ~ I ~ 1os1 1 I I Q I ~ 1100 ~ LOTUS PATH I 1104 ~ `~' 1 I "' I I"' `° I ~ I Fib, b3 ~I I I g I ~ I I 1 I I I 140 1 138 I 136 I ~/' 134 I I 30 1 128 126 124 1226 1 122A 1120 I I 118 I it I O - - - I -~ -r-~ - - ~-T--I---I- ~ ~ -T 1 1 1 I 29 128 I 1 26 125 1 24 123 1 22 1 o 21 I20 119 118 17 116 1 I I ~ I 15 ( 14 113 12 I 1 I 11 1 1 I O 1112 I 1 I N w ~ I 1 I I I 9d32 „ ~~~ I I I _1 I I I `~ I I 1~ I 1 1 ~I I I~ ~, I 1~ ~I~ JEFFORDS ST ,~ ,oozcsl I I I I I ~ I I I se 1211A 1 ~ I 1200 I~ I~ I ~ - L - 1 15 1 a 13 i 2 11 ~ -I- I- 1 ~ r 2 I 12118 ~aie, I 3a 1 ~ ~- -I 1 6 7 1204 r _ e r I _ _ _ I 19 ~ ,5 ZONING MAP Owner: Daniel and Sharon Meek Case: FLS2009-09016 Site: 321 Lotus Path Property Size: 0.195 acres PIN: 16-29-15-36270-000-1320 Atlas Page: 2956 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I g I MI I ~ ~ I l~ I ~ I I$ I ~ (~~~ E 820 ~ JASMINE WAY ~ ~ o . (164) F 90? e~Oq l ~' 0 $' I ~ I ~ s04 ~ ~ I g I ~ e I I ETACHED ~ I ~ 62 ~ ~ I ~ I 5a D~V~~LLINGS ~ ET CH D I I ~ 528 152A I 50 I 48 48 D I J ~ 1 I 7 1 D ~LL I ~S ~ 67 l EIS 85 83 INGS 81 79 I I 77 (166) H $ I ~ ~ to M I ~ I I ~ I 36 I___ ~ N "' 1 ~ ~ I I I' I e y I $ MAGNOLIA D R h (167)1 N rabl I " I I M I I ; I I ~ I I I I I a l I - - - - - - 102 I 100 DETAC ge ED I I I I 92 ~ ~T 90 I 88 D 8s I 84 IaET I I H D I 76 ~ . ETACH ID ELL lYGS I DAVE LIN(;S W L I G LLZR w 139 I 1 A7 I 13 I 133 I 131 I 129 I 127 I 125 I 123 1278 11 121A 117 I 115 I N I ~ "' OI "' I o "' I IN I I M WI ~ ~ I 1051 1 I I I I I I I ' ~ 1100 ~ LOTUS PATH 1104 ~ iDETd~ I~ I~ M ~ ~ ~ F ~ C~ D ~ ~~ D E 1~ CH ~ D ~ 140 IDw~L 1318 I S I I 30 I ~ ~J 7 z!!• i-9~I ( '~('~ uff~ ~ ~ ~J lzzs I~t1x~ '!I 7 7( ~11~~11 I I ---- -- - OFFI - I I I ~ I.L' I -f -I---~-~-r--~-1- I~F#~ I i 26 z5 7 l I 20 I I I I 1 P A ~ i ~ ~ ~AK1i1~G ~ 1s I L ~CILS 12 ~F~I IBS F~CES 8 1 I I ~' I LOa' os432 I~ I L~7) I ~T- I I I I I eo + I I n I„ I eo I v~ ~ ~~ I v JEFFORDS ST ,~ ,oo21s, I I I I 9 ~ I I Q FICE MORTON I C 2 1, I CIO TON 1 3 1211x1 ~I~~ 1 I 120 PLANT _ L ~L ~._ _ r _ 1 ~~ej 1211e ~~ HOSPITAL ~ ~ ~IE#S$IT e 71204 ~~ 3 y 9 ~ I _ _ _ I ._ 1b 4 EXISTING SURROUNDING USES MAP Owner: Daniel and Sharon Meek Case: FLS2009-09016 Site: 321 Lotus Path Property Size: 0.195 acres PIN: 16-29-15-36270-000-1320 Atlas Page: 2956 .. eer~f:...... _ r`.r t v y ~. .,~,~, .;' J' A View looking SW at 315 Lotus Path (property to the W of the subject property) ,-,; ~.~- . . ~----- View looking SW from Lotus Path at the subject property lYi ~ ~ :°~ W r' _ _ i s ~ View looking NE at 322 Lotus Path (property to the NE of the subject property) 321 Lotus Path APP2009-00007/FLS2009-09016 View looking SE at 323 Lotus Path (property to the E of the subject property) View looking SE from Lotus Path at the subject property View looking NW at 316 Lotus Path (property to the NW of the subject property) Clear~vater Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-562-4576 tP5 SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ^ SUBMIT 12 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $ a2 `J a r tJ ~~ 321 LOTUS PATH A PP2009-00007 DANIEL AND SHARON MEEK Zoning: LMDR atlas# 295A APPEAL APPLICATION Level One and Level Two Reviews (Revised 03/29/01) a?lt'Myy~Z~ ~O 1..1tC Ld30 ~3DIAN39 ~.N3~ldp7~;;3C ~ __`_.l i. w b +a 5 ~ ~ ~ QI ..~._..._ r... i ^-YLYAS>i~; l Y Yt/ UK YK1N 1 ^- APPLICATION/NOTICE OF APPEAL (Code Section 4-502.A 8~ B) An appeal of a level one approval (flexible standard) may be initiated by a property owner abutting the property which is the subject of the approval within seven days of the date the development order is issued. The filing of an application/ notice of appeal shall stay the effect of the decision pending the final determination of the case. An application/ notice of appeal of appeal of any decision of the city, as provided in Section 4-501, may be initiated by the applicant or any person granted party status within 14 days of the decision. Such application shall be filed with the city clerk in a form specified by the community development coordinator identifying with specificity the basis for the appeal and accompanied by a fee as required by Section 4-202.E. The filing of an application/ notice of appeal shall stay the effect of the decision pending the final determination of the case. A. APPELLANT AND AGENT INFORMATION: APPELLANT NAME: i~,]" a33~-1 Mrc ~~~g~ ~I~AA~e MAILING ADDRESS: 321 LOtuS Path, Clearwater, FL 33756 PHONE NUMBER: 449-9884 FAX NUMBER: AGENT NAME: R Carlton Ward., Est . MAILING ADDRESS: 1253 Park Street, Clearwater, FL 33756 PHONE NUMBER: 7 2 7- 4 4 3- 3 2 81 FAX NUMBER: 7 2 7- d d 7- $}~~ (1 B. APPEAL INFORMATION CHECK THE SPECIFIC APPEAL: Appeals to the Community Development Board ^ Orders, requirements, decisions or determinations made by an administrative official in the administration of the development code, except for enforcement actions. ^ Administrative interpretations of the development code $1 Level One (Flexible and Minimum Standard) approval decisions ^ Denials of any permit or license issued under the provisions of this Code ADDRESS OF SUBJECT APPEAL (if applicable): Appeals to a hearing officer ^ Decisions of the community development board regarding level two approvals ^ Decisions of the community development board regarding level one approvals ^ OTHER (as allowed by Code) 321 Loutus Path, Clearwater, FL 33756 SPECIFIC CASE NUMBER TO BE APPEALED (if applicable): FLS 2 ~ ~ 9 - ~ 9 ~ 16 DATE OF DECISION: 1 ~/ 2 ~/ ~ 9 Page 1 of 2 -Appeal Application (Level One and Level Two Reviews)- City of Clearwater C. BASIS OF APPEAL: Explain in detail the basis for the appeal. Use additional sheets if necessary. SEE ATTA HED ~~ !D ld3C] ~3DI,^N~5 ~.N3~U,-tG :3:;3 ~r~ :°;c. J D. SIGNATURE: I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this application are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS „~~ Swq(n to and subscribed before ,one this ~~ day of U c'~-o~e.r A.D. 20 d`'S t Cn~.- -I-DV. Wcire who is p ally known h produced as Signature of pro rty owner or representative identification. Y'~. o ary public, My commission expires: IIMS2IPDSIPIanning DepartmentlApplication Formsldevelopment reviewlAppeal Application.doc w~ea.rrN s' DORENE SCICCHITANO ~'~ Commission DD 905502 Expires July 18, 2012 ~'F $~ V,y°,C`~ Bonded Thru Tmy Fain Opy~1.701Y 32 ~ ~ ~ T11S Pq TH APP2409-00007 DANIEL AND SHgRON MEEK Zoning: LMDR atlas# 295q Page 2 of 2 -Appeal Application (Level One and Level Two Reviews)- City of Clearwater C. Basis of Appeal THE DECISION OF THE DRC MISCONSTRUED OR INCORRECTLY INTERPRETED THE PROVISIONS OF CDC SECTIONS 2-203.B.1.A, 2-203.B.1.C, 3- 913.A.1,AND 3-913.A.5. 1. CDC Section 2-203.B.1.a. The applicant submitted documentation regarding 16 parcels out of 88 in the subject neighborhood reflecting FRONT setbacks less than the required 25' (the development order indicated only 15 properties because I do not believe they included the property at 403 Magnolia). Section 2.203.B.1.a provides that in considering a variance of the front setback standard of 25' that consideration shall be given "to the extent to which existing structures in neighborhood have been constructed to a regular or uniform setback from the right of way". The Harbor Oaks neighborhood, as reflected by the documentation submitted, does not have a uniform or regular setback from the right of way. Submitted with the Application was Schedule 3 with a block survey reflecting 16 residential properties (15 built and 1 authorized but not built) constructed with less than a 25' front setback. Four of these are on Lotus Path with 2, the ones at 310 and 316 Lotus Path, being across the street diagonally from the applicant's property. The property at 316 Lotus Path has a 3 car garage built 20.5' from the property line. Schedule 3 of the Application contains aerial photos of the buildings and exterior photos of all buildings listed. Composite Schedule 3 to the Application reflects the extent to which the existing structures in the neighborhood have been constructed with the front setback of less than 25'. Case No. FLS2007-08041 for the property located at 403 Magnolia Drive is relevant to the subject Application. On November 7, 2007 a development order was issued by the DRC which denied a requested reduction of the front setback from 25' to 20' for a garage addition. On appeal to the CDB, the requested reduction of front setback was granted on January 15, 2008. THE CONSIDERATIONS IN THAT CASE CANNOT BE DISTINGUISHED FROM THE FACTS AND CONSIDERATIONS IN THE SUBJECT APPLICATION AND APPEAL. 2. CDC Section 2-203.B.1.c. The requested reduction of the front setback is consistent with the neighborhood character as reflected in Schedule 3 to the Application. Harbor Oaks is a unique neighborhood with ample setback of residences from the curbs. The Code requires a minimum setback of 25' from the front property line, which in a typical subdivision is at or close to the curb. However, in Harbor Oaks, the front property line is typically more than 20' from the back of the curb creating an effective setback in excess of 45'. With respect to the subject property, the front property line is more than 25' from the back of the curb creating an effective setback of 49'. Furthermore, the front property line is 4.5' behind the sidewalk. Therefore, even with the requested reduction of front yard setback from 25' to 21', the actual setback from the back of the sidewalk would be more than the minimum 25' and from the back of the curb more than 45', which is consistent with the neighborhood's character of having large front setbacks between the residences and the road. 1.d3Q ~~=?:~''~ ~a~ ~ lea=,~ra~+C;` i='e3r ;-~ J ... n~ The requested reduction of 4' in the front setback is in reality a reduction of less than ten percent of the actual 49' setback from the curb. The possibility that paved streets will ever be widened in the subject neighborhood is extremely remote due to the character of the neighborhood, the existence of historic specimen trees near the existing roads and the adequacy of the current roads for the neighborhood's needs. Therefore, consideration of the setback measurement from back of curb and not property line is relevant. Therefore, as with Case No. FLS 2007-08041, it is the opinion of the applicant that the development order misconstrued or incorrectly interpreted CDC Section 2-203.B.1.c. 3. CDC Section 3-913.A.1. With respect to this section of the Code, the development order incorrectly interpreted the Code by concluding that the proposed garage construction at the reduced setback would not be consistent with the character of adjacent properties. As previously indicated, the property at 316 Lotus Path, which is across the street from the subject property, has a 3 car garage with a 20.5' front setback. The subject Application is requesting a 21' setback fora 2 car garage. Furthermore, as reflected in Schedule 3 there are 15 other properties where reduced front yard setbacks have either been utilized or authorized. The appeal granted with respect to Case No. FLS 2007-08041 is further evidence that the decision of the DRC misconstrued and incorrectly interpreted this provision of the Code. 4. CDC Section 3-913.A.5. Once again, the development order misconstrued or incorrectly interpreted a Code section when it concluded that the requested front yard setback variance would not be consistent with the community character. Please refer to sub-paragraphs b. and c. above for supporting arguments. ~131bN~tlb9la-~ ~a 1.c+3Q ~"~^r,,. ;~ ;~ ,; 4 ~ ~ ~t'#~:. ~ ro~i,/~ ~~ ~ ~;~~raxuirr.,~~~~ ~~~,;~_~-,~~='~ CITY OF CLEARWATER ~~~ ~q ;,~,=, -. ~~ Posr OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARwATER, FcoxlnA 33758-4748 ~9 =:~- _:-_ ~ t~ ~ ;,. -- - -,,,+' 'C, ~~~ Murr-cIPAC SERVICES Blm.~uvc,100 Sov-n MYRTLE AvFxue, CLEARwATER, FI.oRmA 33756 y j f'`.,,.~ ~~b~ °~'~~~~+4i~o TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 $~~a~~- PLANNING DEPARTMENT October 20, 2009 R. Carlton Ward, Esq. Richards, Gilkey, Fite, Slaughter, Pratesi & Ward, P.A. 1253 Park Street Clearwater, FL 33756 Re: Development Order -Case FLS2009-09016 321 Lotus Path Dear Mr. Ward: This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-202.E of the Community Development Code. On October 1, 2009, the Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed your Flexible Standard Development approval to permit a garage addition to an existing detached dwelling in the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District with a reduction to the front (north) setback from 25 to 21 feet, under the provisions of Section 2-203.B of the Community Development Code (CDC). The DRC recommended denial of this application. Therefore, the application is hereby DENIED based upon the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: Findings of Fact: 1. That the subject 0.199 acres is located on the south side of Lotus Path, approximately 400 feet east of Druid Road South; 2. That the subject property is located within the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District and the Residential Urban (RU) Future Land Use Plan category; 3. That there are no active Code Enforcement violations associated with the subject properly. 4. That the request to reduce the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 21 feet requires that positive findings be made with regard to the Flexibility Criteria set forth in CDC Section 2-203.B; and 5. That the request to reduce the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 21 feet requires that positive findings be made with regard to the General Applicability Criteria set forth in CDC Section 3-913.A. Conclusions of Law: 1. That the development proposal is inconsistent with CDC Section 2-203.B.1.a, in that a determination of the front setback shall consider the extent to which existing structures in the neighborhood have been constructed. to a regular or uniform setback from the right-of--way: a. There are 88 existing detached dwellings in the area known as "Harbor Oaks", generally located within the area bordered by those dwellings located on the north side of Druid Road to those dwellings located on the south side of Lotus Path and those dwellings located west of the nonresidential and attached dwellings located on S. Ft. Harrison Avenue to the east side of Druid Road South. It was mutually agreed with the applicant that, due to the size and character of the properties on the west side of Druid Road South, these seven properties would not be reviewed as part of this application. The applicant has ~~EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRMATP/E ACTION EMPLOYER ~ October 20, 2009 FLS2009-09016 / 321 Lotus Path Page 2 of 3 submitted documentation from 15 properties. (I7 percent of the 88 parcels) of the properties reviewed regarding setbacks less than the required front setback of 25 feet. b. The properties developed with nonresidential and attached dwelling uses fronting on S. Ft. Harrison Avenue should have no bearing on the decision for this case, as they are zoned Office (O) District, where dissimilar development standards and criteria apply. c. A front setback variance approved in 1996 for the property at 322 Magnolia Drive was for the replacement of an existing, detached pool screen enclosure damaged by a storm, which is not the same as the proposed garage addition. d. A variance was approved in 1995 for 316 Lotus Path reducing the front setback from 25 to Z0.5 feet for a new detached dwelling. e. A Development Order was issued November 1, 2007, for FLS2007-08041 for 403 Magnolia Drive denying a front setback reduction from 25 to 20 feet for a garage addition. The Community Development Board (CDB) granted an appeal of this decision, reversing the previous development order, on January 15, 2008. The property owner did not apply for a building permit to construct the proposed addition within the Code prescribed time frame and such CDB approval expired. Such CDB approval on appeal does not set a precedent for the entire neighborhood. f. The documentation that has been submitted does not demonstrate that the existing structures in this neighborhood have been constructed to a regular or uniform pattern of reduced front setbacks, rather those dwellings with a reduced front setbacks are scattered throughout, and represent a minority of, the. properties in the neighborhood. 2. That the development proposal is consistent with CDC Section 2-203.B.1.b, in that the reduction to the front setback will not adversely affect the adjacent property values. 3. , That the development proposal is inconsistent with CDC Section 2-2D3.B.l .c, in that a determination of the front setback shall consider consistency with neighborhood character. Insufficient documentation has been submitted to show the proposed reconstructed garage at a reduced front setback would be consistent w-ith the neighborhood character (see discussion under Conclusion of Law #1 above). 4. That the development proposal is consistent with CDC Section 2-203.B.1.d, in that a determination. of the front setback shall consider whether such results in an efficient house layout. Based on the information submitted, construction of a two-car garage at the required front setback of 25 feet would not provide sufficient depth for two cars (only approximately 17 feet of depth for the western parking stall in the garage). The CDC Section 3-1402.A requires a minimum stall depth of 18 feet. Insufficient area would exist for pedestrians to also maneuver around the parked vehicle in the garage. Sufficient stall depth and pedestrian maneuvering area would be provided in the proposed garage with the reduced front setback, allowing for interior access to the living areas of the dwelling from the garage. It is noted that the CDC does not require any garage or carport for any dwelling in the City. 5. The provisions of CDC Sections 2-203.B.2 and 2-203.B.3 relating to rear and side setback reductions are not applicable to this request. 6. CDC Section 3-913.A.1 requires a determination of the proposed front setback is in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties. The subject property is developed with a single-story detached dwelling. This neighborhood is developed with one- and two-story detached dwellings. The existing dwelling is consistent with the scale, bulk, coverage and density of adjacent properties, but the development proposal is inconsistent with this criterion in that insufficient documentation has been submitted to show the proposed reconstructed garage at a reduced setback would be consistent with the character of the adjacent properties. 7. CDC Section 3-913.A.2 requires a determination that the proposed front setback will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of, or significantly impair the value of, adjacent properties. The reduction to the front setback is not consistent with any regular or uniform pattern of reduced front S:IPlnnning DepartmentlC D BlFlex Standard (FLS)Ilnactive or Finished CnseslLotus Path 321 Meek (LMDR) 2009. l0 -Denied - WWILotus Path 32! - Development Order -Denied /0.20.09.doc October 20, 2009 FLS2009-09016 / 321 Lotus Path Page 3 of 3 setbacks and could set a precedent for the neighborhood. The proposal would not significantly impair the value of adjacent properties. 8. CDC Section 3-913.A.3 requires a determination that the proposed front setback would not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. The development proposal would be consistent with this criterion. 9. CDC Section 3-9I3.A.4 requires a determination that the proposed front setback will minimize traffic congestion. The development proposal would be consistent with this criterion. 10. The development proposal is inconsistent with CDC Section 3-913.A.5, in that a determination of the front setback shall consider consistency with neighborhood character. Insufficient. documentation has been submitted to show the proposed reconstructed garage at a reduced setback would be consistent with the character of the adjacent properties. The variance approved in 1996 for 322 Magnolia Drive was for the replacement of an existing pool screen enclosure. A variance was approved in 1995 for 316 Lotus Path reducing the front setback from 25 to 20.5 feet for a new detached dwelling. Insufficient documentation has been submitted demonstrating the other existing structures in this neighborhood have been constructed to a regular or uniform pattern of reduced front setbacks. 11. CDC Section 3-913.A.6 requires a determination that the proposed front setback would minimize visual, acoustic and olfactory adverse impacts on adjacent properties. The development proposal would be consistent with this criterion. It is noted that the CDC does not require any garage or carport for any dwelling in the City. Pursuant to CDC Section 4-502.A, an appeal of a Level One (Flexible Standard Development) application decision may be initiated by the applicant within seven days of the date the development order is issued. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case expires on Tuesday, October 27, 2009. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III at (727) 562-4504 or via e-mail at «-ayne.~~~ells;amyclearwater.com. Sincerely, ~~~ Michael Delk, AICP Planning Director S: IPianning DepnrtmenAC D BIFIex Stnndard (FLSJVnactive or Finished CaseslLotus Path 321 Meek (LMDR) 2009. /0 -Denier(- WWILotus Path 321 - Development Order -Denied /0.20.09.doc 1 , ~ Planning Department C earwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 ~ Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-5624865 ^ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ^ SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION -Plans and application are required to be collated, stapled, and folded into sets ^ SUBMIT FIRE PRELIMARY SITE PLAN: $200.00 ~ SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $ i (ln _ n n CASE #: RECEIVED BY (staff initials): DATE RECEIVED: * NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS) FLEXIBLE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION (Revised 07/11/2008) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT i A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: CELL NUMBER: PROPERTY OWNER(S): ~ List ALL owners on the deed AGENT NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: CELL NUMBER: Mr. and Mrs. Daniel Meek 449-9884 FAX NUMBER: EMAIL: Daniel L. Meek R. Carlton Ward, Esq• - -- -_ ._._----_------- 1253 Park Street, Clearwater, FL 33756 443-3281 FAxNUMBER: 447-8830 EMAIL: cward@richardsgilkey.com B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A} PROJECT NAME: STREET ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER(S): PARCEL SIZE (acres): LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PROPOSED USE(S): Residence Renovation PROJECT VALUATION: $ 50,000 16/29/15/36270/000/1320 ___ I 8680 sf .2 acres PARCEL SIZE (square feet): 8680 Sf DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Rcr~~i~~f9A- 8f f~'9n~-5~~~~0)t 7 a € rem--a-5 ' is 2-1 '--f sr~n Specifically identify the request area of a roximat 21' to accommodate the construct: (include number of units or square ~~ ~~-~- footage of non-residential use and all of a two car garage to replace existing one car garage requested code deviations; e.g. reduction in required number of -- - - ------- -- parking spaces, specific use, etc.) S:U'lanning DepartmentWpplication Forms\Development Review\2008 Forms\Flexible Standard Development (FLS) 2008 07-1 t.doc Page 1 of 7 DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES _ NO X (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents) C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5) ^ SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see page 7) D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A) Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA -Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The requested front setback variance of 4' to allow approx_ 21' of the garage to extend towards the street is in harmony with the scale, bulk, ' -eeve~ ~ rt within the Harbor Oaks Subdiv. There are multiple examples of existing buildin~s within Harbor Oaks that are closer than the rec~'d 25' setback 2. The proposed evelopment will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land nd buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. The proposed garage will allow the applicants to have a 2 car garage wit i in rease a cu pp and the value of the property and not in any way~o~air th val, of adjacent land and buildings. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety he residents of this property by allowing the home to be accessed from insi garage rather than having to pass from a car in the driveway to the hous vaitheti~t the s e~~t e~--a~- ~ ~- - 4. ~ e~e esee g a~ag The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. allowing additional vehicles to be parked on the property in the propose garage. 5. a roposed develop en is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. ~~ td l propose eve opment is consistent with the community character. A car garage is typical in th; G nPi ahhnrhppd and a aPr^~nnr~ ~ara~ ~ul d~iot +° . . _ added without redeveloping the house layout in that there is not suffici re eve opi existing living space of the home including an existing fireplace 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. The proposed garage has no adverse effec ~ ,n 1,d;ng viGUal a o~~t;~ an , olfactory on adjacent properties. The proposed development actually has on vehicle to be parked within a garage rather than outside on a driveway as is the current pattern. QRIGINAI. REVD S:\Planning Department~Applica6tn Forms\Development RevievA2008 Forms\Flexible Standard vel (Fl~) ~Oloc 1 Page 2 of 7 ~ ~L.w"4~~~~~ ~~ ..._ ~ es 'al >f .e a .wo be ant a WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Flexibility Criteria) l~ Provide complete responses to tk~e applicable flexibility criteria for the specific Use as listed in each Zoning District to which the waiver is requested (use separate sheets as necessary) -Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: SEE ATTACHED " E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual and 4-202.A.21) ^ A STORMWP-TER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that involve addition or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with the City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption to this requirement. ^ If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt ^ At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following; ^ Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines; ^ Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; ^ All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; ^ Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; ^ A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan incuding all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with the City manual. ^ Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; ^ Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations. ^ COPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT SUBMITTAL (SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable ^ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF STORMWATER PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Applicant must initial one of the following): Stormwater plan as noted above is included Stormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor ~, elevations shall be provided. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SlGN!F!C^NT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750. F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A) Q' SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) -One original and 14 copies; ^ TREE SURVEY (incuding existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and location, including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) -please design around the existing trees; ^ TREE INVENTORY; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 4" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of such trees; ^ LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY; O PARKING DEMAND STUDY in conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (ie. Reduce number of spaces). Prior to the submittal of this application, the methodology of such study shall be approved by the Community Development Coordinator and shall be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to the parking standards are approved; ^ GRADING PLAN, as applicable; ^ PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of ^ COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; .... r ~ui111i[~ S:\Planning Department\Appligtion Forms\Development RevievA2008 Forms\Flexible Standard DeveloprfkllC 0 -tt.doc Page 3 of 7 G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A) ~ SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): ~_ Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package; X North arrow; X Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared; ~_ All dimensions; X Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures; ~_ Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures; X All required setbacks; ~ All existing and proposed points of access; _ All required sight triangles; Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including _ description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; location of all public and private easements; _ Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site; Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas _ and water lines; X All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas; _ Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas; Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening _ {per Section 3-201(D)(i) and Index #701}; _ Location of all landscape material; Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities; _ Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; X Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks; and Floor plan typicals of buildings for all Level One (flexible standard development) approvals. A floor plan of each floor is required for any parking garage requiring a Level One (minimum standard and flexible standard) approval. t~ SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in written/tabular form: _ Land area in square feet and acres; _ Number of EXISTING dwelling units; _ Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; _ Gross floor area devoted to each use; Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the _ number of required spaces; Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces & driveways, _ expressed in square feet & percentage of the paved vehicular area; Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility _ easement; _ Building and structure heights; _ Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. D REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale (8'/~ X 11); EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED ® FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan: _ One-foot contours or spot elevations on site; _ Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel; - All open space areas; Q~~~NI~ ~, ~ -Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms; _ Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned); ~ 'J.'~~ 1 ~ ~~9 _ Streets and drives (dimensioned); ` Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); `gym P,.~ ~"' Structural overhangs; S:\Planning DepartmentWpplication Forms\Development Reviev,A2008 Foma\Flexible Standard Development (FLS) 2008 07-t t.doc Page 4 of 7 H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A) ^ LANDSCAPE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): _ All existing and proposed structures; _ Names of abutting streets; _ Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations; Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers; _ Sight visibility triangles; _ Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing; Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including driplines (as indicated on required tree survey); Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant schedule; Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names; Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and _ protective measures; Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and _ percentage covered; Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board); Irrigation notes. ^ REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8 '/z X 11); ^ COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met. I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23) BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -with the following information: All sides of all buildings; --~- _ Dimensions; Colors (provide one full sized set of colored elevations); and ~_ Materials. t0 match existing ^ REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS -same as above to scale on 8'/~ X 11. J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS /Section 3-1806) ^ All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be removed or to remain. ^ All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing; freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals) ^ Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required). ^ Reduced signage proposal (8'/z X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application. ORKiINAt- ~~ ~~ ~t1' 1 Q 209 '`~ 1 ~...,.~ Pt.prNl~lH~G._.._- S:\Planning DepartmentV+pplica6on Forms\Development Revievn\2008 Forms\Flexible Standard Development (FLS) 2008 07-t t.doc Page 5 of 7 K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.13 and 4-801.C) O Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or his/her designee or if the proposed development: Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan. Witl generate 100 or more new vehice directional trips per hour and/or 1000 or more new vehicle trips per day. Will affect a nearby roadway segment and/or intersection with five (5) reportable accidents within the prior twelve (12) month period or that is on the City's annual list of most hazardous intersections. Trip generation shall be based on the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip General Manual. The Traffic Impact Study must be prepared in accordance with a "Scoping Meeting" held with the Traffic Operations Manager and the Planning Department's Development Review Manager or their designee (727-562-4750) Refer to Section 4-801 C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement. Q Acknowledgement of traffic impact study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): Traffic Impact Study is incuded. The study must include a summary table of pre- and post-development levels of service for all roadway legs and each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scoping Meeting. y, Traffic Impact Study is not required. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562- 4750. L. FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS/ WATER STUDY: Provide Fire Flow Calculations. Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply is available and to determine if any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this project. The water supply must be able to support the needs of any required fire sprinkler, standpipe and/or fire pump. If a fire pump is required the water supply must be able to supply 150% of its rated capacity. Compliance with the 2004 Florida Fire Prevention Code to include NFPA 13, MFPA 14, NFPA 20, NFPA 291, and MFPA 1142 (Annex H) is required. ~ Acknowledgement of fire flow calculations/water study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is included. X Fire Flow CalculationsANater Study is not required. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS/ WATER STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Fire Prevention Department at (727) 562-4334. M. SIGNATURE: I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this application are true and acarate to the best of my knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application. r--------..,~ Signature of pro erty owner or representative STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PIN S to cubed before me this day of `~ '~ , A.D. 20 to me and/or by who is personally known has produced as ide tiory,' ~, n ~/ 1 fi ~'=' AAA 5556 My commission expires: 1 S:\Planning Department\Appliwtion Forms\Development RevievA2008 Forms\Flexible Standard Development (FLS~B /j+~~~ Page 6 of 7 / r6j\.,..--~--~---""'"'.'-- N. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: 1. Provide names of all property owners on deed -PRINT full names: 2. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location): s Path Clearwater FL 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request) Reduction of front yard setback from 25' to 21' to allow for reconstruction of garage 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: R. Carlton Ward, Esq. as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 5. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 6. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application; the undersj~nedyluthority, herby cl~ty that the foregoing is true and correct. /, Property Owner Property Owner Property Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this ---~ day of ~~ ~ l" personally appeared t~~' { L, % ~1~~" who having been first duly sworn ~}jil7e Deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/she signed. •'""''~ R. Carlton W ;~ `,QeR:.::o6,~ Commissio ~~~~ Expires February 18, 2 O Notary Public Signature ~i!j~„~l gonad Troy Fsv, Inswance Inc 800-385.7015 Notary Seal/Stamp My Commission Expires: pR{6INA~- `~"V ~ 5t1' 1 C 2~4s I ~~ I 008 07-t t .doc S:\Planning DeparlmentWpPlication FormslDevelopment Review12008 Form\Flexib 3 Page 7 of 7 ~--^' EXHIBIT "A" RESPONSES REGARDING CRITERIA OF CDC SECTION 2-203.B.1 The existing single family home of the Applicant has a one car garage that was previously added to the northeast corner of an existing one story home. Attached as Schedule 1 is a site plan showing the proposed one car garage and elevation of the same prior to its construction. Attached as Schedule 2 is a site plan of the proposed additional garage interior to the existing garage. If the proposed second garage were built to accommodate the standard 25' front yard setback, there would be only less than 17' of space to accommodate a vehicle. This is Less than the minimum space required for a parking space in the City of Clearwater and Less than the standard garage depth of 20'. The interior living space of the existing house is laid out in such a way that the current north wall of the residence could not be moved south without affecting the structural integrity and foundation of the home as well as disrupting the existing living area including an existing fireplace. The reduction of the front yard setback from 25' to 21' would allow a standard depth garage to be constructed that would accommodate a standard vehicle and leave sufficient space for pedestrian traffic inside the garage to enter and exit the current living space. RESPONSES REGARDING CRITERIA OF CDC SECTION 2-203.B.1.a The Harbor Oaks Subdivision bounded by Druid Street on the north and west, Ft. Harrison Avenue on the east and Lotus Path to the south consists of less than 100 properties/residences. Attached hereto as Schedule 3 is a block survey reflecting 20 properties that have buildings either built or authorized (19 built and 1 authorized but not built) constructed within the 25' front setback requirement. Four of these are on Lotus Path with two, the ones at 310 and 316 Lotus Path, being across the street diagonally from the Applicant's property. The property at 316 Lotus has a 3 car garage built 20.5' from the property line. As part of Schedule 3 there are aerial photos of these buildings and exterior photos of all buildings listed. Composite Schedule 3 shows the extent to which existing structures in the neighborhood have been constructed with a front setback of less than 25' and two of the homes on the Applicant's street, Lotus Path, have been constructed with front setbacks of less than 20'. A development order was issued in January of 2008 authorizing construction of improvements at 403 Magnolia with a 20' front setback. This authorization cannot be logically distinguished from the subject request. Attached hereto as Schedule 4 are 11 letters of support from neighbors, three of which are immediate neighbors of the Applicant at 315, 316 and 327 Lotus Path. Furthermore, there are no letters of objection from any individual owners in Harbor Oaks at this time. 321 LOTUS PATH FLS2009-09016 MEEK. DANIEL Zoning: LMDR atias# 295A S~~' i ~ 't;~~~ i ~- ~.ir~h11`~ RESPONSES REGARDING CRITERIA OF CDC SECTION 2-203.B.1.b The reduction in front setback will not adversely affect adjacent property values but will in fact improve property values. The proposed renovation by the Applicant to add the second garage and renovation of the front elevation of the home will increase the home's curb appeal and property value and likewise have a positive influence on surrounding property values. RESPONSES REGARDING CRITERIA OF CDC SECTION 2-203.B.1.c The reduction in the front setback is consistent with neighborhood character as reflected in Schedule 3. The character of the neighbor is that all residences within Harbor Oaks have been constructed with an ample setback of residences from the curbs. While the Code requires a minimum setback of 25' from the front property line, in typical subdivisions the front property 'line is at or close to the curb. However, in this case, the front property Iine is more than 24' from the back of the curb creating an effective setback of 49'. Furthermore the front property line is 54" behind the sidewalk. Therefore, even with the requested reduction in front yard setback from 25' to 21', the actual setback from the back of the sidewalk will be more than 25' and from the back of the curb more than 45' which is consistent with the neighborhood character. RESPONSES REGARDING CRITERIA OF CDC SECTION 2-203.B.1.d The reduction in the front setback will result in an efficient house layout. Without the requested reduction in setback, a garage deep enough to accommodate a standard size vehicle cannot be built without relocating an exterior structural wall of the current residence and impacting 4' of interior living space including a fireplace. See the plan attached as Schedule 2. Without the reduction in front yard setback there will be a parking depth of less than 17' which is less than the minimum depth required by the Clearwater Development Code for a parking space and inadequate for a standard vehicle. RESPONSES REGARDING CRITERIA OF CDC SECTION 3-913 GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL 1 APPROVALS. (1) As previously reflected, the proposed development will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage and density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. For example, the property located at 316 Lotus Path was constructed with a three car garage with a 20.5' front setback pursuant to a variance granted in 1995 by the City of Clearwater. This property is across the street from the Applicant's property. In addition to the property at 310 Lotus Path, 409 Lotus Path and 430 Lotus Path have been built with reduced front yard setbacks. As previously referenced the property at 403 Magnolia has been authorized to have only a 20' front yard setback in January of 2008. (2) The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. As previously stated, this proposed development will enhance the value of surrounding properties. QRiGINAi~ FtEC'D ~ ski ~ ~ zU~os (3) The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The proposed development will in fact have a positive effect on the safety of persons residing in the neighborhood in that it will allow the Applicant to park two vehicles within a garage and access the residence from within the garage. (4) The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion and will have no effect on traffic congestion. (5) The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity as previously stated because the existence of other residences not only on Lotus Path but Magnolia, Jasmine Way and Druid with a variety of front yard setbacks less than 25'. (6) The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. The proposed development will in fact be a benefit in this regard by allowing a second vehicle to be parked within an enclosed garage which will be both a visual and acoustic enchancement to the neighborhood. ~"~rr~--. REC'o ~d~ LAW OFFICES RICHARD S, GILICEY, FITE, SLAUGHTER, PRATESI & WARD, P.A. RICIIAILDS BUILDING 1253 PARK STREET (:LEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 RALPH RICIIARDS (1893 - 1980) JOHN D. FITE (1933 - `1000) JOHN E. SLAUGHTER, JR. EMIL G. PRATESI R. CARLTON WARD TIIEO (. KARAPHILLIS Mr. Wayne Wells Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 TEL: (727) 443-3281 FAX: (727) 447-3481 September 9, 2009 OF COUNSEL WILLIAM W. GILKEY PATRICK W. RINARD ROBERT C. BURKE, JR. ~aRIGIN~IL RECD Sty' 1 ~ 2009 i Pl.~NNING Re: Property Located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater, Florida Dear Wayne: I am enclosing the Flexible Standard. Development Application to allow a reduced front vard setback for a width of 21 feet to accommodate the construction of a two-car garage at the subject property. I know that you are familiar with this property and the subject Application, and have previously come to a conclusion adverse to the Applicant's request. I would, however, kindly request that you reconsider. The enclosed material reflects 19 properties that have been built with less than the standard 25 foot front setback, and an additional property that was granted authorization to have a structure built with only a 20 foot front yard setback, even though the structure has not been built because of the economy. The fact that this authorization for the property at 403 Magnolia was granted on appeal by the CDB, should establish a precedent that would suggest that the DRC should authorize this request as they are so similar in nature that they cannot be distinguished. Furthermore, the property diagonally across the street at 316 Lotus Path has athree-car garage built 20.5 feet from the property line. Notwithstanding the above, should the DRC be disposed to deny the request, please notify me immediately so that we may file the appeal to the CDB in order to be on the October agenda. 321 LOTUS PATH FLS2009-09016 MEEK. DANIEL Zoning: LMDR atlas# 295A IVIr. Wayne Wells September 9, 2009 Page 2 It is my understanding that you. will make any additional copies that may be required of the Application and Exhibits. I thank you in advance for your cooperation and assistance. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Ve truly . urs, !~'`'--~ R. Carlton Ward RCW/cae Enclosures cr. Mr. Daniel L. Meek Mr. Michael Delk ~~ ~ ~~C~~ { ~~.~' t C 209 i PI.kNNING SCHEDULE 1 321 LOTUS PATH FLS2009-09016 ORKi11~AL RECD 5~~ 1 ~ 2s~9 j ~, PLANN!!~G_ _ ~ MEEK. DANIEL Zoning: LMDR atlas# 295A ORIDINAL RECD SEA 1 ~ 2C09 ti %__ 1~'is4NNl~i~ _ ~r1'211'~1 a'z1~~0'?,~ ~ ~°~ GtCt~d 1.`e~ ©r.~'Zib''~ 4~~od0'?~d •4~4~ ~.~ctl~e ~ bHriai~a r/ .~ ,. Z 0 J ~- N ,o •~z~ -- 0 ~a ~~ 1QQQ1~~ ~F~~ ~~ V Z U= l,L~ ~~1 o ~.~ o~~ ~~~ ~.~,~ ~. -~ = Z ~~? ~. ~. D +-~ ~ ~- g 3 H 4 ~ ... , ~ I p ~ ~ F- ~o'~bZi w a a Q w x U ~. ~ti ~~. ~.__ ~ _ ~ I I ~ j, ~; ~ ~~ N~ I ~ ~f ~ I ~ ~ / ~ ~,. ~~ ~ .ten ~~,.~ ,~ I I ~ ~i I. f Ij ~ IA.12~b~ VT I 2-~t'g ANT ~ec~iu.oV4~ '--- -~ I I ~v ! ~~~v/h1 1~6 - 'o / ./ r II I / 8,. I q,~~ I ' ~ .~ I ' .. - ~ y_ ~ _ I ~p~Fi / _ r i t ~ ~ -- 0 `va - ~ ~L ANc_{-1 cNT1251~ . ~ f°LV ; pc " N5\v ~~ic ~v. 2 4 ve ~_c~ G i ~ ~... ~v ~ ~~. Ti2~E To ~ 1 ( 7'~ 12~~.,A- N' ~ I 1Q I / ~~'~ ~ ~ I it j, ~ ~ ~ :~ ( ~ ~- ~ _ vc. ~ O : pn ZLl~~is..IN ..._ i -! µ~.. __..~ --- >~ I s ` R-` V L o0 ~2 1 ~OV i~ l~~~T i O ~ ~°L,b. N ~/~,~ ~ 1 ~~ o~~ R ~/~ N ~F7 Z •I~ ~J~R-• ~I !~E y P~~ LQ~~~O ~~Ll~ To . ~ .. ~~"~ yc co" LcaN.C3 w~ 2" HK. \VLaCJI~ Tp ~~ ~ . ~,~IST t~ . s ~~ ~~~~>/~.~ ova ~r~ srr~-wr4 _r r Y~-rcN t,.a~~ - - - ~JN fM~oLl~ ----- - _ _' ~ ~?cia-t r ~ ~__-_ _ 1 ~. ~ _ Fyn -nets . . ~;~,~ ~~. `k~x 4 CnL.•. ~ ~`totits~ . l' ~ r i ~ i - ~jC1yT. }2rz~' QI¢'iIFIGIa•L ~A~ /Sct,lral~t w~~.~CtST. F,e.sc~ a. ~ ~F`tT _... _2~~ Wt~- ~.TZ~'~1~ SCHEDULE 1 __.. ~reic~,~v~?~u~ _F ~ o N T ~ ~ ~ u~.T ~ o tit OIRIGINAI. R~C'D ~ ~~~ ~ ~ Ll"~J~ ~, PL.kNNtNG ,, QR.itiI1~~U. itEC'D SCHEDULE 2 ~~ORK~INAL RECD ,? SEP 1 ~ 2C09 P~lphtrNG SCHEDULE 3 SCHEDULE 3 • Aerial photos of building built in Harbor Oaks that have improvements constructed within the 25'-0" setback requirement. 415 Magnolia Drive 400 Magnolia Drive 314 Magnolia Drive 322 Magnolia Drive 908 South Fort Harrison 1000 South Fort Harrison 714 South Fort Harrison 800 South Fort Harrison 315 Jasmine Way 409- Lotus Path 430 Lotus Path 310 Lotus Path 316 Lotus Path 323 Druid Road ~ ~~~~!~EC'a 401 Dr ~ ~' ~'' r ``~~~ ~ uid Road 420 Druid Road - -~''~~r~~----~-~ 430 Druid Road 432 Druid Road 711 Bay Avenue o Block Survey of all buildings as they relate to the property in question at 321 Lotus Path. • Exterior photos of all buildings listed above. ~- ~) 1 -~ J ~~ i a~ai~a I .~_ __ ~ at ;~; .i k ~~ ~ .~ ~ s ~ Y°: ~ . i yL~ F ~t ~, Y ~. f: lJ aL` ~~ 1 e~ Y K ~i ~ ~ '~ .. ., ,: V . - I ~" ~!~ a + 'w ", Y $~ «i _: C», P: }~ ~~ ~~,. r ~-. ~. ~ ~ f;; ~~ ': ~ ~-~ ~'° !!~ 1f~ 2 r( ~ `^~ ;~' ~2 ,~~ 53`d :~i .u~. :: ,~~a_ ~ j 1. r ~. ~. b a s ,;:. Y~ ~` i .. L ~. ~,~`, `~~, r .: - ~~.~:; ,, F~iq~e ~~~,:;w «:~~, ~~ ,~~a. ~i ~ ~ ~~` a w+, y~~ _. _ ~i ~ ~---------. _~._.,~.~_.. : ~ ,~---~-._---,~-......~».....r. .. ~ ~. ~: _ t ,. ~~ ri _ .. ~ 1R' . ~ . ~" ' f~~ ~ i ram-!w.rr.'fm a: ~y1;.Y. ,! ~,y~ r ,~ ~w w ~~. ,~_..__ ..... ,,y, k.,~..,.m,..~.ea ,,, ~.'"4 ~~ y L , - . ; ,t F,. i 7 ~ 1~~~y ,~1 , y a^^ ~ ~~~' ~~' ~,, . ~"` ~ w .p~`CSr ~ ' Fem. y~ '`*~S f ~ }Sf ~ ~.~ r w a x ,~ #1' ,$~, ,. .1t ~~' ~ ~i'~,. ~ t d 'e. r ~ , -`y x~, ~y ~teu 3{' t' > ' n~r ,.~ ,`~.. ~., =~ ~ w r' s ~' 1. ,yi A .ry.. C `~' ~ rt .. E' ,~> a i ~, +~ Q ~ ~/ J ,, 5:, 4. l'~ ~ ,. ~~ `~ t ~- aw '`1 ~~' ao-~ v` i j ~~ ~• r,, R ~~: ~ >a.~_ ~~ rrwrr w . ..._, t..__.; r~<. ~`~" i ~~ -q.ta ~ Y V ~~ r~~ :~ .~ Y R ~ ~_ :, ~` .e. W ,~ ~~ 1 (, :',~ 'K ~~"~.J ~~' ,~ ~ ~ t r,~ -; ~.''`< ~+ •>...a. ' _ ~` ~'r ~'f. l~ l:~~y. ~I .,~ 7 I r'? i i~eu i ~ ~T , ...'t'~ ~ i.. ~ wN~ : ~ ~,. w. " . .ate .~,, ~; ~"°" ~. y~ f ~. ;4 ~`~ J ~ ' , ~~~ ~ ,~ 4r ~,, ~ ~w R v ? ~. mss. ~, .~ 4Y y~. ~~ ~ .,cif ' t't,'-C'.~ J _ ,~~ ~l e`'~L- E~ Er .~ +y 1~ t„ rr lr f ' ~.~~' ~4~~fr~,~. `,- s`:;,. ~~ ~,~, ~- .' + ~ ~?~' ~ 3 ~ t-. l.r~ r. - *~.'llt.°.: a ,.ti,.~ w° ~. #a klvrn'.a. ;'i i:.. -. r.' skL~:_ '4 __ ~. rT a.~~.iflo.-~'~-.~~ntr'a4.-eb~1'~... -:~,~ c~.::. .~.ri ',za 'saaww.r~'~x x ?Y. 3 n ~ .~ :~ ~ ~ s °~.,... .~,,,, .~.. +?~wg, ~~ ~ ~ ( , 1F1,., n Mr, ~ ~r ..~, ~ 4. ~, h fir' " ° "4: .~ ~~ .`f 315 Jasmine Way .~ ~~.,. ~'~: k.' ._ ~: ~, Wit. + ,4 pt: z ~ E <~° ;t :.. S, iV. .^h iXlf .~{j} .. ~Y~ ~.F ~. -° e ~~" y' ~ > ~~ ~ , - 4 ~~ ~ y•• _ S 1t~ :_ ~ -, ~;. ,r ~ ~~ ,~ ;.~ ~,G~.~W. .~.,, - ,, ,: § ;, ; f` a ~ 'S' 2 ~, ,;; t ,. ~ ~. ~ ~- ~,:~ "~. ,: ----~c::.~.kr+~~. {s;~y... z ¢'.,..;t~'' ~ f; Tin ~} ad! , r a.~ . S`. ,:. v ,~ ~ t,;. ~+ ' ys & ~ . ~: d ~ ~ ', f,. ~ 7 +u r1 R' a .k., ~y•+t• 1 .~ ~ ~ a~3 f ~ aJS~^~ $.~ :rte ~~'1'3~L.y ~a k f ~ 1d~y. ..QM~~~~~` )" ~~ ae , ., ~ 't ~,»t~t}~e. a ~ ~ ~~ y~ ~v~ ~~~~ k`~ ~ t+5 p' .~ ?~",r~ ..~•b• x« ~, .~.. .§~ ~~`,~.t~,s s ~ •yi~ ~ t r+~ ~ ,~ ~." ~~~ +n y~~ ~ ~ ; .'+~.. wy~µ„~`!0y~11R ~ fib. ~ ~h ~, * W',yt i * ~~,, 'r ~ .~ c ~.• ~ .~.~ reYy~~ .c -;,~ : "* r y+• ° ~ vni. ' X' ~ ~ . ~ a 1,K4, *%~ w roL~~t? ~c~T yy'~. `y` ~,. t ,.w,,,,,,r u~ ~" ~I y,,_..._+, __. . ~ . ~r. ~y~ y'rC.~ T T ~k~~'~ f `.. ~ {} .. ~.A;'~t.s" ,{ Er , ~„ ~` • i t .., .y ~~ ,~` ~. ~` sf~ '~ t1E`~tJ .,~s9Y. e ~Y) 1Yf ~M` ~e .~ ~~ ~~. M,. ~~ wa N ~i may. dt n '~,: .~ ~.f k a ~ ~ ~ i i"d~t,~ ~' ~~ ~L ~k 9 a Z~¢":'~i M j h -' ~ry 4~ ~Y ~~W~TI~~Y'A `+t ~J.~ 9 Z ~~ ~ F t 1 ~" , '~4 ~ ~ ~q ,<<,~ ' +1 ti ~a'~fpT~ vy`, A s~' j ~~rNA .a ~ r, µ y ,.,.~}~ ~. ' 6 ~ ~ ~~~ v x' S ~ w ,~ 1 , ~ "~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~as r,;~ yJ~ ~! 4~ dY'i s a~ M~~v^ ~- ~1 M. i-R 1• 1, . r ~~ ~~~ iq ~~ i ~• r'E ffa ~ F. „, rw~+"'"""'w""~'" ~. ~~. ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ "~, #~ ~t, a ~~.i`s~i''CP: a ~~~: 7 ti / /3'~ yd r~ 1 J~n ~. i : ~~ ..Y~ ~ ~~ ~ {¢ ., ~~"~ :„~ ~ I ., x .~ "'^ ~ L~~. ti k f: , , r ~ ~ ~~ -' ~'~ ~ .~" ~~ a ~ a~iN 'k . ~, ,~~•~, yy__ . ~~Y ~ ~r~~ic~ R ~' .,~, cy, ~`~ <"`G~ ,, •~, w~ ~ [I ,~ ~ --~~. ,. . , :1 •~ •" :.- •' ~ ,~ _ ~~: 1_,,_ ~-° t`~ ^+r . '~., w ,r iK R yX ~ j~ i ~ .. f ~, ~ s ~ _ _~ %~"~ ~.~; ~ _. ~- ~ _. ~ 4 :. .- ~~ ~.... w ~"' =~. ~, ~ ~ . ~- 4_ -;~- ,~ ~ r w ~~ w .. .....: - , ~~-~ ~~ ~ ~', 4 ~ ~ } ~~~ ~ P~ 1~';~ ~ t~;y- #~t. ~' .~ltv ~ ~ ,;~~ ~ °' ' .~ ` ~ ^t:~: ' ~ ~ . ~., ~ R , i 1_ •Yi !:` i ~ e 1 ~ .. ~ . ~. r r ~~ r~ feG~ ~' ~ i" y K ` js~ ~ ~ tY.. j f , ~... y ~ ~,! I ~. ~ k ry ~ t '1 t r ~ + } s ~. > l ..~ ~ ~~. •. f~ ~ 7e^ ~ T ~ ~ i { ~_ r ~`.... R 7 ; ~ S' E~ , :~~r d' ~. ~~ i y~'1 , ~ ~ ;~~ ~-, , 1 ~_. ~ .~ ,: ,.~ ' `` '~`~'~ ~'`~' , rat ~, x. ,. ' ~ '~ .,~. ~, ". w °3~t '~ . Q~-~, ~" ~ _ ~. g. ! r ~ ~`_~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~~ 4 d.~& i ~ ..~v+ .~e'7~„ .., 'S G . r ~ b ~ ~ ~ .' .~ 1 / ~'. ~ , ^c ..~'. _ `cn:1~.~.r eta`:. t- ~.a ~ ~y t~, ~~, ~e^ t ~1 . - r.. ~ ~... ~r :C, K_ ~~ :J J ' b .. 1~ SCHEDULE 4 ~RIGin~a~ RE~~a ~- ~tN ~ '.-t~Gg SCHEDULE 4 City of Clearwater Planning and Development Department Attn: Mr. Wayne Wells RE: Case # FLS 2009-03006-321 Lotus Path I have been advised of the Flexible Standard Development requested by Dan and Sharon Meek located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater. As a resident of Harbor Oaks, 3 I (..P 1,-a~fy 5 I~C~`4'1't I, ~ p i1 ~f ~ ; ~~ ~i support their application to extend the face of their garage by four feet. In fact we feel it would only be an improvement to the home and the neighborhood. We in Harbor Oaks already enjoy a spacious amount of room from the curb to the setback line. Therefore I feel that it would have no adverse effect on the look and feel of this beautiful neighborhood. ectfully sub ' ted, -~ RECD C~~1GtNA1~ i " '~~~g rw~ ~ ~~~~~ City of Clearwater Planning and Development Department Attn: Mr. Wayne Wells RE: Case # FLS 2009-03006-321 Lotus Path I have been advised of the Flexible Standard Development requested by Dan and Sharon Meek located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater. As a resident of Harbor Oaks, 3 i S I--b`~v ~ ~~~ ~~ I, L-c ~-~ /~~ ~ i r~ -~ ~~ i (~ ; G -~ti~ ~ y ~~ support their application to extend the face of their garage by four feet. In fact we feel it would only be an improvement to the home and the neighborhood. We in Harbor Oaks already enjoy a spacious amount of room from the curb to the setback line. Therefore I feel that it would have no adverse effect on the look and feel of this beautiful neighborhood. Respectfully submitted, ~; r `~~ ~. GuG~ `~ o+~G~w~. ~~~~a ~ s~P ~ o z~9 p~;~~--+~~r~~r: ~...._ -- City of Clearwater Planning and Development Department Attn: Mr. Wayne Wells RE: Case # FLS 2009-03006-321 Lotus Path I have been advised of the Flexible Standard Development requested by Dan and Sharon Meek located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater. As a resident of Harbor Oaks, ~ ~- n _L 33~s~ I, ~ ~~% ~J ~ u ~ y' ~ r i 1 ~C rf ~-L-- support their application to extend the face of their garage by four feet. In fact we feel it would only be an improvement. to the home and the neighborhood. We in Harbor Oaks already enjoy a spacious amount of room from the curb to the setback line. Therefore I feel that it would have no adverse effect on the look and feel of this beautiful neighborhood. Respeectfully submi d, E /~ ~~~'t /' .~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~c `'~. ~~~' ~ ~` ~~4g t k JOHN E. SLAUGHTER, JR. 711 BAY AVENUE BELLEAIR, FLORIDA 33756 August 14, 2009 City of Clearwater Planning Department Community Development Board 1 UU S. Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 Re: Notice of Filing of an Application for Flexible Standard Development Approval at 321 Lotus Path (FLS2009-03006) Dear Sir: My wife and I are the owners of the property located at 711 Bay Avenue in the historic Harbor Oaks development of Clearwater and are familiar with the above-referenced application. We support the applicant's request to reduce the front yard setback from 25' to 21' for an approximate distance of 20' to allow construction of a two car garage. We believe that the proposed construction is consistent with the community character of our neighborhood and other similar variances that have been granted in our neighborhood over the years. Furthermore, it is our understanding that the granting of the reduced setback will allow construction of a second garage that will allow access to and from the home from within the garage and afford additional safety to the homeowners as well as allow both cars to be parked within a garage rather than the current situation where one car has to be parked in the driveway. V~ ly yours, J E. Slaughter, Jr.~ , ~~ -- _ . A~. ~~+ ~ - t,,...,,~ `1 `_ 't ~~9 : t ...:. ,~~~.~---~ I ~ AU6 18 2A09 i~ ~ PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY OF CLEAR`,NATER 314 Magnolia Dr Clearwater, FL 33756 August 19, 2009 City of Clearwater Planning and Development Dept. RE: #FLS 2009-03006-321 Lotus Path Dear Mr. Wells: I am writing in support of the request by Dan and Sharon Meek to extend by four feet the face of their garage located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater. I am an officer of the Harbor Oaks board but write this to you as an individual home owner ~n the ne}ghliorhood. I believe that you previously received a letter stating the hoard and neighbors were in objection but that was sent without my prior knowledge or consent. As a woman who lives alone, I can understand Mrs. Meek's concern for her safety when her husband is out of town and the desire for a garage that would allow her to park and move about safely in her garage. I feel that approval of this request would not in any way detract from the neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted, ,~ p~o-c...) Carol E. Lowrey CQRK;II~Al~6 SEN , ,'~3 1 C !v ~ ~.---._ - City of Clearwater planning and Development Department Attn: Mr. Wayne Wells RE: Case # FLS 2009-03006-321 Lotus Path I have been advised of the Flexible Standard Development requested by Dan and Sharon Meek located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater. As a resident of Harbor Oaks, I ~ L L - n - ~ support their application to extend the face of their garage by four feet. In fact we feel it would only be an improvement to the home and the neighborhood. We in Harbor Oaks already enjoy a spacious amount of room from the curb to the setback line. Therefore I feel that it would have no adverse effect on the look and feel of this beautiful neighborhood. Respectfully submitted, ~~-°~ ~ ~ ~~- S ORIQ-I~tAI IZEC'D ` ~ 1 SAP 1 ~ 2Q09 ~ ,~ ~L.~-~tNl~~ ~.. City of Clearwater Planning and Development Department Attn: Mr. Wayne Wells RE: Case # FLS 2009-03006-321 Lotus Path I have been advised of the Flexible Standard Development requested by Dan and Sharon Meek located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater. As a resident of Harbor Oaks, ~2 ~ ~~2,v~, ~ ~~ ~~~ I, ~,~~ ~- ~ support their application to extend the face of their garage by four feet. In fact we feel it would only be an improvement to the home and the neighborhood. We in Harbor Oaks already enjoy a spacious amount of room from the curb to the setback line. Therefore I feel that it would have no adverse effect on the look and feel of this beautiful neighborhood. '~t~~~lh~~~ ~~~~ t !~ 2~ G9 .~~._. pt~Nhll~iG_~._~ City of Clearwater Planning and Development Department Attn: Mr. Wayne Wells RE: Case # FLS 2009-03006-321 Lotus Path I have been advised of the Flexible Standard Development requested by Dan and Sharon Meek located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater. As a resident r Oaks 0 ~ ~fI /,~S • L/IJ - of Harbo , _~~ I, / ~~ ~ support their application to extend the face of their garage by four feet. In fact we feel it would only be an improvement to the home and the neighborhood. We in Harbor Oaks already enj oy a spacious amount of room from the curb to the setback line. Therefore I feel that it would have no adverse effect on the look and feel of this beautiful neighborhood. ~~ 1~`ii~'~'1~ l Stl' t ~! ~~~~ ~ City of Clearwater Planning and Development Department Attn: Mr. Wayne Wells RE: Case # FLS 2009-03006-321 Lotus Path I have been advised of the Flexible Standard Development requested by Dan and Sharon Meek located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater. As a resident of Harbor Oaks, 3~~ I, ~~ ~~r «,h~, ~ (,t~~~P J ~1 `~P. S support their application to extend the face of their garage by four feet. In fact we feel it would only be an improvement to the home and the neighborhood. We in Harbor Oaks already enjoy a spacious amount of room from the curb to the setback line. Therefore I feel that it would have no adverse effect on the look and feel of this beautiful neighborhood. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Oc--R~~- < ~t4' 1 ~ 239 i r~-- P~t~-i~htt~- City of Clearwater Planning and Development Department Attn: Mr. Wayne Wells RE: Case # FLS 2009-03006-321 Lotus Path I have been advised of the Flexible Standard Development requested by Dan and Sharon Meek located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater. As a resident of Harbor Oaks, y HA ~~~aa ~°~'~~-- I, ~°P5~ c~i ~!'`~- support their application to extend the face of their garage by four feet. In fact we feel it would only be an improvement to the home and the neighborhood. We in Harbor Oaks akeady enjoy a spacious amount of room from the curb to the setback line. Therefore I feel that it would have no adverse effect on the look and feel of this beautiful neighborhood. submitted, ~~ ~~ Std' 1 ~ 2~4~ i pfr..~l~...._ ~~--~- ~,~ -:.-- City of Clearwater Planning and Development Department Attn: Mr. Wayne Wells RE: Case # FLS 2009-03006-321 Lotus Path I have been advised of the Flexible Standard Development requested by Dan and Sharon Meek located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater. As a resident of Harbor Oaks, `~~-~ ~~ ~ ro /~?~ G`~ I, ~i~ '~~~~~' ~~20~~~-~-ysupport their application to extend the face of their garage by four feet. In fact we feel it would only be an improvement to the home and the neighborhood. We in Harbor Oaks already enjoy a spacious amount of room from the curb to the setback line. Therefore I feel that it would have no adverse effect on the look and feel of this beautiful neighborhood. Respectfully submitted, ~: ~~ StF' 1 ~ 109 t -~~Ci~'~'~'' ~ ~ ! City of Clearwater Planning and Development Department Attn: Mr. Wayne Wells RE: Case # FLS 2009-03006-321 Lotus Path I have been advised of the Flexible Standard Development requested by Dan and Sharon Meek located at 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater. As a resident of Harbor Oaks, i y ~ ~'' ~~~ I, ~~,~ L~ ~`~ h ~ i ~ support their application to extend the face of their garage by four feet. In fact we feel it would only be an improvement to the home and the neighborhood. We in Harbor Oaks already enjoy a spacious amount of room from the curb to the setback line. Therefore I feel that it would have no adverse effect on the look and feel of this beautiful neighborhood. Respectfully submitted, O'~ilGthlAl IREC'~ ~~ ~~!} t G 2~9 1 ~~±.w -- ~.~~.a.._._ V#95-07 ' CITY O~ CLEARWATER ~' ~ ~ + ` i3 VARIANCE TRANSMITTAL TRANSMIT TO: Cymhia Goudeau, City Clerk (Original + 1 copy) o ald~A.~1e Miles Lance, Asst., City Attorney Vic Chodora, 8uildinp Official Stephen Doherty, Zoning Section Supervisor Lead Planner E~i Dussault, Steve Sarnoff, Don Malone; Zoning Review MEETING DATE AGENDA ITEM: CASE #: January 12, 1995 7 V 95-07 OWNER/APPLICANT (BUSINESS)/REPRESENTATfVE: Donald lV. Johnson ~ Timothy A. Johnson .ir. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Corrected Map of Harbor Oaks, Lot 133 and carts o' Lots 13 : and ' 35 ADDRESS: 372 Lotus Path LOCATION: 400 West of Bay Avenue AREA: 0.33 acres EXISTi~DG/PROPOSED USE: Detached Single Family Dv~reiling ZONING/LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION: RS E (Single Family VARIANCE REQUES' iREC2UESTED CE I .CODE Ci AT ON Structural setback from street I 25 ft right-of-way j Q0.086(5)(at? . ?, Lo ~,; ~w~c. NEWSPAPER AD:Donald W. Johnson for a variance of ~_5 ft to per (Lotus Pathl right-of-way whsre 25 ft is required to allow a new pet Corrected Map of Harbor Oaks, Lot i 33 and parts of Lots ? 3? and ? 35: zoned RS 6 (Single Famiiy Residential 5. V 95-07 SURROUNDING LAND USES (Please refer to attached map for surrounding zoning districts North: Single Famiiy Residential South: Single Famiiy Residential East: Single Famiiy Residential West: Single Family Residential CITY OFFICIALS WISHING TO COMMENT MAY DO SO IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW tCOMMENTS SHOULD BE RETURNED TO ZONING AT LEAST FIFTEEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC NEARING;. `ti~~ -~ ( ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ TRANSMITTED BY: Stephen Sarnof` DATE: December ? 3, ? ggc FOR PUBLIC NEARING BY THE DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD VT9507.S~S proposed building 4.5 feet forward on the iot_ Mr. Richter reported no other applications for variances for this premise. Representing the applica:.tt, Attorney Tim Johnson, 91 l Chestnut Street, Clearwater described the premise and pointed out it is not in the historic portion of Harbor Oaks but a relativel}• new family home. The purpose of the variance is to save three specimen oak trees. The garage has already been shortened two feet. He cited other s~.tback variances in the area. He noted staffs support of the request and a neighbor`s letter in support. Speaking. in opposition, the owner of the adjacent property, Michael McQuigg, 310 Lotus Path, Clearwater identif ed himself as a Director of the Harbor Oaks Owner's Association. He said he opposed the application because 1) it does not meet the cede of 25 feet; 2) it would present a problem when parking a middle to large size car in front of the garage; and 3} it would inhibit the view from his front porch. He described past meetings and attempts to reach an amicable agreement with the applicant. Robert Kern, 321 Lotus Path, Clearwater noted a letter dated January 10, 1995 from Mr. Salterelli, President of the Harbor Oaks Association, which Mr. Kern claimed was delivered to the City CIerk. There was no record of its receipt. Mr. Kern read the Letter of opposition from the homeowners req;iesting modification of the plan to require a 25 foot setback. .An additional letter in opposition was received from one of the signers of the letter above. Rebutting, Mr. Johnson said the distance between the back of curb and the property Iine in Harbor Oaks is very generous, in this case 2I I/2 feet. He said he does not envision a problem parking in the driveway as his extended cab pickup truck parks there comfortably. He disagreed that the proposed building would block the view from the porch of the adjacent premise. Any and aII alternatives suggested, such as "flipping the house," would cause aII trees in the backyard to be removed. He said he was surprised by the homeowners' "ambush" as past meetings with them led him to believe everyone was in accord. ~- In the ensuing discussion, Mr. Richter provided setback distance requirements; it was agreed that a 4-1/2 foot variance request was minimal. The owner was credited for past efforts to sa~•e the specimen oak trees- Based upon the information furnished b~• the applicant, Ms. Whitney awv+~ to grant the variance as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land Development Code, more specifically, because the variance arises from a condition unique to the property and was not caused by the owner or applicant subject to the following conditions: moved to Brant the request subject to the folloti~ing conditions: 1 } This variance is based on the application for a variance and d•~cuments submitted b~ the applicant, including maps, plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in suppor of the ~applican:'s request for a variance. Deviatior, from any of the above documents submitted in suppor of the request for a variance regarding the ~ti~ork to be done ~~-ith regard to the site or am• phvs~cal structure located on the site, viii result in this ~~ariance being null and of no e:`fcct: and ~' i the regai~i: buiidirg permit minDC01 a.95 9 01 r 1 2; 95 ~' ~- ~~~ shall be obtained within six months from the date of this public hearing_ The ~~tii~ wa3 duly _ .. ,. t, ._~,...:_ . _ .. ,; -_ _ y, -• B 10. Cypress Point Holding Corp (Buffalo's Cafe) for a variance of 30 ft to permit a side setback of 20 ft where 50 ft is required at 25801 U.S. 19 N, Cypress Point Shopping Center, Lot 1, zoned. CC (Commercial Center). Mr. Richter gave the background of the application and presented, in writing, the st<.ff recommen- dations. He indicated the deck and proposed canopy will extend approxunately J O feet out from the existing building, positioned 20 feet from the side property Line where 50 feet would ordinarily be required. He said the required three additional parking spaces are available. The applicant, Clifford Soechtig, President of CJS Investments, Inc., 2417 Huntington Boulevard, Safety Harbor identified himself as the owner/franchisee of Buffalo's Cafe. He indicated his architect was present to answer technical questions. He said the front canopy is needed to protect pahYx~s from utclement weather. The deck is a integral part of the franchise concept and all existing Buffalo's restaurants feature decks for outside dining. Proposed deck seating is eight tables of four diners each. Steve Spencer, Spencer cR. Jonnatti, Architects, 1061 East Ba}• Drive, Clearwater said the parkins issue was addressed and he was informed additional parking was not required. He said a site visit will reveal 1) the front canopy is standard and no different from the existing shopping center canop}~; 2) the covered deck, designed by a Georgia architect, does not cause a hardship to surrounding properties. He said a continuance may prove a hardship to the owner in the opening of his restaurant_ In the ensuing discussion it was Hated the absence of two Board members today ma~~ adversely affect the decision of the Board on the issue of the deck. Mr. Spencer requested. a continuance on the matter of the deck and the Chairman agreed, indicating this will allovtr sta`f to further im~esti~ate the number of parking spaces at the site now and. the number originai_ly granted. V Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Whitney moved to grant approval for the canopy only as requested because the applicant has substantiall}~ met all of the standards for approval for the canopy as listed in Section 4524 of the Land Development Code; more specifically, because the variance arises from a condition unique to the property and was not caused b}- the owner or applicant subject to the following conditions: 1) This variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans, surveys. and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the request for a variance regardine the work to be done with regard to the site or an}~ Physical structure located on the site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect; 2) the requisite building permit(s) shall be obtained within six months Iz-om the date of this public hearing; and .i) appropriate transportation impact fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of the building permit; and to continue the decd potion of the application to Januar_~~ 2b, 1995. The motion «-as du1~~ seconded an~ carried unanimousi•.. minDC01 a_95 ~ 0 01 i 12/95 C'1 r ~~~ } I .,, >~r ~, _ _. ---_......~_...._...__........_ ....... .. _...._._/~./\/\..__..t~._ ~ I ,o ~,y~~ ,. ~, `~ _,.. ~ I ,~ ~ ~" ~~ i ._. ~ ~: r ~. _. ~,,~ -- sh„ .: ~ _ .._._...r.....__-•--........... /~ ,~ ,,,. ,~. "l: ~.~, \~ `~ ~_ h/ i , \ i \~ ~ .~~ _ _. ~, . ~__=.._ ~. ~ I T !_. n `~ \ ,u u~ "~. .~•. J P> ..._ c1'. i ~~ ~~ \.. ~ r. .- ~~,. +`~ \ti- ~ i ~~ ' ~' I ~. I ~~ ~ ~ ~ _... _ ~',e~ ~ r .t~~ c~ ' ~l :~ ~l~l ~~ ~~ ~ ~~, ~, ~~--" ___~ ~ ,~ -~ . ^~~ _ ~- I I ~~~ .~ _..~ `~ ~u ~~ '~ ~~ ;; I ~~ ~, ;> r ;rz' u, .,~ v `~ ~~ J ~~ d. `~ ,^ ~ ~ \ h' z `N 4.. \~4- ~ i I~ '1^\~ i V ti, ~?- ,, ` r -" ../ ~. ~~„~."~ ''""` CITY OF GLEARWATER ;~,! ~~ PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ~~~ ~ MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING •~', ~, ~~,~~~~.~~,~~~~ 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVE_ GLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 PHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4576 www_myclea rwater.com/epermits :ASE SUMMARY 3CP1995-040304 16 LOTUS PATH OHNSON, DONALD W. IEW SFR; 4 BEDROOMS, 4 BATHS AND 3 CAR GARAGE 'EOPLE :ole: :ontractor CAMPAGNA, PATRICK T., UH PHONE: (727) 797-9791 M P CAMPAGNA HOMES INC FAX: No Fax 701 ENTERPRISE RD E, #404 SAFETY HARBOR, FL 34695 ;ontractor DON HELMS PHONE: (727) 446-5705 GULF COAST PLUMBING FAX: No Fax 2146 SUNNYDALE BLVD, #D GLEARWATER, FL 33765 ;ontractor RANDALL EGGERS PHONE: 726-0588 EGGERS & SON ROOFING & TILE IN FAX: 726-2228 1047 HARBOR LAKE DR SAFETY HARBOR, FL 34695 owner/Property DONALD W JOHNSON PHONE: No Phone 316 LOTUS PATH FAX: No Fax GLEARWATER, FL 34616 :ontractor GUY R BUELL PHONE: (727) -534-8430 BUELL ELECTRIC INC FAX: 813-855-6575 241 PINECREST DR PALM HARBOR, FL 34683 FEES Assessed Amount Amount Paid Balance Due Permit Fee $1,470.00 $1,470.00 $0.00 Plan Review $75.00 $75.00 $0.00 Reinspection (1st Notice) $75.00 $75.00 $0.00 Reinspection (2nd Notice) $75.00 $75.00 $0.00 State Surcharge $49.38 $49.38 $0.00 Total $1,744.38 $1,744.38 $0.00 ACTIVITIES Date 1 Date 2 Date 3 Disp FTG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 4/19/1995 4/19/1995 PASS FTG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 4/18/1995 4/19/1995 4/19/1995 SCHD 1ST ROUGH -MECH 5/1/1995 5/2/1995 5/2/1995 SCHD 1ST ROUGH -MECH 5/2/1995 5/2/1995 PASS [550 Passed] ; GEN AIR VENT PIPPING ONLY Done By Neil Legters r:\Forms\InfoSummary.rpt 3CP1995~t;40304 16 LOTUS PATH .LAB -ELECTRICAL 5/4!1995 5/4/1995 PASS Michael Hurley ST ROUGH -PLBG 5/4/1995 5/4!1995 PASS .LAB -ELECTRICAL 5!3/1995 5/4/1995 5/4/1995 SCHD ST ROUGH -PLBG 5/3/1995 5/4/1995 5/4/1995 SCHD ;LAB -BLDG 5/5!1995 5/5/1995 PASS Bill Wright >LAB -BLDG 5/4/1995 5/5!1995 5/5/1995 SCHD .INTEL -BLDG 5/22/1995 5/22/1995 PASS Neil Legters .INTEL -BLDG 5/19/1995 5!22/1995 5/22/1995 SCHD JAIL INSP-SHEATHING 6/9/1995 6/9/1995 FAIL John Witkowski [870 Cancelled By Requestor] ;CANCELLED BY CONTR ON SITE. NOTREADY. JAIL INSP-SHEATHING 6/8/1995 6/9/1995 6/9/1995 SCHD JAIL INSP-SHEATHING 6!12/1995 6/12/1995 FAIL John Witkowski [870 Cancelled By Requestor] ;NOT READY. VAILlNSP-SHEATHING 6/9/1995 6/12/1995 6/12/1995 SCHD VAIL INSP-SHEATHING 6/12/1995 6/13/1995 6/13/1995 SCHD ZND ROUGH -MECH 7/3/1995 7/4/1995 7/4/1995 SCHD ?ND ROUGH -MECH 7/5/1995 7/5/1995 PASS Neil Legters ZND ROUGH -PLBG 7/11/1995 7/11/1995 PASS Neil Legters TUBSET - PLBv 7/10/1995 7/11/1995 7/11/1995 SCHD PARTIAL FRAME 7/12/1995 7/12/1995 PASS John Witkowski (550 Passed] ; 1. REAR PORCH BEAMS ONLY. PARTIAL FRAME 7/11/1995 7/12/1995 7/12/1995 SCHD 1ST ROUGH -ELECTRIC 7/18/1995 7/18/1995 FAIL Michael Hurley 2ND ROUGH -ELECTRIC 7/17/1995 7/18/1995 7/18/1995 SCHD FRAME -BLDG 7/18/1995 7/18/19.95 FAIL John Witkowski [620 Failed] ; 1. TRUSS ENGINEERING NOT THERE.2. ELEC INSP3. ; TIE fN SURVEY.NOT READY FOR INSP .LEFT CORRECTI ; ONNOTICE FOR CONTR TO RECALL AND WILLTRY TO SE ; T UP APP T. TO MEET THEMTHERE. 1ST ROUGH -ELECTRIC 7!19/1995 7/19/1995 PASS Michael Hurley FRAME -BLDG 7/18/1995 7/19/1995 7/19/1995 SCHD CHECK ON PROGRESS OF JOB 7/20/1995 7/19/1995 FRE1 John Witkowski [630 Correction Notice $30] ; 1. CAP SHE ET WAS BEING MOPPED IN UPONARRIVAL TO ;SITE AND APPROX 85% OF THEROOF WAS DONE (CAP SHE ; ET). NOTIFIEDROOFING CONTR. THAT BASE SHEET WAS ;NO T FASTENED PER CODE BEING HE STATEDTHIS WAS A ; CEMENT APPLIED TILE.ROO FRAME -BLDG 7/20/1995 7/19/1995 FAIL John Witkowski [620 Failed] ; 1. MISSING FIREBLOCKING AT ALL WALLS10' OR HIGHE ; R, DROP C EILINGS, ANDSTAIR STRINGERS.2. DRAFT ;STOPPING NUMEROUS LOCATIONS.3. VERIFY LOAD PATH ;ALONG NORTH EASTSECTION OF BUILDING ON EXTERIOR ; LOADBEARING WALLS AND ON INTERIOR LOADBE SEWER -PLBG 7/21/1995 7/21/1995 PASS Neil Legters r:\Forms\InfoSummary.rpt CP1995-04034 6 LOTUS PATH =WER -PLBG 7/20/1995 7!21/1995 7/21/1995 SCHD DLUMN -BLDG 7/21/1995 7/24/1995 7/24/1995 SCHD NDERLAY (TILE ROOF) 7/21/1995 7/24!1995 7/24/1995 SCHD ZAME -BLDG 7/21/1995 7/24/1995 7/24/1995 SCHD ~P,ME -BLDG 7!25/1995 7/25/1995 PASS John Witkowski NDERLAY (TILE ROOF) 7/25/1995 7/25!1995 PASS John Witkowski DLUMN -BLDG 7/25/1995 7/25/1995 PASS John Witkowski [550 Passed) ;FRONT COLUMNS. RAMS -BLDG 7/24/1995 7/25/1995 7!25/1995 SCHD RAME -BLDG 7/24/1995 7/25/1995 7/25/1995 SCHD ~OLUMN -BLDG 7/24/1995 7/25/1995 7/25/1995 SCHD INDERLAY (TILE ROOF) 7/24/1995 7/25/1995 7/25/1995 SCHD RAME -BLDG 7/24/1995 7/25/1995 7/25/1995 SCHD HOPPING-TILE/BUILT UP 7/26/1995 7/26/1995 FAIL SSK [870 Cancelled By Reque storl ;Canceled. HOPPING-TILE/BUILT UP 7/25/1995 7/26/1995 7/26/1995 SCHD HOPPING-TILE/BUILT UP 7/28/1995 7/28/1995 PASS Vern Packer /LOPPING-TILE/BUILT UP 7/27/1995 7/28/1995 7/28/1995 SCHD 'AR T lAL - iv1ECi-i 7/28/ i 995 7/28/1995 PASS 'ARTIAL -MECH 7/27/1995 7/28/1995 7/28/1995 SCHD NSULATION INSPECTION 7/31/1995 7/31/1995 PASS John Witkowski NSULATION INSPECTION 7/27/1995 7/31/1995 7/31/1995 SCHD DRYWALL -BLDG 8/7/1995 8/7/1995 PASS John Witkowski [550 Passed) ;DOES NOT INCLUDE MR BOARD. DRYWALL -BLDG 8/4/1995 8/7/1995 8/7/1995 SCHD DRIVEWAY 10/12/1995 10/13/199510/13/1995 SCHD DRIVEWAY 10/16/1995 10/16/1995 PASS FINAL -PLBG 12/1/1995 12/1/1995 PASS FINAL -MECH 12/1/1995 12/1/1995 PASS [550 Passed) ;MECH COMPLETE PEND ELECT FINAL -ELECTRIC 12/7/1995 12/8/1995 12/8/1995 SCHD FINAL -ELECTRIC 12/12/1995 12/12/1995 FRE1 Michael Hurley FINAL -ELECTRIC 12/18/1995 12!18/1995 PASS Ralph Rowe r:\Forms\InfoSummary.rpt iCP1995'040~04 't6 LOTUS PATH EINSN'ECT -ELECTRIC 12!15/1995 12/18!199512/18/1995 SCHD INAL -ELECTRIC 12/15/1995 12/18/199512/18/1995 SCHD :EINSPECT -ELECTRIC 12/18/1995 12/18/1995 PASS Ralph Rowe INAL -BLDG 12/22/1995 12/25/199512/25/1995 SCHD INAL -BLDG 12/26/1995 12/26/1995 FRE1 [630 Correction Notice $30J ; 1. NO ADAACCESSIBLE BATHROOM2. WINDOW ON EAST S ; IDE OF FRENCHDOORS IN LIVING ROOM NOT TEMPERED INAL -BLDG 12/29/1995 1/1/1996 1/1/1996 SCHD =INAL -BLDG 1/2/1996 1/2/1996 FAIL John Witkowski [620 Failed) ; 1. VOIDS IN GARAGE CEILING AND MECHROOM CEILINGS ; .2. ELEVATOR DOOR LOCKING DEVICES NOTINSTALLED ; . =INAL -BLDG 1!3/1996 1/3!1996 FAIL John Witkowski [660 Verbal Notice] ;ELEVATOR LOCKING DEVICES. =INAL -BLDG 1!2/1996 1/3!1996 1/3/1996 SCHD =INAL -BLDG 1!4/1996 1/4/1996 PASS John Witkowski =INAL -BLDG 1/3/1996 1/4!1996 1/4/1996 SCHD =INAL -MECH 1!3/1996 1/4/1996 1/4/1996 SCHD =INAL - PLBG 1/4/1996 1/4/1996 PASS [580 Final) ;MADE INSPECTION 12/1/95 =INAL -MECH 1/4/1996 1/4!1996 PASS [550 Passed] ;MADE INSPECTION 12/1/95 PENDELECTRIAL INSPECTION NGINEERING/UTILITIES 1/4/1996 1/4/1996 PASS Bob Maran r:\Forms\InfoSummary.rpt ~~ ~ ~ 4 ~~ A ti P t_; ,~ LT ~.~ ~u n~ti rr c~ rat ~ ~G` ~ E -. 0 - - ____ f~. f ,r. ~.r ~ ; C1 ~ K tl ~~~c~ c .__ ~,~ T (i l ~~ ~•_c 5 ~.' P-1 ` 'j° f s _ j ~~ ~~~~ .. - _ __ - _ ~ ~ ti.,,,,,._.~ ---- ~ _ ti ~~~ _ _ .~ t ~3 ~ ~ s ~~ L e,~P-~~> - ~~~E~"`ry~~~ o~ `:~\ 1 r~~' ~4 ~~ :~~~ ,~ ~,'Q, o~-J9 ti'I `O,1 ~r~~3~~~DB9P LONG iL~nGE P[ANN[NG Df;~'EI.OPI~IFVT RFVIE'a/ February 13, 2004 s F~ichard Men eflrzr 322 Jasmine Way J ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ S ran. I~ ~ U~~ ~~~~~~"~ W "" ~I~C'Y ~F ~LEAR~.A.TER PLANNING DEPAIZTIvIENT POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CLF~\GATER, FLC~R[DA 3375-4748 MUNiC[P,~V. SFRVICCS BUiLDiNG, IOO SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, C[E~kWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE l' ~~ 562`1567 FAX (!27} 562-4576 RE Development Order regarding case FLS2003-12067 at 322 Jasmine Way Dear Mr 8i 1vlrs Menwether This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-202 E of the Community Development Code On January 29, 2004, the Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed your application for Flexible Standard Development approval for reduction in front. {Bay Parkway) setback from 25 feet [0 21 1 feet to match existing structural setback for a guest room addition, in association wit a sing e- ami y residence, under the provisions of Section 2-203 B The DRC recommended approval of the application with the following bases Bases for Approval 1 The proposal complies with Detached Dwellings cntena under the provisions of Section 2-203 C, 2 The plan complies with General Applicability Cntena under the provisions of Section 3-913, and 3 The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding area 1 concur with the findings of the Development Review Committee and, through this letter, approve your application for Flexible Standard Development The approval is based on and must adhere to the revised site plan dated received February 11, 2004 Pursuant to Section 4-303, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of Flexible Standard Development approval (February 13, 2005) All required certificates of occupancy shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit Time frames do not change with successive owners The issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required In order to facilitate the issuance of any perrrut or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this pnor development approval r. ~:,1[ \ B[unN J AUNGtiI, MntoR Co~i,a[as[oNre 0 iiO'ff NdM[ITQY vlCi A~AY(~R COM. 11tiS1UNLH ~Y'Ni[F[FY CIL\Y CO~IV[tiSIQr,IK Fw~.vr, iluusnxn C0~6~11SSIONFR ~ (jilt JO~SON Cl7AlVhtilQn>H LOUAI FntP[ oYhn N r nND t\r t nt\><t nv[ AC nog hntr[ o~rTR February I3, ?004 Mr & Mrs Menwether -Page Two If you have .any questions, please do not hesitate to call John Schodtler, Development Review Speclaltst, at 727-562-4604 You can access zoning for parcels within the City through our webs~te _ www myclearwater * lYlake Us Your Favonte~ Sincerely, ~l?t Cynth-a H Taraparu, AICP Planning Director S ~Plann~ng DepanmennC D B~Srandard ~lexlPendrng Cases~2 Reviewed and PendmgVasm~ne Way 322 bleriwelher (LJvIDRJVarm~ne Way 322 i Development Order dac , ~`QJ'~'"D~ ~-~F+SI~CNJS~I ~` ~..a~n . rWC.c+t ~ Lr.~-w~ a.w~ Wf. Yrnr i/c7~---' ..-~~ 'S~ lAa.to ~L. ~it.4.1 31-Z. S~-.~6 .r~ ~ C~~gc'ba~- fit, ~ Co+,m,~t~- ~z, sir h~ -prp~~t 5~9-~~ov ` l : S~ ~ Ssb Bot,w.l ~z5 ~ .. - -- .. 13a~ f f ~t3'I r.1 1t f 1 Z2~ ~ ! , .. 1 - -- - ____---~ ~-- . S-~~t~J 38 ~ ~ ~.~~` --... ~ _ '' - _ 1 J 4..J • - - L~ i r lSi4N4 Q.i'~tQ , a ~S ~ 1 t~• a q •t mac. ~~ ~~~ n: ,,.,, , CITY t)~ ~~.LARINAT~R ,.~,,: Wiz., PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ~~ ~ ~`' MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING • ~,~ ~~~~~T~~,~~ae~ 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVE. CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 .,.. PHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4576 www.myc(earwater.com/epermits SSE SUMMARY ;P2003-11272 : JASMINE WAY RIWETHER, RICHARD ~IILY ROOM AND BEDROOM ADDITION (1230 SO FT) OPLE e: ntractor JOHN H LOGAN PHONE: 727-446-2184 CLARK & LOGAN INC FAX: 727-461-2093 1108 ELDRIDGE ST CLEARWATER, FL 33755 ner/Property RICHARD MERIWETHER PHONE: No Phone 322 JASMINE WAY FAX: No Fax CLEARWATER, FL 33756 ntractor BRYAN T WALLACE PHONE: 727-734-2879 DUNEDIN PLUMBING ING FAX: No Fax 483 PATRICIA AVE DUNEDIN, FL 34698 ntractor HARLAN JOHNSON PHONE: 727-409-8944 HARLAN JOHNSON ROOFING FAX: 727-446-6250 229 VELMA DR LARGO, FL 33770 ntractor JEFFREY A REED PHONE: 727-320-9522 OCEAN AIR AND REFRIGERATION IN FAX: 727-532-6793 8306 78TH TERRACE N SEMINOLE, FL 33777 ntractor OLEN J DIXON PHONE: (727) 784-1513 OLEN DIXON ELECTRIC INC FAX: (727) 784-2479 1303 MICHIGAN AVE PALM HARBOR, FL 34683 .ES Assessed Amount Amount Paid Balance Due Clearing & Grubbing $10.00 $10.00 $0.00 Permit Fee $1,760.95 $1,760.95 $0.00 Plans Review Fee $169.00 $169.00 $0.00 State Surcharge $12.30 $12.30 $0.00 Total $1,952.25 $1,952.25 $0.00 ~NDITIONS conditions must be met before a permit can be issued. ectrical Review 't 1.No electrical drawings to review.Please submit electrical drawings. G,..,,,~~ ~.,F„~, „r,,,.,,,, ..,~ P2003-1 X272 JASMINE WAY ineering Review 1 }Need survey. d Resource Condition The NE addition is too close to the oak tree, move northward to setback line, and it is highly recommended that a pier and lintel system be designed for this. structure. The cook center is also too close to the oak tree, the footer system and plumbing cuts will sever structural roots supporting this tree. Redesign this area to address these concerns. Show sanitary and water locations and proposed conections, if connections involve re-routing, consideration must be given to tree impacts. All trenching under existing trees must be done by hand, recommend tunneling under the larger roots. install tree barricades just prior to recieving the building permit. ing Review The proposed addition fronting along Bay Parkway will need a Level One approval. The current`front setback in LMDR is a 25 foot along Bay Parkway. The existing setback from building to property line is 22 feet. (2/6/2004) Reviewed plans submitted on Jan. 30th and the above comments are still applicable. The applicant will have to apply for approval for this. Done rIVITIES Date 1 Date 2 Date 3 Disp By 'd Tree Permit 11/12/2003 11/12/2003 DONE Kathleen Bedini 2 TREE PERMITS PULLED - BCP203-08663 -COMPLETE AND BCP2003-11144 -ACTIVE -in Notes 11/12/2003 DONE Kathleen Bedini 2 SETS OF PLANS RECEIVED -NEED SURVEY AND ADDITIONAL SET OF PLANS ~lication received 11/12/2003 Kathleen Bedini I-in Notes 12/5/2003 DONE James Wagner RECD BOUNDARY SURVEY. JAW 12/05/03 ctrical Review 11/12/2003 12/8/2003 DONE Ralph Rowe SEE CONDITIONS. Iding Review 11/12/2003 12/13/2003 DONE Neil Legters ffic Review 11/12/2003 12/19/2003 DONE Bennett Elbo 1-in Notes 1/30/2004 DONE Jean Peeke 1/30/04 -RECEIVED ENTIRE NEW SET OF REV ISED PLANS -KEPT (1) OLD SET TO REFER TO (JMP) 3-in Notes 2/5/2004 DONE Jean Peeke 2/5/04 -RECEIVED ELEC SHEETS A9.1 -THESE ARE NEW (NOT REVISED) (JMP) Wing Review 11/12/2003 2/13/2004 DONE JVS see conditions id Resource Review 11/12/2003 11/20/20032/13/2004 DONE Rick Albee See Conditions ed Clearing/Grubbing fnsp 11/12/2003 2/13/2004 DONE Rick Albee ue Placard corded NOC renovations and additions corded NOC renovations and additions ;ue Placard 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 11/12/2003 2/17/2004 DONE JC DONE JC DONE JC DONE JC DONE Steve Doherty ~,gineering Review See condition. ;n Letter Sent 3/1 /2004 ..~G,,,r..~~~„E„~,,,.,.,,,,,, ~.,} ;P2003-1 ~ 272 JASMINE WAY 'Footer/Elec. Bond 3/15/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 FAIL John Witkowski Scheduled by IVR on Monday, March 15, 2004 @ 9:34:25 AM.Contact: (727)446-2184 NO SPECIFICS INCLUDED IN FOOTER DETAILS. 'Footer/Elec. Bond 3/17/2004 3/18/2004 3/18/2004 PASS SSK Two footer bonds OK. 1st Rough -Plumbing 4/8/2004 4/9/2004 4/9/2004 PASS Bill Phillips Scheduled by IVR on Thursday, April 08, 2004 @ 2:33:35 PM.Contact: 734-2879 I-in Notes 4/20/2004 DONE Jean Peeke 4/20/04 - RECEIVED'COLUMN FOOTING DETAIL' - TOM C REVIEWED AND SIGNED. PLACED IN ADDRESS FILE. NO REVIEW FEE PER TOM (JMP) ~"Slab 4/21/2004 4/22/2004 4/22/2004 PASS John Witkowski Scheduled by IVR on Wednesday, April 21, 2004 @ 12:31:33 PM.Contact: (727)446-2184 t`Lintel 5/18/2004 5/19/2004 5/18/2004 FAIL John Witkowski same as fill cell insp this date 3'Lintel 5/17/2004 5/18/2004 5/18/2004 FAIL John Witkowski Scheduled by IVR on Monday, May 17, 2004 @ 2:37:34 PM.Contact: (727)446-2184 unable to locate on drawings any info regarding steel in lintels or precast (size, number). 3'Lintel 5/18/2004 5!19/2004 5/19/2004 PASS Vern Packer Scheduled by IVR on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 @ 2:15:50 PM.Contact: (727)446-2184 I `Footer/Elec. Bond 5/18/2004 5/19/2004 5/19!2004 PASS Vern Packer Scheduled by lVR on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 @ 2:15:05 PM.Contact: (727)446-2184 'Nail -Structural Sheath 6/28/2004 6/29/2004 6/29/2004 PASS John Witkowski Scheduled by IVR on Monday, June 28, 2004 @ 3:46:32 PM.Contact: (727)446-2184 ONE OF TWO BUILDINGS ~~Nail -Structural Sheath 7/9/2004 7/12/2004 7/12/2004 PASS SSK Scheduled by IVR on Friday, July 09, 2004 @ 3:30:23 PM.Contact: (727)446-2184 -roof sheeting ok. ~ Partial -Plumbing 7/23/2804 7/26/2004 7/26/2004 FAIL Tom Carrick Scheduled by IVR on Friday, July 23,~L004 @ 2:49:06 PM.Contact: 734-2879 ? 2nd Rough -Plumbing 8/2/2004 8/3/2004 8/3/2004 COM Tom Carrick main addition only--w/heater location in guest house not acceptable Scheduled by IVR on Monday, August 02, 2004 @ 3:32:57 PM.Contact: 734-2879 2 2nd Rough -Plumbing 8/4/2004 8/5/2004 8/6/2004 PASS Tom Carrick Scheduled by IVR on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 @ 2:32:48 PM.Contact: 734-2879 1 1st Rough -Mechanical 8/9/2004 8/10/2004 8/10/2004 PASS Tom Carrick Scheduled by IVR on Monday, August 09, 2004 @ 3:25:23 PM.Contact: (727)638-8653 2'1st Rough -Electrical 8/12/2004 8/13/2004 8/16/2004 PASS Michael Hurley Scheduled by IVR on Thursday, August 12, 2004 @ 10:57:55 AM.Contact: 784-1513 6'Service Change 8/18/2004 8/19/2004 8/19/2004 PASS Michael Hurley 7'Frame 8/18/2004 8/19/2004 8/19/2004 FAIL John Witkowski Scheduled by tVR on Wednesday, August 18, 2004 @ 3:07:38 PM.Contact: (727)446-2184 i .add straps at hip carriers 2. missing details at column tops and ext. wood walls. 7 Roof in Progress 8/31/2004 9/1/2004 9/1/2004 PASS John Witkowski Scheduled by IVR on Tuesday, August 31, 2004 @ 10:03:13 AM.Contact: 409-8944 DRY IN i1 Completed Roof 9/2/2004 9/3/2004 9/3/2004 FAIL John Witkowski Scheduled by IVR on Thursday, September 02, 2004 @ 12:44:06 PM.Contact: 409-8944 CAP SHINGLES NOT NAILED CORRECTLY AND NEED PICTURES OF BASE SHEET. 11 Completed Roof 9/3/2004 9/7/2004 9/7/2004 PASS John Witkowski Scheduled by IVR on Friday, September 03, 2004 @ 10:35:38 AM.Contact: 409-8944 )7`Frame 9/9/2004 9/10/2004 9/10/2004 PASS John Witkowski Scheduled by IVR on Thursday, September 09, 2004 @ 2:03:58 PM.Contact: 420-7809 made two insp this date. contr had completely insulated job. unable to inspect on first visit. talked to him from field. passed insp on 2nd attempt. )9'Drywall-Screw/Nailing 9/17/2004 9/20/2004 9/20/2004 PASS SSK Scheduled by IVR on Friday, September 17, 2004 @ 8:14:08 AM.Contact: (727)446-2184 ;P2003-1.1.272 JASMINE WAY 'Final ~ 2/14/2005 2/15/2005 2/15/2005 COM SSK Scheduled by IVR on Monday, February 14, 2005 @ 9:10:42 AM.Contact: (727)446-2184 Owner wanted to move into the completed master bedroom which was added to existing structure, final inspection cannot be done until kitchen cabinets are installed in the pool house. I did not see a problem with owner moving furniture into bedroom 'Final 2/10/2005 2/11/2005 2/18/2005 FAIL John Witkowski Scheduled by IVR on Thursday, February 10, 2005 @ 3:46:28 PM.Contact: (727)446-2184 NO ACCESS, NOONE HOME. mit Expiration Letter Sent 2/28/2005 sired on 20-MAR-2005 3/20/2005 DONE TEND EXPIRATION DATE 4/29/2005 DONE BJS t Final -Mechanical 4/29/2005 5/2/2005 5/2/2005 FAIL Tom Carrick confirm that check valve is installed intub shower wand Scheduled by IVR on Friday, April 29, 2005 @ 4:03:47 PM.Contact: (727}638-8653 )'Final 4/29/2005 5/2/2005 5/2!2005 PASS John Witkowski Scheduled by IVR on Friday, April 29, 2005 @ 4:00:16 PM.Contact: (727)446-2184 3*Final -Electrical 4/29/2005 5/2/2005 5/2/2005 FAIL Ralph Rowe Main breaker needed in free standing bld. per. art. 225-33 NEC. i Final -Plumbing 4/29/2005 5/2/2005 5/2/2005 FAIL Tom Carrick elevate condenser to 3" above grade Scheduled by IVR on Friday, April 29, 2005 @ 4:00:57 PM.Contact: 734-2879 1 Final -Mechanical 5/9/2005 5/10/2005 5/11/2005 PASS Tom Carrick Scheduled by IVR on Monday, May 09, 2005 @ 1:58:57 PM.Contact: 638-8653 'Final -Electrical 5/10/2005 5/11/2005 5/12/2005 PASS T_C Scheduled by IVR on Tuesday, May 10, 2005 @ 12:15:50 PM.Contact: 784-1513 rmit Expiration Letter Sent 11/3/2005 :TEND EXPIRATION DATE 11/9/2005 DONE Jean Peeke EXT PERMIT FOR 12/12!05 FOR FINALS NO FEE -PERMIT WAS STILL ACTIVE AT TIME OF REQUEST (JMP) S Final -Plumbing 11/16/2005 11/17/200511/17/2005 PASS Tom Carrick Scheduled by !VR on l^.~ednesday, November 16, 2005 @ 9:49:44 A(`A.Contact: 734-2879 D Job Completed 11/17/2005 DONE Tom Carrick ~-- --~ - ~ BOUNDAR Y SUR l/E }' ~~ ~ NAYfF1Yf ~ Z;xRGt ANC(EiDE[fA ~.. _ mPEfFMF De ceD aoar ~ 40 C7' RAK o DEwaPrra+mrxt~D r,r O PRCi'EArvCO4NDt ON DNLL ROTE P JRF[fTC1fNARK ON' (W/YEWAY N F2~OMEASILHO ESM! UJFMEN! G CM.QfA7FD LAI£ UMt4fNFMApiF1W+0E NJE4E7/7 EtfY aEVArrw FF fNI51IfDfLOW ENfR ENfRGfIIAB<r FCN fgAVD (YWGtE9E MO.S.VAEnr ~ GFNrXMT fPX (0.010 P.WNERXA[DRMU 4 L~ f,LVwEIF L [Pr'GAl q PMwEA/YLK'' LA.E /NMIEDACCESJUSEMFNi CM Cq(f>/fT M(NVMENr MX MLWIXF lR faR,o n+cNROD RrJ xorra scuE f/P f0[AOexGW qFE 0.4 O'FIGYL pE(YW0.J RYrY RKY/70`IYAY ORd CYFKiOL RKO97J BOGN NJD NAa 601JC POP PaAW7EVl GOYRKC PORA OF gLWNOEUJFMFM PRAT P"..~W~'EN/A6EAFM'EMWdWENT h U.E V1K/rv USEMERI PG PAGE fIXRq PYMr PAYFMBI! C fD n Mr Pd PU rB(XX / ~ ASAl01r POB vOalrCl'l2GMIN010 G~~~~ t ~J 9~ POL NNr 04 Ov ~ 978 ^ DL44SOZ51W PC PpttCl°LLNAlf.WE UN LAyEPoJCA PGC POWrCFCO'AA7u'K)ORiI'A NRf WM YU A:R METER PRC Ppxf O•REYERJF LVRVF IEt ffIEPNONP FAG A)EJ Px RtNr Or rANGENCY [Sl COVEREDA,FA R RADN.6RLAGLNJ BR BEAR[NG REfERFMF ROE R0.Y'PIEAIWNOUJET/BYr GI CM000 JIR bET ~ACNROD/G° RAO RAta4 rrE SW' SKlIYALK xR NCYIRAOnt rdM /fl MRRARYBf.NCNAWM ae Ane [x7aA'rKrrEx rbe 70°Or BAYK BM BfNO+MMWf M 1Y'P1rIL ~ GB GIYD/AASVR WC n11NESS COB'!ER C G[CL1,1/EO fOW FLCIf CF WA rER ® n81 ® W0.'UOEO( W a ~ W COVL dP'X hAll lrv ~ £YIS/NG E1fvAlIOV GENERAL NOTES ~ L , ( Il LECJL 0.~JOM'fRlxFROnL1ED dr002RJ 3 )1 ME LANOJ 9htlnNNEREM M£RE,WIAASiR1CTFDfO4UJEMC3YIJ 'r ~ }C 5~ OVOMER/E0.Yd~`DET'O/M64v-KEJ xOr51/OIM'O~'l1K. Mr Q ~ m al Is91ENT CGlFD FpplpADCwJ PRODOf '~. a I) W.VL lrE9ARE ID IAFFILECK D4WAl1 MD .JrfxD7 ro BE USED roArcws/wlcrdawaaruxes xar vAW wmKU7 Arc'aGW)I{4f N0%G1WA aALFDSEAt orAf[oRroA A [ KOISED SI MYEYW ANO M UPAL ~. a Dxr nvs[EfNOrpowEATS [[x.IRD n NOKAOOlP1UI1P/fQMD wPRrrtRrrcraAEns [«BEJJAnrEo N w. ERSavssrlo~alAREru rAxonlEAwafn cnatsson+E.nnsE sMUwM q naRa<onwf+vwrAOrpErvarum la f1F'AlIClISP'ENOYM'AREBLSED LWXINGVO IMEJS OIMEAMOSEnOLEO IIJ BEAWxGJ AE~rYFO fOIP/EM"FDASBR ly Rdd A/RFkI GIFNC!®NEREfCVTAfdA OCiSPJ GEOVfrRCRG1/A~ IJ/ RO LN9f7PQ101hO Na%OVEIFJIrJCRVISIHF MJTAlU110RJ ANLE BEBICGVI TEDOALEAIILW SNOnX I 40 ~ [GALL PpNTI (CALL P(NN rJ /.150Ir M CM ~ ~ .Nj (lBLPROvfOJ "~ JASMINE WAY P I ~ _ - , CENTRALFLORJDA 65 RIW 930 S WINTER PARKOR/Vf SUlTf730 CASSELBERRY, (137707 PAma (311J J97-1711 ' Far (]71J J9)-7177 And Affiliated Companies NNmm00 IdGa7B7-01C3 ~~ ~ Na0mmd0 Fax 1-0O11d7.r1r-0 LBNA `Y W ,...J" ~n h ~y T- -_ _ APPROVE6 CITY OF CLEARWATER PUBIIC WORKS ADMINISTRAT10P1 .gy, _ / G a 0 ate:. U 3 (m'•~~) JASMINE WAY 65'R/W 125 O7' M. ~5../k// Y®~F l ~ - _SlY _ , ~+~,~•~P e _ _ II:~~~ 9fl ~ 40 0• fv wu o ~~- . u ~arrrcw;s on ac,. • 91F8`TtT'AL4N an a.Tn~. II f1E]OM:AA.II® Eq/1 E:ScZ J. C LV.LUU l81 GMf UN0.5CM: eF: ervAnoY fv faw,a~tro Za rnoo cnrantw~revr feel fouw Rr'('RE• ~ ~ ® ~Vl93A'F FPX PAp1iT~fF. ~ E'.iEA S CM COMJit'lElfa'/INBVI IU{ ~ flR fQf.9FVYRW NIS nrorrosrw~ fuc PanowaPV>.< on o~au nrmeas ww ,elanci<wAr QRS aT+vulcrvrnsant KN ILIL ipsL PCP PE7t1WLq,PmyrR P. r O O.f ORAMIffElsaHf PRK P~141p/TRt3~ .H. q-h, E 4E UldlfTElg®1? /G PAGF ro ~~ ~ ~ v rtAr9 wr I /.rvlvc A9fN[T POfl <OIYTO~EfJ1EK~C 3~9' ONL OrBtlFM(O,F_f POG 1C14'ITOKVA~ /6919 PP POw97PCiE P.OL PIA949(AE l,[ 1R44SkI4lS1 P.G /ONTO'OT,YA)ME urv C/NERI59! vcc ICV/TCYQTVOIMACVm •~ WM wA ]FAi~7FA PRG Rq'r6lEl9/SECw~a >6_ 18BIg1EFAG/IFS i:T PRNrCf TAMGB,CY ® OOY13i®AI~A R RAgP.6(/{ApA(f ' BR BE4O,tJR96~2 ROE RgFOVBY(NS EI¢ll6V: IX 05O•) S[0. SFTFCk%.Yli fAo RAO Ru24. J1E SM SfSYAlX ' R.R A'OYRADlV. TBAL ]HWD2Vf1'LL#G/NVdf ~ ar AiPRND'lAT6V r.6e rzrcFflwr 9hf 6~nlilna.! m rrrxu ce uroiearR nc wmGSrcvarx G fAWWID Et11C EZffO~IN>Bf ~ ~ csa wH1 ta.~saxwAli n, Y ET/SINGBEVATRK g ~ ~ ~ GOJERAC N07ES C ,' l/ lKX OEAA~lXT'PROY~9r OA19tl Q 0 D RENw59,afMh9RUVMBa~/afAUSJRM.'IID/aPP.tm¢M9 ), pp aR0'R6fRFbS6l8.dgB¢M~¢SAW9gNry O,YfiEPCAr Y m .9 11dtl~CRd.NOPDrINJS OFP(VltW7 fOLxDI rKM oP OtMW d9nvY~ASnswe~xoricrArm a q wai>~swEron~rArfoF nenutAro A/it'MOT ro ~IEmro~amusnasmlwlera A norYkonrnmvrrr+EmwnwESOasKV.ewsmsFACCYA2oea. (~SimYF'[RMmNVf91 q ov.rn~Fe,vaoaettsmurm n .ruccwrsup,xn2wovnmsara~¢vsr9ueea,w,m q Ail~5aY69lOIMAREnArA'Di~WGEDfKES9 onsmve a ~o>a~vsrAVrTarsao~m 14 HtYAiI[M569RA1rfARE9A~IfLri9fl YD IiMESf On6PIt2SEA01. L Iq ~+Rncsrou~v~mwseR ~ 11f ARSmM£YC4L'I®Id3GERls6AC6~ft-t~TR'CPKTNE _ ITl AV4.W9YIMOYH®IISOfIE~EMTA[UTOYS HIYF!®Y(OCAIIDO/)E177/NMBpllk _ 40 0 GM. - ~n h .__ P I 1 I~ 1 ` `~_` ~ = - cEnrrRAC fxoftroa, ~ "~ I 9SOS N7N7EAGr1RKR4NE I~~ S(P11E230 E MAR 1 6 2004 , , assae~ar,,R3z~o~ ~:. 322 JASMINE WAY ~ ~I }~ BCP2004-034• • ~.__.___ .._ - 93 U _,if.~., ,.~.;.`,• - SWIMMING POOL GI'' - 5..~ '-' ntl A MERIWETHER RICHARD C, ~a~~ e-}_~ vain 2onrng IMDR _`____ atlas# 2956 ~~~a, i.~+ I.. ®~ s°!~ _~ ~ i e a . _~_ ~ ~ '~}I I ~ ~~ it j~ fdAR 1 6 2004 ~ j VI II ~ II_J {_ _ 26_ -_.___._._ .__ ~__ ~ 4 fa s'r5' cAr. 2 125.09' M, 125.00' D 6LOCX~ISr 40 0~ conHCR OF LOT it ~ rA s/B- IR /697B IQO' 0 IQO' BS O' L,~ lug Q 1pNII4G 90D9'IS~ K __ _ ~ ~~ _ 3 B9lB'J9' M , MMIIAIt~ etmolNGSC~aaa~ f7EllAN+OfR cr vaen~ cx ~ ~ ~/\~~ )~ ' '1 siaF.r~ nw 55 55 i ` 3v 53 i h a 5 0. r~F _' ~ a ~ J~ F h .. f50' .. .1. n S'OlPP~~,,tD~h ~ If.09' a ~ ~ Q ~ ~ V 57 i 9.19• 8 a "11.B o~ ° ' fNtX03vRf ol. aar "~ ' ~ '"•~ ~ 8 a ~ m A.e ~ o a i p~_++ yy o N .' fN ~ , D ~• . ~„ a Y` J,Y:126~~i3$'~I :LI~~h T>AP B.BD' ~ ~ ~ h COr/G ry - OH/Y£ _ b ~ & ~ oo o'o. ouo' Bs B' 40.0' sw W?MpP 80.00' C. sw ~~ )9.99' C. m• cr Lor n OF Lor ss LP' LiJ ' I7S.00' D Lori ~°'i~Fi' (CALG POB(T) (GALL P(YN~ 125.0f• ~{. GM h (IMPROVED) h ~ JASMINE WAY P, _ _ _ ~___ - 65'R/W _ _ _ APPROVED CITY OF CLEARWATER PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION 9y. S ~c~ ~ T"`1 Date: D 3_ (C G_`~ ^ ~ ~ ~OFOZ --- ~~LINDAR` ~ , ~`b~ -..~-,.- nixnJarf ~ - naranu oa fN ' HAd 0 .~i q /P.CTx.RIY 0.l7l,£R OX OA,'u T SlfRSIWAMR: LY.1' OgS~n Al A3DMF.WA4® EM E4:FA'Fr, G Gl0.4A fED L.ME W+0.~(:4't , AEV P1EVAIX]9 FF fAYAS4571]R eAW 6~'LRLII(]BAH/r FGAL FIX/NDCOK'RE, FPX FgLYO PACiF.+! 4 ® LLYFFE/F l l6VGM HCO~lII'l1vE LAE UAMIIDA[tE:36'SUi LAI ~>F/xMAB// dUl MAnOIRF f.(R PofD.O /KNRW NiS NOf70 SUlF F,AP fIX.oW NOYPIff OA O~flLL RFGGY0.9 ' Acw rooncz<wAr oRa cxfrzuL RCSamsswr r;Aa Rurasc Pv. abwbvAw~svrmmxc F. r \ D oc rnArvAVpEUarsrr vRa P9111NN6vrREF~' wv~:, t ([E Vldnl'EAB81Blf PG PAGE R) rWB/ PNYf PAWI(B// ^ P PUT PA /UTR~,]f non A.srxRr Pae ArnFraBECewwB OJIL OY8BlA01BES PQG Ji7/If Q~mAfHV@fBN PP PO/1HlPdF POl lCLVILriL.I,E rX lA.1MS0'A10t aG nzvrOr 0.WYARRE G7V fAHEPoSBr PGC fLY!?O`GL11D'OLeFJntw+ 1t4CF W.K WA naVAEJtF PRG POWlCFAEYHCSFGIOA~F 7S IHBNOYE fAO[LnEf PT. KW/O~TiWt8rt;Y G~ Gd5•E>DN£A R RAdLK VYGtKJ BR B' ROE RO(FOYSWWYG AiISEJ®r ~~ O/ C,VdI LR 6FTRWAWiW RrD RALiLL i!E SM' ~PYA(K ' RR AwaAnAL ra+L iB16[~NRI'BFIq/AWRY M ARC TOG IgWlT64K BM B6WYMAR( iYP 11P/(lL Gfl UI[NBADN WG wllfr6SB0.T%~SP G ULG14A/FJ EOI% tDYFOrWATR ® W91 ® ~OGC(YOf ~s~~'TP ,+9 s0i EnsmcsEti'Arxw GOYFi7AL NOTES ry lEGrC ~fx„'FRJVP~4l BT OIk6tf 11 f1ELYQS9fOnHlEJ1ECW WBREAC7ABS!lNCIIDWPbIP~B'S OPOlN9PAEWa~B.L1A@ dV.tESAOisAMrMOV iN£RAt A Ar69AOVaefAPplfATlS O<raofan_t FCVmrf>aemorRW DOHOVEM9YI3 n6EAVTLCLIi~ q WAl1 YECAI/ETO ihEfA46nEWVL AA9 AR=nvrro efusmrorrFCU+arrxe'r9aequRruAr3 >) ,wrnvomnrovr n¢sourvAFrpverY.AC RArsearbAt o~A aaaa. IAS(5'EO SLRVEYORAW ANfF6P q oarm~Ee+cweoamnsACrArm n AvAxrv.'nvunovPao.9wF~rrra~a+aeswrsPSrnarm q a+e~vovs.varxAAersnrnnvA~.ac®rvacasorrenr,.~ s+owe Fs~uraWreevmAVrn lasa~ r% aevAixw~sram.A.~sum wrxe vn urESSOneBnq; L,vr. + rp Br~lBres raFrs~c'm mtn£R^^®ASBA rA nDSxAlvfrca+nIDA~FOaoA aaen [Ei]11FlpCAiL1APE 1A 1.9 WL19VGRIXMm RBA0151R7l770PV/SW'EMTNLAROYS 1HVE9®ILOLAfID On:6P 1NlMSINHR 1 CEk2TIFIED T0: ~~~y hr ' atY r.~V4 `1~'r FGt TL~I9 lb g°t3b ~` ( ( ( i' ~~ '~ . ( ( 'Y 1 1 ~~ ~ a r- -- ~ ;tw: ; ~ ~ fi +r ~ICo ~ • , r' \ S-co2^/ r ,WJ Gs3S r ~ ~o x4 - • •. 4 . a ' 7% ~ . r v zo t> -FROM - :~~fRE~T ~-f , ol~E _ ~ ~____~ ` a J J Jolrv S ~ro~7~1~ ~~ LL:7 ~ . ~' .'^ 6 i v t _, ~~• ~ e Z' .(rp~.~, N S's ~„~ ~0 (~ a _ Ywo' .~ . ._--~-"~"i "i4.i.: . - ~ ty ~` i i i "BOUNDARY SURV[Y" pEVELOpr~EtJl FE~ ;\' ;; .C`Y} r~,a.-PODUe (ao>, Aoo, Fcra-. . ~ CITY Os c ~_~-~---___,_-~ LEGEND Fctr_~ouNO cAPF'CO u+orr P,rc, ~~~ F~~N~ 4 °~. ~•L.I~ri}rsET IYCh ROO• f.ra.. ' P.R.1! •- ~PE7WANEH7 RLFifrCNCE IJCNiI/ENT; Y.C.P.+P[ aSK: S.tr.QQ,.~1r SCT~NAk. 9r 6'+9(; F C LL.. f Cpl r LL~II:W/ENT ELEV.. itLVATtON• C.9.3.~ COf/CRfT( 0(,OCX 6 ~C'N7 'C(.rfT rdN7: Pf . Pm+7T OF fbv,-e Cpyprt(pr p~ pz{p. XC. SEC7Npe; t~E• ~'`~C~Ay'M.~ A.SYNALT; P p~1+ ~- RIGTIT Cf" WAY R.. RA,DrUS• A.-. ARL; C. G9 ~ YDw~$CPI RCt,r, pEy, .a}LAIt v.+ CHORp SE/,R STY... S 0.Lf - CYlMN twx~+ra tO~FC9.(Y.. tif48C1(£1l Yt i//1 CC~CRfD AriCA A SURREY OF WEST 40.0 FEET OF' O l.Gl ~.v[~r(Gl.1LU cTHr yr HxxBOR OAKS AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK RAGE tom OF THE F'U6UC RECORDS OE PIN£t,t.AS COUNTY, FLORIOl~ t Yt17lY G k[1T7MQ bR a(Rti41VR M RCY(iV>ys; p'~ [~~'jF7a'~-';i-'^'• nR TWA ~ ~CtA MM MKi~p GtSiD~~~~ ~T,U37 of B+E /~ A~SfA~~jq~ ~ ~At 7(CNNtC,At SfA4(UR03 S[T Iix7M OY aa(T-a oe~r or PRm(sA~ertti ~~~ Q.CVATVOK SfATCIKkT iHtS (S TO CFS1T(fY THAT %[ }µyE pgT O.LYAT}0~{S ~-IOYOt NEftECN, ~ Tyg SHOMlt t(pcECXt AR£ EA~CD CM B(E kATfCHAI VEA1fCAL OAT(Al, 1GIQ. ABQ~E 6CPT„ LOUHTI: TT.01~DA. T1D00 TON[ oLSnNCnoNS ~C1iQN1AAK. CESCR~EU I.tND. TFtCg EtEVABQNs ouc ro bIC~MatSTET>afc5 Faurro w »zuc uAns tint torus Auc ~aASJ:D ttPa~.1F~C-~~i+cr TLwACEVENT{~GY~ SFRwG L /_ PAkE1 Ns APPRQ1p HA7E EST4(/~TION TO TMi BEST OF QU(t AB((JTY, DAPS CS]((ED TO US ~M4V i~AP UATC, c1RA1W tn; OAn• ~/~~ ~~Dj'd !N Mg j ,~~ ~ OASE FLOOD ELLY.~iI()N ' ~C /Z~ pip AWED SUR1J~YtNG ^~ r ~' U+LCKCD BH 7T(e £ Dr+CW STREET ~ ~ ^ ~ ~c ~` ~~ 3p' Q~Rw727R'440~jZg3 ~3 316 J.AS M I N E WAY ~~ ~®~ BCP2004-08333 ADDITION ~~~~~~ SPENCER, STEVE Zon(ng LMDR atlas# 295A ' h.4 vT~ ,.a. ~ GEO~'E'REY WEBER - SEC. /G .TV1P. ~ S, RNG, /~ [ t I C~ . p P t M cu 2 ~1e7o,-1p~4(' O. r 'O'OPS ~ ocvr o• os 40.0 ~~~: ~uR~~~~ ~ s~acK ~O7` s7~ "~ ZQ O !"-'1 ~~•••--- CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION ~~g~. ~L'..: CjT~ :~'. :~=--: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES '~°~ ~~ MUj~l1CIPAL SERVICES BUILDING :~Y~'TE4~F~~, 100 SOUTH MYRTf_E AVE CL_EARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 PHONE (727) 562-4567 F'AX (727) 562-4576 THIS CERTIFICATE ISSUED PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 106 OF THE 2001 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE CERTIFYING THAT AT 'THE TIME OF ISSUANCE, THIS STRUCTURE WAS INSPECTED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH CITY ORDINANCES, BUILDING REGULATIONS AND STATE LAWS REGULATING BUILDING CONSTRUCTION OR USE PREMISES LOCATED AT 316 JASMINE WAY PERMIT NO BCP2004-08333 CONTRACTOR OWNER CHARLES W ALDRICH CBC054588 STEVE SPENCER ALDRICH CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPI-CBC054588 316 JASMINE WAY 1299 STARKEY RD #303 CITY OF LARGO 200506395 CLEARWATER, FL 33756 LARGO, FL 33771 504-1176 (727) 535-7186 THIS CERTIFICATE ISSUED ONLY FOR THE STRUCTURE AND OCCUPANCY STATED ABOVE AND IS VOID IF THERE,~S ANY CHANGE IS EITHER OCCUPANCE OR STRUCTURE ~~ J ; ;, , BUILDING OFFICIAL ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ '~ ~~ ~ i - DATE OF ISSUANCE August 30, 2006 '--~-- CLwCofC }'""'' CITY ©F CLEARWATER rc`~; ,~~,~_~ PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ;~~ MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING s'~~~ F~a,• 100 SO PHONE (727} 562 4567E FAX (727)562045'76A 33756 www. myclearwater.com/epermits :ASE SUMMARY 'LS2003-12067 22 JASMINE WAY IERIWETHER, RICHARD B_ lexible Standard Development approval for reduction in front (Bay Parkway) setback from 25 feet to 22.66 feet to match Kisting structural setback for a guest room addition, in association with asingle-family residence, located at 322 Jasmine /ay, under the provisions of Section 2-203.6. 'EOPLE ole: ether FISHER AND ASSOCIATES PHONE: 727-443-4436 WILLIAM FISHER FAX: 727-831-6653 2315 BELLEAIR ROAD CLEARWATER, FL 33764 owner/Property RICHARD B MERIWETHER PHONE: No Phone 322 JASMINE WAY FAX: No Fax CLEARWATER, FL 33767 ether HARBOR OAKS ASSOCIATION PHONE: 727-447-8081 MARGARET HIGHTOWER FAX: No Fax 301 DRUID RD. WEST CLEARWATER, FL 33756 EES Assessed Amount Amount Paid Balance Due Flex Std-Residential $100.00 $100.00 $0.00 Total $100.00 $100.00 $0.00 :ONDITIONS .II conditions must be met before a permit can be issued. and Resource Condition let The NE addition is too close to the oak tree, move northward towards setback line. let The cook center is also too close to the oak tree, the footer system and plumbing cuts will sever structural roots supporting this tree. Redesign this area to address these concerns. let Show sanitary and water locations and proposed conections, if connections involve re-routing, consideration must be given to tree impacts. All trenching under existing trees must be done by hand, recommend tunneling under the larger roots or suspend the utilities from the floor joist. let All of the above conditions must be shown prior to building permit. oning Condition let That a survey be provided; let That elevation of proposed additions be provided; let That a site data table be provided indicating existing and proposed Impervious Surface Ratio calculations. r:\Forms\I nfoSum mary. rpt L5Z003-12067 >_2 JASMINE'~NAY' Done ~TIVITIES Date 1 Date 2 Date 3 Disp By slid Waste Review 12/24/2003 ;gal Review 12/24/2003 ~rify Traffic Impact Fees 12/24/2003 rainage Calculation Recd 12/24/2003 ap Created 12/24/2003 ase Complete 12/24/2003 .O. Mailed Out 12/24/2003 ;tter of Completeness 12/24/2003 ocuments attached in PPlan 12/24/2003 ~plication received 12/24/2003 A D RC Comments 12/24/2003 A_D ~ee Survey Recd 12/24/2003 1/2/2004 DONE Rick Albee irk & Rec Review 12/24/2003 1/5/2004 DONE DWR No comment to single fami ly addition. ~ndscaping Review 12/24/2003 1/7/2004 1/7/2004 DONE A_D no comments ite Visit 12/24/2003 1/8/2004 DONE JVS ;tter To Abutting Prop Cwner 12/24/2003 1/8/2004 DONE J`JS nvironmental Review 12/24/2003 1/8/2004 DONE Heather Faessle no comment tormwater Review 12/24/2003 1/9/2004 DONE Bab Maran no comment raffic Eng Review 12/24/2003 1/9/2004 DONE Bennett Elbo No comment for increased sq.ft. additions to single family home. ngineering Review 12/24/2003 1/12/2004 DONE Don Melone ire Review 12/24/2003 1/12/2004 DONE Duanne Anderson oning Review 12/24/2003 1/20/2004 DONE JVS RC Meeting 12/24/2003 1/29/2004 DONE JVS end Resource Review 12/24/2003 2/10/2004 2/10/2004 DONE Rick Albee See conditions. RT Review 12/24/2003' 5/6/2004 DONE JVS ompleted 5/20/2004 DONE JVS override -Activity Holds 5/20/2004 JVS override -Activity Holds 5/20/2004 JVS r:lForms\I nfoSummary. rpt LS2OO3-12067 '2 JASMINE ~tiAY ' ZC Approved rerride -Activity Holds 5/20/2004 DONE JVS 5/20/2004 rerride -Activity Holds 5/20/2004 JVS JVS r:\Forms\I nfoS um m a ry. rpt Map Vutput rage 1 of 1 http://publicgis.myclearwater.com/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=OVMa... 7/20/2009 ~r „-,, 40 0' a I W 'B' i91B ~pppaa,... Ij. W ~~~ 4 m a0 0' PI ~oFo~ tjUUIVUHK r JuIT vc r ~~ .. ^' ~ CYYIRAL AxOLfAEl lA NLYY1 fF)A'E fn ~ mcEfucr oe atmeocr N<A n cESramnLrr cR OEEo aE ~" ~ ~ ° tt ~ M C . .wr vrr eExca N fB`1/NUSLLAEO ESM' FASEAFI/r ~~Ry LALE UhDSEAPE LNP'fEWACE EJ5E4E11! W ELEY E2EYA nDY FF fWWlEO/IOOi ENCR ~ EnCR01GMEN! FCN FOR.90?VGFIENO~WIEnt CEx1rA,YrF fPA: faAAiMRRFAALLLCWNUI ~ GtiHGnE/F L IHwM 4 PR04RlYlRE LhE LRMIE9AR'EBB EASFMEM CN f/R CtiTYQIC MLYNAlEM MN NLYNOIF fgMO RRIRM M!S MOfro SGLE fIP P/rY fRPfO ROY PU'E 0.4 LYTiCNL AELYM09 RwMO~WAt OA! OrFCUL AECRB)B BOU AtiO AM EWC ICP PSAMW6Vi Q1YLRR Ppxr OF GPARLA4EUBEKM PRN PER4VYExrRFFERENCFM(YAAIFM O.E l/nl/il'FASEMEN7 AG PACF AB fOLRq eAr r ~ - ~ .x A er a n v aAr As/xur Poe voonaBECV.ww ORL OYEWE.101ALE3 POC PQN7EFLL.Y/MEx(fAO,It PI P011ERPRE POL PQ1?GYLME ' !I iR.WSfOWIEN PC POxJQ`CIENA1LRf E ' UN Y!M EPO~Rw LU7rAnR GELf/VS6L POC PpWJCFCQ YG rFR ME7FN PRC POMO~REYERSFORIE 7R /E(E71L(YYE fApLR1E5 PT KIA76tAAGENCY ® COrFAfOARU R RAOM1ORtrONL/ BR BEARB/O RFJFIfEKE AOE RCATOrFRIKA'G FASEMbl7 LN GiICYN sIR SETROY'R00/GP RAO NA RACLAI nE SAM SBlEIf'ALA NCx RAC41 rBM JCYAPL]AARYBFNMMAR/ NC ARCOWfK1YER T(SB 1L1^0°BA'K BM GB BENfMANAR M 11'PAX Gltr BlNx WC mlkESS CCYdYER C GLG.U lEO EOW FLY'E Q'W.1 /EF ® HELL ® nooo«« CCNC ~~~ ~ ~ EAl$lBw EIEYAnOY GENERAL NOTES 1/ lEGt 0.`SCRYIRMPAONLkDOYOn243 y MELA/B)S.9IDYRI NEAEDV N91EAOlAEBrRICTEpfE14USEILA'!S Bx ornEaREUra.~oeKUlmawYCesxorvlomlw nLEnnr y wfnoi9sL ~Ex~orLaG~~foiawnws ae onaR q wru rrES.vrtronrtfACELr ns wAUANB y .xE,wt ro raE irsEO roRCCwsmECreaanwrLREs norvuw mlxcut nrESiau(ua BOArcwE AALCwsEMt o~A rLOeas y L;CENSEO S(.RYEYCK NrD ALrAA'FR aYtrnsnLEfnVtGwMEStrsLOUrEo ~ y ssnnrEo ~waLAS-xwrwvfWxB pvfycPtmrt',uA.vExs Lwt y nvEnsnrs sRwnAAERArAwMEA.aREn LracssolNUmsE yawn y aana: owxERgrsxnraErvaRALro ly ELEVAnnYSPSra+MAAEBA.vnuan'xc vo V2ESf onrERmsEnorEo IIJ BFXBAY6REtER~1'FD RILPfN^~EDKeR I1J nBS SURVEYLEPK7FD MEREfOiMSA RL15E7 tY{YAFIRL'FlB'L/Q ly NOIR.V6P(Rp1B1MRROVEAEYrJ OR rrg3FRSlAW1lOY's x41E BEF)I L OUlEO OJMN M4Y S//OINf ^ ~ CENTRAL FLOR/OA 9SD$ N7NTER PAlRI(ORIVE SUITE 230 / CASSECBERRY, R J7707 i fMn (J21J 197~171t Far p2lJ]97-Y!!1 nd AffLliated Companies N~~ fu°7B~'~'rB,,~,~ LBW! (uLC vaAYrJ (cALC PaNtJ 18501' M cM ~n h N h _ (IMPROVED/ "~ ~, JASMINE WAY _ __ -~ - -- - - 651 R/W - - _ n~oDf~'E e ' /+cwnaE,ASr ~- nvefass o8 BLOCX 40.0, fd ~ Kn[ D ~e. - ' coarACR o PRO=arrcrn/~ ox avc. o<LOrzz • S'lE@9VO/Ak9l OYI Groi"cY, A/ f7F1DA6tS1.R® E4Y7 E45r~f9~ C LV.Q/LI/81 LACE W/;15[A4 ~ - EtEI: HEYATACM ff fPot9GDAA EMN evaoswisvr fcK fouw mvcRE, ~! v £~a- v ~~,v~r irx ~ Pwgsc~ ,/ ~ WvblE7F~1N'Aw®? eUf Y6\MrE EaFh 26 ~7 ~~ ~ ~ f1R rLV9NpYR47 KTS evrro.~ue ,,~~ fv. fpAroamvPVE as osAaAtRta'rrn9 ~• RAY aa~rrcrwAr DaE L%7C. sA1 RH.77C{SeoDr /eaD Rna Angie PGP Pwxw~vrawra P. r ~\ Od MAlIAEEFA.i~,fq'f PRAL P~WA9rrRfFBfBAZ .NJF]V, eE Vl9/lTE49®Yr /G ANEE ~r v~ aAra~~A• I Fti. s',s' 125.09' M. ~ vt .A.swALT Poe auvra~~cravrvc fa s/e' Dxl. asrl~,~D~9 Pac PDwra~ cu. 125.00' 0 ~_ /R /692e va ronerPaE POL PO.Yr4Y/IE rs rRexsfoem9t Rc Anwro=a9rv~tua eD.D•o. ~aa' sza' arv cASEaA~r PCG nnrrp~aavaeAw aur. ,nf+F 9pV9•IS' K - '-~ W.N WAIWAmFR PRG RATOf~.SEIX9M1'F ._ ___ 12. l8B#A]tEFACd/rWJ P.T PRMrO~iAKrSK'Y 3" '~--_. E9'18"J9' M. ® CDYBr®A/~EA R RACRR (R1GNfJ IX LTQIV 91R 9ETFCliR00! W ~ 'I aQAanrofa af- pavn rr ~~ `~ Kee KD'/~RAD~~L rr x rE~nvrreew/ewer . 9 ' ~ ~ ca cAroiEAVV we nrtr~rcaow G C/[AAAIID EOIC 6YEG~NRIA 4 ` ~ j Q]~AL' atnrwrArff n9•. ® Mzoceu ~~, ~ s :s-' E1f9llYD9EYA1kW ~,, 4 ~, Z ~ GOVERfiL NOTES $ „s *_ y q ~ N '. .~ Q I ~ // lEG1(rr~llwfrrovn~Br ORA3Zf ~ / w M !10" ~..~m,~„ T1.09' Q Q A RF/NQS9R1nNhH6W 116SROr.~S7R10/IDfOPHaI~iFM/D l~. ""."' neon+er~evamavr~s/~w.srolwoKn~rtnr . 4 819- ^ ~ G.OSt/RE ~i ~ ~' ~ ~ -0 LIL1~fR49OfIFTAbY{eOfRM7Ae,7 AGAWAnP1'90TOame ~1 1"~1 8 ;zE D seJ ~ .%." a y Q nermEAensnsAEeortceam 57 h : K I 8 A)1 > ~ ry WAU.>afREro>t¢f~¢nertuL,un i . - 3.B' ~~ ~ _ _ ~ O1 ¢ AREAA7rro lgl~rolFar6rscrnanncwuFS _-... .. ..r :.,.`a ^ ~ m ~ ~A1m~ A0ti'4NCRN5®6KIL [I~n RPeO~ ~,g >,•" .:'~,y f a ~ I31"~ A noAC~~u~fou+oovf.~rrmw~aesu.Easm7na 4®'~ a l~a~~'~.`- '~ q ewrsrvonssroimf/rFn.~r.~wAas~.nw~u~ecssoD~err+rse r/aw/ ..:%.S-~ - q fs~arrAavsrwra~lsvnra , - - vim Iq HEVATReteR9AJWKAFE6tfE4V4YKIIYD IMESCOnBLVSEe07. 1 s f. •, ., (P~ t rr/ ervmres~.c~rot~~A,sen ~ ~~1W!+ ~Y`; ~ , ~R l~ AA74Am9IMD99tBR3 or K@1ENf~~ - . &69' ~ T/60' /N 1EtigirOC+!®ORE]e )K4YFCAnL o ~ CONG ^`I ^! >n I ry h OMyE ~ ~ I~ 1 p tO. D' D '~ ea O' O30' 40 0' ~ s'rr crnvm A0.00' C. sr naeMex 39.9.9' C. ~~ q~ oar Q~ LOT 37 Of LDI Ss I LP' (C4LG Powr) (GnLG posh 125.00" 0. fp~i• 175 Of' M. GAL h 1n h - (lAt°ROVEDJ n _ r JASMINE WAY p, L '- 65`WW I c ,ail r2 ~ `~', -~'=' ~ CENTAAC FLORIDA .L, ~ [ s•~ Ij 1. ~I - z:sosmvrFeraRxawve APPROVED I ~,~AR 1 6 2004 h I A oi~ssseEnnr,~3z~a~ ciTV of c~EaR~~TE~ 322 JASMINE Wqy POBLIG WORKS ADMIPdISTRAiION I I~ ~I _ 1 BCI'2004-03493 ~~ C._-_...._- _• _ j7o!-~r'P"l [_ 4U:'If.i.,rv:•,• .~ r-` SWIMMING POOL ~y: Cr;}'--` ~_.' • '"' - ndA MERIWETHER RICHARD ~ G (} - f~~ ~, ~0~~~ Lear, Zoning LMDR Date: ~3 ,N`/~1`(~/~ allastt2g58 - --...~_..,--...~:.--:.~~.~ ~ ~ Nas'nrcnsr »in.~ oa ~ i ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ BCOGY IO O' FN Hid 0 l`. N ~J}NRW £R O ' - L~l ~~ MAR 1 6 Z~~Q !'I LONNFR n~toru ~ X C rLla "' ° " ~" `~` ~i ~ 1 ~~_-, ia sv wf -~~ sn e af°n~ C fALQtA TED lifb IANCisfi4'(: ~ r l-\I \~';)v ~ ' ~ ~ '~ l ~~ ftEV L}El'AIXW FF F.vsY.91}R ~ 61't~bd MF F Xd f(WkD PApff~+Y ` ~ Cl ~ . - ~ aw,~t7F l \svcnr _ 26^ ._ ------ - -- 24 22 O 4 I'RO'FA)YUYF LAE LMMfIDAQE,56'abi CAr CCNVrElf 1lCM9B/f /UL NAMaYE fut FLC/ORPVRLAJ Nrt Norroawd f1P FPlPO NOVPNE OA fTii(7Al BFCL'1 4af a:t from LFwAr oAa o~fmu2~zL~saw. r.'60 MLLdpaC PCP. PWIL41b~7 LYlVr/Kl f, f a OE aQW~EA.I7AYM PRN F91iIHhHIf/hF~.1[>• N.`R:r - ~ UE V}Al}YG~eNr PG PACE ~ fu e.:s• 125.09' M. ~ I _ fD RTlm PYNf MI'6NB/1 ~n A~wrucr PPaa ~aeFmwWo ' CM 72$ OO' D ~' a~ ORL q'HOKIL}1I64 POL AYNI L?`LI1ifNB25EM . ' . 1R. /9s79 v.P PoMat~ Pot faNrtntlE X /RA ' PC F ICO D 10.0' 950• N30 9®P PpfVrL1 1 CVWArlO}f G}Y G4ERLSBP PCC FC41TO°IX>IPY\POfvB. )CRF 2 C ' 90Dy75~ AL W.N WA/FR.IC7W PRC PmVrtKRFYEVSFLLNff M 91 .• ZONING 3 - -- 994979' Af L~ awa~affA Rr Rd[x,s rANm¢r ~U Rasa O W ' MININIIJ'a1 6UlDINGSE~&6X RatAw.roFR cr Poen a~ r~ ~ ~~~~\ Y6 4YCGSE~B:, ~~ e~ w n~oa} e d~aio L i N~ x s~~ 55 55 f (~ J c . g } unm+a+Lw9r Ac AnLnKV»cWeO rna }Lra•aax ~, f 53 8Al 9Ba)IMA4R }YP IIPIGIL l ~P bb v) ~ C8 Grl'JI BS 9N WC IryJlmSf~ sr~fr~nw - ~ ' 3 L: ~>a Eon Pni~rs}arsv S'~c ~a ~ j La~eaxrwdrm ~ f ~.;~R ___-e__y~___ _ ~n o o a \ ~~+ •- C i~ Z ~ W cvsnrcadvArror GOVERAC NOTES (~~ ~D3( ~~ rn nn° -~, r9o'~ ~ ~' sG}P¢NID h zr.os• I ~ ¢ o a ~ ~ ~ ~ o LECACam>~riwf,rwzmmrrrNers - N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 's w rt ~ // ~ ' .~,-~ o+'ao-vwe . 4 :i ~ ~^ ~ as}ai .u e ve rvd iv r na w 8 9. r9 .'26 a ^i aar ` $ 2n a m 2~ Ldav+tmtfvFLrmoLS LrRmpc~Fp4aln~GOLxLU)rtR aOAOVEN9~TJ ifHlNOrL00V~ e 57 _ x' ' :.. .._~',y- cn >. N WAli 7rE4A/d<rD 7AEBILFLF rIE rwu.Nm 1.9 ~ .-. O M ~ ? w~ . ~. .._ ... ~."5~b ~. _ .- A /Nf1u[DNfMa?nEaaw JFx 6AROm. gWCMK 4 i L L J ~ ^=-~^"~+~~ih O ,.~\ ^~C /{p! SIm1E1 iM00 E ~ N (MINS®EB.O}WOAf~'lSLLG}81 A Av.aenwunLwfunvnvnsvsnraaa~asca+,m~norm h - ~ li~fiy.BO`'~•. 4{r..N i C y LiJ I/ PP9K'OVf 9IP1NA9BRArM9,IF.4Al/~L19G790n6lIM.aF 9Im1M ` - ~~ ' ~ F@li1 AfTePBPAVfL87Hi9i'ID .- .~~ 2Ti ` /~ HE1'A}WI9ff9RitN.lSL 9a~LR11'KCVL {]1fEAf OlIERMDFAOf.' .. ~ ' ~ - n/ 9swazr~Eiam roLS~rP^®as9R ~ ~ ~ ~~;' (~ :: ~' } h rA B9s.cw>frmicfm~Faw9A tidtt5 (SAiF}RtFaGVPE NO LN'L~9POlIXPOa~V9®/!SO}YdiKE'IATKLAnOYS I a 99' : yY , ^-~~.IXZL., ~: 2190' _ 1 .y NiVEaLHlLOC1}IDON6LMWS'AJIWI ~ ~ ' " Il QMG °ry ~ ORlVF n -i i^,~ a I ~ S .o o' o. Sao' as 9' 40.0' SW COPNER BO DO G SW LYIPNF7t 39.99' C. ~.°•LP ql torn OF COr s) OF for 55 (LAdc Pp/Nn (citc PaNO 125.00' 0 ' ~ 1~1• 125.01 M. cu h i~ h lm+~xtvtkv/ r JASMINE WAY --~ - - - P, 65'R/W _ CENTRAL fLORlDA P~~ APPROVED ~z ~ CITY OF CLEARWATER CASSH.BFRRY,R37707 PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION t ~ S D ! Puma laz}/s9~-7m Fac (azq~2$ o , - ry ap: - 0 3 / C o ~~ C And Affiliated Companies ^'~'°'^^i"Lacara'au^' N.>oo'nrrda FaC 7dq}79rd260 _ : ~~~ ~or OZ ~9 w' ~ ~ CERTIFIED T0: GEOFFREY WEBER FG12~°I9 Lb 3°I~ - - is:~ ( :n ,,"s F, i :Y S .LT [~, It~. r ; ~•a,. ,~c't l k t~ {`t, MM .+ ~ ! U (1' Y tlt~.p T'~Yt.~j a y io.op~ 6 Zd Q r'-r ~1.11,j r•.o ~~ a a T---- ~ ~ r SEC. /G .TWP. 29 5, RNG. /S [ ~rL~@ _ o. LNG ~_ ~n1~ ~~• o D 40.0' ~171~ s~L- r au~t~i~ ~ sE~aac~ - FROM - ~TRE~ ~s , Qlt~E ~ ! ~;E~R 1~, ~ f `~' Toliu 5~~.~1e~' ~ a •- -oy f 2L:~ r.3.~ !J~'A 1t ..J((p L 1 „ tel.] ~ S.-co2.y r D c ~s ~ r ~~ ~ v ` r V Tv ~ L7. ~/ ,' . ~_ ~ ~a _ ` ' 0. Se's . . 1: .. ~. ; , 0 w.u ..,.- -~: ~ ~0 a Q~ Yw p' Q.. tc ~ 1-, ~' _ i ,' ~ i ~~~ .. , ~''t4¢'.t~. ;, j 1 _, ,{ ••-~'' } I +.".r' _. _ ~ ~J~tv1}~~ _ ~IA`f cam, ~.. _ .. ~I ~` ~1 JEr ~ ~ ~~~9 j `, ~ ,~( t "BOUNDARY SURVCY" 44 F, ~ \' .~ . ~OEVEIOp~.~fraz SE~,~:,~ ,I U~~} CtYY 0( ` I LECENO F"lR -FaJNO WOtI Roo. F cr R .. fou,ro cArPw tROk Roo. ~, !____~-----~- F Ca't•.~pf1N6 ClIPP£0 IRtrt P7Pf, F R P •-IQJNO NNL 4 F.IiTiawsET 140M1 ROO- f.f Pr P.R.ll •• •Pf7+SJ.UfEt~T REFUtENCE kCM1J£N is P.C.P. ~(: S.N. •~ ~T1k}(, 4' C19(; F C U .. F FUt1Fm ~~'~' T1fV+ £[£VATIfM• C.B.S. CONCR£T( OCDCS( 6TRUCYU~[~~~T MIN7; Pt .POINT Of tHTERSrrr: '' kONWEIIT CC1vn COVOt[Or 0~ OFLP: S(C. SFC7WI+; T~!^r ipvRfip~4pr thct.r~ASPH.~ A5PHALT; PAV;_~. PAKyp1~K ~ RIC}tT C•f WAY R.•• RAt><VS• A.-. ARG C, G8 ~ UfOR6 BEiIR ~' ~+h'IATr v,, taL.aSilRl Ol CS](Y. 1E STI;w S .0.l.( ~- CYlACf LINK I(:k(x {l'f' - FYI ~ COK1tfD MICA A StlRteEY OF WEST 40.0 FEET OF Y.O -v~~na;~.iLU (~nr yr tiRHHUK OAKS _ AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK RAGE ~~ OF THE PUBLIC RECpROS OF PItJE --~~ t Y[.I7Ay G kIJTIp6 M SJ111QXXt M 1K~(tkali+,£ CtW0.Y, OIA Mf RAR16A tKN+o o- Lw10 anaeroai n-vaakn ioqFt naR vzav~~ ~ eua+,iv RcracxNtm Noaw. An unn,m ne LLAS COUNTY. FLORIDI~ T vwo uam Cep MiN Ar or~ovrn wnvCtiv~r's ttu (ntoA suatcs As rRCSreaern ~ ~a'~'`~ ~,touiu "d"" eY ~ mwrrrc aulT-e o®r ACVAT1di SfA THtS tS ib GfA ~~~ O~CMT~ -KREOH 11(£ QA.Y~ CN fTFY TkAT irL KAbE f)STAbtF~ f7,[yt~ Si0Y6t HCRECN, OF FtE kATtOWtL VEA1fCAl OATu-1. 1020. ~Pd4ARK• ~ ABO:£ OE'SCR~EA OUt: Td btG7i18tf ~~ /l.0ltf0A. IL000 ION[ txsTtNCnoNS /:RC ~ASYD tlPQV. ~+'PlrfD 8Y THE a~Ci tdlc [lEVATtQNS TF)+Qrty IWNO IN YkGS[ uAOi 7Mt ZONCS ML AK xt`ERITR~IrCr LAN~EIlEH7 AOENCYS '~~pl1A7L £STM{AT10N 70 TFK tiis7 OF OUR Aa((jM, 1~1.PS ~~~ i0 (1S TM N ~ PAkf7 Ha UAP U~TC, auwr aY: ~JDB rJ'~0,~. d ~M ~ $ zoo ,r oASF Rood £>.tv.~ Ttorr DAT£• APPR b+[caco nr ~ scA~r /1 ~ ~D ~WeQ~ MRS EETC ~ ~ j ~, %_ ~ 1iyc ~'= 30' a~At:~ ~ ;4Fi,Q%63 33 316 JAS MI IV E WAY ~~~ ~~ BCP2004-08333 ADDITION ~~~~~~~~ SPENCER, STEVE Zontng MDR atlas# 295A ~'~~--- CERTIFICATE OF CC)I'VIPLETION ;~ ; _ -: PLANNING AND DEVELOPnnENT SERVICES '~~:, Q,; MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING =~~7E~F~'' 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVE CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 PHONE (727) 562-4567 FAQ; (727) 562-4576 THIS CERTIFICAI E ISSUED PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 106 OF THE 2001 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE CERTIFYING THAT AT THE TIME OF ISSUANCE, THIS STRUCTURE WAS INSPECTED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH CITY ORDINANCES, BUILDING REGULATIONS AND STATE LAWS REGULATING BUILDING CONSTRUCTION OR USE PREMISES LOCATED AT 316 JASMINE WAY PERMIT NO BCP2004-08333 CONTRACTOR OWNER CHARLES W ALDRICH CBC054588 STEVE SPENCER ALDRICH CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPI-CBC054588 316 JASMINE WAY 1299 STARKEY RD #303 CITY OF LARGO 200506395 CLEARWATER, FL 33756 LARGO, FL 33771 504-1176 (727) 535-7186 THIS CERTIFICATE ISSUED ONLY FOR THE STRUCTURE AND OCCUPANCY STATED ABOVE AND IS VOID IF THERE, ANY CHANGE 15 EITHER OCCUPANCE OR STRUCTURE %' f , DATE OF ISSUANCE August 30, 2006 BUILDING OFFICIAL ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~"_ `1` CLWCotC Map Uutput Yage 1 of 1 http://publicgis.myc learwater.com/servlet/com. esri. esrimap. Esrimap?ServiceName=OVMa... 7/20/2009 August 26, 1999 John & Patricia Slaughter 711 Bay Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 RE: A development order approving a flexible standard development application to construct an addition to asingle-family dwelling with a front setback of twenty (20) feet. Dear: Mr. & Mrs. Slaughter: On August 26, 1999, the Development Review Committee reviewed your application to construct an addition to asingle-family dwelling with a front setback of twenty (20) feet at 711 Bay Avenue and has unanimously recommended approval to the Planning Director. The Planning Director concurs with the findings of the Development Review Committee and, through this letter, approves your application for flexible standard development. Please be aware that the issuance of this development order does not relieve that applicant of the necessity to obtain any building pemnts that may be required. In order to facilitate the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter with you when applying for any permits or licenses which require this prior development approval. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call the Planning Department at 562-4561. Sincerely yours, Ralph Stone Planning Director CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATION STAFF REPORT FOR DRC MEETING BACKGROUND INFORMATION: APPLICANT: John & Patricia Slaughter PROPERTY LOCATION: 711 Bay Avenue LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 21 together with the west 35' of Lot 19 Harbor Oaks. REQUEST: Flexible standard development approval to construct an addition to a single-family dwelling with a front setback of twenty (20) feet. SITE INFORMATION: ZONING: Low Medium Density Residential EXISTING USE: Single family dwelling ADJACENT LAND USES: All adjacent land uses are residential. STAFF ANALYSIS CRITERIA FOR FLEXIBLE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT: A determination of the front setback shall consider the extent to which existing structures in the neighborhood have been constructed to a regular or uniform set back from the right of way. A majority of the structures in the vicinity have been constructed at this distance from the property line or closer. Therefore, the applicant complies with this standard. The reduction in front setback will not adversely affect adjacent property values. The construction of a new single-family dwelling will constitute an improvement to the lot and will improve its value. The reduction in setback will not adversely affect adjacent property values. Therefore, the applicant complies with this standard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the application and the site plan, staff recommends approval of the request submitted by John & Patricia Slaughter to construct an addition to asingle-family dwelling with a front setback of twenty (20) feet at 711 Bay Avenue. Page 1 1 0 ~T V ttt~"~-L CITY O~ CL~ARVVATER VARIANCE TRANSt11[tTTA! TRANSMIT TO: n~ -; :~.-,; -~ aff;c Engineer Cynthia Goudeau, City Clerk (Origir'~.3+i --.-r,~ra, ~?t:!ding Official Miles Lance, Asst., City AttornaY _ --, r~:lar. i=-:~.,:renmentat Stephen D^herty, Central Perrritt^:y S~~F=rviscr ?.ead Planner Esr1 Dussautt, Steve Sarncf'. Don "=1e'.one: Znn;.,4 ~~~=~°'~• MEE?'ING DATE: 'May 25, 1995 AGENDA ITEM: 2 CASE #: V95-27 ~. x;., OWNERiAPPLiCANT ZBUSINESS)fREPRESEIVTA7[Vc: ia'y aid Mary _: '`= LEGAL DESCRIPTION: i-larbor Oaks, Farts of Lots 78 a^C 80 ADDRESS: 415 Magroiia Drive LOCATION: 420 feat East of S For± Harrison Avenua AREA: 0.42 acres EXISTiNGrPROPJSED iJSE: Detached Sir:gle Farrtii6y i:~^:e!!i~q ZONING/LAND'JSEPLAN DESIGNATION: RS E (Sir.gte'=amity Residential ~° VARIANCE REQUirST -: , ~.:::: REQI;!`STI VAFitAlVC~ TYPt ty1= VA~t~kNCE >:-NEEDED.. lat~ni>litS`1'~b _ - REQJlREMENTI~ODE CItAt1ON PROPOSED Front setback ~ 25 f4`40.086{5){a)1 j 22.0 ft 3.0 ft _ ! S 5 ft;40.08E(5)(a)S ~ 4.0 ft t i .0 ft Rear setback „~,... ,.~.-~ r r for ~ 45 I'ercenti40.086(81(a) 40 percent 5 perr_ent ~.,N.~~ ,r,a„s ,e. NEWS AP PER AD: 3arY and f;llarv D-NOrkin for variances o` (t) 3 ft to per,,~~t,a structural Setback of 22 ft from a street {Magr:olia Drivel. nght-of-~;,;ay °.. here 25 f~ is required; {2! ft to permit a structure 4 ft from a rear property line where ':5 ft s required; (3) 5 percent to permit V` percent of oeen s;~ace for the tat where 45 percent is required at 4 i 5 ltAaanoiis Drive. Harbor Oaks, pay's ;-f lots 73 and 80. zoned RS 6 {Single Family Residential 6). V 95-27 SURROUNDING. LAND USES {Please refer to attached map for surrounding zoning districtsi: _ ----- - 7+}ortlt:---SirrgfE?-~esr,;-errtr'Tf~"t3Si:- Sirrye fdts•!iy rt25?(]P.?~t~al South: Sngle Fame+y Residestia! West: Single Far^:'y Resider~'~~`~ CITY OFFICIALS WISHING TO COMMENT MAY DO SO IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW (COMMENTS SHOULD BF RETURNED TO ZONING AT LEAST FIFTEEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE SC:fEDULED PUBLIC HEARING)- , ~~~n.. lr" 4.x"1 _._ - . f -" `-~ - _ _ - . _ - - - - - - ---- ~ _-~-`. ~ , t - -- - ----- _. ~ -~ - _.i r .. ,. . TRANSMITTED BY: D~n?'~~ ~"Gi;,"~~ ., .~ - ~-;D` aD.;~STt^E"T BO;.FD Dl1TE: April 28. j 995 FOR PC;BL{C HEARING BY TFiE DES E~CF~;,E~+ `'F?9~27.DDti1 CITY OF Cl.EARWATER DEVt`LORMEt1iT GODE ADJUSTMENT E30AR0 VARIANCE STAFF REPG'RT ME'`TING DATE: May 25, 1995 AGENDA fTEfVi: 3 CASE ~: VR 95-27 Qif11NER~APPLICANT (BUSINESS}iREPRESENTATIyE: Mary and ll~lary D~^lorkir~ LEGAL DESCGIIPTIO~N: Harbor Oaks, Parts of Lots 78 ar.d 80 ADDRESS: 4i 5 Magnolia Drive LOCATION: 420 feat East of S Fort Harrison AvenuQ AREA: 0.42 acres EXISTINGIPROPOSEd, USE: Detached Single Family Dwelling ZONING/LAND USE PLARt DESIGNATfON: RS 6 (Single Family Residential s) VARIANCE REQUEST T1'Of 1~NCE #~t2UES31ri~ REQUIREMENTI CDDE.CITATIOid REQ~IEST/ PRE~POSED VARIANCE NEEI<3ED Front setba:.k 25 ft/40.08fi(5)(a)1 22.0 ft 3.0 ft Rear setback 15 ft/40.086(5){a)3 4.0 ft 1 1.0 ft Opera spac® for lot 45 Percent/4L.L36(8)(a) 40 percent 5 percent NEWSPA~R AD: Gary, and aTy D~+rc~rkir~ for variances of (i } 3 ft to permit a structural setback of 22 ft from a street (Magnolia Drive} right-of-way where 25 ft is required; {2} 1 1 ft to permit a structure 4 ft from a rear property line where i 5 ft is required; (3) 5 percent to permit 40 percent of open space for the lot wherse 45 percent is required at 415 Maanofia Drive, [-irbor Oaks, parts viii i~ io aid o0, Loned nS cci (JI(IgIC ralillly Res .ientiai ti). VR 95-27 SURRAUNDING LAND USES (Please refer to attached crap for surrounding zoning districts): North: Single Family Residential East: Single Fatuity Residential _ _ South: Single Family Residential West: Single Family Residential POTEN T fAL ADVERSE IfViPAGTS ON SURROUI`1DiNG PROPERTIES: ~ Generally compatible as proposed. OTHER REQUIRED REVIEWS/PUBLIC f-IEARlNGS: ® Historic Preservation Board. STAFF ANALYSIS OF REQUEST: This property is developed with a single family home. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing garage and build in its place a new garage and a pool house. Also, the applicant proposes to enlarge the home to the east, and construct a swimming pool and othsr outdoor amenities. Three variances are requested: (i) a setback variance of 3 feet from the required 25 foot setback from the Magnolia Drive right of way, (2) a setba:,k variance of 1 1 feet from the required 15 foot setback from the rear property line, and (3) an open space variance for the lot of 5 percent of the !ot area in lieu of the required 45 percent. '~ ~ ~ X -- T ~ ~ - i A `" ~ !r l.U 1u ~n O < I I I L~ , c'? Z I i. 1/ ~ c: ~. l (\ / t ~/ ~~ ~I~ ~ ;~r _.. ... ..5 ~~.. . I °` C) ( ~ `' 7 ,~~ , A ! (~) y fr1 ~" ~~~ a ~ j -p t1 n t' ~ ~n + i fil Q ~r '1 () ~I I n Y111(•'t I'(A 0 1/~'i FnF r I ~f~A>1 ~~1,onfA I U~< c~ c) " t ~ y n ~ ~~~ U ~ G'I y rn 1~ i I ~;' ~~ ~ ~ .~:::~ X: ;;,; 5'+ ..;,•:.~ ..: . ..::.:: .... .... •.:r . •~.; :{• :4i::•:'•:... : ..; .• :: l::7 . . r..........~•::: ......:. ....•. ..... . .....y .ri:•i:~,.,. .. .. ..... ... ... ...............::::'..: ':..:::~ •i'r::Pir:ii: ~:.t .:... ....... ... .~ .. ......:. :' i:• dr•i?:i .. ? ?:~ii :•:?i ::•i:ii : i :@i' ?: i i : ' ':• i~ i: is^ ' ~ •' .:: . ' ' ' • ' r ...... •. •:4 : v : r s : : i . ~r : i ~:•.. •::•i: ii:'r:''};•ii:~i:•r:''••: •r:i:i):;:i::; •ii;i•\•ii; ii?:ii''ii ...... :.: f.. ......... ::: :i~'. :: ::: :: :~ tlY ..... ........'... ~. ~'l: i::'~:: ~:.. .'.':i1:'.'t::'.:.':...'.:'I1' :':'.T.'.I: .. ... 1' • .. . ! ' .. :~.: . ... . . : is :.: ...1 ............1... ti:'t ::....................::.~:: •.~r: •: tJb•:•::::: •~ .':;~ '. : ' ... ..I. I).: .. .1. . .. 1 ::.\:•l.~:: 1 ~~~ JJJ . t ~~fi~ c ,: {... .., ~.~ ~ ~ I ~~ ' U ~~~ lll ; : I ~ -' i ~. ' c~> /~~ ~f , 130.23 (F) 130. (P) ~' ~nY "~y ~}} ~~' . ~ 11 i ~t.l ~ ~ i l I` ' ~ i I ~ I i ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ cu ~ ;- ~ ~ ~~ ~ -.~ Cl {Tj ~) ~ tTT ~;) ~ c. ~ ~ L1 I ~' ^ l (l ~i o .. Y ~ r ~ ~ I ~ ~~ z ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I r _~ ~ (~m-1 ~ ~ ~' ~ i"Tl r ~~~ ~' i ~rn0 fl,~ / '.. ~7. luJ. .~..._. \ .. ,\~ 1 'i • ~ ~ _ _ y i _...__....__ __ -- \, ~ i , i ' s o0„33,4°c ~-,'_a'~ U j. t~~~~,~ AA~I nib ~ . . ~Z~~. f i~ P ~n ~lJ ~~ .. ..• ,•,,. • --fcvn ter..: t vv ~t . r t):r`,11~N LiY. ~'0. 5100 Buil~ec ~, Inc. ,~pg rig, _ g3Z~7 _ SEC. ~" , 1VaP. g., R ~~E ~~, ~ `~ GOI~#t1Y, F~.+o~A [ S.OQ feEt at~d tt~e Eest f~5.00 feet of tot 80, ~ ~L~OR OAKS, sccorcii~~g Co tie plat Cl~ereof as ~k 3, Page 65, o: '__ize Pict>lf.c R xor,~~o ne 88~C5 ~ _ , . h'lt~t~UM ~-~A~h~la D~iV~ ~ ~ ~~LQt~!~ s~.-~~~c~c S F RAE? a. .w. SiGE h 8~'S3'31" ~ M 139.95' .. . d~_r -~ - ~ ~. t -~ ~ !~ ~~ j ; r.~ ~ t STORY ~jSCyiRY ( +:r x '~~.r ;; 4 bt tie F=' s ~~' ~ •~. t ~•~ ~3 ~ i b ».~ I:~ e ~ Zi.~ ~ r,~i v~s~~ -j~o -- h.r,,yv~17 l ~ , ~ ~.r J w ±+.~.., r ...~ i ~~ I Gam' ,i~~~9 aar •-s r ~.~-- C~ ~ E s_oor `5 nor ~e e~ rn.n~M hnrxtxm ~i M,.K~ .-A.,c~,n...-,.... ~. ~- ....,......,..., . Rte.. ,..,..1 L07 73 3a ' zzr '° %~ ~, ~ a; 15T'CR7 ~.lA:~~i 1RY ~ Z~ P.l'3^.atG j,~ ~ (UIiCFA CGilS 1-~s iC~~Pl) U 0 O ~ r~ I r LoT 7s 3L4' f ==~ - -~~ ~z.r ---~. ~~ :f~ 1 -~---- s.t.H. r .~~!•"""r CITI~ OF CLE~4RWATER :~_ . ._~ _;, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ;~,,~ moo; MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 9~`~- ~~'~~~' 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVE. CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 ._`~y~~~~i`, PHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727} 562-4576 vvww. myclearwater.com/epermits :ASE SUMMARY 3;CP1996-110600 15 MAGNOLIA DR WORKIN,GARY AND MARY EW TWO STORY POOLHOUSE WITH GARAGE, 'EOPLE :ole: :ontractor TIMOTHY STROYNE PHONE: 446-7600 MONOGRAM BUILDERS, INC. FAX: 446-7668 521 S MARTIN LUTHER KING JR AV CLEARWATER, FL 33756 :ontractor GLEN J DIXON PHONE: (727) 784-1513 GLEN DIXON ELECTRIC INC FAX: (727) 784-2479 1303 MICHIGAN AVE PALM HARBOR, FL 34683 ;ontractor TIMOTHY REVELS PHONE: 813-920-7663 FLORIDA R & R ROOFING, INC FAX: No Fax 460 E DOUGLAS ROAD OLDSMAR, FL 34677 owner/Property GARY AND M ~/VIORKIN PHONE: (813) 000-0000 415 MAGNOLIA DR FAX_ No Fax CLEARWATER, FL 34615 :,ontractor LECOURIS, JASON MARCUS, UH PHONE: (727} 938-3771 AMTEC MECHANICAL FAX: No Fax CONTRACTORS I 110 ATHENS ST TARPON SPRINGS, FL 34689 ;ontractor KELLY, DAVID MATTHEW, UH PHONE: (727) 725-2588 DO NOT USE NOW CFC057617 FAX: No Fax 910 HARBOR LAKE COURT SAFETY HARBOR, FL 36495 FEES Assessed Amount Amount Paid Balance Due ADJ-Plan Review -$157.00 $0.00 -$157.00 Permit Fee $965.00 $965.00 $0.00 Plan Review $157.00 $0.00 $157.00 Reinspection (1st Notice) $30.00 $30.00 $0.00 State Surcharge $25.60 $25.60 $0.00 Total $1,020.60 $1,020.60 $0.00 ACTIVITIES Date 1 Date 2 Date 3 Disp DRIVEWAY 11/17/1997 11/18/1997 SCHD SIDEWALK INSPECTION 11/17/1997 11/18/1997 SCHD Done By r:\Forms\InfoSummary.rpt tCP1996=1~'i 0600 15 MAGNOLIA DR INAL -ELECTRIC 11/14/1997 11/17/1997 SCHD INAL -PLBG 11/14/1997 11/17/1997 SCHD INAL -MECH 11/6/1997 11/7/1997 SCHD ARTIAL LINTEL 10/24/1997 10/27/1997 SCHD TG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 10!20/1997 10/21/1997 SCHD TG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 10/16/1997 10/17/1997 SCHD FTG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 10/10/1997 10/13/1997 SCHD .INTEL -BLDG 9/2/1997 9/3/1997 SCHD .INTEL -BLDG 9/2!1997 9/3/1997 SCHD )RYWALL -BLDG 6/13/1997 6/16/1997 SCHD =IRE DEPARTMENT 6/12/1997 6/13/1997 SCHD MARTIAL DRYWALL 6/11/1997 6/12/1997 SCHD =RAME -BLDG 5/30/1997 6/2/1997 SCHD CUBSET -PLBG 5/28/1997 5/29/1997 SCHD 1ST ROUGH -ELECTRIC 5/27/1997 5/28/1997 SCHD 1ST ROUGH -MECH 5/27/1997 5/28/1997 SCHD i ST ROUGH -MECH 5/21/1997 5/22/1997 SCHD ?ND ROUGH -PLBG 5/6/1997 5/7/1997 SCHD NAIL INSP-SHEATHING 4/29/1997 4/30/1997 SCHD COLUMN -BLDG 4/21/1997 4!22/1997 SCHD NAIL INSP-SHEATHING 4/9/1997 4/10/1997 SCHD LINTEL -BLDG 4/4/1997 4/7/1997 SCHD PARTIAL LINTEL 3/20/1997 3/21/1997 SCHD SLAB -BLDG 3/13/1997 3/14/1997 SCHD SLAB -BLDG 3/6/1997 3/7/1997 SCHD COLUMN -BLDG 2/25/1997 2/26/1997 SCHD FTG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 2/17/1997 2/18/1997 SCHD FTG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 2/14/1997 2/17/1997 SCHD FTG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 2/12/1997 2/13/1997 SCHD r:\Forms\InfoSummary.rpt - _ -- -LP1936=110c300 15 MAGNOLIA DR TG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 2/10/1997 2/11/1997 SCHD LAB -BLDG 2/10/1997 2/11/1997 SCHD ST ROUGH -PLBG 1!31/1997 2/3!1997 SCHD EWER -PLBG 1/31/1997 2/3/1997 SCHD :OLUMN -BLDG 1/30/1997 1/31/1997 SCHD .LAB -ELECTRICAL 1/30/1997 1/31/1997 SCHD 'ARTIAL FOUND 1/29/1997 1/30/1997 SCHD ST ROUGH -PLBG 1/28/1997 1/29/1997 SCHD >EWER -PLBG 1/28/1997 1/29/1997 SCHD =TG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 1/17/1997 1/20/1997 SCHD NGINEERING/UTILITIES 11/17/1997 11/18/1997 SCHD =1NAL -BLDG 11/17/1997 11/18/1997 SCHD =1NAL -ELECTRIC 11/17/1997 11/18/1997 SCHD 3ULDING 10/8/1996 10/16/199610/8/1996 PASS TAW BIN B-6 ?ONING DEPARTMENT 10/4/1996 11/25/199610/10/1996 FAIL E_D NO 2ND UNIT ALLOWED 3UILDING DEPT (PLUMBING) 10/4/1996 10/16/199610/16/1996 PASS T_C SAS 10/4/1996 10/24/199610/16/1996 PASS T_C BUILDING DEPT (MECHANICAL) 10/4/1996 10/16/199610/16/1996 PASS T_C BUILDING DEPT (ELECTRICAL) 10/4/1996 10/24/199610116/1996 PASS T_C BULDING 10/8/1996 10/16/199610/16/1996 FAIL T_C pool location BULDING 10/8/1996 10/16/199610/16/1996 PASS T_C B-6 BUILDING DEPT (BUILDING) 10/4/1996 10/24/199610/16/1996 FAIL T_C pool GAS 10/4/1996 10/24/199610/24/1996 PASS T_C BUILDING DEPT (ELECTRICAL) 10/4/1996 10/24/199610/2411996 PASS T_C BUILDING DEPT (BUILDING) 10/4/1996 10/24/199610/24/1996 PASS T C ZONING DEPARTMENT 10/4/1996 11/25/199611/25/1996 PASS Steve Doherty Res.Covenant submtd. FTG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 1/21/1997 1/21/1997 PASS Vern Packer SEWER -PLBG 1/29/1997 1/29/1997 FAIL Tom Carrick 1ST ROUGH -PLBG 1/29/1997 1/29/1997 PASS Tom Carrick [550 Passed] ; DWV/SEWER LOST WAT ER. LEAKAGE POINTNOT OBVIOUS. ;WATER PRESS. GUAGE NOTLEG I BLE.A97010274 r:\Forms\InfoSummary.rpt t~P1996 "'! 10600 15 MAGNOLIA DR ARTIAL FOUND 1!30/1997 1/30/1997 FAIL Vern Packer [620 Failed] ;not ready ST ROUGH -PLBG 1/31/1997 1!31/1997 FRE1 Tom Carrick :OLUMN -BLDG 1/31/1997 1/31/1997 PASS RJS VERTICAL DOWELS OK 1131 RS [550 Passed] ;VER TICAL DOWELS OK :OLUMN -BLDG 1/31/1997 1/31/1997 PASS RJS JOB NOT READY 1131 RS ; JOB NOT READY ST ROUGH -GAS 1/31/1997 1!31/1997 PASS Tom Carrick .LAB -ELECTRICAL 1/31/1997 1/31/1997 PASS Michael Hurley EWER -PLBG 1/31/1997 1/31/1997 FAIL Tom Carrick ST ROUGH -PLBG 2/3/1997 2/3!1997 PASS Tom Carrick SEWER -PLBG 2/3/1997 2/3/1997 PASS Tom Carrick =TG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 2/11/1997 2/11!1997 PASS Vern Packer >LAB -BLDG 2/11/1997 2/11/1997 PASS Vern Packer =TG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 2/13/1997 2/13/1997 FAIL Vern Packer [620 Failed] ;not ready =TG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 2/18/1997 2/18/1997 PASS Vern Packer COLUMN -BLDG 2/26/1997 2/26/1997 PASS Vern Packer FILL CELLS 2/26/1997 2/26/1997 PASS Vern Packer [550 Passed] ;spa area SLAB -BLDG 3/7/1997 3!7/1997 PASS Vern Packer [550 Passed] ;FOR SLAB ON EAST SIDE OF BUILDING SLAB -BLDG 3/14/1997 3!14/1997 PASS Vern Packer PARTIAL LINTEL 3/21/1997 3/21/1997 PASS Vern Packer LINTEL -BLDG 4/7/1997 4/7/1997 PASS RJS RAINING TOO HARD TO MAKE INSPECTION 4/7 RS [550 Passed) ;RAINING TOO HARD,! WILL GO BACKLATER LINTEL -BLDG 4/7/1997 4/7/1997 PASS RJS LINTEL OK 4/7 RS [550 Passed] ; LINTEL OK NAIL INSP-SHEATHING 4/10/1997 4/10/1997 PASS Vern Packer PARTIAL -ELECTRIC 4/22/1997 4/22/1997 PASS Michael Hurley [550 Passed] ; pvc thru de ck COLUMN -BLDG 4/22/1997 4/22/1997 PASS Vern Packer NAIL INSP-SHEATHING 4/30/1997 4/30/1997 PASS Vern Packer [550 Passed] ;two story roof deck and walls PARTIAL -PLBG 5/7/1997 5/7/1997 PASS Neil Legters [550 Passed] ;PART PLA STIC ONLY - NOT A SEC ONDROUGH -TOLD HIM ;WHEN WATER LINESD ONE -THEN -CALL FOR SECOND R ;OUCH 1ST ROUGH -MECH 5/22/1997 5/22/1997 FA-L Tom Carrick [650 Correction Notice] ; f.d.'s improperly installed- -needinstructions o ; n site 1ST ROUGH -MECH 5/28/1997 5/28/1997 PASS Tom Carrick 1ST ROUGH -ELECTRIC 5/28/1997 5/28/1997 PASS Michael Hurley [550 Passed] ;pool house only TUBSET -PLBG 5/29!1997 5/29/1997 PASS. Tom Carrick [500 Undersupervision Of Licensed) ; 2ND ROUGH OK r:\Forms\InfoSummary.rpt 3LP1906-00 15 MAGNOLIA DR ND ROUGH -MECH 6/2/1997 6/2/1997 PASS FRAME -BLDG 6/2/1997 6/2/1997 PASS 'ARTIAL DRYWALL 6!1211997 6/12/1997 PASS [550 Passed] ;upstairs and ele shaft )RYWALL -BLDG 6/16/1997 6/16/1997 PASS =IRE DEPARTMENT 6/16/1997 6/16/1997 PASS called in wrong inspection type ;LAB -BLDG 9/3/1997 9/3/1997 PASS [550 Passed] ;for walkway ,fishpond _INTEL -BLDG 9/3/1997 9/26/1997 PASS [550 Passed] ;rake beam =TG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 10/13/1997 10/13/1997 PASS =TG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 10/17/1997 10/17/1997 FAIL [620 Failed] ;not ready =TG/ELEC BOND -BLDG 10/21/1997 10/21/1997 PASS FOOTING OK,I MARKED THE PLANS 10/21 RS [550 Passed] ;FOOTING OK,I MARKED THE PLANS. PARTIAL LINTEL 10/28/1997 10/27/1997 PASS FINAL -MECH 11/7/1997 11/7/1997 FAIL [620 Failed] ; ret. angles in gacage coveredw/stucco---access d ; oor req. in supply FINAL -MECH 11/12/1997 11/12!1997 PASS BOND/PLBG-POOL 11 / 14/1997 11 /14/1997 FAI L FINAL -PLBG 11/17/1997 11/17/1997 PASS [500 Undersupenrision Of Licensed] ;final ok FINAL -ELECTRIC 11/17/1997 11/17/1997 FAIL FINAL -ELECTRIC 11/18/1997 11/18/1997 PASS FINAL -BLDG 11/18/1997 11/18/1997 PASS CO PRINTED 11/21/1997 11/21/1997 PASS CHECK ON PROGRESS OF JOB 9/4/1998 9/4/1998 PASS checked on complaint that lot hasbeen cleared we ; st of this address •~ s Tom Carrick Vern Packer Vern Packer Vern Packer Vern Packer Vern Packer Vern Packer Vern Packer Vern Packer RJS Vern Packer Tom Carrick Tom Carrick Michael Hurley Tom Carrick Michael Hurley Michael Hurley Vern Packer Kevin Garriott Vern Packer r:\Forms\I nfoSummary. rpt http://publicgis.myclearwater.com/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=OVMa... 7/2012009 Map Output Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Robert Fritz [bfritz@utopiahomecare.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 7:48 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: 321 Lotus Path Dear Mr. Wells I am writing on behalf of Dan and Sharon Meek to give my unconditional support for their application to reduce the front yard setback. 1 want to point out that the letters that were sent to the adjoining neighbors (notice of hearing) were written on September 14, 2009, yet postmarked September 23, 2009 and received a few days after that. Needless to say, the Harbor Oaks Neighborhood Association, which I am Vice President of, did not have proper time to have a meeting and "vote" internally one way or the other as a group representing the Association. However, I need to make the following points clear to you , and anyone else who has a say in this application being approved. ~-;~;,-, ..._ 1. Mr. Salterelli has been told by our Association that he can not write letters either in support or denial of any flexible standard application by any of our neighbors.The board has decided to "look at" any application that comes up (now and in the future) and discuss it with the owners. He has the right to express his opinions,.as it relates to him and his family ONLY. 2. The HOA board has determined that this application will get a proper "vote" from~us if it is determined to be needed. Therefore, if the Meeks are denied once again and they elect to go the appeals route, I will promise you that we will vote accordingly. I must stress that the short notice given here appears (to me) to be somewhat deliberate. have knowledge of this application from day one, and as a neighbor only, I feel I mush give you.~rny;horlest opinion of how the Meeks have been treated. First off, I really feel that had Mr Salterelli NOT wri#)en f~isfirst;gbjec~ion I:etter (1 1/2 years ago) before you were. involved, this would have been approved. and this garage would~f~ave bean~p~lt and finished already. I think his letter seta "tone" that has not been able to be shaken. Mr SaltgreA.i has~goo~yntentiions, but his facts as they pertain to historic preservation are flawed and totally innaccurate. Not only~thMat;~he.has;NO~attthority to express his opinions as if they were ours. When the application was brought a second time: Mr.Salterelli sent.yei; another letter, this one drafted by Mike Saunders. Once again, the tone was set and the Meeks were left with:~n,.uphil.lbattle. You claim that his letters. had no bearing on the decisions, but with all due respect, I do not believe you_, I have told: you how the HOA board feels, and they have sent many letters of support, as have other neighbors who do not sit on the board. But-in spite of how I feel, the Meeks followed your direction to indicate to your board any "patterns" of front yard setbacks in the neighborhood that could support their request. They did, over and over and over again, with the most direct comparison being. DIRECTLY across the street. There definitely is a pattern of variances in our neighborhood. They have been pointed out repeatedly. Yet the Meeks find themselves having to hire a lawyer to point out what is very obvious to us all. I respectfully request that this application be approved so that the Meeks can get on with the project. It will be an improvement, have zero influence on any historical status, and provide safety to Mrs Meek. As a side note,l have personally received 2 variances approvals in Harbor Oaks for homes I have owned. I never experienced the amount of hurdles the Meeks have been confronted with, and. I am 100% in favor of them doing whatever is needed to demonstrate that approval is the proper course to take. I thank you for your considersation Bob Fritz ~M Jim and Karen Lehrburger 302 Lotus Path Clearwater, FL 33756 727-443-4035 lehrbur4eri@tampabay rr com September 25, 2009 Re.: Application for Flexible Standard Development Approval at 321 Lotus Path (FLS2009-09016) Development Review Committee City of Clearwater Planning Department Municipal Services Building 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 Dear Members of the Development Review Committee: This is in response to your Notice of Filing of an Application for Flexible Standard Development Approval at 321 Lotus Path (FLS2009-09016), dated September 14, 2009. We live at 302 Lotus Path, across the street and just a few doors down from 321 Lotus Path. We strongly object to the proposed front setback reduction. Although the proposed variance is only four feet, it would have a significant and adverse impact on the appearance and character of the historic Harbor Oaks community. Please feel free to contact us if you have any question. Thank you. Very truly yours, es Lehrburger ~: ~ ~ K en Lehrburger ,' I ------~ ~1~itlhl~b~l~ :~0 il.ilJ ---- s3~inH~s i 1N=E'ddOl3/13a '8 JNINNy~',~ .. ~ I ,-~ ; ~~ ~ f Z d3S September 28, 2009 City of Clearwater Planning Department Municipal Services Building 100 South Myrtle Ave. Clearwater, FL 33756 CE~DIO S. SAL7A~I~;EGGI 322 G0~'US ~PA~X' CG~~R,tiVA~R, ~F'G 33756 - 727 446-0689 Attn: Development Review Committee ;7RIGINAI ,rCrF!l~Et° .:~.;~;rv~.: ueF.AktwlENt "I?~' nr CLEARWATER Re: The Notice of Filing of an Application for Flexible Standard Development Approval at 321 Lotus Path (FLS 2009-09016) Dear Sirs: Regarding the application for Flexible Standard Development at 321 Lotus Path Clearwater, FL for approval to permit a garage addition to an existing detached dwelling in the Low Medium Residential (LMDR) district to the front (north) set back from 25 feet to 21 feet under the provisions of sections 2-203B. It took years of effort on the part o.f the individual Harbor Oaks residents in cooperation with the City of Clearwater Board of Commissioners and City Staff employees plus thousands of tax payer's dollars to establish and obtain Registration of Harbor Oaks in the National Register of Historic Places. Harbor Oaks unique in Pinellas County, if not in Florida, being the oldest Planned, Platted, Residential neighborhood in the county platted in 1913. This historical residential neighborhood will be 100 years old in 4 more years and as long standing residents we have sought to preserve its ambience, integrity and historical character for the residents of Clearwater. Our concern is that the granting of variances can change the character and appearance of the neighborhood plus exceptions to street setbacks and zoning requirements may result in a dwelling being designated as non contributory to the Historic District this may result in Harbor Oaks being removed from the National Register of Historic places. ..Please refer to the document "A HISTORIC AND ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY AND PRESERVATION PLAN" PREPARED FOR THE City of Clearwater in 1976 by Florida MM. ~ Preservation Services. This is the document that enabled Registration of Harbor Oaks in the NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. Attached you will please find copies of pages 1-9 and page 65 of this document. Your attention is respectfully directed to page 4 paragraphs 3 and page 65 paragraphs 3 and 4. The loss of the Historic District designation may also result in depreciation of our property values. The Historic District designation has added value to Harbor Oaks properties which has resulted in additional tax revenue to the City of Clearwater over the years. Any deviation from the requirements of the single family residential designations and set backs in conformance with the zoning code cannot be viewed as anything other than detrimental to our property which is situated directly across the street from the applicants. We have resided at 322 Lotus Path since October 1962 and are opposed to the granting of this request for a variance and respectfully request that the application be denied. Yours sincerely, Cedio S. Saltarelli ~ ~~~: Melba . Saltarelli CC: Frank Hibbard -Mayor George N. Cretikos -Vice Mayor John Doran -Council Member Carlen Peterson -Council Member Paul F. Gibson -Council Member