The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2010-03005; 921 LAKEVIEW RD; THE BOILING POTFLD2010-03005 921 LAKEVIEW RD Date Received: 3/2/2010 THE BOILING POT ZONING DISTRICT: C LAND USE: CG ATLAS PAGE: 306A PLANNER OF RECORD: WW CDB Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 Case Number: FLD2010-03005 Agenda Item: D.2. Owners/Applicant: Mark and Dorothy LeBlanc Representative: Renee Ruggiero, Northside Engineering Services, Inc. Address: 921 Lakeview Road CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Flexible Development application to permit a restaurant in the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 11,018 square feet, a lot width of 146.79 feet along Lakeview Road and 89.77 feet along Dempsey Street, a front setback (north along Lakeview Road) of 18.1 feet (to existing building), 13.8 feet (to sidewalk) and four feet (to pavement), a front (south along Dempsey Street) of 30.2 feet (to existing building), one-foot (to pavement) and zero feet (to dumpster enclosure), a side (east) setback of three feet (to existing building), a side (west) setback of five feet (to pavement), a building height of 25.5 feet (to existing midpoint of the pitched roof) and 16 parking spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-704.C, with a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer along Lakeview Road from 15 feet to 13.8 feet (to sidewalk) and four feet (to pavement), a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer along Dempsey Street from 10 feet to one-foot (to pavement) and zero feet (to dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the east perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to three feet (to existing building), a reduction to the interior landscape requirement from 10 percent to 5.5 percent of the vehicular use area and reductions to the width of the foundation landscape area on both the north and south sides of the building from five feet to zero feet, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3-1202.G. CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT: Commercial (C) District CURRENT LAND USE CATEGORY: Commercial General (CG) PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Attached dwellings (4) with accessory storage Proposed Use: Restaurant Community Development Board -June 15, 2010 FLD2010-03005 - Page 1 of 13 EXISTING North: Institutional (I) District SURROUNDING Cemetery ZONING AND USES: South: Medium Density Residential (MDR) District Detached dwellings East: Commercial (C) District Offices West: Commercial (C) District Manufacturing ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 0.253 acres is located on the south side of Lakeview Road, approximately 600 feet east of South Myrtle Avenue and 50 feet west of Prospect Avenue. The property has been zoned commercially for some time. The existing building on the property has some historic value, as it was previously used by Coca Cola as a distribution facility, but is not listed on the Florida or National Register of Historic Places. The last legal use of the property was as four attached dwellings (two on the second floor and two on the south side of the ground floor) with accessory storage on the balance of the ground floor. A complaint was received in August 2004 regarding inadequate fire separation between the storage unit and the dwellings (UNS2004-00088). Building Permit BCP2007-10647 was issued November 9, 2007, for interior renovation and one exterior wall with four windows in response to the unsafe conditions and to secure the site. No use of the site was approved or implied by this building permit approval. There is a driveway on Lakeview Road that provided access to the front of the building, with a small concrete area adjacent to the front of the building that could have been used for parking; otherwise all on-site parking areas are unpaved. On February 20, 2007, the Community Development Board (CDB) denied Case FLD2006-05032 for this same property to permit a restaurant. The property to the north is zoned Institutional (I) District and is developed as a cemetery. To the east and north of the cemetery, properties are zoned Medium Density Residential (MDR) and Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) Districts and developed with detached dwellings. The properties to the east are zoned Commercial (C) District and are developed with an office use (adjacent property), vacant land and attached dwellings closer to Ewing Avenue. The property to the west is zoned Commercial (C) District and is developed with an automotive parts re-manufacturer. The properties to the south on Dempsey Street are zoned Medium Density Residential (MDR) District and are developed with detached dwellings. Development Proposal: The development proposal is to permit a restaurant within the existing building, with construction of accessory parking, retention, landscaping and trash facilities on the rest of the site. The applicant proposes to utilize the downstairs as the restaurant with an accessory office on the second floor loft. The exterior finish of this commercial building is proposed with stucco painted mellow coral and banana cream trim, with white soffit and fascia. The subject property is a through lot, with street frontages on both Lakeview Road on the north and Dempsey Street to the south. Community Development Board -June 15, 2010 FLD2010-03005 - Page 2 of 13 While the building and parking lot locations, as well as other site improvements, are similar to the prior restaurant application denied by the CDB in February 2007, this restaurant application is different in the following: a. Under the prior application (FLD2006-05032) the western 25 feet of the subject property (Lot 17) was owned by the adjacent property owner and the applicant had entered into a Commercial Lease with a 15-year time period and an additional five years for the use of this lot. The applicant has since purchased this 25-foot wide lot (Lot 17) in September 2008. b. Under the prior application (FLD2006-05032) the gross floor area of the restaurant was 2,890 square feet. The 975-square foot second floor was indicated to be used as an accessory office for the restaurant. A prior Staff concern was regarding the large size of this second floor office area and how "accessory" it would be to the ground floor area. Through the interior renovation permit to comply with the unsafe circumstances under BCP2007-10647 the applicant has reduced the second floor area to 320 square feet as a loft accessory office. The gross floor area has been reduced to 2,316 square feet. Open joists on the second floor allow occupants views through the joists to the ceiling/roof of the second floor. c. Since the required number of parking spaces is based on the gross floor area, the number of required parking spaces has been reduced from the prior 20-43 spaces to the current 16-35 spaces. % The proposal includes renovating the existing building for a small neighborhood specialty restaurant (Cajun seafood) with a parking area with 16 spaces located to the west and south of the building. The parking area is accessed solely from Lakeview Road. In order to provide as much of the required off-street parking as possible, the site is restricted in the ability to meet setback and landscape buffering requirements for restaurants. Due to these proposed setbacks to property lines, this application is being processed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project (see discussion below under Minimum Setbacks). Based on the gross floor area for both floors of the existing building, a minimum of between 16 and 35 parking spaces are required for this proposed restaurant. The applicant proposes 16 parking spaces, which is the minimum number of spaces based on the lowest of the parking range. The applicant has submitted a Parking Study that analyzed a similar neighborhood specialty restaurant (Lakeview Grill at 1510 Lakeview Road) to justify the requested reduction to required parking. While the Study found that adequate parking for the subject property would be available by the 16 provided spaces, Staff disagrees with the Study findings of adequate provided parking, rather that the Code required parking of 15 spaces per 1,000 square feet should be provided (see discussion under Minimum Off-Street Parking below). Re-use of this building should occur. At issue is whether this restaurant proposal is the proper use at this location, given the constraints of providing required parking, setbacks and landscape areas. The result of inadequate provided parking is unacceptable spill-over parking onto adjacent properties and streets that would burden the surrounding residential neighborhood. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-701.1, the maximum FAR for properties with a designation of Commercial General is 0.55. The proposal is Community Development Board -June 15, 2010 FLD2010-03005 - Page 3 of 13 for a restaurant of a total gross floor area of 2,316 square feet at a FAR of 0.21, which is consistent with the Code provisions. Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to CDC Section 2-701.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.95. The proposed ISR is 0.69, which is consistent with the Code provisions. Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, there is no minimum required lot area or lot width for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, the minimum lot area for restaurants can range from 3,500 - 10,000 square feet. The subject lot area is 11,018 square feet (0.253 acres), which exceeds this comparative Code provision. Pursuant to the same Table, the minimum lot width for restaurants can range from 35 - 100 feet. The lot width along Lakeview Road is 146.79 feet, while the lot width along Dempsey Street is 89.77 feet. The proposal exceeds this comparative Code provision along Lakeview Road, but is less than this comparative Code provision along Dempsey Street, while still within the range. This lesser lot width can be attributed to the pie-shape of some of the lots that comprise the subject property and the curvature of the roadway. Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, there are no minimum required setbacks for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, the minimum setbacks for restaurants can range for front setbacks from 15 - 25 feet and for side setbacks from 0 - 10 feet (through lots have front setback requirements on both street frontages and side setback requirements from the perpendicular lot lines). The proposal includes a front setback (north along Lakeview Road) of 18.1 feet (to existing building), 13.8 feet (to sidewalk) and four feet (to pavement), a front (south along Dempsey Street) of 30.2 feet (to existing building), one- 'foot (to pavement) and zero feet (to dumpster enclosure), a side (east) setback of three feet (to existing building) and a side (westl setback of five feet (to pavement) This proposal includes the re-use of an existing building, which has existed on this site for quite some time. As stated in the Staff Report for FLD2006-05032, Staff is supportive of front and side setback reductions to the existing building, as any proposed use will need setback reductions for this existing building. The proposed use of a restaurant requires more parking than other less intense uses within the Commercial District (such as retail sales, medical clinics or offices). The need to provide as much of the required off-street parking as possible produces restrictions to meeting setback and landscape buffering requirements. Other less intense uses requiring fewer parking spaces could provide larger setbacks and buffers, but Staff acknowledges that reductions to setback and buffer requirements to a lesser degree would still be necessary to permit these other less intense uses. With this application, setbacks have been minimalized in order to provide even the minimum number of required parking spaces, which in turn minimizes the ability to provide meaningful landscape planting areas to mitigate views of the parking lot and for site beautification. Along Lakeview Road, the smallest provided front setback at four feet is north of the western parking row. Moving eastward, the eastern parking row is at an 8.6-foot setback to the north property line and the sidewalk is at a 13.8-foot front setback, while the existing building is set back 18.1 feet. Along Dempsey Street, the southern end of the parking lot backup flair is only at a one-foot setback, which eliminates any ability to place any landscape buffering on-site at this location to block the headlights of vehicles pulling into the parking lot to the Co=nunity Deve?op,-imt Board - June 15, 2010 FLD2010-03005 - Page 4 of 13 detached dwellings on the south side of Dempsey Street. The southern ends of the parking rows are at a 3.5-foot (west) and three-foot (east) setback. The dumpster enclosure has been designed at a zero-foot front setback to the Dempsey Street property line and, given the need to provide as much on-site parking as possible, the site configuration and the existing building location, the dumpster has been placed in the only location possible. It is not optimal, as it requires the trash truck to traverse Dempsey Street for this dumpster pickup and requires the truck to stage within the right-of-way while collecting the trash. With such orientation, this impacts the detached dwellings to the south. Additionally, since it is at a zero-foot front setback, it is visually more obtrusive as well as bringing unwarranted negative odors closer to the residential neighborhood. The existing building is set back three feet from the east property line. The proposed parking lot is set back five feet from the west property line, which coincides with the required landscape buffer width. The proposed setbacks in this case must be reviewed in light of its affect on other Code requirements as to their appropriateness and ultimately the appropriateness of the restaurant at this location. Maximum Building Heigh Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, there is no maximum height for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, the maximum height for restaurants can range from 25 - 50 feet. The existing building height is 25.5 feet (to the existing midpoint of the pitched roof). Whether this existing building is re-used for a restaurant or other uses allowable in the Commercial District, the existing building height is acceptable and compatible with the surrounding residential and commercial buildings. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code, the minimum required parking for restaurants can range between 7 - 15 spaces per 1,000 square feet GFA. Based on the 2,316 square feet GFA for both floors of the existing building, a minimum of between 16 and 35 parking spaces are required for this proposed restaurant. The applicant proposes 16 parking spaces, which includes one handicap space, which is the minimum number of spaces based on the lowest of the parking range. All parking spaces are accessed solely from Lakeview Road and are located on the west and south sides of the building. The applicant has submitted a Parking Study to justify the requested reduction to required parking. The applicant indicates that this restaurant is intended to be a small neighborhood specialty restaurant (Cajun seafood). The methodology of the Parking Study was to conduct a parking accumulation study of a similar neighborhood specialty restaurant. The Lakeview Grill at 1510 Lakeview Road was analyzed by the applicant's consultant as the similar restaurant. That restaurant is on a similarly sized parcel, is of similar floor area, employs 3-4 persons and has 10 on-site parking spaces. The Parking Study found that on the Friday the site was studied the parking demand was from a low of zero occupied spaces (2 pm) to 5 occupied spaces (7 pm), while on the Saturday the site was studied the parking demand was from a low of 2 occupied spaces (8 pm) to a peak of 6 occupied spaces (11 am and 7 pm). The Study determined a parking demand ratio of 2.55 spaces per 1,000 square feet for the Lakeview Grill. The Study concludes that, transferring this parking demand ratio to this site would result in a need of six spaces and, even if all six proposed employees drove to this site, that a total of 12 spaces would be necessary. This would allow for four overflow spaces of the total 16 spaces proposed. While City Staff approved the methodology for the Study, Staff disagrees with its findings. The location of the Community Development Board- June 15; 2010 FLD2010-03005 - Page 5 of 13 Lakeview Grill is on the southern edge of a much larger and more concentrated commercial area that is surrounded by relatively large attached dwelling complexes and detached dwelling subdivisions. Staff found it curious that there were zero occupied spaces on the Friday the site was studied. Staff enquired of the Lakeview Grill management this circumstance, since there would be employees at the restaurant even if there were no customers. The management stated that many employees and customers walk or take a bus to that restaurant, which could account for zero vehicles in the parking lot. For the subject property, there is not a similar concentration of commercial businesses or a larger population in close proximity. For the subject property, there is a large lake and a City park to the south and southeast, while there is a cemetery to the north and northwest. It is Staff's position that the Code required parking of 15 spaces per 1,000 square feet should be provided. Staff's concern with this restaurant proposal for this site is that without adequate number of off-street parking spaces parking demand could result in spill-over parking onto adjacent properties and into the rights-of-way. Such spill-over parking into the surrounding rights-of-way is within residential areas, which would be burdened with nonresidential parking resulting in traffic congestion within the residential neighborhood. Re- using this existing structure is appropriate, but with a lesser intense use that would have a reduced parking demand. Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-201.D.1, all outside mechanical equipment must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. Based on the plans submitted, it is unclear of the location of such mechanical equipment, whether such will be placed on the ground or on the roof area outside the second floor accessory office loft. The location and screening of such mechanical equipment will be reviewed at time of building permit submission, should this application be approved by the CDB. Sight Visibil.ty Tnanales: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the proposed driveway on Lakeview Road, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20- foot sight visibility triangles. The proposal was reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineering Department and found to be acceptable. Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-912, for development that does not involve a subdivision, all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. The existing building is served by overhead utilities. Should this application be approved by the CDB, utilities serving this building must be installed underground on-site in compliance with this requirement. Electric equipment (electric panels, boxes and meters) located on the outside of the buildings should be painted the same color as the buildings they are affixed to reduce their visibility. The location and visibility of such exterior electric equipment would be reviewed at time of any building permit submission. Landscaping: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, there is a 15-foot wide perimeter buffer required along Lakeview Road, a 10-foot wide perimeter buffer along Dempsey Street and a five- foot wide perimeter buffer along the east and west sides of the site. The proposal includes a Community Development Board - June 15, 2010 FLD2010-03005 - Page 6 of 13 reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer along Lakeview Road from 15 feet to 13.8 feet (to sidewalk) and four feet (to pavement), a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer along Dempsey Street from 10 feet to one-foot (to pavement) and zero feet (to dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the east perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to three feet (to existing building), a reduction to the interior landscape requirement from 10 percent to 5.5 percent of the vehicular use area and reductions to the width of the foundation landscape area on both the north and south sides of the building from five feet to zero feet. The ability to meet the Code requirements for perimeter, interior and foundation landscaping is restricted by the property configuration, building location, stormwater requirements and the provision of the greatest number of parking spaces possible. Given these design constraints, the applicant has designed as much landscaping as possible within the planting areas provided. Turf has been minimized to only the stormwater pond bottoms and side slopes. Along Lakeview Road, the provided landscape buffer is the least north of the western parking row where only a four-foot setback is provided. A minimum of 7.5 feet is provided north of the retention pond north of the building, expanding to a larger dimension north of the eastern parking row and at the northeast corner of the building. The front perimeter buffer along Lakeview Road will be planted with a dwarf podocarpus, schefflera, Indian hawthorn and Simpson's stopper as hedge material, with minima jasmine ground cover, and cabbage palms, Japanese privet and winged elm trees. Along Dempsey Street, the southern end of the parking lot backup flair is only at a one-foot setback, which eliminates any ability to place landscaping on-site at this location. The southern ends of the parking rows are at a 3.5-foot (west) and three-foot (east) setback, where a hedge and accent trees are proposed. The front buffer along Dempsey Street will be planted with dwarf podocarpus and schefflera as hedge material, with crape myrtle and Japanese privet trees. The provision of a perimeter buffer along the balance of Dempsey Street is restricted by the dumpster enclosure and the location of the southern retention pond. It is noted that detached dwellings exist across Dempsey Street from the subject property, where perimeter buffering would be needed the most to mitigate negative impacts of the proposal. However, to provide the required perimeter buffer would further reduce provided parking, which would be counterproductive to mitigating parking needs. The reductions to perimeter buffers, especially along Dempsey Street, do not adequately mitigate negative impacts of the proposed use on the residential neighborhood. to the south. The applicant has indicated that, should the CDB approve this application, he would seek to place landscaping within the Dempsey Street right-of-way to aid in mitigating visual impacts to the detached dwellings. In such circumstances when landscaping is placed in rights-of-way, any utility work that removes such landscaping requires the property owner to replace the removed landscaping at their expense. In these circumstances, any benefit of the growth of such landscaping providing increased screening is lost when the landscaping is removed, unless the owner replaces the lost landscaping with larger than minimum requirements. Many times, this is cost prohibitive to the property owner. Staff has not relied on such landscaping within the Dempsey Street right-of-way for the reasons discussed. It is noted that the possibility of a fence or wall six feet in height was discussed by the applicant, but Code provisions would not permit such. Conunuzity Development Board -June 15, 2010 FLD2010-03005 - Page 7 of 13 The proposal includes a reduction to required parking lot interior landscaping from 10 percent to 5.5 percent. The only area counted toward interior landscaping is on the west side of the building. This requested reduction is also a result of the need to provide required parking for the proposed use, with considerations of the curvature of the adjacent roadways and property and the location of this existing building. The purpose of interior landscaping to the parking lot is to break up the expanse of pavement and provide shade to the parking lot. This reduction requested mirrors the other landscape reductions requested where there is inadequate land area to meet the Code requirements for the intended use. The interior landscape area is proposed to be planted with dwarf podocarpus, schefflera, Indian hawthorn and Simpson's stopper as shrub material and one magnolia tree. The proposal includes a reduction to the required foundation landscaping facing Lakeview Road and facing Dempsey Street from five feet wide to zero feet. On the north side, this reduction is due to the need to provide sidewalk access from the parking lot to the front door and the vertical wall retention pond in the front setbackibuffer. On the south side, parking is located adjacent to the building. Foundation landscaping is being provided on the east portion of the north and south sides of the building, consisting of schefflera and Indian hawthorn shrub material and cabbage palms. Comprehensive Landscape Program: Pursuant to Section 3-1202.G of the Community Development Code, the landscaping requirements contained within the Code can be waived or modified if the application contains a Comprehensive Landscape Program satisfying certain criteria. The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with those criteria: Consistent ; Inconsistent 1. Architectural theme: a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program shall be designed as a X part of the architectural theme of the principle buildings proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for development; or b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment N/A N/A proposed in the comprehensive landscape program shall be demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape standards. 2. Lighting: Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is N/A N/A automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed. 3. Community character: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive X' landscape program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. 4. Property values: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape x program will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 5. Special area or scenic corridor plan: The landscape treatment proposed in the N/A N/A comprehensive landscape program is consistent with any special area or scenic corridor plan which the City of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel proposed for development is located. ' See Analysis for discussion of consistency/inconsistency. Coma. wni y Dev??apmt r t Loa=d->Jun- 15, 2010 FLD2010-03005 - Page 8 of 13 The applicant has provided tiered landscaping of varied landscape material in as many areas as possible on-site in order to offset the deficiencies of adequate planting areas (perimeter buffers, parking lot interior and foundation). The applicant has also proposed "historical planters" along the edge of the sidewalk from Lakeview Road as a landscape enhancement. Solid Waste: The proposal provides a dumpster enclosure oriented to and accessed from Dempsey Street. Plans indicate this enclosure will be constructed to City standards, including the requirement the exterior of the enclosure to be consistent with the exterior materials and color of the building. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste Department. Signage: The proposal does not include any freestanding sign. Submitted building elevations indicate attached signage on the front of the building. While this application is being processed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project use, from a comparative standpoint restaurants requesting flexibility to the Minimum Standards of the Commercial District either as a Level 1 Flexible Standard Development (FLS) or Level 2 Flexible Development (FLD) application have a flexibility criteria requiring a monument-style freestanding sign. Should the CDB approve this request, any freestanding sign is recommended to be monument-style a maximum of six feet in height, unless such sign is part of a Comprehensive Sign Program, and be designed consistent with the exterior building material and color. Landscape design and plantings need to coordinate with any such signage, so as to not shield the signage from view. Code Enforcement Analysis: There is an active Code Enforcement case for missing windows that are boarded up (CDC2010-00638, which has been referred to Building Division). Community Develop rtent Board -JvJ nt, =15, - =- : - •:, , FLD2010-03005 - Page 9 of 13 COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Section 2-701.1 and Table 2-704: Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent Floor Area 0.55 0.21 X Ratio (max. of 6,059 square feet) (2,316 square feet proposed) Impervious 0.95 0.69 X Surface Ratio Minimum Comprehensive Infill: N/A 11,018 sq. ft. (0.253 acres) X Lot Area Restaurant: 3,500 - 10,000 sf Minimum Comprehensive Infill: N/A Lakeview Rd: 146.79 feet X Lot Width Restaurant: 35 - 100 feet (north) Dempsey St: 89.77 feet (south) Minimum Front: Comprehensive Infill: N/A Lakeview Rd: 18.1 feet (to existing X1 Setbacks Restaurant: 15 - 25 feet building), 13.8 feet (to sidewalk) and four feet (to pavement) Dempsey St: 30.2 feet (to existing X1 building), one-foot (to pavement) and zero feet (to dumpster enclosure) Side: Comprehensive Infill: N/A East: three feet (to existing X' Restaurant: 0 - 10 feet building) West: five feet (to X' pavement) Maximum Comprehensive Infill: N/A 25.5 feet (to existing midpoint of the X Height Restaurant: 25 - 50 feet pitched roof) Minimum Comprehensive Infill: N/A 16 parking spaces V Off-Street Restaurant: 7 - 15 spaces per 1,000 sf (7 spaces per 1,000 sf) Parking (Required parking: 16 - 35 spaces) See analysis in Staff Report. z Based on Parking Reduction Study, See analysis in Staff Report. Community Development Board -June 15; 201 FLD2010-03005 -Page 10 of 13 COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-704.C (Comprehensive Mll Redevelopment Project): 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. Consistent I Inconsistent 2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning district. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X development and improvement of surrounding properties. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X' development. 5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance with one or more of the following objectives: a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standard or flexible development use; b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs; c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic contributor; d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing; e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation; or f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a working waterfront use. 6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives: a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district; b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City; c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design elements: ? Changes in horizontal building planes; ? Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.; ? Variety in materials, colors and textures; ? Distinctive fenestration patterns; ? Building stepbacks; and ? Distinctive roofs forms. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. i See analysis in Staff Report. Corrnrnuniry Development Board - June 15, 2010 FLD2010-03005 - Page 11 of 13 COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-913: Consistent Inconsistent 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, x coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X:' immediate vicinity. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. See analysis in Staff Report SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meetings of April 1 and May 6, 2010, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following: Findings of Fact. The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact: 1. The 0.253 acres is located on the south side of Lakeview Road, approximately 600 feet east of South Myrtle Avenue and 50 feet west of Prospect Avenue; 2. The subject property has approximately 146.79 feet of frontage along Lakeview Road and approximately 89.77 feet of frontage along Dempsey Street; 3. On February 20, 2007, the Community Development Board (CDB) denied Case FLD2006- 05032 for this same property to permit a restaurant with similar characteristics; 4. This proposal is similar in design to the prior application under FLD2006-05032, but is different in that a western lot is now owned by the applicant (rather than leased), the gross floor area of the building has been reduced and the resultant parking requirements have been reduced; 5. Based on the gross floor area for both floors of the existing building, a minimum of between 16 and 35 parking spaces are required for this proposed restaurant and the applicant proposes 16 parking spaces (lowest of the parking range); 6. A Parking Study has been submitted to justify a parking space reduction that analyzed a similar neighborhood specialty restaurant (Lakeview Grill at 1510 Lakeview Road), finding that adequate parking for the subject property would be available by the 16 provided spaces; 7. Staff disagrees with the Parking Study findings of adequate provided parking, rather that the Code required parking of 15 spaces per 1,000 square feet should be provided; Community Deveiopmenc Board-'Arne i5, 2010 FLD2010-03005 - Page 12 of 13 8. In order to provide as much of the required off-street parking as possible, the proposal includes reductions to setback and landscape requirements required for restaurants; 9. With this application, setbacks have been minimalized in order to provide even the minimum number of required parking spaces, which in turn minimizes the ability to provide meaningful landscape planting areas to mitigate views of the parking lot and for site beautification:; and 10. There is an active Code Enforcement case for missing windows that are boarded up (CDC2010-00638, referred to Building Division). Conclusions of Law. The Planning and Development Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law: 1. That the development proposal is inconsistent with the Standards as per Tables 2-701.1 and 2-704 of the Community Development Code; 2. That the development proposal is inconsistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2- 704.C of the Community Development Code; and 3. That the development proposal is inconsistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as per Section 3-913 of the Community Development Code. Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends DENIAL, of the Flexible Development application to permit a restaurant in the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 11,018 square feet, a lot width of 146.79 feet along Lakeview Road and 89.77 feet along Dempsey Street, a front setback (north along Lakeview Road) of 18.1 feet (to existing building), 13.8 feet (to sidewalk) and four feet (to pavement), a front (south along Dempsey Street) of 30.2 feet (to existing building), one-foot (to pavement) and zero feet (to dumpster enclosure), a side (east) setback of three feet (to existing building), a side (west) setback of five feet (to pavement), a building height of 25.5 met (to existing midpoint of the pitched rcc1) and 1.6 parking spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-704.C, with a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer along Lakeview Road from 15 feet to 13.8 feet (to sidewalk) and four feet (to pavement), a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer along Dempsey Street from 10 feet to one-foot (to pavement) and zero feet (to dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the east perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to three feet (to existing building), a reduction to the interior landscape requirement fi-om 10 percent to 5.5 percent of the vehicular use area and reductions to the width of the foundation landscape area on both the north and south sides of the building from five feet to zero feet, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3-1202.G. Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: Wayne M. ells, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map; Photographs of Site and Vicinity S.•IPlanning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending casesl Up for the next CDBILakeview 0921 Boiling Pot (C) 2010.xx - 6.15.10 CDB - WWILakeview 921 Staff Report.doc Community DeaeloPmo-m Board - Jm.& 1 2015 FLD2010-03005 - Page 13 of 13 Wayne M. Wells, AICP 100 South Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756 Phone: 727-562-4504 Email: wayne.wells(a,myclearwater.com PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE ¦ Planner III Planning and Development 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. S ¦ 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'/z 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 L-1 Lj Z 1 A WAY JASMINE WAY y m LD f7-\ D D York XJA DR y i z D? D D Q I PATH LOTUS PATH LOTUS C DD D D ST sn E:7 F7 ? L DD ) y PINELLAS wLu uj n S dm DaD Pt?_? n M TUSKAVVILLA ST - D Dd ui Lj u.i w LLI d C LAKEVIEbV' LIJ SOUTH ST 0 i3 D? D J •? - -- '::? W Z PROJECT Q a E ST SITE f KJNG§-EY ST l T QUEEN ST E PAIL EC NAN S 0J ALM j ELW. EL?- m WAY L% WOODLAWN ST F-1 F 1 11 H F-1 F-1 F-1 LOCATION MAP Owners: Dorothy LeBlanc and Mark LeBlanc Case: FLD2010-03005 Site: 921 Lakeview Road Property Size: 0.24 acres PINs: 21-29-15-47466-001-0130 Atlas Page: 306A 21-29-15-47466-001-0170 7 ap O a O T d 5 a n r? is n n n 126 c ? a?D 0 Q A q o'f ? ? Q AM I A -QT Q W ?. O O s? C y 1301 Met 300 I rn M ? m rn m a° O1 o rn rn w? rn O a $' OS/R $, s s s°s s °o P D OS/ R 699 ZONING MAP Owners: Dorothy LeBlanc and Mark LeBlanc Case: FLD2010-03005 Site: 921 Lakeview Road Property Size: 0.24 acres PINs: 21-29-15-47466-001-0130 Atlas Page: 306A 21-29-15-47466-001-0170 p O1 p 01 O? Sj 'Q11 V' I? ? O? ? 129$ o N ? o Ol QNi D tac ed e 0 p11333 14 Q :lftw./ F r; j? W 8 I 112 14 5 16 17 1 8 19 De ached 17 1 18 ? 1 elling 1 1 w CO ( ro ro 1 w C I I I 1 (0 .1 1 Cemetery 30 l a 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 F 12 iV05 7 8 9 fet ch & g g o ww Rip % a+ a a a a a a TUSKAWILLA ST N Q v U-1 co co 60 0 0 ? Det ach d 6 5 1j A 's 1 a g 7 De a9ch ecd „ D OR gs 1295 o p\ N w w ,20 N Cemetery 22/04 3.8 A c (c) 30 30 Cemetery 99 33 33 \ r13,01 Met 1300 Acp 8 00 rk? cial \ ?° _,• 47466 Offices 33 Cc I 33 % 5 4 ; ?? \ 11 ( 1 AC(C) tP 1101 cpk M7 19 00 144 tit 144 14\13 \ O?j? ?ta?c \ 3 X17 1? ` ad ing 18 \ S 4 11 - 11 b Hi zs?5 ?/ s S? t d 4 LAKE V/. y /':? 3" IHng / 17 5 / 14 d 13/ x J / 12? 9 / i „ i 1` RGI 1 C\/IC\A/ a o y 1 a z z °o T' w w Q 58086 Z De ache w A e?li?n O) p\ p\ 50 LAKEVIEW RD I ? 111 1 1 4d' I 1 gJ2 11I 1 1 EXISTING SURROUNDING USES MAP Owners: Dorothy LeBlanc and Mark LeBlanc Case: FLD2010-03005 Park 230, 13.9 Site: 921 Lakeview Road Property Size: 0.24 acres PINs: 21-29-15-47466-001-0130 Atlas Page: 306A 21-29-15-47466-001-0170 View looking SE from Lakeview Road at subject property View looking NE from Dempsey Street at office building at 925 Lakeview Road E of subject property 921 Lakeview Road Case Number FLD2010-03005 Page 1 of 2 Enlarged view looking N from Dempsey Street at the sliding door on the rear side of the building at the subject property View looking N from Dempsey Street at rear side of the building at the subject property View looking NW from Dempsey Street at W side of subject property where parking area is proposed View looking W from Lakeview Road at manufacturing business at 901 Lakeview Road (W of subject property) View looking NE along Lakeview Road at cemetery N of subject property and detached dwellings on E side of S Prospect Ave View looking NE from Lakeview Road at automobile service station W of Lakeview Grill at 1510 Lakeview Road (regarding parking study) 4.?f4 w..' '!i•:mv?mrrF.rf?..?•r,.+`.ma«?wv?s?..` .a View looking N at Lakeview Grill at 1510 Lakeview Road (regarding parking study) 921 Lakeview Road Case Number FLD2010-03005 Page 2 of 2 View looking NE from Lakeview Road at attached dwellings E/NE of Lakeview Grill at 1510 Lakeview Road (regarding parking study) 19i EJ4 I ? SERVICE FOUNDAMON CO TY SERVICE FOUNDATION, INC. Affordable Housing ,Services 925 Lakeview Road • Clearwater, FL 33756-3420 • (727) 461-0618 • Fax (727) 443-6287 mail@csfliome.org • www.csfhome.org June 9, 2010 Wayne M Wells, AICP Planner III, and Community Development Board JUN 09 2010 City of Clearwater MANNING i?EFr,NT RE: Marls & Dorothy B. Le Blanc OF 'E Flexible Development Application for a Restaurant at 921 Lakeview Road Dear Mr. Wells and Community Development Board Members: Community Service Foundation at 925 Lakeview Rd. regretfully cannot support the Le Blanc request for a proposed restaurant at 921 Lakeview Road, Clearwater, FL 33756. It is our opinion this simply is not a suitable property for the proposed restaurant use. Parking is inadequate, setbacks along north, south and east sides of property are not to code, the landscape buffer is minimal, and the setback for a rollaway dumpster is supply not advantageous to a predominately residential neighborhood. Also we are very concerned that food waste deposited in dumpster will become a feeding bed for rodents. At, only 16 narking spaces it ig not nlenr to iie hove the Owner wm,lrl be able to nrnvirla narlnnn fnr work staff and customers. We are very concerned that restaurant customers will park in the adjacent parking lot owed by Community Service Foundation. We are also concerned that by the nature of the business that food and beverage delivery trucks on a daily basis will be utilizing Dempsey Street, a predominately residential street. We have a few other concerns? Will liquor be served? Will there be music or other forms of entertainment? What impact will this have on the neighborhood residents? Community Service Foundation wishes the Le Blanc's no financial hardship but in our opinion although this is a wonderful historical property the proposed use is not a good fit for the neighborhood. Sincercly, Spilatro Jerry Executive Director ORIGINAL 4ECFWD June 4, 2010 27101 Attention: Michael Delk, Planning and Development Director 'LANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER Cynthia Goudeau, MMC, City Clerk This is concerning the request by Mark and Dorothy LeBlanc to have a restaurant at 921 Lakeview Road. Our names are Keith and Dolores Estes and we live across the street from the proposed restaurant for the last 28 years. We own two lots with 3 houses on them. We also have no financial interest in this proposed business. West of us is the cemetery which is across the street from the proposed business. We are not averse to having the restaurant there and are sure the residents of the cemetery won't mind. We are the ones on the North side that would be most impacted. We feel that a viable business at that location would be a lot better than anything the past history has shown for that building. At one time the building had 4 rentals and a small real estate office. The residents on Dempsey St. behind the building will be a lot better off, and so would we, with a restaurant than with a bunch of undesirable tenants living there. The City Staff is aware that Lakeview Road from Fort Harrison to Missouri is a mixed use road. It exists with a car lot at Fort Harrison, then Doctors offices, warehouses, the Candy Factory, Auto Repair, and a few residences. A restaurant in this mix would certainly fit in. It is certainly more commercial than residential. When the City changed the designation to infili commercial some years ago, one of the former commissioners said he would like to see some kind of a business open at that location. This is the time and these are the people to do it. At this critical time in the City's history, when we need business's to open, and we have a couple with vast restaurant experience, and are investing a lot in this effort, let's refrain from discouraging them. if someone wanted to open up a business in downtown Cleveland St. there would be no problem and they don't even have any nearby parking. Let's allow these people to open their restaurant: frankly we are anxiously awaiting some good Cajun food! K ith L. Estes 1 res R. Estes n,C' R - C? 1295 S. Prospect Ave Clearwater, Fl 33756 Phone 727-446-7005 bray o, 01169trN&? e Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue ClearwiaterClearwater Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-562-4865 ? 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 y ? SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $ NOTE: 15 1 OTAL S CASE #: RECEIVED 13Y (staff initials): DATE RECEIVED: S OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS) FXIBILE DEVELOPM:C1o T APPLICATIO Comprehensive InEill. Redevelopment Project (Revised 07/11/2008) -PLEASE'I'YPE OR PIZtNrr- A. APPLICANT, P ROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME: ; Mark (Marc) and Dorothy B. LeBlanc MAILING ADDRESS: 1418 Dexter Drive, Clearwater, 33786 HONE NUMBER: 727-461-2122 FAX NUMBER: ...----- - CEI_L NUMBER 727-461-2122 - - - EMAIL: PROPERTY OWNER(S): Dorothy B. LeBlanc / Lots 13-15 - -- - _.._-------- . ist ALL owners on the deed Mark and Dorothy B. LeBlanc / Lot 17 GliN':f' NAME : Northside Engineering Services, Inc. - Housh Ghovaee, Cho AGENT NAME: Renee Ruggi_er:o, Senior Project Planner MAILING ADDRESS: 300 S. Belcher Road, Clearwater, PL 33765 Renee Ruggiero, PI IONE NUMBER: 727-443-2869 FAX NUMBER: 727-446-8036 - --- - ------- -- CELL NUMBER: 727-235-8475 - g. ----- EMAIL: Renee@northsideeng:i.ne etj_ngnei: Q. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) PROJECT NAME: `.L'he Bolling Pot PROJECT VALUATION: ? 375,00,0.00 STREET ADDRESS 921 Lakeview Road, Clearwater, FL 33755 PARCEL NUMBER(S): 21-29-15-47466-000-0130 and 21-29-1.5-47466-000--0170 ....._ PARCEL SIZE (acres) 0.253 acres PARCEL SIZE (square feet) 11,018 sq :Et LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lo Ls 13-17, B1_k. 1, Lake Dellview Add_i.Lion PROPOSED USE(S): Restaurant-. DESCRIPI ON OF REQUEST: Specifically identify the request (include number of units'or square footage of non-residentiol use and all requested code deviations; e.g. reduction in required nudmber of harking spaces, spedfic'use, etc.) See Attached Narrative C:\Documenis and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 20-08 07-11.doc Page 1 of 8 DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (T?)R), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UN DEVELOPMEN F, OR A. PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES - NO _ (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents) C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5) to SUBMIT A COPY=OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see page 7) i D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A) V Provide complete 'responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA - Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: VVI. 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. I SEE ATTACHED NARRATIVE j 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. SEE ATTACHED NARRATIVE - - -------- - - -------- -- ----- 3. The proposed clevolopment will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. SEE ATTACHED NARRATIVE 4. The proposed clevclopment is designed to minimize traffic congestion. SEE ATTACHED NARRATIVE 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed forldevelopment. SEE A`T'TACHED NARRATIVE 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of-.operation impacts, on adjacent propeitieq 9- SEE ATTACHED NARRATIVE i. i' r' C:\Documenk and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2n08 07-11.doc 1'... Page 2 of 8 _ WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria) Provide complete responses to the six (6) COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA - Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail) 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. SEC: ATTACHED NARRATIVE 2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning district SEE ATTACHED NARRATIVE 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding-properties, SEE ATTACI3ED NARRATIVE 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as,a result of the proposed development. SEE ATTACHED NARRATIVE 5. The proposed use' shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance with one or more of the following objectives: a. The proposed; use is permitted in this zoning district as a mininnum standard, flexible standard or flexible development' use; b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs; C. -rhe development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic contributor; d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing; e. The proposed' use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan,.arnendment and rezoning would result in a spot and use or zoning designation, or f. I he proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a working waterfront use. SEE ATTACHED NARRATIVE --------- - -------- - ----- ------ - ------- - - ----------- 6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives. a. The proposedi development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district; - b. I he proposed'development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City, G. -Fire design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; cl. In order to fon?n a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design elements: U Changes in horizontal building planes; U Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.; U Variety in materials, colors and textures; U Distinctive fenestration patterns, U Building stepbacks; and U Distinctive roofs forms. e. The proposed zlevelopment provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. SEE AT` ACHED NARRATIVE C:\Documents and Settingslderek.ferguson\Desl<top\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc Page 3 of 8 E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual and 4202.A.21) tT A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL. APPLICATIONS, All applications that involve addition or modification ofimpervious 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. U 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; U Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; U All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; U Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; U A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with the City manual U 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. U 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 i Cl ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF sTORMWATER PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Applicant must initial one of the following): RMR Storr'nW2ter 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 - (F APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN AND NONE F AS 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. e_ [F. SUPPLEMENTAL_ SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A) F 9 tx QI Ly SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) - One original and 14 copies TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greeter), and location, including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) - please design around the existing trees, 3 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 MAPIOF THE PROPERTY 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; See Provided Parking Study GRADING PLAN as applicable; PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided); WA COPY OF REC0J3DED PLAT, as applicable; N/A f. ' r C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc Page 4 of 8 G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A) L? SITE PLAN with (fie following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): Index sheet•referencing individual sheets included in package; North arrow; - Engineering; bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared; All dimensions; Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures, Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures; All required All existing and proposed points of access; All iequiredj_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 'exisling public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas and water lines, 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 bII landscape material; Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities; n/a Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures, Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks; and Floor plan t?picals of buildings for all Level Two approvals. A floor plan of each floor is required for any parking garage requiring a Level Two approval. f tY, SITE DATA TABl for existing, required, and proposed development, in written/tabular form: t 1 EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED Land area igsquare feet and acres; See Site Data Table on Civil C1.1 Number of RXISTING dwelling'units; -- - - ---- _.._._.. _-__- Number of P,,ROPOSED dwelling units; ----- _._..... .__._-.__ Gross floor $rea devoted to each use; Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the number of required spaces; Total pavedarea, including all paved parking spaces & driveways, expressed i ''square feet & percentage of the paved vehicular area; _ Official recprds book and page numbers of all existing utility easement; I Building anc( Structure heights; Impermeable 'surface ratio (LS.R,); and -`"--"?- ?------ Floorarea ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. -------??"- REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale (8'%X 11); ? 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; Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms; Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned); Streets and drives (dimensioned); Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); Structural overhangs, C:\Doaun-ren.ts and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 21408 07-11.doc Page 5 of 6 FI. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A) l LANDSCAPE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): _?k\II 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; E=xisting 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 (he plant a schedule; Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all existing andproposed 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; i Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in bolh square feet and percentage covered; Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board); Irrigation notes. 4 REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8 %X 11); lY 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. IX BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23) BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -with the following information: All sides of all buildings Dimensioned Colors (provide one full sized set of colored elevations) Ctt Materials REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS - same as above to scale on 81/2X 11 J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19, SIGNS / 'Section 3-1806) No Signage Exists on Site - Any New Proposed Signage Shall Require Permit U 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) 0 Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required). ? Reduced signage"proposal (8'/2X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desl<top\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc Page 6 of 8 K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.'13 and 4-801.C) U Include if requirecl by the Traffic Operations Manager or his/her designee or if the proposed development: r Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan. Will generate 100 or more new vehicle 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 Engineer's (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. Acknowledgement of traffic impact study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following Traffic Impact Study is included. The study must include a summary table of pre- and post-development levels of service for all road,Way legs and each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scalping Meeting. XX r 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 clue 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. 604 Florida Fire P evention Code to include NFPA 13, MFPA 14, NFPA 20, NFPA 291, and MFPA 1142 (Annex H) is required. i Acknowledgement of fire flow calculations/water study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is included. f-_ mot ?(X Fire Flow Calculations/Water 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 RESUBMITTE=D 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 accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and photogrI the property described in this application. I:i STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELI q Swore to a subscribed before me this day of f 444A.D. 20_1-P:2 to me and/y y '" --1 who is personally known has produced as identification h N ' ?y4%d ?'^vw tr,+hWrkvy 17, Signature of property owner or representative Notary public, My commission expires. n- 05? 41" C:ADocuments and Settings\derek fergusanADesktop\planning dept forms 07081GnI?iPiel,) rlt?hY?ilhflfl(P,foje Qllt ` _)`;7_ b,8 07-11.doc Page 7 of 8 J l Ifk;;: ?l? (I t !a N. AFFIDAVIT TQ AUTHORIZE AGENT: 1. Provide names of 01( property owners on deed - PRINT full names: 3. That this property' constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request) P-J 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: __ ?\gL 1a? 11'.-7. )..-( 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 ttiQ-P!o necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City repre e'ntative to° Kit ar`d photograph the property described in this application; ? J 7. Tht I/vv ) , f e ui d rsi dign??lthority, hereby certify that the foregoing i ?7 F is true and correct. }v f ?/ perty uwner Property Owner Hroperty Owner Property Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY 01= PINELLAS Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this day of ?..?? AEI ' ' - -. „ personally appeared + f'",4who having been first duly sworn Deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/she signed. ?' {?.?Sl( ,19E , ?> 1 1 :;v? a Illtltl` 1(tll li` 31 Notary Public Signature Notary Seal/Stamp My Commission Expires: J'A Y'et'" 9")j 4"g 1 - C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.cloc Page 8 of 8 LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION This letter will serve as authorization for Housh Gt7ovaee _ (agent Narne) with NO thSl[IL E119ineeffilJ Smiles, Inc. to act as an agent for ??,o-: ?.(- ( /'- i'Ck ,gyp _ Lf n , ? 1 .? (Property Owner's Name) And to (ixecute any and all documents related to securing permits and approvCils for the construction on the property generally located at !j21 Lakeview Road Clearwater, FL (Property Location) P, , State of FLORIDA. Print Name of Property Owner V-,ock:n- S'ignahire?*Mr-operty Owner vk Address of Property Owner City/Stdte/Zip C de - State ©f77 _ coLintycf-(1 Title 7 7 `7 ? E 12 -2 Telephone Number The foregoing instrument was acknowledge before me t/h?is, ? clay of 200, byCUr N_C_ asf . who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification and who did (did not) take an oath. (Signature) Notary Public Y41?.NY Poe v-. ..... IWO DO' 13EEN A. WILLIAMS MY?ycC MISSIaN // DD 155802 r?Rr "o( 1? V iFS: nclober ?BQ? ! AAY ? 14, 2008 _ FL`Noicuy Service & e-"';- mission #J ??ZQ 2 (Name of Notary Typed, Printed or Stamped) 7'rdt,k,rv l ;7v; POWER OF ATTORNflIv t.plydr?r i t t. dohs htr?b i whftt"- x nndiwyt w'tw`.?t?tly finc1, f6r me Hrrel lit. TY1y rte;, aral ste ao: gain, sell, csmvq, ?m w' agr, vW.ge. r?r encIr? r tl'? »l.?ar?rlng i?x s?i7gaci i)tc?j?t'y: Ent" J.,tpl Ntwrlptfan ofPrrxarty 44*4 44001W*00491VN4dkW+#1,010440*f4141#iYY?4lY4pyY4r }',? rf rrltnr}lcrtzas? l?Jat.t???..,1? .ruff 2l? C.. lr "Ft's Arid l 3o hvr°cby givo and graxtt to my'airy at(c'mey ffill po"r aml whotitr,;? to ear onti p-r0-1ty7 all and rwtr-y act and th"no Whatsoevm m0e. smr;yixi e dme irrr ilia reomifs w fbi ly to f dl Inti!rit W purp)w m T might -or could do if ,rtkorkally iImt, with full rvruts' of subOl htiott. and rmoofion, ltreby nd-tying and cunff it g all that my i atirsr tcv may do ptrmiani to thin prmv ,t. IN Wl"i N? 811??I1?1?_l have 1ke?r?:?ktrtn sot my hand and Som thia_I S A d1w o-r -0- 2' C1 Sip&l, seiiktl av.d dph ttd in flit pweyiec esf, Vl%i rt?r? I VIII,, FFµsANA V. TRYON Notary Public, State of Texas My ?ammission Expires w January 20, 2008 7:lrc (nrrpin.f? Irt.ntMrn'5nt )"rt hemby iwkn mvf p'td d lx'-'Pore jf?c, this. , S 200 I#: 2005245184 BK: 14403 PG: 2602, 06/23/2005 at 06:46 PM, RECORDING 1 PAGES $10.00 D DOC STAMP COLLECTION $1575.00 KEN BURKE, CLERK OF COURT PINELLAS COUNTY, FL BY DEPUTY CLERK: CLKPRI8 I Prer+ar@d,hy, Title Clearinghouse 423 Mandalay Avenue Clearwater Beach, Florida 33767 File Number: 05-1123-03 General Warranty Deed Made this May 31, 2005 A.D. By Sadion Properties, Inc., a Florida corporation, whose address is: 411 Cleveland Street # l 10, Clearwater, FL 33755, hereinafter called the grantor, to Dorothy B. LeBlanc a married woman, whose post office address is: 201 S. Fulton Beach Rd., Fulton, TX 78358, hereinafter called the grantee: (Whenever used herein the term "grantor" and "grantee" include all the parties to this instrument and the heirs, legal representatives and assigns of individuals, and the successors and assigns ofcorporations) Witnesseth, that the grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars, ($10.00) and other valuable considerations, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, bargains, sells, aliens, remises, releases, conveys and confirms unto the grantee, all that certain land situate in Pinellas County, Florida, viz: Lot 13,14, 15 AND 16 BLOCK 1, LAKE BELLEVIEW ADDITION, LESS THAT PART CONVEYED TO PINELLAS COUNTY FOR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY IN OR BOOK 1367. PAGE 279, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE: 141 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA Parcel ID Number; 21/29/15/47466/001/0130 Together with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining To Have and to Hold, the same in fee simple forever. And the grantor hereby covenants with said grantee that the grantor is lawfully seized of said land in fee simple; that the grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell and convey said land; that the grantor hereby fully warrants the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever; and that said land is free of all encumbrances except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31, 2004. In Witness Whereof, the said grantor has signed and sealed these presents the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence: Sadlo qro?7, Inc. ?Y NI/A Lt I ?`Y (Seal) //11 a Witness Printed Name laiFla.VIYI B . Ju y 11 ei and as P for Mark Nickels It : V ce Pre (dent Ad ress: 411 Cleveland Street #110, Clearwater, FL 33755 Witness Printed Name 't?C State of Florida County of Pinellas The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 31th day of May, 2005, by Sadion Properties, Inc., a Florida corporation, who is/are personally known to me or who has produced drivers license as identification. Notary Pobf c /t .t? lJ( V Print Namr. •_//`` , My Commission' Expires: 51tY?7 /?7 _ ._ Gina Botvtn ?aY P C'ommissionNDD217338 :Expires: May 29, 2007 Bonded Thru 11` Atlantic Bonding Co., Inc. DEED Individual Warranty Deed - Legal on Face Closers' Choice S1 ?fF OF FLC1l1[)A- PINELLASCOUN Y , QGUR it S a true hercM rertify that the f0regoing C Ptf in i1e,0(ticlal records of v rPt ? # t s A* NEI r6trr . op PI 20 i?S --- 11itf• ?' 1 iy 12I .[ S t?FN6llf??? ^ 6 `y :; dt , . t?bs-t ,nt;?tl?lt G0 ? PINELLAS COUNTY FL OFF. REC. BK 16390 PG 1081 y i To Have and to Hold, the same in fee simple forever. And the grantor hereby covenants with said grantee that the grantor is lawfully seized of said land in fee simple; that the grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell and convey said land; that the grantor hereby fully warrants the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever; and that said land is free of all encumbrances except taxes accruing; subsequent to December 31st of 2007. In Witness Whereof, the grantor has hereunto set their hand(s) and seal(s) the day and. year first above written. Sexton Enterprises, In , Florida corporation i y: Kevin Sexton, President Ice: State of FL County of Pinellas The Foregoing Instrument Was Acknowledged before me on Septembe 1, 2008-,,by Sexton Enterprises, Inc., a Florida corporation who is/are personally kno t" e or who has/have produced a valid driver's license as identification. PUBLIC m }r;" 1t?r??t . ?.? a T,riTy c rlity fh at tF,t t?nc?r5in{ I true 11'li rect Ws of .:, qtr °tr , ? r rjrr'eri cn 4he (I O Cgy er rx,gy n 20AI Cc) .. *rr t5,tc???, ?i( rk prty Syr epui "Verk r Notary Print Name My Commission Expires: Notary Public . State of Florida MyCaYrr"MbplresJan 5, 2009 Commisslon # DD 357589 Borxled By National Notary A a Page 2 of 2 1046- 1994959 Print Name: i- - r y?-55/vZo?__ I#: 2008266607 BK: 16390 PG: 1080, 09/30/2008 at 04:31 PM, $18:50 D DOC STAMP COLLECTION $462.00 KEN BURKE, CLERK OF COTNTY, FL BY DEPUTY CLERK: CLKDUI9 Prepared by Lydia Messina, an employee of First American Title Insurance Company 14100 Walsingham Road, Suite 14. Largo, Florida 33774 (727)595-4527 Return to: Grantee File No.: 1046-1994959 WARRANTY DEED This indenture made on September 11, 2008 A.D., by Sexton Enterprises, Inc., a Florida corporation RECORDING 2 PAGES COURT PINELLAS whose address is: , hereinafter called the "grantor", to Mark LeBlanc and Dorothy B. LeBlanc, as joint tenants with full rights of survivorship whose address is: 901 Lakeview Road, Lot 17, Clearwater, FL 33756 hereinafter called the "grantee": (Which terms "Grantor" and "Grantee" shall include singular or plural, corporation or individual, and either sex, and shall include heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns of the same) Witnesseth, that the grantor, for and In consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars, ($10.00) and other valuable considerations, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, bargains, sells, aliens, remises, releases, conveys and confirms unto the grantee, all that certain land situate in Pinellas County, Florida, to-wit: Lot 17, Block 1 of LAKE BELLEVIEW ADDITION, according to the Map or Plat thereof as recorded iii Plat Book 9, Page 141, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, less and except the road right-of- way. Parcel Identification Number: 21/29/15/47466/001/0170 Subject to all reservations, covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements of record and to all applicable zoning ordinances and/or restrictions imposed by governmental authorities, if any. Together with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in any way appertaining. Page 1 of 2 1D46- 1994959 BOUNDARY SURVEY ****NOTE**** SURVEY DRAWN BY OCCUPAT70N KEV/EW ROAD(P) APSEY STREET(F) i 60'RW S. 89 5 6 q,-CM 3x3 $) (, ?) x ? ) 6'? cx?cx? v 0 3' 91)_ 6•u lx'?x, g N (9 - T °oc6 ti 0 0 o? 0 0 8 .? ADDRESS: 921 LAKEVIEW ROAD CLEARWA TER, FLORIDA, 25 31, (M) 65.31'?? ®WB ?'FCM 4x4 ?. W/ N&D :"E. 39.40'(M) 9?1 ?? 9 6 FCM 3x3 0 of CONCRETE 49.9' TWO STORY CBS BUILDING #921 (LLF.=10.0) 49.9' 010 S 9.0 89 ro v? 2p ? O FCM 4)k* W/ N&D 661 10' 25" (x lqg?l 9. C?. 3 CX? 91') 1 9g ?x 10p (X' 26" r o 10.4') V g6) s A01') rn 1oti? -? o l* 0.4 ) 50 ??1 1I"k 00 ?Pl 1k5 h? ?Iv COD G I^? 2 y0 ?xh ?pF tF F /NQ N.8836 '16"W. 86.29'(M) F 5/8,. ?55p ?1 WB 5'CSW i LAKEVIEW ROAD(F) COUNTY HIGHWAY(P) - 30'PAR7IAL RW (ELEVA77ONS ARE SHOWN IN PARENTHESIS AND ARE ASSUMED.) OTE : This survey was conducted without the benefit of on abstract of title, therefore, there may be other easements, right-of-way, setback 1 S, agreements, reservations, restrictions, or other similar matters of public reord not de icted o thi s 1 RK CH - CHORD EDP = EDGE OF PAVEMENT FlP FOUND IRON PIPE CLF CHAIN LINK FENCE EA RN EOW =EDGE OF WATER FlR FOUND IRON ROD t , p n s urvey. M MEASUREMENT PP -POWER POLE MH MANHOLE R =RADIUS : : CON=CONCRETE BLOCK/STUCCO FCC =FOUND CROSS CUT FOUND NAlC ATED -CSW CONCRETE S10EWALK FCM =FOUND CONCRETE FPP FOUND PINCH PIPE DEE A4P OL£RHEAD POKER UNE SIP =.SET/RgN PIPE PLAT RR = SET RM ROO KITH CAP f 5947 P CONCRETE D MONUMENT LLF LOWEST UNNG FLOOR EARING DE = DRAINAGE EASEMENT fH = FlRE HYDRANT I/ INCRES5 1 EGRESS C =POINT OF CURVATURE UE =UT7UTY EASEMENT POP = PERMANENT CONTROL PONT µg WATER BOX FLOOD INF 1 Pl = POINT OF INTERSEC170N WF =; !W0OD FENCE ORMA TION.'' LEGAL: sECnoN: TowNSHiP S RANGE- E CERTIFIED TO: ZONE. LOT 13, 14, 15 AND 16, BLOCK 1, LAKE BELLEWEW ADDITION, NUMBER: LESS ROAD-RIGHT-OF-WAY AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK DOR07HY LEBLANC x , 9, DATE.• PAGE 141, ACCORDING TO THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA. X X FLORIDA BENCHMARK INC / I HEREB ER I , . C 77FY AT S SURVEY WAS MADE UNDER PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR TECHNICALNS?NDARDS AS SET FORTH BY THE/BOARD OF 1298 LAKEVIEW ROAD PH. (727) 298-0286 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS IN CHAPTER 61G17-6 OF THE FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE PURSUANT TO SECTIO CLEARWATER, FL. 33756 FAX# (727) 461-0696 , 472,027 OF FLORIDA STATWES NOT VALID SI GNATURE ANDEEMBOSSED WITH SURVEYOR SEAL.W1THOUT AUTHORIZATION NO. LB 6947 FIELD WORK BY.• RF DATE:' 4-26-06 REVISION DATE: PAGE # DRAWN BY.• CH DATE 5-08-06 2: 3: JOB# 06-0953 M. G. MAYER PLS 4495 DATE SCALE: 1" = 30' ADDRESS. 909 L_Ak/ V/l: W Dl7/l i7 CU?AR1,VA7-FR, F1,-0Fi`0A, OFAfF SEY 57REET(F LAKF_VIEW DRIVE(P 6ORIV 145, 00'(L) S. 89'7446"{V. i 45.47'(M) FIR 518" FCM 04 C LOT 16 LOT 17 LOT 18 LOT 19 LOT 20 Lot 21 LOT 22 BLOCK 1 I I ____`-i I I BLOCK I p I I I I I g9) ('?' g, 71) __ I I I I I I I ? 0 . v EON.. 7 .-? o? ? ? 0.'11 Z) 1 , j0 I I I ? ? o o? d u> I p?ii (Y (x ONE S]ORY + p:+ o° I I I ASPHALT I C S ? a ti 8y 1 PAR,mIG RCIAt- COA4M '' e 1 p 9' 01 - 4? O (114. 10.12) , YV O FCM 4x4 _?._ 2.5.00' (P) -..--_- 2'CVG LAKEKEW ROAD(F) 14 5.Od(L) EAST 145.22(A! COUNTY HIGNWAY(P) ASSUMED BASIS OF B_ARINOS --' -30'PART7AL. RW -- ?- - -' - IwL-LE VATIONa SNOWN IIERCON APE //\/ PAREA17/-IL,91S AMID ICI Q -FE: This Furvev w(7,5 conducted without the benefit of on obstruct of title, therefore, there may be other Paremeats, right-of- wa e,< setback lines, ogreements, reservotions, restrictions, or other simiior rnoriers of public record, V depicted this ^ CH = CNal7U FOP .. ED6F. OF PA,¢dfENT rTP " FVUPIO IRON PIPE df - MF.ASURFhfENr I-P - I'Olffl7 I'MF BAI ECNCH MARK !R rOUND WIN ROIL MH 6OVEWY.F. /7 .r RADIUS i BRG = REARING C= CHAIN CO LINK FENCE EOIY „ EDGE OF o.,7ER p VERIfiAO PONF.R IlNF , SIP Y 1" lR/lY TIFF CBS CONCRETE 6LOCk%57UGGa CON =CONCRETE rCC FOUND CROSS CUT f"N FVUNO NAIL p - PI AT SIT ,G7 ,Yd".I! r0J M7!I c•!c f ?.`:'% U CSIV- CCHMM SIOEIVALX FCM >- FOUND CONCRETE r1'P T`O(J"O PINCI/ FIFE PG PONlT [a' CUlPVA11/RF (IC UII ITY rn r-f,-rn CALC - CALGMA 7E0 D n DE"F.D MONUMENT !LF - LDIff"57 LI1911G AODR (VI - PLITWATlENI GCNTRU(. PU'NI NII JfATTR BO J GHU - CHHOW ORD BEAARINGRING Y L C - CE7E DE- - ORAINAGF EASEMENT TH = TIRE HYDRANT //r- 1NG6F557tCRESS !'I POINI or INILRSCCIICV NT liucv FFIILE - - a 100D INFORMA IION• LEGAL: SECTION: 21 TOONSHIP: S29 RANCE: 15E (3/40/01:0 10.' 'ONE.' X LOTS 17-22, Ut.OClC 1, LAKE OF_LLEWPHI AUD1710N, AS E65 DUMBER: 12103CO10811 RFCORDEO IN PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE 141, ACCORDING !O X >ATE.• 05-17-05 THE- PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINE'LLAS COUNTY, FI ORIDA. x r I? Fl 0R- I D/-1 L_J J 1 V CHMA JK) I N J-- I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT MIS 501M) II, HAI r IINI ! I; U n MY RFSr ONSIBl F. CHARGE ANO efFE T- 7NF NIl,IA(UH PROFESSIONAL. SURVEYOR TECHNICAL STAIIDARDS AS SF7 oRT11 Bl NIF Pcl+rl PROri SSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS IN CIIAI 7E7 61G'17 F OI - 1HF FLONtUA ADdaN1511PAnVf wtx, fvrwnlrl To Lr, n%l. 1298 LAKCVIENr ROAD pit. (727) Z98-0286 it i T 71 r(II/I ? 472.027 OF THE 1l SWA JIT (XTGS, NOT VALIv {I 1 AR WA TER, EL. 3,3756 FAXf (727) 461-0696 SIGNAR)RE ANO E66 n-S50) MIT[ .1JMEY0R SEAL. CLE 7-1 Northside EXHIBIT "B" TO FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 921 Lakeview Road Section B. Description of Request Civil Land Planning Due Diligence Reports Re-Zoning, Land Use, Annexation Stormwater Management Utility Design Traffic Construction Administration The Applicant, Mr. Marc LeBlanc proposes to convert the existing vacant building into a neighborhood restaurant use. The subject property is a 0.25 acre site bounded on the north by Lakeview Road and on the south by Dempsey Street. Specifically, the Applicant requests flexible development approval to allow conversion of the site and existing building into a restaurant use with: a. a Lot Area of 11,018 square feet; b. a Lot Width of 146.79 feet on Lakeview Road and 89.77 feet on Dempsey Street; c. an existing Height (above BFE) of 25' 5" to mid-point of roof; d. a Front (north) Setback along Lakeview Road of 18.1' to existing building, 4' to a portion of the parking lot pavement and 13.8' to the sidewalk; e. a Front (South) Setback along Dempsey Street of 30.2' to the existing building, 0' to the dumpster enclosure and 1' to a portion of the parking lot pavement; f. a Side (east) setback of 3' to existing building and 13.72' to the dumpster enclosure; g. a Side (west) setback of 54.92' to the existing building and 5' to the parking lot pavement; h. an Impervious Surface Ratio of .69 i. F.A.R. of 0.21 j. Providing 16 On-Site Parking Spaces 300 South Belcher Road Clearwater, Florida 33765 tech@northsideengineeringservices.corn 727 443 2869 Fax 727 446 8036 1 as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C of the Code with reductions to the landscape requirements through a Comprehensive Landscape Application to allow a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer along Dempsey Street from 10 feet to one-foot (to pavement) and zero feet (to dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the east perimeter landscape buffer, a reduction from five feet to three feet (to existing building), a reduction to the interior landscape requirement from 10 percent to 5.5 percent of the vehicular use area and reduction to the width of the foundation landscape area on both the north and south sides of the building from five feet to zero feet. History The structure, built in the 1920's, although not on the Florida or National Register of History Places does in fact provide historic value to the City of Clearwater. The site historically contained a Coca Cola distribution facility with the last occupancy being four attached dwelling units; the site has been vacant for approximately 5 years. The Applicant purchased the site in 2006 with the goal of opening a "little neighborhood restaurant" similar to those found nestled within the neighborhoods of his hometown in Texas. Mr. LeBlanc immediately fell for the historic charm of the building, the vibe of the neighborhood and the surrounding small businesses. Over the past four years, while working his way through the development process, the Applicant has maintained the property in good condition in addition to demolishing a large unsafe portion of the structure thru the permitting process. Proposed Use The Applicant is seeking development approval to allow a small specialty neighborhood restaurant utilizing the existing structure, the site area under consideration now includes additional land under the ownership of the Applicant. The proposed casual neighborhood restaurant will offer Cajun fair in a charmingly rustic building located in a unique, underutilized and historically enriched area of our City. The second floor of the structure will contain the office for the business operation; much the same as most restaurants provide an area of the floor plan to the managers/owners office and is devoted to the completion of paperwork, filing, accounting, ordering and so forth. The proposed overall patron area of the building is reduced when taking into consideration the areas required for the operation of a restaurant business such as the kitchen, storage room/shelving, coolers, restroom facilities and office area. The remaining area for the actual patron portion of the footprint is approximately 50% of the gross floor area of the building; although Code requires the entire square footage of the building be calculated as Patron/Restaurant space when calculating parking, the actual patron area is much less than portrayed by the total area of the building. In direct response to a Planning Department concern, although the Planning Department does not regulate seating, the Fire Department certainly does; there are regulations associated with restaurant occupancy loads, required square footage per table seat, booth seat and bar seat, in addition to walkway minimum dimensions and push back requirements, occupancy is in fact regulated. 2 The business plan of a small scale casual neighborhood restaurant is the appropriate scale and intensity for this commercially designated corridor and surrounding mixture of uses. The business will be owned and operated by the Applicant/Property Owner helping to insure responsible operation, preservation of investment through maintenance, improvements and a dedicated ownership stake in the community Section D. Written Submittal Requirements General Applicability Criteria: 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 existing building built in 1920, either predates or equals the construction date of many of the surrounding structures and as such will not create nor be in disharmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of the surrounding properties. The area, comprised of an array of various building types and uses provides no particular emerging character. The character of each site is quite unique and is the true charm of the area. The area with or without this restaurant, offers a quirky array of uses including but not limited to: the Candy Factory, an office for the Community Service Foundation, a large warehouse facility, the Local Fire Fighters Association, a cemetery, the main facility for Incredible Edibles (office, sales, and food preparation) in addition to other offices. The eclectic collection of uses will be enhanced by the proposed small specialty neighborhood restaurant. 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. It is commonly known that vacant buildings generally have a negative impact on new development and re-development and can lower or impair property values. The proposed re-occupancy of the building and site will help to encourage new development and re-development of adjacent land, providing a positive effect on the property values of the surrounding land. 3 Some of the substantial improvements proposed to the building and site include: • Installation of professionally designed landscaping along all yards, approximately 95' linear feet of the Lakeview Road frontage will receive three or more tiers of plantings including multiple plantings of decorative and shade trees. The east and west side yard will receive landscape treatment to the fullest extent possible taking into consideration the location of the building and the remaining area available for required parking and drive aisle. The Applicant has proposed to in-fill the southern area along Dempsey Street where possible with landscaping. • Further the Applicant proposes to provide additional landscaping beyond his property line, within the ROW of Dempsey Road to further mitigate any adverse impact to the residential properties to the south and will provide assurances of replacement should the City require access to the area for repair work. This additional area of landscaping will fulfill the intent of the landscape code providing the desired landscape buffer. • Historically the site offered primarily non-paved dirt parking surfaces, the new proposed paved surfaces will decrease dirt and dust to the surrounding sites. • The proposed design offers responsible site drainage which is not currently present on site. • The rehabilitation and restoration of a historically significant structure together with the addition of a use which allows the community to step inside and share a meal with your neighbor will certainly enhance the vicinity and strengthen the sense of community. The items outlined above only touch on the more than $300,000.00 worth of improvements proposed for this site; the proposed improvements will increase and benefit the values of the surrounding land and buildings. The proposed re- development will help to encourage further commercial development along this commercially zoned corridor. 3) The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The proposed re-use of the site and building will have positive effects on the health and safety of area residents and workers; typically vacant sites do not promote safety; active, vibrant and utilized commercial properties reflect positively on the health and safety of residents and workers in the area. 4 Through responsible business management and operation, the health and safety of persons residing and/or working in the neighborhood will not be adversely affected. The proposed restaurant, located within a commercially designated site will offer reasonable hours of operation, the appropriate enclosure for the dumpster, and access to the site for vehicles from Lakeview Road. Additionally, environmentally speaking, approval of this request will allow the re- use of a structurally sound building in lieu requiring utilization of new precious land materials and resources such as wood, petroleum and rock to provide a new building in a new location in order to provide just a few more parking spaces. The neighboring sites will have far less disruption through the proposed conversion of the existing site vs. the disruption associated with a site under full construction. 4) The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. This small casual neighborhood restaurant containing approximately 14 tables will not create traffic congestion; the site design provides code compliant access to the site along the commercially designated Lakeview Road. This portion of Lakeview is not constrained and can easily accept the low number of trips generated by this small commercial development. Vehicular access to the site has been designed to take place along Lakeview Road further minimizing the impacts of the proposed restaurant on the properties to the south. The site is within a 1/4 mile walk from many residences located in the neighborhoods to the north, south and east of the site, a portion of the Pinellas Trail and Ross Norton Complex. Please also see discussion within Item #6. 5) The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. As stated above the area offers no particular community character to find consistency with, however the proposed neighborhood restaurant will fit in nicely with the array of various uses (commercial and residential) in the vicinity. The small scale restaurant is intended to support and serve the immediate vicinity and neighborhoods. 6) The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. 5 The proposed development will not cause adverse effects on adjacent properties, through sound site design, access points appropriately located along the commercially designated Lakeview corridor, a dumpster enclosure per City Standards and responsible site drainage. The proposed upgrades to the structure and site together with the smaller scale of the proposed neighborhood restaurant and the contemplated landscape treatment to the Dempsey Street ROW, the proposal development offers many actions to successfully minimize adverse effects on the adjacent properties. The proposed landscape treatment within the ROW will offer mitigation of the landscaping that can not be accomplished on site. Further, it should be noted that through discussion with Mr. Tom Glenn of the Sanitation Dept. it was determined that Dempsey Road is currently utilized by commercial garbage trucks servicing some of the commercial businesses located further to the west along Dempsey Road. 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. The proposed deviations from Code are the minimum necessary to make practical re-use of this existing site and historic building. Certain deviations are necessary due to circumstances associated with the land and/or were not self created by the Applicant; the double frontage lot, the location of the existing building and the irregular shape of the site all play a part in the hardships associated with the site. Most any use would require some of the same deviations proposed as the same challenges would be present when designing the require parking lot, driveway, required drainage, solid waste access and locations. The site design for any use would look much the same as this proposal with the exception of the deletion of the first and last parking spaces in the western parking row and one space from both the front and rear of the building; this small distinction should not be grounds to deny this development proposal. The Applicant believes that this development proposal requires the minimum deviations necessary to accomplish his proposed and permissible use and re-development would be impractical without the deviations. The proposed rehabilitation of this unique structure and site meets the City's vision of encouraging the adaptive re-use of underutilized buildings in the event redevelopment is not feasible. The building is structurally sound and has been a part of this community's character for 80 years. Additionally, allowing the re-use of this existing building and site will provide positive momentum in a very poor economic time and in an area that is currently struggling with vacant buildings, and an identity crises. 6 Setbacks The relief sought from the building setback is the minimum necessary to accommodate the re-use of the existing building. The remaining setback deviations are to pavement and the dumpster enclosure. The designation of two legal front yards, the irregular shape of the property and location of the existing building presents a hardship in the development of this site. Height The existing height of the building is 25'-5" to the mid-point of the roof and is within the lower limits of the flexible height allowance of between 25 and 50 feet. The building has existed since the 1920's and will continue to cohesively blend into block face. Parking The site design provides 16 parking spaces and falls within the lowest end of the allowable flexible range of between 16 and 35 parking spaces. Per Code parking may be further reduced when substantiated by a formal Parking Study with scoping determined by the City of Clearwater. A formal Parking Study has been provided to offer verification of adequate parking to service the site and proposed business operation. Please see provided Parking Study for additional information and discussion. 2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning district. The subject site with the requested approval as a Comprehensive In-Fill Project is consistent with many of the goals and policies within the Comprehensive Plan associated with urban conservation and renewal. Restaurant uses are permissible uses within the "Commercial" zoning district and within the "Commercial General" land use category. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. The proposed project is compatible with the neighborhood, as is more particularly discussed in General Applicability Criteria 1 and Comprehensive Infill Criteria 4 below, and will not impede other development. The re-use of the site may encourage renovation or redevelopment of some of the other vacant sites in the vicinity. An occupied site with new businesses and tenants will certainly benefit the community as a whole and specifically this district. 7 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. Re-occupation of the property will improve the value of the adjoining properties as well as improving safety through the establishment of an active businesses to help create a more vibrant and safe street presence. Illegal activity is threatened by legal activity; the proposed re-occupation of the site will help to deter crime, loitering and vandalism. Please see General Applicability Criteria 2 for additional discussion regarding this item. 5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance with one or more of the following objectives: a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standard or flexible development use; b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs; c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic contributor; d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing; e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation; or f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new, and/or preservation of a working waterfront use. Restaurant uses are permitted by the "Commercial General" land use category and in the "Commercial" zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standard and flexible use. New jobs will be generated by the proposed neighborhood restaurant and as previously discussed in General Applicability Criteria I the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding uses. 6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives: 8 a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district. The proposed restaurant use is permitted in the Commercial zoning district. As previously discussed in detail in General Applicability Criteria 1, the proposed re- occupation of the site will not impede the surrounding properties which are of varying sizes and uses. The proposed project may stimulate additional business activity in this area and may encourage redevelopment of other sites. b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City. The area is not controlled by specific design guidelines; however, the Applicant believes the design meets the intent and spirit of the code. Although the area of the vehicular landscape within the parking lot is proposed at 290 square feet where 525 square feet is required, the smaller scale of the proposed development does not provide expansive areas of pavement that will be noticeably void of landscaping. Further, the overall open space proposed for the site is 3,329 square feet where only 550.90 is required. There may be a deficit of 235 square feet of landscaping within the parking lot; there is an overage of more than 2,500 square feet of overall open space. The site clearly meets the intent and spirit of the code. The area is burdened with a declining business base, an increasing number of vacant buildings and a lack of identity. This proposed re-development plan will encourage the business base, provide occupancy to a currently vacant site and will provide desired commercial support to the surrounding low to medium residential neighborhood. This proposal addresses the concerns and visions stated above. The re-establishment of occupancy to the site will create neighborhood employment opportunities; encourage adaptive re-use of underutilized buildings. c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; The area does not provide and emerging character, please see Comp. Infill Criteria 4 for discussion of compatibility with the neighborhood. d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design elements: 9 • Changes in horizontal building planes; • Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc; • Variety in materials, colors and textures; • Distinctive fenestration patterns; • Building stepbacks; and • Distinctive roofs forms. The existing building built in the 1920's is attractive, unique and blends into the neighborhood landscape, offering an interesting and distinctive building appearance especially from the northwest. The building also provides the desired changes in height and building lines. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. We believe the proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, offers an enhanced landscape plan which includes installation of professionally designed landscaping along all yards including approximately 95' linear feet of the Lakeview Road frontage receiving three or more tiers of plantings including multiple plantings of decorative and shade trees. The east and west side yards will receive landscape treatment to the fullest extent possible taking into consideration the location of the existing building and required parking and drive aisles. To provide additional buffering/landscaping the Applicant has voluntarily proposed to in-fill the southern area along Dempsey Street where possible with landscaping to better accomplish what can not be provided on site. The proposed buffers on site, together with the proposed improvements to the ROW provide appropriate buffering. 5/13/2010 6:40 PM 10 Northslmde EXHIBIT "A" VIEW CORRIDOR Civil Land Planning Due Diligence Reports Re-Zoning, Land Use, Annexation Stormwater Management Utility Design Traffic Construction Administration The attached aerial demonstrates the angle of the view corridor of the residences located to the south of the proposed neighborhood restaurant. We offer the following additional points of discussion for your consideration: • The residences to the south of the site are angled toward the northeast and northwest offering increased mitigation of impacts. Additionally the existing mature trees and hedges located along the northern property lines and between the residences provided additional buffering. • The Applicant/Owner agrees to provide professionally designed and installed landscaping within the Dempsey Street ROW; the proposed landscaping will certainly provide additional buffering and beautification for many years to come. The Owner/Application further agrees to replace any landscaping that was installed as a part of this project when necessary to allow for work within the ROW. 300 South Belcher Road Clearwater, Florida 33765 tecli c@northsideengineeringservices.corn 727 443 2869 Fax 727 446 8036 7 .. r x 0 Tn y? PARKING STUDY FOR BOILING POT RESTAURANT 921 LAKEVIEW ROAD CLEARWATER , FLORIDA PREPARED FOR: Mark LeBlanc PREPARED BY: GULF COAST CONSULTING, INC. REVISED MAY 2010 PROJECT # 10-002 ? Z' zl?? - Robert Perg zz AICP/PTP AICP #9023/PTP #133 I. INTRODUCTION The applicant is seeking approval to utilize the building located at #921 Lakeview Road as a small neighborhood specialty restaurant. The 0.253 acre property is located on the south side of Lakeview Road between Myrtle Avenue and Prospect Avenue and has rear access to Dempsey Street. (See Figure 1) The redevelopment of the property is the subject of a Flexible Development Application. This application requires an assessment of the parking adequacy for the operation and it was determined a parking study should be completed. As part of the redevelopment a parking lot will be constructed to include a total of 16 parking spaces. The building currently has 1,996 square feet of floor space on the ground floor and 320 square feet in a second floor office. This area is considered restaurant space for the purposes of this report although it does not contain customer seating. The proposed Boiling Pot restaurant will specialize in Cajun seafood in a casual neighborhood setting. The restaurant would employ 5 or 6 staff and would serve dinner only on weeknights (4:30 - 10 PM) and lunch and dinner on Fridays and weekends (11 AM - 10 PM). This study was revised based on comments received from City of Clearwater staff at the April 1, 2010 DRC meeting and additional requests from another DRC meeting held May 6, 2010. II. METHODOLOGY Prior to conducting this analysis a methodology was established with the City of Clearwater staff. It was agreed GCC would conduct a parking accumulation study of a similar neighborhood specialty restaurant on a normal weekday between 11 AM and 8 PM, and on a Saturday between 11 AM and 8 PM. The agreed to comparable restaurant is the Lakeview Grill which is a Mexican specialty restaurant located at 1510 Lakeview Road, just east of Highland Avenue. The Lakeview Grill is open for breakfast, lunch and dinner, is located on a 0.21 acre site with 2,352 square feet of gross building area, and contains 10 code-compliant parking spaces. The Lakeview Grill restaurant contains 15 tables and is open from 9 AM-9 PM with 3 to 4 total employees. The study area included the existing parking lot only since public parking lots and on-street spaces are not in close proximity to the Lakeview Grill site, if any restaurant parking occurred an a nearby vacant lot it was recorded as an occupied space. Per the Community Development Code there is a minimum parking requirement of 7-15 spaces per 1,000 square feet of restaurant space. According to strict interpretation of the code, the 2,316 square foot Boiling Pot restaurant would require between 16 and 35 parking spaces. The code provides for reducing the required number of parking spaces to recognize the special situations that exist. The Community Development Code allows a reduction in parking if the property will require fewer parking spaces per floor area than otherwise required due to unique operations and a significant portion of the building is used for storage or 1 N I I PROJECT LOCATION - BOILING POT (PROJECT NO: I 10-002 Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. DATE: FIGURE: Land Development Consulting 1/2010 DRAWN BY: G.J.S. non-parking demand-generating purposes. The applicant believes the specialty neighborhood restaurant being located in a mixed-use area containing residential, recreational, and office/industrial uses will encourage walk-up patrons and a specialized clientele such that parking needs will be reduced. Additionally the Pinellas Trail is located nearby which may reduce the need for vehicle parking during certain times of day during daylight and early evening hours. Also PSTA route #61 stops at the Lakeview Road/Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue intersection which is only 2-blocks to the east of the site. III. EXISTING PARKING CONDITIONS OF LAKEVIEW GRILL Existing conditions were established by conducting parking lot counts between the hours of 11:00 AM and 8:00 PM on Friday January 29, 2010 and Saturday January 30, 2010. The existing Lakeview Grill parking lot was checked on the hour for the number of spaces that were occupied. The number of occupied spaces was noted and an hourly accumulated total was obtained. Friday January 29, 2010 On Friday (high weekday) parking demand varied significantly throughout the day from a low of 0 occupied spaces (0 %) at 2 PM to a peak demand of 5 occupied spaces (50%) at 7 PM. Table 1 provides an hourly tabulation and Figure 2 provides a graph of hourly parking space occupancy. Saturday January 30, 2010 On Saturday (weekend) parking demand varied significantly throughout the day from a low of 2 occupied spaces (20 %) at 8 PM to a peak demand of 6 occupied spaces (60%) at 11 AM and again at 7 PM. Table 2 provides an hourly tabulation and Figure 3 provides a graph of hourly parking space occupancy. Based on the data collected the Lakeview Grill has an actual parking demand of 2.55 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area. This ratio (6 spaces / 2,352 sf) may be transferred to similar specialty restaurants in neighborhood areas. To be conservative it was assumed these would serve customers. It should be noted, the Boiling Pot may have up to 5 to 6 employees, and assuming a worst-case of all driving separately, an additional 5 to 6 spaces may be required for employee parking. This would raise the maximum total demand to 12 spaces. 2 TABLE 1 FRIDAY JANUARY 29, 2010 TIME 11:00 AM 12:00 NOON 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM LAKEVIEW GRILL PARKING LOT OCC. TOTAL % OCCUPIED 2 10 20% 2 10 20% 2 10 20% 0 10 0% 2 10 20% 2 10 20% 3 10 30% 3 10 30% 5 10 50% 3 10 30% FIGURE 2 - FRIDAY JANUARY 29, 2010 15 14 13 12 11 10 U) w 9 v a can 8 0 w 7 a v 6 V O 5 4 3 2 1 0 11:00 AM 12:00 NOON 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM TIME OF DAY TABLE 2 SATURDAY JANUARY 30, 2010 TIME 11:00 AM 12:00 NOON 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM LAKEVIEW GRILL PARKING LOT OCC. TOTAL % OCCUPIED 6 10 60% 5 10 50% 3 10 30% 3 10 30% 3 10 30% 3 10 30% 3 10 30% 2 10 20% 6 10 60% 2 10 20% FIGURE 3 - SATURDAY JANUARY 30 , 2010 15 14 13 12 11 10 CO) w v 9 a CL co) 8 0 w 7 a V 6 V O 5 4 3 2 1 0 + Series1 11:00 AM 12:00 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM NOON TIME OF DAY IV. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH REDEVELOPMENT The proposed modifications would result in 16 on-site parking spaces. The site would require between 16-35 parking spaces according to strict interpretation of the code. Using the data obtained from a comparable neighborhood restaurant the maximum demand for the Boiling Pot would be 12 spaces, and 4 additional spaces would be available for overflow if needed. Therefore, the construction of the parking lot to contain 16 spaces will still provide adequate parking for the proposed operation at this site. Additionally bus stops located within 2-blocks of the site may provide transportation options for employees without the need for parking. An attached aerial photograph and PSTA Route Map demonstrates the I/4-mile walking distance from the site which includes bus stops, and a variety of land uses including moderate density residential, offices, commercial and warehouses, and the bus route. V. CONCLUSION This analysis was conducted in accordance with a specific methodology established with City of Clearwater staff. This analysis demonstrates a maximum of 6 parking spaces were occupied during any hour of the study period. Counting spaces for employees separately would create demand for another 5 to 6 spaces at the Boiling Pot. As such, the parking demands for a specialty neighborhood restaurant are easily satisfied with the proposed parking supply. With the redevelopment of site providing a parking supply to 16 spaces, the parking demands of the Boiling Pot can be accommodated. The proposed 16 spaces falls within the range required by the Community Development Code. 3 i?n y Aly ?. ? j ?a 'r R'6 ...>mC,XtrJilft? lee p t c R fr R ?' 'A a, ?? t} ?n? Y? it e r P 0000- }R S C M I ' "'vvveee ...??;y ? "4'' ? * •" ? ..` ? 1 Y ` ._ { ??yy* ??*° 4_!i•. "?i r •/I4F"1* ? 1' ..&. '' R !Ip A? C .1 ('7i f?1.'tr .. ?.. a 1 .-. i.. ; ??lij?.,.y1>? •? ",,' "?.i?rx -? ?.1?- 13825 ICOT Blvd., Suite 605 Clearwater, Florida 33760 Phone: (727) 524-1818 Fax: (727) 524-6090 la BOILING POT RESTAURANT 07/07/2006 f1:02 7275624967. PUBLIC UTILITIES PAGE 02 JAR1 9NIlS3nO:-lU 2J?IIIIUlSI1? 1 { 1 NOIl1iOC lN2V11lliVdW1 113-LVAA 113.Lvm f3-lD =10 Allo 1 AI m o I -Ii Clear 'water Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-562-4865 U SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION U SUBMIT 14 C&'IES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION - Plans and application are inquired to be collated, stapled and folded into setts CASE NUMBER: RECEIVED BY (Staff Initials): A NOTE: A TOTAL OF 15 SETS OF THIS APPLICATION AND ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COMPLETE LEVEL ONE OR LEVEL TWO APPLICATION. OMPRE HE NSIVE ]LANDSCAPE PROGRAM (Revised 03/29/2006) -PI EASE TYPE OR PRINT- APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME: !1 Mark and Dorothy _ B LeBlanc MAILING ADDRESS; 1418 Dexter Drive., Clearwater FL 33786 PHONE Nl1MBFR 4 727-461-2122 or 361-729-4143 CELL NUMBER: 727-.461-2122 PROPERTY OWNER(S): Dorothy 18, LeBlanc / Lots 13-16 List ALL owners on the deed ............... Mark and Dorothy B. LeBlanc / Lot '17 Nor'thside Engineering Services, Inc AGENT NAME: Housh Ghovaee, CEO - Renee Ruggiero, Senior Project Planner MAILING ADDRESS. 300 S. Belcher Road, Clearwater, FL 33765 PHONE NUMBER 727-443-,2869 FAX NUMBER: 727-446-8036 72 7-235-FI475 E-MAIL CELL NUMBER: ADDRESS: Renee@northsideengineering.net REQUEST: Reductions to the front buffer for a portion of the site adjacent to Lakeview Road and Dempsey Rd., also a reduction to the interior parking lot landscaping, and foundation landscaping along portions of the building. 1. ARC HITECTURAIr',THEME: a. The landscapjng in a Comprehensive Landscape Program shall be designed as a part of the architectural theme of the principal buildings proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for the development. A Mediterranean theme has been incorporated into the landscape desi _n oiterin a rich color allet of brilliant reds and greens. The proposed landscape theme will nicely compliment and accenthe unique architectural style of the building. OR b. The design, c aracter, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall be demonstrably s standards. pore attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape L DATE RECEIVED: Z.12010 AutoCAD Projects11002 - Boiling PotlLetters & Documents12010 Letters & CorrespondanceslComp. landscape App w Narrative.2.26.10.doc Page 1 of 2 N/A 2. LIGHTING: Any lighting propused as a part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program is automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed. Acknowledged, any proposed lighting will be turned off when the business is closed. 3. COMMUNITY CHARACTER: The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. The character of the community, surrounding) neighborhood and streetscape will most certainly be enhanced with the installation of 22 new trees consisting of 6 different species in addition to over 300 other new plantings 100% of all available open space will be planted to the fullest extent possible; the Developer also intends to provide new plantings along the Dempsey Street ROW to provide additional suffering and an improved streetscape for the residential properties to the south. _ ---- _ 4. PROPERTY VALLIES: 3 The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will have a beneficial impact on the value of the property in the immediate vicinity;pf the parcel proposed for development. The proposed improvements will have a positive impact on the value of the surlroundinn properties within ine immediate vicinity as we as the surrounding neighborhood as a whole. To insure sustainability of the -- investment, draught tolerant native plantings make up the majority of this design. Through sound landscape design, the improvements offered will be enjoyed by the community for many years to come. 5. SPECIAL AREA OR SCENIC CORRIDOR PLAN: The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program is consistent with any special area or scenic corridor plan which the Cily of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel proposed for development is located. N/A THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 3, DIVISION 12 MAY BE WAIVED OR MODIFIED AS A PART OF A LEVEL ONE OR LEVEL TWO APPLICATION, AS THE CASE MAY BE, IF THE APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL INCLUDES A COMPREFIENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM, WHICH SATISFIES THE ABOVE CRITERIA. THE USE OF LANDSCAPE PLANS, SECTIONS / ELEVATIONS, RENDERINGS AND PERSPECTIVES MAY BE NECESSARY TO SUPPLEMENT THE INFORMATION PROVIDE=D ON THIS WORKSHEET. SIGNATURE: I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in (his application ale true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application. ign ure of property owner or representative Z12010 AiltoCAD STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Sworn to and ubscribed before me this , day of A.D. 20 f to me and/or by " produced K 'hty-I(A, 1 FL, who is personally known has as identification. Notary public, My commission expires. t- k J {.i.cI.I11. A.. 7o1 4 ?f )Coin.rfiission W. DD531438 Exlfte.s: MAY 03, 2010 Bonded Th.'u ?,Ltanlic 33ond.inFt Ce:, T?nr„jects11002 - Boiling PohLetters & Documents12010 Letters & CorrespondanceslCOmp. landscape App w Narrative. 2.26.10.doc Page 2 of 2 _----____ ----__ _.I ? ? ??... `= Sic. .. EX 6' W4 TER........ . . ? +? ?? ? 22 }p'PARTIAL R ? ? ? 3 RA ? ? ? /? ' 46 93 EX cewc ?? / TM WALK ? ? ? ? ? / / ?WAtK Li EX. W. M. UA 37 ? 5T ? ? 8 ' 6'16" W 86.29( UA r ?G ,rLk 55 j 2 +.a'+?1'Ai?io EX. 2-STORY CBS BUILDING #921 (LLF.=10.0) 1,996 S. F. h to + 6k 4 ' ?r LCh?5er;rry Laurel 2 9 )RETENTION 334 f PA ?«? . X 1?s?, I / 60'RW WiL+ a -7) MY. EL +/- 4.6 (DOS 13 ?' BUTLER DESIMN t#ROUR INC. butler Design Group, Inc Ron Belko 4203 46`h Avenue North St. Petersburg, Florida 33714 Ph (727) 521-1684 Fax (727) 527-7422 E-mail: bd lg @tampabay.rr.com ronsnlans(a tamoabav.rr.corn n Ltu?d?caiw t)esif~nx?r FNGLA . We Know What GrOWR lJorticulnn " 11ndev i4 Tree Inventory 921 Lakeview Rd Clearwater, Fl April 10, 2010 I have completed an assessment of all trees (4" dbh or greater) on the subject site and within 25' of the property boundaries. My opinion is set forth below as to the viability (rating of 1-5) and any potential hazards of these trees. # off site TREE DBH & SPECIES RATING COMMENTS 1 off 18" Live Oak 2 Poor Structure, Poor Pruning, Co-Dominate, site Inclusions, Decay, Girdling Roots, Poor Trunk Flare, Compacted Soil, Large Dead Limbs, Cross branching, In wires 2 off 8",4" Twin Laurel Oak 2 Leader snapped out, In wires, Very poor structure, site Poor Pruning, Compacted soil, Decay, Epicormic growth 3 25" Laurel Oak 2 Large dead branch, Hazardous tree, Large open cavaties, Debris piled on root plate, Evidence of Ganoderma 4 43" Laurel Oak 3 Large open cavaties, Debris on root plate, compacted soil, Co-dominate, Inclusions, Weeping trunk wound, Cross branching, Dead limbs (Hazardous condition), Extremely mature tree with good strong spring flush, Evidence of decay in upper canopy, Mistletoe, Tree should be further evaluated for extent of the internal decay 5 26" Laurel Oak 0 Removed 6 off 9" Cherry Laurel 1 Hazard, Almost dead, Girdled, Competing with #7 site 7 off 10" Laurel Oak 2 Leaning, Twisted trunk, Decay, Large girdling root, site Cross branching with open wounding, Extremely one sided, Leaning, Hazardous tree 8 off 12" Sabal Palm 3 site 9 off 13" Laurel Oak 2 Declining, Extreme epicormic growth, Leaning, Large site amount of decay Lower-mid-upper canopy, One sided, In wires, Compacted soil, Potential hazard 10 off 9",6",6",6",5",5",4",4",4" 3 Decay, Poor Pruning, Poor structure, Competing , site Cherry Laurel Cluster Leaning, Dead limbs, Inclusions, Epicormic growth, Compacted soil I affirm that my opinions have been made in good faith, with no coercion from others. I further affirm that I have no interest with the parties or people involved with neither this issue nor any interest with regard to the outcome. Sincerely, Ron Belko FNGLA Certified Landscape Designer: #D31-66 FNGLA Certified Horticulture Professional: #H31-6445 ISA Certified Arborist: #FL-5802A ISA Certified Municipal Specialist: FL-5802M