07/13/2010
BUILDING/FLOOD BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MEETING MINUTES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
July 13, 2010
Present: Edward H. Walker, Jr. Acting Chair
Pankaj Shah Board Member
Gary Richter Board Member
Arthur Shand Board Member
Absent: John H. Logan, Jr. Chair
Also Present: Camilo Soto Assistant City Attorney
Kevin Garriott Building Official
Patricia O. Sullivan Board Reporter
The Acting Chair called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. at the Municipal Services
Building.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
2 - Approval of Minutes –
February 2, 2010
Member Shah moved to approve the minutes of the regular Building/Flood Board of
Adjustment and Appeals meeting of February 2, 2010, as submitted in written summation to
each board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
3 – Continued Requests
: - None.
4 – New Request
:
4.1. Case: MIS2010-05012 - 701 Island Way – Island Ests of Clearwater Unit 8 Lot 17 - Agent
Name: Brent McDonald - Applicant requests approval to construct a 28-inch high block earth
retaining wall 4 feet from seawall.
Applicant Brent McDonald reviewed his project to level the 10% slope in his backyard to
stop his children’s balls from rolling into the water. He said based on his research of City Code
and views of properties across the water, he thought he did not need to obtain a permit to
construct a 28-inch high block earth retaining wall four feet from the seawall. He said the four-
foot setback is for drainage. He said he dug 16-inch footers above the tiebacks; he did not
know the footers’ exact locations. He said only dirt and sod will be placed inside the retaining
wall. He said the pool deck is about 28 inches higher than the top of the wall he constructed.
Building Director Kevin Garriott said an “after the fact permit” would be needed. All other
building and zoning code requirements apply independently of Board action; the Board is
considering this use of the property within 18 feet of the seawall only. During the permitting
process, engineering design and structural approval of the retaining wall will be required before
a permit can be issued.
Building - Flood 2010-07-13 1
Discussion ensued regarding access to seawall tiebacks with comments that tiebacks
would remain accessible on both sides of the wall and recommendations that information
regarding the location of the tie backs be recorded and a fence or steps be added to the wall for
safety.
Member Shah moved that the Building/Flood Board of Adjustment and Appeals
approved the request to construct a retaining wall within four feet of the seawall at 701 Island
Way, with conditions: 1) a building permit is required for construction of the retaining wall project
and 2) information regarding the location of the deadmen anchors is to be recorded at the
County Courthouse to ensure that future owners of the property are aware of the location of the
anchors. The motion was duly seconded. Members Shah, Richter, and Acting Chair Walker
voted “Aye”; Member Shand voted “Nay.” Motion carried.
4.2. Case: MIS2010-06003 – 984 Eldorado Avenue – Mandalay Sub Blk 69, Lot 4 & N'ly 1/2 of
Lot 3 & S'ly 1/2 of Lot 5 – Vacant Property – Agent Name: Steven Williamson, Esq./Johnson,
Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP – Applicant requests a waiver of Code requirement for 18-
foot setback from seawall on waterfront lot.
Attorney Steven Williamson, representing the applicant, said plans are to construct a
home and swimming pool within 18 feet of an obsolete, nonfunctional seawall at 984 Eldorado
Avenue. He said the house will be at least 10 feet from the seawall. He said the applicant has
a contract to purchase property at 1000 Eldorado Avenue. He said the CCCL (Coastal
Construction Control Line) line does not parallel the seawall.
Engineer Reuben Clarson, representing the applicant, said his May 28, 2010 letter to
Steven Williamson addressed Cases MIS2010-06002 and MIS2010-06003 for properties at 984
and 1000 Eldorado Avenue. (See Exhibit: MIS2010-06002/MIS2010-06003 2010-07-20). He
said the swimming pool would not negatively affect the structural integrity of the seawall. He
said the tie backs are 10 to 12 feet apart.
Mr. Garriott reported that the recent buyer of a nearby property said he had not received
notice of today’s meeting and requested a continuance. It was felt that a neighbor’s comments
would have little bearing on relative facts used by the Board to decide the case. Comments
were made that the Board assumes that notice was done correctly and the property’s seller was
obligated to provide this information to the purchaser. The Board declined to continue the
hearing.
Discussion ensued with comments that the seawall no longer functions as a seawall.
Member Shah moved that the Building/Flood Board of Adjustment and Appeals
approved the request to construct a swimming pool and deck adjacent to an existing seawall
and a habitable structure a minimum of 10 feet from the seawall at 984 Eldorado Avenue based
on the board’s previous decisions that the seawall structure is not critical and the opinion of
engineer Reuben Clarson that the seawall is structurally non-functioning. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
4.3. Case: MIS2010-06002 - 1000 Eldorado Avenue – Mandalay Sub Blk 69, Lot 6 & N'ly 1/2 of
Lot 5 - Agent Name: Steven Williamson, Esq./Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP –
Building - Flood 2010-07-13 2
Applicant is requesting a waiver of Code requirement for 18-foot setback from seawall on
waterfront lot.
Mr. Garriott reported that a neighbor had emailed the City in opposition to this request.
Attorney Steven Williamson„representing the applicant, said the request is to allow
construction of a pool adjacent to the seawall at 1000 Eldorado Avenue. He said the applicant
plans to modify the porch of the existing house that is located within the 18-foot setback from
the seawall. He said the swimming pool will be small; it has not been designed.
Engineer Reuben Clarson, representing the applicant, referenced his May 28, 2010
letter to Steven Williamson which addressed today's Cases MIS2010-06002 and MIS2010-
06003 for properties at 984 and 1000 Eldorado Avenue. (See Exhibit: MIS2010-06002/
MIS2010-06003 2010-07-20).
Discussion ensued with comments that the Board did not recall denying any similar
request to construct within 18 feet of the subject seawall due to its location far from the water.
The wall is not functioning as a seawall.
Member Shah moved that the Building/Flood Board of Adjustment and Appeals
approved the request to construct a swimming pool and deck adjacent to an existing seawall at
1000 Eldorado Avenue based on the board's previous decisions that the seawall structure is not
critical. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
5 - Other Business:
Engineer Reuben Clarson said tiebacks should not be of concern due to modern seawall
construction techniques. Mr. Garriott said the BIG-C (Barrier Islands Governmental Council),
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), and FDEP (Florida Department of
Environmental Protection) had agreed to leave the CCCL unchanged if an 18-foot setback was
required for tieback maintenance.
Mr. Clarson said a seawall engineer should review Case MIS2010-05012 before
construction is approved.
6 - Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 3:01 p.m.
Chair
Building/Flood Board of Adjustmen Appeals
Attest:
C
Board er /
Building - Flood 2010-07-13 3
LXH igi-'v M15,aOlo-060060MIS&10-oG003 :5Z010-07-r;20
Reuben Clarson Consulting, Inc.
972-31 st Ave. N.E.
St.Petersburg, F1. 33704
Ph. 727-895-4717
Fax 727-895-4717
Florida Licensed Engineer # 16313
Certificate of Authorization #9206
May 28, 2010
Johnson, Poe, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns LLP
911 Chestnut Street
Clearwater, Fl. 33756
Attn: Steven Williamson, Esquire
Re: Seawall/pool at 984 and 1000 Eldorado, Clearwater Beach, Fl.
Gentlemen:
On May 26, 2010, I inspected the above site conditions with an existing reinforced
concrete seawall, the CCCL varying from 3' to 10' waterward of the seawall. Proposed
pools will be built on both lots. There has been beach nourishment in this area with the
water's edge approximately 500' away from the seawall, and there are vegetated sand
dunes between the water and the seawall.
The top of the present 20" high x 16" wide seawall cap varies from being flush with the
yard and the beach sand to being exposed for 20" in a few spots where there are vegetated
depressions on the waterside of the cap. In the depressions there is a 3' wide reinforced
concrete pad (possibly the cap of a toewall ?) visible, but it is unknown if the pad exists
over the entire frontage. The "seawall" is basically a "sand wall", not even an "upland
retaining wall" since there is little, if any, difference between the yard and beach grades.
The pools will be built on both lots behind the seawall (just outside the 10' setback from
the CCCL). This will involve the removal of several of the existing tieback rods and
since there is little, if any, lateral loading on the sand wall, this is structurally acceptable.
If some of the sand washed away as much as 3'-4' in front of the wall, the location of the
pool (with no tiebacks) would not be an issue since the pool shell is a structural element
and the seawall slabs would cantilever with little, if any earth loads on the seawall. The
pool shell would not be bonded to the seawall.
The new pools can be built directly behind the existing seawall (outside the CCCL
setback) with no structural issues or needed modifications.
. ?.??l???r: M?sao?o-c?a?M?s?o-a?oo3 ao?o-o?ac,
If there are any questions please call. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service.
Sincerely,
TZeu ei Clarson 06hs? lting
Reuben Clarson
Florida Licensed Engineer 16313
?,, ?IIda