The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2005-08090s s Planning Department Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue > Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 v Fax: 727-562-4865 ? SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ? SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION including 1) collated, 2) stapled and 3) folded sets of site plans ? . SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $ CASE #: DATE RECEIVED: RECEIVED BY (staff initials): ATLAS PAGE #: ZONING DISTRICT: LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: SURROUNDING USES OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES: NORTH: SOUTH: WEST: EAST: * NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS) FLEXI13LE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION Residential Infill Project (Revised 12/30/2004) ORIGINAL PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT- A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: 7,22 ?t " • c. FAX NUMBER: PROPERTY OWNER(S): R 2 I '14rt- Pe:??-.; 4- M 0 (Must inc"lu ALL owners as listed on the deed - provide ginal signature(s) on page 6) AGENT NAME:. j[ 4 (w 4 n 1a" C° e7 ^et % t >1 a. ') t sly f ?' 3? C MAILING ADDRESS: ??I, l a/2 r .?xa l Ci?i ! / - _ ?-_5) ? firLC. / !± s° s PHONE NUMBER: o r L?Y_3 s% ? (s' 9 FAX NUMBER:.- r s E-MAIL ADDRESS: ?F5°-f,, :Jel CELL NUMBER: " 769- B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) STREET ADDRESS of subject site: li cr .e- V t .?j LEGAL DESCRIPTION: °k cuter x- e Ili. j if not listed here, please note thellocation of this document in'the submittal) PARCEL NUMBER: 73°?fdr-?r PARCEL SIZE: (acres, squar feet) PROPOSED USE(S) AND SIZE(S): f« `" % (number of dwelling units, hotel rooms or square footage of nonresidential LA UT C, 6 _C, r 1i P- r" DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST(S): Attach sheets and be specific when identifying the request (include all pf,parking°spaces,.specific.use,. btc.) 0 a DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR), A PREVIOUSLY APi*bVEb PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES NO (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents) G: PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5) SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see page 6) D. O 1. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A) Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA - Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: 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. ) f Z J,k; - 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. Z' Z 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. f pC?C? o? I OCT 0 6 2005 PLANNING & OEVELOPMEN1 SVCSi CITY IEAt?4NA „? ,, PLAM'404 & 1DE'S'''_r -'-)-P"'.- ? Provide complete responses to the seven (7) RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECT CRITERIA - Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: 1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards. , r 2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill project will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties. (Include the existing value of the site and the proposed value of the site with the improvements.) 3. The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in the City of Clearwater. 4. The uses or mix of use within the residential infill project are compatible with adjacent land uses. a 5. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 6. The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and function that enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. 7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. rr? n?, OCT 0 6 100 y gY_ 4MINING,S CtL x.i) mf • 0 AL E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteri Manual and 4-202.A.21) A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that involve addition or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with the City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in impervious surface area dg.@s not aualjfv as an exemption to this requirement. 1 , ?IJJu L?, D (0 M D (fin R If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt. U At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following: OC I 0 v 2005 1/ J Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines; Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; PLANNING & OEVFLOPMEK Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; SeITY OF CLEAMATE A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with the c manual. Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations. COPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT SUBMITTAL (SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable ro9 C]f Acknowledgement of stormwater plan requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): ?V Stormwater plan as noted above is included Stormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor elevations shall be provided. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. if you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750. F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A) SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) -One original and 14 copies; 4 TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and location, including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) - please design around the existing trees; f LOCATION MAP OF 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; U GRADING PLAN, as applicable; PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided); OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; G.. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A) J SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): All dimensions; North arrow; ? f 3 P Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared; ( tz Hl 207 i Location map; , Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package; Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures; Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures; All required setbacks; All existing and proposed points of access; l All required sight triangles; _ Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; 0 r Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site; Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas and water lines; All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas; Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas; Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening (per Section 3-201(D)(i) and Index #701); Location of all landscape material; Location of all onsite and offsiite storm-water management facilities; N Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; and A L Location of all existing and.proposed sidewalks. 0 R,G TE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in written/tabular form: SI Land area in square feet and acres; Number of EXISTING dwelling units; Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; Gross floor area devoted to each use; Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the number of required spaces; Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces and driveways, expressed in square feet and percentage of the paved vehicular area; Size and species of all landscape material; Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easement; Building and structure heights; [? j}(] Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and PD ?..?? L 11 Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. REDUCED SITE PLAN to scale (8'/z X 11) and color rendering if possible; OCT 0 6 2005 FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan: One-foot contours or spot elevations on site; PLANNING & DE0-10PMEN1 $ La?na?TF i? i Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel; Cm f 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; Tree Inventory; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 8" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of such trees. H.. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A)?`?' LANDSCAPE PLAN: ? a--- --. All existing and proposed structures; Names of abutting streets; Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations; }!? ALIG 2 5, 015 Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers;' Sight visibility triangles; Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing; PLAP4:v,d(,? iDF' i=' P;.T Proposed-find required parking spaces;° 14 CFi C:? Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, Including driplines (as indicated on required tree survey); J Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names; Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant schedule; Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and protective measures; Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and percentage covered; Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board); Irrigation notes. REDUCED LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8'/2 X 11) (color rendering if possible); 1 IRRIGATION PLAN (required for level two and three approval); ?,F r 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. 11 f 1. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23) Required in the event the application includes a development where design standards are in issue (e.g. Tourist and Downtown Districts) or as part of a Comprehensive Infili Redevelopment Project or a Residential Infill Project. J G/ BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS - all sides of all buildings including height dimensions,, colors and materials; ORIGH?A REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS - four sides of building with colors and materials to scale (8'/2 X 11) (black and white and color rendering, if possible) as required. J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS / Section 3-1806) A. All EXISTING freestanding and atta hed signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be removed or to remain. ?y ? All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing; freestanding signs \ shall include the street address (numerals) _ Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required). Reduced signage proposal (8'/3 X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application. 111111 OCT 0 6 .? v? ri..wrrv?GV K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.13 an 4-801.C) V Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or his/her designee or if the proposed development: • Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan. 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 roadway s a each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scoping Meeting. raffic Impact Study is not required. CAUTION -RIF 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 01 2, 2005 L. SIGNATU.IkE: I, the under$,igned, acknowledge that all representations made in this application /are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize ;City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application. Signature of property owner or representative e?C1I !c.'?.?1?'I;`ENT SVCI PLAN NI:1?'t{C?s tr?? STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Sworn to and subscribed before me this ?I.- day of A.D. 20 to me and/or by who is personally known has pr duced""// as identifcay?on. n My of Florida Co Mnliaiort S DD aMM ?5?,,,t•Mk, r? CITY OF CLEARWATER GRIl'GINAL?,g AFFIDAVIT TO.AUTHORIZE AGENT y o? PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATION MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 •SOUTH-MYRTLE AVENUE, 2"d FLOOR PHONE (727)-562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4576 (Name of all property owners) 1.. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property: 16L.o 1Q 7e, / ®© / 10 (Address or General Location) r?OCT l L' 2. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: 0 6 200 6 (Nature of request) 3. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appolnt lf-L s d/ /d as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other docum nts necessary to affect such petition, 4. That this affidavit has been executed to induce th City f lea ater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 5, That (1/we), the undersigned authority, hereby ce f th t th for oing Is true and correct. STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS _--BAfgre me the undersigned, an officer duly com?m/I?J? to d bylaws of the State of Florida, on this day of personally appeared ? 2• t who having been first duly sworn deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/she signed. v9'? ""?c DOREEN A. WILLIAMS C` a4 MY COMMISSION # 00155802 6 Notary Public My Commission Expires: ?o` t0 {$ E)(ptRFS' October 14, 200 800.3.NOTARY FL NCAWy S8,r;ce & Bond S; appl)catlon forms/development review/Affidavit to Authorize Agent &F CITY OF CLEARWATER ORIGINAL .! a AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT oQ° PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 9h'ATMUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100. SOUTH. MYRTLE AVENUE, 2nd FLOOR PHONE (727)-562-4567 FAX (727) 562=4576 of all property owners) 1. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following descri s ss or General Location) (Nature of request) 3. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint '-NCO U ?-?- (his/their) agent(s) to execute any necessary to Mect such 4. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 5. That (I/we), the undersigned authority, hereby STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS that the foregoing jatrue and correct. Owner Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by the laws of, tl?le State 'o'ff._ ri Florida, ?on this Z_Vr o day of -266_-> personally appeared -?'? i^j}? V ,yjZ^it.C who having been first duly sworn depo s-and says that he/she fully understands the contb-nts of the affidavit that he/she signed. ?TA" PIMIC4TATl3OF FWRIDA (I Cyltthia K Marden My Commission Expires: C^,ml i it D041030 Y.Ily Ill. 20Y) BMdgdThr4Ailwiu?: Guuduib Lu., Li:. S: application forms/development review/Affidavit to Authorize Agent Notary Public 2. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: ORIGINAL LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION This letter will serve as authorization for Housh Ghovaee with Northside Engineering Services, Inc. to act as an agent for ?f [) ir` t? S S { ? )eoc,s and to.execute any and all documents related to securing permits and approvals for the construction on the property generally located at 1,3 'e.? sus Q I? L? LD 4? lying with! 9\cN l?.S County, State of r I f r (C ? Si o roperty Owner Address of Property Owner City/Stale/Zip Code Print Na e of Property Owner Telephone Number State of The foregoing instrument was acknowledge, before me this °?-Z. day fQ as County off pi m ?'^S of;. 49-._ , by who i personally known to m 'or who has produced NOTARY PUBUC-S ATE OFROI2I P identification and who did (did not) take an oath. Cynthia N. Mare en Commisston # DD44930g Evires; JMY 10, 2009 Uondod Thru Atlantic aonding Co., !ne Notary Public i nature) Commission #?L (SEAL ABOVE) 3___?? (Name of Notary Ty , Prieftr!tainp ........?. d..ae • LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION ORIGINAL This letter will serve as authorization for Housh Ghovaee with Northside Engineering Services, Inc. to act as an agent for't_/ -' 6(", tr and to execute any and all documents related to securing permits and approvals for the construction on the property generally located at ' ,?? ? , lying within County, State of Signa re o Pro-erty Owner Print Name of Property Owner ? -Z.f1116zd46 Address of Property Owner rG :!Z71 "1 City/State/Zip Code -Aj '7 n- ,v Telephone Number ro 0 C T 0 6 2005 PLAi+rk:Nr ? c7L V? i.C)t?ME N SVCS Stat?? \ Countyq The foregoing instrument was acknowledge before me this l day byi,?? ate ?' as who is personally known to me or who has produced. ,c61? as identification and who•" (did not) take an oath. ?0rrr, DOREEN A. WiLLi. _ Notary Public ? a MY COMMISSION # U fS ature ?IVIr ? EXPIRES: October 14, 200N ) 1•gpa3NOTARY FL Notary Service & 600ng,'no. o mission # ?L r (SEAL ABOVE) I (Name of Notary Typed, Printed or Stamped) - " z L? I 0 MEE TIT U Exhibit A to Residential Infill Project Application DEC 0 9 2M PLAN,,rR G 8 i?EV?LOPMtN V? 693 and 699 Bay Esplanade -Somerset Condominium rJnr c7F Q ?,, yy T NES Project # 0473 Description of Request: To raze the existing structures which contain 5 residential dwelling units and construct an eight (8) unit, five story (4 stories above parking) attached dwelling structure with an increase to the allowable building height from 30' to 44.83' from BFE to roof deck with an additional height of 4.16' for perimeter parapets. Reductions to the required lot area from 15,000 sq. ft. to 13,087 sq. ft. and lot width from 150' to 120'. A reduction to the required front yard setback from 25' to 23' for the water feature on the west elevation of the building and reductions to the required front yard setback on the South from 25' to 11' for the building and 25' to 0' for the trash staging area. Also, reductions to the east side yard from 15' to 0' for the removable deck pavers and from 15' to 4.2' for the proposed spa. A Comprehensive Landscape Application is also being requested to allow a reduction in the required landscape buffers in the south and west yards. Also requested is a minimal deviation to allow a small portion of the building to encroach into the driveway visibility triangle from a dead-end street. It is the vision of the Developers to provide two developments that compliment each other and function in unison with Somerset Street dividing the two sites. Through this request for Residential Infill two mirror image development projects are being proposed (a separate application has been submitted for 685-689 Bay Esplanade.) General Applicable Standards (Section 3-913 (A)): 1. The subject site is located within the Medium High Density District of the Community Development Code and within the Old Florida District of the Beach by Design program. The surrounding properties to the south are currently developed with various types of attached dwelling units ranging from one story to three stories containing two units to thirty residential units; the properties to the north are developed with primarily large three story residences. The proposed development provides a four story, eight unit attached dwelling with the parking situated below. The development plan provides fewer units than the code would permit for the site. The approved development trend for the vicinity to the south has allowed building heights exceeding this developments proposal. Further, a tour of the residential structures to the north of the subject site, reveal many residences that appear to be quite tall and are of substantial bulk. 2. A noticeable amount of sites within the area are exhibiting signs of age and deferred maintenance. The proposed development and subsequent improvements will substantially increase the value of the subject property, thereby providing a positive influence on the surrounding property values which typically encourages reinvestment in the surrounding sites. The estimated property value is $9, 6000,000.00 upon completion. 1 3. The proposed design of the development offers positive health and safety rewards for the neighborhood by providing green yards that are not currently present on the site and provides a new and improved structure that meets current building codes and FEMA requirements. The proposed site design provides a parking plan that is contained within the foot print of the building with. one driveway access onto Somerset deleting the current undesired situation of cars backing out into Bay Esplanade. In addition, the proposal provides for responsible site drainage which will better serve the community as a whole. 4. The proposed development and site design provides largely improved and decreased access to the site by providing a single driveway entrance along Somerset in lieu of access on Bay Esplanade. The site design allows for forward access to and from the site, deleting the current need for vehicles to back out into the right of way. 5. The proposed Old Florida vernacular of the building is in keeping with the desires of the Beach by Design program and is consistent with many recently approved developments in the immediate vicinity such as; Ocean Breeze, the Larissa development, and the Chalets on White Sands located at 14 Somerset Street, in addition to being harmonious with the various designs of the existing multifamily developments in the immediate area. The design provides a decorative water feature on the west elevation of the building adding more interest to the streetscape. Additionally, the Developers of this particular site have a personal interest in landscaping and the proposed plan provides for high quality and colorful plantings to further enhance the development. Through materials and design this development will provide a beautiful upgrade to the existing environment. Further, Beach by Design states "No particular architectural style is prescribed. However, good architecture, from a community character perspective, comes in all shapes and styles " The proposed design is most certainly good architecture and meets the desires for design set forth by the Beach by Design program. 6. The following proposed site improvements will provide increased benefit to the community; Improved and sufficient parking contained within the foot print of the building further creating an increase to the area of green space adjacent to the public right of way, improved sidewalk systems and a water feature, and responsible site drainage through the creation of a pond. One additional parking space is being provided beyond the minimum prescribed by code to better serve the community by providing sufficient parking for the site. 2 Residential Infill Project Criteria Section 2-404(F) 1. The subject site is located within the Old Florida district and is located on the outer most border of the Medium High Density Residential District. The properties south of the subject site are designated as Tourist within the Community Development Code. In order to make practical economic use of the site the development plan requires minimal deviations to make viable use of the site. The following proposed site improvements will provide increased benefit to the community; Establishment of the parking area primarily within the footprint of the building creating an increase to the area of green space adjacent to the public right of way, a new sidewalk system to promote safe pedestrian travel. Responsible site drainage is provided through the creation of a retention pond at the front of the site. All of the above referenced items are either non-existent or insufficient on the current site as developed. The additional height being requested will provide for better articulation of the architectural design of the proposed building and mitigation is achieved by providing elements (such as balconies and decorative overhangs), stepbacks and a beautiful mixture of materials. 2. The proposed development and subsequent improvements will substantially increase the value of the subject property, thereby providing a positive influence on the surrounding property values as well. The new development planned for this site will have a positive influence on the surrounding properties and community. 3. The proposed development of attached dwellings is a permitted use within the Medium High Density Residential District of the Community Development Code. 4. The area is comprised of residential uses of varying types, a mixture of multi- family, duplexes and single family residences surround the site. The proposed attached dwelling use therefore, offers no conflict with the existing surrounding land uses. The site and design provides features such as; substantial landscaping, parking within the confines of the building, and an attractive building with well stated architectural elements. Stepbacks, building setbacks, landscaping and thoughtful design are provided to alleviate any negative impacts. 5. The development proposed for this site will upgrade the surrounding vicinity by offering a new building with architectural interest and a site design that will enhance the visual attractiveness of the area in addition to providing needed improvements to a currently deficient site. The immediate vicinity will enjoy the benefit of improvements to drainage, parking and green space. 3 • • 6. The Beach by Design program desires buildings of low to mid-rise height; the proposed development is within the acceptable range of height for a mid-rise development and will provide a smooth transition to the Low Medium Density Residential District to the North. Particular care has been taken through design and density to insure harmonious existence with the adjoining residential properties by developing less dwelling units then allowed by code and creating a building that has visual interest and character. 7. Providing the requested deviations to this proposal will benefit the community character by providing a structure that is architecturally compatible with the surrounding built environment and the Beach by Design program. The additional height and minimal setback reductions will provide for better articulation of the architectural design of the building. The structures along Bay Esplanade have been constructed with varying setbacks, therefore the proposed reduction to the front yard setback will not be out of character with the neighborhood. Further public benefit will be achieved by providing a new quality structure that is built to meet all current construction standards including FEMA regulations. The proposed development and subsequent substantial investment will enhance the property values of the surrounding sites. The Flexible Standards will allow reasonable use of the site and allow development of an eight (8) attached dwelling unit use. The new proposed parking area will be designed to meet the intent of the Beach by Design program with tenant parking being provided within the confines of the building and much like a residential building one guest parking space is provided adjacent to the building. This area will be screened by a fence and landscape buffer to alleviate any adverse impact to the adjoining property. The proposed twelve parking spaces are adequate for the site and exceed the current code. The curb cut will be decreased by more than 50% to provide a more pedestrian friendly environment with a new sidewalk and landscape area along the right of way. The proposed building design associated with this application will most certainly add to the desired character of the beach community. Revised12-9-05 rmr NES# 473 693 - Bay Esplanade 4 Planning and Development Services 100 South Myrtle Avenue >- Clearwater, Florida 33756 0 C learwate? Telephone: 727-562-4567 ?_vn• ¢? ? ae v SF Fax: 727-562-4576 U £ as ? SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ? SUBMIT 1 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION including folded site plans C. DATE RECEIVED: i l t7E d RECEIVED BY (staff initials): ATLAS PAGE #: ZONING DISTRICT: LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: ZONING & LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES: NORTH: SOUTH: WEST: EAST: ORIGINAL COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS NAME: c-t,r"? ADDRESS: "Y (-,-7 - I do Q Cr e F(. 7 The landscaping requirements of Article 3 Division 12 may be waived or modified as a p kof a Level One or Level Two Approval, as the case may be, if the application for development approval includes a Comprehensive Landscape Program, which satisfies the following criteria. The use of landscape plans; sections/elevations, renderings and perspectives may be necessary as supplementary information in addition to the information provided on this worksheet: Architectural Theme. a. The landscaping 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. OR Pu.r y f - b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall be demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel DroDosed for develoDment under the minimum IandscaDe standards. Z 3. Community Character. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. 4. Property Values. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will have a beneficial impact on the value of the property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. Lighting. Any lighting propos *a part of a Comprehensive Landscape ram is automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off w, iiin the business is closed. 5. Special Area or Scenic Corric, Oan. The landscape treatment proposed i, _,ie 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. 4 Please return checklist for review and verification. 60- Date: .1"( (Signature of S: application formsidevelopment review /comprehensive landscape program applicaUon.doc .9 F, TF?A UfS PLANNING =V'LSLIULg OCT 0 6 2005 1 IG & OEVELOPM,EffT LvC gF_CL f,-;WA q.,,. ,..? 0 0 Comprehensive Landscape Program Requirements 693-695 Bay Esplanade - Bay Esplanade Condominium Request: A reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10' to 9' (to pavement), from 10' to zero feet (to trash staging area), along the north property line from 10' to 3.5' (to pavement) at the most reduced point and along the west property line from 10' to 8' (only adjacent to the retention pond). 1. Architectural Theme: A: N/A ORIGINAL B: The proposed landscape plan will blend beautifully with the Mediterranean style of the building with a multilayered rustic look. The plan provides substantial plantings along the streets which will provide strong enhancement to the streetscape. The many flowering trees will add much color and brilliance to the site and the community. Virtually all open space available has been heavily planted well beyond the minimum required by code. 2. No lighting proposed at this time. 3. The extensive landscaping proposed with a wonderful mixture of textures, heights, layers and colors will most certainly enhance the community character. 4. The surrounding property values will benefit from proposed development and landscape plan as both will provide a substantial increase to the value of the subject site which in turn will raise the value of the surrounding properties. Additionally, the extensive high quality list of proposed plantings will offer much visual reward to the surrounding sites and the community as a whole as the proposal is very similar to the higher quality designs you would normally see along Mandalay Avenue. 5. N/A Revised 10-04-05 - RMR NES #473 693 Bay Esplanade 19Lt ljUV LL OCT 0 6 2005 S 1 t ? ?ex. ,s- rr//ty. d 1 c a r NEW RETENTION N N W ONC. j SI Ew ^ N WATER- RE rn o ? b E / EX. TREE, TO REMAIN , r {? (j ?Cfi 'IT 201 ANGLE (TYP ) . QcN co W O (,, z 4 z Q a ? EX. TREE TO BE REMAIN -- EX. TREE TO REMAIN N89'57'03"E 110.00' ct 25' OF NEW 3' v NEW 6' HIGH F NEW 3' HIGH HIGH SOLID SOLID FEN -- -- I r-- -1 SOLID FENCE FENCE --? I I - L_ I BLDG. LINE ,1 Kh wAu a ABOVE I I 1 ? WHEEL ST (TYP. Ica r ? ¢ 1 1 s.Y I i 4 wt H T ? I 1 2 O i TUB °' 1 REMOVABLE 1 1 5 tt? 0 MIgROR I T?q/MSH VAL BOX 1 td H.C. SIGN g? P L WCHM DOCKC??N ??? • ti cr I NEW 4' CONC. a rn SIDEWALK 0 SIDEWALK CONC. II a I ? n 2 I u a °' 1 I ? ? td ? 1 -_-, ¦ 1 ?? 20'x20' SIGHT 20'x20' SIGH TRIANGLE (TYP.) / IANGLE ( L i BLDG. LINE 5' CONC. SIDEWALK,S9000 00 W 10'x10' TRASH 110.00 11O R STAGING AREA ?,h 'Pl,p• 2 NEW HANDICAP NEW HANDICAP 7' tX1Re RAMP PER F.D.O.T. RAMP PER F.D.O.T. INDEX 304 INDEX 304 (MERC7GK) SOMERSET STREET' is I EX. iz• R/W. 1 1 C=m 1 1 I NEW REMAWO ?i o ? O t qFMC920 I[,' 0 0 _ -SOMERSET STREEVmEROOK) 60' W-0. W_.T- _ OF A +T?R z rD Q In, LU N ? ` ?y+ L, ti, . ?" 1 I r Gl f ai 11 -iy at a1F f jt ;r t w V P 1?y. -. flLs - i L'T rd t +? } w f Lc, "$P''•`? - ~ , its _ µ NMrw .? __,FLca._.• 1 7 ? Iw ? ? w t. jap r y ?+P''? W '? "s?,•"r ? ?,'_ \ ',•ti.. ,? ?.? a.?w!"r+i?yt?"? =.y\?AT?k^"` t _,.. ?r- Y;p::.d '+f? SRS "?R°AV F Y G' ITJ ` 683 t 669 SOUTH PROPERTY 693 &699 NORTH PROMW EAST ELEVATION Z' lip § ? T _. ":a y) 693&699 NORTH PROMW - , . 683 & 6R9 ROUTTI PROPERTY WEST ELEVATION AUDE SHAND& WILLIAMS AIA u®ncnimRwrom+a Rohm T. Awe,A 0 .U 991J`?w ? i r I? - 71 SOUTH ELEVATION 1 . -, -Val -_? ?..,s r 3 t"s LT: .? L ?Tj 1 ti^ ; r , $s t 4ff wm? NORTH ELEVATION AUDE SHAND& WILLIAMS AIA a BnMI /..A-..1N Wl EAST ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION AUDE SHAND& WILLIAMS AIA a I I II w 1 L ?r Eil Q • 8 Robn 1. Audc AN • i ? O / ?I IITT?I ww _ O L iwir w \ ?\? ??? L V • O w / I ® /% Q I O O O O HUM AWA O e '? 8 2W 2227 FT % FT BALCONY AREA on,e • r.M I Val O ? 336 SQ F7 wa 1 BIAM FOOTpRR1T 6,036 SO. FT PER FL X 4- Fft - 24,152 SO. FT TOTAL Ko,tt? p?,rr? „?.? I ST & 2ND FLOOR PLANS TYPICAL 3RD FLOOR PLAN ?u au. i BALCONY AREA 338 S4 FT 4TH FLOOR PLAN 2227 S0. H BALCONY AREA 338 SO. Ff z ? Reliable White Sensational Sand DISTINCTIONS Packaging: Available in big boxes (120 square feet) or Dura-Paks (15 square feet). Square-foot coverage for Eastern Ledge is based on installation with a''/2" mortar joint at the back of the stone. Sealing: Not required. However, if installed on an exterior exposed to excessive water from runoff or improper drainage, we suggest the product be sealed in that particular area to protect it from staining or spalling during freeze-thaw cycles. Accessories: Corners, Matching Pavers, Wall Caps, Post Caps and more (see Accessories section of binder). Panels: Eastern ledge contains 15% panels for a fast and easy installation, as shown on previous page. Eastern Ledge Joints: Drystack Color: Grey Quartzite 3 ,oat e, z h t At- h APB Horthside CIVIL • LAND PLANNING • ,,,, •? e ENVIRONMENTAL • 4 ?m&& 10K. TRANSPORTATION • STORMWATER REPORT ORIGINAL FOR : SOMERSET CONDOS PROJECT OCT06200J ? .c`f 0 y v r tU n a ,J t 4t Ram A. Goel, D?.; 'P31 a ??.?[l'7!17?7.a 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NESADMIN@MINDSPRING.COM NESTECH@MINDSPRING.COM 727 • 443 • 2869 FAX 727 • 446 • 8036 October, 2005 Project No. 0473 • SOMERSET CONDOS DRAINAGE NARRATIVE The proposed project is located in Clearwater, Florida (Section 5, Township 29 south, Range 15 east) at 693-699 Bay Esplanade Road. The project consists of the redevelopment of 13,087 sf of property and will include the construction of eight condominium units with associated infrastructure improvements such as roadways, utilities, stormwater detention facility and landscaping. The existing site contains 5,479 sf of impervious and 7,608 sf of open space. The proposed site will contain 7,215 sf of impervious and 5,872 sf of open space. Discharge will be directly into open Florida waters and quantity runoff will be discharged through an overflow in the detention pond control structure. For water quality purposes Y2" quality treatment volume equal to 545 cf will be provided. Recovery of this volume will be within 16 hours through 20' of underdrain. ORIGINAL I D OCT06200S ;. PLANNING & DEVG-LOPNIENT SJCS • 9 PROJECT NAME : PROJECT NO.: STAGE STORAGE DATA : T.O.V. EL.= W.Q. EL.= BOTTOM EL.= SOMERSET CONDOS 0473 ORIGINAL STAGE ft-NGVD AREA SF AREA AC STORAGE CF 4.50 1,303 0.030 1,433 4.00 1,010 0.023 855 3.25 570 0.013 262 3.00 423 0.010 138 2.90 365 0.008 99 2.80 306 0.007 65 2.70 247 0.006 38 2.60 189 0.004 16 2.50 130 0.003 0 WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS: DRAINAGE AREA = REQUIRED WATER QUALITY DEPTH = REQUIRED WATER QUALITY VOLUME _ PROPOSED OUTFALL ELEVATION = AVAILABLE WATER QUALITY = D 15 U M OCT 0 6 2005 PLANT NG Ox DEVELOPMENTSi/CS I Y C CLEA!? 13,087 SF 0.50 IN 545 CIF 4.00 FT 855 CF NORTHSIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES POND DRAWDOWN ANALYSIS PROJECT: SOMERSET CONDOS PROJECT NO.: 0473 VOLUME PROVIDED = 855 C.F. BOTTOM OF SLOT ELEV. = 4.00 BOTTOM OF POND ELEV. = 2.50 UNDERDRAIN INVERT ELEV. = 1.83 K = 0.09 FT/MIN LENGTH OF UNDERDRAIN = 20 FT SIZE OF UNDERDRAIN = 4 INCH 0 POND AREA (SF) = POND AREA (SF) = ORIGINAL 1,010 S.F. 130 S. F. ELEV. AVG. HEAD INCR HEAD L (AVG) HG FILTER ARE FLOW POND AREA INCR VOL. INCR TIME FT FT FT FT S.F. CFM S.F. C.F. MIN. 4.00 1,010 1.81 0.38 2.75 0.66 21 1.24 338 272 3.63 790 1.44 0.38 2.75 0.52 21 0.98 255 259 3.25 570, 1.06 0.38 2.75 0.39 21 0.73 173 237 2.88 350 0.69 0.38 2.75 0.25 21 0.47 90 191 2.50 130 TIME = 959 MINUTES TIME = 16.0 HOURS 6 lD L5 U U Lg OCT06200a ?G 0? . ?:.?.ONPm T SvCS? 0 October 5, 2005 Parajoitis Vasiloodes 12108 Marblehead Drive Tampa, FL 33626 Reference: Somerset Condos • QRI,GINAL Subject: Maintenance and Operation of the Retention Basin Dear Mr. Vasiloodes: OCT 0 6 200e PLAiJitiNG R DEVfA-OPME?Tf;:JCSJ Per the rules and regulations of the Southwest Florida Water Management District, we are required to furnish you with a set of instructions for maintenance and operation of the retention basin. The retention basin is designed to maintain certain volumes of rainfall runoff corresponding to specific water elevations. The control structure regulates the level of the water in the basin. The volume above the slot should be discharged under a grease skimmer and through the slot within a few hours following a storm event. The volume below the slot should take less than 24 hours to be discharged through filtration underdrains. The water level in the basin should drop approximately 1' below the slot within 24 hours following a storm event assuming there is no interceding rainfall. Here are some suggested procedures to keep the system functional: • Grass clippings and other vegetative debris should be removed from the area surrounding the basin. • The area immediately in front of the control structure should be cleared of aquatic growth. • Limit fertilizer use around the pond area to prevent nutrient loading of the facility. • The control structure should be checked monthly and all debris cleared. 9 0 ORIGINAL • Your Management of Surface Water Permit should contain a number of conditions which must be met. If you have any question, please do not hesitate to call Sincerely, Nortb.side Engineering Services, Inc. 4 Ram A. Gael, Ph.D., P.E. Senior 'Engineer Northside Engineering Services, Inc 601 Cleveland Street, Suite 930 Clearwater, Florida 33755 r Ci 0 610 vrt,?PII?EN7 ?, J;,S? 12/13/2004 16:31 1727453 OFFICAL RECORT- PAGE 05/05 ter: ZuV99Lb918 Eu' Pa= 513, 10/29/2004 at 03:00 pk)....*GTVG 1 PAGES $10.00 D DOC STA.. ZOLLECTION $7350.00 KARUEN F. DE PLAIMR, CLERK Or COURT PINELLAS cOUNTY, k SY DEPUTY CLERK: CLXDMC2 Prepared by dt Return to; C, Moore' Pan iarleQican Tltle Co 8220 N. Hanley Rd. Tampa, FL 33634 PDM240 ' ORIGINAL A jn1l ? TIIiS W)UUUN ff !MeRmadc t b?,2.083 by Drett 1'r, Fisher, a tr\' y1.4 man Whoscaddressia:???? w?Pa?es? •?G,l4ctve tie??337 hereinafter called the Grantors, to Petrit Meron Whaac address is: 967 Eldorado Ave., Clearwater; FL 33767 ,hereina8er called the Qrantee; WITNES9ET.E};: that the Grantors, for and in coesidcration of the sum of TEN and 00/100 Dollars ($ l0.00),and otber valuable connideratlon, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, hereby grant%bsrgains,Wls, aliens, rctnises, releases, conveys and confirms unto the Gtantoo al that'ccrtain land situate in Pinellas County, Florida; to wit: The North 'A` bf Ulock 76 AWA Lott, Bloch 76, of a ReplAt of'a Portion of MandalAy Unit '5,, accorftg to the.plat (hereof As recorded in Plat Rook 20, Page 48, of the public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. ' .. Parcel #:05129/15/547$6/076/0010 . SUI3MCX'to easements and restrictions of record. TOGETHER with all, the tenements, h6mditameius, and apptutenances thcrbto anywise appertaiiung. ' TO 13AVE AND TO HQLD, ibd'5nMe in Iensehold forevct, OCT 016 2005 PLANNING ~, a ' ;. PMI AM ; the Grantors hereby covenant with said arnntoce that the atantors islare lawfully seized e said land in lease told, that the Grantomhave good right and lawn al authority to s611 and convey said land, and hereby warrant thc.title to said land and will defend the some against the lawful claims of all persona whomsoever; and that said land is tkee of all encumbrances, except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31, 2003, any easements, restrictions, rose m, tion of record. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Grantnrs have signed and sealed thes0 presdots the day and year firsthbove written. J I Signed, scaled and delivered in th Bence of,, V wetness 4ean MHgpus State of Florida Cottnty of Hillsborough The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 24th dny of September 2004 by Brett L. Fisher, who is personally (mown to me or who has produced a driver's license as i fication. Note ?P-ba- N%rWAAIMBWAUS My c4nwWwon ee OUS ?'V bon Naywnbet 40, Md I#: 2005301277 BK: 14495 PG: 1833, 1/2005 at 06:39 PM, RECORDING 1 PA $10.00 D DOC STAMP COLLECTION $10055 KEN BURKE, CLERK OF COURT PINEL COUNTY, FL BY DEPUTY CLERK: CLKDU08 ORIGINAL PREPARED BY AND RETURN TO: ?. J PAN AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY 8220 NORTH HANLEY ROAD TAMPA, FL 33634 E NO:C ?4 6523(p 4HIS WARRAN DEED made this f , 2005 by SPRING TIDE INVESTMENTS II LLC. tP? whose address is ZZ? f??,?P1?C?( ( (*-LA?J?@reinafter the Grantor and PANAYIOTIS VASILOUDI S ) whose address is ! t OS IV)?,/`1/? ,n 4 hereinafter called the Grantee; WITNESSETH: that the grantors, for an in consideration of the sum of Ten and 00/100 Dollars ($10,00) and other valuable considerations, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, here by grants, bargains, sells, aliens, remises, releases, conveys and confirms unto the grantee all that certain land situate in Pinellas County, Florida, to wit: Southerly One-half of of Block 76, a Replat of Lots 1 to 8 inclusive, Block 83- Lots 11 to 20 inclusive, Block 84- Lots 9 to 16 inclusive, Block 85- Lots 5,6 and 7, Block 86, and all of Blocks 76,77,78,79,80,81,82, and 87, Unit No. 5, of Mandalay, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 20, Page 48, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. SUBJECT TO easements and restrictions of record. TOGETHER with all the tenements, hereditaments, and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same in fee simple forever. AND, the grantors hereby covenant with said grantees that the grantors is/are lawfully seized of said land in fee simple/that the grantors have good right and lawful authority to sell and convey said land, and hereby warrant the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever; and that said land is free of all encumbjfances, except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31, 2004, any easements, restrictions, reservations of record. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said grantors have signed and sealed these presents the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in he presence of.. Wi17ess'?'> SPRIN E INVES ENTS II LLC 4AL L STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF HILLSBOROUGH i VN G('t'Z S W The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2005 by SPRING TIDE INVESTI I LL -who is/are personally known to me or has roduced a driver's lice a as identification and did not take an oath. / ti?v ^? S V") " C_12?j -- Notary Public State of Florida J??SvG?.? + Notary Pak state of Flom$ P% 0obbe R 0ecku ? My cnmmiumn 00106892 pT-j E*s0V011009 44 OCT 0 6 2005 LANNIM', 5'. c?'r NIR SYCS t Line Items: Case No • Receipt #: 1200600000000000147 Date: 01/05/2006 1/5/2006 4:17:38PM Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid FLD2005-08090 04 Flex Continuation 010-341262 150.00 Line Item Total: $150.00 Payments: Method Payer Initials Check No Confirm No How Received Amount Paid Check NORTHSIDE ENG SVCS INC RD_ 3889 In Person 150.00 Payment Total: $150.00 THIS IS NOT A PERMIT. This is a receipt for an application for a permit. This application will be reviewed and you will be notified as to the outcome of the application. Page 1 of 1 cReceipt.rpt CD?uu FLD2005-08090 693 BAY ESPLANADE Date Received: 08/25/2005 SOMERSET CONDOS ZONING DISTRICT: MHDR LAND USE: RH ATLAS PAGE: 258A PLANNER OF RECORD: WW CLWCoverSheet • 9?9 0 ORIGINAL FLD2005-08090 693 BAY ESPLANADE Date Received: 08/25/2005 SOMMERSET CONDOS o L LL a T ALIG 2 5 2005 i PLANN,'NG & DE' l Svcs CITY (}F C1 r ` :.- ZONING DISTRICT: MHDR LAND USE: RH ATLAS PAGE: 258A PLANNER OF RECORD: NOT ENTERED CLWCoverSheet Lei. Page 1 of 3 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 6:12 PM To: 'Hunraf@aol.com' Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Kurleman, Scott Subject: Joe Burdette - Quick Question Joe - I forgot to include in my response that the docks recently approved would also have to come back through the CDB process as "commercial docks" in conjunction with overnight accommodation uses, as the docks to date have been approved as "multi-use docks" in conjunction with attached dwellings. Different rules apply to "commercial docks". The design of the docks and the number of slips may need to be re-evaluated in light of the change of use to "overnight accommodations". Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 6:03 PM To: 'Hunraf@aol.com' Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Kurleman, Scott Subject: Joe Burdette - Quick Question Joe - Yes, my recollection is they have a May 15th and May 17th deadline to submit complete applications for building permits to construct the attached dwellings (condominiums). Completed construction of at least the northern attached dwelling project will be deemed nonconforming to the requirements of the Old Florida District of Beach by Design in relation to at least height. To request overnight accommodations on these parcels will require the submission of Flexible Development applications (to be decided by the CDB), which besides setback reductions, a lot area reduction will be necessary. The new applications will be evaluated based on the standards and criteria of the Code for such use and the requirements of the Old Florida District of Beach by Design. The requirements of the Old Florida District of Beach by Design were adopted right after the approval of the northern parcel. You have indicated that you want to use the same site and building designs approved as attached dwellings. The northern parcel is inconsistent with the requirements of the Old Florida District of Beach by Design at least from a height standpoint. The Planning Department is not compelled to recommend approval of such change, nor is the CDB mandated to approve such change, in light of the overnight accommodations use requirements and characteristics and the new regulations adopted for the Old Florida District of Beach by Design. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Hunraf@aol.com [mailto:Hunraf@aol.com] Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 2:58 PM 3/28/2008 Page 2 of 3 To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: Joe Burdette - Quick Question This would be FLD 2005-0890-693-699 Bay Esplanade and FLD2005-08088-685-689 Bay Esplanade. I need to file construction drawings in May to keep the Development Order alive. I would like to do that and then come in and ask for a change of use. There would be no change in the drawings whatsoever. This would be a time share sold on a weekly ownership basis and would not be overnight so there is really no need for a check in desk and we would not be proposing one. These guys are just in a bind and are trying to figure a way out and this has come to mind. They already meet all the parking and landscaping codes and could use a monument sign for the name of the project only. There would be no overnight rentals. Joe In a message dated 3/28/2008 2:47:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com writes: Joe - You know you never ask a quick question. Based on your scenario, it sounds like you have a residential condominium project somewhere in the City. By Code, this is defined as "attached dwellings" and I am assuming at this point that the project was approved and developed for such use. "Time share" is the same as or equal to an "interval ownership", which is deemed an overnight accommodation (see definitions below). Such "time share" use would be rented, leased or by contractual arrangement for less than 30 days. Overnight accommodations means any use that provides transient lodging accommodations to the public, a membership group, or members of an association, including interval ownership. Allowable accessory uses shall be integral to the principal use and may include, but shall not be limited to, offices, restaurants and retail provided such uses are integral to the primary use. Interval ownership/timesharing unit means an overnight accommodation, the ownership or contractual use of which is for a specified period of time, designed to be utilized as a temporary place of residence and counted as a hotel room for the purpose of applying the density standards of this Development Code. No dwelling unit located on residentially zoned property shall be used or occupied in interval ownership or as a timesharing unit. As such, your question deals with a desired change of use from "attached dwelling" to an "overnight accommodation". Assuming the zoning district for the property involved permits an overnight accommodation use, such desired change of use must go through whatever process to permit such use (FLS or FLD), based on the existing characteristics of the site, or to be redeveloped to permit such use, including, but not limited to, allowable density, ISR, setbacks, height, parking, etc. So, yes, the City must review the change in use. As a change in use, parking, landscaping and signage would need to be brought into full compliance with Code provisions. Different than attached dwellings that normally do not have a lobby with a registration desk, an overnight accommodation use will also need to function as such. If you want to give me more specifics as to location of such property, I can be more specific in my response. Wayne 3/28/2008 A* Page 3 of 3 -----Original Message----- From: Hunraf@aol.com [mailto:Hunraf@aol.com] Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 1:00 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Joe Burdette - Quick Question Wayne If a project that is planned as a condo wants to change to time share and there are no changes to the drawings or the plans as approved by the CDB is that a problem? Does it require any further review from the city? Joe Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home. Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home. 3/28/2008 0 0 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 4:33 PM To: 'Renee Ruggiero' Subject: North and South Somerset Projects Renee - FLD2005-08088 for 685-689 Bay Esplanade was originally approved by the Community Development Board (CDB) on November 15, 2005. A six-month time extension to May 15, 2007, was granted by the Planning Director by letter dated September 7, 2006. On April 17, 2007, the CDB granted a one-year time extension to May 15, 2008. FLD2005-08090 for 693-699 Bay Esplanade was originally approved by the CDB on January 17, 2006. A four- month time extension to May 17, 2007, was granted by the Planning Director by letter dated December 1, 2007. On April 17, 2007, the CDB granted a one-year time extension to May 17, 2008. Unfortunately, there are no additional time extensions available or permissible. With both projects, unless building permit applications are submitted to construct the proposed projects by the above time frames in May, the prior approvals will lapse and become void. The Development Orders for both time extensions by the CDB included the following statement: "Should you be unable to apply for a building permit to construct the improvements approved under the above referenced case, you will need to re-apply for development approval in accordance with the requirements of the Community Development Code." Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Renee Ruggiero [mailto:renee@northsideengineering.com] Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 3:26 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: North and South Somerset Projects Good afternoon Wayne, The North and South Somerset projects I believe are ready to expire in May. Would you be able to check to see if there is the ability to request one additional year or six month extension on them (the response may be different for each)? Obviously, with the economy everyone is begging and praying for additional time. Thank you and hope all is well ..... miss you - R Renee Ruggiero, Project Planner Herthside Engineering Services, Inc. 300 Belcher Road Clearwater, FL 33756 T 727.443.2869 / F727.446.8036 2/28/2008 Wells, Wayne From: Katie Cole [Katiec@jpfirm.com] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 6:31 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Kurleman, Scott Subject: Re: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Thank you. I didn't have the information on both cases. I appreciate the summary and fully understand the impact to the dock DO. Katie -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld ----- Original Message ----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com <Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com> To: Kati Cole Cc: michael.delk@MyClearwater.com <michael.delk@MyClearwater.com>; Gina.Clayton@myClearwater.com <Gina.Clayton@myClearwater.com>; neil.thompson@MyClearwater.com <neil.thompson@MyClearwater.com>; Scott.Kurleman@myClearwater.com <Scott.Kurleman@myClearwater.com> Sent: Thu Dec 20 17:53:28 2007 Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Katie - Case No FLD2005-08090 for the property at 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade was originally approved by the CDB on January 17, 2006. The Development Order gave until January 17, 2007, to submit for building permits to construct the improvements. On December 1, 2006, a four- month time extension to May 17, 2007, was granted by the Planning Director. On April 17, 2007, the CDB granted a one-year time extension to May 17, 2008, to submit for building permits to construct the improvements. This was the final time extension available under the Code. Either the applicant must submit building plans to the City to construct the improvements by May 17, 2008, or the Development Order will expire and be void. The companion project approved under Case No. FLD2005-08088 for the property at 685 - 689 Bay Esplanade was originally approved by the CDB on November 15, 2005. The Development Order gave until November 15, 2006, to submit for building permits to construct the improvements. On September 7, 2006, a six-month time extension to May 15, 2007, was granted by the Planning Director. On April 17, 2007, the CDB granted a one-year time extension to May 15, 2008, to submit for building permits to construct the improvements. This also was the final time extension available under the Code for this project., Either the applicant must submit building plans to the City to construct the improvements by May 15, 2008, or the Development Order will also expire and be void. In both projects, should the Development Orders expire and become void, any future development proposal for either property must comply with current Code and Beach by Design provisions. It should be noted that the docks that were just approved by the CDB are accessory uses to the primary, upland use of attached dwellings uses, are contingent upon the submission of permits to construct the dwellings. Should you have any further questions, feel free to contact me. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Katie Cole [mailto:Katiec@jpfirm.com] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 3:35 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: FLD2005-08090 for these properties and, as accessory upland attached 1 0 0 Wayne - I am looking for final deadlines of the development order for Case no. FLD2005- 08090. In my records, I have that the Do will expire on 5/17/2008. Is this correct? Is this case eligible for another extension? The companion case (FLD2005-08088) has already received one administrative extension and one CDB extension so I would presume that building permits must be pulled by 5/15/08 with no option of extension. Would you please confirm? This is the condo project that accompanies the Channel Club docks (685, 687, 689 Bay Esplanade and 693, 699 Bay Esplanade). Thank you! our offices are closed through Dec. 25 but I am available via email and by cell: 727-644-4921. Happy holidays. Katie Katherine E. Cole, Esquire Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP 911 Chestnut St. Clearwater, FL 33756 Tel: 727-461-1818 Fax: 727-462-0365 2 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 0 • CITY OF C LEARWATE R POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 April 18, 2007 Ms. Kathy Ziola 610 Mandalay Avenue Clearwater, FL 33767 RE: FLD2005-08090 - 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Time Extension Development Order Dear Ms. Ziola: On April 17, 2007, the Community Development Board (CDB) APPROVED your request to extend the time frame for the Development Order for the above referenced case. Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit to construct the site improvements on your parcel at 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade shall be submitted by May 17, 2008. All required certificates of occupancy shall be obtained within two years of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do not change with successive owners. Should you be unable to apply for a building permit to construct the improvements approved under the above referenced case, you will need to re-apply for development approval in accordance with the requirements of the Community Development Code. Please be aware that the issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III at 727-562-4504. Sincerely, &rol Mi chael Delk, MCP Planning Director S: (Planning Departmentl C D BIFLEX (FLD) (Inactive or Finished ApplicationslBay Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos (MHDR) - ApprovedlBay Esplanade 693-699 CDB Time Extension Development Order 4.18.07.doc FRANK HIBBARD, MAYOR JOHN DORAN, COUNCILMEMBER J.B. JOHNSON, COUNCILMEMBER BILL JONSON, COUNCILMEMBER CAREEN A. PETERSEN, COUNCILMEMBER "EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER" 0 0 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 5:12 PM To: 'tbziola@msn.com' Cc: 'Hunraf@aol.com'; 'katiec@jpfirm.com' Subject: Development Orders from the April 17, 2007, CDB meeting Ms. Ziola - Attached are the Development Orders for the Time Extensions for the following cases, where the Community Development Board (CDB) took action at their meeting of April 17, 2007: 1. FLD2005-08088, 685 - 689 Bay Esplanade; and 2. FLD2005-08090, 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade. The original letters are being mailed. Wayne cEi? WI -1 Bay Esplanade Bay Esplanade 585-689 CDB Time.393-699 CDB Time.. 0 0 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:24 PM To: 'tbziola@msn.com' Cc: 'Hunraf@aol.com'; 'katiec@jpfirm.com' Subject: Staff Reports for the April 17, 2007, CDB meeting Ms. Ziola - Attached are the Staff Reports for the time extensions for the April 17, 2007, CDB meeting for the following cases: 1. FLD2005-08088, 685 - 689 Bay Esplanade; and 2. FLD2005-08090, 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade. These two cases are being placed on the consent agenda for this meeting. Wayne Bay Esplanade Bay Esplanade 685-689 Time Ext...693-699 Time Ext... 0 • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:48 PM To: 'Hunraf@aol.com' Cc: katiec@jpfirm.com Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Yes, the time extension is on the consent portion of the agenda. -----Original Message----- From: Hunraf@aol.com [mailto:Hunraf@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 2:52 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: katiec@jpfirm.com Subject: Joe Burdette - Quick Question Wayne The CDB agenda is not on the web site yet. Can you please confirm for me that the time extension for 693-699 Bay Esplande, FLD2005-08090 is, as of now, on the consent agenda. Thanks Joe See what's free at AOL.com. 4/11/2007 s 0 • Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 2:30 PM To: Delk, Michael; 'Hunraf@aol.com' Subject: RE: Joe Burdette - Extension Request Michael/Joe - Yes, I am in receipt of the time extension requests. Both requests have been added to the April 17, 2005, CDB agenda. The memorandums being sent to the CDB follow a format and a copy of each is attached. We will not be adding in the information requested, as others cases in a similar situation have not been so noted. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Delk, Michael Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 2:01 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: FW: Joe Burdette - Extension Request Wayne - Do you know the answer? mld -----Original Message----- From: Hunraf@aol.com [mailto:Hunraf@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2007 6:10 PM To: Delk, Michael Subject: Joe Burdette - Extension Request Michael An extension request was dropped off to you last week by the developers of 693-699 Bay Esplanade and 685-689 Bay Esplanade (FLD2005-08090 and FLD2005-08088). I was not a part of the original approval of this project. I am told by the owners that they did not use any conversion from hotel to condominium to obtain their density and, if that is a fact, would ask that you include that in the staff report that goes to the CDB members prior to the April meeting as that is a substantial difference between this project and the ones we just received extensions on in February. If that is not a fact, please notify me right away so I can talk to the owners. Thanks as usual Joe 3/19/2007 :wH.,-.._ f 0 Page 2 of 2 AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. 3/19/2007 ORIGINAL RECEIVED Somerset Inc 61o .Mandalay Ave Clearwater F.L 33767 MA 14 2007. PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER Re: FLD2005-08088-685-689 Bay Esplanade and FLD2005-08090-693-699 Bay Esplanade Dear Mr. Delk Please accept this letter as our request for a 1-year extension for the above referenced two (2) Development Orders for our projects on Clearwater Beach and to have this request placed on the April 17, 2007 Community Development Board Agenda. This request is based on the land development code section 4.04 and the specific criteria for our request is as follows: 1. We are in the process of pre-sales and market conditions have been slow. Construction lenders' have increased the number of pre-sales required to fund construction loans and this has hampered us as well. 2. Increase in construction costs have forced us to redo some of our architectural construction drawings in order to keep our costs in line while still maintaining our commitment to a quality product. 3. Dock sales are an integral part of our marketing plan and we are still awaiting permitting for them. Should you require any additional information, please contact me and I will see that you receive whatever information you may require. Thank you for your help in this matter. 7' K by , Secretary / 6 /6 ;n•- D*vision of Corporations • 0 Page 1 of 2 C9 t art ?t it;jai ? +' ?., k, ¢+ /? '!k.'fr y,. f Y. `M?y., •Y Y 14,E ``IT Florida Limited Liability PETER PAN DEVELOPMENTS LLC PRINCIPAL ADDRESS 5210 WEBB ROAD TAMPA FL 33615 Changed 04/11/2006 MAILING ADDRESS 5210 WEBB ROAD TAMPA FL 33615 Changed 04/11/2006 Document Number FEI Number Date Filed L03000045378 200711485 11/18/2003 State Status Effective Date FL ACTIVE NONE Last Event Event Date Filed Event Effective Date AMENDED AND 06/17/2004 NONE RESTATED ARTICLES Total Contribution 0.00 Manager/Member Detail II Name & Address II Title II MEROLI, PETRIT http://www. sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?al=DETFIL&nl =LO3000045378&n2=NAMFW... 3/19/2007 ..-? Di'vision of Corporations Page 2 of 2 610 MANDALAY AVENUE CLEARWATER BEACH FL 33767 MGRM VASILOUDES, PANOS 5210 WEBB ROAD MGRM TAMPA FL 33615 Annual Reports - Report Year I Filed Date F 2004 04/ 19/2004 2005 04/22/2005 2006 04/11/2006 Previous Filing Return to List Next Filing View Events No Name History Information Document Images Listed below are the images available for this filing. 04/11/2006 -- ANNUAL REPORT 04/22/2005 -- ANN REP/UNIFORM BUS REP 06/17/2004 -- Amended and Restated Articles 04/19/2004 -- ANNUAL REPORT 11/18/2003 -- Florida Limited Liability THIS IS NOT OFFICIAL RECORD; SEE DOCUMENTS IF QUESTION OR CONFLICT Carpor itions Inquiry Corporations Help http://www. sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?a1=DETFIL&n 1=LO3000045378&n2=NAMFW... 3/19/2007 Pinellas County Property App r Information: 05 29 15 54756 077 00 Page 2 of 5 1 er 05 / 29 / 15 / 54750 / 070 / 0011 19-Mar-2007 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 11:50:58 Ownership Information Non-Residential Property Address, Use, and Sales PETER PAN DEUELOPMENTS LLC OBK: 14564 OPG: 1141 5210 WEBB RD TAMPA FL 33615-4518 EVAC: A EUAC Comparable sales value as Prop Addr: 693 BAY ESPLANADE of Jan 1, 2006, based on Census Tract: 260.02 sales from 2004 - 2005: 0 Sale Date OR Book/Page Price (Qual/UnQ) Vac/Imp Plat Information 8 /2,005 14,495/1,833 1,436,200 (U) I 1929: Book 020 Pgs 048- 8 /2,004 13,761/ 606 1,050,000 (0) I 0000: Book Pgs - 12/2,002 12,465/1,217 715,000 (Q) I 0000: Book Pgs - 2 /1,999 10,418/ 513 300,000 (0) I 2006 Value EXEMPTIONS Just/Market: 1,005,200 Homestead: NO Ownership % .000 Govt Exem: NO Use %: .000 Assessed/Cap: 1,005,200 Institutional Exem: NO Tax Exempt: .000 Historic Exem: 0 Taxable: 1,005,200 Agricultural: 0 2006 Tax Information District: Cu Seawall: Frontage: Bay Clearwater View: 06 Millage: 21.7640 Land Size Unit Land Land Land Front x Depth Price Units Meth 06 Taxes: 21,877.17 1) 60 x 110 200.00 6,757.40 S Special Tax .00 2) 0 x 0 .00 .00 3) 0 x 0 .00 .00 Without the Save-Our-Homes 4) 0 x 0 .00 .00 cap, 2006 taxes will be : 5) 0 x 0 .00 .00 21, 877.17 6) 0 x 0 .00 . 00 Without any exemptions, 2006 taxes will be ; 21,877.17 Short Legal MANDALAY UNIT NO. 5 REPLAT BLK 76, S 1/2 OF UNPLATTED Description BLK 76 Building Information http://136.174.187.13/htbin/egi-click?o=1 &a=l &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&p.=0...._3/l9/2007 Pinellas County Property Appor Information: 05 29 15 54756 077 0 Page 3 of 5 05 129 / 15 154750 / 070 1 0011 :01 19-Mar-2007 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 11:50:58 Commercial Card 01 of i Improvement Type: Res Comm Use Property Address: 693 BAY ESPLANADE Prop Use: 313 Land Use: 39 Struc-tural E1?ments Foundation Continuous Footing Floor System Slab on Grade Exterior Wall Conc Block/Stucco Height Factor 0 Party Wall None Structural Frame None Roof Frame Gable & Hip Roof Cover Composition Shingle Cabinet & Mill Average Floor Finish Carpet Combination Interior Finish Drywall Total Units 5 Heating & Air Heating&Cooling Pckg Fixtures 15 Bath Tile Floor and Wall Electric Average Shape Factor Rectangle Quality Average Year Built 1,949 Effective Age 15 Other Depreciation 0 Function Depreciation 0 Economic Depreciation 0 Sub Aromas Description Factor Area Description Factor Area 1) Base Area 1.00 1,816 7) .00 0 2) Screen Porch .25 384 8) .00 0 3) Open Porch .20 156 9) .00 0 4) Open Porch .15 418 10) .00 0 5) Upper Stry Base Area .90 1,000 11) .00 0 6) 00 0 12) .00 0 Coinm?rcial Ex?r2t Fea-tur?s Description Dimensions Price Units Value RCD Year 1) DOCK 414 40. 00 414 16,560 6,620 1,970 2) PATIO/DECK 650 6.00 650 3,900 2,260 1,991 3) BT LFT/DAU 2 1,500.00 2 3,000 1,200 1,970 4) .00 0 0 0 0 5) .00 0 0 0 0 6) .00 0 0 0 0 TOTAL RECORD VALUE: 101080 Map With Property Address (non-vacant) F*_1 [;? Fil F411 PJ M http://136.174.187.131htbinlcgi-click?o=1 &a=l &b=-I &c=l &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&p=0... 3/19/2007 Pinellas County Property Apptv r Information: 05 29 15 54756 077 0 Page 4 of 5 19 1 S7 r f-'1 720 ` BRUCE BA's` BMA AVE SPLANADE ?P DE BRE UE i 718 ESPL 7'17 ESPLBANA D 52 A d a . C' AC IA ACI ST BA" I ? BAY ? .?f SPLA.NAD SPLANAD STREET Y SPLANAD BAY 47 45 SI 51 SPLA.NAD CACI ' CACI '. CA CI CAC IA 71 7 ST ST ST BAY SPLANAD H i 7 E 9 '22 4 ET OMES B? 4 R 3 . ESP AD S7 S ST .+ S 3 ?.. ESPBIAD SPL ANAD? J.I z J BAY SPL ANAD 6 7.3 BA SP NAI rn 27942 1/8 Mile Aerial Photograph (2002) http://l36.174.187.13/htbin/cgi-click?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&p=0... 3/19/2007 1?537 3, ; TREET http://l36.174.187.13/htbin/cgi-click?o=1.&a=1&b=1&c=1&r=.16&s=4&t3=1&u=0&p=0... 3/19/2007 - Pinellas County Property Ap0er Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 is Page 2 of 5 05 / 29 / 15 / 54755 / 070 / 0010 19-Mar-2007 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 11:51:24 Ownership Information Residential Property Address, Use, and Sales PETER PAN DEVELOPMENTS LLC OBK: 14564 OPG: 1139 5210 UEBB RD TAMPA FL 33615-4518 EVAC: A EUAC Comparable sales value as Prop Addr: 699 BAY ESPLANADE of Jan 1, 2006, based on Census Tract: 260.02 sales from 2004 - 2005: 1,382,200 Sale Date OR Book/Page Price (Qual/UnQ) Vac/Imp Plat Information 10/2,004 13,915/ 513 1,050,000 (Q) I 1929: Book 020 Pgs 048- 12/2,002 12,452/1,789 475,000 (U) I 0000: Book Pgs - 11/2,001 11,659/ 658 452,000 (0) I 0000: Book Pgs - 5 /1,999 10,514/ 171 378,000 (Q) I 2006 Value EXEMPTIONS Just/Market: 1,183,800 Homestead: NO Ownership % .000 Govt Exem: NO Use %: .000 Assessed/Cap: 1,183,800 Institutional Exem: NO Tax Exempt: .000 Historic Exem: 0 Taxable: 1,183,800 Agricultural: 0 2006 Tax Information District: CU Seawall: YES Frontage: Bay Clearwater View: 06 Millage: 21.7640 Land Size Unit Land Land Land Front x Depth Price Units Meth 06 Taxes: 25,764.22 1) 60 x 110 175. 00 6,682. 62 S Special Tax .00 2) 0 x 0 .00 .00 3) 0 x 0 .00 .00 Without the Save-Our-Homes 4) 0 x 0 .00 .00 cap, 2006 taxes will be : 5) 0 x 0 .00 .00 25, 764.22 6) 0 x 0 . 00 . 00 Without any exemptions, 2006 taxes will be 25, 764.22 Short Legal MANDALAY UNIT NO. 5 REPLAT BLK 76, H 1/2 OF UNPLATTED Description BLK 76 Building Information http://l 36.174.187.13/htbin/cgi-click?o=1.&a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&p=0... 3/19/.2007 ..., ;• Pinellas County Property Ap0er Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 0 Page 3 of 5 05 I 29 I 15 / 54755 I 070 1 0010 :01 19-Mar-2007 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 11:51:24 Residential Card 01 of i Prop Use: 210 Land Use: 01 Living Units: i Imp Type: Single Family Prop Address: 699 BAY ESPLANADE Structural E1em?nts Foundation Spc Footing- Wd/Blk Floor System Wood Exterior Wall Frame/Rclad Alm/Unyl Roof Frame Gable-Hip Roof Cover Composite Shingle # Stories 1.0 Floor Finish Crpt/HdTI/HdMar/Prgt Interior Finish Drywall/Plaster Quality Year Built Effective Heating Cooling Fixtures Other Depr Functional Econonomic Above Average 1,984 Age 10 Central Duct Cooling (Central) 9 °ciation 0 Depreciation 0 Depreciation 0 Sub ArE3as Description Factor Area Description Factor Area 1) Base Area 1.00 1,746 7) .00 0 2) Enclosed Porch .60 1,206 8) .00 0 3) Open Porch .20 288 9) .00 0 4) Garage .35 540 10) .00 0 5) Open Porch .15 252 11) .00 0 6) .00 0 12) .00 0 RE3 S1dia n1L 1a1 E>ctra FE3 aturc-_ s Description Dimensions Price Units Value RCD Year 1) FIREPLACE 21500.00 1 21500 1,500 1,984 2) DOCK 232 40.00 232 9,280 6,030 1,994 3) BT LFT/DAU 11500.00 1 11500 980 1,994 4) .00 0 0 0 0 5) .00 0 0 0 0 6) .00 0 0 0 0 TOTAL RECORD VALUE: 8,510 Map With Property Address (non-vacant) a®o® FQ R] ..- http://136.174.187.13/htbin/cgi-click?o=l&a=l&b=1&c=I&r=.16&s=4&t3=1&u=0&p=0... 3/19/2007 Pinellas County Property Ap*er Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 96 Page 4 of 5 STREET 1/8 Mile Aerial Photograph (2002) STREET http://l36.174.187.13/htbin/cgi-click?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&p=0... 3/19/2007 -)f 5 http://l 36.174.187.13/htbin/cgi-click?o=1 &a=1 &b=l &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&p=0... 3/19/2007. , - _ V. • 0 Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:19 AM To: Sherry Bagley (E-mail) Subject: Bay Esplanade properties Sherry - Thought I would forward Mike Quillen's thoughts on the proposed boardwalk. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Quillen, Michael Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:14 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Rice, Scott Cc: Morris, William D.; Clayton, Gina; Delk, Michael Subject: FW: Tropicana Resort Land Trust I agree with Wayne's question about public use of the boardwalk. This looks more to me like closing off a street end for use as a private dock facility. Michael D. Quillen, P.E. Director of Engineering City of Clearwater mich.ael.qu.illen@myclearwater.com 727-562-4743 -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 5:28 PM To: Quillen, Michael; Morris, William D.; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: FW: Tropicana Resort Land Trust FYI - This is the forwarded email so you can see the attachments Sherry Bagley sent. -----Original Message----- From: Sherry Bagley [mailto:sbagley@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Tropicana Resort Land Trust Wayne, I've been trying to get some clarification on the Unity of Title for the Tropicana properties. The attorney would like to get it prepared but the condition does not specifically state what needs to be included in that Unity. Is it all the properties or is it the Hotel lots with the water lots? We want to ensure we do it correctly. Also, I have another project I am working on, on Bay Esplanade. I met with Bill Morris regarding it but they have some special issues he felt you might be able to address. Somerset Drive ROW is between the two properties (4 lots in all, 2 on each side). They would like to construct two docks (one on each property) which would face the 1/22/2007 L, F 0 • Page 2 of 2 ROW. The length of the dock they would like to propose would require a variance for length. The applicant thought that the city might consider the entire shoreline, the two properties and the ROW, as the waterfront/shoreline width to establish the setbacks. Our feeling is that the city would not support this but we wanted to get you opinion. We feel that each property would use its own waterfront width to establish the setbacks and that as they do not have ownership of the ROW it could not be used in the calculations. Additionally, they wanted to repair/replace the seawall along the entire length, the two properties and the ROW, and create a parallel boardwalk along the city's ROW, open to the public, which would connect the two docks. What issues do you see with this and do you have someone we could discuss the repair of the ROW seawall with? I have included a aerial view of the proposed dock. This is a very preliminary design but should give you an idea of what they are looking to do. I would appreciate any comments you could provide. Thanks, Sherry Bagley Woods Consulting 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 www.woodsconsultinq.orq Phone: 727-786-5747 Fax: 727-786-7479 1/22/2007 Jw. e 0 Wells, Wayne From: Morris, William D. Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:30 AM To: Quillen, Michael; Wells, Wayne; Rice, Scott Cc: Clayton, Gina; Delk, Michael Subject: Re: Tropicana Resort Land Trust I'll be back in the office Thursday, the dock consultant Woods consulting caught me juat before I left town and was working with the property owner building on both sides of the Somerset ROW. The upland property builder is trying to configure it docks on either side of Somersets extended property line. While they were doing the they were looking at having to fix and recap some of the seawall. They were discussing the repair the seawall/cap as needed at the end of Somerset and perhaps putting a bench there as a public amenity. They had not made any decisions before I left but did want the cities concerns. I told them I would meet with them when I got back and suggested the talk to Planning and Engineering. Without a set of plans in front of me I can't comment past that, Bill M Bill Morris Marine & Aviation Director City of Clearwater -------------------------- Sent from my B1ackBerry Wireless Handheld -----Original Message----- From: Quillen, Michael To: Wells, Wayne; Rice, Scott CC: Morris, William D.; Clayton, Gina; Delk, Michael Sent: Mon Jan 22 10:13:48 2007 Subject: FW: Tropicana Resort Land Trust I agree with Wayne's question about public use of the boardwalk. This looks more to me like closing off a street end for use as a private dock facility. Michael D. Quillen, P.E. Director of Engineering City of Clearwater michael.quillen@myclearwater.com 727-562-4743 -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 5:28 PM To: Quillen, Michael; Morris, William D.; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: FW: Tropicana Resort Land Trust FYI - This is the forwarded email so you can see the attachments Sherry Bagley sent. -----Original Message----- From: Sherry Bagley [mailto:sbagley@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Tropicana Resort Land Trust Wayne, I've been trying to get some clarification on the Unity of Title for the Tropicana properties. The attorney would like to get it prepared but the condition does not specifically state what needs to be included in that Unity. Is it all the properties or is it the Hotel lots with the water lots? We want to ensure we do it correctly. 1 Also, I have another project I am working on, on Bay Esplanade. I met with Bill Morris regarding it but they have some special issues he felt you might be able to address. Somerset Drive ROW is between the two properties (4 lots in all, 2 on each side). They would like to construct two docks (one on each property) which would face the ROW. The length of the dock they would like to propose would require a variance for length. The applicant thought that the city might consider the entire shoreline, the two properties and the ROW, as the waterfront/shoreline width to establish the setbacks. Our feeling is that the city would not support this but we wanted to get you opinion. We feel that each property would use its own waterfront width to establish the setbacks and that as they do not have ownership of the ROW it could not be used in the calculations. Additionally, they wanted to repair/replace the seawall along the entire length, the two properties and the ROW, and create a parallel boardwalk along the city's ROW, open to the public, which would connect the two docks. What issues do you see with this and do you have someone we could discuss the repair of the ROW seawall with? I have included a aerial view of the proposed dock. This is a very preliminary design but should give you an idea of what they are looking to do. I would appreciate any comments you could provide. Thanks, Sherry Bagley Woods Consulting 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 www.woodsconsulting.org Phone: 727-786-5747 Fax: 727-786-7479 2 • • Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Quillen, Michael Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:14 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Rice, Scott Cc: Morris, William D.; Clayton, Gina; Delk, Michael Subject: FW: Tropicana Resort Land Trust I agree with Wayne's question about public use of the boardwalk. This looks more to me like closing off a street end for use as a private dock facility. Michael D. Quillen., P.E. 'Director of Engineering City of Clearwater michael.quillen@myclearwater.com 727-562-4743 -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 5:28 PM To: Quillen, Michael; Morris, William D.; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: FW: Tropicana Resort Land Trust FYI - This is the forwarded email so you can see the attachments Sherry Bagley sent. -----Original Message----- From: Sherry Bagley [mailto:sbagley@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Tropicana Resort Land Trust Wayne, I've been trying to get some clarification on the Unity of Title for the Tropicana properties. The attorney would like to get it prepared but the condition does not specifically state what needs to be included in that Unity. Is it all the properties or is it the Hotel lots with the water lots? We want to ensure we do it correctly. Also, I have another project I am working on, on Bay Esplanade. I met with Bill Morris regarding it but they have some special issues he felt you might be able to address. Somerset Drive ROW is between the two properties (4 lots in all, 2 on each side). They would like to construct two docks (one on each property) which would face the ROW. The length of the dock they would like to propose would require a variance for length. The applicant thought that the city might consider the entire shoreline, the two properties and the ROW, as the waterfront/shoreline width to establish the setbacks. Our feeling is that the city would not support this but we wanted to get you opinion. We feel that each property would use its own waterfront width to establish the setbacks and that as they do not have ownership of the ROW it could not be used in the calculations. Additionally, they wanted to repair/replace the seawall along the entire length, the two properties and the ROW, and create a parallel boardwalk along the city's ROW, open to the public, which would connect the two docks. What issues do you see with this and do you have someone we could discuss the repair of the ROW seawall with? I have included a aerial view of the proposed dock. This is a very preliminary design but should give you an idea 1/22/2007 _ . • 0 Page 2 of 2 of what they are looking to do. I would appreciate any comments you could provide. Thanks, Sherry Bagley Woods Consulting 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 www.woodsconsulting.org Phone: 727-786-5747 Fax: 727-786-7479 1/22/2007 Pagel of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Quillen, Michael Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:12 AM To: 'Sherry Bagley' Cc: Wells, Wayne; Rice, Scott; Bahnick, Glen Subject: RE: Tropicana Resort Land Trust The City contact regarding seawall repair will be Glen Bahnick, Asst. Director of Engineering, 562-4760. Michael D. Quillen, P.E. Director of Engineering City of Clearwater michael.quillen@myclearwater.com 727-562-4743 -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 5:25 PM To: 'Sherry Bagley' Cc: Quillen, Michael; Morris, William D.; Thompson, Neil; Clayton, Gina; Delk, Michael Subject: RE: Tropicana Resort Land Trust Sherry - 1. Hamden properties - The Unity of Title should be with how the ownership is. There may need to be more than one Unity of Title prepared (probably a total of three). I am attaching the Unity of.Title form that can be used for this. If you have any questions about filling it/them out, let me know. 2. Bay Esplanade properties - This Somerset Street right-of-way separates the two properties. The City's right-of-way cannot be vacated by City Charter. Each side of Somerset Street must be considered on its own as to waterfront/shoreline width, setbacks, length, etc. and the width of Somerset Street cannot be counted. As to replacing the seawall at the end of Somerset Street as part of their project, I would suggest contacting Mike Quillen, City Engineer (562-4743). You might also ask him regarding the installation of the four-foot wide boardwalk adjacent to the seawall. However, why is it proposed? How will the public benefit by this boardwalk? Or, is it primarily for the residents' benefit for the projects on either side of Somerset Street? In prior discussions with Bill Morris on other docks, I understand there is a rule of thumb to use on boat maneuvering area that is 1.5 times the dock length. I see you are proposing docks 70 feet in length, but with only 74.5 feet between the docks. Unclear if there is a navigation issue relative to "parking" the boats. Section 3-601.C.3.h.i requires a minimum setback of one third of the waterfront property width on the north side for the northern project, or a 40-foot setback. It does not appear that this is being met. Additionally, am I reading your preliminary design to show a slip on the north side of the dock that is 30 feet wide by 100 feet in length? I am unclear what type/size of yachts are envisioned for these condos. Slips that are 70 feet in length seems extremely long. These slips are to be exclusively for the residents of the condos. This is not a marina. It also appears there must be adequate water depth to have a slip 16 feet in width and 70 feet in length directly adjacent to the seawall (?). It may also beg a question as to why 16 feet wide but 70 feet in length - how many boats are anticipated in these slips? It also appears you will be asking for side setback reduction for the northern project from the southern property line (Somerset Street right-of- 1/22/2007 Page 2 of 2 way extended). With a waterfront property width of 120 feet, the maximum length by Code is 90 feet. The proposal exceeds by more than twice this maximum length. It may be questionable whether the City will support such a significant increase, especially with other properties to the south proposed for redevelopment (with the assumption of new future docks) and for the northern project in relation to single family to the north, as to whether a precedent is being set. I am going to forward your email to Mr. Quillen and Mr. Morris so they will have the benefit of seeing your attachments. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Sherry Bagley [mailto:sbagley@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Tropicana Resort Land Trust Wayne, I've been trying to get some clarification on the Unity of Title for the Tropicana properties. The attorney would like to get it prepared but the condition does not specifically state what needs to be included in that Unity. Is it all the properties or is it the Hotel lots with the water lots? We want to ensure we do it correctly. Also, I have another project I am working on, on Bay Esplanade. I met with Bill Morris regarding it but they have some special issues he felt you might be able to address. Somerset Drive ROW is between the two properties (4 lots in all, 2 on each side). They would like to construct two docks (one on each property) which would face the ROW. The length of the dock they would like to propose would require a variance for length. The applicant thought that the city might consider the entire shoreline, the two properties and the ROW, as the waterfront/shoreline width to establish the setbacks. Our feeling is that the city would not support this but we wanted to get you.opinion. We feel that each property would use its own waterfront width to establish the setbacks and that as they do not have ownership of the ROW it could not be used in the calculations. Additionally, they wanted to repair/replace the seawall along the entire length, the two properties and the ROW, and create a parallel boardwalk along the city's ROW, open to the public, which would connect the two docks. What issues do you see with this and do you have someone we could discuss the repair of the ROW seawall with? I have included a aerial view of the proposed dock. This is a very preliminary design but should give you an idea of what they are looking to do. I would appreciate any comments you could provide. Thanks, Sherry Bagley Woods Consulting 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 www.woodsconsulting.org Phone: 727-786-5747 Fax: 727-786-7479 1/22/2007 Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 5:25 PM To: 'Sherry Bagley' Cc: Quillen, Michael; Morris, William D.; Thompson, Neil; Clayton, Gina; Delk, Michael Subject: RE: Tropicana Resort Land Trust Sherry - 1. Hamden properties - The Unity of Title should be with how the ownership is. There may need to be more than one Unity of Title prepared (probably a total of three). I am attaching the Unity of Title form that can be used for this. If you have any questions about filling it/them out, let me know. 2. Bay Esplanade properties - This Somerset Street right-of-way separates the two properties. The City's right-of- way cannot be vacated by City Charter. Each side of Somerset Street must be considered on its own as to waterfront/shoreline width, setbacks, length, etc. and the width of Somerset Street cannot be counted. As to replacing the seawall at the end of Somerset Street as part of their project, I would suggest contacting Mike Quillen, City Engineer (562-4743). You might also ask him regarding the installation of the four-foot wide boardwalk adjacent to the seawall. However, why is it proposed? How will the public benefit by this boardwalk? Or, is it primarily for the residents' benefit for the projects on either side of Somerset Street? In prior discussions with Bill Morris on other docks, I understand there is a rule of thumb to use on boat maneuvering area that is 1.5 times the dock length. I see you are proposing docks 70 feet in length, but with only 74.5 feet between the docks. Unclear if there is a navigation issue relative to "parking" the boats. Section 3-601.C.3.h.i requires a minimum setback of one third of the waterfront property width on the north side for the northern project, or a 40-foot setback. It does not appear that this is being met. Additionally, am I reading your preliminary design to show a slip on the north side of the dock that is 30 feet wide by 100 feet in length? I am unclear what type/size of yachts are envisioned for these condos. Slips that are 70 feet in length seems extremely long. These slips are to be exclusively for the residents of the condos. This is not a marina. It also appears there must be adequate water depth to have a slip 16 feet in width and 70 feet in length directly adjacent to the seawall (?). It may also beg a question as to why 16 feet wide but 70 feet in length - how many boats are anticipated in these slips? It also appears you will be asking for side setback reduction for the northern project from the southern property line (Somerset Street right-of-way extended). With a waterfront property width of 120 feet, the maximum length by Code is 90 feet. The proposal exceeds by more than twice this maximum length. It may be questionable whether the City will support such a significant increase, especially with other properties to the south proposed for redevelopment (with the assumption of new future docks) and for the northern project in relation to single family to the north, as to whether a precedent is being set. I am going to forward your email to Mr. Quillen and Mr. Morris so they will have the benefit of seeing your attachments. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Sherry Bagley [mailto:sbagley@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Tropicana Resort Land Trust Wayne, I've been trying to get some clarification on the Unity of Title for the Tropicana properties. The attorney 1/19/2007 Page 2 of 2 • • would like to get it prepared but the condition does not specifically state what needs to be included in that Unity. Is it all the properties or is it the Hotel lots with the water lots? We want to ensure we do it correctly. Also, I have another project I am working on, on Bay Esplanade. I met with Bill Morris regarding it but they have some special issues he felt you might be able to address. Somerset Drive ROW is between the two properties (4 lots in all, 2 on each side). They would like to construct two docks (one on each property) which would face the ROW. The length of the dock they would like to propose would require a variance for length. The applicant thought that the city might consider the entire shoreline, the two properties and the ROW, as the waterfront/shoreline width to establish the setbacks. Our feeling is that the city would not support this but we wanted to get you opinion. We feel that each property would use its own waterfront width to establish the setbacks and that as they do not have ownership of the ROW it could not be used in the calculations. Additionally, they wanted to repair/replace the seawall along the entire length, the two properties and the ROW, and create a parallel boardwalk along the city's ROW, open to the public, which would connect the two docks. What issues do you see with this and do you have someone we could discuss the repair of the ROW seawall with? I have included a aerial view of the proposed dock. This is a very preliminary design but should give you an idea of what they are looking to do. I would appreciate any comments you could provide. Thanks, Sherry Bagley Woods Consulting 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 www.woodsconsulting.org Phone: 727-786-5747 Fax: 727-786-7479 1/19/2007 Page 1 of 1 1 0 0 Wells, Wayne From: Sherry Bagley [sbagley@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Tropicana Resort Land Trust Wayne, I've been trying to get some clarification on the Unity of Title for the Tropicana properties. The attorney would like to get it prepared but the condition does not specifically state what needs to be included in that Unity. Is it all the properties or is it the Hotel lots with the water lots? We want to ensure we do it correctly. Also, I have another project I am working on, on Bay Esplanade. I met with Bill Morris regarding it but they have some special issues he felt you might be able to address. Somerset Drive ROW is between the two properties (4 lots in all, 2 on each side). They would like to construct two docks (one on each property) which would face the ROW. The length of the dock they would like to propose would require a variance for length. The applicant thought that the city might consider the entire shoreline, the two properties and the ROW, as the waterfront/shoreline width to establish the setbacks. Our feeling is that the city would not support this but we wanted to get you opinion. We feel that each property would use its own waterfront width to establish the setbacks and that as they do not have ownership of the ROW it could not be used in the calculations. Additionally, they wanted to repair/replace the seawall along the entire length, the two properties and the ROW, and create a parallel boardwalk along the city's ROW, open to the public, which would connect the two docks. What issues do you see with this and do you have someone we could discuss the repair of the ROW seawall with? I have included a aerial view of the proposed dock. This is a very preliminary design but should give you an idea of what they are looking to do. I would appreciate any comments you could provide. Thanks, Sherry Bagley Woods Consulting 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 www.woodsconsulting.org Phone: 727-786-5747 Fax: 727-786-7479 1/19/2007 SCALE: 1" = 50' ? k Z ^7 t ? cy?- Y U Q ? m ? W W co a w 6.0 CO 25% 0 74.5 co o WATERWAY ... • • ' M 70.0 ... . 1..1 I 5.0 5.0 30.0 CS •••••••" . I I 25.0 CSI 25.0 CS I I . -1 25.0 CS I 4.0 I 25.0 CS I I '10 .0I 1 L.18.0 CS•I I •? 18.0 CS 1 I I 1 182.1 I 18.0 CS 1 3.0 I 18.0 CS I 1182.1 ° I L 18.0 CS/ ? I 18.0 CS I zl 1 ° ?°I =I ?? I I . z 18.0 CS I 3.0 ?I 18.0 CS W 1 I w I ?I EXISTING DOCK ° I I 0 1 I CO 1 116.0 CSI w 0I 16.0 CS II EXISTING eoaT 1 I •I oI . I I 16.0 CS I ? I 4.0 16.0 CS I I 120.1 60.0 673 BAY ESPLANADE 125.0 699 BAY 693 ESPLANADE BAY ESPLANADE 689 685 BAY ESPLANADE BAY ESPLANADE WOODS CONSULTING 1714 COUNTY ROAD 1, SUITE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 PH. (7275 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 THE CHANNEL CLUB PROPOSED DOCK TOTAL SQUARE FEET XXXXXXXXX WATERWAY WIDTH 750.0 FT WATERFRONT WIDTH 125.0 FT EA MHW +1.4' MLW -0.6' 'ELEVATIONS REFEREN CE NGVD-1929 Fri, 19 Jan 2007 - 11:19am P:\Epic Holdings Docks (191-05)\CAD\EPIC HOLDINGS Master 010807.dwg SCALE: 9" = 50' TOTAL SQUARE FEET XXXXXX)" WOODS CONSULTING WATERWAY WIDTH 750.0 FT 1714 COUNTY ROAD 1 SUITE 22 THE CHANNEL CLUB WATERFRONT WIDTH 125.0 FT EA 1 r r I? J J DUNEDIN FL 54698 MHW +1A' MLW -006' PH. 27 788-5747 PROPOSED DOCK FAX 2 786-7479 "ELEVATIONS REFERENCE NGVD-1929 Fri, 19 Jan 2007 -11:20am P:\Epic Holdings Docks (191-05)\CAD\EPIC HOLDINGS Master 010807.dwg 0 0 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 5:51 PM To: Angel Haines (E-mail) Cc: Renee Ruggiero (E-mail) Subject: FLD2005-08090 - 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Angel - I thought I already sent you an email regarding the Time Extension for this project, but I couldn't find any record of such (if I already sent this to you earlier, then you can disregard this email). The Time Extension was approved on December 1, 2006 (see attached Development Order). You may already have received the original in the mail. Wayne Bay Esplanade 693-699 Time Ext... 1W I 'I Ud A?? LONG R4NGF PLANNING DEVEL0Pib1@N"1' IZF, i w Ms. Renee Ruggiero Northside Engineering Services Inc. 601 Cleveland Street, Suite # 930 Clearwater, Florida 33755 RE: FLD2005-08090 - 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Time Extension Development Order Dear Ms. Ruggiero: December 1, 2006 On January 17, 2006, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved the above application for Flexible Development approval to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 44.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.F, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3- 1202.G. Section 4-407 of the Community Development Code requires the application for a building permit within one year of the date the CDB approved the request (January 17, 2007). This same Section allows an extension of time to initiate a building permit, provided good cause is shown and documented in writing within the original period of validity. The Planning Director may also consider whether significant progress on the project is. being made and whether or not there are pending or approved Code amendments that would significantly affect the project. On November 15, 2006, you submitted a request for a four-month time extension to apply for a building permit to construct the improvements on this parcel. Your letter cited a desire to have a corresponding expiration date as the companion project at 685 - 689 Bay Esplanade, which has been granted a time extension until May 15, 2007, and the finalization of construction documents with construction pricing as the main issues with the inability to submit for building permits within the allowable timeframe. Since the approval of this project, the Code has been amended in the following that affect this proj ect: I'ItrAKK I IIIiIiAHU, N1AYt>R C ITY OF C LEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT POST OFFR:H Box 4748, CLSARWA'TEft, FI.ORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL. SfiR ci--.s Mjil,I)fNG, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVIiNt1H, CLEARWATI-T, FLORIDA 33756 Ti--11PHONG (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 DO]\;\, Cot.""CII.NIENIM..k I Icn-r I I:UIIITON, Ccx R1111ON',0N, C(W?N ILA EMBI{Ii C:,?r,LPn ;?. 11rT172SIA, Cu( N I.MIN1WR "EQUAL EMPLOYMENTANI) Ari;mm iwi; ACTION f;mPI.O) t:P," December 1, 2006 Ruggiero - Page Two 1. The requirement for parking has been amended to two parking spaces per unit. This project was approved with 13 parking spaces for eight attached dwelling units, at a parking ratio of 1.625 parking spaces per dwelling unit. 2. Beach by Design has been revised for the "Old Florida District" to require a minimum front setback of 15 feet (South: 11 feet [to building and pavement] and zero feet [to trash staging area]) and a minimum side setback of 10 feet (North: 3.1 feet [to pavement]; East: zero feet [to pool deck]) and building stepbacks for buildings exceeding 35 feet in height (none provided under FLD2005-08090). In considering the above changes to the Code and Beach by Design, in accordance with the provisions of Section 4-407 of the Community Development Code, I APPROVE a four-month time extension to May 17, 2007, to submit an application for a building permit to construct the site improvements on your parcel at 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade. In the event you are unable to proceed with the project by submitting for the building permit, the CDB may approve one additional extension of time to initiate a building permit application. Such extension shall not exceed one year, shall be for the project originally approved (or as approved through the Minor Revision process) and shall be for good cause shown and documented in writing. The CDB must receive the request for this extension within the time frame granted by the Planning Director (period of validity after the original extension approved by the Planning Director, which means that any time extension request must be submitted with sufficient lead time to be placed on the CDB agenda that precedes the above expiration date). Good causes may include, but are not limited to, an unexpected national crisis (acts of war, significant downturn in the national economy, etc.), excessive weather-related delays, and the like. The CDB may also consider these same Code amendments enumerated above, whether significant progress on the project is being made and whether or not there are additional pending or approved Code amendments that would further significantly affect the project. Please be aware that the issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III at 727-562-4504. Sincerely, Michael Delk CP Planning Director S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)Ilnactive or Finished Applications Way Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos (MHDR) - ApprovedlBay Esplanade 693-699 Time Ext. Dev. Order 12.1.06 doc NorthsMe November 15, 2006 • CIVIL LAND PLANNING • ENVIRONMENTAL 0 TRANSPORTATION • ORIGINAL RECEIVED NOV 212006 Mr. Wayne Wells Planner III City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33765 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER RE: FLD2005-08090 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Somerset Condominiums (North) Dear Mr. Wells: On January 17, 2006 the Community Development Board granted approval of the above referenced project. The Development Order issued to this site expires on January 17, 2007. As this development proposal is moving forward simultaneously with the development proposal approved under FLD2005-08088 which expires on May 15, 2007 we hereby respectfully request a four month extension to the Development Order. A four month extension will provide the projects a corresponding expiration date and allow sufficient time for quality plan development and pricing. The construction documents are in the final stages of development and will be sent out for pricing within the next two weeks. With the expiration date so near to the holidays we are concerned that the pricing portion of the process will take a little longer than normal. Should you require additional clarification or information, please feel free to contact me. Thank you in advance for your kind consideration and assistance with this development project. Respectfully, Renee Ruggiero, Project Planner cc: NES 473 File N. Pelzer 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 N ESADMI N@MI N DSPRI NG.COM NESTECH@MINDSPRING.COM 727 - 443 • 2869 FAX 727 - 446 - 8036 11/15/2006 15:28 7274468 NORTHSIDE ENGS PAGE 01102 Northside CIVIF . LANDSCAPE - • ENVIRONMENTAL • TRANSPORTATION FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 15, 2006 TIME: 3:40 pm ; PAGE 1 OF 2 TO: Wayne Wells FAX NO: 562-4865 OF; Clearwater Planning Department FROM: Angel Haines, Executive Administrative Assistant PROJECT NAME: FLD2005-08090 -693-099 Bay Esplanade COMMENTS: D.O. Extension request. PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO CONTACT OUR OFFICE SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING T141S PROJECT. 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATE,R, FLORIDA 33755 T (727) 443-28691F (727) 4468036 E-.MAIL: ADMIN@,NORTHST..DEENGIIVEE'RING. COIF r= D NOV 15 2006 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY OF CLEARWATER 11/15/2006 15:28 72744 6 01a" n !6% November 15, 2006 Mr. Wayne Wells Pla". or ITT City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33765 RE: FLD2005-08090 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Somerset Condominiums (North) Dear Mr. Wells: NORTHSIDE ENG IN PAGE 02/02 CNIL • LAND PLANNING • ENVIRONMENTAL + TRANSPORTATION • On January 17, 2006 the Community Development Hoard granted approval of the above referenced project. The Development Order issued to this site expires on January 17, 2007. As this development proposal is moving forward simultaneously with the development proposal approved under )~LD2005-08088 which expires on May 15, 2007 we hereby respectfully request a four month extension to the Development Order. A four month extension will provide the projects a corresponding expiration date and allow sufficient time for quality plan development and pricing. The construction documents are in the final stages of development and will be sent out for pricing within the next two weeks. With the expiration date so near. to the holidays we are concerned that the pricing portion of the process will take a little longer than normal. Should you require additional clarification or information, please feel free to contact me. Thank you in advance for your kind consideration and assistance with this development project. Respectfully, __ Renee Ruggiero, Project Planner cc: NES 473 17..06 N. Pel,er 6o1 CLEVELAND STREET, SMITE CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NESADMINom[NDSPRIN'G.CON N ESTECH01 MI NDSPRI NG.COM 727 • 443 -,2869 FAX 727 446 930 8036 693 & 699 Bay Esplanade Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 7:37 AM To: 'Angel Haines' Subject: RE: 693 & 699 Bay Esplanade Angel - I am attaching the DO, however, the next time you are over, pick up a copy of the signed version for your files. Don't know what happened to your original. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Angel Haines [mailto:Angel@northsideengineering.com] Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 4:08 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: 693 & 699 Bay Esplanade Hi Wayne! How you doin'? I am unable to locate a DO for 693 & 699 Bay Esplanade in our file. This was approved at 1/17/06 CDB. Will you please email or fax the DO to us? Thanks! Angel Haines Executive Administrative Assistant Northside Engineering Services, Inc. T 727.443.2869 / F 727.446.8036 Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.3/209 - Release Date: 12/21/2005 2/21/2006 • • CITY OF C LEARWATE R PLANNING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4865 LONG RANGE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW January 18, 2006 Mr. Housh Ghovaee Northside Engineering Services Inc. 601 Cleveland Street, Suite # 930 Clearwater, Florida 33755 RE: Development Order - Case No. FLD2005-08090 - 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Dear Mr. Ghovaee: This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206.D.6 of the Community Development Code. On January 17, 2006, the Community Development Board reviewed your requests for Flexible Development approval to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 1.50 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 44.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.F, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. The Community Development Board (CDB) APPROVED the application with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C. 2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913. 3. The development is compatible with the surrounding area. Conditions of Approval: 1. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB; 2. That a Unity of Title be recorded in the public records prior to the issuance of any permits; 3. That a condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; FRANK HIBBARD, MAYOR BILL. JONSON, VICE,:-MAYOR JOHN DORAN, COUNCILME1%1BER HOYT HAMILTON, COUNCILMEMBER CARI.EN A. N.-TF,RSFN, COUNCI1MEN1BF.R "EQUAL EMPLOYMENTAND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYI?R" 0 0 January 18, 2006 Ghovaee - Page 2 4. That any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building; 5. That boats moored at the docks, lift and/or slips be for the exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the condominiums and not be permitted to be sub-leased separately from the condominiums; 6. That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related . to seawall setbacks; 7. That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting right-of-.way shall be installed along the entire site's street frontages prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior to the commencement of work; 8. That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits; 9. That pool fencing be non-opaque within the waterfront sight visibility triangle; 10. That there be no landscaping (other than sod) within the waterfront sight visibility triangle; 11. That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits; 12. That all utility equipment including but not limited to wireless communication facilities, electrical and gas meters, etc. be screened from view and/or painted to match the building to which they are attached, as applicable prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 13. That site and landscape plans be revised prior to the issuance of any permits showing the existing four-foot wide sidewalk to remain south of the existing asphalt driveway and adjacent to the 12-inch oak tree along Bay Esplanade; 14. That rooftop mechanical equipment be screened from view prior to the issuance of the building permit; and 15. That the retention pond be modified prior to the issuance of any permits to provide a five=foot planting area between the front property line and top of bank. Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of Flexible Development approval (January 17, 2007). All required certificates of occupancy shall be obtained within two years of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do not change with successive owners. The Community Development Coordinator may grant an extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of validity. The Community Development Board may approve one additional extension of time after the community development coordinator's extension to initiate a building permit application. The issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval. Additionally, an appeal of a Level Two approval (Flexible Development) may be initiated pursuant to Section 4-502.B by the applicant or by any person granted party status within 14 days of the date of the CDB meeting. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case expires on January 31, 2006 (14 days from the date of the CDB meeting). r-1 LJ January 18, 2006 Ghovaee - Page 3 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Wayne M. Wells, Planner IIl, at 727-562-4504. You can access zoning information for parcels within the City through our website: www.myclearwater.com/ og v/depts/planning. *Make Us Your Favorite! Sincerely, a% Michael Del , A P Planning Director S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IInactive or Finished Applications Way Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos (MHDR) - ApprovedlBay Esplanade 693-699 Development Order.doc • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Bryan Veilleux [Bryan@northsideengineering.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 11:44 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: 693 Bay Esplanade Revised 1/17/2006 k 8 8 E F a a? R X Y. ? 7.41 'yAtJf;ARY SF.Yf::T. MA.RNOiE. P. U? c is V, ' 5. x14. EL. 0-4 (fi"XP) I 1 /NN. .2' NJu, f f.:Ift F:.• GP ;6 W9} j q SILT FENCE • - Feu i'.d .. .• 1 - q tx u?x, :i ?,'S. N, pw Etc. `. 13 MkNN{il.E --_- _ q 1 i t I N. 13i Irv. F. tC-) i x Irv. _= -rl !a aNr, v E,; W. I\: A.= ?-LSi ;1::`dlhCifx.' .<%7 q ! i ? i MEWRE ON AP q ??P? A q Iq 1 ?1 q r ? 'i !, i 1 1 q m1h7 1 q ? .IIt? i j iN61E I I! I! q Ali 'r?i Y' 1 ? I I i 1 ? II 1 q {, i O"d...S1 E.8m. q Pa I } l 'd. RM OF SAVAPY MkdOlf i _ i .. Tt r. = 3.753 NAV08E 1 NEW TdN q r! ;?. 1 q r i STCViM 3EY0 ti-W OI= t --------- r N. W4 Fie,= 154 "-q- . E. N4. {{'<J• FS) q 14,: 't r'1I, x N89'57'03"E EX. TREES TO E REMOVED i I I 1 ! i q .............._ .................__ ... _._. ............. j RT jaT Ww msstr w?l q I ?/??!&f-'y'i EY F'=n .t ? ? r• x? ? ws ? ? ? ? 1 1/ ??? .rd GM' /' 111 an 1 ev ?e?? 11 A[w e' A/P. a. NPof111219ifD- / - us AfW e]R'RE ? pj GlS% RM/ apEwxwrtc f j X X / SILT FENCE 110.00'RIC; 110•R f 'IE 11.66 ER. E 0 ;ii 1 4.761 1 / ______ I J x l ?\ 1 1 1 I I 1 EX TREE TO BE REMOVED 1 1 i 4. ' --'-\ 4.7 i /?----Er r• Plc mr. f Anr • cx /1 M M AS1Y fi a{' I[f 11 f 1 IENI BIDR. 406^ SECTION NA-A TS_'0 10,17- L A4 Y a ?v,?.,x..w v- m:Q 1;1 c Ar i 'C' FLU DETAIL 1 .. J 1sn mo '- -• F mz cf 9 V ?N O 3 ga W? EB#5936 5. 9 SILT FENCE a• ca M 2 H lipVT INLET SOMERSET STREET-`'r,_,K0c, ,, ?.r ER , UIRERRRo- 6 NOT PP/LRG•81F. xEw wyioalNES ro ¢ xW ww .w- R¢R ro Rpt?Rl_wpiF?W2N A g?¢? mBVRA 9pIA 11TM. SFx¢ r s sTAm' NR wimnF ? RFPIINYfWf mxrRSmR .. 6 MAKER wlM l r/1' L¢MW1¢ ?i m mo'?xr uu wEx T. rw, swi a rwrANto ePnaEiwWC[ m m>n ua sxrES AAa . to REIA ? N z t7 $ o oa NORTH o C) z F a ° L wLL V) (R) Y w SCALE: V-10' QaZ LU L?,I rn 3 5 < 5 ? W 0 C9 V) _ C3.1 0 • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Doreen Williams [Doreen@northsideengineering.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 10:17 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: 693 Bay Esplanade Hope you have a nice LONG weekend and are back all refreshed!!!!!! Somehow we all overlooked the comment on the staff report regarding revising the retention pond to allow for the 5' landscape buffer along the west side of the property. We have done this. I have left a message for Scott so I can meet with him this morning to review. I will e-mail you a pdf file to look at. Are you done with comments for Playa? I need to get these back into you 0 Doreen A. Williams Project Director Northside Engineering Services, Inc. 601 Cleveland Street, Suite 930 Clearwater, FL 33755 Phone: 727-443-2869 / Fax: 446-8036 / Cell: 235-8474 Email: doreen .northsideengineering.com 1/17/2006 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:55 PM To: Renee Ruggiero (E-mail) Cc: Doreen Williams (E-mail) Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Renee - Attached is the Staff Report for the above referenced case scheduled for review by the Community Development Board on Tuesday, January 17, 2006, at 1:00 pm. Wayne Bay Esplanade 693-699 Revised Wells, Wayne From: Doreen Williams [Doreen@northsideengineering.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3:32 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade ABSOLUTELY!!!! -----Original Message----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com [mailto:Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 10, To: Doreen Williams Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, Doreen - 2006 3:19 PM 693-699 Bay Esplanade In regard to 693-699 Bay Esplanade, I have been requested to revise the Staff Report to allow the case to be heard at the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting (which is different than the last email I sent you informing you of the February 21, 2006, CDB meeting). Will you be ready for this case to be discussed at the January 17, 2006, meeting with all of your consultants (Ed Armstrong, et al)? Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Doreen Williams [mailto:Doreen@northsideengineering.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3:14 PM To: Wells, Wayne; Renee Ruggiero Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Per Chief Strong and Robert Fahey, we should be a go to CDB for February on 693 Bay Esplanade and Playa Del Sol. I met with Lenny Rickert and revised our plan for Playa Del Sol showing us tapping into the 16" water line on Bayway. -----Original Message----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com [mailto:Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 10, To: Renee Ruggiero Cc: Doreen Williams Subject: FW: FLD2005-08090, FYI 2006 10:30 AM 693-699 Bay Esplanade > -----Original Message----- > From: Rickard, Leonard > Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 7:46 AM > To: Wells, Wayne > Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade > Wayne, According to Chief Strong and Rob Fahey I can release 693-699 Bay Esplanade and I have cleared it in the computer. Also bcp2005-07071 at 678 S Gulfview Blvd > is being released after Rob's consultation with Jeffrey from Northside and an agreement has been made to tap into a 16" line for the water supply for this project. > -----Original Message----- 1 > From: Wells, Wayne > Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 12:06 PM > To: Rickard, Leonard > Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade > Thanks. Just needed to know, so that I can appropriately deal with the case for the January 17th CDB agenda. Looks like they will need to be continued to the February meeting of the CDB. > -----Original Message----- > From: Rickard, Leonard > Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 8:45 AM > To: Wells, Wayne > Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade > Wayne, No we have not received the calculations as of today. I have not heard from them. > -----Original Message----- > From: Wells, Wayne > Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 7:35 PM > To: Rickard, Leonard > Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade > Lenny - > The above case was continued from the November 15th and December 20th Community Development Board (CDB) meetings to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting. > Has the Fire Department received Fire Flow calculations for this project that are acceptable to the Fire Department? > Let me know as soon as possible, as I am trying to prepare documents for the January 17, 2006, CDB agenda. Thanks. > Wayne 2 0 0 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 10:30 AM To: Renee Ruggiero (E-mail) Cc: Doreen Williams (E-mail) Subject: FW: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade FYI -----Original Message----- From: Rickard, Leonard Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 7:46 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Wayne, According to Chief Strong and Rob Fahey I can release 693-699 Bay Esplanade and I have cleared it in the computer. Also bcp2005-07071 at 678 S Gulfview Blvd is being released after Rob's consultation with Jeffrey from Northside and an agreement has been made to tap into a 16" line for the water supply for this project. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 12:06 PM To: Rickard, Leonard Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Thanks. Just needed to know, so that I can appropriately deal with the case for the January 17th CDB agenda. Looks like they will need to be continued to the February meeting of the CDB. -----Original Message----- From: Rickard, Leonard Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 8:45 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Wayne, No we have not received the calculations as of today. I have not heard from them. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 7:35 PM To: Rickard, Leonard Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Lenny - The above case was continued from the November 15th and December 20th Community Development Board (CDB) meetings to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting. Has the Fire Department received Fire Flow calculations for this project that are acceptable to the Fire Department? Let me know as soon as possible, as I am trying to prepare documents for the January 17, 2006, CDB agenda. Thanks. Wayne 01/G172006" 14: 02 72744686 NORTHSIDE ENG W PAGE 01102 Nofthside CfVIL • LANDSCI. P.L` • . ? ENVIRONMENIA1, • TRANSPORTATION FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: January 3, 2006 TIME: TO: Chief Strong FAX NO: Neil Thompson Wayne Wells OF: 2:05 pm PAGE 1 OF 2 (727) 562-4461 (727) 562-4865 FROM: Angel Haines, Executive Administrative Assistant PROJECT NAME: 693 & 699 Bay E lanade / NES #473 COMMENTS: Fire Protection Letter. PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO CONTACT OUR OFFICE SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THIS PROJECT. 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 T (727) 443.28691F (727) 446-8036 E-MAIL: NESTECH@M..TNDSPRING. COM D ECEME` JAN 3 2nnF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY OF CLEARWATER 01/2006 14:02 7274468 NORTHSIDE ENG S PAGE 02/02 Deo So 05 l l ; 56a FI Shand .8, Williams Inc 7270099 10.2 Ep'gifie!et'ing Plie1fi?SilDlle+13,?__ ' IIRFLC?l3111f?A1 ?#19'll1Be,FS • December 34; 2008 . Mr-'13111 Nagai Au.db, Shand & Williama, rnc.,. XLA. 1M3•US Hilghway 19 North, Suite 1d1 Clearwater, Florida 33764 Re: Somerset Condos Clearwater, " PL EPI #.5259.p0 -non- %No The properties located at 693, and' 699 Bay, Espraftcre in Clesrvvater; Florida, wil! hevz a ifght hazard' fire protection systersl: The 'minimOrn r.oquired fow rate will be ada gpm.. A flow -test 1188 green pcxformed and, the rdsufts aria 6'S psi static, ?5 psi tesidtr l at : 1.040 gph1., The firnnr Vast indicates the dgatcr flow at this site wilf be arlaquata.for the fire. prbteatlon needs of the building, . Piease cell if we oar, be of ft,rther assistance. Very iruly-yours, Engrg Bering' Prafessr'd pals, Inc, diatY Ste und; f?. .1720 W Cleveland.Sbv t Suite rz •. Ta tlps, Rcrlda'33506 (91aj 2si-Bias. FAX (M).M,;146 WwVlwjenbrpros,c m FLD2005-08090 - 693 - 699 B?splanade • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Renee Ruggiero [Renee@northsideengineering.com] Sent: Tuesday,. January 03, 2006 1:59 PM To: Wells, Wayne; Thompson, Neil; Strong, Steve Subject: FLD2005-08090 - 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Good Afternoon Gentlemen - I hope this finds you all well in the New Year ! We have received the Fire Flow Calc required for the above referenced case and it will be faxed to you shortly. I am hoping it is possible to keep this case on the January 17th, 2006 agenda for CDB. Once you have had an opportunity to review the information please provide any necessary direction at your earliest convenience. Thank you, Renee Ruggiero, Project Planner Northside Engineering Services, Inc. T- 727-443-2869 F- 727-446-8036 1/19/2006 9 0 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 5:59 PM To: Doreen Williams (E-mail) Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Rickard, Leonard Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Doreen - On December 20, 2005, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued the above referenced case to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting. By email sent to Renee Ruggiero on December 15, 2005, you were informed of the Fire Department requirement for fire flow calculations/water study prior to being scheduled for the CDB. Based on information from Lenny Rickard with the Fire Department, such required information has not yet been submitted for their review. As such, this case will need to be continued to the February 21, 2006, CDB meeting. Wayne 0 0 it^ < 1 gl'ER? v'??.rraiAtt LONG RANGE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Mr. Housh Ghovaee Northside Engineering Services, Inc. 601 Cleveland Street, Suite 930 Clearwater, FL 33755 December 22, 2005 Re: Community Development Board Meeting (Case No. FLD2005-08090 - 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade) Dear Mr. Ghovaee: The Community Development Board (CDB) at their meeting on December 20, 2005, continued the above referenced request to their January 17, 2006, meeting. The request is for Flexible Development approval to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 46.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.F, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G, for property located at 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade. In accordance with the City's fee schedule, there is a total of $150.00 ($75.00 per continuance - two continuances approved) fee due to the City for your approved request to continue this application to the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting. This fee must be submitted by 4:00 pm on Friday, January 6, 2006. Please remit a check made out to the City of Clearwater. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III, at 727-562- 4504. Sincerely, -.7 9 ,,, ? ?el Planning Director S: IPlanning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD) (Pending caseslUp for the next CDBIBay Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos (MHDR) 1.17.06 CDB - WWIBay Esplanade 693-699 CDB Continuance Letter 12.22.05.doc BRIAN r. AUNGST, MAYOR CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4576 I'ILWK HIBBARD, Vic. MAYOR HO I I-IAMRXON, COUNCILNINNIBER 1311.1JONSON, Cot!NCILmrkts R AML CARLEN A. Pri'r:RSLN, CUUNCII 1i:.%If)LR "FQUAL EMPLOYMENT ANn ArrIIRAIA'I'Ivr. ACl'ION I?MPI.OYr.R" • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 6:01 PM To: Doreen Williams (E-mail) Cc: Renee Ruggiero (E-mail); Jayne Sears (E-mail) Subject: FLD2005-08090 - 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Doreen - Attached is the Staff Report for the above referenced application scheduled for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting. Staff is recommending continuing this application to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting. On the CDB Consent Agenda I have placed the above referenced application in the "Request for Continuance" area of the agenda. Wayne Bay Esplanade 693-699 Staff Re... Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 3:09 PM To: Renee Ruggiero (E-mail) Cc: Thompson, Neil; Strong, Steve; Rickard, Leonard; Keller, James; Rice, Scott Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Renee - The above referenced case was reviewed by the Development Review Committee on September 29, 2005. The Fire Department made the following comment: "Provide Fire Flow Calculations by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure adequate water supply for project. Acknowledge intent PRIOR TO CDB. Calculations due PRIOR TO PERMIT." You acknowledged the requirement in your response letter dated October 6, 2005. This case was scheduled for review by the Community Development Board (CDB) on November 15, 2005. Due to the Staff recommendation, you requested and received a continuance to the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting. This case is requested by Staff to be continued to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting to review the new application material. The following comment from the Fire Department was added to Permit Plan on November 27, 2005: "Provide Fire Flow Calculations / Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply is available and to determine if any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this project. Calculations / Water Study due PRIOR TO CDB. (Previous approved condition voided per Fire Marshal's directions based on Assistant City Managers directive)" This new comment is being forwarded to you to determine compliance with the comment. Any questions should be directed to Steve Strong (562-4327 x3039). Wayne Norths e 5"41"sm,46a 910, • CIVIL • LAND PLANNING • ENVIRONMENTAL • TRANSPORTATION • LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: December 12, 2005 To: Mr. Wayne Wells, Planner III Planning Department 100 S. Myrtle Ave #210 Clearwater, FL 33755 Reference: Somerset Condos / 693-699 Bay Esplanade NES Proj# 473 We Transmit: Enclosed Under Separate Cover Mail UPS Overnight Pick-Up X Hand Delivered Per Your Request For Your Review & Comment X_ For Your Use For Your Approval For Your Files For Your Information x Originals Prints Addendum Shop drawings Specifications Applications Floppy Disk Copies Date Description 15 Sets (4 She ts) of Architectural Pl s Please contact us at (727) 443-2869 should you have any questions or comments. By: e c Admin. Assistant Copies To: FILE N. Pelzer 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NESADMIN@MINDSPRIN6.COM N ESTECH®MI N DS PRI N6.COM 727 • 443 • 2869 FAX 727 • 446 • 8036 Northside CIVIL • LAND PLANNING • ENVIRONMENTAL • TRANSPORTATION • LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: December 9, 2005 To: Mr. Wayne Wells, Planner III Planning Department 100 S. Myrtle Ave #210 Clearwater, FL 33755 Reference: Somerset Condos - 693 & 699 Bay Esplanade NES Proj# 473 We Transmit: Enclosed Mail Pick-Up Per Your Request X For Your Use For Your Files Under Separate Cover UPS Overnight X Hand Delivered For Your Review & Comment For Your Approval For Your Information X Originals X_ Prints Addendum Shop drawings Specifications Applications Floppy Disk Copies Date Description 15 Revised Narratives 15 Reduced Civil and Landscape Plans 15 Sets (4 Sheets) of Civil and Landscape Plans Please contact us at (727) 443-2869 should you have any questions or comments. B: Renee Ruggiero, oje an e Copies To: File N. Pelzer A. Haines 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NE5ADMIN@MINDSPRIN6.COM N ESTECH@MI NDSPRI N6.COM 727 • 443 • 2869 FAX 727 • 446 • 8036 • f CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 LONG RANGE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW November 16, 2005 Mr. Housh Ghovaee Northside Engineering Services, Inc. 601 Cleveland Street, Suite 930 Clearwater, FL 33755 Re: Community Development Board Meeting (Case No. FLD2005-08090 - 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade) Dear Mr. Ghovaee: The Community Development Board (CDB) at their meeting on November 15, 2005, continued the above referenced request to their December 20, 2005, meeting. The request is for Flexible Development approval to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 46.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-4041, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G, for property located at 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade. In accordance with the City's fee schedule, there is a $75.00 continuance fee due to the City. Please remit a check made out to the City of Clearwater. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III, at 727-562- 4504. Sincerely, Michae elk, ICP Planning Director S:IPlanning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending caseslUp for the next CDBIBay Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos (MHDR) 12.20.05 CDB - WMBay Esplanade 693-699 CDB Continuance Letter 11.16.05.doc FRANK HIBBARD, MAYOR Biu. JONSON, VICE-MAYOR JOHN DORAN, COUNCIL MEMBER HOYT HAMILTON, COUNCILMEMBER CAREEN A. PETERSEN, COUNCfI.htE:.,m3F.R "EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRMATNL' ACTION EMPI.OYI?R" 11/14/2005 16:17 727446 6 Hort'nsme Sm6w INC. November 14, 2005 Mr. Wayne Wells Planner City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 S. Myrtle Avenue Clearwater., FL 33756 NORTHSIDE ENG if RE: FLD2005-08090 -- 693-699 Bay Esplanade NES #473 Dear Mr. Wells: PAGE 02/02 CIVIL 4 LAND PLANNING • ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION 0 In regards to the above mentioned project, which is scheduled to be heard at the November 15, 2005 Community Development Board (CDB) meeting, we are requestilig for a continuance to the December 20, 2005 CDB meeting. If there are any additional comments or concerns, please contact our office. Sincerely, 6?4? R Doreen A. Williams Project Director 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NE5ADM1WPMIND5PRIN6.COM NESTECHOuMIND$PRING.COM 727 • 443 - ?869 FAX 727 - 446 • 8036 11114/2005 16:17 727446 NORTHSIDE ENG PAGE 01/02 Northside Cmi, • LANDSCAPE • 4" 5"w z", '70m. ENVIRONMENTAL • TRANSPORTATION FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 1.4, 2005 TO: Wayne Wells OF : TIME: FAX NO: 4:25 pm 562-4865 PAGE I OF 2 FROM: Angel Haines, Executive Administrative Assistant PROJECT NAME: 693 Bay Esplanade COMMENTS: Request for continuance. PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO CONTACT OUR OFFICE SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING THIS PROJECT. 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 T (727) 443.28691x' (727) 446-8036 E-,M.A.1L:.NFSTECH@M1NDSPR1NG. COM L J r1 ?J Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 11:47 AM To: Renee Ruggiero (E-mail) Cc: 'LindaC@jpfirm.com' Subject: Staff Reports for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting Renee - Attached are the Staff Reports for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting for the following cases: 1. FLD2005-08088, 685 - 689 Bay Esplanade; and 2. FLD2005-08090, 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade. To be placed on the consent agenda for this meeting, please indicate to me by noon, Monday, November 14, 2005, that the conditions of approval for Case No. FLD2005-08088 are acceptable. Thanks. Wayne e? e? Bay Esplanade Bay Esplanade 685-689 Staff Re... 693-699 Staff Re... Message . • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Linda Cunningham [LindaC@jpfirm.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 1:46 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Peter Meroli - Bay Esplanade Hi Wayne Wells, Ed asked me to email you and let you know that he represents Peter Meroli regarding his properties located at 685 Bay Esplanade and 693 Bay Esplanade. Ed would like a staff report for both when they are ready. Please email me or fax me the staff reports and I will forward them to Ed when you are all set to send them Thanks Wayne, Linda Cunningham Secretary to Ed Armstrong LindaC@jpfirm.com 727-461-1818,ext. 2155 727-462-0365 fax IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE To the extent this email contains federal tax advice, such advice was not intended to be used, and cannot be used by any taxpayer, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. If you would like us to prepare written tax advice designed to provide penalty protection, please contact us and we will be happy to discuss the matter with you in more detail. 11/9/2005 • • "j ?rE?,_+,? LONG RANGE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Mr. Housh Ghovaee Northside Engineering Services Inc. 601 Cleveland Street, Suite # 930 Clearwater, Florida 33755 Re: Community Development Board Meeting (Case No. FLD2005-08090) Dear Mr. Ghovaee: November 3, 2005 The Case No. FLD2005-08090 for Flexible Development approval to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 46.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.F, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G, for property located at 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade, has been scheduled to be reviewed by the Community Development Board on November 15, 2005. The meeting will take place at 1:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 3`d floor of City Hall at 112 S. Osceola Avenue, Clearwater. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 727-562-4504. Sincerely, WaM. Wells, AICP Yn Planner III S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending caseslUp for the next CDBIBay Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos (MHDR) 11.15.05 CDB - WWIBay Esplanade 693-699 CDB Letter. doc FRANK HIBBARD, MAYOR ITY OF C LEA.RWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 BIL1. JONSON, VICE-MAYOR JOHN DORAN, COUNCILMEMBER HOYT HAMILTON, COUNCINMPMBER CARLEN A. PETFRSFN, COUNCILMEMBER "EQUAL. EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRMATIVii ACTION EMPLOYER" CIVIL e LAND PLANNING A ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION A October 6 2005 Mr. Wayne Wells Planner City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 S. Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 RE: FLD2005-08090 - 693 Bay Esplanade - DRC Response NES #0473 Dear Mr. Wells: Listed below are our responses to the Development Review meeting held on September 29, 2005. General Engineering 1. Show dimensions of all parking spaces on the plan. All parking space dimensions are shown on plans 2. Sidewalk shall be constructed one-foot from property line in accordance with City Index 109, Sheet 3 of 3. Acknowledged and revised. The above to be addressed prior to CDB. Prior to Building Permit: 1. Either relocate F.H.A. and unrestricted fire line serving hydrant into street right-of-way or dedication of and easement to the City of Clearwater will be required to be recorded prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. Acknowledged. 2. Sidewalk construction shall be consistent with City of Clearwater Contract Specifications and Standards Index #109 and FDOT Roadway and Traffic Design Standards, Detail #304. Acknowledged and revised. 3. All unused driveways shall be removed at applicant's expense, curb replaced and unimproved surfaces resodded. Acknowledged. Prior to CO: 1. The condominium plat for "Somerset Condominiums" shall be recorded by Pinellas County. Acknowledged. General Note: DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review, additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application Environmental 1. Dry Detention systems must contain a grassed bottom and designed with no steeper than 4:1 side slope. Provide cross-section for the pond(s). See attached cross-section of proposed pond on Sheet C3.1. 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NESADMIN@MINDSPRING.COM Pagel of7 N ESTECH@MI NDSPRI NG.COM 727 - 443 - 2869 FAX 727 - 446 - 8036 ORIGINAL o OCT0620055 SVGS ORIGINAL Fire 1. By order of Chief of Construction, NO APPROVALS on Bay Esplanade, Skiff Point, Brightwater, until water supply is improved. All questions regarding this fire comment should be addressed to Chief of Construction S. C. Strong who can be reached at 727-562-4327 ext 3039. PRIOR TO PERMIT. Architect acknowledges and per telephone conversation with the Chief of Construction, Clearwater will run water lines as needed. 2. Show location of fire hydrant for fire fighting use. Must be within 300' of building as hose lays and on same side of street as building. This is in addition to the one for fire systems. PRIOR TO CDB. See Sheet C3.1 for location. 3. An automatic Class I standpipe system with a Fire Pump is required. 100psi at roof is required. Fire Pump to be located above BFE. PRIOR TO CDB. See architectural plans for information. 4. An emergency generator is required as a back up source of power for elevators and fire pump. Must be located above BFE. Emergency lighting should also be connected. PRIOR TO CDB. Electrical Room/Generator Room has been added to floor plans for 1s` and 2nd floors and will be above BFE. 5. Standpipe connection for dock area must be connected to fire pump/wet standpipe system. Acknowledge PRIOR TO CDB. See Sheet C3.1 for location. 6. Provide Fire Flow Calculations by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure adequate water supply for project. Acknowledge intent PRIOR TO CDB. Calculations due PRIOR TO PERMIT. Acknowledged. Land Resource 1. Show the two palm trees on the north property line to be preserved prior to building permit. See Sheet C2.1for retention note. 2. Show the existing 4' sidewalk to remain south of the existing asphalt driveway and adjacent to the 12" oak tree prior to building permit. Acknowledged. Landscanine 1. Northern edge of the pavement must be curbed, similar to other edges. See Sheet C2.1 for revision. 2. Per Section 3-1202.D.2, Front slopes of stormwater retention areas may comprise up to 50 percent of any required landscape buffer width, provided that the slope is 4:1 or flatter and all required shrub plantings are not more than six inches below the top of the bank and provided that the buffer width is at least five feet in width. There is only a three-foot flat area provided from the front property line to the top of bank. Provide a cross section that shows compliance with this provision. Landscape narrative has been revised to address a 2' reduction in the landscape buffer adjacent to the pond. Also, see C3.1 for pond cross section. 3. As part of the Comprehensive Landscape Program application, indicate requirements are being requested to be waived or modified. See revised Ian for request information. Paget of 7 what landscape scape narrative 4. Sheet L 1.1 - Revise Landscaping Note #8, as the minimum size of trees at time of planting is 10- foot tall and 2.5-inch caliper. See Sheet L1.1 for revision. Landscaping 1. See sheet Ll.land C2.1 indicating "Fencing maximum height 48" and landscaping maximum height 36" within water sight triangles. 2. Curbing has been installed to protect from cars. See Sheet C2.1. 3. Plant material has been revised. See landscape plan. Parks and Recreation 1. A recreation facility impact fee of $200 is due for each new residential unit prior to the issuance of building permit or final plat (if applicable) whichever occurs first. Credit will be given for any existing residential units. Contact Art Kader at 727-562-4824. Acknowledged. Stormwater The following to be addressed prior to building permit: 1. The applicant is to provide a copy of an approved SWFWMD permit for the proposed site. So noted. 2. Show how post-development runoff is directed to stormwater pond. Pond top of bank lowered to allow sheet flow from open space into pond. Inlet added to collect runoff from parking area. Note added to direct roof drains into proposed pond. Solid Waste 1. Show where recycling carts will be placed for resident use (each cart makes a 3'x3' footprint). The Developer/Association will pay in lieu of recycling. Traffic Engineering 1. Correct directional pavement arrows to be a 2-way bi-directional traffic instead of one-way. Acknowledged and revised 2. Relocate handicap parking space close to elevator. Met with Ben Elbo w/ Traffic prior to final development of plan and submittal. Traffic had no objection, providing plan included marked walkway. 3. All parking spaces must meet City standard parking dimensions 9 feet wide by 19 feet long with a 24 feet drive aisle. Proposed parking meets the minimum City standard dimensions. See revised site plans. 4. Motorist's line of sight must not be blocked when backing out of parking space(s). Mirrors added to provide clear line of sight. Acknowledge that the vertical clear height for parking garage (entrance, route, and exit to and from h/c parking space must be a minimum of 8 feet 2 inches (8' 2' ccnmmQdate h/c van r[E Architect added clear height dimension of 9' to plans. D Page3 of 7 OAT 0 U2005 L9 W?uvW OCT 0 6 2005 L PLANNIN(' , R f)r-vPj nDAACKrrelMC O R I G I N A L All of the above to be addressed prior to CDB. General note: Comply with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule. Planning 1. Residential Infill Project criteria #2 - Provide the value of the site after all site and building improvements are constructed. The value of the property is estimated at $9,600,000.00 upon completion. 2. Revise first page of the application to revise Parcel # 05/29/15/54756/076/0020 to Parcel #05/29/15/54756/076/0011. The parcel number on the first page of the application has been revised. 3. Sheet C2.1 - Provide the dimension from the front property line of Somerset Street to the closest edge of pavement (without the radius; just from the edge of pavement extended). Parking space has been removed. See revised Sheet C2.1. 4. Sheet C2.1 - Minimum width of parking spaces is nine feet (no compact spaces). Acknowledged and revised. 5. In accordance with City Council directives, Staff will not support any building height over 35 feet for this parcel. 6. Staff will not support any reduction to the 10-foot side (north) setback and 10-foot landscape buffer along the north property line. One parking space has been deleted and reduces encroachment area substantially. Also, fence has been added to provide additional buffering. 7. Recommend the installation/construction of a six-foot high solid fence along the north property line (reduced to a maximum of three feet high within the 25-foot front setback), with a maximum four-foot high non-opaque fence within the waterfront visibility triangle and east setback. Fence has been added to site plan as per recommendation. 8. Indicate the location, height and type of fencing for the pool on Sheet C2.1. Fence has been added to C2.1 9. Potential condition of approval: That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB. Acknowledged. 10. Potential condition of approval: That a Unity of Title be recorded in the public records prior to the issuance of any permits. Acknowledged. 11. Potential condition of approval: That future signage meet the requirements of the Code and any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height, designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building. Acknowledged. 12. Potential condition of approval: That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting right-of-way shall be installed along the entire site's street frontages prior to Page4 of 7 • ORIGINAL the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior to the commencement of work. Acknowledged. 13. Potential condition of approval: That a condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. Acknowledged. 14. Potential condition of approval: That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits. Acknowledged. 15. Potential condition of approval: That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits. Acknowledged. 16. Potential condition of approval: That boats moored at the docks be for the exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the condominiums and not be permitted to be sub-leased separately from the condominiums. Acknowledged. 17. Potential condition of approval: That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks. Acknowledged. 18. Sheet C3.1 - Revise title on the right side to read "Grading, Drainage & Utilities Site Plan." Revised. 19. Show visibility triangle at street intersection on Sheets C2.1 and Ll.1. Revised. 20. Strongly recommend providing two parking spaces per unit. Acknowledge recommendation. However, proposed number of parking spaces meets or exceeds current code. 21. Sheet C1.1 - Revise the "Parking Calculations" at the bottom of the Site Data table to read "8 units @ 1.5 spaces..." rather than "8 units 2 1.5..." Revised. 22. Need to remove existing driveways/parking areas within the Bay Esplanade right-of-way and sod. Acknowledged. 23. Remove proposed upright curbing from the Somerset right-of-way. Curbing also interferes with the trash staging area. Acknowledged. 24. In lieu of the water feature on the west side, suggest a special landscape feature instead. Suggestion acknowledged, Developer prefers to move forward with proposed water feature. 25. Elevations - Elevator machine room appears as a square box on top of the structure with a flat roof, lacking the detail that the stair tower does. Suggest relocating the elevator machine room to be part of the stair tower with a pitched roof. Revised plan provides a pitched roof as suggested. 26. Elevations - Most balconies appear to be a solid, stuccoed wall with a railing on top. The east elevation is not as detailed as to what is proposed regarding the balcony. The balcony extends across the full width of the building but is unclear as to whether the balcony edge is a solid, ? ccned wall or simnl ra'ht_ %_ Revise. Simple railing, see revised elevation. L?WMUV n ocTUS20055 Pagel of 7 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SVCS r1r" r%c rrl r. LA" NATFQ 9 0 ORIGINAL 27. Elevations - It is unclear if there are any parapets extending above the roof deck, except at the corners of the building. It is noted that the a/c units are to be located on the top of the building, but no screening of these units appears to be provided (usually screened by the parapets). Advise/revise. See elevation for noted parapet. 28. Unclear why the mailboxes are proposed in the open air area of the parking garage. Mailboxes are generally placed inside the lobby area. Advise. Mailboxes have been moved to the lobby. See revised site plans. 29. Elevations - Clarify that the sides of the chimneys (as seen on the east and west elevations) are stucco, rather than a stone finish. The sides of the chimneys are stone finish, see revised elevations. 30. Based on the floor plans submitted, the rear balconies extend to the edge of the rear stairwell. However, the south and north elevations do not indicate such, except for the 4th floor. Revise/advise. Roofs have been added to the first and second floor plan. See Revised. Additionally, the east elevation indicates a tiled overhang/roof structure at the first floor level, extending approximately 4 feet from the main structure, as indicated on the east elevation. This overhang/roof structure is not indicated on the 1st floor plan, nor on the site plans for the overhang/roof structure as a dashed line. Revise/advise. Architect revised plans Following items addressed through revised narrative(s) 31. General Applicability criteria #I response: Ensure the accuracy of the height of the single family dwellings, stated at between 30 and 40 feet, based on the Base Flood Elevation and the measurement of height (to flat roof deck or to midpoint of a pitched roof). Acknowledged. 32. Residential Infill Project criteria #1 response: Provide detailed justification as to HOW the redevelopment of this site is "otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards." "Benefits to the community" are not a justification. 33. Residential Infill Project criteria #4 response: Provide detailed information as to HOW the proposal is "compatible with adjacent land uses." 34. Residential Infill Project criteria #6 response: The single family development to the north is zoned Low Medium Density Residential District, not Medium High Density Residential District. 35. Residential Infill Project criteria #7 response: Provide a detailed justification as to HOW "flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking" benefit the community character of the immediate vicinity and the City of Clearwater as a whole. The response does not address the flexibility requested. 36. Based on the site plan and the building elevations, unclear how this proposal is complying with the attached dwelling criteria which requires the screening of off-street parking from adjacent parcels and streets by a landscaped wall or fence of at least four feet in height. Advise/revise. Fence being added to site plan as requested previously in this document. Page6 of 7 OCT062005 PLANNING & OEVt l,OPMFNT;,VCS CITY OF Qtk ?MIAMR,- 4 0 37. Address through the Residential Infill Project criteria HOW this proposal complies with the attached dwelling criteria for front setback reductions: a. The existing structures along the same side of the road have been constructed with irregular setbacks and the proposed reduction in front setback will not be out of character with the neighborhood; and b. The extent to which existing structures in the neighborhood have been constructed to a regular or uniform set back from the right of way. If there are any additional comments or concerns, please contact our office. 2 erely, e e M. Ruggiero Project Planner Pagel of 7 Horthside CIVIL • LAND PLANNING • O ^ K I G ENVIRONMENTAL • IffAsURTATION • LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: October 6. 2005 To: Sherry L. Watkins, Administrative Analyst City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 S. Myrtle Ave, #210 Clearwater, FL 33756 Reference: 693 Bay Esplanade / Somerset Condos NES Proj# 0473 We Transmit: X Enclosed Under Separate Cover Mail UPS Overnight Pick-Up X Hand Delivered p GCS[E OUCE OCT 0 6 2005 PLAs l ll DQ E vrJfENTSVGS X Originals X_ Prints Addendum Shop drawings Specifications X Applications Floppy Disk Please contact us at (12 /) 443-2669 should you have any questions or comments. Copies To: FILE 6y: N. PELZER ee Ruggiero, Project l ne A.HAINES 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NESADMIN@MINDSPRIN6.COM NESTECH@MINDSPRING.COM 727 • 443 • 2869 FAX 727 • 446 • 8036 0 0 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 1:26 PM To: Doreen Williams (E-mail) Subject: Draft 9.29.05 DRC comments Doreen - Attached are the draft DRC comments for the following cases (with the DRC time): 1. FLD2005-08086, 405 Island Way (1:30 pm) 2. FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade (1:35 pm) 3. FLD2005-08088, 685-689 Bay Esplanade (2:00 pm) The other two cases on S. Gulfview Blvd. are forthcoming. Wayne It, Lw draft 9.29.05 dre draft 9.29.05 dre draft 9.29.05 dre action agend... action agend... action agend... Clearwater September 05, 2005 Housh Ghovaee 601 Cleveland Street Suite 930 Clearwater, Fl 33755 0 CITY OF CLAARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE: (727) 562-4567 FAX: (727) 562-4576 W W W.MYCLEAR WATER.COM RE: FLD2005-08090 -- 693 BAY ESPLANADE -- Letter of Completeness Dear Housh Ghovaee : The Planning Staff has entered your application into the Department's filing system and assigned the case number: FLD2005-08090. After a preliminary review of the submitted documents, staff has determined that the application is Complete. The Development Review Committee (DRC) will review the application for sufficiency on September 29, 2005, in the Planning Department conference room - Room 216 - on the second floor of the Municipal Services Building. The building is located at 100 South Myrtle Avenue in downtown Clearwater. Please call Sherry Watkins, Administrative Analyst, at 727-562-4582 no earlier than one week prior to the meeting date for the approximate time that your case will be reviewed. You or your representative (as applicable) must be present to answer any questions that the DRC may have regarding your application. Additional comments may be generated by the DRC at the time of the meeting. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 727-562-4504 or Wayne.Wells@myclearwater.com. Sincerely yours, kol rl- H. k4% Wayne Wells, AICP Planner III Lefler of Completeness - FLD2005-08090 - 693 BAY ESPLANADE 10 0 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 9:01 AM To: Doreen Williams (E-mail) Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Doreen - Attached is the Letter of Completeness for the above referenced case. Please pick up the original when you come over on Tuesday with other case. Wayne letter of )mpleteness 9.5.05, Horthside September 2, 2005 Mr. Wayne Wells Planner III City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 S. Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 CIVIL • LAND PLANNING • ENVIRONMENTAL • TRANSPORTATION • SEA' 0 2 2005 ? 1.` ? is a.i k13A;..EY .. RE: FLD2005-08090 -- 693 BAY ESPLANADE -- Letter of Incompleteness NES #473 Dear Mr. Wells: Please find listed below responses to the letter of incompleteness dated August 30, 2005. 1. An original, signed and sealed survey has been provided. See attached. 2. The site plans provide a tree survey (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size [DBH 4" or greater], and location, including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed). See attached. 3. Elevation plan now indicates that all mechanical equipment shall be roof mounted. 4. Floor plans have been provided. See attached. 5. There are no outdoor lighting fixtures planned at this time. 6. A reduced (8 V 2X 11) site plan has been provided. See attached. 7. The proposed colors (in written form) of the exterior building elements on the building elevations and color samples/chips have been provided. Also, larger colored to scale elevations are provided. See attached. 8. A reduced (8 %2 X 11) landscape plan has been provided. See attached. 9. Roof building dimensions have been provided on the elevation plans. See attached. 10. The Residential Infill Project application narrative indicates what landscape requirements are being requested to be waived or modified. See attached. This should satisfy the incompleteness of the above project. If you have any additional comments, please feel free to call. Renee Ruggiero Project Planner 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NESADMIN@MINDSPRINC.COM NESTECHQMINDSPRIN6.COM 727 • 443 • 2869 FAX 727 • 446 • 8036 ORIGINAL Northside CIVIL • LAND PLANNING • ENVIRONMENTAL • TRANSPORTATION • LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: To: September 2, 2005 Sherry Watkins, Administrative Analyst 100 S. Myrtle Ave Clearwater, FL 33755 D Reference: NES Proj# We Transmit: 693 Bay Esplanade 473 Enclosed Mail Pick-Up Per Your Request X For Your Use For Your Files Under Separate Cover UPS Overnight X Hand Delivered For Your Review & Comment For Your Approval For Your Information ,C? 0 2 2005 X Originals X_ Prints Addendum Shop drawings Specifications Applications Floppy Disk Please contact us at (727) 443-2869 should you have any questions or comments. B ? R ?ee ?e 601 CLEVELAND 5YREE T o?3P?ojectPlanner CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 N E5ADM1 N@MI N D5PR1 NG.COM NESTECH@MINDSPRING.COM 727 • 443 • 2869 FAX 727 • 446 • 8036 FILE N. Pelzer A. Haines ORIGINAL CITY OF CLEIRRWATER ' Clearwatelp PLANNING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 0 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE: (727) 562-4567 FAX: (727) 562-4576 W WW.MYCLEARWATER.COM August 30, 2005 Housh Ghovaee 601 Cleveland Street Suite 930 Clearwater, Fl 33755 RE: FLD2005-08090 -- 693 BAY ESPLANADE -- Letter of Incompleteness Dear Housh Ghovaee : The Planning Staff has entered your application into the Department's filing system and assigned the case number: FLD2005-08090. After a preliminary review of the submitted documents, staff has determined that the application is Incomplete with the following comments. 1. Provide one original signed and sealed survey (could not find original). 2. Provide a TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size [DBH 4" or greater], and location, including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed). 3. Indicate the location of all outside mechanical equipment and all required screening (if on roof, indicate such in a note). J 4. Provide floor plans (if each floor is typical, need to indicate typical for each floor). f 5. Indicate the location of all outdoor lighting fixtures. 1 6. Provide REDUCED SITE PLAN to scale (8 ''/Z X 11) and color rendering if possible. 7. Provide the proposed colors of the exterior building elements on the building elevations (in written form). Provide color samples/chips of the proposed exterior building colors. Provide the color rendered west elevation at the same scale as depicted on the elevation sheet (colored west elevation submitted too small). 8. Provide REDUCED LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8 V 2X 11) (color rendering if possible). ?I 9. Provide on the building elevation sheet the height of the building from BFE to the highest roof deck (assumed to be flat roof), the height of perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and the height of elevator and stair towers and chimneys (from roof deck), including a dimension from finished grade to BFE. As part of the Comprehensive Landscape Program application, indicate what landscape requirements are being requested to be waived or modified. Section 4-202 of the Community Development Code states that if an application is deemed incomplete, the deficiencies of the application shall be specified by Staff. No further development review action shall be taken until the deficiencies are corrected and the application is deemed complete. Please resubmit by 4:00 pm on Friday, September 2, 2005. Letter of Incompleteness - FLD2005-08090 - 693 BAYESPLANADE LL CITY OF CLF*RWATER Clearwater PLANNING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE: (727) 562-4567 FAX: (727) 562-4576 WW W.MYCLEARWATER.COM August 30, 2005 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 727-562-4504 or Wayne.Wells@myclearwater.com. Si cerely yours, M .G? u7Wells WaYn Planner III Letter of Incompleteness - FLD2005-08090 - 693 BAY ESPLANADE 0 0 . Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 7:52 PM To: Doreen Williams (E-mail) Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Doreen - Attached is a Letter of Incompleteness for the above referenced project. The original is being mailed. Wayne letter of completeness 8.30., Northside CIVIL • LAND PLANNING • S,,? we" Jmtui?ed ENVIRONMENTAL • ????'' TRANSPORTATION • ORIGINAL LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL f i 3 i cz Date: August 25; 2005 D LAUS ? To: Sherry L. Watkins Administrative Analyst City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 S. Myrtle Ave, #21o 2.5 2005 Clearwater, FL 33756 PLANNING & DE'. r;;- . ?_.. CITY i:.' Reference: Somerset Condos/693 & 699 Bay Esplanade NES Proj# 0473 We Transmit: X Originals X_ Prints X Enclosed Under Separate Cover Addendum Mail UPS Overnight Shop drawings Pick-Up X Hand Delivered Specifications X Applications Floppy Disk M. 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NESADMIN@MINDSPRING.COM N ESTECH@MI N DS PRI NG.COM 727 - 443 • 2869 FAX 727 • 446 - 8036 / Copies to: FILE Pelzer I7Yt Haines ALTS 2 5 2005 PLTUti(\ -4.Gk Wells, Way ne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 9:47 AM To: Bill Woods (E-mail) Cc: Kurleman, Scott; Clayton, Gina Subject: 685-689 and 693-699 Bay Esplanade Bill - As a courtesy to you, please be aware that the upland development approvals for the Flexible Development approval to construct attached dwellings (condominiums) under Case Nos. FLD2005-08088 and FLD2005-08090 have ex fired due to failure to submit building permits to construct the improvements contemplated under those applications. As the docks approved under FLD2007-03007 were accessory to the upland attached dwellings and Condition #2 stated "That vertical building construction of the upland development (FLD2005-08088 and FLD2005-08090) commence prior to the issuance of dock permits," the Flexible Development approval for the docks at these addresses under FLD2007-03007 has expired. When similar upland projects expire, we will also try to remember to send you a courtesy email informing you (if you were the applicant) of such expiration of the dock approvals. Wayne M. Wells, A/CP Planner I I I City of Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756-5520 Phone: 727-562-4504 Fax: 727-562-4865 MEMORANDUM TO: Community Development Board FROM: Wayne M. Wells, AICP Planner III ,? RE: Request for Time Extension Yv1 " I U FLD2005-08090 - 693-699 Bay Esplanade DATE: March 19, 2007 0 Attached is information related to the request by Kathy Ziola of Somerset Inc., on behalf of Peter Pan Developments LLC, for an extension of time relative to the above referenced project located at 693-699 Bay Esplanade. A one-year extension is being requested which would expire on May 17, 2008. Pursuant to Section 4-407 of the Community Development Code, extensions of time "shall be for good cause shown and documented in writing." The Code further delineates that good cause "may include but are not limited to an unexpected national crisis (acts of war, significant downturn in the national economy, etc.), excessive weather-related delays, and the like." In this particular case, the applicant has indicated that the project is being delayed for economic reasons as it relates to deteriorating market conditions. It should be noted that, pursuant to Section 4-407, the Planning Director has previously granted a four-month extension. The Code further directs that the Community Development Board may consider whether significant progress on the project is being made and whether or not there are pending or approved code amendments which would significantly affect the project. It should be noted by the Board that in the intervening period subsequent to the original approval, the Code has been amended in the following that affect this project: 1. The requirement for parking has been amended to two parking spaces per unit. This project was approved with 13 parking spaces for eight attached dwelling units, at a parking ratio of 1.625 parking spaces per dwelling unit. 2. Beach by Design has been revised for the "Old Florida District" to require a minimum front setback of 15 feet (South: 11 feet [to building and pavement] and zero feet [to trash staging area]) and a minimum side setback of 10 feet (North: 3.1 feet [to pavement]; East: zero feet [to pool deck]) and building stepbacks for buildings exceeding 35 feet in height (none provided under FLD2005-08090). Attachments: Letter of Request Time Extension Development Order December 1, 2006 Maps and Photos S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)Wending cases)Up for the next CDBIBay Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos WHDR) - Approved - 4.17.07 - WWIBay Esplanade 693-699 Time Extension Memorandum for 4.17.07 CDB.doc a oqlfl 0 N FLD2005-08090 693 BAY ESPLANADE SOMERSET CONDOS PLANNER OF RECORD: WW ATLAS # 258A ZONING: MHDR LAND USE: RH RECEIVED: 08/25/2005 INCOMPLETE: COMPLETE: MAPS: PHOTOS: STAFF REPORT: DRC : CDB: CLW CoverSheet Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 10:21 AM To: 'mark.andrew.smith@smithbarney.com' Subject: Bay Esplanade docks Mark - Attached are preliminary plans and emails regarding proposed docks adjacent to your house. Dock provisions in our Code are under Section 3-601. You may find these on our website (myclearwater.com) by following the links to the Community Development Code. Call me or email me with any questions you may have (or if you can't find the link to the Code when you go to our website). Wayne Proposed Proposed Email to & from S. Email to S. Bagley •eliminary dock desi;eliminary dock desi. Bagley re p... re M. Quill... Potential conditions for FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade 1. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB; 2. That a Unity of Title be recorded in the public records prior to the issuance of any permits; 3. That a condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 4. That any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building; 5. That boats moored at the docks, lift and/or slips be for the exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the condominiums and not be permitted to be sub- leased separately from the condominiums; 6. That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks; 7. That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting right-of-way shall be installed along the entire site's street frontages prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior to the commencement of work; 8. That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits; 9. That pool fencing be non-opaque within the waterfront sight visibility triangle; 10. That there be no landscaping (other than sod) within the waterfront sight visibility triangle; 11. That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits; 12. That all utility equipment including but not limited to wireless communication facilities, electrical and gas meters, etc. be screened from view and/or painted to match the building to which they are attached, as applicable prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 13. That site and landscape plans be revised prior to the issuance of any permits showing the existing four-foot wide sidewalk to remain south of the existing asphalt driveway and adjacent to the 12-inch oak tree along Bay Esplanade; 14. That rooftop mechanical equipment be screened from view prior to the issuance of the building permit; and 15. That the retention pond be modified prior to the issuance of any permits to provide a five-foot planting area between the front property line and top of bank. • ORIGINA1 CDB Meeting Date Case Number: Agenda Item: Owner/Applicant: Representative: Addresses: January 17, 2006 FLD2005-08090 D2 Peter Pan Developments LLC (Panaviotis Vasiloudes and Petrit Meroli) Mr. Housh Ghovaee, Northside Engineering Services, Inc. 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVISED STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a r-eduetie to the side (nei4 ` sethaek ffem 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to , a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 46.83 44.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.F, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area); and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) the nefth pr-apet4y line from 10 feet te 3.1 feet (to ,asa Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3- 1202.G. (Note: Stfilethfough [deleted] and underlining [new] are changes from that originally requested.) EXISTING ZONING/ Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District; Residential LAND USE: Facilities High (RFH) Category PROPERTY SIZE: 0.30 acres PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Attached dwellings (five apartments) Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (eight condominiums) Revised Staff Report - Community Development Board - January 17, 2006 Case FLD2005-08090 -Page 1 of 10 i • ADJACENT ZONING/ North: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District; LAND USES: Detached dwellings East: Preservation District; Clearwater Harbor South: Tourist District; Overnight accommodation uses West: Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District; Attached dwellings CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY: The area to the west and south is a mixture of attached dwellings and overnight accommodation uses. Detached dwellings are located to the north and northwest in a single family area not part of Beach by Design. UPDATE: This case was continued at the applicant's request at the November 15, 2005, Community Development Board (CDB) meeting to the December 20, 2005 meeting in order to address Staff concerns. While there was some initial Staff discussion with the applicant after the November 15th CDB meeting regarding how the site and building plans were going to be revised, revised site and building plans were submitted in mid-December. In order to provide Staff adequate time to review the revised proposal, in light of our recommendation, Staff requested, and the CDB granted, a continuance to the January 17, 2005, meeting of the CDB. ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 0.30 acres is located at the northeast corner of Bay Esplanade and Somerset Street. The site is a parallelogram corner lot with dimensions of 110 feet deep by 120 feet wide. The site is currently developed with a total of five apartments. All existing buildings and other site improvements will be demolished. Properties to the west and south are developed with a mixture of attached dwellings and overnight accommodation uses. The area to the north is developed with detached dwellings in the Low Medium Density Residential District (which is not part of Beach by Design). This site is located in the "Old Florida" District of Beach by Design. Many properties within this District are undergoing change, where the existing developments are being demolished and new attached dwelling buildings will be constructed. Proposal: The proposal includes the construction of an eight-unit residential building 44.83 feet tall (to roof deck). Two dwellings per floor with approximately 2,227 square feet of living area each are proposed on four floors. A total of 12 parking spaces are proposed, located under the building. A hot tub is proposed to the east of the building adjacent to the seawall. The proposal includes a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet and reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Revised Staff Report - Community Development Board - January 17, 2006 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 2 of 10 9 .0 Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street. The site is at the northern edge of the "Old Florida" District of Beach by Design. The lot area and width reduction is complicated by the applicant being unable to obtain any additional land area or lot width due to its location at the edge of the "Old Florida" District of Beach by Design, as the detached dwelling area to the north is not part of Beach by Design and is zoned Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District. Additionally, the site is a corner lot bounded by City rights-of-way, which will not be vacated (Bay Esplanade on the west and Somerset Street on the south), and there is water (Clearwater Harbor) located to the east of the site. A reduction to the lot area and lot width requirements appears appropriate, so long as site design is acceptable. The proposal includes a request for a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to hot tub deck). The design of the proposed building includes a water feature in the center of the building facing Bay Esplanade, extending three feet from the base of the building. The building otherwise meets the minimum 25-foot front setback from, and has been designed parallel with, Bay Esplanade. The lot is a parallelogram, which creates angles to the north and south sides of the rectangular building in relation to lot lines. The building meets the required 10-foot side setback, being located 10.3 feet from the north property line at its northeast corner and approximately 18 feet at its northwest corner. The pavement for the parking area under the building meets the required 10-foot side setback to the north property line. Due to the angles created with the building parallel on the lot with Bay Esplanade, the proposal includes a reduction to the front setback adjacent to Somerset Street of 11 feet to the southwest corner of the building. Somerset Street dead-ends at the east side of this property: With the placement of the building and the angles of property lines, the southeast corner of the building is located 19.5 feet from the Somerset Street property line. With regard to the front setback reduction from Somerset Street related to the trash staging area, the building will have a refuse collection room on the ground floor within the parking garage. Dumpsters will be rolled out to the staging area on collection days. The location of the trash staging area within the front setback is necessary to eliminate the necessity of the trash truck coming on-site and is common with many newer developments. This proposal includes a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to hot tub deck). Current development practices place the pool/hot tub area adjacent to the waterside of the property, which is generally the most private area of the property, with a pool/hot tub deck at a zero setback. The Community Development Board has approved other properties along the water within the "Old Florida" District with a pool/hot tub in a similar location and setback as this proposal. These proposed front and side setbacks are consistent with the setbacks approved for similar projects within this "Old Florida" District to the south, however, the setbacks must be reviewed in light of compatibility issues (see discussion below). The proposal includes a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area). As stated above regarding the setback reduction for the trash staging area, its location at the property line and within the street landscape buffer is one of necessary function. It is noted the applicant proposes a solid fence along the north property line to assist landscape buffering. The requested reduction to the buffer Revised Staff Report - Community Development Board - January 17, 2006 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 3 of 10 for the retention pond is in response to Section 3-1202.D.2 that requires a minimum five-foot planting area for landscape materials when retention ponds and the slopes of such ponds are located within perimeter buffers. Rather than redesign the retention pond to meet the requirements of the Code, the applicant chose to request a reduction to the buffer planting area, which Staff objects to this reduction. The proposal includes 12 parking spaces, which meets the minimum parking requirement when this application was filed and reviewed (Code has now been amended to require two parking spaces per unit), accessed from a driveway from Somerset Street. On-site parking meeting Code requirements will eliminate existing parking conditions that require vehicles to back into the right- of-way for maneuvering, producing safer conditions. New public sidewalks will be constructed within the rights-of-way for both Bay Esplanade and Somerset Street, reducing impacts between pedestrians and motorists and increasing the safety for this area. An increase to building height from 30 feet to 44.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) is included in this proposal. Pursuant to Section 2-404, the Medium High Density Residential District allows a height of 30 feet that may be increased to a maximum height of 50 feet, based upon meeting certain criteria. The subject property is located within the "Old Florida" District of the Beach by Design special area plan. Beach by Design defines the "Old Florida" District as "an area of transition between resort uses in Central Beach to the low intensity residential neighborhoods to the north of Acacia (Street). " The applicant submitted this project with a twin project located across Somerset Street (FLD2005- 08088, 685-689 Bay Esplanade), with one building designed to fit onto two sites. While designed essentially as mirror projects, the property on the south side of Somerset Street is zoned Tourist District which has different development standards (height range, setbacks, buffering, etc.). Prior to the submission of these two projects, Staff advised the applicant that this proposal would be reviewed differently, especially in regard to compatibility issues, due to it being zoned differently with different development standards and due to its location at the edge of the "Old Florida" District and the Beach by Design Special Area. It is noted that this twin project (FLD2005-08088, 685-689 Bay Esplanade) was approved by the CDB on November 15, 2005. The primary issue with this proposal is compatibility with the detached dwelling area to the north, which is not part of the Beach by Design Special Area and the "Old Florida" District. The maximum height for detached dwellings in the LMDR District to the north is 30 feet. The existing - dwelling directly to the north-is-one living floor above ground level parking at an approximate height of 18 feet (to midpoint of the pitched roof). The applicant has inaccurately portrayed dwellings to the north as being "primarily large three story residences" and "quite tall and are of substantial bulk." Most detached dwellings to the north within a block of the subject site are older dwellings constructed on the ground or newer dwellings with one or two floors above ground level parking, meeting their required setbacks. The perceived bulk of these detached dwellings to the north may be the result of lot widths primarily less than 60 feet each (a minimum lot width of 50 feet is required in the LMDR District) and having to meet a minimum five-foot side setback. The proposed height of this building of four living floors over ground level parking is 44.83 feet (to roof deck). This proposed building height does not transition the intensity between adjacent uses, Revised Staff Report - Community Development Board - January 17, 2006 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 4 of 10 0 0 producing a use/building that is not compatible with the detached dwellings to the north. The "Old Florida" District supports varying building heights. While the proposed building and pavement meets the minimum side setback requirement of 10 feet, the scale, bulk and height of this building is not harmonious with, does not minimizes adverse visual effects, nor consistent with the character of the detached dwelling area to the north. The applicant has stated within the responses to the criteria that "The additional height being requested will provide for better articulation of the architectural design of the proposed building and mitigation is achieved by providing elements (such as balconies and decorative overhangs), stepbacks and. a beautiful mixture of materials." Staff is unaware of any "better articulation" proposed than what is normally found in many of these redevelopment projects in the "Old Florida" District, including the provision of balconies and decorative overhangs. The building fagade materials are permissible by Beach by Design and have no bearing on the height of a structure. There are no stepbacks proposed with this building, as evidenced by the floor plans and elevations. Flexibility in regard to the proposed height has not been justified by the applicant. It is acknowledged that the proposed building and site design may be consistent and compatible with the emerging development designs for properties to the south within the "Old Florida" District. The proposed height, as part of the overall site design, does not create a form and function enhancing the character of the surrounding community (primarily to the north). Based on the building design, one floor of the proposed building could be removed reducing the building height to approximately 35 feet, which Staff considers compatible with the adjacent detached dwellings to the north. The redevelopment of this parcel may be impractical without deviations from the some of the intensity and development standards, however, it must be demonstrated with compatibility between the more intense uses within the "Old Florida" District and the detached dwelling area to the north. The proposed building has been designed using an Old Florida vernacular style utilizing a light-to- medium brown stone finish on the first two floors and other vertical portions of the fagade for accent. The upper portions of the building fagade will be white stucco with banding at the second and fourth levels. While the primary roof will be flat, pitched roofs finished with shades of brown barrel tiles over the stair tower, balconies and end units will provide visual interest to the perimeter of the roofline. Pursuant to Section 3-904.A, at street or driveway intersections no structure or landscaping may be installed within the sight visibility triangle that will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches and eight feet above grade. A building column on the east side of the driveway is located within the visibility triangle, as well as a column and a portion of the building on the west side of the driveway.- The visibility will not be-impacted, however, as Somerset Street dead ends at the water at the east side of the property. Granting the ability for the columns and portion of the building within the visibility triangle will not result in the grant of a special privilege, as similar reductions could be supported elsewhere under similar circumstances. Pursuant to Section 3-904.B, in order to enhance views of the water from residential waterfront property, no structure or landscaping may be installed, other than a fence around a swimming pool or any non-opaque fence not exceeding 36 inches within the sight visibility triangles formed by the rear and side property lines. The proposal includes a four-foot high solid fence and hibiscus shrubs, an Oleander tree-form and a sabal palm within the waterfront sight visibility triangle at the northeast corner of the site. The Revised Staff Report - Community Development Board - January 17, 2006 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 5 of 10 fence will need to be lowered to a maximum of three feet and be non-opaque and the landscaping will need to be removed from the triangle. The site will be extensively landscaped with a variety of trees (Gold Trumpet, Oleander tree-form, Sabal palms, Mexican fan palms, Medjool date palms and Pygmy date palms), shrubs (hibiscus, ixora and schefflera arboricola) and ground covers (fakahatchee grass and dwarf jasmine). A retention pond is proposed on the east side of the building adjacent to Somerset Street and the seawall. The applicant has not indicated any freestanding signage for this site. Any future freestanding sign should meet the requirements of the Code, be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building. All applicable Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Residential Infill Project criteria (Section 2-404.17) have not been met. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site. Revised Staff Report - Community Development Board - January 17, 2006 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 6 of 10 0 0 COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: Sections 2-401.1 and 2-404): STANDARD PROPOSED CONSISTENT INCONSISTENT MAXIMUM Eight dwelling units X DENSITY (30 dwelling units per acre) (Nine dwellings maximum IMPERVIOUS 0.47 X SURFACE RATIO ISR 0.85 LOT AREA (15,000 0.30 acres; 13,087 square feet X* s q. feet LOT WIDTH (150 South: 110 feet X* feet) West: 120 feet FRONT SETBACK South: 11 feet (to building and X* (15 - 25 feet) pavement) and zero feet (to trash staging area) West: 22 feet (to water feature) REAR SETBACK N/A (corner lots have two front and X 10-15 feet) two side setbacks) SIDE SETBACK North: 10 feet (to building and X* (0 - 10 feet) pavement) East: Zero feet to pool deck) HEIGHT (30 - 50 feet 44.83 feet (to roof deck) with an X* maximum) additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets from roof deck) PARKING SPACES 13 spaces X (1.5 spaces per unit) 12 spaces minimum * See discussion under Analysis. Revised Staff Report - Community Development Board - January 17, 2006 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 7 of 10 COMPLIANCE WITH RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECT FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA (Section 2-404.F): Consistent Inconsistent 1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for X* development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards; 2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a X residential infill project will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties. 3. The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in X the district. 4. The uses within the residential infill project are compatible with X* adjacent lands uses. 5. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a X residential infill project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 6. The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and X* function which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. 7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off- X* street parking are justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. * See discussion under Analysis. COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS (Section 3-913): Consistent Inconsistent 1. Development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X* coverage, density and character of adjacent properties. 2. Development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. Development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. -Develo ment is des. ed to minimize traffic congestion. X 5. Development is consistent with the community character of the X* immediate vicinity. 6. Design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, X* including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. * See discussion under Analysis. Revised Staff Report - Community Development Board - January 17, 2006 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 8 of 10 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject 0.30 acres is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Bay Esplanade and Somerset Street; 2. The current use of the site is for five attached dwellings in two buildings; 3. The proposal includes the demolition of the residential buildings and all existing site improvements; 4. The subject property is zoned Medium High Density Residential District and is located within and at the northern edge of the special area redevelopment plan, Beach by Design, as part of the "Old Florida" District; 5. The lot area is 13,087 square feet, which requires a reduction from the 15,000 square feet required; 6. The lot width is 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and 110 feet along Somerset Street, which requires a reduction from the 150-foot lot width required; 7. The proposal is for a four-story residential building over ground level parking at a height of 44.83 feet (to roof deck); 8. The site is adjacent to a detached dwelling area to the north zoned Low Medium Density Residential, which is not part of Beach by Design, and is restricted to a maximum height of 30 feet; 9. The "Old Florida" District supports varying building heights; 10. The proposed building encroaches into the front setback along Somerset Street, with the building's southwest corner located 11 feet from the front property line; 11. The proposed building height does not transition the intensity between adjacent uses, producing a use that is not compatible with the detached dwelling to the north; 12. There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Staff concludes that the proposal does not comply with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project per Section 2-404.F; 2. Staff further concludes that the proposal is not in compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913 and the other standards of the Code; and 3. Based on the analysis of this proposal and the above findings, Staff recommends denial of this application. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 29, 2005. The Planning Department recommends DENIAL for the Flexible Development application to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a Revised Staff Report - Community Development Board - January 17, 2006 Case FLD2005-08090 -Page 9 of 10 0 0 r-eduetion to the side (nefth) setbaek 4em 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to , a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 466.-83 44.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-4041, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area); and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a r-eduetio to the !andseape buffer aleng the nei4h pr-epeAy line ftem 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), asa Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G (Note: Stri1etIffeugh [deleted] and underlining [new] are changes from that originally requested), for the site at 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade with the following bases: Bases for Denial: 1. The proposal does not comply with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project per Section 2-4041; 2. The proposal is in not compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3. The development is incompatible with the surrounding area. Prepared by: Planning Department Staff: ayne . Wells, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS : Location Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Existing Surrounding Uses Map Application S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending caseslUp for the next CDBIBay Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos (MHDR) 1.17.06 CDB - WWIBay Esplanade 693-699 Revised Staff Report for 1. 17.06 CDB.doc Revised Staff Report - Community Development Board - January 17, 2006 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 10 of 10 Resume Wayne M. Wells, AICP 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 727-562-4504 wayne.wells(ci-)myclearwater.com PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE is • Planner III Planning Department, City of Clearwater, FL November 2001 to Present As part of the Development Review Division, prepared and presented staff reports for Flexible Standard Development (staff-level cases), Flexible Development (public hearing cases) and Plats before the Development Review Committee and the Community Development Board and Development Agreements before the City Council; reviewed building permits for Code conformance; prepared and/or assisted preparation of Code amendments; provided public information (via telephone, mail, email, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). • Zoning Coordinator Zoning Division, City of Pinellas Park, FL March 1989 to November 2001 Acting Zoning Director, Represented the Zoning Division on cases and issues before the City Council, Community Redevelopment Agency, Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Adjustment and outside agencies; Prepared and presented. staff reports for land use plan amendments, rezoned, planned unit developments, conditional uses, variances and site plans; reviewed final site plans and building permits for Code conformance; prepared and/or assisted preparation of Code amendments; provided public information (via telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). • Program Manager, Zoning Branch Manatee County Department of Planning and Development June 1984 to March 1989 Bradenton, FL 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). 0 • • Planner I Alachua County Department of Planning and Development June 1980 to June 1984 Gainesville, FL 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. • Graduate Assistant University of Florida Department of Urban and Regional Planning 1979 to 1981 Gainesville, FL 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 Prepared primarily graphics, for both publication and presentation; Division photographer for 1 %2 years; worked on historic survey and report. EDUCATION Master of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning (Degree not conferred; course work completed, thesis not completed), University of Florida, 1981 Bachelor of Design in Architecture, University of Florida, 1976 LICENSES & CERTIFICATES American Institute of Certified Planners American Planning Association, Suncoast Section 0 0 DD g ? AF MURSL xD Q ? fl w >U OARO$ I ' Q d A Sr m a QWo oil VER NA ?p a Y ST g aa ?? 0 LOCATION , Elk - MAP ASTER ST m CAMBRIA J,? UI.FmD T •.CDI'K Y NFJLMOm P? O BAY AVAIAN ar[ o 11E77ddObLl o aaawwr ?MeAr ??'?' 3M PMx4 SAYMONr Sr lU 1y yy W ? ? O m SAN i l A "?Y y O IDl ? ; Z PAPAYA Sr ' ga. g ?ry PAS:.?'+E` o $ ? O C---Y S Li ui Location Map Owner. I Panayoiotis Vasiloudes Petrit Meroli Case: FLD2005-08090 Site: 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Property Size(Acres): 0.30 PIN: 05/29/15/54756/076/0010 05/29/15 /54756/076/0011 Atlas Page: 258A • 11 Atlas Page: 258A 739 58 7rld 1 3 1 I_ 7t6 6t 1 7Y1_ 1'- 1 ASTER ST w 7 j? I 1 _- 1 7fl C 70 _' -?J' X720 Q L 1 ? ? i it 1 _ '° n I ?J ?r 7jA ? 3 ?L, m --, , I , , tom- Q 5 11 f13 ACACIA sr 11 I rF. 11 I ILJ - 7? I r7 - ? , 5 1 ? --= -? 3B j L- L / v , 642 T 682--^-. , •_ ?-----? Sr 1665 f ,__6 ; --- - 6Ep 68 ' --- i -- I , 661 i B61 I r?-r?r _ I 65 - \ ------ _ 7 rl q' 1 r ------ i ---6P4_ - ??` I H ' - J t i16! ?s Eli _ J r 1 I r - 1 El L---- 44 d „ 4. ! --, 1 r 1 64 t IL 01 ? / ) \ _ 839 `- Zoning Map Panayoiotis Vasiloudes Owner: Case: FLD2005-08090 Petrit Meroli Site: 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Property 0.30 Size(Acres): 05/29/15/54756/076/0010 PIN: 05/29/15/54756/076/0011 Atlas Page: 258A • • a? f? _1 1? _? I X24 I ? ASTER ST C 709 L t`dl ed n ng 05 - I _r1 ACACIA ST I I I I Q I _ 720 Q I- rr?18 W r =1 '--? Q 5 II '1 I? i i -l I i f a `_ I $.C?ea ;{IV; `_ I _ ? 682 SOMERSET ST m A t0 ed IWV4 A11-1 z Existing Surrounding Uses Map Owner: Panayoiotis Vasiloudes Case: FLD2005-08090 Petrit Meroli Site: I 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Property 0.30 Size(Acres): PIN: 05/29/15/54756/076/0010 05/29/15/54756/076/0011 Atlas Page: I 258A `r r?R?a'_,*?. ' ..ems- - ?-.,W View looking north at dock area on east side of subject property 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Page 1 of 2 FLD2005-08090 View looking northeast at subject property (693 View looking northwest at detached dwelling across Bay Esplanade northwest from subject property 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade FLD2005-08090 View looking east at detached dwelling directly north of subject property 4 . .. .1k Mai +- a View looking west at development on west side of Page 2 of 2 View looking northeast at detached dwellings farther north of subject property on east side of Bay Esplanade 0 • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 4:01 PM To: 'Nick Fri' Subject: RE: 693 Bay Esplanade Nick - I believe the lot is a parallelogram, not the proposed building. If you designed the rectangular building parallel with Somerset Street, the southwest corner of the building would be closer to Bay Esplanade and the northeast corner of the building would be closer to the seawall, requiring setback reductions at those locations. Off hand, I don't think this orientation would produce a better site design. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Nick Fri [mailto:natbeach@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 2:41 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: 693 Bay Esplande What if the parallelogram of the building along Somerset St ran parallel to Somerset instead of in conflict to better observe setbacks? nick 1/16/2006 9 ? 0 Wells, Wayne From: Rickard, Leonard Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 7:46 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Wayne, According to Chief Strong and Rob Fahey I can release 693-699 Bay Esplanade and I have cleared it in the computer. Also bcp2005-07071 at 678 S Gulfview Blvd is being released after Rob's consultation with Jeffrey from Northside and an agreement has been made to tap into a 16" line for the water supply for this project. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 12:06 PM To: Rickard, Leonard Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Thanks. Just needed to know, so that I can appropriately deal with the case for the January 17th CDB agenda. Looks like they will need to be continued to the February meeting of the CDB. -----Original Message----- From: Rickard, Leonard Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 8:45 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Wayne, No we have not received the calculations as of today. I have not heard from them. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 7:35 PM To: Rickard, Leonard Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Lenny - The above case was continued from the November 15th and December 20th Community Development Board (CDB) meetings to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting. Has the Fire Department received Fire Flow calculations for this project that are acceptable to the Fire Department? Let me know as soon as possible, as I am trying to prepare documents for the January 17, 2006, CDB agenda. Thanks. Wayne Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 12:06 PM To: Rickard, Leonard Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Thanks. Just needed to know, so that I can appropriately deal with the case for the January 17th CDB agenda. Looks like they will need to be continued to the February meeting of the CDB. -----Original Message----- From: Rickard, Leonard Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 8:45 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Wayne, No we have not received the calculations as of today. I have not heard from them. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 7:35 PM To: Rickard, Leonard Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Lenny - The above case was continued from the November 15th and December 20th Community Development Board (CDB) meetings to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting. Has the Fire Department received Fire Flow calculations for this project that are acceptable to the Fire Department? Let me know as soon as possible, as I am trying to prepare documents for the January 17, 2006, CDB agenda. Thanks. Wayne 0 0 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 1:45 PM To: Clayton, Gina Subject: RE: Peter Meroli None -----Original Message----- From: Clayton, Gina Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 1:44 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Peter Meroli no word from Ed? -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 1:41 PM To: Clayton, Gina Subject: RE: Peter Meroli I have not heard they have agreed to a continuance, but it has sounded, at least from Northside, the reluctance to the case being continued. -----Original Message----- From: Clayton, Gina Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 1:38 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Peter Meroli Did they agree to another continuance? Gina L. Clayton Assistant Planning Director City of Clearwater gina.clayton@myclearwater.com 727-562-4587 04 i 9 • Page 1 of 4 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 9:08 AM To: Delk, Michael Cc: Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Michael - I have thought a lot about this email trail this past weekend and felt compelled to respond. Joel Gray has this scenario totally wrong with wrong assumptions. Garry Brumback, Joel Gray and Steve Strong have never talked to me regarding the email that I wrote to Northside nor any of the circumstances regarding such. My original email was written very deliberately, pointing out the timeline and content of events. Northside did not initiate anything that prompted my email of December 15, 2005. They did not "shop the city staff for an answer that best suites them" and I take issue with this statement. I initiated the email due to the new Fire Department comment I found in Permit Plan. I spoke to Lenny Rickard on December 15, 2005, regarding the original and new Fire Department comments prior to sending my email to Northside. The applicant asked for a continuance at the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting to address the compatibility issues raised by the Planning Department staff in the Staff Report and to see if changes to the plan would reverse the Staff recommendation for denial. The revised plans attempting to respond to these Planning Department's concerns regarding compatibility was submitted on December 9th and 12th, which did not provide sufficient time for analysis and revision to the Staff Report for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting. That is why the Planning Department is requesting a continuance to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting and has nothing to do with fire flow calculations. I discovered the new November 27, 2005, Fire Department comment on December 15, 2005. No one in the Fire Department informed me that they had entered this new comment on November 27, 2005, retroactively to a case that had already gone to the DRC and found sufficient to move forward to the CDB, complying with the Fire Department comments originally provided, and gone to the CDB. If I hadn't discovered this new Fire Department comment, it would have never been seen until after the CDB takes action (assumably on January 17, 2006), since I had already looked at all DRC comments (as to "met" or "not met") prior to scheduling this case for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting. I have also checked the FLD cases for 170 Brightwater Drive and 201 Brightwater Drive, both scheduled for review and action by the CDB on December 20, 2005, and neither case has the new Fire Department comment of November 27, 2005, entered (both have yet to receive a Development Order). I am not here to create a division between departments. I totally understand Fire Department's comment as it applies to new cases and is necessary to ensure adequate water supply. The cases that just went to the DRC on December 8, 2005, where such fire flow calculations are necessary prior to scheduling the case for the next CDB meeting, will need to comply. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Delk, Michael Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 12:28 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina Subject: FW: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade FYI. mld -----Original Message----- From: Brumback, Garry Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 12:07 PM To: Gray, Joel; Delk, Michael; Thompson, Neil; Kronschnabl, Jeff Cc: Geer, Jamie 12/19/2005 W ,• ? Page 2 of 4 Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Thanks Joel, the guidance was clear and I expect Northside to comply. Garry Brumback, ICMA-CM Assistant City Manager (727) 562-4053 -----Original Message----- From: Gray, Joel Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 10:14 AM To: Brumback, Garry Cc: Geer, Jamie Subject: FW: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Sir, I wanted to bring this to your attention that even after you hosted a meeting at 14:00 hours on November 11, 2005, at which Northside Engineering was present and received very clear direction from you as did we which was understood to be as follows: 1. For any project that already has a Development Order (DO) we would require the water impact study information be submitted prior to permits for construction being issued. Fire Construction Services and Public Utilities Engineering was tasked with expediting the review and approval for projects with a preexisting DO. 2. All newly proposed projects the water impact study is required as apart of the application process and must be provided, reviewed and approved before CDB hearing. As is evident in this email trail Northside Engineering continues to shop the city staff for an answer that best suites them. This particular case was scheduled for CDB on 11/15/2005 (which would have been 4 days after Northside's Meeting with all of us and receiving the aforementioned directions) Then Northside requested a continuance to the 12/20/2005 agenda for the CDB (my guess is because of the direction given they were given in the 11/11/2005 meeting they new they needed time to get the Water Impact Study done) This case is requested by Staff to be continued to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting to review the new application material. I wanted you to be aware of this situation and have a chance to give us your input before we responded. Respectfully, Joel Joel WT Gray 12/19/2005 F • • Page 3 of 4 Fire Division Chief I Fire Marshal Clearwater Fire & Rescue 610 FRANKLIN STREET Clearwater, FL 33756 Telephone: 727.562.4327 ext. 3078 Fax: 727.562.4461 -----Original Message----- From: Strong, Steve Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 8:35 AM To: Gray, Joel Subject: FW: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Fx1 S.C. Strong Fire Bureau Chief / Assistant Fire Marshal 610 FRANKLIN STREET Clearwater, FL 33756 Telephone: 727.562.4327 ext.3039 Fax: 727.562.4461 -----Original Message----- From: Renee Ruggiero [maiIto: Renee@north sideengineering.com] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 5:20 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Thompson, Neil; Strong, Steve; Rickard, Leonard; Keller, James; Rice, Scott; Jeffrey Izzo; Doreen Williams Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Wayne - Thank you for the information. - Renee Chief Strong - This agenda item is a continuation of a project that has already been deemed sufficient and complete to go to CDB. It would seem unfair and inappropriate at this time to change the rules of play. Obviously any new/future project will adhere to the new directives but this case has already been on track for CDB and was simply deferred to another hearing. Please contact me should this issue require further discussion or if I may provide additional information. Thank you for your assistance. Respectfully, Renee Ruggiero, Project Planner -----Original Message----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com [mailto:Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 3:09 PM To: Renee Ruggiero Cc: neil.thompson@MyClearwater.com; steve.strong@MyClearwater.com; Leonard.Rickard@myClearwater.com; James.Keller@myClearwater.com; Scott.Rice@myClearwater.com 12/19/2005 C, r • • Page 4 of 4 Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Renee - The above referenced case was reviewed by the Development Review Committee on September 29, 2005. The Fire Department made the following comment: "Provide Fire Flow Calculations by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure adequate water supply for project. Acknowledge intent PRIOR TO CDB. Calculations due PRIOR TO PERMIT." You acknowledged the requirement in your response letter dated October 6, 2005. This case was scheduled for review by the Community Development Board (CDB) on November 15, 2005. Due to the Staff recommendation, you requested and received a continuance to the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting. This case is requested by Staff to be continued to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting to review the new application material. The following comment from the Fire Department was added to Permit Plan on November 27, 2005: "Provide Fire Flow Calculations / Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply is available and to determine if any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this project. Calculations / Water Study due PRIOR TO CDB. (Previous approved condition voided per Fire Marshal's directions based on Assistant City Managers directive)" This new comment is being forwarded to you to determine compliance with the comment. Any questions should be directed to Steve Strong (562-4327 x3039). Wayne 12/19/2005 0 0 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 8:04 AM To: 'Nick Fri' Subject: RE: CDB Nick - There has been no change to the proposal at this time in front of the CDB. Due to changes submitted to Staff late, Staff is requesting a continuance to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting. Staff will evaluate the revised proposal and issue a revised Staff report for the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Nick Fri [mailto:natbeach@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 1:10 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: CDB 693 Bay Esplande MUCH better than before. 170-188 Brightwater minor error in Floor Plan 2&3 floors: 3rd stack from the east - words designating Great Room and MBR are inverse. Nick 12/19/2005 • 0 Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Renee Ruggiero [Renee@northsideengineering.com] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 5:20 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Thompson, Neil; Strong, Steve; Rickard, Leonard; Keller, James; Rice, Scott; Jeffrey Izzo; Doreen Williams Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Wayne - Thank you for the information. - Renee Chief Strong - This agenda item is a continuation of a project that has already been deemed sufficient and complete to go to CDB. It would seem unfair and inappropriate at this time to change the rules of play. Obviously any new/future project will adhere to the new directives but this case has already been on track for CDB and was simply deferred to another hearing. Please contact me should this issue require further discussion or if I may provide additional information. Thank you for your assistance. Respectfully, Renee Ruggiero, Project Planner -----Original Message----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com [mailto:Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 3:09 PM To: Renee Ruggiero Cc: neil.thompson@MyClearwater.com; steve.strong@MyClearwater.com; Leonard.Rickard@myClearwater.com; James.Keller@myClearwater.com; Scott.Rice@myClearwater.com Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Renee - The above referenced case was reviewed by the Development Review Committee on September 29, 2005. The Fire Department made the following comment: "Provide Fire Flow Calculations by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure adequate water supply for project. Acknowledge intent PRIOR TO CDB. Calculations due PRfOR TO PERMIT." You acknowledged the requirement in your response letter dated October 6, 2005. This case was scheduled for review by the Community Development Board (CDB) on November 15, 2005. Due to the Staff recommendation, you requested and received a continuance to the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting. This case is requested by Staff to be continued to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting to review the new application material. The following comment from the Fire Department was added to Permit Plan on November 27, 2005: "Provide Fire Flow Calculations / Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply is available and to determine if any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this project. Calculations / Water Study due PRIOR TO CDB. (Previous approved condition voided per Fire Marshal's directions based on Assistant City Managers directive)" This new comment is being forwarded to you to determine compliance with the comment. Any questions should be directed to Steve Strong (562-4327 x3039). 12/15/2005 ,? 0 0 Page 2 of 2 Wayne 12/15/2005 0 0 ORIGINAL CDB Meeting Date: December 20, 2005 Case Number: FLD2005-08090 Agenda Item: D6 Owner/Applicant: Peter Pan Developments LLC (Pan%jotis Vasiloudes and Petrit Meroli) Representative: Mr. Housh Ghovaee, Northside Engineering Services, Inc. Addresses: 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 46.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Mll Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.17, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3- 1202.G. EXISTING ZONING/ Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District; Residential LAND USE: Facilities High (RFH) Category PROPERTY SIZE: 0.30 acres PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Attached dwellings (five apartments) Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (eight condominiums) Staff Report - Community Development Board - December 20, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 -Page 1 of 10 0 0 ADJACENT ZONING/ North: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District; LAND USES: Detached dwellings East: Preservation District; Clearwater Harbor South: Tourist District; Overnight accommodation uses West: Medium, High Density Residential (MHDR) District; Attached dwellings CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY: The area to the west and south is a mixture of attached dwellings and overnight accommodation uses. Detached dwellings are located to the north and northwest in a single family area not part of Beach by Design. UPDATE: This case was continued at the applicant's request at the November 15, 2005, Community Development Board (CDB) meeting to this meeting in order to address Staff concerns. While there was some initial discussion after the last CDB meeting regarding how the site and building plans were going to be revised, revised site and building plans were submitted this week. In order to provide Staff adequate time to review the revised proposal, in light of our recommendation, Staff recommends this application be continued to the January 17, 2005, meeting of the CDB. ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 0.30 acres is located at the northeast corner of Bay Esplanade and Somerset Street. The site is a parallelogram corner lot with dimensions of 110 feet deep by 120 feet wide. The site is currently developed with a total of five apartments. All existing buildings and other site improvements will be demolished. Properties to the west and south are developed with a mixture of attached dwellings and overnight accommodation uses. The area to the north is developed with detached dwellings in the Low Medium Density Residential District (which is not part of Beach by Design). This site is located in the "Old Florida" District of Beach by Design. Many properties within this District are undergoing change, where the existing developments are being demolished and new attached dwelling buildings will be constructed. Proposal: The proposal includes the construction of an eight-unit residential building 46.83 feet tall (to roof deck). Two dwellings per floor with approximately 2,227 square feet of living area each are proposed on four floors. A total of 13 parking spaces are proposed, primarily located under the building. A hot tub is proposed to the east of the building adjacent to the seawall. The proposal includes a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet and reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street. The site is at the northern edge of Staff Report - Community Development Board - December 20, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 2 of 10 • • the Old Florida District of Beach by Design. The applicant is unable to obtain any additional land area or lot width due to its location with regard to being at the edge of the Old Florida District of Beach by Design, the single family area to the north not being part of Beach by Design and being zoned Low Medium Density Residential District, the site being a corner lot bounded by Bay Esplanade on the west and Somerset Street on the south and Clearwater Harbor (water) located to the east of the site. A reduction to the lot area and lot width requirements appears appropriate, so long as site design is acceptable. The proposal includes a request for a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck). The design of the proposed building includes a water feature in the center of the building facing Bay Esplanade, extending three feet from the base of the building. The building otherwise meets the minimum 25-foot front setback from Bay Esplanade. The building has been designed parallel with Bay Esplanade. The lot is a parallelogram, which creates angles to the north and south sides of the rectangular building in relation to lot lines. The building exceeds the required 10-foot side setback, being located 10.3 feet from the north property line at its northeast corner and approximately 18 feet at its northwest corner. The site design locates a parking space outside of the building on the north side of the building with the drive aisle within 3.1 feet of the north property line. Staff cannot support this requested reduction to the side (north) setback to the edge of pavement from a compatibility and buffering standpoint to the detached dwelling to the north, which is not part of Beach by Design (further discussion below). Due to the angles created with the building parallel on the lot with Bay Esplanade, the proposal includes a reduction to the front setback adjacent to Somerset Street of 11 feet to the southwest corner of the building. Somerset Street dead-ends at the east side of this property. With the placement of the building and the angles of property lines, the southeast corner of the building is located 19.5 feet from the Somerset Street property line. With regard to the front setback reduction from Somerset Street related to the trash staging area, the building will have a refuse collection room on the ground floor within the parking garage. Dumpsters will be rolled out to the staging area on collection days. The location of the trash staging area within the front setback is necessary to eliminate the necessity of the trash truck coming on-site and is common with many newer developments. This proposal includes a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck). Current development practices place the pool/hot tub area adjacent to the waterside of the property, which is generally the most private area of the property, with a pool/hot tub deck at a zero setback. The Community Development Board has approved other properties along the water within the "Old Florida" District with a pool in a similar location and setback as this proposal. These proposed front and side setbacks are consistent with or exceed the setbacks approved for similar projects within this "Old Florida" District to the south, however, not along this northern edge of the District. The project at 14 Somerset Street provided a minimum setback of 10 feet to the building and pavement. The proposal includes 13 parking spaces, which exceeds the minimum requirement by one space, accessed from a driveway from Somerset Street. On-site parking meeting Code requirements will eliminate parking that requires vehicles to back into the right-of-way for maneuvering, producing Staff Report - Community Development Board - December 20, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 3 of 10 0 0 safer conditions. The minimum required parking is exceeded by only one space. While this space could be eliminated, parking exceeding the current minimum requirement for attached dwellings is encouraged. This northernmost parking space could have been designed adjacent to the southeast side of the building (requiring a front setback reduction), but it was not part of this proposal. New public sidewalks will be constructed within the rights-of-way for both Bay Esplanade and Somerset Street, reducing impacts between pedestrians and motorists and increasing the safety for this area. An increase to building height from 30 feet to 46.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) is included in this proposal. Pursuant to Section 2-404, the Medium High Density Residential District allows a height of 30 feet that may be increased to a maximum height of 50 feet, based upon meeting certain criteria. The subject property is located within the "Old Florida" District of the Beach by Design special area plan, where height is further limited by the standards set forth in the Plan as being low to mid-rise in accordance with the Community Development Code. In 1997 and 1998, a Plan was prepared for the City entitled "Clearwater Beach: Strategies for Revitalization. " This Plan was prepared after an extensive public process, directive surveys and input from the City Council and City administration. The purpose of Beach by Design, which was adopted by the City Council in 2001, is to implement the recommendations of that Plan and regulate development within certain areas of the beach. The subject property is located within the "Old Florida" District of the Beach by Design special area redevelopment plan which is defined as "an area of transition between resort uses in Central Beach to the low intensity residential neighborhoods to the north of Acacia (Street). " In order to implement this vision, Beach by Design states that building heights should be low to mid-rise in accordance with the Community Development Code. While "mid-rise" is not specifically defined within the Community Development Code, based upon the height standards set forth in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR), Tourist (T) and High Density Residential (HDR) Districts, the Planning Department has previously interpreted "mid-rise" development as having a maximum height of 50 feet. Revisions to "Old Florida": At its meeting of September 1, 2005, the City Council discussed a new policy direction with regard to the "Old Florida" District. This policy direction calls for limiting the height of buildings on those properties north of Somerset Street to 35 feet; limiting the height of buildings on the first 60 feet south of Somerset Street to 50 feet; and limiting the height of buildings in the balance of the District to 65 feet. In addition, the Council gave direction for increased site design performance by the way of larger setbacks and/or building step backs. As stated previously in this Staff report, the proposal includes a front setback to the proposed building adjacent to Bay Esplanade equal to the minimum required setback, less than the minimum required setback adjacent to Somerset Street and exceeding the minimum side setbacks (south and east). This application was submitted prior to, and therefore could not anticipate, City Council's new policy direction. The proposed building with four living floors over ground level parking at a height of 46.83 feet (to roof deck) is inconsistent with the new policy direction, as this site falls into the maximum 35-foot building height area north of Somerset Street. Irrespective of this new Staff Report - Community Development Board - December 20, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 -Page 4 of 10 policy direction, Staff advised the applicant of compatibility and setback issues prior to submission of the application (further discussion below). The proposal includes a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement). As stated above regarding the setback reduction for the trash staging area, its location at the property line and within the street landscape buffer is one of necessary function. The reduction to the north landscape buffer does not enhance the quality of this proposed development in relation to the existing lower intensity uses to the north. This reduction restricts the planting area to provide meaningful landscape buffering for visually screening between these two residential uses. It is noted the applicant proposes a solid fence along the north property line to assist landscape buffering. The design of the building and site improvements for the project at 14 Somerset Street complied with landscape buffer requirements along the north property line, which was also adjacent to detached dwellings. The northernmost parking space could be removed or could have been designed on the south side of the building adjacent to Somerset Street in order to provide the full landscape buffer adjacent to the detached dwelling to the north. The requested reduction to the buffer for the retention pond is in response to Section 3-1202.D.2 that requires a minimum five-foot planting area for landscape materials when retention ponds and the slopes of such ponds are located within perimeter buffers. Rather than redesign the retention pond to meet the requirements of the Code, the applicant chose to request a reduction to the buffer planting area, which is unacceptable. The primary issue with this proposal is compatibility with the detached dwelling area to the north, which is not part of Beach by Design. The applicant has designed one building to fit onto two sites across Somerset Street from each other (see FLD2005-08088, 685-689 Bay Esplanade). The maximum height for detached dwellings in the LMDR District to the north is 30 feet. The existing dwelling to the north is one living floor above ground level parking at an approximate height of 18 feet (to midpoint of the pitched roof). The proposed height of this building of four living floors over ground level parking is 46.83 feet (to roof deck). This proposed building height does not transition the intensity between adjacent uses, which is what the new policy directive provides at the edge of the Old Florida District, producing a use that is not compatible with the detached dwelling to the north. While the proposed building meets the minimum side setback requirement of 10 feet, the scale, bulk and height of this building is not harmonious with, does not minimizes adverse visual effects, nor is consistent with the character of the detached dwelling area to the north. Flexibility in regard to the proposed height has not been justified. It is acknowledged that the proposed building and site design may be consistent and compatible with the emerging development designs for properties to the south within the Old Florida District. As pavement is also a structure under the Code, the requested reduction to pavement along the north property line, albeit at ground level, is part of the overall site design that does not create a form and function enhancing the character of the surrounding community (primarily to the north). Based on the building design, one floor could be removed to bring the height close to the new policy direction of a maximum height of 35 feet. Flexibility in regard to required setbacks potentially could be viewed more favorably if the northernmost parking space had been relocated adjacent to the southeast corner of the building, however, the applicant did not design it as such and it was not Staff Report - Community Development Board - December 20, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 -Page 5 of 10 0 0 advertised for any reduction at this location. The redevelopment of this parcel may not impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards, however, it must be manifested with compatibility between the more intense uses within the Old Florida District and the detached dwelling area to the north. The proposed building has been designed using an Old Florida vernacular style utilizing a light-to- medium brown stone finish on the first two floors and other vertical portions of the facade for accent. The upper portions of the building facade will be white stucco with banding at the second and fourth levels. While the primary roof will be flat, pitched roofs finished with shades of brown barrel tiles over the stair tower, balconies and end units will provide visual interest to the perimeter of the roofline. Pursuant to Section 3-904.A, at street or driveway intersections no structure or landscaping may be installed within the sight visibility triangle that will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches and eight feet above grade. A building column on the east side of the driveway is located within the visibility triangle, as well as a column and a portion of the building on the west side of the driveway. The visibility will not be impacted, however, as Somerset Street dead ends at the water at the east side of the property. Granting the ability for the columns and portion of the building within the visibility triangle will not result in the grant of a special privilege, as similar reductions could be supported elsewhere under similar circumstances. Pursuant to Section 3-9043, in order to enhance views of the water from residential waterfront property, no structure or landscaping may be installed, other than a fence around a swimming pool or any non-opaque fence not exceeding 36 inches within the sight visibility triangles formed by the rear and side property lines. The proposal includes a four-foot high solid fence and hibiscus shrubs, an Oleander tree-form and a sabal palm within the waterfront sight visibility triangle at the northeast corner of the site. The fence will need to be lowered to a maximum of three feet and be non-opaque and the landscaping will need to be removed from the triangle. The site will be extensively landscaped with a variety of trees (Gold Trumpet, Oleander tree-form, Sabal palms, Mexican fan palms, Medjool date palms and Pygmy date palms), shrubs (hibiscus, ixora and schefflera arboricola) and ground covers (fakahatchee grass and dwarf jasmine). A retention pond is proposed on the east side of the building adjacent to Somerset Street and the seawall. The applicant has not indicated any freestanding signage for this site. Any future freestanding sign should meet the requirements of the Code, be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building. All applicable Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Residential Infill Project criteria (Section 2-4041) have not been met. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site. Staff Report - Community Development Board - December 20, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 6 of 10 COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: (Sections 2-401.1 and 2-404): STANDARD PROPOSED CONSISTENT INCONSISTENT MAXIMUM Eight dwelling units X DENSITY . (30 dwelling units per acre) (Nine dwellings maximum IMPERVIOUS 0.47 X SURFACE RATIO ISR 0.85 LOT AREA (15,000 0.30 acres; 13,087 square feet X* s q. feet LOT WIDTH (150 South: 110 feet X* feet) West: 120 feet FRONT SETBACK South: 11 feet (to building and X* (15 - 25 feet) pavement) and zero feet (to trash staging area) West: 22 feet (to water feature REAR SETBACK N/A (corner lots have two front and X 10-15 feet two side setbacks) SIDE SETBACK North: 3.1 feet (to pavement) X* 0 -10 feet East: Zero feet (to pool deck HEIGHT (30 - 50 feet 46.83 feet (to roof deck) with an X maximum) additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets from roof deck) PARKING SPACES 13 spaces X (1.5 spaces per unit) 12 spaces minimum) * See discussion under Analysis. Staff Report - Community Development Board - December 20, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 -Page 7 of 10 • 0 COMPLIANCE WITH RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECT FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA (Section 2-404.F): Consistent Inconsistent 1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for X* development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards; 2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a X residential infill project will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties. 3. The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in X the district. 4. The uses within the residential infill project are compatible with X* adjacent lands uses. 5. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a X residential infill project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 6. The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and X* function which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. 7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off- X* street parking are justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS (Section 3-913): Consistent Inconsistent 1. Development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X* coverage, density and character of adjacent properties. 2. Development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. Development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. Development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X 5. Development is consistent with the community character of the X* immediate vicinity. 6. Design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, X* including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. Staff Report - Community Development Board - December 20, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 8 of 10 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject 0.30 acres is located within the Small Motel District of Beach by Design; 2. The current use of the site is for five attached dwellings; 3. The proposal includes the demolition of the residential buildings and all existing site improvements; 4. The subject property is zoned Medium High Density Residential District and is located within and at the northern edge of the special area redevelopment plan, Beach by Design, as part of the "Old Florida" District; 5. The lot area is 13,087 square feet, which requires a reduction from the 15,000 square feet required; 6. The lot width is 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and 110 feet along Somerset Street, which requires a reduction from the 150 feet required; 7. The proposal is for a four-story residential building over ground level parking at a height of 46.83 feet (to roof deck); 8. The site is adjacent to a detached dwelling area to the north zoned Low Medium Density Residential, which is not part of Beach by Design, and restricts dwellings to a maximum height of 30 feet; 9. The proposed building encroaches into the front setback along Somerset Street, with the building's southwest corner located 11 feet from the front property line; 10. The northernmost parking space and associated drive aisle encroaches into the side setback and landscape buffer area; 11. The setback and landscape buffer reduction to pavement along the north property line is inconsistent with the setback and buffer approved for 14 Somerset Street, which is also at the edge of the Old Florida District and adjacent to detached dwellings; 12. The proposed building height does not transition the intensity between adjacent uses, producing a use that is not compatible with the detached dwelling to the north; 13. There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Staff concludes that the proposal does not comply with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project per Section 2-404.F; 2. Staff further concludes that the proposal is not in compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913 and the other standards of the Code; and 3. Based on the analysis of this proposal and the above findings, Staff recommends denial of this application. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 29, 2005. The Planning Department recommends DENIAL for the Flexible Development application to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Staff Report - Community Development Board - December 20, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 9 of 10 Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 46.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.F, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G, for the site at 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Denial: 1. The proposal does not comply with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project per Section 2-404.F; 2. The proposal is in not compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3. The development is incompatible with the surrounding area. Prepared by: Planning Department Staff: "", M '. ug, Wayne M. ells, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS : Location Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Existing Surrounding Uses Map Application S: Tlanning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD) IPending caseslUp for the next CDBWay Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos (MHDR) 12.20.05 CDB - WWIBay Esplanade 693-699 Staff Report for 12.20.05 CDB.doc Staff Report - Community Development Board - December 20, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 10 of 10 • Resume Wayne M. Wells, AICP 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 727-562-4504 wayn e.wellsAmyclearwater. com PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE • Planner III Planning Department, City of Clearwater, FL • November 2001 to Present As part of the Development Review Division, prepared and presented staff reports for Flexible Standard Development (staff-level cases), Flexible Development (public hearing cases) and Plats before the Development Review Committee and the Community Development Board and Development Agreements before the City Council; reviewed building permits for Code conformance; prepared and/or assisted preparation of Code amendments; provided public information (via telephone, mail, email, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). • Zoning Coordinator Zoning Division, City of Pinellas Park, FL March 1989 to November 2001 Acting Zoning Director, Represented the Zoning Division on cases and issues before the City Council, Community Redevelopment Agency, Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Adjustment and outside agencies; Prepared and presented staff reports for land use plan amendments, rezoned, planned unit developments, conditional uses, variances and site plans; reviewed final site plans and building permits for Code conformance; prepared and/or assisted preparation of Code amendments; provided public information. (via telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). • Program Manager, Zoning Branch Manatee County Department of Planning and Development June 1984 to March 1989 Bradenton, FL 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). i • • Planner I Alachua County Department of Planning and Development June 1980 to June 1984 Gainesville, FL 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. • Graduate Assistant University of Florida Department of Urban and Regional Planning 1979 to 1981 Gainesville, FL 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 Prepared primarily graphics, for both publication and presentation; Division photographer for 1 %2 years; worked on historic survey and report. EDUCATION Master of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning (Degree not conferred; course work completed, thesis not completed), University of Florida, 1981 Bachelor of Design in Architecture, University of Florida, 1976 LICENSES & CERTIFICATES American Institute of Certified Planners American Planning Association, Suncoast Section • . • Pagel of 3 Wells, Wayne From: Delk, Michael Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 12:28 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina Subject: FW: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade FYI. mld -----Original Message----- From: Brumback, Garry Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 12:07 PM To: Gray, Joel; Delk, Michael; Thompson, Neil; Kronschnabl, Jeff Cc: Geer, Jamie Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Thanks Joel, the guidance was clear and I expect Northside to comply. Garry Brumback, ICMA-CM Assistant City Manager (727) 562-4053 -----Original Message----- From: Gray, Joel Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 10:14 AM To: Brumback, Garry Cc: Geer, Jamie Subject: FW: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Sir, I wanted to bring this to your attention that even after you hosted a meeting at 14:00 hours on November 11, 2005, at which Northside Engineering was present and received very clear direction from you as did we which was understood to be as follows: 1. For any project that already has a Development Order (DO) we would require the water impact study information be submitted prior to permits for construction being issued. Fire Construction Services and Public Utilities Engineering was tasked with expediting the review and approval for projects with a preexisting DO. 2. All newly proposed projects the water impact study is required as apart of the application process and must be provided, reviewed and approved before CDB hearing. As is evident in this email trail Northside Engineering continues to shop the city staff for an answer that best suites them. This particular case was scheduled for CDB on 11/15/2005 (which would have been 4 days after Northside's Meeting with all of us and receiving the aforementioned directions) Then Northside requested a continuance to the 12/20/2005 agenda for the CDB (my guess is because of the direction given they were given in the 11/11/2005 meeting they new they needed time to get the Water 1/19/2006 • • Page 2 of 3 Impact Study done) This case is requested by Staff to be continued to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting to review the new application material. I wanted you to be aware of this situation and have a chance to give us your input before we responded.. Respectfully, Joel 119 J!" Joel WT Gray Fire Division Chief / Fire Marshal Clearwater Fire & Rescue 610 FRANKLIN STREET Clearwater, FL 33756 Telephone: 727.562.4327 ext. 3078 Fax: 727.562.4461 -----Original Message----- From: Strong, Steve Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 8:35 AM To: Gray, Joel Subject: FW: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade 0 S.C. Strong Fire Bureau Chief / Assistant Fire Marshal 610 FRANKLIN STREET Clearwater, FL 33756 Telephone: 727.562.4327 ext.3039 Fax: 727.562.4461 -----Original Message----- From: Renee Ruggiero [mailto:Renee@northsideengineering.com] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 5:20 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Thompson, Neil; Strong, Steve; Rickard, Leonard; Keller, James; Rice, Scott; Jeffrey Izzo; Doreen Williams Subject: RE: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Wayne - Thank you for the information. - Renee Chief Strong - 1/19/2006 Al 0 • Page 3 of 3 This agenda item is a continuation of a project that has already been deemed sufficient and complete to go to CDB. It would seem unfair and inappropriate at this time to change the rules of play. Obviously any new/future project will adhere to the new directives but this case has already been on track for CDB and was simply deferred to another hearing. Please contact me should this issue require further discussion or if I may provide additional information. Thank you for your assistance. Respectfully; Renee Ruggiero, Project Planner -----Original Message----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com [mailto:Way e.Wells@xnyClearwater.com] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 3:09 PM To: Renee Ruggiero Cc: neil.thompson@MyClearwater.com; steve.strong@MyClearwater.com; Leonard.Rickard@myClearwater.com; James.Keller@myClearwater.com; Scott.Rice@myClearwater.com Subject: FLD2005-08090, 693-699 Bay Esplanade Renee - The above referenced case was reviewed by the Development Review Committee on September 29, 2005. The Fire Department made the following comment: "Provide Fire Flow Calculations by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure adequate water supply for project. Acknowledge intent PRIOR TO CDB. Calculations due PRIOR TO PERMIT." You acknowledged the requirement in your response letter dated October 6, 2005. This case was scheduled for review by the Community Development Board (CDB) on November 15, 2005. Due to the Staff recommendation, you requested and received a continuance to the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting. This case is requested by Staff to be continued to the January 17, 2006, CDB meeting to review the new application material. The following comment from the Fire Department was added to Permit Plan on November 27, 2005: "Provide Fire Flow Calculations / Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply is available and to determine if any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this project. Calculations / Water Study due PRIOR TO CDB. (Previous approved condition voided per Fire Marshal's directions based on Assistant City Managers directive)" This new comment is being forwarded to you to determine compliance with the comment. Any questions should be directed to Steve Strong (562-4327 x3039). Wayne 1/19/2006 0 0 CDB Meeting Date: November 15, 2005 Case Number: FLD2005-08090 Agenda Item: D7 Owner/Applicant: Peter Pan Developments LLC (Panayiotis Vasiloudes and Petrit Meroli) Representative: Mr. Housh Ghovaee, Northside Engineering Services, Inc. Addresses: 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 46.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.F, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3- 1202.G. EXISTING ZONING/ Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District; Residential LAND USE: Facilities High (RFH) Category PROPERTY SIZE: 0.30 acres PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Attached dwellings (five apartments) Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (eight condominiums) Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 15, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 -Pagel of 10 r? LJ ADJACENT ZONING/ North: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District; LAND USES: Detached dwellings East: Preservation District; Clearwater Harbor South: Tourist District; Overnight accommodation uses West: Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District; Attached dwellings CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY: The area to the west and south is a mixture of attached dwellings and overnight accommodation uses. Detached dwellings are located to the north and northwest in a single family area not part of Beach by Design. ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 0.30 acres is located at the northeast corner of Bay Esplanade and Somerset Street. The site is a parallelogram corner lot with dimensions of 110 feet deep by 120 feet wide. The site is currently developed with a total of five apartments. All existing buildings and other site improvements will be demolished. Properties to the west and south are developed with a mixture of attached dwellings and overnight accommodation uses. The area to the north is developed with detached dwellings in the Low Medium Density Residential District (which is not part of Beach by Design). This site is located in the "Old Florida" District of Beach by Design. Many properties within this District are undergoing change, where the existing developments are being demolished and new attached dwelling buildings will be constructed. Proposal: The proposal includes the construction of an eight-unit residential building 46.83 feet tall (to roof deck). Two dwellings per floor with approximately 2,227 square feet of living area each are proposed on four floors. A total of 13 parking spaces are proposed, primarily located under the building. A hot tub is proposed to the east of the building adjacent to the seawall. The proposal includes a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet and reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street. The site is at the northern edge of the Old Florida District of Beach by Design. The applicant is unable to obtain any additional land area or lot width due to its location with regard to being at the edge of the Old Florida District of Beach by Design, the single family area to the north not being part of Beach by Design and being zoned Low Medium Density Residential District, the site being a corner lot bounded by Bay Esplanade on the west and Somerset Street on the south and Clearwater Harbor (water) located to the east of the site. A reduction to the lot area and lot width requirements appears appropriate, so long as site design is acceptable. Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 15, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 2 of 10 The proposal includes a request for a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck). The design of the proposed building includes a water feature in the center of the building facing Bay Esplanade, extending three feet from the base of the building. The building otherwise meets the minimum 25-foot front setback from Bay Esplanade. The building has been designed parallel with Bay Esplanade. The lot is a parallelogram, which creates angles to the north and south sides of the rectangular building in relation to lot lines. The building exceeds the required 10-foot side setback, being located 10.3 feet from the north property line at its northeast corner and approximately 18 feet at its northwest corner. The site design locates a parking space outside of the building on the north side of the building with the drive aisle within 3.1 feet of the north property line. Staff cannot support this requested reduction to the side (north) setback to the edge of pavement from a compatibility and buffering standpoint to the detached dwelling to the north, which is not part of Beach by Design (further discussion below). Due to the angles created with the building parallel on the lot with Bay Esplanade, the proposal includes a reduction to the front setback adjacent to Somerset Street of 11 feet to the southwest corner of the building. Somerset Street dead-ends at the east side of this property. With the placement of the building and the angles of property lines, the southeast corner of the building is located 19.5 feet from the Somerset Street property line. With regard to the front setback reduction from Somerset Street related to the trash staging area, the building will have a refuse collection room on the ground floor within the parking garage. Dumpsters will be rolled out to the staging area on collection days. The location of the trash staging area within the front setback is necessary to eliminate the necessity of the trash truck coming on-site and is common with many newer developments. This proposal includes a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck). Current development practices place the pool/hot tub area adjacent to the waterside of the property, which is generally the most private area of the property, with a pool/hot tub deck at a zero setback. The Community Development Board has approved other properties along the water within the "Old Florida" District with a pool in a similar location and setback as this proposal. These proposed front and side setbacks are consistent with or exceed the setbacks approved for similar projects within this "Old Florida" District to the south, however, not along this northern edge of the District. The project at 14 Somerset Street provided a minimum setback of 10 feet to the building and pavement. The proposal includes 13 parking spaces, which exceeds the minimum requirement by one space, accessed from a driveway from Somerset Street. On-site parking meeting Code requirements will eliminate parking that requires vehicles to back into the right-of-way for maneuvering, producing safer conditions. The minimum required parking is exceeded by only one space. While this space could be eliminated, parking exceeding the current minimum requirement for attached dwellings is encouraged. This northernmost parking space could have been designed adjacent to'the southeast side of the building (requiring a front setback reduction), but it was not part of this proposal. New public sidewalks will be constructed within the rights-of-way for both Bay Esplanade and Somerset Street, reducing impacts between pedestrians and motorists and increasing the safety for this area. Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 15, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 3 of 10 0 0 An increase to building height from 30 feet to 46.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) is included in this proposal. Pursuant to Section 2-404, the Medium High Density Residential District allows a height of 30 feet that may be increased to a maximum height of 50 feet, based upon meeting certain criteria. The subject property is located within the "Old Florida" District of the Beach by Design special area plan, where height is further limited by the standards set forth in the Plan as being low to mid-rise in accordance with the Community Development Code. In 1997 and 1998, a Plan was prepared for the City entitled "Clearwater Beach: Strategies for Revitalization. " This Plan was prepared after an extensive public process, directive surveys and input from the City Council and City administration. The purpose of Beach by Design, which was adopted by the City Council in 2001, is to implement the recommendations of that Plan and regulate development within certain areas of the beach. The subject property is located within the "Old Florida" District of the Beach by Design special area redevelopment plan which is defined as "an area of transition between resort uses in Central Beach to the low intensity residential neighborhoods to the north of Acacia (Street). " In order to implement this vision, Beach by Design states that building heights should be low to mid-rise in accordance with the Community Development Code. While "mid-rise" is not specifically defined within the Community Development Code, based upon the height standards set forth in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR), Tourist (T) and High Density Residential (HDR) Districts, the Planning Department has previously interpreted "mid-rise" development as having a maximum height of 50 feet. Revisions to "Old Florida": At its meeting of September 1, 2005, the City Council discussed a new policy direction with regard to the "Old Florida" District. This policy direction calls for limiting the height of buildings on those properties north of Somerset Street to 35 feet; limiting the height of buildings on the first 60 feet south of Somerset Street to 50 feet; and limiting the height of buildings in the balance of the District to 65 feet. In addition, the Council gave direction for increased site design performance by the way of larger setbacks and/or building step backs. As stated previously in this Staff report, the proposal includes a front setback to the proposed building adjacent to Bay Esplanade equal to the minimum required setback, less than the minimum required setback adjacent to Somerset Street and exceeding the minimum side setbacks (south and east). This application was submitted prior to, and therefore could not anticipate, City Council's new policy direction. The proposed building with four living floors over ground level parking at a height of 46.83 feet (to roof deck) is inconsistent with the new policy direction, as this site falls into the maximum 35-foot building height area north of Somerset Street. Irrespective of this new policy direction, Staff advised the applicant of compatibility and setback issues prior to submission of the application (further discussion below). The proposal includes a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement). As stated above regarding the setback reduction for the trash staging area, its location at the property line and within the street landscape buffer is one of necessary function. The reduction to the north landscape buffer does Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 15, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 4 of 10 not enhance the quality of this proposed development in relation to the existing lower intensity uses to the north. This reduction restricts the planting area to provide meaningful landscape buffering for visually screening between these two residential uses. It is noted the applicant proposes a solid fence along the north property line to assist landscape buffering. The design of the building and site improvements for the project at 14 Somerset Street complied with landscape buffer requirements along the north property line, which was also adjacent to detached dwellings. The northernmost parking space could be removed or could have been designed on the south side of the building adjacent to Somerset Street in order to provide the full landscape buffer adjacent to the detached dwelling to the north. The requested reduction to the buffer for the retention pond is in response to Section 3-1202.D.2 that requires a minimum five-foot planting area for landscape materials when retention ponds and the slopes of such ponds are located within perimeter buffers. Rather than redesign the retention pond to meet the requirements of the Code, the applicant chose to request a reduction to the buffer planting area, which is unacceptable. The primary issue with this proposal is compatibility with the detached dwelling area to the north, which is not part of Beach by Design. The applicant has designed one building to fit onto two sites across Somerset Street from each other (see FLD2005-08088, 685-689 Bay Esplanade). The maximum height for detached dwellings in the LMDR District to the north is 30 feet. The existing dwelling to the north is one living floor above ground level parking at an approximate height of 18 feet (to midpoint of the pitched roof). The proposed height of this building of four living floors over ground level parking is 46.83 feet (to roof deck). This proposed building height does not transition the intensity between adjacent uses, which is what the new policy directive provides at the edge of the Old Florida District, producing a use that is not compatible with the detached dwelling to the north. While the proposed building meets the minimum side setback requirement of 10 feet, the scale, bulk and height of this building is not harmonious with, does not minimizes adverse visual effects, nor is consistent with the character of the detached dwelling area to the north. Flexibility in regard to the proposed height has not been justified. It is acknowledged that the proposed building and site design may be consistent and compatible with the emerging development designs for properties to the south within the Old Florida District. As pavement is also a structure under the Code, the requested reduction to pavement along the north property line, albeit at ground level, is part of the overall site design that does not create a form and function enhancing the character of the surrounding community (primarily to the north). Based on the building design, one floor could be removed to bring the height close to the new policy direction of a maximum height of 35 feet. Flexibility in regard to required setbacks potentially could be viewed more favorably if the northernmost parking space had been relocated adjacent to the southeast corner of the building, however, the applicant did not design it as such and it was not advertised for any reduction at this location. The redevelopment of this parcel may not impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards, however, it must be manifested with compatibility between the more intense uses within the Old Florida District and the detached dwelling area to the north. The proposed building has been designed using an Old Florida vernacular style utilizing a light-to- medium brown stone finish on the first two floors and other vertical portions of the fagade for accent. The upper portions of the building fagade will be white stucco with banding at the second and fourth levels. While the primary roof will be flat, pitched roofs finished with shades of brown Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 15, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 5 of 10 0 0 barrel tiles over the stair tower, balconies and end units will provide visual interest to the perimeter of the roofline. Pursuant to Section 3-904.A, at street or driveway intersections no structure or landscaping may be installed within the sight visibility triangle that will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches and eight feet above grade. A building column on the east side of the driveway is located within the visibility triangle, as well as a column and a portion of the building on the west side of the driveway. The visibility will not be impacted, however, as Somerset Street dead ends at the water at the east side of the property. Granting the ability for the columns and portion of the building within the visibility triangle will not result in the grant of a special privilege, as similar reductions could be supported elsewhere under similar circumstances. Pursuant to Section 3-9043, in order to enhance views of the water from residential waterfront property, no structure or landscaping may be installed, other than a fence around a swimming pool or any non-opaque fence not exceeding 36 inches within the sight visibility triangles formed by the rear and side property lines. The proposal includes a four-foot high solid fence and hibiscus shrubs, an Oleander tree-form and a sabal palm within the waterfront sight visibility triangle at the northeast corner of the site. The fence will need to be lowered to a maximum of three feet and be non-opaque and the landscaping will need to be removed from the triangle. The site will be extensively landscaped with a variety of trees (Gold Trumpet, Oleander tree-form, Sabal palms, Mexican fan palms, Medjool date palms and Pygmy date palms), shrubs (hibiscus, ixora and schefflera arboricola) and ground covers (fakahatchee grass and dwarf jasmine). A retention pond is proposed on the east side of the building adjacent to Somerset Street and the seawall. The applicant has not indicated any freestanding signage for this site. Any future freestanding sign should meet the requirements of the Code, be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building. All applicable Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Residential Infill Project criteria (Section 2-404.F) have not been met. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site. Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 15, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 6 of 10 • • COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: (Sections 2-401.1 and 2-404): STANDARD PROPOSED CONSISTENT INCONSISTENT MAXIMUM Eight dwelling units X DENSITY (30 dwelling units per acre) (Nine dwellings maximum IMPERVIOUS 0.47 X SURFACE RATIO (ISR 0.85) LOT AREA (15,000 0.30 acres; 13,087 square feet X* s q. feet LOT WIDTH (150 South: 110 feet X* feet West: 120 feet FRONT SETBACK South: 11 feet (to building and X* (15 - 25 feet) pavement) and zero feet (to trash staging area) West: 22 feet (to water feature) REAR SETBACK N/A (corner lots have two front and X (10-15 feet) two side setbacks) SIDE SETBACK North: 3.1 feet (to pavement) X* (0 - 10 feet East: Zero feet to pool deck) HEIGHT (30 - 50 feet 46.83 feet (to roof deck) with an X maximum) additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets from roof deck) PARKING SPACES 13 spaces X (1.5 spaces per unit) 12 spaces minimum * See discussion under Analysis. Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 15, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 7 of 10 • COMPLIANCE WITH RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECT FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA (Section 2-404.F): Consistent Inconsistent 1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for X* development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards; 2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a X residential infill project will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties. 3. The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in X the district. 4. The uses within the residential infill project are compatible with X* adjacent lands uses. 5. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a X residential infill project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 6. The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and X* function which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. 7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off- X* street parking are justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS (Section 3-913): Consistent Inconsistent 1. Development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X* coverage, density and character of adjacent properties. 2. Development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. Development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. Development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X 5. Development is consistent with the community character of the X* immediate vicinity. 6. Design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, X* including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 15, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 8 of 10 0 0 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject 0.30 acres is located within the Small Motel District of Beach by Design; 2. The current use of the site is for five attached dwellings; 3. The proposal includes the demolition of the residential buildings and all existing site improvements; 4. The subject property is zoned Medium High Density Residential District and is located within and at the northern edge of the special area redevelopment plan, Beach by Design, as part of the "Old Florida" District; 5. The lot area is 13,087 square feet, which requires a reduction from the 15,000 square feet required; 6. The lot width is 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and 110 feet along Somerset Street, which requires a reduction from the 150 feet required; 7. The proposal is for a four-story residential building over ground level parking at a height of 46.83 feet (to roof deck); 8. The site is adjacent to a detached dwelling area to the north zoned Low Medium Density Residential, which is not part of Beach by Design, and restricts dwellings to a maximum height of 30 feet; 9. The proposed building encroaches into the front setback along Somerset Street, with the building's southwest corner located 11 feet from the front property line; 10. The northernmost parking space and associated drive aisle encroaches into the side setback and landscape buffer area; 11. The setback and landscape buffer reduction to pavement along the north property line is inconsistent with the setback and buffer approved for 14 Somerset Street, which is also at the edge of the Old Florida District and adjacent to detached dwellings; 12. The proposed building height does not transition the intensity between adjacent uses, producing a use that is not compatible with the detached dwelling to the north; 13. There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Staff concludes that the proposal does not comply with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project per Section 2-4041; 2. Staff further concludes that the proposal is not in compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913 and the other standards of the Code; and 3. Based on the analysis of this proposal and the above findings, Staff recommends denial of this application. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 29, 2005. The Planning Department recommends DENIAL for the Flexible Development application to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 15, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 -Page 9 of 10 0 0 Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 46.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-4041, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to 3.1 feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G, for the site at 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Denial: 1. The proposal does not comply with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project per Section 2-4041; 2. The proposal is in not compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3. The development is incompatible with the surrounding area. Prepared by: Planning Department Staff: a*f "- M - 4ay Wayne . Wells, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Aerial Photograph of Site and Vicinity Location Map Future Land Use Map Zoning Atlas Map Application S: (Planning Departmen6C D BIFLEX (FLD) IPending cases )Up for the next CDBIBay Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos (MHDR) 11.15.05 CDB - WWIBay Esplanade 693-699 Staff Report.doc Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 15, 2005 Case FLD2005-08090 - Page 10 of 10 u t? Conditions Associated With FLD2005-08090 • ?.; . as `?•` 693 BAY ESPLANADE Landscape Wayne Wells, AICP 727-562-4504 09/26/2005 Per Section 3-1202.D.2, Front slopes of stormwater retention areas may comprise up to 50 Not Met percent of any required landscape buffer width, provided that the slope is 4:1 or flatter and all required shrub plantings are not more than six inches below the top of the bank and provided that the buffer width is at least five feet in width. There is only a three-foot flat area provided from the front property line to the top of bank. Provide a cross section that shows compliance with this provision. Land Resource Condition Rick Albee 727-562-4741 Not Met 09/22/2005 Show the two palm trees on the north proerty line to be preserved on ALL plans prior to building permit. 09/22/2005 Show the existing 4' sidewalk to remain south of the existing asphalt driveway and adjacent to the 12" oak tree prior to building permit. Parks & Recs Condition Debbie Reid 562-4818 Not Met 09/16/2005 A recreation facility impact fee of $200 is due for each new residential unit prior to the issuance of Not Met building permit or final plat (if applicable) whichever occurs first. Credit will be given for any existing residential units. Conact Art Kader at 727-562-4824. Zoning Condition Wayne Wells, AICP 727-562-4504 09/26/2005 9/29/05 - WW Not Met At the DRC meeting, Wayne Wells emphasized that issues of setback and compatibility are primary issues with this request, as this site is at the northern boundary of Beach by Design and adjacent to existing single family dwellings. This is irrespective of City Council directives. 9/26/05 - WW In accordance with City Council directives, Staff will not support any building height over 35 feet for this parcel. 09/26/2005 Staff will not support any reduction to the 10-foot side (north) setback and 10-foot landscape Not Met buffer along the north property line. 09%26/2005 10/14/05 - WW Not Met Condition any approval with the fence along the north property line to be non-opaque within the waterfront visibility triangle. 9/26/05 - WW Recommend the installation/construction of a six-foot high solid fence along the north property line (reduced to a maximum of three feet high within the 25-foot front setback), with a maximum four-foot high non-opaque fence within the waterfront visibility triangle and east setback. 09/26/2005 Potential condition of approval: Not Met That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB; 09/26/2005 Potential condition of approval: Not Met That a Unity of Title be recorded in the public records prior to the issuance of any permits; Print Date: 10/14/2005 CaseConditons Page 1 of 2 V? 0 • FLD2005-08090 693 BAY ESPLANADE Zoning Condition Wayne Wells, AICP 727-562-4504 09/26/2005 Potential condition of approval: Not Met That future signage meet the requirements of the Code and any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height, designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building; 09/26/2005 Potential condition of approval: Not Met That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting right-of-way shall be installed along the entire site's street frontages prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior to the commencement of work; 09/26/2005 Potential condition of approval: Not Met That a condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 09/26/2005 Potential condition of approval: Not Met That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits; 09/26/2005 Potential condition of approval: Not Met That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits; 09/26/2005 Potential condition of approval: Not Met That boats moored at the docks be for the exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the condominiums and not be permitted to be sub-leased separately from the condominiums; 09/26/2005 Potential condition of approval: Not Met That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks; 09/26/2005 10/14/05 - WW Not Met Potentially include a condition of approval that rooftop a/c units be screened from view prior to the issuance of the building permit. 9/26/05 - WW Elevations - It is unclear if there are any parapets extending above the roof deck, except at the corners of the building. It is noted that the a/c units are to be located on the top of the building, but no screening of these units appears to be provided (usually screened by the parapets). Advise/revise. 09/26/2005 Based on the site plan and the building elevations, unclear how this proposal is complying with the Not Met attached dwelling criteria which requires the screening of off-street parking from adjacent parcels and streets by a landscaped wall or fence of at least four feet in height. Advise/revise. 09/26/2005 Address through the Residential Infill Project criteria HOW this proposal complies with the Not Met attached dwelling criteria for front setback reductions: a. The existing structures along the same side of the road have been constructed with irregular setbacks and the proposed reduction in front setback will not be out of character with the neighborhood; and b. The extent to which existing structures in the neighborhood have been constructed to a regular or uniform set back from the right of way. Print Date: 10/14/2005 CaseConditons Page 2 of 2 Pinellas County Property App*r Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 06 Page 2 of 5 05 / 29 / 15 1 54 756 1 076 I 0010 14-Oct-2005 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 13:22:01 Ownership Information Residential Property Address, Use, and Sales PETER PAN DEUELOPMENTS LLC OBK: 14564 OPG: 1139 5210 WEBB RD TAMPA FL 33615 EVAC: A EUAC Comparable sales value as Prop Addr: 699 BAY ESPLANADE of Jan 1, 2005, based on Census Tract: 260.02 sales from 2003 - 2004: 932,900 Sale Date OR Book/Page Price (Qual/UnQ) Vac/Imp Plat Information 10/2,004 13,915/ 513 1,050,000 (Q) I 1929: Book 020 Pgs 048- 12/2,002 12,452/1,789 475,000 (U) I 0000: Book Pgs - 11/2,00i 11,6591 658 452,000 (Q) I 0000; Book Pgs - 5 /1,999 10,514/ 171 378,000 (Q) I 2005 Value EXEMPTIONS Just/Market: 791,100 Homestead: NO Ownership % 000 Govt Exem; NO Use %: .000 Assessed /Cap; 791,100 Institutional Exem: NO Tax Exempt : 000 Historic Exem: 0 Taxable: 791,100 Agricultural: 0 2004 Tax Information District: Cu Seawall: YES Frontage: Bay Clearwater View: 05 Millage; 23.2372 Land Size Unit Land Land Land Front x Depth Price Units Meth 04 Taxes; 13,306.17 1) 60 x 110 11, 000.00 60.00 F Special Tax 00 2) 0 x 0 00 00 3) 0 x 0 00 00 Without the Save-Our-Homes 4) 0 x 0 00 00 cap, 2005 taxes will be 5) 0 x 0 .00 .00 18, 382.95 6) 0 x 0 00 00 Without any exemptions, 2005 taxes will be 18, 382.95 Short Legal MANDALAY UNIT NO. 5 REPLAT BLK 76, N 1/2 OF UNPLATTED Description BLK 76 Building Information http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-click?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0... 10/14/2005 Pinellas County Property App*r Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 06 Page 3 of 5 05 / 29 / 15 / 54756 / 076 / 0010 :01 14-Oct-2005 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 13:22:02 Residential Card 01 of 1 Prop Use: 210 Land Use: 01 Living Units: 1 Imp Type: Single Family Prop Address: 699 BAY ESPLANADE Structural E1em?nts Foundation Spc Footing- Wd/Blk Floor System Wood Exterior Wall Frame/Rclad Alm/Unyl Roof Frame Gable-Hip Roof Cover Composite Shingle # Stories 1.0 Floor Finish Crpt/HdTI/HdMar/Prgt Interior Finish Drywall/Plaster Quality Above Average Year Built 1,984 Effective Age 10 Heating Central Duct Cooling Cooling (Central) Fixtures 9 Other Depreciation 0 Functional Depreciation 0 Econonomic Depreciation 0 Sub Arras Description Factor Area Description Factor Area 1) Base Area 1.00 1,746 7) .00 0 2) Enclosed Porch 60 1,206 8) 00 0 3) Open Porch 20 288 9) 00 0 4) Garage 35 540 10) 00 0 5) Open Porch 15 252 11) 00 0 6) 00 0 12) 00 0 Rssidq-_ntial Extra Fsatur?s Description Dimensions Price Units Value RCD Year 1) FIREPLACE 21500.00 1 21500 1,600 1,984 2) DOCK 232 20.00 232 4,640 3,290 1,994 3) BT LFT/DAU 500.00 1 500 500 1,994 4) 00 0 0 0 0 5) 00 0 0 0 0 E) 00 0 0 0 0 TOTAL RECORD VALUE: 5,390 Map With Property Address (non-vacant) M FIE? 141 Fil Ril http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.uslhtbinlcgi-click?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0... 10/14/2005 Pinellas County Property Apper Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 0? J' M STREET SET ,T w D z W d0or STREET r z o_ 1/8 Mile Aerial Photograph (2002) 27942 http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-click?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0 Page 4 of 5 10/14/2005 Pinellas County Property App ' r Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 0 Page 5 of 5 http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-click?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0... 10/14/2005 Pinellas County Property Appoer Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 06 Page 2 of 5 05 / 29 / 15 / 54756 / 076 / 0011 14-Oct-2005 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 13:21:11 Ownership Information Non-Residential Property Address, Use, and Sales PETER PAN DEUELOPMENTS LLC OBK; 14564 OPG; 1141 5210 WEBB RD TAMPA FL 33615 EVAC: A EUAC Comparable sales value as Prop Addr; 693 BAY ESPLANADE of Jan 1, 2005, based on Census Tract; 260.02 2004 ; sales from 2003 - 0 Sale Date OR Book/Page Price (Qual/UnQ) Vac/Imp Plat Information 8 /2,005 14,495/1,833 1,436,200 (Q) I 1929: Book 020 Pgs 048- 8 12,004 13,761/ 606 1,050,000 (Q) I 0000: Book Pgs - 12/2,002 12,465/1,217 715,000 (0) I 0000; Book Pgs - 2 /1,999 10,418/ 513 300,000 (Q) I 2005 Value EXEMPTIONS Just/Market; 727,200 Homestead: NO Ownership % .000 Govt Exem: NO Use %: .000 Assessed/Cap; 727,200 Institutional Exem; NO Tax Exempt; 000 Historic Exem: 0 Taxable; 727,200 Agricultural; 0 2004 Tax Information District: Cu Seawall: Frontage: Bay Clearwater View; 05 Millage: 23.2372 Land Size Unit Land Land Land Front x Depth Price Units Meth 04 Taxes; 9,876.84 1) 60 x i 10 100. 00 6,610. 00 S Special Tax 00 2) 0 x 0 .00 .00 3) 0 x 0 00 00 Without the Save-Our-Homes 4) 0 x 0 .00 .00 cap, 2005 taxes will be 5) 0 x 0 .00 .00 16, 898.09 6) 0 x 0 00 00 Without any exemptions, 2005 taxes will be 16, 898.09 Short Legal MANDALAY UNIT NO. 5 REPLAT BLK 76, S i/2 OF UNPLATTED Description BLK 76 Building Information http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/egi-scr3?o=l &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&... 10/14/2005 Pinellas County Property AppWr Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 0 Page 3 of 5 Prooerty.._and Land Use Code-....descriotions 05 20 / 15 54750 / 070 1 0011 :01 14-Oct-2005 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 13:21:11 Commercial Card 01 of i Improvement Type: Res Comm Use Property Address: 693 BAY ESPLANADE Prop Use: 313 Land Use: 39 Structural E1em?nts Foundation Continuous Footing Floor System Slab on Grade Exterior Wall Cone Block/Stucco Height Factor 0 Party Wall None Structural Frame None Roof Frame Gable & Hip Roof Cover Composition Shingle Cabinet & Mill Average Floor Finish Carpet Combination Interior Finish Drywall Total Units 5 Heating & Air Heating&Cooling Pckg Fixtures 15 Bath Tile Floor and Wall Electric Average Shape Factor Rectangle Quality Average Year Built 1,949 Effective Age 15 Other Depreciation 0 Function Depreciation 0 Economic Depreciation 0 Sub Aromas Description Factor Area Description Factor Area 1) Base Area 1. 00 1,816 7) . 00 0 2) Screen Porch 25 384 8) 00 0 3) Open Porch 20 156 9) 00 0 4) Open Porch 15 418 10) 00 0 5) Upper Stry Base Area 90 1,000 11) .00 0 6) 00 0 12) 00 0 Coinrn?rcial Extra Futures Description Dimensions Price Units Value RCD Year 1) DOCK 414 20.00 414 81280 3,310 1,970 2) PATIO/DECK 650 3.00 650 1,950 1,210 1,991 3) BT LFT/DAU 2 500.00 2 1,000 1,000 1,970 4) 00 0 0 0 0 5) .00 0 0 0 0 6) 00 0 0 0 0 TOTAL RECORD VALUE: 51520 Map With Property Address (non-vacant) F*_1 [41 Fil I R R http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.uslhtbinlcgi-scr3?o=1 &a=1 &b=l &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&... 10/14/2005 l Inellas County Property Appr-4,zer Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 001 > 1%001 N?' STREET 47 EACI: T f 1 ji D z J.I yJ ?' 720 6f PLANADE 718 r c? P! 7101 BA"? 5PLAN"' D STREET 1/8 Mile Aerial Photograph (2002) i , LI { Page 4 of 5 http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-scr3?o=l&a=l&b=l&c=l &0=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&... 10/14/2005 Dinul_l s (Ccolmy Property App r _11,Rwrt}wkHu 05 29 15 54756 076 00' Page 5 of Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Information ?3] cw'x1):uls.1:21tZ31 t)??11z1? •iLt<'} flack _16&s=4 t:3::: J &u:::0&... 10,,` 112005 M03?'7 080901- ) - 6*404 F $ ? 249A 249E j I _ a Iq ,r. - a 12 ... z ASTER EE N?.?} a? CITY OF CLEARWATER I >rt $ >ort Z3 yp1l 18 t5yd T >i4 22 1 4 3 >r0 ACACIA STREET o 3 . Z 8. 4 3 2 BB 1o s s 14' - 3 2 ,? 2 » t t 704 it dos 5 4 3,,:. , T 4 5 CON 9 fit 7 6 5 4 3e ay 9 I 't 8 41- e e a6 - lit e $ a + t $ SOMERSET ST !2 ? W e.;O e w r6pNLyBm ?n r 76 ?y 13 q t , e m \) C z I y y? d?. 1'2' BB6 5 4 Ba - OU E ° ° 1 T S CAMBRIA $T g 8 13 4 E eel $1IQR I pl P . - q e6e r 7 to CONW t 4 t3 t n to 15664 Z t3 it ese ?_69.:. ??? 111 Q. P. ?i 66 ?/} 16e60 ? ? 1$'660 669 E IDLEWUO ST 17 F .. CD 6 q 5 a3 t8e4e S 9 70- 6 -1 . a au 1 n 10 19 ap 8 g CL E ST t .?Z n6 reB t AS-OF CLW. $ROYAL I s WA'I BSA CON eIDt 9 13 80-118 4 ,, T11 1 z a t2'. k 3 at, it t0 9 6 ] *THE CAY T s g HVIL WOOD ST ere .p z c'. a s a a Z 6?F l e: ; ,4, 6 CLW. BEACH 3 4 5 6 7 1 6 6 5 err ESPCAr+AOE g 6tA CONDO 11 -78 so -- 4 61 rrr a 10e tt eut it 5 t xn 996 i3 11 e0 6 0?`q t3 01 t E, PVALON kg ar» 741 76r os: tai 1 .. 6fT?l, a a49 F 17 6 1 0 s?1 3 etIN 3: ` BI dq 9 A w' 3 . z T a y3 ° 4 5 6 a t 0 Q^Z 2 ^ eoe wi 2 it ?J 1 - 71 63 7 14 ao> 2.. && t tl t3 ? eD1. M I a a t $ 4 $ .Wk. - 6 k age t Y? ' ae4 a TA KENDALL = ST st 16660 0 i eei t N O \ . ap, I1 E4 < ba W3 4 4 5 6 9 5 E-' 541 ) 4 2 me 176>! N ? t 75 14 13 ?. tt t0 - 3 ?? jt7 .. 7 6 67 tge6e I O Vt V £ _ BB n 4 ? a a iq 5 O O . BAY ,I C I rIRE _ (2 lla4 iW (2) $46 ..? 6L C e » aO S R CLEARWATER BEACH REC COMPLEX 4 33/01 of ? MANDALAY N od v P. PARK aeD Rw,9.. LA N nip P •I? ? m 4o s s RIXKAWAr 8 STREET ° MIL 4e q" ° 5 _ ® BELLE HARBOR j >9 2 to ql e lee 1 a 126 - 15 tJ - 9 . 9w sham CDR a? CT C i . T oa ,7?/ LO Epp ear ® ? 267A 3 4 C 5 C 6 a 7 8 9 C' t4 t3 1 I 10 -< B° . s« aa Ph.: (727)564-4]30, foa: (717)526-6133 man a T ED ran +a/p+/e] AND VICINITY PINEILAS COUNTY. FLORIDA ? G PREPARED 61 jg?jaNO c? ? s PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION WAY ENGINEERING 00 S. N)rlle Ave., Clearwoler, Gl 37756 ???FF^r?,41 blip:IlwKw_NepfWDtar-B.COnI/CIIy?Pp°IImBP19/pUD1IC_H°Ik9/POQI°e!r/ t ?N? m9Natm er: 7 Public Infvrmallon solo Is tuml9hea Dy the Clty of Clearwoler p 81- Public Works "m11[9lrotIoft/E,q1near1h9. and must De accepted and used by Ine reclDlenl with the underotpndlnQ that the data reeelsed was coil ected for lh! Durpvze of developing o grpDnlc Inrrvslrvclare Inventory. As ach, Ine Clly or Clearwpler PWA/E c oeae no worronl»a, a+Dwaaoa or Iml>'lea. nc InQ the G ecuroer. comDletmna, rNloblely, or auRobltlly of this data for any outer pormeaumlor I,ae earlnermare, the eny or nearwater r PWA/E vszu noRoDillly »nolsaever associated »Itn the use `sf. mtsvae or or eolo. ?f?yv`y?iy Thla All.. page la svb?JecL11 to periodle changes for lnrormoUon about lolesl revisions please call PWA/E or r vsll air Web site. I N I I 0 100 200 400 600 I SCALE: t" = 400' LEGEND: I I O BLOCK NUMBER N W 1234 LOT ADDRESS P I N ____ a, ? - CITY LIMITS LINE I I r?_7 SHADED AREA - PROPERTY y L??d OUTSIDE CLEARWATER CITY LIMITS J I ? AGREEMENT TO ANNEX CITY OWNED PROPERTY I MDR ZONING DESIGNATION ZONE LINE I 6rrohE oRp Q 69+1 +i/+J/p+ I I C C°RP[C110N p9/ir/9i I I REVISED; 09 /09 /2002 ZONING ATLAS SW 1 /4 OF SECTION Z ?QA V 2678 ? 5 - 29 S - 15 E Wells, Wayne From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 12:49 PM To: Tefft, Robert; Wells, Wayne Subject: FW: DRC re submittals FYI -----Original Message----- From: Rickard, Leonard Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 12:01 PM To: Watkins, Sherry Subject: DRC re submittals SHERRY, HERE ARE FIRE DEPT RESULTS as of 10/11/2005 1. FLD2005-08089 41 Devon Drive Planner: Wayne Wells MET 2. FLD2005-08086 405 Island Way Planner: Wayne Wells MET 3. FLD2005-08088 685 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells MET 4. FLD2005-08090 693 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells MET 5. FLD2005-08084 400 Cleveland Street Planner: Robert Teft MET 6. FLD2005-08087 657 Bay Esplanade Planner: Robert Teft MET 7. FLD2005-07071 678 S GULFVIEW BLVD MET 1 0 0 Wells, Wayne From: Albee, Rick Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:32 PM To: Watkins, Sherry; DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Herman, Sandra; Hufford, Diane; Irwin, Rod; Jeffries, Teresa A.; Keller, James; Pulizotto, Lynne; Reid, Debbie; Rickard, Leonard; Strong, Steve Subject: RE: resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: 41 Devon-One condition Met, other to be condition for building permit. 405 Island Way- No Issues 685 Bay Esplanade- No Issues 693 Bay Esplanade- Conditions Not Met, required prior to building permit. 400 Cleveland- No Issues 657 Bay Esplanade- No Issues. -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 1:57 PM To: DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Herman, Sandra; Hufford, Diane; Irwin, Rod; Jeffries, Teresa A.; Keller, James; Pulizotto, Lynne; Reid, Debbie; Rickard, Leonard; Strong, Steve Subject: FW: resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: Correction I should Have Addressed this email as follows: Good Afternoon DRC Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-08089 41 Devon Drive Planner: Wayne Wells 2. FLD2005-08086 405 Island Way Planner: Wayne Wells 3. FLD2005-08088 685 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 4. FLD2005-08090 693 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 5. FLD2005-08084 400 Cleveland Street Planner: Robert Teft 6. FLD2005-08087 657 Bay Esplanade Planner: Robert Teft I have placed one copy of the case resubmittal package on the cabinets outside of Room 216 in our office for your review (please do not take it, as we need it for the CDB mail out). Please review your comments/conditions for this case in Permit Plan and determine if they are met. Whether the conditions are "met" or still "not met," please affirm to me via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possible by 12:00 pm on Wednesday, October 12, 2005. Thank you Sherry Watkins Planning -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 1:15 PM To: DRC Members Subject: resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: Good Afternoon CDB Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: 1 1. FLD2005-08089 41 Devon Drive Planner: Wayne Wells 2. FLD2005-08086 405 Island Way Planner: Wayne Wells 3. FLD2005-08088 685 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 4. FLD2005-08090 693 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 5. FLD2005-08084 400 Cleveland Street Planner: Robert Teft 6. FLD2005-08087 657 Bay Esplanade Planner: Robert Teft I have placed one copy of the case resubmittal package on the cabinets outside of Room 216 in our office for your review (please do not take it, as we need it for the CDB mail out). Please review your comments/conditions for this case in Permit Plan and determine if they are met. Whether the conditions are "met" or still "not met," please affirm to me via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possible by 12:00 pm on Wednesday, October 12, 2005. 2 • U Wells, Wayne From: Rice, Scott Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 9:08 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Watkins, Sherry Subject: FLD2005-08090 - 693 Bay Esplanade Engineering has completed review of the resubmittal for the subject application and updated Permit Plan. Approval conditions: Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant is to provide a copy of the approved SWFWMD permit for the proposed site. Prior to CO, comply with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule. D. Scott Rice Land DeveL Engr. Manager 727-562-4781 scott.rice@MyClearwater.com 5 wv 0 0 Wells, Wayne From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 8:59 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Tefft, Robert Subject: FW: resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: FYI -----Original Message----- From: Reid, Debbie Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 2:30 PM To: Watkins, Sherry Cc: Kader, Art Subject: RE: resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: Sherry, P&P has no issues with the below cases. Debbie O -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 1:57 PM To: DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Herman, Sandra; Hufford, Diane; Irwin, Rod; Jeffries, Teresa A.; Keller, James; Pulizotto, Lynne; Reid, Debbie; Rickard, Leonard; Strong, Steve Subject: FW: resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: Correction I should Have Addressed this email as follows: Good Afternoon DRC Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-08089 41 Devon Drive Planner: Wayne Wells 2. FLD2005-08086 3. FLD2005-08088 4. FLD2005-08090 5. FLD2005-08084 6. FLD2005-08087 405 Island Way Planner: Wayne Wells 685 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 693 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 400 Cleveland Street Planner: Robert Teft 657 Bay Esplanade Planner: Robert Teft I have placed one copy of the case resubmittal package on the cabinets outside of Room 216 in our office for your review (please do not take it, as we need it for the CDB mail out). Please review your comments/conditions for this case in Permit Plan and determine if they are met. Whether the conditions are "met" or still "not met," please affirm to me via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possible by 12:00 pm on Wednesday, October 12, 2005. Thank you Sherry Watkins Planning -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 1:15 PM To: DRC Members Subject: resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: Good Afternoon CDB Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-08089 41 Devon Drive Planner: Wayne Wells 2. FLD2005-08086 405 Island Way Planner: Wayne Wells 3. FLD2005-08088 685 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 4. FLD2005-08090 693 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 5. FLD2005-08084 400 Cleveland Street Planner: Robert Teft 6. FLD2005-08087 657 Bay Esplanade Planner: Robert Teft I have placed one copy of the case resubmittal package on the cabinets outside of Room 216 in our office for your review (please do not take it, as we need it for the CDB mail out). Please review your comments/conditions for this case in Permit Plan and determine if they are met. Whether the conditions are "met" or still "not met," please affirm to me via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possible by 12:00 pm on Wednesday, October 12, 2005. 2 I I 1" 0 9 Wells, Wayne From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 3:32 PM To: Wells, Wayne; Tefft, Robert Subject: FW: Resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: FYI -----Original Message----- From: Rickard, Leonard Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 3:29 PM To: Watkins, Sherry Subject: RE: Resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: SHERRY, HERE ARE FIRE DEPT RESULTS 1. FLD2005-08089 41 Devon Drive Planner: Wayne Wells MET 2. FLD2005-08086 405 Island Way Planner: Wayne Wells MET 3. FLD2005-08088 685 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells NOT MET 4. FLD2005-08090 693 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells NOT MET 5. FLD2005-08084 400 Cleveland Street Planner: Robert Teft 6. FLD2005-08087 657 Bay Esplanade Planner: Robert Teft 7. FLD2005-07071 678 S GULFVIEW BLVD MET NOT MET MET -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 1:57 PM To: DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Herman, Sandra; Hufford, Diane; Irwin, Rod; Jeffries, Teresa A.; Keller, James; Pulizotto, Lynne; Reid, Debbie; Rickard, Leonard; Strong, Steve Subject: FW: resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: Correction I should Have Addressed this email as follows: Good Afternoon DRC Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-08089 41 Devon Drive Planner: Wayne Wells 2. FLD2005-08086 405 Island Way Planner: Wayne Wells 3. FLD2005-08088 685 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 4. FLD2005-08090 693 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 5. FLD2005-08084 400 Cleveland Street Planner: Robert Teft 6. FLD2005-08087 657 Bay Esplanade Planner: Robert Teft I have placed one copy of the case resubmittal package on the cabinets outside of Room 216 in our office for your review (please do not take it, as we need it for the CDB mail out). Please review your comments/conditions for this case in Permit Plan and determine if they are met. Whether the conditions are "met" or still "not met," 1 please affirm to me via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possibleRy 12:00 pm on Wednesday, October 12, 2005. Thank you Sherry Watkins Planning -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 1:15 PM To: DRC Members Subject: resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: Good Afternoon CDB Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-08089 41 Devon Drive Planner: Wayne Wells 2. FLD2005-08086 405 Island Way Planner: Wayne Wells 3. FLD2005-08088 685 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 4. FLD2005-08090 693 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 5. FLD2005-08084 400 Cleveland Street Planner: Robert Teft 6. FLD2005-08087 657 Bay Esplanade Planner: Robert Teft I have placed one copy of the case resubmittal package on the cabinets outside of Room 216 in our office for your review (please do not take it, as we need it for the CDB mail out). Please review your comments/conditions for this case in Permit Plan and determine if they are met. Whether the conditions are "met" or still "not met," please affirm to me via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possible by 12:00 pm on Wednesday, October 12, 2005. 2 AW . 0 • Wells, Wayne From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 1:57 PM To: DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Herman, Sandra; Hufford, Diane; Irwin, Rod; Jeffries, Teresa A.; Keller, James; Pulizotto, Lynne; Reid, Debbie; Rickard, Leonard; Strong, Steve Subject: FW: resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: Correction I should Have Addressed this email as follows: Good Afternoon DRC Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-08089 2. FLD2005-08086 3. FLD2005-08088 4. FLD2005-08090 5. FLD2005-08084 6. FLD2005-08087 41 Devon Drive Planner: Wayne Wells 405 Island Way Planner: Wayne Wells 685 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 693 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 400 Cleveland Street Planner: Robert Teft 657 Bay Esplanade Planner: Robert Teft I have placed one copy of the case resubmittal package on the cabinets outside of Room 216 in our office for your review (please do not take it, as we need it for the CDB mail out). Please review your comments/conditions for this case in Permit Plan and determine if they are met. Whether the conditions are "met" or still "not met," please affirm to me via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possible by 12:00 pm on Wednesday, October 12, 2005. Thank you Sherry Watkins Planning -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 1:15 PM To: DRC Members Subject: resubmittals for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: Good Afternoon CDB Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the November 15, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-08089 2. FLD2005-08086 3. FLD2005-08088 4. FLD2005-08090 5. FLD2005-08084 6. FLD2005-08087 41 Devon Drive Planner: Wayne Wells 405 Island Way Planner: Wayne Wells 685 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 693 Bay Esplanade Planner: Wayne Wells 400 Cleveland Street Planner: Robert Teft 657 Bay Esplanade Planner: Robert Teft I have placed one copy of the case resubmittal package on the cabinets outside of Room 216 in our office for your review (please do not take it, as we need it for the CDB mail out). Please review your comments/conditions for this case in 1 Ior It till affirm to me "met'. Permit Plan and determine if they are met. Whether the conditions are till not met, p via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possible by 12:00 pm on Wednesday, October 12, 2005. 1:35 pm Case Number: FLD2005-08090 -- 693 BAY ESPLANADE Owner(s): Spring Tide Investments Ii Llc 622 Bypass Dr Ste 100 / Clearwater, Fl 33764 TELEPHONE: No Phone, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email VRML Representative: Roush Ghovaee cft**V?41 601 Cleveland Street Clearwater, Fl 33755 TELEPHONE: 727-443-2869, FAX: 727-446-8036, E-MAIL: nestech@mindspring.com Location: 0.30 acres located at the northeast comer of Bay Esplanade and Somerset Street. Atlas Page: 258A Zoning District: MHDR, Medium High Density Residential Request: Flexible Development approval to permit eight attached dwellings with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, a reduction to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 1 1 feet (to building), from 25 feet to xx feet (to pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to one foot (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to xx feet (to roof deck) with an additional xx feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.17, and reductions to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to xx feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to one foot (to pavement), as a C6mprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. Proposed Use: Attached dwellings Neighborhood Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition Association(s): Clearwater, Fl 33761 2544 Frisco Drive TELEPHONE: 727-725-3345, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: Djw@gte.net Neighborhood Clearwater Beach Association Association(s): Clearwater, Fl 33767 100 Devon Dr TELEPHONE: 443-2168, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: papamurphy@aol.com Neighborhood Coral Resort Condominum Association(s): Clearwater, Fl 33767 483 E Shore Drive `I`E1:EPHONE.-727=#46=37_I1, FA-" Fax, E-MAIL: coral483@aol.com Prese_nter:_.WayneWell s;•Planner III-- - -- Attendees Included: City Staff: Wayne Wells, Neil Thompson, Scott Rice Lenny Rickard Applicant/Rep: Housh Ghovaee, Doreen Williams, Renee Ruggerio Sol t The DRC reviewed this application with the following comments: S.?I C General Engineering: Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 44 • • 1. Show dimensions of all parking spaces on the plan. 2. Sidewalk shall be constructed one-foot from property line in accordance with City Index 109, Sheet 3 of 3. The above to be addressed prior to CDB. The following to be addressed prior to building permit: 1. Either relocate F.H.A. and unrestricted fire line serving hydrant into street right-of-way or dedication of and easement to the City of Clearwater will be required to be recorded prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. 2. Sidewalk construction shall be consistent with City of Clearwater Contract Specifications and Standards Index #109 and FDOT Roadway and Traffic Design Standards, Detail #304. 3. All unused driveways shall be removed at applicant's expense, curb replaced and unimproved surfaces resodded. Prior to CO: 1. The condominium plat for "Somerset Condominiums" shall be recorded by Pinellas County. General Note: DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review, additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. Environmental: Dry Detention systems must contain a grassed bottom and designed with no steeper than 4:1 side slope. Provide cross-section for the pond(s). Fire: I . By order of Chief of Construction, NO APPROVALS on Bay Esplanade, Skiff Point, Brightwater, until water supply is improved. All questions regarding this fire comment should be addressed to Chief of Construction S. C. Strong who can be reached at 727-562-4327 ext 3039. PRIOR TO PERMIT. 2. Show location of fire hydrant for fire fighting use. Must be within 300' of building as hose lays and on same side of street as building. This is in addition to the one for fire systems. PRIOR TO CDB 3 . An automatic Class I standpipe system with a Fire Pump is required. 100psi at roof is required. Fire Pump to be located above BFE. PRIOR TO CDB 4. An emergency generator is required as a back up source of power for elevators and fire pump. Must be located above BFE. Emergency lighting should also be connected. PRIOR TO CDB 5 . Standpipe connection for dock area must be connected to firepump/wet standpipe system. Acknowledge PRIOR TO CDB 6. Provide Fire Flow Calculations by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure adequate water supply for project. Acknowledge intent PRIOR TO CDB. Calculations due PRIOR TO PERMIT. Harbor Master: No issues - existing docks being retained. Legal: I . No issues. Land Resources: I . Show the two palm trees on the north proerty line to be preserved prior to building permit. 2. Show the existing 4' sidewalk to remain south of the existing asphalt driveway and adjacent to the 12" oak tree prior to building permit. Landscaping: 1 . Northern edge of the pavement must be curbed, similar to other edges. Per Section 3-1202.D.2, Front slopes of stormwater retention areas may comprise up to 50 percent of any required landscape buffer width, provided that the slope is 4:1 or flatter and all required shrub plantings are not more than six inches below the top of the bank and provided that the buffer width is at least five feet in width. There is only a three-foot flat area provided from the front property line to the top of bank. Provide a cross section that shows compliance with this provision. As part of the Comprehensive Landscape Program application, indicate what landscape requirements are being requested to be waived or modified. Sheet L1.1 - Revise Landscaping Note #8, as the minimum size of trees at time of planting is 10-foot tall and 2.5-inch caliper. Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 45 • • Parks and Recreation: Stormwater: Solid Waste: A recreation facility impact fee of $200 is due for each new residential unit prior to the issuance of building permit or final plat (if applicable) whichever occurs first. Credit will be given for any existing residential units. Conact Art Kader at 727-562-4824. The following to be addressed prior to building permit: 1. The applicant is to provide a copy of an approved SWFWMD permit for the proposed site. 2. Show how post-development runoff is directed to stormwater pond. Show where recycling carts will be placed for resident use (each cart makes a 3'x3' footprint) Traffic Engineering: 1 . Correct directional pavement arrows to be a 2-way bi-directional traffic instead of one-way. 2. Relocate handicap parking space close to elevator. 3. All parking spaces must meet City standard parking dimensions 9 feet wide by 19 feet long with a 24 feet drive aisle. 4. Motorist's line of sight must not be blocked when backing out of parking space(s). 5. Acknowledge that the vertical clear height for parking garage (entrance,route, and exit to and from h/c parking space must be a minimum of 8 feet 2 inches (8'2") to accommodate h/c van. All of the above to be addressed prior to CDB. Planning: General note: Comply with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule. Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 46 • • 1 . Residential Infill Project criteria #2 - Provide the value of the site after all site and building improvements are constructed. 2 . Revise first page of the application to revise Parcel # 05/29/15/54756/076/0020 to Parcel # 05/29/15/54756/076/0011. 3 . Sheet C2.1 - Provide the dimension from the front property line of Somerset Street to the closest edge of pavement (without the radius; just from the edge of pavement extended). 4. Sheet C2.1 - Minimum width of parking spaces is nine feet (no compact spaces). 5 . In accordance with City Council directives, Staff will not support any building height over 35 feet for this parcel. 6. Staff will not support any reduction to the 10-foot side (north) setback and 10-foot landscape buffer along the north property line. 7. Recommend the installation/construction of a six-foot high solid fence along the north property line (reduced to a maximum of three feet high within the 25-foot front setback), with a maximum four-foot high non-opaque fence within the waterfront visibility triangle and east setback. 8 . Indicate the location, height and type of fencing for the pool on Sheet C2.1. 9. Potential condition of approval: That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB; 10. Potential condition of approval: That a Unity of Title be recorded in the public records prior to the issuance of any permits; 11 . Potential condition of approval: That future signage meet the requirements of the Code and any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height, designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building; 12. Potential condition of approval: That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting right-of-way shall be installed along the entire site's street frontages prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior to the commencement of work; 13 . Potential condition of approval: That a condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 14. Potential condition of approval: That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits; 15 . Potential condition of approval: That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits; 16. Potential condition of approval: That boats moored at the docks be for the exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the condominiums and not be permitted to be sub-leased separately from the condominiums; 17. Potential condition of approval: That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks; 18. Sheet C3.1 - Revise title on the right side to read "Grading, Drainage & Utilities Site Plan." 19 . Show visibility triangle at street intersection on Sheets C2.1 and L 1.1. 20. Strongly recommend providing two parking spaces per unit. 21 . Sheet CL I - Revise the "Parking Calculations" at the bottom of the Site Data table to read "8 units @ 1.5 spaces..." rather than "8 units 2 1.5..." 22. Need to remove existing driveways/parking areas within the Bay Esplanade right-of-way and sod. 23 . Remove proposed upright curbing from the Somerset right-of-way. Curbing also interferes with the trash staging area. 24. In lieu of the water feature on the west side, suggest a special landscape feature instead. 25 . Elevations - Elevator machine room appears as a square box on top of the structure with a flat roof, lacking the detail that the stair tower does. Suggest relocating the elevator machine room to be part of the stair tower with a pitched roof. 26. Elevations - Most balconies appear to be a solid, stuccoed wall with a railing on top. The east elevation is not as detailed as to what is proposed regarding the balcony. The balcony extends across the full width of the building but is unclear as to whether the balcony edge is a solid, stuccoed wall or simply railings. Revise. Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 47 0 0 27. Elevations - It is unclear if there are any parapets extending above the roof deck, except at the corners of the building. It is noted that the a/c units are to be located on the top of the building, but no screening of these units appears to be provided (usually screened by the parapets). Advise/revise. 28. Unclear why the mailboxes are proposed in the open air area of the parking garage. Mailboxes are generally placed inside the lobby area. Advise. 29. Elevations - Clarify that the sides of the chimneys (as seen on the east and west elevations) are stucco, rather than a stone finish. 30. Based on the floor plans submitted, the rear balconies extend to the edge of the rear stairwell. However, the south and north elevations do not indicate such, except for the 4th floor. Revise/advise. Additionally, the east elevation indicates a tiled overhang/roof structure at the first floor level, extending approximately 4 feet from the main structure, as indicated on the east elevation. This overhang/roof structure is not indicated on the 1 st floor plan, nor on the site plans for the overhang/roof structure as a dashed line. Revise/advise. 31 . General Applicability criteria #1 response: Ensure the accuracy of the height of the single family dwellings, stated at between 30 and 40 feet, based on the Base Flood Elevation and the measurement of height (to flat roof deck or to midpoint of a pitched roof). 32. Residential Infill Project criteria #1 response: Provide detailed justification as to HOW the redevelopment of this site is "otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards." "Benefits to the community" are not a justification. 33 . Residential Infill Project criteria #4 response: Provide detailed information as to HOW the proposal is "compatible with adjacent land uses." 34. Residential Infill Project criteria #6 response: The single family development to the north is zoned Low Medium Density Residential District, not Medium High Density Residential District. 35 . Residential Infill Project criteria #7 response: Provide a detailed justification as to HOW "flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking" benefit the community character of the immediate vicinity and the City of Clearwater as a whole. The response does not address the flexibility requested. 36. Based on the site plan and the building elevations, unclear how this proposal is complying with the attached dwelling criteria which requires the screening of off-street parking from adjacent parcels and streets by a landscaped wall or fence of at least four feet in height. Advise/revise. 37. Address through the Residential Infill Project criteria HOW this proposal complies with the attached dwelling criteria for front setback reductions: a. The existing structures along the same side of the road have been constructed with irregular setbacks and the proposed reduction in front setback will not be out of character with the neighborhood; and b. The extent to which existing structures in the neighborhood have been constructed to a regular or uniform set back from the right of way. Other: No Comments Notes: To be placed on the 11/15105 CDB agenda, submit 15 collated copies of the revised plans & application material addressing all above departments' comments by noon, 10/6/05. Packets shall be collated, folded and stapled as appropriate. Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 48 1:35 pm Case Number: FLD2005-08090 -- 693 BAY ESPLANADE Owner(s): Spring Tide Investments Ii Llc s 622 Bypass Dr Ste 100 Clearwater, F133764 TELEPHONE: No Phone, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email Representative: Housh Ghovaeeow•wt 601 Cleveland Street Clearwater, Fl 33755 TELEPHONE: 727-443-2869, FAX: 727-446-8036, E-MAIL: nestech@mindspring.com Location: 0.30 acres located at the northeast corner of Bay Esplanade and Somerset Street. Atlas Page: 258A Zoning District: MHDR, Medium High Density Residential Request: Flexible Development approval to permit eight attached dwellings with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, a reduction to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building), from 25 feet to xx feet (to pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to one foot (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to xx feet (to roof deck) with an additional xx feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-4041, and reductions to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to xx feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to one foot (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. Proposed Use: Attached dwellings Neighborhood Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition Association(s): Clearwater, Fl 33761 2544 Frisco Drive TELEPHONE: 727-725-3345, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: Djw@gte.net Neighborhood Clearwater Beach Association Association(s): Clearwater, Fl 33767 100 Devon Dr TELEPHONE: 443-2168, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: papamurphy@aol.com Neighborhood Coral Resort Condominum Association(s): Clearwater, Fl 33767 483 E Shore Drive TELEPHONE: 727-446-3711, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: cora1483@aol.com Presenter: Wayne Wells, Planner III Attendees Included: City Staff: Wayne Wells, Neil Thompson, Scott Rice, Lenny Rickard Applicant/Rep: Housh Ghovaee, Doreen Williams, Renee Ruggerio The DRC reviewed this application with the following comments: General Engineering: Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 38 1. Show dimensionlpf all parking spaces on the plan. • 2. Sidewalk shall be constructed one-foot from property line in accordance with City Index 109, Sheet 3 of 3. The above to be addressed prior to CDB. The following to be addressed prior to building permit: 1. Either relocate F.H.A. and unrestricted fire line serving hydrant into street right-of-way or dedication of and easement to the City of Clearwater will be required to be recorded prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. 2. Sidewalk construction shall be consistent with City of Clearwater Contract Specifications and Standards Index #109 and FDOT Roadway and Traffic Design Standards, Detail #304. 3. All unused driveways shall be removed at applicant's expense, curb replaced and unimproved surfaces resodded. Prior to CO: 1. The condominium plat for "Somerset Condominiums" shall be recorded by Pinellas County. General Note: DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review, additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. Environmental: 1 . Dry Detention systems must contain a grassed bottom and designed with no steeper than 4:1 side slope. Provide cross-section for the pond(s). Fire: 1 . By order of Chief of Construction, NO APPROVALS on Bay Esplanade, Skiff Point, Brightwater, until water supply is improved. All questions regarding this fire comment should be addressed to Chief of Construction S. C. Strong who can be reached at 727-562-4327 ext 3039. PRIOR TO PERMIT. 2 . Show location of fire hydrant for fire fighting use. Must be within 300' of building as hose lays and on same side of street as building. This is in addition to the one for fire systems. PRIOR TO CDB 3 . An automatic Class I standpipe system with a Fire Pump is required. 100psi at roof is required. Fire Pump to be located above BFE. PRIOR TO CDB 4. An emergency generator is required as a back up source of power for elevators and fire pump. Must be located above BFE. Emergency lighting should also be connected. PRIOR TO CDB 5 . Standpipe connection for dock area must be connected to firepump/wet standpipe system. Acknowledge PRIOR TO CDB 6. Provide Fire Flow Calculations by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure adequate water supply for project. Acknowledge intent PRIOR TO CDB. Calculations due PRIOR TO PERMIT. Harbor Master: 1 . No issues - existing docks being retained. Legal: I . No issues. Land Resources: 1 . Show the two palm trees on the north proerty line to be preserved prior to building permit. 2. Show the existing 4' sidewalk to remain south of the existing asphalt driveway and adjacent to the 12" oak tree prior to building permit. Landscaping: 1 . Northern edge of the pavement must be curbed, similar to other edges. 2 . Per Section 3-1202.D.2, Front slopes of stormwater retention areas may comprise up to 50 percent of any required landscape buffer width, provided that the slope is 4:1 or flatter and all required shrub plantings are not more than six inches below the top of the bank and provided that the buffer width is at least five feet in width. There is only a three-foot flat area provided from the front property line to the top of bank. Provide a cross section that shows compliance with this provision. 3 . As part of the Comprehensive Landscape Program application, indicate what landscape requirements are being requested to be waived or modified. 4. Sheet L1.1 - Revise Landscaping Note #8, as the minimum size of trees at time of planting is 10-foot tall and 2.5-inch caliper. Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 39 Parks and Recreation: • • 1 , A recreation facility impact fee of $200 is due for each new residential unit prior to the issuance of building permit or final plat (if applicable) whichever occurs first. Credit will be given for any existing residential units. Conact Art Kader at 727-562-4824. Stormwater: 1 . The following to be addressed prior to building permit: 1. The applicant is to provide a copy of an approved SWFWMD permit for the proposed site. 2. Show how post-development runoff is directed to stormwater pond. Solid Waste: 1 . Show where recycling carts will be placed for resident use (each cart makes a 3'x3' footprint) Traffic Engineering: 1 . Correct directional pavement arrows to be a 2-way bi-directional traffic instead of one-way. 2. Relocate handicap parking space close to elevator. 3. All parking spaces must meet City standard parking dimensions 9 feet wide by 19 feet long with a 24 feet drive aisle. 4. Motorist's line of sight must not be blocked when backing out of parking space(s). 5. Acknowledge that the vertical clear height for parking garage (entrance, route, and exit to and from h/c parking space must be a minimum of 8 feet 2 inches (8'2") to accommodate h/c van. All of the above to be addressed prior to CDB. General note: Comply with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule. Planning: Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 40 1 . Residential Infill Pct criteria #2 - Provide the value of the site after all site and building improvements are constructed. 2 : Revise first page of the application to revise Parcel # 05/29/15/54756/076/0020 to Parcel # 05/29/15/54756/076/0011. 3 . Sheet C2.1 - Provide the dimension from the front property line of Somerset Street to the closest edge of pavement (without the radius; just from the edge of pavement extended). 4. Sheet C2.1 - Minimum width of parking spaces is nine feet (no compact spaces). 5 . In accordance with City Council directives, Staff will not support any building height over 35 feet for this parcel. 6. Staff will not support any reduction to the 10-foot side (north) setback and 10-foot landscape buffer along the north property line. 7. Recommend the installation/construction of a six-foot high solid fence along the north property line (reduced to a maximum of three feet high within the 25-foot front setback), with a maximum four-foot high non-opaque fence within the waterfront visibility triangle and east setback. 8 . Indicate the location, height and type of fencing for the pool on Sheet C2.1. 9. Potential condition of approval: That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB; 10. Potential condition of approval: That a Unity of Title be recorded in the public records prior to the issuance of any permits; 11 . Potential condition of approval: That future signage meet the requirements of the Code and any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height, designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building; 12 . Potential condition of approval: That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting right-of-way shall be installed along the entire site's street frontages prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior to the commencement of work; 13 . Potential condition of approval: That a condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 14. Potential condition of approval: That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits; 15 . Potential condition of approval: That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits; 16. Potential condition of approval: That boats moored at the docks be for the exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the condominiums and not be permitted to be sub-leased separately from the condominiums; 17 . Potential condition of approval: That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks; 18 . Sheet C3.1 - Revise title on the right side to read "Grading, Drainage & Utilities Site Plan." 19 . Show visibility triangle at street intersection on Sheets C2.1 and L1.1. 20. Strongly recommend providing two parking spaces per unit. 21 . Sheet C1.1 - Revise the "Parking Calculations" at the bottom of the Site Data table to read "8 units @ 1.5 spaces..." rather than "8 units 2 1.5..." 22 . Need to remove existing driveways/parking areas within the Bay Esplanade right-of-way and sod. 23 . Remove proposed upright curbing from the Somerset right-of-way. Curbing also interferes with the trash staging area. 24 . In lieu of the water feature on the west side, suggest a special landscape feature instead. 25 . Elevations - Elevator machine room appears as a square box on top of the structure with a flat roof, lacking the detail that the stair tower does. Suggest relocating the elevator machine room to be part of the stair tower with a pitched roof. 26. Elevations - Most balconies appear to be a solid, stuccoed wall with a railing on top. The east elevation is not as detailed as to what is proposed regarding the balcony. The balcony extends across the full width of the building but is unclear as to whether the balcony edge is a solid, stuccoed wall or simply railings. Revise. Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 41 < 27. Elevations - It is unclear if there are any parapets extending above the roof deck, except at the corners of the building. It is noted that the a/c units are to be located on the top of the building, but no screening of these units appears to be provided (usually screened by the parapets). Advise/revise. 28 . Unclear why the mailboxes are proposed in the open air area of the parking garage. Mailboxes are generally placed inside the lobby area. Advise. 29. Elevations - Clarify that the sides of the chimneys (as seen on the east and west elevations) are stucco, rather than a stone finish. 30. Based on the floor plans submitted, the rear balconies extend to the edge of the rear stairwell. However, the south and north elevations do not indicate such, except for the 4th floor. Revise/advise. Additionally, the east elevation indicates a tiled overhang/roof structure at the first floor level, extending approximately 4 feet from the main structure, as indicated on the east elevation. This overhang/roof structure is not indicated on the 1st floor plan, nor on the site plans for the overhang/roof structure as a dashed line. Revise/advise. 31 . General Applicability criteria #1 response: Ensure the accuracy of the height of the single family dwellings, stated at between 30 and 40 feet, based on the Base Flood Elevation and the measurement of height (to flat roof deck or to midpoint of a pitched roof). 32. Residential Infill Project criteria #1 response: Provide detailed justification as to HOW the redevelopment of this site is "otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards." "Benefits to the community" are not a justification. 33 . Residential Infill Project criteria #4 response: Provide detailed information as to HOW the proposal is "compatible with adjacent land uses." 34. Residential Infill Project criteria #6 response: The single family development to the north is zoned Low Medium Density Residential District, not Medium High Density Residential District. 35 . Residential Infill Project criteria #7 response: Provide a detailed justification as to HOW "flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking" benefit the community character of the immediate vicinity and the City of Clearwater as a whole. The response does not address the flexibility requested. 36 . Based on the site plan and the building elevations, unclear how this proposal is complying with the attached dwelling criteria which requires the screening of off-street parking from adjacent parcels and streets by a landscaped wall or fence of at least four feet in height. Advise/revise. 37 . Address through the Residential Infill Project criteria HOW this proposal complies with the attached dwelling criteria for front setback reductions: a. The existing structures along the same side of the road have been constructed with irregular setbacks and the proposed reduction in front setback will not be out of character with the neighborhood; and b. The extent to which existing structures in the neighborhood have been constructed to a regular or uniform set back from the right of way. Other: No Comments Notes: To be placed on the 11/15/05 CDB agenda, submit 15 collated copies of the revised plans & application material addressing all above departments' comments by noon, 10/6/05. Packets shall be collated, folded and stapled as appropriate. Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 42 • • Wells, Wayne From: Kambourolias, Sam Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 9:29 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Watkins, Sherry Subject: RE: Map Request for 693-699 Bay Esplanade zone.doc location.doc FLD Map request existing.doc aerial.doc form.doc Soto Kambourolias CAD Technician City Of Clearwater (727) 562-4769 -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 3:28 PM To: Kambourolias, Sam Cc: Herman, Jason Subject: Map Request for 693-699 Bay Esplanade Sam - Attached is a map request for Case FLD2005-08090 for the property at 693-699 Bay Esplanade. I will bring over the paperwork. The survey that I will bring over you may keep. Thanks- Wayne << File: FLD Map request form.doc >> • • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 3:28 PM To: Kambourolias, Sam Cc: Herman, Jason Subject: Map Request for 693-699 Bay Esplanade Sam - Attached is a map request for Case FLD2005-08090 for the property at 693-699 Bay Esplanade. I will bring over the paperwork. The survey that I will bring over you may keep. Thanks- Wayne FLD Map request form.doc Apzoowr- D1 C N O of O N O N M rn O 3 In N 2 i O i v aJ I I I I ? 249A 2498 ,f, 12 S ASTER STREET $ tS ay CITY OF CLEARWATER ig a nr AND VICINITY 'n4 e0 - i PINMJAS COUNTY FLORIDA ACACIA 2 yob CJ 22 a t ,o$iA 4 3 2 t eD 1 2 4 5 0 1 a ?1 N29 °'° 9 SOMERSET ST 3 e C 10 `w 4 5 6 7 8 9 CO tic 13 t + 10 68-49m asa:iw:a < CAMBRIA ST I P , 60-118 S HE1LW *THE CAY CLW BEAC T H 'a x3 , 7 CONDO 11 - 8 H 1 21 ? 4 5 6 " 0 ;; y 2 , 14 13 2 a. I ? t s a a ? ? I KEk 20AL l ^? Fa]3 ' 4 5 a3 J?J J\ \ as '^ 1 ,5 tic 13 al; vl V e O BAY flRE (2) a MANDALAY 0.6 y A, , ARK 1 OS/] nm ST v g S e ?. IW.1 s WRI JIM t'dHl6gll.p, 7 e6s 1.3-. 606 ?y 666 5 6 604 !00 12 < 4 PENTHOUSE TIIE , I FALL1 3 13- wO IX r 666 2 13 ti e64 71_1 1 12666 0 E 7 a° WAY o I is 3 7 4 g a 5 era ESPLANADE S 81 -cc'-- eN - a . 101 IT,,, 10' 6 Qsg t3 1 6a 0 el 741 21u '? {s g H r nw wn .., 6 , 12_ < "4 17, 3 l o4e eD."1.. 7 6 ?3 ? is a eea eo n 4 o E _.. .. a 1g 5 ns-sY? J10° ae, L o : D.B. CLEARWATER BEACH REC. COMPLEX ? 33/01 O / O.a0. N ;?00-iar F1 P s ® BELLE HARBOR N T 1R Gal 700 h `y? a . CT PREPARED BY ygypND PUB11C WORKS ADMINISTRATION ENGINEERING p6Y 100 S Myrtle ave.. Clearwater. FL 33756 n/1 7R1 ?(v Ph: (727)562-4750. fax: (7271526-4755 . olif nllD://MNw.doorwoler-ft.cam/Cny-Deportments/public-woks/engineer/ CO Dlaclolmer. Public Information data is furnished by the City of Clearwater Public Works Adminwrotbn/Engineering, and must be accepted and used by the recli,lohk etth the understanding that the data received was collected for the purpose of developing o graphic InfrosWcture Inventory. As such. the City of Clearwater PWA/E mOkea no worrOnlles, exDE689ed Of Implied, Concerning the accuracy. connDletenos. reliability, or sultOD6ily of this data for 'rf, I any other Dartqular uae. Furlnermere, the City of Cleo-le, r PWA/E assumes no I'iaDaity wholsoever ossOclaled 01, the use misuse of such data. G? This Atlas page to subject to periodic changes, m For information about latest revislonf please call PWA/E or volt our WeD site. N I 0 100 200 (D"00 600 SCALE: 1" aoo' LEGEND: I I O BLOCK NUMBER OD 1234 LOT ADDRESS P I N J , - -? CITY LIMITS LINE r..,-D SHADED AREA -PROPERTY ?}\Y, L'- ?-?J OUTSIDE CLEARWATER CITY LIMITS ? AGREEMENT TO ANNEX CITY OWNED PROPERTY MDR ZONING DESIGNATION '\ • Cl c_? ? ZONE LINE `fV J I I wEZOIe: 060 (M 7310 y 1/e7 1 m67 : ,2n1ro, C caRRECnbN 0/21/02 I REVISED: F09/09/2002 ZONING ATLAS SW 1 /4 OF SECTION Q 2678 L 5 - 29 S- 15 E 8 A PInellas County Property Appoer Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 0 ' 1 Page 2 of 5 05 / 29 / 15 / 54750 / 070 / 0011 30-Aug-2005 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 18:37:i2 Ownership Information Non-Residential Property Address, Use, and Sales UASILOUDES, PANAYIOTIS OBK: 14495 OPG: 1833 12108 MARBLEHEAD DR TAMPA FL 33626 EVAC: A EUAC Comparable sales value as Prop Addr: 693 BAY ESPLANADE of Jan 1, 2005, based on Census Tract: 260.02 sales from 2003 - 2004: 0 Sale Date OR Book/Page Price (Qual/UnQ) Vac/Imp Plat Information 8 /2,005 14,495/1,833 1,436,200 (Q) I 1929: Book 020 Pgs 048- 8 /2,004 13,761/ 606 1,050,000 (0) I 0000: Book Pgs - 12/2,002 12,465/1,217 715,000 (Q) I 0000: Book Pgs - 2 /1,999 10,418/ 513 300,000 (Q) I 2005 Value EXEMPTIONS Just/Market: 727,200 Homestead: NO Ownership % 000 Govt Exem: NO Use %: .000 Assessed/Cap: 727,200 Institutional Exem; NO Tax Exempt; 000 Historic Exem: 0 Taxable: 727,200 Agricultural: 0 2004 Tax Information District: CW Seawall: Frontage: Bay Clearwater view: 05 Millage; 23.2372 Land Size Unit Land Land Land Front x Depth Price Units Meth 04 Taxes: 9,876.84 1) 60 x 110 100. 00 6,610. 00 S Special Tax .00 2) 0 x 0 00 00 3) 0 x 0 . 00 . 00 Without the Save-Our-Homes 4) 0 x 0 .00 .00 cap, 2005 taxes will be 5) 0 x 0 .00 .00 16, 898.09 6) 0 x 0 00 00 Without any exemptions, 2005 taxes will be 16, 898.09 Short Legal MANDALAY UNIT NO. 5 REPLAT BLK 76, S 1/2 OF UNPLATTED Description BLK 76 Building Information http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.uslhtbinlcgi-ser3?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&p... 8/30/2005 Pinellas County Property App?er Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 0 Page 3 of 5 Property and Land. Use Code descriptions 05 / 29 / 15 / 54750 / 070 / 0011 :01 30-Aug-2005 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 18:37:12 Commercial Card 01 of i Improvement Type: Res Comm Use Property Address: 693 BAY ESPLANADE Prop Use: 313 Land Use: 39 Structural E1?mcnts Foundation Continuous Footing Floor System Slab on Grade Exterior Wall Cone Block/Stucco Height Factor 0 Party Wall None Structural Frame None Roof Frame Gable & Hip Roof Cover Composition Shingle Cabinet & Mill Average Floor Finish Carpet Combination Interior Finish Drywall Total Units 5 Heating & Air Heating&Cooling Pckg Fixtures 15 Bath Tile Floor and Wall Electric Average Shape Factor Rectangle Quality Average Year Built 1,949 Effective Age 15 Other Depreciation 0 Function Depreciation 0 Economic Depreciation 0 Sub Aromas Description Factor Area Description Factor Area 1) Base Area 1. 00 1,816 7) . 00 0 2) Screen Porch 25 384 8) 00 0 3) Open Porch 20 156 9) 00 0 4) Open Porch 15 418 10) 00 0 5) Upper Stry Base Area 90 1,000 11) 00 0 6) 00 0 12) 00 0 C omm t-_ r c i a 1 E x t r a F4-- at ur (-- s Description Dimensions Price Units Value RCD Year 1) DOCK 414 20.00 414 8,280 3,310 1,970 2) PATIO/DECK 650 3. 00 650 1,950 1,210 1,991 3) BT LFTIDAU 2 500.00 2 1,000 1,000 11970 4) 00 0 0 0 0 5) 00 0 0 0 0 6) 00 0 0 0 0 TOTAL RECORD VALUE: 51520 Map With Property Address (non-vacant) F+_1 FE [f 141 M M http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.uslhtbinlcgi-scr3?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&p... 8/30/2005 Pinellas County Property Appr-ser Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 00' 1 : BR,J?E l fi co r 'tirE ?? APL A N,l DE sP '4? ?".L7E 1 ? 1 6? . E-s PlJt' E Eir' 't E`,PL.r?c? ESPL??r? AD ,A ? sr-, Cdr" s. i I r' 71 U I LAINAD 5PLArl .Cl PLANAt as CAC 1 Is T- ET I SPLANAD ESPLA,A.aoE 5F'r,4tI4A'c LD B A"( ESP , A.D[ 6r3 ESPL a4D 3. 7 7 STREET ?r;?P???ERST Crfv1 ?ET ST _, in ilhlS?TT1>? "~ Bpi P SPLA.NAD ? V r I V L?'.Fq ESPLl?nC1E P - t?t?l PL ?DE B KS 1 , . , ' ESPLA.r?DE k_ ESF'Lha.D 1/8 Mile Aerial Photograph (2002) r ? I 9 4 Page 4 of 5 http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.uslhtbinlcgi-scr3?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&p... 8/30/2005 STREET j."m lLt: C*ounty Property App, :, ccr Infori-nmion: 05 29 15 54756 076 001 ? ?':.ty 5 of 5, Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Information t.S,I+? ttt t.icSTl i?1 _illt4 SL'f? s,t3. An hup:; pameogincHas.1l.?ts; Ixrl3ttxit ;i sc r 1.>0-=1 ?X <? ::1 &b1 -1 A.c:-1;4ct-::: Ms?4&0- I &u--: O(S,,p... 8i30i200 Pirfellas County Property Apper Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 0 Page 2 of 5 05 / 29 / 15 / 54756 / 076 / 0010 30-Aug-2005 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 18:37:50 Ownership Information Residential Property Address, Use, and Sales MEROLI, PETRIT OBK: 13915 OPG: 0513 967 ELDORADO AUE CLEARWATER FL 33767-1020 EVAC: A EUAC Comparable sales value as Prop Addr: 699 BAY ESPLANADE of Jan 1, 2005, based on Census Tract: 260.02 sales from 2003 - 2004: 932,900 Sale Date OR Book/Page Price (Qual/UnQ) Vac/Imp Plat Information 10/2,004 13,915/ 513 1,050,000 (Q) I 1929: Book 020 Pgs 048- 12/2,002 12,452/1,789 475,000 (U) I 0000: Book Pgs - 11/2,001 11,659/ 658 452,000 (Q) I 0000: Book Pgs - 5 /1,999 10,514/ 171 378,000 (Q) I 2005 Value EXEMPTIONS Just/Market: 791,100 Homestead: NO Ownership 000 Govt Exem: NO Use %: .000 Assessed/Cap: 791,100 Institutional Exem: NO Tax Exempt: 000 Historic Exem: 0 Taxable: 791,100 Agricultural: 0 2004 Tax Information District: CW Seawall: YES Frontage: Bay Clearwater View: 05 Millage; 23.2372 Land Size Unit Land Land Land Front x Depth Price Units Meth 04 Taxes: 13,306.17 1) 60 x 110 11, 000.00 60.00 F Special Tax 00 2) 0 x 0 .00 .00 3) 0 x 0 00 .00 Without the Save-Our-Homes 4) 0 x 0 .00 00 cap, 2005 taxes will be 5) 0 x 0 00 00 18, 382. 95 6) 0 x 0 00 00 Without any exemptions, 2005 taxes will be 382. 95 18j _ Short Legal MANDALAY UNIT NO. 5 REPLAT BLK 76, N 1/2 OF UNPLATTED Description BLK 76 Building Information http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-click?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&... 8/30/2005 - Piriellas County Property App4r Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 06 Page 3 of 5 05 / 29.1 15 / 54750 / 070 / 0010 :01 30-Aug-2005 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 18:37:48 Residential Card 01 of 1 Prop Use: 210 Land Use: 01 Living Units: i Imp Type: Single Family Prop Address: 699 BAY ESPLANADE Structural E1sm?n?s Foundation Spc Footing- Wd/Blk Floor System Wood Exterior Wall Frame/Rclad Alm/Unyl Roof Frame Gable-Hip Roof Cover Composite Shingle # Stories 1.0 Floor Finish Crpt/HdTI/HdMar/Prgt Interior Finish Drywall/Plaster Quality Above Average Year Built 1,984 Effective Age 10 Heating Central Duct Cooling Cooling (Central) Fixtures 9 Other Depreciation 0 Functional Depreciation 0 Econonomic Depreciation 0 Sub Arras Description Factor Area Description Factor Area 1) Base Area 1.00 1,746 7) 00 0 2) Enclosed Porch 60 1,206 8) 00 0 3) Open Porch .20 288 9) 00 0. 4) Garage 35 540 10) 00 0 5) Open Porch 15 252 11) 00 0 6) 00 0 12) 00 0 R(-_sidcnt ia1 Extra F?eaturss Description Dimensions Price Units Value RCD Year 1) FIREPLACE 2,500.00 1 2,500 1,600 1,984 2) DOCK 232 20.00 232 4,640 3,290 1,994 3) BT LFT/DAU 500.00 1 500 500 i,994 4) 00 0 0 0 0 5) 00 0 0 0 0 6) 00 0 0 0 0 TOTAL RECORD VALUE: 5,390 Map With Property Address (non-vacant) aoT M Fq http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-click?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&... 8/30/2005 Pinellas County Property Appwr Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 06 ?- 4 E .? Y g?','_1 C E r._ 37 SP? k1ADE SPL.APl,hDE 09 ST 720 1 BRUCE ? BA's SPWID t AV E _?PLANADE s 716 717 70 BAY BA', eF'!tiJ,E y2 + SS ESPL,ANAD ESPLANAD Ac'I.' r10 ??.? ACACIA u ST BA 'Y r 5T i _,PL,?'.h?PLANA.D SF' ?.P?dA STREET ?'LA [E$PN' 47 49 51 F5 9 61 NA1 CACJA CA C I ; CACA., C 1. AC AC 1A 701 "Q1,"T ;, ` T S7 S T L? I ISPLANAD[ i B , ; 54 i? I 4 91D B ' [TyOtv1E7 ET7 F'S T BA_ ESF dAD ,T ST SPMN''A sp a ?? = ' SPLA.iJA.D 7 STREET M4 89 sn_MERS T S 6 5T S 7 SPLANAD OINSET-TI,?? BAY 15- 'B AVE `' L E? SPrAt lAI L D z - LLI ?5 > 01HSETTLA Nor ,AVE 0 lima ! ?TTjI 4- ESPF;?P,?ADE BAY 27942 - L AN.AD L- Page 4 of 5 1/8 Mile Aerial Photograph (2002) http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.usihtbin/cgi-click?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&... 8/30/2005 Pinellas County Property App er Information: 05 29 15 54756 076 040 Page 5 of 5 http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-click?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&... 8/30/2005 CITY OF CLEARWATER NOTICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD PUBLIC HEARINGS The Community Development Board of the City of Clearwater, Florida, will hold public hearings on Tuesday, December 20, 2005, beginning at 2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, in City Hall, 3rd floor, 112 South Osceola Ave, Clearwater, Florida, to consider the following requests: NOTE: All persons wishing to address an item need to be present at the BEGINNING of the meeting. Those cases that are not contested by the applicant, staff, neighboring property owners, etc. will be placed on a consent agenda and approved by a single vote at the beginning of the meeting. 1. (Cont'd from 10-18-05) KP 23 Enterprises Inc, Peter & Kelly L Nascarella, and KP 26 LLC are requesting Flexible Development approval (1) to permit vehicle sales/display and an automobile service station in the Commercial District with reductions to the front (east) setback from 25 ft to 5 ft (to pavement), from 25 ft to 13.7 ft (to existing building) and from 5 ft to zero ft to retain existing signage (to the leading edge of the sign), reductions to the side (south) setback from 10 ft to 5.8 ft (to carport) and from 10 ft to 3.9 ft (to pavement), reductions to the rear (west) setback from 20 ft to 3.5 ft (to pavement and existing building), a reduction to required parking from 55 spaces to 30 spaces, an increase to sign ht from 14 ft to 15 ft (for existing signage), a deviation to allow vehicle sales/display contiguous to residentially-zoned property, a deviation to allow the display of vehicles for sale outdoors and a deviation to allow direct access to a major arterial street, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2- 704.C, and reductions to the landscape buffer width along South Missouri Ave from 15 ft to 5 ft (to pavement) and from 15 ft to 13.7 ft (to existing building), a reduction to the landscape buffer width along the south property line from 5 ft to 3.9 ft (to pavement), a reduction to the landscape buffer width along the west property line adjacent to single family dwellings from 12 ft to 5.8 ft (to pavement), a reduction to the landscape buffer width along the west property line adjacent to a nonresidential use from 5 ft to 3.5 ft (to pavement and existing building), a reduction to the foundation landscaping adjacent to buildings from 5 ft to zero ft and a reduction to reduce the interior landscape area from 10 percent to 7.45 percent of the vehicular use area, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Sec 3-1202.G; and (2) to permit non-residential off-street parking in the Low Medium Density Residential District, with a deviation to allow landscaping on the inside of a perimeter fence, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-204.E. (Proposed Use: Vehicles display and sales) at 1460, 1470, & 1480 S Missouri Ave, , A H Duncan's Resub Parts of Lots 11-13, and Zephyr Hills Sub Lots 7-10. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2003-08039 2. (Cont'd from 10-18-05) Patrick E & Toni V Hickey are requesting Flexible Development approval to permit a doctor's office in the Office (O) District with a reduction to the minimum lot width of 100 ft to 64.08 ft, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 ft to 16 ft (to pavement), reductions to the side (north) setback from 20 ft to 10.7 ft (to existing building), from 20 ft to 1-ft (to pavement) and from 20 ft to 5 ft (to sidewalk) and reductions to the side (south) setback from 20 ft to 7.1 ft (to existing building), from 20 ft to 9.7 ft (to pavement) and from 20 ft to 7.3 ft (to sidewalk), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-1004.13, and reductions to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 12 ft to 10.7 ft (to existing building), from 12 ft to 1-ft (to pavement) and from 12 ft to 5 ft (to sidewalk), reductions to the landscape buffer along the south property line from 12 ft to 7.1 ft (to existing building), from 12 ft to 9.7 ft (to pavement) and from 12 ft to 7.3 ft (to sidewalk) and a reduction to foundation landscaping from 5 ft to zero ft, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the 0 0 provisions of Sec 3-1202.G. (Proposed Use: Doctor's office) at 107 McMullen Booth Rd, Sec 16-29-16, M&B 21.05. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005- 07077 3. (Cont'd from 10-18-05) Lenny Cristino is requesting Flexible Development approval to permit the expansion of a restaurant with a reduction to lot width from 100 ft to 96 ft, reductions to the front (west) setback from 25 ft to 15 ft (to existing outdoor seating deck), from 25 ft to 22 ft (to canopy), and from 25 ft to 9 ft (to pavement), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 ft to 5.8 ft (to existing building), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 ft to zero ft (to existing pavement), reductions of the rear (east) setback from 20 ft to 14.3 ft (to building), from 20 ft to 4 ft (to existing pavement) and from 20 ft to zero ft (to dumpster enclosure) and a reduction of parking spaces from 43 spaces to 9 spaces, under the provisions of Sec 2-704.M, and a reduction to the front (west) landscape buffer from 15 ft to 9 ft (along S Ft Harrison Ave), and a reduction to the rear (east) landscape buffer from 5 ft to zero ft (to dumpster enclosure), as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Sec 3-1202.G. (Proposed Use: Restaurant) at 1101 S Ft Harrison Ave, Magnolia Park Blk 39, Lot 1, parts of Lot 2 & Vac Lotus Path Adj on N. Assigned Planner: Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005-06053 4. (Cont'd from 11-15-05) Peter Pan Developments LLC (Panayiotis Vasiloudes, Petrit Meroli, Somerset Condominium) are requesting Flexible Development approval to permit 8 attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 sq ft to 13,087 sq ft, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 ft to 120 ft along Bay Esplanade and from 150 ft to 110 ft along Somerset St, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 ft to 22 ft (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 ft to 11 ft (to building and pavement) and from 25 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 ft to 3.1 ft (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 ft to zero ft (to pool deck), an increase to building ht from 30 ft to 46.83 ft (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 ft for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-404.17, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from 5 ft to 3 ft (for the retention pond planting area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset St from 10 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 ft to 3.1 ft (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Sec 3-1202.G. [Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (8 condominiums)] at 693- 699 Bay Esplanade, Mandalay Unit No. 5 Replat, Blk 76 & unplatted Blk 76. Assigned Planner: a-yne-'M -Wells,-AICP'-Planner III.'CVLD2005--080901 5. Clearwater Townhomes Inc (Roland Rogers) are requesting (1) Flexible Development approval to permit the addition of a pool to a previously approved attached dwelling project (FLD2002-11042, approved January 21, 2003) in the Tourist District with a reduction to the rear (east) setback from 20 ft to zero ft (to pool deck), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-803.C; and (2) Preliminary Plat approval revising the previously recorded plat to provide for the proposed pool (PLT2005-00026). (Proposed Use: Addition of pool to townhomes) at 161 Brightwater Dr, Island Townhomes, Lots 1-10. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005-09095/PLT2005-00026 6. Carlouel Yacht Corp. is requesting Flexible Development approval for the expansion of an existing commercial dock (10'x 107' floating dock addition to an existing 10'x 250' floating dock for transient vessel mooring), with a reduction in side (north) setback from 226.13 ft to 3.3 ft, under the provisions of Sec 3-601. (Proposed Use: Expansion of an existing commercial dock) at 1091 Eldorado Ave, Mandalay Replat Blk 171, Lots 6-11 & part of Lots 4 & 5. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner 111. FLD2005-09094 7. Miriam L Cebula, & Harley P and Sharon R Evans (GFB Development, LLC) are requesting Flexible Development approval to permit 27 attached dwelling units in the High Density Residential (HDR) District with an increase to ht from 30 ft to 79 ft (to roof deck) with an increase to the ht of the parapet from 30 inches to 90 inches (from roof deck); a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 ft to 21 ft (to building) and 12 ft (to pavement), a reduction to the rear (east) setback from 15 ft to zero ft (to pavement), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 ft to 3 ft (to pavement), and a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 ft to 7 ft (to building) and 8 ft (to pavement) as part of a Residential Infill Project under the provisions of See 2-504.17. (Proposed Use: Attached Dwellings) at 125 & 143 Island Way, Island Estates of Clearwater, Lots 4 & 5. Assigned Planner: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III. FLD2005-07062 8. Georgia Street Properties LLC, 302-308 N Osceola Properties LLC, Belvedere Land Trust, Church of Scientology Flag Svc Om Inc, Osceola-Jones Properties LLC, & Triangle S A Land LLC (Triangle Old Bay Holdings, LLC, Triangle Development Company LLC) are requesting Flexible Development approval to permit a mixed-use development (324 attached dwelling units and 26,124 sq ft of non-residential floor area), an increase in the permitted ht from 30 ft to 169 ft (to roof deck) with an additional 28 ft for architectural embellishments (from roof deck) for that portion of the development on the west side of N Osceola Ave, an additional 21 ft (from roof deck) for architectural embellishments for that portion of the development on the east side of N Osceola Ave as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-903.C. (Proposed Use: Mixed-use) at 302, 303, 304, 308 and 309 North Osceola Ave; 410 Jones St: and 410 N Ft Harrison Ave, A. B. & Jennie Cate's Sub Lots 1-7 & Vac Alley Betw & Bergen's Repl Blk A-B & Vac Alley, Lots 8-11 & Subm Land, Sec 09-29-15, M&B 43- 03, Sec 09-29-15, M&B 43.04, Sec 09-29-15, M&B 43-05, Sec 09-29-15, M&B 43-06, Clovis C Lutz Sub Tract A-B, Subm Land, & 10 Ft Strip of Land Adj N of Tract A, Belvedere Apts Co-op Apt 2 A, Jones' Sub of Nicholson's Blk 2, part of Lots 1-2. Assigned Planner: Robert G. Tefft, Planner 111. FLD2005-09098 9. Flamingo Bay of Clearwater, LLC is requesting (1) Flexible Development approval to permit 27 attached dwellings in the Tourist District with reductions to the front (south) setback from 15 ft to 2.27 ft (to sidewalk) and from 15 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area), reductions to the rear (north) setback from 20 ft to 18 ft (to building) and from 20 ft to zero ft (to pool deck and boardwalk), an increase to building ht from 35 ft to 45.67 ft (to roof deck) with an additional 5.5 ft for parapets (from roof deck) and with an additional 16 ft for a roof top pavilion (from roof deck), as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of See 2- 803.C (retaining 5 existing boat docks for sole use by the property owners); and (2) the Transfer of Development Rights for 2 units from 28 Idlewild St and 2 units from 321 Coronado Dr, under the provisions of Sec 4-1403 (TDR2005-09027). [Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (27 condominiums)] at 170, 174-, 180, & 188 Brightwater Dr, Bayside Sub No.2, Lots 36-40. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005-09101/TDR2005-09027 10. LaBella Vista of Clearwater, LLC is requesting (1) Flexible Development approval to permit 18 attached dwellings in the Tourist District with reductions to the front (north) setback from 15 ft to 10.8 ft (to building) and from 15 ft to zero ft (to sidewalk and dumpster staging area), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 ft to 7 ft (to pavement and wall), reductions to the side (west) setback from 10 ft to 8.8 ft (to building) and from 10 ft to 7 ft (to pavement and wall), reductions to the rear (south) setback from 20 ft to 18 ft (to building) and from 20 ft to zero ft (to pool deck and boardwalk) and increases to building ht from 35 ft to 45.67 (to roof deck) with an additional 5.5 ft for parapets (from roof deck) and with an additional 14.25 ft for a roof top pavilion (from roof deck), as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-803.C (retaining three existing boat docks for sole use by the property owners); and (2) the Transfer of Development Rights for 3 units from 200 Brightwater Dr, under the provisions of Sec 4-1403 (TDR2005-09026). (Proposed Use: Attached dwellings [18 condominiums]) at 193, 199, & 201 Brightwater Dr, Bayside Sub No. 2, Lots 24 & 25, and part of Lots 23 & 26. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005- 09102/TDR2005=09026 11. Shaul & Meir Lew Partnership (C/O L&L Wings Inc.) are requesting a Flexible Development approval (FLS2003-09046) for redevelopment of an existing retail sales establishment and includes a reduction to front (south along Marianne St) setback from 25 ft to 10.75 ft (to building) and a reduction to front (south along Marianne St) setback from 25 ft to zero ft (to pavement), per Sec 2-803.K. (Proposed Use: Remodel of existing Retail Sales Store) at 400 Poinsettia Ave, Barbour-Morrow Sub, Blk A, Lots 29-33 Incl. Assigned Planner: John Schodtler, Planner I. FLD2005-09096 12. Parkdale, LLC (Maria Nikolova & Belleair Harbor, LLC) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to construct a 2 unit attached dwelling building in the Tourist Marina Residential District and includes a minimum lot area reduction from 10,000 sq ft to 8,171 sq ft, a minimum lot width reduction from 100 ft to 60 ft, the rear, waterfront (east) setback from 20 ft to zero ft (to pool deck), and the rear, waterfront (east) setback from 20 ft to 10 ft (to pool), as a Comprehensive Infill Project under the provisions of Sec 2-803.C. (Proposed Use: A 2 unit attached dwelling) at 475 East Shore Dr, Clearwater Beach Park, ls` Add Replat, Blk C, Lot 5 & Submerged Land E to Channel. Assigned Planner: John Schodtler, Planner I. FLD2005-10105 13. MaLnolia Park Realty & BKB Properties Inc. are requesting a (1) Flexible Development to permit a Mixed Use of offices (5,250 square feet) and nine attached dwellings in the Commercial and Office Districts with a reduction to the minimum lot width in the Commercial District from 100 feet to 79.5 feet, a reduction to the front (west) setback in the Commercial District from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building), reductions to the front (south) setback in the Office District from 35 feet to 8.18 feet (to building) and from 35 feet to 16.34 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (north) setback in the Commercial District from 10 feet to zero feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (north) setback in the Office District from 20 feet to 8.02 feet (to building), reductions to the side (south) setback in the Commercial District from 10 feet to seven feet (to building), from 10 feet to four feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to three feet (to sidewalk), a reduction to the side (south) setback in the Office District from 20 feet to zero feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (west) in the Office District from 20 feet to one foot (to pavement), reductions to the side (east) setback in the Office District from 20 feet to 7.3 feet (to building), from 20 feet to 5.4 feet (to pavement) and from 20 feet to 4.2 feet (to sidewalk), an increase to building height for offices in the Commercial District from 25 feet to 31 feet (to flat roof), an increase to building height for townhomes in the Office District from 30 feet to 37.5 feet (to midpoint of roof) and to permit buildings within the visibility triangles, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sections 2-704.F and 2-1004.13, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the west property line along South Ft. Harrison Avenue from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the landscape buffer along the south property line along Magnolia Drive from 10 feet to 8.18 feet (to building), a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line in the Commercial District from five feet to zero feet (to pavement), a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line in the Office District from 10 feet to 8.02 feet (to building), a reduction to the landscape buffer along the south 9 • property line in the Commercial and Office Districts from five feet to zero feet (to pavement), a reduction to the landscape buffer along the west property line in the Office District from 10 feet to one foot (to pavement) and reductions to the landscape buffer along the east property line in the Office District from 10 feet to 7.3 feet (to building), from 10 feet to 5.4 feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to 4.2 feet (to sidewalk), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G; and (2) Preliminary Plat approval for a 10-lot subdivision. (Proposed Use: Mixed Use of offices (5,250 square feet) and nine attached dwellings.) at 907 S Ft. Harrison Ave, Magnolia Park, Blk 33, Lots 4, & 7-8, and part of lots 5 & 6, and Sec 16-29- 15, M&B 44.01. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005- 07074/PLT2005-00027 Interested parties may appear and be heard at the hearing or file written notice of approval or objection with the Planning Director or City Clerk prior to the hearing. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by the Board or Council, with respect to any matter considered at such hearings, will need to request a record of the proceedings and, for such purpose, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based per Florida Statute 286.0105. Community Development Code Sec 4-206 states that parry status shall be granted by the Board in quasi-judicial cases if the person requesting such status demonstrates that s/he is substantially affected. Party status entitles parties to personally testify, present evidence, argument and witnesses, cross-examine witnesses, appeal the decision and speak on reconsideration requests, and needs to be requested and obtained during the case discussion before the CDB. An oath will be administered swearing in all persons giving testimony in quasi-judicial public hearing cases. If you wish to speak at the meeting, please wait to be recognized, then state and spell your name and provide your address. Persons without party status speaking before the CDB shall be limited to three minutes unless an individual is representing a group in which case the Chairperson may authorize a reasonable amount of time up to 10 minutes. Five days prior to the meeting, staff reports and recommendations on the above requests will be available for review by interested parties between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., weekdays, at the City of Clearwater, Planning Department, 100 S. Myrtle Ave., Clearwater, FL 33756. Please contact the case presenter, at 562-4567 to discuss any questions or concerns about the project and/or to better understand the proposal and review the site plan. Michael Delk Planning Director Cynthia E. Goudeau, CMC City Clerk City of Clearwater P.O. Box 4748, Clearwater, FL 33758-4748 NOTE: Applicant or representative must be present at the hearing. A COPY OF THIS AD IN LARGE PRINT IS AVAILABLE IN OFFICIAL RECORDS AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES. ANY PERSON WITH A DISABILITY REQUIRING REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING SHOULD CALL (727) 562-4093 WITH THEIR REQUEST. Ad: 12/04/05 FLD2908090 = 114 • 1066363 ONTARIO LTD AMERPOL HOTELS & MOTELS INC ARMBRUSTER, JOHN 152 CLARENDON ST 428 MINER ST 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 209 SOUTHAMPTON ON NOH 21-0 00030 - BENSENVILLE IL 60106 - 2657 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1535 CANADA BANNON, MARY KATHLEEN TRUST BEARDSLEY, JAMES M BERETA, STANLEY D THE 8013 WILDWOOD LN 15 MAYFAIR LN 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 203 DARIEN IL 60561 - 5914 BUFFALO NY 14201 - 1522 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1535 BOERNER, SUSANA B BOSCHEN, ELSIE R REV TRUST BOYES, JAMES R 112 S LAUBER WAY BOSCHEN, ELSIE R THE BOYES, GEORGIA TAMPA FL 33609 - 2615 675 MANDALAY AVE 969 BRUCE AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1526 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1013 BROUZET, THIERRY M BROWN, DEBRA P BUNDY, RUSSELL H 57 ASTER ST GARRICK, EARL T NORGORDT, HANNAH K CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1407 723 BAY ESPLANADE 42 SOMERSET ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1543 BUNDY, THOMAS C CAPRI MOTEL CONDO ASSN CIUCEVICH, JOSEPH 43 ACACIA ST 55 SOMERSET ST # 3 736 BRUCE AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1404 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1546 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1418 Clearwater Beach Association Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition COMB, JEAN J Jay Keyes Doug Williams, President 100 Devon Drive 2544 Frisco Drive 287 PILGRIM Clearwater, FL 33767 Clearwater, FL 33761 BIRMINGHAM MI 48009 - 4610 COQUINA APTS INC Coral Resort Condominium CZIPRI, BRENDA K THE 692 BAY ESPLANADE Peggy Harnung 334 EAST LAKE RD STE 338 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1500 483 East Shore Drive PALM HARBOR FL 34685 - 2427 Clearwater, FL 33767 DANIEL, HAROLD M D'ARRIGO, STEPHEN V DE BELLIS, BARBARA DANIEL, JANICE V 11 ARLENE AVE 55 SOMERSET ST # 3 713 BRUCE AVE WILMINGTON MA 01887 - 1111 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1546 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1416 DOM, MARY DVORNIK, DONALD F EPIC HOLDINGS SOUTH 65 SOMERSET ST DVORNIK, SUSAN E 139 BAYSIDE DR CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1547 52 ASTER ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2502 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1406 EYLER, CYNTHIA A EYLER, DONALD C FITZGERALD, RONALD HOLDEN, DONNA L EYLER, CYNTHIA A 665 POINSETTIA AVE 554 ADALINE AVE 554 ADALINE AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1530 VANDALIA OH 45377 - 1802 VANDALIA OH 45377 - 1802 Aw • • FIVE PALM CONDO ASSN INC FOLEY, DONALD F FOLEY, CATHERINE G 673 BAY ESPLANADE 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 108 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1503 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1534 FRIARS MINOR ORD OF ST FRANCIS GALASSO, MICHAEL PROVINCIAL CURIA GALASSO, DAWN 147 THOMPSON ST 727 BAY ESPLANADE AVE NEW YORK NY 10012 - 3110 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 GARRIS, BERLE SR GARRIS, ANNE M 38 ACACIA ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1403 GIRDLER, JEAN C THE GIRDLER, NICHOLAS M THE 732 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1410 HALGREN, RALPH W HALGREN, VELORA B 56 SOMERSET ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1543 HILDEBRAND, WILLIAM O JR 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 107 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1534 HAYS, WILLIAM D 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 304 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1536 HOLDEN, ROBERT L 12 STILLWATER HEIGHTS DR WEST BOYLSTON MA 01583 - 1122 Housh Ghovaee, Northside Engineering JAKSCH, ROBERT W Services, Inc. 1596 SHIRLEY PL 601 Cleveland Street, Suite 930 LARGO FL 33770 - 2218 Clearwater, FL 33755 KEYS, RANDALL A 6713 E WHITEWAY DR TAMPA FL 33617 - 3216 KIELMANN, LOTHAR E KIELMANN, WENDY 35154 LEON ST LIVONIA MI 48150 - 2668 LA RISA DEVELOPMENT CO LLC 880 MANDALAY AVE # C 908 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1219 LETOURNEAU, WILLIAM T HIRSCH, DEBORA A 395 16TH ST NEWPORT MN 55055 - 1061 LEARY, EDWARD B JR THE PMB 331 30 JERICHO TPKE COMMACK NY 11725 - 3009 LEWINSKI, HANNA LEWINSKI, WOJCIECH 661 POINSETTA AVE #306 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1537 FORLINI, DOMENICO G 808 MANDALAY AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1324 GALLAGHER, PATRICK J GALLAGHER, BEVERLY B 726 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1410 GLEASON, WILLIAM J GLEASON, KRISTIN J 53 ASTER ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1407 HESSELSCHWERDT, BERND J HESSELSCHWERDT, BERNHARD 55 SOMERSET ST # 5 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1546 HORGAN, DANIEL B HORGAN, ROISIN A 710 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1408 KELLEY, PAUL KELLEY, TRACEY 667 BAY ESPLANDE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1550 KROMER, JOHN KROMER, JANET 10317 GREEN LINKS DR TAMPA FL 33626 - 5400 LENTRICCHIA, DOMENICK LENTRICCHIA, KARIN 814 NARCISSUS AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1334 LEWINSKI, WOJCIECH LEWINSKI, HANNA 60 SOMERSET # 3 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1543 LEWINSKI, WOJCIECH LITTLER, BRUCE C LOCKE, WILLIAM R LEWINSKI, HANNA LITTLER, CAROL A 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 306 711 BAY ESPLANADE 47 ACACIA ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1537 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1404 LONG, MARIAN C 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 104 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1534 MAVITY, LEON L 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 307 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1537 MC SWEENEY, GARY W MC SWEENEY, CARMEN 20942 E GLEN HAVEN CIR NORTHVILLE MI 48167 - 2465 MERRITT, GORDON E 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 201 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1535 MOSSER, RICHARD S 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 301 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1536 NEIL, MARIE-THERESE 31 ISLAND WAY # 201 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 PALMA, GEORGE 32 FORGE DR DOWNSVIEW ON CANADA M3N 2R3 00030 - PETER PAN DEV 610 MANDALAY NE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1632 PUTYRSKI, ANNE M 56 ACACIA ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1405 • MARTUCCI, MICHAEL MARTUCCI, ELIZABETH 731 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1437 MC FADDEN, ARLENE S MC FADDEN, ROBERT G 661 POINSETTIA AVE #204 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1535 MEROLI, PETRIT 967 ELDORADO AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1020 MILLHOUSE, DEAN A GILL, SHARON R 704 BRUCE AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - • MASTORIDES, NICHOLAS MASTORIDES, LACEY 2187 VIOLA DR CLEARWATER FL 33764 - 3738 MC KINNEY, CARMELLA C MC KINNEY, GEORGE L 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 210 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1535 MERRIAM, RICHARD P 717 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 MORRISON, GEORGE ROBERT ALBERT 115 ARGYLE 1415 KIRKLAND QC H9H 3H9 00030 - CANADA MURPHY, VICKI A FALASKY, DOROTHY A PO BOX 3505 CLEARWATER BEACH FL 33767 - 8505 NICHOLAS, JERRY 3002 STRAWBERRY RD #OFC PASADENA TX 77502 - 5230 PASQUALE, JACK R THE PASQUALE, PATRICIA A THE 1433 NORMAN DR DARIEN IL 60561 - 4434 PIOLI, RICHARD T THE PIOLI, ROBERTA B THE 750 ISLAND WAY # 402 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1820 RADAY, DAVID M YOUNG, SEAN 12003 LI LLIAN AVE N SEMINOLE FL 33778 - 3504 NAPOLI, JOHN D 709 BRUCE AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1416 OSTROWSKI, JOZEF OSTROWSKI, RENATA 39 ACACIA ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1404 PENTHOUSE SHORES ASSN INC 661 POINSETTIA AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1561 PROPERTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES 12003 LILLIAN AVE SEMINOLE FL 33778 - 3504 RHOADS, JEFFREY L THE PO BOX 861 DUNEDIN FL 34697 - 0861 ROBERDS, ROGER O ROLLINSON, ANN C ROZENITS, FRED ROBERDS ELEANOR A ROZENITS ANNA ' 1364 ELLINGTON RD ' 715 BAY ESPLANADE SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074 - 2600 31 ISLAND WAY # 1002 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 SAGONIAS, NICK EST SAGONIAS, STAMATINA SEIFERT, MICHAEL E 235 OLD OAK CIR 235 OLD OAK CIR SEIFERT, NANCY S PALM HARBOR FL 34683 - 5862 PALM HARBOR FL 34683 - 5862 5825 PERSIMMON DR MADISON WI 53711 - 5003 SILLASEN, SEAJAYE SMITH, MARK A SMITH, RUPERT W JR 12313 W LOUISIANA AVE SMITH, CHARLENE S SMITH, IRENE V LAKEWOOD CO 80228 - 3829 701 BAY ESPLANADE 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 106 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1534 SNO-BIRD PROP INC SONDERMANN, WILFRIED & SPEAR, ROBERT E THE 10 PRINCE ST HELGARD SONDERMANN, WILFRIED BEN 102 CARRIAGE SQUARE CT CUMBERLAND CTR ME 04021 - 4007 52 ACACIA ST HENDERSONVILLE NC 28791 - 1396 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1405 SPERELAKIS, NICHOLAS SR SPRING TIDE INVESTMENTS II LLC THOMPSON, MICHAEL S SPERELAKIS, DOLORES J THOMPSON, MARIA 12114 PAULMEADOWS DR 622 BYPASS DR STE 100 BRENDON FEN POND RD IGTHEHM CINCINNATI OH 45249 - 1330 CLEARWATER FL 33764 - 5002 NEAR SEVEN OAKS KENT TN15 9JE 00003 - GREAT BRITAIN VERBAN,STEVE VERBAN, HELEN K 55 SOMERSET ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1546 WELLS, DARCY NALEY, STEPHEN 705 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 WELPTON, MARY ELIZABETH 462 MAIN ST STE 300 WATERTOWN MA 02472 - 2246 WEYANT, JAMES R III CARDONI-WEYANT, KRISTI A 51 ACACIA ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1404 WHITE, ANDREA P 55 SOMERSET ST # 4 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1546 WHITING, J RODGER HARRAH, HAROLD D 929 LANTANA AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1127 WICKY, JERRY E WINCHESTER, GARY WOSCHITZ, EVA THE WICKY, BETTY W WINCHESTER, PAMELA 302 POINSETTIA LAND TRUST PO BOX 1191 17111 HANNA RD 10 COURTWOOD PL OLDSMAR FL 34677 - 1191 LUTZ FL 33549 - 5666 TORONTO ON M2K 1Z9 00030 - CANADA `r CITY OF CLEARWATER NOTICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD PUBLIC HEARINGS The Community Development Board of the City of Clearwater, Florida, will hold public hearings on Tuesday, November 15, 2005, beginning at 1:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, in City Hall, 3rd floor, 112 South Osceola Ave, Clearwater, Florida, to consider the following requests: NOTE: All persons wishing to address an item need to be present at the BEGINNING of the meeting. Those cases that are not contested by the applicant, staff, neighboring property owners, etc. will be placed on a consent agenda and approved by a single vote at the beginning of the meeting. 1. Jerry and Teresa Tas are requesting Flexible Development approval to permit 17 attached dwellings within the Tourist (T) District with an increase to building ht from 35 ft to 78 ft (to roof deck) with an additional 14 ft for architectural embellishments (from roof deck), a reduction to the front (north) setback from 15 ft to zero ft (to pavement) and a reduction to the minimum lot width from 100 ft to 67.5 ft along Coronado Dr and to 71.64 ft along Hamden Dr as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-803.C. (Proposed Use: Attached dwellings) at 342 Hamden Dr and 343 Coronado Dr, Columbia Sub No 2, Blk A, Lot 11 & part of Lot 10, and Columbia Sub No 3, Lot 7 and part of Lot 6. Assigned Planner: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III. FLD2005-07066 2. Griffin International, Inc. is requesting Flexible Development approval to permit Alcoholic Beverage Sales in the Commercial (C) District on a parcel of land contiguous to a parcel of land which is designated as residential in the Zoning Atlas as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Sec 2-704.C. (Proposed Use: Alcoholic Beverage Sales) at 1575 Highland Ave S, Sec 23-29-15, M&B 34.03. Assigned Planner: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III. FLD2005-08082 3. Beach & Gulf Sands, Inc, and North Clearwater Beach Development, LLC (Anthony Menna) are requesting 1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (11 existing attached dwelling units to remain where a maximum of 10 attached dwelling units would be permitted under current Code); 2) Transfer of Development Rights (TDR2005-03019) of 2 dwelling units from 116 Brightwater Dr under the provisions of Secs 4-1402 and 4-1403; and 3) Flexible Development approval to permit 13 attached dwelling units in the Tourist (T) District with an increase to ht from 35 ft to 59.66 ft (to roof deck) with an additional 42 inches for perimeter parapets (from roof deck), a reduction to the front (north) setback from 15 ft to 2 ft (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 ft to zero ft (to pool deck), a reduction to the side (west) setback from 10 ft to 1.5 ft (to pavement), a reduction to the rear (south) setback from 20 ft to 10 ft (to building) and zero ft (to pool deck), and to allow 5 parking spaces to encroach within the required sight visibility triangles along Bay Esplanade as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Sec 2-803.C. (Proposed Use: Attached Dwellings) at 657 & 663 Bay Esplanade, Mandalay Unit No 5 Replat Blk 77, Lots 4-5. Assigned Planner: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III. FLD2005-08087 4. 400 Cleveland, LLC, Mainstreet Clearwater Development, and Whtbuff, Inc (TH Management, LLC, Laura Street Development, LLC) are requesting Flexible Development approval to permit a mixed-use development in the Downtown (D) District with 245 attached dwelling units (which includes an increase in density of 36 dwelling units from the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan Public Amenities Incentive Pool) and 186,300 sq ft of non- residential floor area (restaurant, retail/movie theater, and existing office), an increase in the permitted height from 30 ft to 380 ft (to roof deck) with an additional 27 ft for architectural embellishments as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2- 903.C. [Proposed Use: Mixed-Use (245 attached dwellings, 98,500 sq ft retail/restaurant/movie theatre, and 87,800 sq ft office)] at 400, 410, 418, & 420 Cleveland St and 416 Laura St, Sec 16-29-15, M&B 12-03, Earl & Tate's Sub Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, 9-10, 19-21 and part of lots 2, 4, 6, 8, 11, 17, & 18. Assigned Planner: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III. FLD2005-08084 5. Ronald E & Karen L Kozan (Newkirk Ventures Inc) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to permit the addition of a pool to a previously approved attached dwelling project (FLD2005-05045, approved August 16, 2005) in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the rear (east) setback from 15 ft to zero ft (to pool deck), as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-404.F. [Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (26 condominiums) with pool] at 405 Island Way, Island Estates of Clearwater, Unit 2, Lot 15 & S '/s of Lot 16. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005- 08086 6. Dam Devon LLC (City of Clearwater) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to permit a parking lot in the Tourist (T) District with a reduction to minimum lot area from 20,000 sq ft to 16,500 sq ft, a reduction to the front (north along Devon Dr/First Ave) setback from 25 ft to 15 ft (to pavement) and a reduction to the front (east along Hamden Dr) setback from 25 ft to 15 ft (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-803.C. (Proposed Use: Public parking lot for 25 parking spaces) at 41 Devon Dr, Columbia Sub, Blk B, E V2 of Lot 1. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner Ill. FLD2005-08089 7. Peter Pan Developments LLC (Panayiotis Vasiloudes, Petrit Meroli, Somerset Condominium) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to permit 8 attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 sq ft to 13,087 sq ft, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 ft to 120 ft along Bay Esplanade and from 150 ft to 110 ft along Somerset St, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 ft to 22 ft (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 ft to 11 ft (to building and pavement) and from 25 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 ft to 3.1 ft (to pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 ft to zero ft (to pool deck), an increase to building ht from 30 ft to 46.83 ft (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 ft for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-404.F, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from 5 ft to 3 ft (for the retention pond planting area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset St from 10 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 ft to 3.1 ft (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Sec 3-1202.G. [Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (8 condominiums)] at 693-699=:Bay. Esplanade, Mandalay Unit No. 5 Replat, Blk 76 & unplatted Blk 76. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005-08090 8. Peter Pan Development LLC & Epic Holdings South LLC (Bay Esplanade Condominium) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to permit 8 attached dwellings in the Tourist (T) District with a reduction to the front (west) setback from 15 ft to 13 ft (to water feature), reductions to the front (north) setback along Somerset St from 15 ft to 12.67 ft (to building), from 15 ft to 9.83 ft (to pavement) and from 15 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 ft to zero ft (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 35 ft to tl 0 a 46.83 ft (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 ft for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, under the provisions of Sec 2-803.B. [Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (8 condominiums)] at 685-689 Bay Esplanade, Mandalay Unit No. 5 Replat Blk 77, Lots 12-13, & part of Lot 11. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005-08088 9. Jaycee Roth is requesting an appeal of an administrative determination denying the ability to apply for an Animal Boarding Facility use as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project in the Downtown East Gateway Character District, per Sec 3-502. (Proposed Use: Animal Boarding Use) at 1242 Cleveland St, Padgett's Estates Sub Lot 3 & parts of Lots 2 & 4. Assigned Planner: John Schodtler, Planner I. APP2005-00002 Interested parties may appear and be heard at the hearing or file written notice of approval or objection with the Planning Director or City Clerk prior to the hearing. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by the Board or Council, with respect to any matter considered at such hearings, will need to request a record of the proceedings and, for such purpose, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based per Florida Statute 286.0105. Community Development Code Sec 4-206 states that party status shall be granted by the Board in quasi-judicial cases if the person requesting such status demonstrates that s/he is substantially affected. Party status entitles parties to personally testify, present evidence, argument and witnesses, cross-examine witnesses, appeal the decision and speak on reconsideration requests, and needs to be requested and obtained during the case discussion before the CDB. An oath will be administered swearing in all persons giving testimony in quasi-judicial public hearing cases. If you wish to speak at the meeting, please wait to be recognized, then state and spell your name and provide your address. Persons without party status speaking before the CDB shall be limited to three minutes unless an individual is representing a group in which case the Chairperson may authorize a reasonable amount of time up to 10 minutes. Five days prior to the meeting, staff reports and recommendations on the above requests will be available for review by interested parties between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., weekdays, at the City of Clearwater, Planning Department, 100 S. Myrtle Ave., Clearwater, FL 33756. Please contact the case presenter, at 562-4567 to discuss any questions or concerns about the project and/or to better understand the proposal and review the site plan. Michael Delk Planning Director City of Clearwater P.O. Box 4748, Clearwater, FL 33758-4748 NOTE: Applicant or representative must be present at the hearing. Cynthia E. Goudeau, CMC City Clerk A COPY OF THIS AD IN LARGE PRINT IS AVAILABLE IN OFFICIAL RECORDS AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES. ANY PERSON WITH A DISABILITY REQUIRING REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING SHOULD CALL (727) 562-4093 WITH THEIR REQUEST. Ad: 10/30/05 FLD2005- 090-117 +?` r1066363 ONTARIO LTD AMERPOL HOTELS & MOTELS INC •ARMBRUSTER, JOHN 152 CLARENDON ST 428 MINER ST 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 209 SOUTHAMPTON ON NOH 21-0 00030 - BENSENVILLE IL 60106 - 2657 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1535 CANADA BANNON, MARY KATHLEEN TRUST BEACH & GULF SANDS INC BEARDSLEY, JAMES M 8013 WILDWOOD LN 657 BAY ESPLANADE 15 MAYFAIR LN DARIEN IL 60561 - 5914 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1515 BUFFALO NY 14201 - 1522 BERETA, STANLEY D THE BOERNER, SUSANA B BOSCHEN, ELSIE R REV TRUST 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 203 112 S LAUBER WAY BOSCHEN, ELSIE R THE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1535 TAMPA FL 33609 - 2615 675 MANDALAY AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1526 BOYES, JAMES R BROUZET, THIERRY M BROWN, DEBRA P BOYES, GEORGIA 57 ASTER ST GARRICK, EARL T 969 BRUCE AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1407 723 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1013 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 BUNDY, RUSSELL H BUNDY, THOMAS C CAPRI MOTEL CONDO ASSN NORGORDT, HANNAH K 43 ACACIA ST 55 SOMERSET ST # 3 42 SOMERSET ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1404 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1546 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1543 CIUCEVICH, JOSEPH Clearwater Beach Association Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition 736 BRUCE AVE Jay Keyes Doug Williams, President CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1418 100 Devon Drive 2544 Frisco Drive Clearwater, FL 33767 Clearwater, FL 33761 COMB, JEAN J COQUINA APTS INC Coral Resort Condominium 287 PILGRIM 692 BAY ESPLANADE Peggy Harnung BIRMINGHAM MI 48009 - 4610 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1500 483 East Shore Drive Clearwater, FL 33767 CZIPRI, BRENDA K THE DANIEL, HAROLD M D'ARRIGO, STEPHEN V 334 EAST LAKE RD STE 338 DANIEL, JANICE V 11 ARLENE AVE PALM HARBOR FL 34685 - 2427 713 BRUCE AVE WILMINGTON MA 01887 - 1111 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1416 DE BELLIS, BARBARA DOM, MARY DVORNIK, DONALD F 55 SOMERSET ST # 3 65 SOMERSET ST DVORNIK, SUSAN E CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1546 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1547 52 ASTER ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1406 EPIC HOLDINGS SOUTH EYLER, CYNTHIA A FERGUSON, MELODIE A 139 BAYSIDE DR HOLDEN, DONNA L PENNOCK, ROBERT M CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2502 554 ADALINE AVE 665 BAY ESPLANADE VANDAL IA OH 45377 - 1802 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1598 U FITZGERALD, RONALD 665 POINSETTIA AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1530 FIVE PALM CONDO ASSN INC 673 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1503 • FOLEY, DONALD F FOLEY, CATHERINE G 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 108 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1534 FORLINI, DOMENICO G FRIARS MINOR ORD OF ST FRANCIS GALASSO, MICHAEL 808 MANDALAY AVE PROVINCIAL CURIA GALASSO, DAWN CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1324 147 THOMPSON ST 727 BAY ESPLANADE AVE NEW YORK NY 10012 - 3110 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 GALLAGHER, PATRICK J GARRIS, BERLE SR GIRDLER, JEAN C THE GALLAGHER, BEVERLY B GARRIS, ANNE M GIRDLER, NICHOLAS M THE 726 BAY ESPLANADE 38 ACACIA ST 732 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1410 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1403 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1410 GLEASON, WILLIAM J GLEASON, KRISTIN J 53 ASTER ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1407 HESSELSCHWERDT, BERND J HESSELSCHWERDT, BERNHARD 55 SOMERSET ST # 5 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1546 HORGAN, DANIEL B HORGAN, ROISIN A 710 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1408 KEYS, RANDALL A 6713 E WHITEWAY DR TAMPA FL 33617 - 3216 LA RISA DEVELOPMENT CO LLC 880 MANDALAY AVE # C 908 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1219 LETOURNEAU, WILLIAM T HIRSCH, DEBORA A 395 16TH ST NEWPORT MN 55055 - 1061 HALGREN, RALPH W HALGREN, VELORA B 56 SOMERSET ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1543 HILDEBRAND, WILLIAM O JR 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 107 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1534 JAKSCH, ROBERT W 1596 SHIRLEY PL LARGO FL 33770 - 2218 KIELMANN, LOTHAR E KIELMANN, WENDY 35154 LEON ST LIVONIA MI 48150 - 2668 LEARY, EDWARD B JR THE PMB 331 30 JERICHO TPKE COMMACK NY 11725 - 3009 LEWINSKI, HANNA LEWINSKI, WOJCIECH 661 POINSETTA AVE #306 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - HAYS, WILLIAM D 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 304 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1536 HOLDEN, ROBERT L 12 STILLWATER HEIGHTS DR WEST BOYLSTON MA 01583 - 1122 KELLEY, PAUL KELLEY, TRACEY 667 BAY ESPLANDE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1550 KROMER, JOHN KROMER, JANET 10317 GREEN LINKS DR TAMPA FL 33626 - 5400 LENTRICCHIA, DOMENICK LENTRICCHIA, KARIN 814 NARCISSUS AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1334 LEWINSKI, WOJCIECH LEWINSKI, HANNA 60 SOMERSET # 3 1537 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1543 LITTLER, BRUCE C LOCKE, WILLIAM R LONG, MARIAN C LITTLER, CAROL A 47 ACACIA ST 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 104 711 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1404 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1534 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 MARTUCCI, MICHAEL MARTUCCI, ELIZABETH 731 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1437 MC FADDEN, ARLENE S MC FADDEN, ROBERT G 661 POINSETTIA AVE #204 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1535 MEROLI, PETRIT 967 ELDORADO AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1020 MILLHOUSE, DEAN A GILL, SHARON R 704 BRUCE AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - SMASTORIDES, NICHOLAS MASTORIDES, LACEY 2187 VIOLA DR CLEARWATER FL 33764 - 3738 MC KINNEY, CARMELLA C MC KINNEY, GEORGE L 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 210 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1535 MERRIAM, RICHARD P 717 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 MORRISON, GEORGE ROBERT ALBERT 115 ARGYLE 1415 KIRKLAND QC H9H 3H9 00030 - CANADA MURPHY, VICKI A FALASKY, DOROTHY A PO BOX 3505 CLEARWATER BEACH FL 33767 - 8505 NICHOLAS, JERRY 3002 STRAWBERRY RD #OFC PASADENA TX 77502 - 5230 PALMA, GEORGE 32 FORGE DR DOWNSVIEW ON CANADA M3N 2R3 00030 - NAPOLI, JOHN D 709 BRUCE AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1416 NORTH CLEARWATER BEACH DEVELOP PO BOX 4189 CLEARWATER FL 33758 - 4189 PASQUALE, JACK R THE PASQUALE, PATRICIA A THE 1433 NORMAN DR DARIEN IL 60561 - 4434 0 MAVITY, LEON L 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 307 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1537 MC SWEENEY, GARY W MC SWEENEY, CARMEN 20942 E GLEN HAVEN CIR NORTHVILLE MI 48167 - 2465 MERRITT, GORDON E 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 201 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1535 MOSSER, RICHARD S 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 301 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1536 NEIL, MARIE-THERESE 31 ISLAND WAY # 201 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 OSTROWSKI, JOZEF OSTROWSKI, RENATA 39 ACACIA ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1404 PENTHOUSE SHORES ASSN INC 661 POINSETTIA AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1561 PETER PAN DEV Peter Pan Developments, LLC PIOLI, RICHARD T THE 610 MANDALAY NE Panayiotis Vasiloudes and Petrit Meroli PIOLI, ROBERTA B THE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1632 5210 Webb Rd 750 ISLAND WAY # 402 Tampa, FL 33615 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1820 PROPERTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES 12003 LILLIAN AVE SEMINOLE FL 33778 - 3504 PUTYRSKI, ANNE M 56 ACACIA ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1405 RADAY, DAVID M YOUNG, SEAN 12003 LI LLIAN AVE N SEMINOLE FL 33778 - 3504 RHOADS, JEFFREY L THE ROBERDS, ROGER O ROLLINSON, ANN C PO BOX 861 ROBERDS, ELEANOR A 1364 ELLINGTON RD DUNEDIN FL 34697 - 0861 715 BAY ESPLANADE SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074 - 2600 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 ROZENITS, FRED ROZENITS, ANNA 31 ISLAND WAY # 1002 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 SEIFERT, MICHAEL E SEIFERT, NANCY S 5825 PERSIMMON DR MADISON WI 53711 - 5003 SMITH, RUPERT W JR SMITH, IRENE V 661 POINSETTIA AVE # 106 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1534 SONDERMANN, WILFRIED & HELGARD SONDERMANN, WILFRIED BEN 52 ACACIA ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1405 CJ SAGONIAS, NICK EST 235 OLD OAK CIR PALM HARBOR FL 34683 - 5862 SILLASEN, SEAJAYE 12313 W LOUISIANA AVE LAKEWOOD CO 80228 - 3829 SNO-BIRD PROP INC 10 PRINCE ST CUMBERLAND CTR ME 04021 - 4007 SPEAR, ROBERT E THE 102 CARRIAGE SQUARE CT HENDERSONVILLE NC 28791 - 1396 THOMPSON, MICHAEL S SPRING TIDE INVESTMENTS II LLC THOMPSON, MARIA 622 BYPASS DR STE 100 BRENDON FEN POND RD IGTHEHM CLEARWATER FL 33764 - 5002 NEAR SEVEN OAKS KENT TN15 9JE 00003 - GREAT BRITAIN VERBAN,STEVE VERBAN, HELEN K 55 SOMERSET ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1546 WELLS, DARCY NALEY, STEPHEN 705 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 WEYANT, JAMES R III CARDONI-WEYANT, KRISTI A 51 ACACIA ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1404 WHITE, ANDREA P 55 SOMERSET ST # 4 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1546 SAGONIAS, STAMATINA 235 OLD OAK CIR PALM HARBOR FL 34683 - 5862 SMITH, MARK A SMITH, CHARLENE S 701 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1409 Somerset Comdominium 610 Mandalay Ave Clearwater Beach, FL 33767 SPERELAKIS, NICHOLAS SR SPERELAKIS, DOLORES J 12114 PAULMEADOWS DR CINCINNATI OH 45249 - 1330 VASILOUDES, PANAYIOTIS VASILOUDES, HELEN 767 BAY ESPLANADE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1412 WELPTON, MARY ELIZABETH 462 MAIN ST STE 300 WATERTOWN MA 02472 - 2246 WHITING, J RODGER HARRAH, HAROLD D 929 LANTANA AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1127 WICKY, JERRY E WINCHESTER, GARY WOSCHITZ, EVA THE WICKY, BETTY W WINCHESTER, PAMELA 302 POINSETTIA LAND TRUST PO BOX 1191 17111 HANNA RD 10 COURTWOOD PL OLDSMAR FL 34677 - 1191 LUTZ FL 33549 - 5666 TORONTO ON M2K 1Z9 00030 - CANADA /:!-,?aDD ---D ?D 9d 0< CITY OF CLEARWATEER POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 PLANNING DEPARTMENT April 18, 2007 Ms. Kathy Ziola 610 Mandalay Avenue Clearwater, FL 33767 RE: FLD2005-08090 - 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Time Extension Development Order Dear Ms. Ziola: On April 17, 2007, the Community Development Board (CDB) APPROVED your request to extend the time frame for the Development Order for the above referenced case. Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit to construct the site improvements on your parcel at 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade shall be submitted by May 17, 2008. All required certificates of occupancy shall be obtained within two years of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do not change with successive owners. Should you be unable to apply for a building permit to construct the improvements approved under the above referenced case, you will need to re-apply for development approval in accordance with the requirements of the Community Development Code. Please be aware that the issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III at 727-562-4504. Sincerely, ?j Michael Delk, AICP Planning Director S:0anning DepartmenhC D BIFLEX (FLD)Ilnactive or Finished Applications lBay Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos (MHDR) - ApprovedlBay Esplanade 693-699 CDB Time Extension Development Order 4.18.07.doc FRANK HIBBARD, MAYOR JOHN DORAN, COUNCILMEMBER J.B. JOHNSON, COUNCIJ MEMBER BILL JONSON, COUNCILMEMBER CARI.EN A. PETERSEN, COUNCILMEMBER "EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER" 1` W Y LONG RANGE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CITY OF C LEARWATE R PLANNING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 January 18, 2006 Mr. Housh Ghovaee Northside Engineering Services Inc. 601 Cleveland Street, Suite # 930 Clearwater, Florida 33755 RE: Development Order - Case No. FLD2005-08090 - 693 - 699 Bay Esplanade Dear Mr. Ghovaee: This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206.D.6 of the Community Development Code. On January 17, 2006, the Community Development Board reviewed your requests for Flexible Development approval to permit eight attached dwellings in the Medium High Density 'Residential (MHDR) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 15,000 square feet to 13,087 square feet, reductions to the minimum lot width from 150 feet to 120 feet along Bay Esplanade and from 150 feet to 110 feet along Somerset Street, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 22 feet (to water feature), reductions to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 11 feet (to building and pavement) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), an increase to building height from 30 feet to 44.83 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 4.17 feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and to permit the building within the visibility triangles, as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.F, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Bay Esplanade from five feet to three feet (for the retention pond planting area), and a reduction to the landscape buffer along Somerset Street from 10 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. The Community Development Board (CDB) APPROVED the application with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C. 2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913. 3. The development is compatible with the surrounding area. Conditions of Approval: 1. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB; 2. That a Unity of Title be recorded in the public records prior to the issuance of any permits; 3. That a condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; FRANK HIBBARD, MAYOR BILL JONSON, VICE-MAYOR ,JOHN DORAN,, COUNCILMEMBER HOYT HAMILTON, COUNCILMEMBER CARLEN A. PETERSEN, COUNCII.NIEMBER "EQUAL. EMPLOYMENT AND ArFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER" January 18, 2006 Ghovaee - Page 2 4. That any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building; 5. That boats moored at the docks, lift and/or slips be for the exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the condominiums and not be permitted to be sub-leased separately from the condominiums; 6. That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks; 7. That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting right-of-.way shall be installed along the entire site's street frontages prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior to the commencement of work; 8. That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits; 9. That pool fencing be non-opaque within the waterfront sight visibility triangle; 10. That there be no landscaping (other than sod) within the waterfront sight visibility triangle; 11. That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits; 12. That all utility equipment including but not limited to wireless communication facilities, electrical and gas meters, etc. be screened from view and/or painted to match the building to which they are attached, as applicable prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 13. That site and landscape plans be revised prior to the issuance of any permits showing the existing four-foot wide sidewalk to remain south of the existing asphalt driveway and adjacent to the 12-inch oak tree along Bay Esplanade; 14. That rooftop mechanical equipment be screened from view prior to the issuance of the building permit; and 15. That the retention pond be modified prior to the issuance of any permits to provide a five-foot planting area between the front property line and top of bank. Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of Flexible Development approval (January 17, 2007). All required certificates of occupancy shall be obtained within two years of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do not change with successive owners. The Community Development Coordinator may grant an extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of validity. The Community Development Board may approve one additional extension of time after the community development coordinator's extension to initiate a building permit application. The issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval. Additionally, an appeal of a Level Two approval (Flexible Development) may be initiated pursuant to Section 4-5023 by the applicant or by any person granted party status within 14 days of the date of the CDB meeting. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case expires on January 31, 2006 (14 days from the date of the CDB meeting). January 18, 2006 Ghovaee - Page 3 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Wayne M. Wells, Planner III, at 727-5624504. You can access zoning information for parcels within the City through our website: www.myclearwater.com/ og v/depts/planning. *Make Us Your Favorite! Sincerely, a% Michael Del , A P Planning Director S: (Planning Departmen6C D BIFLEX (FLD)Ilnactive or Finished ApplicationsWay Esplanade 693-699 Somerset Condos (MHDR) - ApprovedWay Esplanade 693-699 Development Order.doc