The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2005-09093w T~ C~ear~vater Pianniny Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727.562.4567 Fax: 727.582-4865 U SUBMIT ORIGINAL Sy„IGNED ANp NOTARIZEq APPLICATION [~ SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION Including 1) collated, 2) stapled and 3) folded sets of site plans O SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE ~ 1,205.00 CASE #: DATE RECEIVED; RECEIVED BY (staff initials): ~_, ATU~s PaGE #: ZONING DISTRICT; LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: ~~ SURROUNDING USES OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES; NORTH: SOUTH: WEST: EAST: * NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS 51TE PLAN SETS) ~'LF.XIBLE DEVELOPMENT .APPLICATION I (.Revised 2/02/2UU4) ~PI..EASN 'I'YI'} UR PRINT A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Sect(on 4.202.A) ORIGINAL RECEIVED APPt.ICANT NAME: Harbour Estates, LLC, Barry Greenfield, VP _ 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444, Tampa, FL 33607 B MAILING ADDRESS: flHONE NUMBER: (813) 677'44'44 FAx NUMBER: PLANNING DEPARTMENT - PROPERTY OWNER(S.): Harbour Estates, LLC, Barry Greenfield, VP, 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444, Tampa, FL 33807 (Must Include All owners as listed on Che deed - provitle orlglnal.signature(s) on pa8e B) AGENT NAME: BIII WOOds, Pres.,Woods Consulting, Inc. and/or Terri Skaplk; Woods Consulting, Inc. „ ~. MAILING ADDRESS: 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22., Dunedin, FL 34698 727.786-5747 727-786-7479 PHONE NUMBER: ,_,,,,,,,~_„__,,,.._, r „FAX NUMBER; ,_,._„•_ CELL. NUMBER: ?27"671"0084 E-MAIL ADDRESS; biliwoodsr~woodsconsulting.org __rM_ B. PROP05ED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4.202.A) STREET ADDRESS of.subject site: 279 Windward Passage, Clearwater, FL 33767 - LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached warranty deeds - (If not listed here, Wleasa Hole the location of ttds dorumanl in the submittal) PARCEL NUMBER: 06 / 29 / 15 / 43380 / 003 / 0050 and 60 feet of parcel 0060 _ _~ PAi2CEL SfZE: 1.18 acres ~~ (acres, square feet) PROPOSED USE(S) AND SIZE(S): Construct amulti-use dock consisting of 1818 sf of new decking and 8 wet slips for the ~~~ (number of dweliing units, hotel rooms or square footage of nonresidential use) .__._- exclusive use of the residents of upland condominium development. r Remove existing docks consisting of 1325 sf of decking and 12 wet slips. Construct amulti-use DESCRIPTION OF REQUES'f'(5): ,,,,,_„,_..._- .~ Attach sheets anal be specific wtson Idenlilying the request (include all requested coda deviations; e,g, reduction in required number or parking spaces, spurltic use, ate.) dock consisting of 1818 sf of decking and 8 wet slips. The net gain will be 493 sf of new decking and the net lose of 4 slips. Please see attached plans for scope and details, r~ V O r0 V 1 c C~ ~1" Page 'I of 6 -• Flexible Devolo{7m®nt Application-• City of Clearwater • ~ DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS fTDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT AEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES ____ NO ~ pf yes, attach a copy of the epppcable documents) C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section A•202.A.ti) Q SUE3MIT A COPY OF 1'HE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see page G) D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-t313.A) [] Provids camplete responses to the six (ti) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA - Explain h~ each criteria fa achieved, In detail: 1. Tha proposed development of the land will be'in harmony with the scat®, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The proposed docks are located in an area already containing docks that are similar in design. The docks (9 slips) at the Island Estates Public docks are located in an area immediately adjacent to the site on the east. The Marine Science Center with slips is located immediately to the site on the west. 2. Tl~e proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly Impair the value thereof. The construction of the condominiums and the docks (as amenities to the condominiums) will increase the value of properties that are not being redeveloped at this time. The docks will not hinder the construction of docks on the adjacent properties. 3. Tha proposed development wlli not adversely affect the health or safety or persona residing or working (n the neighborhood of the proposed use. The docks are for the exclusive use of the owners of the. upland condominiums. The construction of the docks should have no r negative Impact on the health and safety of persons working or residing in the neighborhood. A. 7ho proposed development Is designed to minimize traffic congestion. As the dock and slips are an ameni~r to the condominium development and for the exclusive use of the condominium residents, there will be no impact on traffic. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the cormunity character of the Immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. Please see item 1.above. The community in the vicinity consists of condominiums with docking facilities. &. The dE°sign of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory. end hours of operation Impacts, on adjacent properties, The pro, posed condominiums and docks will enhance the area and will not have any adverse Impacts visually or acoustically. ^ Provide complete responses to the applicable flexibility rriterla fvr the spec(fic land,use as listed in each Zoning Distril~t ~~Jtho waiver is rettuested (use separate sheets as necessary) - Explain j?3~ each criteria Is achieved, fn detail; RECEIVED Please see attachments A & B ~~ ~~ pI,ANNING DEPARTMENt .~ CITY OF IT=~R~'~'-' Page 7. o/ 6 - Flexihlo Development Ap.plicatfon- Ctty of Clearwalar a • E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City o1 Clearwater Design Criteria Manual and 4.202.A.29) ^ STORMWATER PLAN including the following requirements: ,,,~ Existing topography extending 30 Ieet beyond all property Ilnes; _ Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all strtrcluros; ,___ All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; ____. Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top o! bank, toe of slope and outlet cont-ol structure; Storrnwater calculations for attenuation and water quaUry; Signature of Florida registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations ^ COPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWf=WMD) PERMIT' 5U9MiTTAI {SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of Cily Building Permit), It applicable ^ COPY OF STATE AMD COUNTY STORMWATER SYSTEM TIE•IN PERMIT APPLICATIONS, if applicable F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Gods Section 4-202.A) Q SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal dascriptlon of property) -One .original and 74 copies; ^ 7REE SURVEY (Including existing trees on site and within 26' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and locatlorr, including drip tines and indicating trees to be removed} -please design around the exfatinp trees; Q LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY; ^ PARKINC3 DEMAND STUDY In conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (le. Reduce number of spaces}, Hior to the submittal of this application, the methodology of such study shall be approved by the Community Development Coordinator and shop be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to tho parking standards are approved; ^ GRADING P~IAN, as applicable; ^ PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: dullding permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is pravlded); CORY OF RECORDED PLAT, as G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section a-202,A) Q SITE PLAN with tho following information (not to oxceed 24" x 38"'): ORIGINAL All dimensions; RECEIVED ,_-,_ North arrow; ", Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 60 feo!), and date prepared; FEB 0 8 ZQ~6 ,__ Locatlan map; ~_ Index sheet referencing individual sheets included In package; Foatprint.and size of aft EXISTING buildings and structures; Footprint and size of ail PROPOSED buildings and structures; pIANNING DEPARTMENT ._,,.. Al-.required setbacks; CITY pF CLEARWATER ___ All existing and proposed points of access; ,,, ,_ All required sight triangles; ,_-„_ identNlcatlon of environmenlallyunlque areas, such as waierco.urses, wetlands, tree rnasstly, unu dpecrmcsn trees, including dascriptlon and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; Location of all public and private easements; _„_ Location of ail street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site; __ Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sandtary sewer lines, manholes end lift stdtiars, gas and 4vater Fnes; __., All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas; Depiction by shading or crosshatching of ail required parking lot interior landscaped areas; ~_ Location of ail solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanlcat equiprnent and all roquirc+d screening (per Section 3-?.01(D)(i) and Index #701); ____ Location of all landscape material; ~_ Location of all onsita and oflsite storm-water management facilities; ._-_, Location of a.lt outdoor fighting fixtures; and „r- Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks, ^ 511'E DATA TABLE foroxisting, required, and proposed development, in wnttan/tabular loan. i.and area in square foet and acres; _,_; Nu-nber of EXISTING dwelling units: ~, Numbor of PROPOSED dwelling units; _.~, Gross floor area devoted to each us®; Page 3 of 6 - Floxlble Development Appllcatign- City of Clearwater _,_ Parking spaces: total number, presented In tabular form with the number of required spaces; _,,,,, Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces end driveways, expressed in square feet and percentage of the paved vehicular area; _„ Sizo and species of all landscape material; _-__ Offlclal records book and page numbers of ail existing utility easement; ~.. Building and structure heights; ,,,,,~ Impermeable surface ratio (I,~.R,); and _,__ Floor area ratio (F.A,R,) (or all nonresidential uses, Q REDUCED SITE= F'~LAN to scale (8 Y: X 1 t) and rotor rendering If possible; ^ POR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additlonai inlormatlon on site plan. .,__ One-foot contours or spot elevations on site; ,_--_, Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormWatet managemen.l for the parcel; Ali open space areas; .. Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms; .,._ Lot Ilnos and building lines (dimensioned); .,.,_„ Streets anti drives (dimensioned); .....,,. Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); ___ Structural overhangs; H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL R£QUIREM£NTSt (Section 4-110.2.A) RECEIVED ^ I.ANDSCAAE PLAN: __ All existing and proposed structures; FEB 0 8 2006 .^-- Names of abutting streets; Drainage and retention areas Including swales, side slopes antl bottom elevations:; Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape butters; ._-..... Sight visibility triangles; PLANNING DEPARTMENT .__. Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas Including landscaping islands and curbing; CITY OF CLEARWATER r,-,- Proposed and required parking spaces; ,-_, Existing traces on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, includury dnpUt~e (as indtcaleu on required tree survey); _._„ plant schedule with s key (symbol or label) Indicating the size, description, apeci8cationa 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 reiating to the plant schedule; ._-_, Typical planting details for tress, palms, shrubs and ground cover pients includinp~instructions, soil mixes, backfllling, mulching and protective measures;. __~ Jn.terfor landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverag®, expressing in both square feet and percentage covered; ..... Cohditions of a previous development approval (e.g. condltlons Imposed by the Community gevelopment Board); „_ , Irrigation notes, ^ RkDUCED LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8 ~/: X t t) (eola.r rendering If possible); ^ IRRIGATION PLAN (required for Leval two and three approval); ^ COMPREt•iENSIVE IANDSCAPE PROGRAM appllcatlon, as applicable. 1. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4•Z02.A.23) Required In the event the appiicatlon Includes a development where design standards are In Issue (e.g. Tourist and Downtown Districts) or as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project or a Residential Infill Project. ^ BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -all sides of all buildings Inciuding height dimensions, colors and materials; ^ REDUCED E3UILDING ELEVATIONS -four sides of building with colors and materiels to stela (8 Y: X 1 !) (black and white and color reendering, if possible) as required. J. SIGNAG£: (DivJsion 18, SIGNS I Section 3-1808) [] All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimens(ona (area, height, etc,), indicate whether they will bu rernovocl or to remain, ^ Ail PROPOSED }reastanding and attached signs; Provide details Inciuding location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing; freestanding signs shod include the street address (numerals) ^ Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate appiicatlon and fee.required), ^ Reduced signaye proposal (8'/a X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program .appiicatlon. Page 4 of 6.-• Flexible Development Application- City of Ciearwetar K: 'TRAFFIC IMPACT 81'uDY: (~tton 4.~O~,A.13 end 4-B01,C} ^ lildWde ee required tt proposed devebpment w!{t degrade the acceptstlle kval of service for 9ny,tahdwsx ar adopted In the Cc-nprahanaiva Plan, T.11p,penentlon N1e11 be~baNd an the molt r~soent edlRion of the Instllute of Transportation t:n~ineer's T-Ip Oonerel Manual, Relet fo Bectlon 4801 C of the CommuNty Dwetapment Code for exoeptlons to thla roAUlrement, L. 8i4NA7URl; r, tna undaatQnad, •clmoWledpe lA,at all repro appplloatlon ani true •nd accurate to the bael auM•ortza CMy rapt+re~entaSNes to ~lalf ^nd pi drssarlbid in t11-a appitoatlon, /l ~ ., In 11118 _ ,..,• Expires Z2 Oltl Repubt c~6unty Op FLOPttDA, CO~JNTY O ~ n~u 1 a d aubaortbad baMre . s Ihla , 2~~ day of ,D, 2t~ to by d ~ who h Wally known . as .Ilwn a~ expit~s: .~'/ ORIGINAL RECEIVED DEB 0 8 2006 , PiANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER Pap's~ti•o'I8 - plaxibls DavslopRlent Applloatlon- City o/ Clearwater ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ gleRtDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: Haarbour Eatatea, LLC, Bar Greenfl~ld, VP, 4200 West Cypreae Street, Suite 444, Tempe, FL 33607 ( smes otalt propety ownu* on sad ~ p saes PR N 1 nemee ; 1'hitt (I aArtYwe are) the ownsr('e) and reoont lkle holder(s) of the tvllowlnp dpeoribpd property (eddrees or Qenenl looatlon); 279 Windward Passage, Clearwater, Florlck 33787 2. That this propeRy oonatitdtes the propaRy for which a raque~t for a; (deacrlt~varqusit) B slip multi-were docking faculty to replaoe exleting faollity RECEIVED FEB 0 8 2006 °E~!lAt1~t1AI;a.DFP4D7MFNT CITY OF CLEARWATER 3, 'That the undsrst~nted (haslttave) appointed and (doerNdo) appoint: _..............,.__.. t3111 Woods and/or Terri &keplk of Woods Conaulting, Inc., a8 (hh+thelr) a9snt(e) to sxaoute any petkione or other donumenta nbnsasrry to aAeot auoh petitbn; 4, 7hat,thla ahldavlt hath Asan swecuted to Induce the Clty of Clebrwaler, f'lorlds to oonaldar and eat on the abovs detlcribed property; 6. That site visits to tha,property are nsoeaeary by Clty rap-eaentatNes in order to process this appiloat(on and Me owner aulllortrss C)ty npraentethne to visit end pholbpraph thr property drsoribed In Ihla sppllcatton; 8. That (Ilwe), the undenlpned authority, hereby eattlly that the lanrpolnp Is true and oarrsC, properly r toperry ner Pr perry Owrier ""---~ 1~~ t:s' ot:~~j ~. COUNTY'OF psro me Ihr untle ne , an oMiwr duly commtasto psnonaly appee spoees a says sAt Ae/ehe fWly urtdsrslinda My Cotnmlaalon Explrett: ~, j= /~ Proprrty r .-.,,..-~w,..,.,.,__.,,.._ STAT')lr OF k"X~(JR~~A, the law of $!•t• of F r•d•, a this _,~ ~ ~ day of Y ~~,_, Who hev np been rirot duly sworn Commit8lon M DD2tt4314 Expires ?J?JOt3 Bonded throwGh Old Republic 6urety Company stiF-~nn,np t~.p*rrm.nrtApprroetron Formetd•vNopmanr rwlaWlpexrbfa oweMpnlevtt appHcerron roo0.rroc ~6 page t3 of 8 - Flexible Oevelopmant Applloation- City of CletnMatcr • • (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (~ (g) . AT~~HMENT A PROPOSED HARBOR WATCH MULTI-USE DOCKS RECE~I~VNEAD COMMERCIAL / MULTI-USE DOCK CRITERIA FHB 0 $ 2006 SECTION 3.601C.3.(a) through (g) PLANNING DEPARTMENT Use and Compatibility CITY OF CLEARWATER The docks will be for the sole use of the occupants of the 31 unit condominium community. The existing community, in the immediate vicinity, consists of the Island Estates Public Docks on the east and the Clearwater Marine Science Center on the west. To the north of the facility are condominiums that have docking facilities. The entire area is a boating community such that the proposed development is in harmony with the character of the area. Impacts on Existing Water Recreation Activities The dock is designed so as to not create any adverse impact on persons using the adjacent waterways for recreational or commercial purposes. The only boat traffic to in front of an to the east of the facility consists of boat traffic ingressing and egressing the Island Estates Public Docks (9 sllps). The facility is designed so that the most waterward structure extends no more than 25% of the waterway width at this location, leaving 75% of the waterway open for the general boating public. Impacts to Navigation As noted in item (b) above, the dock does not create any hazard to navigation as the area waterward of the docks is open water. Impacts on Marine Environment A complete underwater benthic survey was performed to check for the presence of any valuable submerged resources. None were found. A bathymetry check was also performed and the depths of waterwere determined to be sufficient forthe intended use, being greaterthan 3 feet at mean low water. The proposed development represents a net improvement to the marine environment in that the condominium developmentwith 8 wet slips is replacing a heavy maintenance boatyard that had 12 slips. In addition the boat yard had 7 mooring buoys, each of which could moor up to 5 vessels. Impacts on Water Quality l As noted in (d) above, there is a net improvement in water quality given that 12 wet slips and up to 35 mooring slips, represented by the 7 anchoring buoys, are being replaced by 8 wet slips for use by recreational boaters. Also, and more importantly, the heavy maintenance boatyard is being replaced by a condominium. Any pollution that may have been discharged into the waters due to the maintenance activities will cease. impacts on Natural Resources A complete underwater benthic survey was performed to check for the presence of any valuable submerged resources. None were found, thus there shall be no impact on natural submerge resources. Impacts on Wetlands Habltat/Uplands As noted under (c) and (e) above, the docking facility should have no adverse impact on the adjacent waters or the uplands. • ~ ATTACHMENT B PROPOSED HARBOR WATCH MULTIUSE DOCKS ORIGINAL FACT SHEET .RECEIVED DIMENSIONAL CRITERIA ~ F~~ 0 8 2U06 SECTION 3.601C.3.(h) PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. Proposed Use: CITY OF CLEARWATER The proposed use is a multi-use dock to provide 8 slips for the exclusive use of residents of the proposed 31 unit condominium development on the uplands. 2. Property Width: The property width measured at the shoreline is 224.0' (MOL). 3. Setbacks: The property to the east is commercial, being the Island Way Grill, and also the location of the 9 slip Island Estates Public Docks. The setback on the east side is 1.5'. The required setback is 10% of the property width as measured at the shoreline or 22.4'. Actual setback as proposed is 1.5'. Note, applicant has obtained a letter of no objection from the east side neighbor, allowing the required setback to be waved. The docks were placed to the east side of the property to allow for boats moored at the Clearwater Marine Science Center ingress/egress. The property to the west is the Clearwater marine Science Center. The required setback is 10% of the property width as measured at the shoreline or 22.4'. Actual setback as proposed is 81.5'. Note, the setback includes a turning area for boats moored at the Clearwater Marine Science Center. 4. Length: The docking facility extends a total of 92' from the seawall, which is less than 75% of the width of the waterfront (75% of the waterfront width is 168'). 5. Width: The proposed width of the docking facility is 141.8', which is less than 75% of the width of the waterfront (75% of the waterfront width is 168'). 6. Area: The total deck area of the proposed docks is 1,818 square feet. 7. Width of Waterway: The 25% of width of waterway line is 99.5'. The proposed docks are landward of the 25% line. 8. Docks Being Removed The docking facility supporting 12 boat slips located adjacent to the uplands are being removed as well as the 7 mooring buoys in the open water. The 7 mooring buoys can moor up to a total of 35 boats, 5 at each buoy. The square footage of deck area being removed is 1,325 sf. • 9. Seagrass Survey A benthic survey of the site was performed by Woods Consulting, Inc. Under the direction of a Senior Hydrogeologist. No valuable submerged resources were found. ORIGINAL RECEIVED FEB 0 8 2006 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER • LETTER OF NO OBJECTION Lot Owner's Name: v Lot Owner's Address: 20 Island Wav. learwater FL 33767 I certify that I am the owner of the above property which is adjacent to the property owned by the applicant who proposes to construct a (circle one): Commercial Dock Multi-Use Dock Private Dock at the following address: 279 Windward Passage. Clearwater F~ 33767 I have no objection to the proposed structure(s). and D,O NOT object to any vlolatlori of the City of Clearwater setbacks, the Pinellas County setbacks, nor do I object to any setback required by DE~nd/or SWFWMD ~ertainin~ to a submerged land lease. O'Wn 'Signature wner's Name and Title r ~ O~ Dt ORIGINAL RECEIVED FEB 0 8 2006 C N OF C EARWA ERA NOTARY; Pinellas County STATE OF FLORIDA, .~_000NTY, BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appearedf?b~f(if~tt?.~, well known to me, or who provided a valid Florida Driver's License to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument and that he/she acknowledged to me, under oath, that he/she signed the same freely and voluntarily for the purposes expressed herein. Witness my hand and official seal this day of Notary ubllc ~~ My commission expires:. ~'~~ °~'!~ q /1 ~avc~6c ~' 2005 i. ......DIMWt K~ 1M/1~EE..•..••~. •{ I CMI~O'r ODOi~1M~ t 4 tNMN NOA00~ I ~rw~n~eo~t•~as+{ Ia~u~i~iuau~~~~R~u~""iii~lu~'i~i~~{ ~ ~:. ,. BENTHIC SURVEY Harbour Watch Dock Prepared for: Harbour Watch, LLC c/o Joseph W. C3aynor, P.A.~ 302 Monroe Str®®t Dunedin, Florida 34698 Submitted by; Woods Consuiting, Inc. April 1, 2005 ORIGINAL RECEIVED FEB 0 8 20Q6 ptANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER • • Woods Consu/tin Environmental Permltting Marine Englneering Hydrogeology Land Plannln 9 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 April 7, 2005 Dunedin, Pt. 34898 Mr. Joseph Gaynor Harbour Watch, LLC 302 Monroe St, Dunedin, FL 34888 Re; Benthlc Survey Report Dear Mr, Gaynor; Woods Consulting, Inc. performed a Benthlc Survey for the Harbour Watch Condominium sits. Staff underthe guidance of Sherry Bagley, Senior Permitting Specialist, performed the Benthlc Surveyors March 22, 2006, The area was swam to note the occurrence of sea grasses, worm tubules, fish, crabs, oysters, algaes,~etc, and to determine depths, The survey area exhibits a sand bottom with overlying slits, Barnacles (ea/anomor ha and (Crassotrea vlrglnlca) were present along the existing seawall from the mean high water line to the bottom Oysters were also attached to all the existing dock pilings. Assorted rubble was found on the bottom. If you have any qusstfons, please call, • ORIGINAL My regards, RECEIVED ~~~- FEB o s 2aos A Sherry Bagley PCN OF DLEARWA ER Senior Permitting Specialist Woods Consulting, Inc, \1WoodeeerverlproJ~CtelHerbour Welch Oocke (1113.04) (Oaynor)1Benthlc report.wpd ce; (727) 786.5747 Fax; (727) 7es.~a~a ~rY,~--,1,---,.,,,...,_ ~,..._ _ ~ _ _ _ . • ~ ORIGINAL RECEIVED Woods Consultln Fig o~ Zoos • PLANNING DEPARTMENT Environmental Permitting Marine EnglnesrJng Hy a ogy Land Planning ~~ I ~ ~I sl b r~ r~ ~y ~'1 II ;-r. ~a n e' ~~, ~Of 8~ ~.~ ~...r/ f ~".r~ ~ ~1 / ' ~, ~r,yy T ~ ,~. j„~.\~I ~I WOODS CONSULTING 171• COUNTY Rp~Ap~1, 9iURt Z2 PM N~ 27} 7i! 6717 FAX 7Z7 7a0+7171 ~`ti , ~ ~~ 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34888 .l ~` I ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~} ~ J ~~ ~ / ~_~ ~ C: }r*f ~~ G~ i :~ ~ ~~ 1 ~ I ~, ~''' ~~ .o''~ I..r~ / r~" ',y~• ~.. r'~-..r .. ~~wmcr.•nrYrmuuniwouynYY:uuaucnolinumvuvi~v > ,w - ...,..M.,.., ,,,. .. Ian ~. _..un ... ... o..l IYIMXMN~IIII~~IYIINAAYIMI/•N.Mi1gN.II1,Y! .....r... ~........ _....._n...~•n ..... . ~....... ..x wni~r_wf_~. .n i.w.r_w.. w. .. '~ `ti~TlHl:•Nt Y~~.~~•.~}'•.... ............. .... 1 .•t....t _. STORAGE ~• i i I I. I I I I II ,_.....~......,,,~:~.:....,...~.........~;:r;l.:......~;~::~;,.,,;1;-1,I~~,°,.~r;,4~-.,:~s:.:~;.r_.~,.,,..;~+ ~I STORAGE `I~ HAR60UR WATCH CONDOMINIUMS BENTHIC & BATHYMETRY DATA TOTAL SQUARE FEET--~ WATERWAY WIDTH WATERFRQNT WIDTH t 0 "ELEVi4A0NS REFERENCE NC1'D-!9?9 MHW +~' 3 "' MLW p~7 SHE TE ~„ OfflCe; (727) 786.5747 FaYI l777~ ~Qa_~~~e L~..._1~.1~~1~..._ _ _I_ ~, . . • • HARBOUR ~STA'~'E~, L,~,C. 42Q0 W Cypress St., 3u3te 444 Tampa, FL 33607 Telex (813) 87?-4444 Fax: (813) 817-1222 September 1; 2005 . . ORIGINAL RECEIVED Harbour Estates, L.L.C. 4200 W; Cypress Street, Suite 444. Tampa, FL 33607 To Whom It May Concern: FEB 0 g 2006 PLANNING UEI'l~12Ttvi~NT CITY OF CLEAR-~JATER Pex the above referenced property, please be advised that Barry Greenfield, Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer, is hereby authorized to act on my behalf to sigzl any and all documents relating to State, County or other governing agencies. This shall include but not be limited to all water-related permits, leases or licenses related to the above referenced property, Sincerely ~. Jose j au rst Pr i nt JJR/ljc STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ~A~.rn ~ ~;~ ~,~- Before me the undersigned, an office duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Plorida, on this,(? day of _StpT~Em (~ ~,~ Rauenhorst, who having been first duly sworn deposes and says that he fulply understands the contents of the affidavit that he has signed, Notary Public: ~- Signature j~ T~BNlSL S JOHNSON Notary Public: I S C s' ~1 ~Sc~ ~ AMY CCMM+aaioN N DD109902 Typed or Printed Name ~c~on~+eo enPone.He+w~«N .,~„ My Commission Expires: ~4~ t' ~ 1ay ~ • • Affidrtvit of Authorized Agent ORIGINAL Name of Pro •rt Owner; ~ RECEIV~'p p y Harbour Estetea, L,L,C, goo w Cypress st,, suite aaa FHB ~ _~ ~~06 Tampa, FL 33Qp7 PiANNING dEPK,~~~v,F~;T CITY OF CLE.ARyVATER 1 ~ That we the owner end rocord tNle holder of the following property 2~ Thatthispropertyconatitutesiheprapertyforwhlchpermltapplioation s endr being msde, () equest(a) are 3. The undersigned has appointed and does a to execute petftlvns, permit applioatlons, or olheirdoouments as nsceesary for permfhinfl,. They are also authorized to represent us as our agents at any requirod pubifc hearings, 4. This affidavit hag been exeouted to induce the various regulatory agenofee having Jurisdiction over. ouch matters to:conslder and act on the above described property, 5, That we the underolgnsd authority, hereby, certify that the foregoing is true end correct, Property Owner (818neture) Property Owner (Print); 8 ry Qreen eld Tltie; . ' oats: _ ~ l ~1a5 ,_.~..~. 8?'ATE OF FLORIDA County ot=W~etlee ~j`/~5~,~.L~'h~tC~~~ Before the and roigned, an office duly commiasloned by the iaw of the tale o piorida, on this ~ S'f' day of / '" , 2005, personally appeared ~ ~ • ~!,~ having been first duly sworn deposes end eays'that he fully under tanda the contents of the affld vit that hs hag iigned Notary Public ,~lCd~ l~. ~ ,.~~,~" '~ LAURA J, COPLON ~~~ Comminlon M DD284314 My Cot~nml=sloe Expires: __ ~~ :Zit! J~j ! ~Plnt?/?lp0A8 Oid R~puDlla~6uriry 8anp~ny Ili: 2005224344 BK; 14371 p • 444,60 KEN SURKE., CLERK OF COURT CLKDM82 Prepared by; Investors l Rotum to; Investors Rea Attn: Thomas 304 Monroo S Parcol ID # 08/29/ r6 ,•..,.- C~DIr1~,n, RECEi~rFn ~~~ o `~ tui~~? ~E.r 7 ,~~a•~cru~rr~iv~ made as of the 23'd day of May, 2005, by and botwoen Quality goats of a~e~i `Inc,, a Florida oorporation .("Grantor"), whoso addroas is 23S Windward Passa e, Ito iyFlorlda 33767, for and In considoration of Ton Dollars ($10,00) and other good aged ~ '6nsideratIons in hand paid, recoipt of~which !s hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, ~~solla, aliens, remisos, releases and conveys unto Har liability company ("grantee") whoso addross is 4200 West Cyproas Stroet, Suitea444 Florida 33607, the following described coal property in the County of Plnollas, Stato of to-wit: Seo Exhibit "A" attached heroto and made a part hcroof, Subject to the manors set for on 13xhiblt g attached hereto and made a part hereof TOGETHER with all the tenements, heroditatnonta and appurtenances, with every privilege, ~8ht, title, interest and estate, rovorsion,~remaindor and easement thereto belonging or ~ ~ se appertaining, y~ TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the sears to fee simple forever, And the Grantor does hereby oovenant that Grantor does lirlly warrant the title to the above described coal estate so hereby conveyed and will defend the same against the lawR~l olaims, arisin out of events ocewring prior to the recording of this Deed, of alt persons claiming by, throe h or under the Grantor, but against none other, g 06/09/2005 at: 04:17 QSNELLAB COUNTY, FL pM, RECORDING 5 PAQE$ SY DEBUTY CLERK: K!N WRKl, ClBRK OP COURT '~Y, LLC PINELL~i COUNTY /LORroA INiTIM 200i20N0/ OIRT/300i N 02r2~ PM -LLC c°~Tyaooeeo R c POOROnrii ~iss~.ao 0 DOC iTAMPi 121000.00 This Speelal Warranty Deed is being re-recorded to correct Exhibit A. • • BIN~IrLA9 COUNTY FL OFF, RI+C, BK 14371 p0 I,729 ''1 ~t ~ ' . ~,w,,,~ •,~,, `I 1N WITNEgS ~~OF~ ~9.!C~etitor aforesaid has set its hand and seal as of the ~5~' day of May, 2005, /''~•,,,`~) •~' ` ~.~ WITNESSES; ~ '~.S 1 '~,~~~~' ~ Quality Boats of Cloarwater, Inc, , a Florida corporation C sy; N tle; CEO ~,~'~~ATE OF FLORIDA ':~~~.,~~DNTY OF PIIVELLAS ~,.,.~ ORIG)I~gL RECEIVED FED 0 8 2005 PLANNING DEPARTiUIENT CITY OF CLEAR~'1ATER The foregoing instiwnont was acknowlodged beforo me this ~°•5~~,y afMay, 2005, by n11A1.tTV_AAATA Afi n}A~ee,~w~ the Gf .._._._~as ide~ntitlcation and did (dId notj tako an oat~h~o~ly lmo~ to mo or havo produced My Commtasion Expires: RIOt~Cathl~en e . n ~ v....._ Notary KrIAI~MA.O'M~~m ' My Comml~Np1 OC99g74 ExWr11 JUy 90,1007 2 • • PINELLAB COUNTY FL OFF, AEC, 8K 14371 PG 1730 "~`~'~, ~, ''~»i ., map or plat thereof recordFd in.Plat Book S1, Page 34, of the Public Re ~ ~,,%;~ unty, Florida. TOOSTHSR W e easement created by Reciprocal Easements and Maintenance Agreement ',r t f~-"~~~ /l.~ ~y S ,,•, !~ ~. ~I* ~,~ ~ ~~' ~`~• /~~~ ~ (,~M,, ~~: ~ ,,,~ ~•~:,~~ t rv`~,, ~~,.. ., ,~ f ORIGINAL . RECEIVED FEB 0 8 2006 PANNING DEPgRTMENT CIN pF C~~RWATER • • ?INELLAB COUNTY FL OFF, REC. BK 14371 PC 1731 ,• ~~~~y~~~+ ~~ ~A'e \l.~ ~• `J.~ ,,. ~~~'~ ~` Exhibit "A" `vti\?*+J The Weat SO feet f ~~~~dne (1) and four (4) and all of Lo ESTATES OP CI~>~,~ ATER, t S, Block C, ISLAND in Plat Book S1, PAga• 4, of the Public Rcco~rda of Pnelglas Countyt Plodda, recorded ORIGINAL RECEIVED FEB 0 8 2006 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER PINELLAg COUNTY FL OFF . REC, BK 14371 PG 1732 , , - ~ ~ ,r..Y ~~ ' ,~~y- 1,` J.n ~w',4~` , ,~ ..~ ,' I 'J ` ~~// ~ ~,^,'~, ~"~.1'~,,. Exhibit "B-- Taxes and assessments for`the~ ear 2805 and subsequent years, ReaMetions, condit~oits``rea'ervations, easemonts, and other matters contained o ESTATES ! '"~~ ~•.- ~ n tho Plat of ISLAND OF CLEARW ` ~,~ > 235. ~~~.; ~~ ~~~ as rocorded in Plat Book S1, Page 34 and in O.R, Book 586, Page Zts~ried in Deodxccorded in O.R. Book 2308, Page 44. I'ments and Maintonance Agroemont recorded in O, R, Boo ' ~~~ of Pinellas County, Florida. ~~~'aga __._ of the ~,~•~~; ~~+, ~,~~ .."~ ~ ~~ ~~...~,, ORIGINAL RECEIVED F~a o8 Zoos ptANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER ~~,pta 7/ 17/2006 ~'I`~ ~ Receipt #: 1200600000000007236 11:53:12.AN1 ~ = Date: 07/17/2006 r Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid FLD2005-09093 04 Flex Continuation 010-341262 75.00 Line Item Total: $75.00 Payments: Method Payer Initials Check No Confirm No How Received Amount Paid -- - r~ Its Check WOODS CONSULTING INC R_D 2791 In Person Payment Total: 75.00 $75.00 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 S~,pL~ 6/7/2006 ~'I`• ~ Receipt #: 1200600000000005860 11:56:24AM -p ~= ~ Date: 06/07/2006 r Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid FLD2005-09093 04 Flex Continuation 010-341262 75.00 Line Item Total: $75.00 Payments: Method Payer Initials Check No Confirm No How Received Amount Paid • • Check WOODS CONSULTING INC R_D 2727 In Person Payment Total: 75.00 $75.00 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 S~,pt~ 5/30/2006 ~'~`• '~ Receipt #: 1200600000000005529 1:35:12PM a ~y ~= ~~~~ Date: 05/30/2006 0 r Line Items: FLD2005-09093 FLD2005-09093 Payments: Method Check :"'~ 04 Flex Continuation 04 Flex Continuation 75.00 75.00 $150.00 Payer Initials Check No Confirm No How Received Amount Paid WOODS CONSULTING INC R_D 2711 010-341262 010-341262 Line Item Total: In Person Payment Total: RECEIVED MAY 3 0 206 PLANNING pEPAlt1MEM CLLY Of C~EARWAlER 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 1 150.00 $150.00 cReceipLrpt Septa ,LI;, ~ t Line Items: Receipt #: 1200600000000003993 Date: 04/17/2006 4/ 17/2006 1:19:26PM Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid FLD2005-09093 04 Flex Continuation 010-341262 75.00 Line Item Total: $75.00 Payments: Method Payer Initials Check No Confirm No How Received Amount Paid Check WOODS CONSULTING INC R_D 2620 In Person Payment Total: 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 75.00 $75.00 cReceipt.rpt ~• • c~ 3~~` OR{GINAL FLD2005-09093 279 WINDWARD PSG Date Received: 09/08/2005 HARBOUR WATCH DOCKS ZONING DISTRICT: C LAND USE: CG ~„ _~ ~~. ATLAS PAGE: 267B ~~~.~Rd~~~"=~ ~~p°~`~'j`~'~'~-'~ ,Y ,- PLANNER OF RECORD: WW CLW CoverSheet Woods Consu tang Environmental Permitting Marine Engineering Hydrogeology Land Planning 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Narrative ORIGINAL Harbor Watch Condominiums Multi-Use Docks RECEIVED FLD 2005-09093 ~RAR 0 ~ 2006 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Ci F CLEARWATER The Applicant, though their agent, Woods Consulting, submitted in September of Z00~ a Flexible Development application for multi-use docks to be located in Island Estates, immediately to the west of the Island Estates Public Docks. The proposed docks will be amenities for the exclusive use of the residents of the Harbor Watch Condominiums. The proposed multi-use docks are also under review by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). SWFWMD has informed the applicant, in a request for additional information (RAI), that the State of Florida considers the submerged lands at the project site to be sovereign (state-owned) lands. They therefore require that the docks be designed to conform with the requirements for docks located on sovereign lands within an Aquatic Preserve (note: all sovereign submerged lands within Pinellas County are part of the Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve as set forth in Section 18-20, F.A.C.). The State's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) made this determination based on the 1925 deed wherein the state deeded the submerged lands to the City of Clearwater. The deed contained what is referred to as a "reverter clause" which states that if the submerged lands are not used for the public good, the ownership of the submerged lands is to revert to the state. The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulations contain a state lands preemption requirement which states that the area of submerged lands an Applicant may use must not exceed the area calculated as 30 times the linear feet of shoreline bordering sovereign lands. In the case of the Harbor Watch Condominiums, the shoreline length is 224 feet. Thus the total area allowed for preemption is 6,720 square feet (sf). Please note that preemption must include the entire "footprint" of the mooring facility, including not only the deck area but also the area where boats moor. The design submitted to the City, that is to go before the Community Development Board, was based on the assumption that the submerged lands were owned by the City of Clearwater and thus a preemption limit was not applicable. With the imposition of the SWFWMD-mandated preemption regulation, the mooring facility footprint is limited to 6,720 sf. The area. (footprint) of the design to be considered by the CDB represents 10,142 sf and must be increased by 805 sf to address the boat ramp as discussed below. Thus the current design represents a total preempted area of sovereign lands of 10,947 sf., which is well in excess of the allowable preemption area. (This amount of submerged land use would be acceptable if the Aquatic Preserve regulations were not applied). Shown in Exhibit A is a design that reflects imposition of the preemption limit. Note the number of slips is~reduced from 8 to 5 and the slip sizes are smaller. It should be noted that the design shown in Exhibit A is just an example of one mooring design that would satisfy the preemption rules. The design of the facility actually becomes a "numbers game" in that there are a myriad of designs that would meet the preemption requirements, as long as the preemption limit of 6,720 sf is not exceeded. The actual design shown in the exhibit preempts a total square footage of 6,712 sf which is less than the limit of 6,720 sf. Office: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 Email:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org It is the Applicant's understanding that the City of Clearwater is currently negotiating with the Department of Environmental Protection for the potential purchase of the submerged lands. The results of the negotiation may not be known for some time. As the Applicant must move forward in the permitting process so that the slips will be available when the condominium construction is complete, the Applicant requests the CDB to approve the design submitted as part of the Flexible Development application, but also approve the Applicant to construct a mooring facility that would be smaller and one that meets the preemption regulations. The Applicant commits that the revised design will meet the important parameters that pertain to the current design, those being as follows: The slips cannot extend beyond a distance of 25% of the width of the waterway. This limit is shown on Exhibit A; and The slips cannot impact the ingress/egress of the vessels that are currently moored at the City facility to the immediate west of the proposed facility. In addition the Applicant commits that: The revised facility will meet all City regulations pertaining to a multi-use docking facility; The footprint (area Over water) of the revised facility will be less than the existing footprint; and The revised design will not exceed a maximum of 8 slips. It should be noted that the Applicant has committed to the Marine Science Aquarium to construct a boat ramp for use by the Aquarium to load and unload injured mammals. The boat ramp will be a replacement for the fork lift loadout ramp that is currently located at the site. As the ramp is also located on sovereign lands, it will impact the preemption area available for the boat slips. This impact is 805 square feet. Thus the Applicant has the 30:1 preemption limit less the 805 square feet for use of the multi-use docking facility. ORIGINAL RECEIVED MAR 0 0 2006 PLANNING L'EPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER SCALE: 1 "=20' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) I ~ ~ ml zl ~ I 25% LINE I OI 30:1 PREEMPTION = 6,720 sf rn I BOAT RAM P = 805 sf ~I DOCK OPTION = 5 907 sf 0 -21 , ~~ . --18.6 TOTAL PREEMPTED ARE A = 6,712 sf m I 20.0 ;> o ~ N I 18.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 o O I ~ N N I ~ I o N 17.5 17.5 0 17.5 17.5 0, I CO 20.0 ~ u? ~2 X30- 4 ~ ~ ,.- ~ X50-:~ I I o n°, _ q ~ 3.0 N 3.0 N ~" 3.0 I o ~ ~ o o I ` { `° ,I , 6 } 78 --18.1 20.9 . 4.0-- 38.7 EXISTING SEAWALL WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET ~ 3 PRELIMINARY DOCK DESIGN T , 224' ,7,a couNn ROAD ,, suITE z2 WATERFRON DTH DUNEDIN FL 34696 PH. (727 786-5747 Mi..iW }~,3' MLW _p,7' FAX (727) 786-7479 "ELEli.471'ONS REFERENCE NG!/0-1929 SHORELINE Engineers Seal ORIGINAL ~S~< ~~' ~ ~\ w~ ~ RECEIVED ; , •• \ ~~ •, •',,~GE NS~.••• ~ ; o m ~. ° ~m • S ~ Oo MAC 0 ~ 2006 = * ~ No. 15586 ~ * _ j o ~° ~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVISION 5: 3-7-06 REVISION 4: 3-2-06 = ~ STATE OF ;' - w~~~ ~ =WCC CITY OF CLEARWATER REVISION 3: 2-17-06 ~ • a ••••• ~ ~ P \ ~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 % ,, ~~ •• ~, ~'~,~' ~~~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 '~, ~~~ ,, ,~ } ~Iear~ater u Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-562-4865 O SUBMIT ORIGINAL 51GNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ® SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION including i) collated, 2) stapled and 3) folded sets of site plans © SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $ 1,205.00 r: 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) ~ ~ ~ :,,~ ~ ~ ~~ FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION (Revised 2/42/2004) PLEASE TYPE OR PRtNT~ A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION; (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME: Harbour Estates, LLC, Barry Greenfield, VP MAILING ADDRESS: 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444, Tampa, FL 33607 PHONE NUMBER: (813) 877-4444 FAX NUMBER: PROPERTY OWNER(S): Harbour Estates, LLC, Barry Greenfield, VP, 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444, Tampa, FL 33607 (Must Include ALL owners as itsted on the deed - provide original signature(s) on page 6) AGENT NAME: Bill Woods, Pres.,Woods Consulting, Inc. and/or Terri Skapik, Woods Consulting, Inc. MAILING ADDRESS: 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22., Dunedin, FL 34698 PHONE NUMBER: 727-786-5747 FAX NUMBER: 727-786-7479 CELL NUMBER: 727-871-0084 E-MAIL ADDRESS: biliwoods@woodsconsulting.org B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) 279 Windward Passage, Clearwater, FL 33767 STREET ADDRESS of subject site: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached warranty deeds (if not listed here, please note the bCation of this document fn the submittal) PARCEL NUMBER: 08 / 29 / 15 / 43380 / 003 / 0050 and 60 feet of parcel 0060 DEPARTMEENT PARCEL SIZE: 1.18 acres TER (acres, square feet) PROPOSED USE(S) AND StZE(Sj: Construct amulti-use dock consisting of 1818 sf of new decking and 8 wet slips for the (number of dwelling units, hotel rooms or square footage of nonresidential use) exclusive use of the residents of upland condominium development. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST(S): Remove existing docks consisting of 1325 sf of decking and 12 wet slips. Construct amulti-use Attach sheets and be specific when identifying the request (include all requested code deviations; e.g. reduction in required number of parking spaces, specific use. etc.) dock consisting of 1818 sf of decking and 8 wet slips. The net gain will be 493 sf of new decking and the net lose of 4 slips. Please see attached plans for scope and details. Page 1 of 6 - Flexible Development Application- City of Clearwater DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ITDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLANT YES ~ NO ~ (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents) C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: {Code Section 4-2©2.A.5) Q SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see page 6) D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-9'13.A) Q Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA -Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The proposed docks are located in an area already containing docks that are similar in design. The docks (9 slips) at the Island Estates Public docks are located in an area immediately adjacent to the site on the east. The Marine Science Center with slips is located immediately to the site on the west. 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. The construction of the condominiums and the docks (as amenities to the condominiums) will increase the value of properties that are not being redeveloped at this time. The docks will not hinder the construction of docks on the adjacent properties. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The docks are for the exclusive use of the owners of the upland condominiums. The construction of the docks should have no negative impact on the health and safety of persons working or residing in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. As the dock and slips are an amenity to the condominium development and for the exclusive use of the condominium residents, there will be no impact on traffic. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. Please see item 1 above. The community in the vicinity consists of condominiums with docking facilities. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. The proposed condominiums and docks will enhance the area and will not have any adverse impacts visually or acoustically. ^ Provide complete responses to the applicable flexibility criteria far the specific land use as listed in each 2+b}ip~{j~ ct to~p~~ r is requested (use separate sheets as necessary} -Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: UU ~~ Ll(~~ 1% Please see attachments A & B PLANNING DEPARTMENT Page 2 of 6 - Flexible Development Application-- City of Clearwater ~ • E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Design Criteria Manual and 4-202.A.21) t~'~'~p flu ^ STORMWATER PLAN including the following requirements: ®~ ~ ~N t _ Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines; _ Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; _ Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; Stormwater calculations for attenuation and' water quality; _ Signature of Florida registered Professional Engineer an all platys 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 ^ COPY OF STATE AND COUNTY STORMWATER SYSTEM TlE-IN PI=RMIT APPLICATIONS, if applicable F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL. REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A) Q SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY {including legal description of property) -One original and 14 copies; ^ TREE SURVEY {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; Q 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 shah be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to the parking standards are approved; ^ GRADING PLAN, as applicable; ^ PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided); ^ COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; 1 G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-2Q2.A) Q SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): _ All dimensions; _._. North arrow; _„_ Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared; __._ 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; ___„ All required sight triangles; identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specunen trees, including description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; Location of all public and private easements; ____ Location of alt 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 rift stations, gas and water lines; __,_ All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas; _ Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking tot interior landscaped areas; Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment a 'Y nd au required screening (pe+ Section 3-20t (D)(i) and Index #701}; Location of all landscape material; Location of all onsite and affsite storm-water management facilities; ~j~} ~](~ ~] .,,_ Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; and ~~~ ~ i i~ ~ I i 1 1I f _.__. Location of alt existing and proposed sidewalks. tl u lj , % ^ 517E DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in writtenttabular for+n: r1 NOV O 8 ZOOS Land area in square feet and acres; Number of EXISTING dwelling units; PLANNING DEPARTME Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; Gross floor area devoted to each use; CITY OF CLEARWATE Page 3 of ti - Flexible Development Application- City of Clearwater • - 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; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '{~`, _.__ Impermeable surface ratio (LS.R.); and ~ 'V Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. ^~ RF_DUCED SITE PLAN to scale (8'/z X 11) and color rendering if possible; ^ FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan: .` One-foot contours or spok elevations on site; _ Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel; All open space areas; _ Location of all earth or water retaining wails and earth berms; _ Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned); Streets and drives (dimensioned); __.., Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); ____ Structural overhangs; I-I, LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section a-11o2.A) E]v, 'L~~l~l1 V L'~LJ ^ LANDSCAPE PLAN: ~~~ 0 Q ~~n~ _ All existing and proposed structures; U U Names of abutting streets; Drainage and retention areas Includq g swaples, side slopes apd bottom elevations; pl~-NNING DEPARTMENT Delineation and dimensions of all re uired erimeter landsca a buffers; - Sight visibility tria"g"es; CITY OF CLEARWATER _,_ Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas Including landscaping islands and curbing; Proposed and required parking spaces; ,,,,_„ Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including onplrne (as rndu;ated an required tree survey); 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 inGuding~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); Irrigatipn notes. ^ REDUCED LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8'/. X 11) (color rendering if possible); ^ IRRIGATION PLAN (required for level two and three approval); ^ COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBM#T?'AL 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 Infill Redevelopment Project or a Residential InfiLl Project. ^ BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -all sides of all buildings including height dimensions, colors and materials; ^ REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS -four sides of building with colors and materials to scale (8'/: X 11) (black and while and color rendering, if possible) as required. J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS !Section 3-1806) ^ All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be removed or to remain. ^ All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing; freestanding signs shall include the street address {numerals) ^ Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required). ^ Reduced signage proposal (3'/~ X 11) (color), if subrnitking Comprehensive Sign Program application. Page 4 of 6 - Flexible Development Application- City of Clearw afar • • n.i.:W. ,. URIG',NAL K: TRAFFIC IMPACT 3'1'llDY: ti8actlun 4~2.A.13 and 4-801.Cy ^ It•~ude es requtred• if propQaed devetopmeat w(II degrade the accaptatlte level of service for 9ny.rotadwsy as adopted M the Comprehensive Plan. Zitp.genergtlon ehell be•baeed on the most recxint edltlon of the Inslltute of Tranaport>itlon ~nglneer's Trlp Ganerol Manual. Refer to Section 4-BO1 C of the Conlmunlty gevelapment Code for exCepttona to thla roqulroment. ~. sir~~,tnru~: 1, the undera(pned, adtrlOWbd$e Irlet alt rapteaentations made Inr thla , 5T'A7sr ©F xlppll~tton era true and accurate to the best m auM'oriza Cfly rept'Qsentatlvem to ufalt and p the . COPLON deacrtbed i/n~ ttlls appllooti~lon. _~~`' ~~ Comm(sslon # DD28431 // '/~~/ ~ i / i~~4 Bonded m ou08 p- d n d ~Aw~ ~ .P,f ..~•~' Old Republic Surety Company 7 -i /(Jq ;~,yL(/ g ~~ cout~r o~~nOG!Gjl~ 9crtbed betora ma lhls ~ day of ~A.D. 2t~ to R.a~. by I]`~ ~ 1('1' who Is natty known . as es ~ X,l.[~. ~. ~ ey ~ltC, -'Z My oontmfs*!on expires: i2ECEIVED NOV o a 2005 PLANNING QEPARTMENT CITY OF CIEARWATER ly. F~ap'e 6•of 8 - l=lexiblo Develrtprnent Application- City of Clearwater • • (°IwFf1J~u~r~. L. nRGIVAI. AiF'F'IDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AdENT; Harbour Estates, LLC, Barry Greenfield, VP, 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444, Tampg, FL 33607 (tVsmets of alt propety ownerx on deQd -please PRINT fuN names) ; That (I amMre are) the owner('s) end rer~rd tkle hokter(s) of the following desoNbed property (address or generet location): 279 Windward Passage, Clearwater, Florida 33767 ~. That this properly constitutes the property for which q request -or s: (descritxe~raqussq B slip multi-use docking facility to replace existing facility 3, That the underoigned (haeltteve) appointed and (does/do) appoint Bill Woods and/or Terri Skaplk of Woods Cor Inc. as (htaRhalrj agent(s) to execute any patltlons or other documents n9cesasry to affect such petition; 4. That .Iris affidavit hatt• Aeon ettscuted to Induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and acl on the above described proper.y; 6. That site visits to the•pr»peny ere neCeseBry by City reD-esentatives in ardor to prncesa tMs application and the owner authori>!es City representatlvea to visit and photopreph the property desaribed in this opplkxtlon; 8. That (I/we), the undersigned euthorNy, hereby cartliy that the ibrsgoing le true and correct, Property Uw r Property Owner J~' ~S Ot:~(G~ L. COUfJTY OF 8efo rna the untlersigned, an afrioer duly commrs+ro y~',~!y~D~' personally epees apoaes and says thst he/she fatly understand My Cotnrnieslan r_xpires: ~, J~ /(h`~ Property Owner PropedY Owher ~,...,-.,,..~.._._ the laws of Stafe of FF Pride, o this ~ ~~~ day of X11,1 L7~~ _ ~r1T-Il° ~ ~ Who Na~ving t~eerl first duly sworn Commission # DD284314 Expires 2/2/08 Bonded through Old Republic Surety Company 5.•lFrann,ng UapartmenrtA,dpGOeNOn FormelrreveJapmant reviawiRaxlbfe oeYeloprttent appNcerron 2oo3.rloc (6 Page 6 of 6 - Flexible OeVelopment Application- City of Cldgrwatetr (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (~ (g) ~ I~tc~~~v v NOV 08 20 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CIN OF CLEARWA7ER PROPOSED HARBOR WATCH MULTI-USE DOCKS COMMERCIAL / MULTI-USE DOCK CRITERIA SECTION 3-601C.3.(a) through (g) Use and Compatibility ATTACHMENT A CRlG!N(l~. The docks will be for the sole use of the occupants of the 31 unit condominium community. The existing community, in the immediate vicinity, consists of the Island Estates Public Docks on the east and the Clearwater Marine Science Center on the west. To the north of the facility are condominiums that have docking facilities. The entire area is a boating community such that the proposed development is in harmony with the character of the area. Impacts on Existing Water Recreation Activities The dock is designed so as to not create any adverse impact on persons using the adjacent waterways for recreational or commercial purposes. The only boat traffic to in front of an to the east of the facility consists of boat traffic ingressing and egressing the Island Estates Public Docks (9 slips). The facility is designed so that the most waterward structure extends no more than 25% of the waterway width at this location, leaving 75% of the waterway open for the general boating public. Impacts to Navigation As noted in item (b) above, the dock does not create any hazard to navigation as the area waterward of the docks is open water. Impacts on Marine Environment A complete underwater benthic survey was performed to check for the presence of any valuable submerged resources. None were found. A bathymetry check was also performed and the depths of waterwere determined to be sufficient for the intended use, being greaterthan 3 feet at mean low water. The proposed development represents a net improvement to the marine environment in that the condominium developmentwith 8 wet slips is replacing a heavy maintenance boatyard that had 12 slips. In addition the boat yard had 7 mooring buoys, each of which could moor up to 5 vessels. Impacts on Water Quality As noted in (d) above, there is a net improvement in water quality given that 12 wet slips and up to 35 mooring slips, represented by the 7 anchoring buoys, are being replaced by 8 wet slips for use by recreational boaters. Also, and more importantly, the heavy maintenance boatyard is being replaced by a condominium. Any pollution that may have been discharged into the waters due to the maintenance activities will cease. Impacts on Natural Resources A complete underwater benthic survey was performed to check for the presence of any valuable submerged resources. None were found, thus there shall be no impact on natural submerge resources. Impacts on Wetlands Habitat/Uplands As noted under (c) and (e) above, the docking facility should have no adverse impact on the adjacent waters or the uplands. • • CRfG!iJr,,L ATTACHMENT B PROPOSED HARBOR WATCH MULTI-USE DOCKS ~~ ~~~~~~ FACT SHEET 2 3 4. 5 6. 7 8. AND DIMENSIONAL CRITERIA SECTION 3-601C.3.(h) Proposed Use: NQV 0 8 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER The proposed use is a multi-use dock to provide 8 slips for the exclusive use of residents of the proposed 31 unit condominium development on the uplands. Property Width: The property width measured at the shoreline is 224.0' (MOL). Setbacks: The property to the east is commercial, being the Island Way Grill, and also the location of the 9 slip Island Estates Public Docks. The setback on the east side is 1.5'. The required setback is 10% of the property width as measured at the shoreline or 22.4'. Actual setback as proposed is 1.5'. Note, applicant has obtained a letter of no objection from the east side neighbor, allowing the required setback to be waved. The docks were placed to the east side of the property to allow for boats moored at the Clearwater Marine Science Center ingress/egress. The property to the west is the Clearwater marine Science Center. The required setback is 10% of the property width as measured at the shoreline or 22.4'. Actual setback as proposed is 81.5'. Note, the setback includes a turning area for boats moored at the Clearwater Marine Science Center. Length: The docking facility extends a total of 92' from the seawall, which is less than 75% of the width of the waterfront (75% of the waterfront width is 168'). Width: The proposed width of the docking facility is 141.8', which is less than 75% of the width of the waterfront (75% of the waterfront width is 168'). Area: The total deck area of the proposed docks is 1,818 square feet. Width of Waterway: The 25% of width of waterway line is 99.5'. The proposed docks are landward of the 25% line. Docks Being Removed The docking facility supporting 12 boat slips located adjacent to the uplands are being removed as well as the 7 mooring buoys in the open water. The 7 mooring buoys can moor up to a total of 35 boats, 5 at each buoy. The square footage of deck area being removed is 1,325 sf. C: • iR°;GI;Jr1i. 9. Seagrass Survey i2ECEIVED NOV 0 8 2005 A benthic survey of the site was performed by Woods Consulting, Inc. Under the direction of a Senior Hydrogeologist. No valuable submerged resources were found. PIANNlNG DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER • • LETTER OF NO OBJECTION Lot Owner's Name: Frank Chivas Lot Owner's Address: 20 Island Wav. Clearwater FL 33767 ~RfG,U;~I. I certify that I am the owner of the above property which is adjacent to the property owned by the applicant who proposes to construct a (circle one): Commercial Dock Multi-Use Dock Private Dock at the following address: 279 Windward Passage. Clearwater FL 33767 I have no objection to the proposed structure(s) and DO NOT object to any violation of the City of Clearwater setbacks, the Pinellas County setbacks, nor do I object to any setback required by DE~9nd/or SWFWMD ~ertainingto a submerged land lease. Signature r er's Name and Title 0 ~' " - RECEIVED NOV 0 8 1005 Pt.ANNING DEPARTMENT CiTYOF CtEARWATER NOTARY: Pinellas County STATE OF FLORIDA, ~ COUNTY, BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appearedf~/af (%~~ l,C'r~, well known to me, or who provided a valid Florida Driver's License to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument and that he/she acknowledged to me, under oath, that he/she signed the same freely and voluntarily for the purposes expressed herein. Witness my hand and official seal this day of ~~ Notary ublic My commission expires: _o?'~ q /~O~MUG~ 2005 t, ~ ~~ e rand rw {roo~urtza•; 's x'01„, F~ Noe~ry ~..~.. Irk Inumnuww~uu~nuu~~uu~~n~uu~l BENTHIC SURVEY Harbour Watch Dock Prepared for: Harbour Watch, LLC c/o Joseph W. Gaynor, P.A. 302 Monroe Street Dunedin, Florida 34698 Submitted by: Woods Consulting, Inc. April 1, 2005 i~ECEIVED NpV 08 1005 PLANNINGDEPARiMENT C~TYOFCIEARWATER Woods Consul ~ QR{GlUt~l_ Environmental Permitting Marine Englneering April 1, 2005 Mr. Joseph Gaynor Harbour Watch, LlC 302 Monroe St. Dunedin, FL 34698 Re: Benthic Survey Report Dear Mr. Gaynor; Hydrogeology Land Planning 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Woods Consulting, Inc. pertormed a Benthic Survey for the Harbour Watch Condominium site. Staff, underthe guidance of Sherry Bagley, Senior Permitting Specialist, performed the Benthic Survey on March 22, 2005. The area was swam to note the occurrence of sea grasses, worm tubules, fish, crabs, oysters, algaes,~etc. and to determine depths. The survey area exhibits a sand bottom with overlying silts. Barnacles (Ba/anomorpha) and oysters (Crassotrea vlrginica) were present along the existing seawall from the mean high water line to the bottom. Oysters were also attached to aii the existing dock pilings. Assorted rubble was found on the bottom. If you have any questions, please call. My regards, ~~~ Sherry Bagley Senior Permitting Specialist Woods Consulting, Inc. i2ECEIVED Nov o s 2005 PIANNING DEPARTMENT CIN~O~~E~AARWATER \1Woodsserver\proJectslHarbourWatch Docks (115-04) (Gaynor)16enthic report.wpd uttiC6: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727} 786.7479 Email:billwoods~woodsconsulting.org • ~~C~~~~I[~ ~~u~~~~~~ Woods Consu/tina ..~,. _ ~ .... Environmental Permitting Marine Englneering Hydrogeology Land Planning PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY QF CLEARWATER~ ~~ 4 County Road i ,suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 _.~. ~'~ .'~~ .~' ~ ~ `~, s. b ~ ~~ r~~ 'o ~i n r ~. :17 Rt ~ i I WOODS CONSULTING 171• COUN7Y ROAD t, SUITE 22 DUN DIN FL 346!10 PH. 727 756-8747 FAX 727 7l3E-7470 ~9 ~.~.. r~r/' ~' ~ ,~ /.! `y~, ~i i ~> ~~ ~J ~° / ~ jJ {.~ 1 ~~~ ~..: L': z.. I~t / I i I ,~,lX ,~ ` ~ ~~ „I..--,~ y __ „`,-~_ ....---- 7,' ...., 1, I f ' __._..._ __._.._...~ l_..._~...._~....~.........a..._.,..............__~ l__..~._.~..___. . ; s "` ro ~`~ 1; ryN I"",~•...• ... ..... °^•I +o~:xmmnw.owm,oian~vevwwncwn..~a~rtm~nrrau+ ......................... ............~ .............~..... ( .W...... ... ~........ ea ...-....::c• ~ ~ .... 1 •.. .. STORAGE - I I i i I ~ ~ ~ Ij I ~ HARBOUR WATCH CONDOMINIUMS BENTHIC & BATHYMETRY DATA tELEV'4TIONS REFERENCE NCIiD-1929 ~; STORAGE TOTAL SQUARE FEET - 1794 WATERWAY• WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 170 MHW +t.3' MLW -0.T SHEET .SL Office: (727) 786.5747 Fax: (727j 786-7479 Email:billwoodsC~woodsconsulting.org • t~,c;t~pt~ ~A~.~a-UR. ~~T'A'~~~, L.~.~. 4200 W, Cypresa St., Suite 444 Tampa, FL 33607 Tele: (813) 877-4444 Fax; (813) $77-1222 September 1, 2005 Harbour Estates, L.L.C. 4200 W: Cypress Street, Suite 444. Tampa, FL 33607 To Whom It May Concern: Per the above referenced property, please be advised that Barry Greenfield, Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer, is hereby authorized to act on my behalf to sign any and all documents relating to State, County or other governing agencies. This shall include but not be limited to all water-related permits, leases or licenses related to the above referenced property. Sincerely Jose j au rst ~~~~~~~® Pr i nt NOV 0 8 2005 1TR/ljc PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ~~-r~n ~ ~; fl L~ Before me the undersigned, an office duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this II S? day of St pT~E m ~ ~ ti 2005 personally appeared Joseph J. Rauenhorst, who having been first duly sworn deposes and says that he fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he has signed. Notary Public: Signature ""`•`^^~~^~' Y ~ENI56 S JOHNSON Notary Public: ~~ S t s. , .~,~}~,,,) ~ A coMMIS910N N DD409902 ?prM1~ HXPIRfS:lune10,2009 Typed or Printed Name cono~ec,ea Flond.r~a.rye«Noaeo~, My Commission Expires: ~4~ t ~ ~-~ g OP,iG!NA~. At"fid~vit of Authorized Agent Name of Property owner; Harbour Estates, L.L.C. 200 W Cypress St., Suite ~4 Tampa, FL 33807 ~ ~ That we the owner ®nd record title holder of the tollowing property 279 Windwwrd pa.~sne Cl~wwuw~wr CC/ ww..~.~ --"- - li[Qltioavl r ~S/M/ 2. Thatthls property const(tutes the propertyforwhich permit application(s) end request(s) are being made. 3. The undersigned has appointed and does appoint Woods Consulting, inc. as their agents to execute petitions, permit applications, or other documents as necessary for permitting.. They are also authorized to represent us as our agents at any requinsd public hearings. 4. This affidavit has been executed to induce the various regulatory ag®ncies having Jurisdiction over such matters to consider and act on the above d®ecribed property, 5• Thet we the undersigned authority, hereby, certify that the foregoing (s true end correct. Property Owner (Signature) ,.,_ ' Property Owner (Print); B ry Qreen eld T(tle: Date; _,_, ~ ~ if d S _~_, SPATE OF FLORIDA County o1~PMe~Ik-s /fig/lS~~~ul~:~ Before ~, the undersigned, an office duly commissioned by the laws of the fate o Florida, on this ~ St havinf 1~~~"'_~ 2005, personally appeared /` ~ iP~/~ ~ ~ c'~ who g been first duly sworn deposes and says~that he fully under tends the contents of the affidavit that hs has signed Notary Public ,~C~C~ G~ ~. ~ ~.~C .~~(„~' '" ~~~ LAURA J. COPLON Commission M DD284314 F Expires 2/2/08 My Commission Expires: ~~ .Z- (.'~~j 9ondedth~ouph . ~ Old Republic 6urety Company RECEIVED NOV 0 is 2U05 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARwArftQ I#: 2005224344 BK: 14371 PG:~28, 06/09/2005 at 04:17 PM, Rn~RDING 5 PAGES $44.60 KEN BURL , CLERK OF COURT P2NELLAB COUNTY, FL BY DEPUTY CLERK: CLKDM82 "1, ~y; ,. ;;~~~.. ~.,, .i ~,r, 4 Prepared by: Investors Realty~l?it)e~C Return to: Investors Realty~'gt •CtSm Attn: Thomas Iv'(c>ya'~~hlin 304 Monroe Stree't•°°'' Dunedin,F~.:3~6Q8, ,,, .,, ; Parcel ID # 08/29/1S/4,~3~0/003/0050 r ` ~r•• C. ~i a`Lr,4 ~ I c~fiic~~~an~ KEN BURKE, CLERK OF COURT PINELLAS COUNTY FLORIDA ny, LLC INSTM 4000400001 asn7/4000 at 04:x! PM LLC OFF REC 8K: 14341 PG: 40M•4004 DocTyp~:DEED RECORDING: =36.00 D DOC STAMP: =41000.00 /" !" ~/ ~~~ 4 ~ SPEC1tAL WA_RRAN'ry nF~n ~`' ~.. ,,1~T5:VINDENTUltE made as of the 23rd day of May, 2005, by and between Quality Boats of ~,~i ~'•I:ic., a Florida corporation ("Grantor"), whose address is 235 Windward Passage, ~~errTFlorida 33767, for and in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10,00) and other good and tcbnsiderations in hand paid, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, 4,~sells, aliens, remises, releases and conveys unto Harbour Estates, L,L.C., a Delaware liability company ("Grantee") whose address is 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444, Florida 33607, the following described real property in the County of Pinellas, State of to-wit: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. Subject to the matters set for on Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof TOGETHER with all the tenements, heteditaments and appurtenances, with every privilege, right, title, interest and estate, reversion, remainder and easement thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same in fee simple forever. And the Grantor does hereby covenant that Grantor does fully warrant the title to the above described real estate so hereby conveyed and will defend the same against the lawful claims, arising out of events occurring prior to the recording of this Deed, of all persons claiming by, through or under the Grantor, but against none other. This Special Warranty Deed is being re-recorded to correct Exhibit A. ~~C~C~ON/~D NOV 0 8 1005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF ClEARWATER PINELLAS COUNTY FL OFF, REC. 14371 PG 1729 t~Ri~4idt1L .~'~,~ ~ WITNESS WF~EREOF, ~9.'t~r"atitor aforesaid has set its han ~' day of May, 2005. '' ~` ~ d and seal as of the ~~-~ / ~ t\ ~.,r J WITNESSES: ~, ~`~~' J ~,„,.,,~ Quality Boats of Clearwater, Inc. , a Florida ,"~, ,r•. y'V ~~' ~ \~~i ~~dCZrJ <;~; -' . `.,.`~`il ~. ~~~ `~ ~~ ..~ r ,^, k, 1, ` ~ ~ ~~~~ATE OF FLORIDA ~;",~..yJ~~UNTY OF PINELLAS . ~ ~, corporation ay. N ATR ~tle: CED The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ 5~~y of May, 2005, by the r.FO of -a11aT•T'rv RnATa nF rT rrea +er~R rNO,They are personally known to me or have produced as identification and did (did not) take an oath, My Commission Expires; '~ Nemo: Kathleen A, O'Hearn Notary Public ~' K~lh~n A. O'Hpm My cOmml~~Iq~ ODZ21p74 ~a~ FxWn~ JWy Z0.20W ~2ECEIVED NOV 0 8 2Qn5 2 PI ANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER PINELLAB COUNTY FL OFF. REC. 14371 PG 1730 .- 'ti X 'y.` 11 1 ' 4 % , ~ I `; ~.1 ~.-,i i • .,~. . ,* ~ may ,~; 'J %~~ ~9 map or plat thereof recorded in~Plat Book S1, Page 34, of the Public ~ - c~®me~nt~created by Reciprocal Easements and Maintenance Agreement rr~~ ~ ~~~ ~. '~;, ~~''? ~~, ' ~, `,' 4 ~ ~1 ~4 /~~.~1. y ~~ ~ % '4~ ~, / "'^~ ` ~~. ~~• ` `~ ~ ~ ~. `~ i2ECEIVED NOV 0 8 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OE CLEARWATER PINELLAS COUNTY FL OFF, REC,~ 14371 PG 1731 fr ~~~..Y'~,; ,~ ~~ ;3 '~ ~~,~~j Exhibit "A" f `' The West 50 feetf7rfi, ~es~~,dne (1) and four 4 and all o ESTATES OF C p () f Lot 5, Block C, ISLAND in Plat Book 51, P~Aga34 of the Public Records of Pne~as Countat Floreof, recorded y, nda. ti ,•, ~~~~ ,~ ~`~ S :.,,,,,,. ;e , r ~.,~ ~., ~..,,~ t~ t J ~~ ~ ~~ t,' • ~,~ ,j. !; .; ~`+ J ~~ ~ ^ .^"~~~~ ~ ~\ ~ ••/ ~,,~.~ y 4, ~~ .. '~ ~~~~,I~'^ ry N n ~\ ':~ t~.`~ ~.~~ i2ECEIVED NOV 0 8 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CEEARWATER t RECEIVED NOV 0 8 1Q05 PINELLAS COUNTY FL OFF. REC. 14371 PG 1732 `. ~ ~ :, ~ ~~~ .. ,. ~ <'r'~ ~'~~, .~• ; ~, ~; " .4 '..f Y`•-~' Exhibit "B" Taxes and assessments for thc•~ear 2405 and subsequent years. • t;r~v!;~;;. Restrictions, condi~,oits, r'es'ervations, easements, and other matters contained on the Plat of ISLAND ESTATES t' ~'~• OF CLEARWAr'PP~ , ~'NI'I' ~~, as recorded in Plat Book 51, Page 34 and in O.R. Book 586, Page 235. ,~"~,;~~ `~: t (•~ 4 Restrictions c14,n„t~,ried in Deed recorded in O.R. Book 2308, Page 44. •',•, ZASO ReciproCal'•~ase'ments and Maintenance Agreement recorded in O. R. BookJ~~age _ of the Publie,~~~Gbr~ls of Pinellas County, Florida. ,•°~^, ~,, 1. ,i ~~ ~~. ~ ~~~ ., ~+ .k.....wJ ~1ti ti~ ~ ti\ ti.' ~"t ~~ ~~ ~.,...~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT CIiY OF C~EgRWATER ~ /. ~~ '~o M 2N 3 3 S ~~ tl i ~~ C ~y_R ~~~ p ~uL'~`JL~IJ 1"/ L~~ ~, r",'~ NOV 0 8 2Q05 PLANNING DEPARTMENT ~ CITY OF CLEARWATER '~ --- ~ l~ iil ~t 2~ ~• ~~~ ~ ,, W 0 o~ 0 SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ I ~ ~. ' ~ ~. f ~' _ CLEARWATER~11U1+9~~. ~ , ~, ~, ~, ^ 1 SCIENCE CV1~E Ft•, ~~ '`=`~.~,4 T ~ " • ,. ~ r` may-" ~'--w } . ~ - .~~ .. ~i if ,~' i +~ ~ ~~ i .. ~.. ~'-i, ~ ~~ ' ~.I~A,~I D STAT ~ rPUBLIC OCK HARBOUR WATCi~. ~O DOS ,~,~ ~,~~ . ` '` ~ ~` ~ ~ . `~, 279 WINDWARD Pi4SSAGE CLEARWATER, FL~'3,376~ ~ .~ Jf ~~ ~~ '~r~4~ h ~``~ ~ ~ FORMERLY ROSS YACH~1• j `~ ~ .. _,. - ( ~~ ~ ' ~~1y ~, `' t .g 1 ~ `4~ ,,,Y Z ~~` ~ ~~ t 4 ~ ~ WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TQTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 LOCATION MAP WATERWAY WIDTH 400 ' 1714 COUNTY ROAD 1, suITE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224 DUNEDIN FL 34698 MHW +T.3' MAW -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 "ELElG4T/ONS REFERENCE NG!/D-1929 SHEET ~ SHORELINE Engineer's Seal DECEIVED ,,,,,~,;,:.,.~.,,,,,, ~~ , w~ NOV 0 8 1Qa5 ~' _:~ F~ o m v m 2~~~ • O. ~ ~oz m Q p~,ANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER ' <,x • ~ ~~ ~ ~ • ~I ,. ~. ~~• ~ `~~ ~~ ~wN~ '°r T" ~ • •. ,~ _~ ,o ..~ ~ 3 ~( REVISION 2: 11-7-05 REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~Y'~ ~NQF-~ `f~', E " .`~ `"~~~ ~"-~!i°g,r~ ~,~„~r~ ,,~'~ : "` SCALE: 1"=100' MULTI-USE DOCK *. , i .. 1 ~` Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) R ~~, ~ . ~ ~' •,, _. ,. ~,. 1 ~: ~ ~ ~ t<• ~.'3 I I' I~ -- ~`' ~ r .r ~ ,~ ° ~ ~,~ N. v `-~ 1 `.4 3 r ~,' k9F" ~` ~.. J ~ r .~ -.~ ,..~ ... ~ I ~ `,.~# ,~~ R: WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 EXISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 ~7~a couNly ROAD ~, surer 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEDIN FL 34698 W/ AERIAL ~Hyy +1.3' M~yy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 *ELEl44T/ONS /,'EFERENCE NG'!~D-1929 SHEET ? SHORELINE Engineer's Seal i~ECEI ,,,,, ~ I I I,,,,,, W~ NOV 0 S 2005 Ng •. ~ m `"~` p°oo p(,p-NNING DEPARTMEN _ * ~ ` ~ "~~ ~ * - 3 ° ~ "' • i Q~-~~ ~ _~ivr C,l ~ V i SST' ~ \ FW-KNN N [/~~F CLEARWATER _, . i ~ ~•~ ~ UQ i •~•. ~ • • ~ O ~ w ~ ••. • \ NQHIL REVISION 2: 11-7-05 '~ t ~\ "~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~'~~,,,, ,,~~~`~ SCALE: 1"=100' MULTI-USE DOCK ,) ~ (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~~ .{. ~` ~ i 0 0 0 ~o e m u © .. ~, ~ t,. ~. 4 :: - ~ ~ _ I ~ ~~y ' ~ ~.~ ~ :. - p ~ ~ ~, / .., p ~ __. .~ R ~' --+~ . ' ~= ~ ~~~ r ~ ~ 1.v ~~ Ill ~ - ,~~~, ~1~._ ~ ;.~~". WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET Isis PROPOSED DOCKS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 1714 COUNTY ROAD t, sufTE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224 DUNEDIN FL 34698 W/ AERIAL MHyy +1.3' MLyy -0.7 PH. (727 786-5747 FAx (727) 78s-747s 'ELEli.4T/ONS REFERENCE NG'!~D-1929 SHEET 3 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal . . ` Qmn ~, p. ~ - 30~.,~ t ~ =Q~~~ w ~ ~ H~NN r ., ,., sT• ~ _~~~ i .i~ ~ U~ . REVISION 2: 11-7-05 '~ .i ~\ `"~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~'~~,,, ,,~~~`~ -- -- ~ - -- Application # ~ ~` SCALE: 1 "=40' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ® ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I m) ~ ~ ~~ z °m~ Io of ~ Iv o I ~ ~ Ir z r m ° ~ f fr:X ' 1W~ 73DCK XISTING DOCK O O O rfXISiIN;i P~ ~ I,~~K 4 O `~ O ~ ~ € ~.. ~1 ' [: i ` ~ • y !''. . . r 0 C z m WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 XISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' ma couNn ROAD ,, suRE z2 DUNEDIN FL 34698 W PROPOSED OVERLAID WATERFRONT WIDTH MHW +~•3' MLW -D•7 PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 "ELEVATIONS REFERENCE NGl/0-1929 SHEET 4 SHORELINE Engineer's Seol ' •••. ~ ~ ~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT =: ~ ~•, j % ` ~~ : - W - CITY OF CLEARWATER , , ' ~~ ~~ T ~ ~ .~• ~ ••~• • • ` ~ \ ~ ~ N N uQ~n ~ ¢ ~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 i ••..•• ..•• '~, ~ .~~ ~~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 '~~~, ~~~`~ ~ i. ~ ~ 6r ~ ;, if ~~ ~ ~ ~ SCALE: 1 "=80' MULTI-USE DOCK Appiicotion # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) • I~ I m 0 0 ~o o O O® ® O O p ® I I 10' UTILITY EASEMENT o . ~~ ~D m~ ~~ ~ fo __ ___ ~a ___ . : / ~Z~ ` i 1 I / i i = ~ ~ ~ ~ NOTE: I I ~ ~ I ~ -NO STRUCTURES SHALL BE I ~ d I I CONSTRUCTED WITHIN 10' ~~ + ' * ~ UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG ~ • ~ SHORELINE. ~° '~ CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE ' CAUTION WORKING NEAR 12" , '~ i FORCE MAIN. ~ / ,_.~ , ~~ -ACCESS TO THE 12 FORCE ~~ MAIN FOR CITY EMPLOYEES / SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT ALL 1 , / TIMES. _ l / / ~ ,' t ~ / / WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 - t7ta couNTr RoAO t, surrE 22 PROPOSED DOCKS W/ SITE PLAN WATERWAY WIDTH 4 ~ WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' ' ' DUNEDIN FL 34698 PH. (7275 786-5747 " MHw +t.3 MLW -D•7 5 / FAX (727) 786-7479 ELEI~.4l70NS REFERENCE ' NGl 0-1929 SHEET SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ~~ ~~ ' V ~ NOV 08 205 ':;~ ~ •~ ~ ~ , ~~~°' P1~NNINGDEPARTMENT ta~.S.'~ i O o ~ m ,-~ f: _ ~~ ,. ~ ~_ ~ CIT1l OF Cf.EARWATER j ~ ,~ ~~. F-WNN • .cis ~~, ~ ~ ~ = F C r J~ 1!S :•• v • • ~ O~w~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 . '%,' ~• `•••• \\\ "~~,~ ' ~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~~~, ,~~~ N ,' C {~.v, tt a .~ 6 dY SCALE: 1"=30' MULTI-USE DOCK ~ I I SEE SHEET 8 F^R CR^SS-SECTI^N xl m ~I z vI m o. 4 Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) I I I I~ z Im m I~ v I~ -20,5 I m 46.01 I~ °~ IZ cv m I 18,o I ~ 5.0 25.7 15.5 ___ O O O ~ s O O N M O O O i 3.0' I I 24.0 I 6,0'x8.0' PLA 141,8 I I I I 4,0'x22.0' RAMP I ~-~D WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 t7ta couNtY RonD t, sul~E 22 PROPOSED DOCK DETAIL WATERWAY WIDTH WATERFRONT WIDTH 400 224' DUNEDIN FL 34698 PH. (727 786-5747 MHyy +7.3' MLyy -0.7' FAX (727) 7es-7a7a "ELEl~.4T/ONS REFERENCE NG!/0-1929 SHEET 6 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ~, w NOV ~ 8 2005 "~ .•~~~.~ : s •'.s ~ o m ~- ~~ pLANNING DEPAR?MENT '"* ~ ~~`'~~ 5 s ' ~t - 3° CITY OF CLEARWATER w' ~ ~ N N i 1 ' •• -, ~ ••• '~ ~ O ~ W ~/~'~ o~ !•Ll •• ~ uNi Q ~ ~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~ ~ ~ -~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~~%iiy "~ ~~~`~~ LINE d :. P~.~~M~~K~ ~.. ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~• ~ ~~ ~ SCALE: 1 =30 MULTI-USE DOCK A pplication # `~ (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) w b, -II- -11- ~ I v o ± w I ..F V V '~' v1 I cn acr v I I V ~P O v I + r~ + I I Cr Ou "f' I O I -~- i f0 V f0 T I O I O W v I N I W v o, I "~ ± -F + I v I ± v •V i ~ 1 I I , .~- ~ N I A W rn I v ~ o ~' I ~ V I W .} V O~ I ~ V ~ I O V ''" ..F ~ + p I ~ W O + ~ I .U °' ~, rn v ` 1 1 V I V V V (O + I Ui V o, '}- 1 t0 N I V O+ ± '± ~ W V I~ V '~- V N N .v ± I 1 0+ V ~ a~ N I v + I + 1 -F + I I v.~ ~o o O .O ~+ ~° 1 1 V V + ''' v '~' O ~ '~' v V y I V ~'i' V m rn I 1 N N , • } ,y J ~" ~ W I v .~O .V"F ~ Qp '~ V OD T O .V V-Y 1 O-I'~A ~' ± N ~ I_ 1 I v I [t1 Uf ~ O + } V 1 O 'i-± V ~I .p N '± W v OD' i -~+N "I' 0 ~1 V v0'r'fr '~ +I N V ± I .+ .V A 1 ± I •N ,V+ + + 1 <O W m A A I v m ~ + ¢825% ~~ ~ +~ '~- o N A ~ + . A w ~ / v ,v `~ -p} 'f- -~ I v ~ W p +1 rs #I A ~ W O I N I ~ o ~ ~, ' ~ •°~ •~ N W ~ I ~ ..F v v rn~~ A ? m o Cn fbv~ -~- -F cn 'i' I N O+ I XISTING DDCK I rn I ~' ~ J + + ~ ~ 1 . I ~ O O O 6 o + O +~ i 3.0' MLW ~ O 07 ± ~ N ~ O 07 A +,U I W O ~ I ~ ± ~- A ~ I ~ ~. I Ou I N r I !. 'I"fD N N W I I I N N W N .~. N I 1 O V O ~ p'i' W A ~ A O W & ~ ~ ~ l.+ _A ~ N W (Ali O OWi V WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 BATHYMETRY DATA WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224` t7ta couNty ROAD t, suITE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 (727 786-5747 PH MHW +t•3' MLW '~•~~ . FAX (727) 786-7479 '"ELElG4T/ONS REFERENCE NG'!/0-1929 SHEET ~ SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ 111 viii ` ~ ~ \ I ~ W v NOV O S 20D5 ,~~~- \~j E-.:!' ~ ' ~:; .I; : ~ : o a ~ m 0 ° ~ ~ ~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT 0 6 * -30 ~~ : .1 ~ _'~~°"~~~~ ~~ ~~ff' - Q~~~ '~ ~ irt~ i~ ~ HoCNN ~~ ~' ~a~n ' CITYOFCLEARWATER ; ;~; ~,~ P~: 3 J ~( ~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~ ~` ~` y~ ~~ ~`• -~ ~\ '"~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 - . ~,, , . • ''~ ~ ~`~~ •"~'!~,~~ . ~ ,; ~`~~ `~ r' c A...aa ~ 5'~ F, r ~ u ~''~ ~i j -, °'d~ kPA i .~ . s ~.u t $ U Z' 1 SCALE: 1"=10' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) SEE SHEET 6 F^R CR^SS-SECTION L^CATI^N ELEVATI^NI MAX, 10,0' NGVD-29 4.0' X 22.0' RAMP 36.0 8,0 6.0 WITH RECAP-ELEV.=5.4' EXISTING ELEV.=4.4' +1.3' MHW APPROXIMATE SURVEY ELEVATIONS -3.0' MLW -4.0' MLW -6.3' MLW -6.0' MLW 8' TIP PILING 2.5 C.C.A. RET. SET BUTT D^WN, 8.0' PENETRATI^N, 6.0' AT WALL, AND 10.0' MIN, FOR TIE PILES CR^SS-SECTI^N A- A' WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' t7ta couNrr RonD t, sulrE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 WATERFRONT WIDTH MFiW +1.3' MLyy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAx (727) 786-7479 *ELElifIT/ONS REFERENCE NGl~O-1929 SHEET 8 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ~ ~~ ~ ~~tt~l~i~ii ( L1 v i~i ~~~ ~ SI i v w ~fQV 0 8 2005 ~ ;. , ~ ~ .~~ i .~~' i >m o m v m ~~1 ~ . , . ; ,~6' .,~ i NNINGDEPARTMENT Pthl _~ _~ ~• ~ ~; * _ ~o~° ~ ~ = Q~" ~ ~'~ + ~ WA 11Y p +LEAR TER r a a ~ ~= ~ ~~,~. i, : ` FK N N F,~~ ; , A ~ 1F ~ ~ ~ . C = , . T •,~ 3J~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 -~. ~, :. ~ ~' ~.~~ -~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 , , ' ~~~. ~" t ~.~~~~ SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK WIDTH 2 % 2 TUBE r ~• CHANNEL POLYETHYLENE TUB FLOATING SYSTEMS LENGTH - 45' MAX • Rn ~ r° z x z TIRE RIBBED DECxING PILE QlIDE AT E ~ DDEK B A A B .• aurBCL TYP %-10R P0.YETMYLENE TUBS TYP ELEAT LDCATBH salnLr vILLrn vrrN PRrsTYRQE PLAN VIEW I aaLER PIIE Q"D~ N^TEI ALL C^NSTRUCTI^N T^ MEET OR EXCEED REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN SECTIONS 166-C332, 33, & 334) ^F THE PINELLAS C^UNTY WATER AND NAVIGATI^N C^NTR^L AUTHORITY REGULATIONS MANUAL I2 X 3 CLGT - RIBBED DECKIIIfi ve vDNN Dvo' yr ss. BLr ~ ~ e ~• ¢c. s DLIDLrn vrtN PDLYSTTRENE BEADS SECTI^N B- B WOODS CONSULTING INC. 1714 CR1, SUITE 22 DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34698 KPH. (727) 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 Application # zxevT v® DUiER yr ss. B~Ts VITN LDCX NUT AIm fumER vASNERs " ~ k R~~ ,r ~~ -~ ~~ V` (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) nEaDc BAB ccA r u saEVs PER sralNCER .• LOGITUDINM. TTPIGIL N-NBR ICAL TnLnc Tu,s Y raLED vITN 'rRENE >IEADS HARBOUR WATCH FLOATING DOCK DETAILS spy 0 8 2005 PLANNING DEPR1R~TA ART CITY OF CLEA REVISION 2: 11-7-05 REVISION 1: 10-18-05 TOTAL SQUARE FEET- 81 WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' MHW +1.3' MLW -0.7' SHEET 9 Engin ~~~ ~~ ` ~ ~ ~9 r U I ~ l .~'* ~•'~,~ No :~ . :,. 'a ,,,,_r ~~, ~b c ;, ~' S'T/ ~•, ,: ., ~ ••~ .~, ~ ~ • ` I. ,. ~-: ., f, ,,,~ , . ,01 C ~ ~-~ I I s Seal ~~i i S/ ~i~ W v 'S . m m • ~ i ~~t~' ~ ~ o ~ m l~ Oo~`» r~ _ a~^~ ,~ \ _~~~ • ~' HR~NN •' ~ Q ~ •• 1~ ~3~ . ; ~\ ~ J ' ~~ ~. U ,~.\ SECTI^N A-A ~ ~ F'-~I~~P,~ft.~fl +~ it +~'~rV'~~V ~ a SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) RIBBED GUSSET e % 3 % 1/6 TUBES ARCS - 4r AND 3' 'E' CNANIiL 4 RDD TYPICAL A7 EACH A LIGNT tR NEAVY VERTICAL PDST 1 pa W W A p a 1s1 g+a _ _ I LDWGiTUDINAI a Y J I VIDTNS GREATER W TRAM / iEE7 9' DR 12' 7 % 3 RI88ED ~T~ 1° Tp' ~1- PLAN VIEW A PIAIN 4 RAID LIP VARIES - 46' AND uP z-Le' scND 40 PIPE DTNER SIZES ARE AVAMBLE RUB RAIL ~ DIiPERENT DESIGNS e X 2 X 3/16 TUBES 4' 30' I~ 45' ELEVATI^N 1 1 3/16' 325 1-Vr eERR2 T 6N5 T END VIEW 1/s• DEEP ogee' RUB RAIL 1_3/16, an 1/4' PLATE V/NDN-SKID TAPE - 19• LDNG ALTERNATE GRATING DETAIL e,bes 3/1 X 3 ~ BAR I~0341 D1~ 1/e' DIA IboS 5~0.47D p• ALUNnruIl RoD z-vr 0 x 9• L3T3 IBIMV RDLLER cwER°D z EACH RIBBED DECKING TREAD PLATE END DETAIL No,,,D„,~,~~„~,,,~,~,,,,,,,,~, 1 1/r TUBE 9' RIBBED DECKDiG 2-1/r SCND ID PIPE O e x e TueE 7' X 3' RIHBED ANGLE ALT. ADA GRAHRAILS GRABRAIL BRACKET HINGE PDCKET GRABRAIL 70 VRAP BALI( TD 2 1/r SCND 40 PIPE y ~• CHANNEL 1/4' % 4' BAR A7 ENDS IIAY )>E ADDED RuBRAIL GRABRAIL DETAIL SHORE SIDE HINGE DETAIL ' 2 x e x 3/16 TUBES 34 VmrN 3/r ss BDLT ~ RIBBED DECKDIG 1-1/r SCHD ¢0 PIPE _n _--_________ _ .~, .E, CNAIHEL 1/r e % 3 X 1/8 TUBE 2 % 3 % 1/9 TUBE e' SCND 4D PIPE - 1' LOIG rDR wDTHS > 4• HINGE PIN -GANGWAYS SECTION A - A HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET - 1818 WOODS CONSULTING INC. FLOATING DOCK DETAILS WATERWAY WIDTH 4 O~ SUITE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 1714 CR1 ' 224 ' , -0.7 MLW DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34698 MHW +~•3 PH. (727) 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 SHEET 10 SHORELINE Engineer's Seol ~I~; ~ I~`~~~I., .• ~ ~~ ~ < ' w a zoos Novo ~..:..... ., ~ >~ tr ~, ~ ' ~ . ANNING DEPARTMENT p( o n= ~ ; * ''s . ~o~° . CI~1(OF CLEARWATER , , ~~ r-~,~ ~' ~ _l~( REVISION 2: 11-7-05 '~ " ./ ~ ~\ ~ "-~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~'~~, ~~~~ , , r~a~~~~~,~ ~~~ SCALE: 1"=40' MULT I-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ I I I I I I I WEIGHED TURBIDITY CURTAINS I SEE SHEET 12 FOR DETAILS PROJECT AREA=0.25 ACRES I ~I I~ ~I to AI to m I~ z I~ ;-k KISTY : "ICI. Y. Iz m • ~ f kX, + 1NIa ~~~%~ I XISTING I ~ DDCK O O ~ ;-£X 'TINS I O ~ f ll'i.~ ~ 4 ~ O 8 I ~ ~ ~~ , ~f ~ ~~ ~~ _ ~ I ~ ~ ,;E f: I .<.. ~~ ~~~ r 0 C z m H• WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 TURBIDITY CURTAIN LOCATIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' i7~a couNTr ROAD ~, suITE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 WATERFRONT WIDTH MHyI/ +1.3' MLyy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 *ELElG4TIONS REFERENCE NGli0-1929 SHEET 11 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ~V O ` ` v _ ~ S (~ ~i v ! I \ •. ~ a ~ o ~ •y ~~ •• ,~* ~ o,h v~ a~ m~ ANNINGDEPARTMENT \ Q ~~' oo~m ' ~,~fi: y ' -~~ OWNERS SIGNATURE P1., G1~Y OF CIEARWATER .~ ~ ~ r .,, _ ~ ~ _ `* ~ "~ ; * - 3 ~ ~ ~ HKNN '~ • .Y } ~ ~~+ . .' T ' •~ \ ~ ST Mf'~F~~. ~ =FW-C~ A° EVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~~ . 3J •• ~ o~w~ • = . \ NQI-IL y~ .t, ~`~ "~ ~'% ~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 , . '~i~~'~ ~~~~` SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) WEIGHED TURBIDITY CURTAINS SEE SHEET 11 FOR LOCATION WATER LEVEL CONNECTING RODS FLOAT LAMINATED SEA FLOOR ° VINYL-POLYE STE LENGTH AS REQUI RED FABRIC CHAIN WEIGHTE TYPICAL FLOATING TURBIDITY CURTAINS (DESIGN BY AER-FLO INC.) WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 TURBIDITY CURTAIN WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' ~7~a couNrr ROAD ~, suITE 22 DUNEDIN ~ aasa8 STANDARD DETAILS WATERFRONT WIDTH MHW +,.3~ MLW _D,7• PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 "ELEl~ATIONS REFERENCE NGl/0-1929 SHEET ~ 2 SHORELINE Engineers Seal ~~~11,11-~~~ ~ Q / \ \~- r.' Wqs ~i ~CE~ g ~ om U ~liM V U [ ~vm ~ ~ ~~:~,~'~-t;~' ` F•• • ' ~ yJ~p ~• ~ ~ '~° ~ • O o ~ m OWNERS SIGNATURE p~p-NNING DEPARTMENT ~ ~ +~~ * !~o• 15586 ~ ~`~ U ~_ _ j g CtN QF CLEARWATER is ~ ,. • _• .~,. ~~ ~ ' ~ QQ ~ W~NN y ATE~OF- '. p,~f ~ r ~; ~ + ~ a ~ yn ~ v¢ REVISION 2 11 7 05 ~ a I ~ ~\ ~''~ `r "~ : - - p~-~. ~ ~.,R ~~~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~~ ~`` y ,; ~• . ,~.~. SCALE: 1"=30' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ PEDESTAL = ~ SEE SHEETS 1 4 & 15 FOR UTILITY PEDESTAL SPECIFICATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS ~~B~~V~~-_, P1 P2 P3 P4 O O O O O O O O 3.0' MLW P5 WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 `- UTILITY PEDESTAL LOCATIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' t7ta couNTY ROAD t, suITE 2z DUNEDIN FL 34696 (727 786-5747 PH MHW +1.3' MLW -D•7 . FAX (727) 786-7479 "ELElG4T/ONS REFERENCE NGliO-1929 SHEET 13 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ~~~~L1 ~ ~~~~` I ~~~~ ~ .~J l~QP 0 ~ 2tJUJ ~ ~ `" ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~~., ~'~.~~ .~ ~~ ly ~~ ~ o m ~ ~ ~~ .~~~ ~ .~ ~ i o<~m p NINGDEPARTMENT ~ ~ :~~ ~`~/* ' No .1 5 ~ * _ 30~° ~ ' ~ ~ CITY OF CtEARWATER ~ ~ - Q~t~l: = 5 v ' ~~~ ~ ' I • ~ Q w ~ v ~: ST O Via.. .• REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~ ~ ~'•- F~,~~-,~'~~ ' ~~~~ '~~ ~' REVISION 1: 10-18-05 :, \ ~p ~••~.,.., .~~~, ;~~ SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ - _ ~ PEDESTALS: - ALL PEDESTALS TO BE INNOVATIVE MARINE PRODUCTS "LIGHTHOUSE" PEDESTALS OR ENGINEER-APPROVED EQUAL. EVERY TWO SLIPS SHALL BE SERVED BY ONE PEDESTAL. WHERE ONE PEDESTAL CANNOT SERVICE TWO SLIPS, A PEDESTAL IS TO BE PROVIDED TO SERVE THE SINGLE SLIP. THE NUMBER OF PEDESTALS REQUIRED AND THEIR POWER REQUIREMENTS ARE: DUAL PEDESTALS PEDESTAL NUMBER POWER REQUIRED EACH PEDESTAL OTHER 2, 3, & 4 QUAD 50 AMP RECEPTACLES DUAL WATER SINGLE 20 AMP GFI RECEPTACLE ILLUMINATION CABLE TV (Optional) TELEPHONE (Optional) NOTE: DOUBLE PEDESTALS MUST BE CAPABLE OF ACCOMMODATING 2 -TWO POLE BREAKERS UP TO 60 AMP CAPACITY SINGLE PEDESTALS PEDESTAL NUMBER POWER REQUIRED EACH PEDESTAL OTHER 1 & 5 DUAL 50 AMP RECEPTACLES SINGLE WATER SINGLE 20 AMP GFI RECEPTACLE ILLUMINATION CABLE TV (Optional) TELEPHONE (Optional) NOTE: SINGLE PEDESTALS MUST BE CAPABLE OF ACCOMMODATING 1 -TWO POLE BREAKER UP TO 60 AMP CAPACITY SEE SHEET 13 FOR UTILITY PEDESTAL LOCATIONS WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 UTILITY PEDESTAL WATERWAY WIDTH 400' 224' i7~a couNn Rorw ~, suITE 2z WATERFRONT WIDTH DUNEDIN FL 34698 SPECIFICATIONS MHyy +1.3' MLW -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 7as-7a7s ''ELEl~.4T/ONS REFERENCE NGl/0-1929 SHEET ~ 4 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal n 1J ~~~i~ll-i~~ ~ \ ~ ,_ i ~~ . '~ S f ~. ~~ W v (Yllr O V LUUJ ~ ~~ ,• 1 V,4 •, ~ p`mc`r~j~ ~ ~ oo'a'm °° '~' ~ s fir- _~~~ ~ ~ ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT .. ~_ ,~ CITY OF CLEARWATER , , _ w- : 4~. ~ .~ W r~ ~ ~ = u-~ ~ ~ F-K N N w ~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 •- ;"' ~ >•:~~ ~~ ~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ••%%~; ' '' ; ~ ~`~ SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # ON L ) (OFFICIAL USE ~ fl ~ ~ 1 OTHER ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS: ~' ~'~ U r~ ~ ~6~ ~~~ ~~, 1. POWER TO DOCK SERVICE DISTRIBUTION PANEL(S) TO BE PROVIDED VIA UNDERGROUND SERVICE. 2. POWER FOR PEDESTAL ILLUMINATION TO BE FED FROM COMMON SERVICE PANEL FOR DEVELOPMENT VIA UNDERGROUND SERVICE. 3. CABLE ENTRANCES INTO BASES OF PEDESTALS AND CABLE EXITS FROM SERVICE PANELTO BE SEALED WITH SILICONE CAULK 4. ALL ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE MANUFACTURED BY SQUARE D COMPANY. 5. ALL CONDUCTORS AND BUS BARS TO BE COPPER. NO ALUMINUM PERMITTED. 6. ILLUMINATION TO BE ON COMMON LINE FOR NIGHT ILLUMINATION. 7. DISTRIBUTION PANELS (IF REQUIRED) TO BE OF ALL STAINLESS STEEL CONSTRUCTION. 8. ELECTRICAL CONDUIT LOCATED ABOVE GROUND (INCLUDING CONDUIT LOCATED BENEATH DOCKS) TO BE SUPPLIED WITH AN EXPANSION JOINT PER SECTION 347.6 OF THE NEC. AS A MINIMUM, ONE EXPANSION JOINT, ALLOWING HORIZONTAL MOVEMENT UP TO 6", IS TO BE PLACED IN EVERY 100 FOOT RUN OF CONDUIT. 9. HANGER STRAPS FOR CONDUIT TO BE STAINLESS STEEL AND DESIGNED SO AS TO ALLOW FREE HORIZONTAL MOVEMENT (EXPANSION) OF CONDUIT. 10. CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN APPROVAL OF ELECTRICAL PLANS BY A PROFESSIONAL ELECTRICAL ENGINEER AND PLANS ARE TO BE SIGNED AND SEALED BY THE PROFESSIONAL ELECTRICAL ENGINEER. 11. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE PROPOSED LOCATIONS OF ELECTRICAL SERVICE PANELS (IF REQUIRED) AND GAIN ENGINEER APPROVAL. WOO DS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' t7ta couNTr Bono t, suITE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH DUNEDIN Fl 34698 MHyy +1.3' MLyy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 rnx (727) 78s-747s ~ELEl~AT/ONS REFERENCE NGl/0-1929 SHEET ~ 5 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal N~V 8 ~{ S ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~< ~% w~ m ' •' LUil ~~ .• ~~ _ •. ~ o v m m ~ ~~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT ` ~ ' y N ~ "- 300 _ ~ ~ ~ CITYOFCLEARWATER ~; ,~• `~ ~ • ~ i N .' .y;= ~""" . \} FKN w ~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~ ~. ~, ~ ~~ j ` `"~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 , ~ ''••.~~i~~,``` ~~~~~'` .... SCALE: 1"=30' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE O NLY) ~ ~u~~~~~r~~_, 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 lOlb.-ABC FIRE lOlb.-ABC FIRE EXTINGUISHER EXTINGUISHER CABINET NFPA CAB N ITI FIRE LINE NOTES i. ALL FIRE MAINS TD BE 6' OR 4' PVC, AWWA 2. ALL FIRE LINES T^ BE PRESSURE TESTED TD 300 PSI FDR 2 HOURS, FLUSHED BEFORE C^NNECTING T^ STANDPIPE SYSTEM. 3. PIPING THRU SEAWALL T^ BE GALVANIZED SC 40 WITH GALVANIZED FIT TINGS AND HANGERS. FIRE LINE HANGERS AND ATTACHMENTS T^ BE STAINLESS STEEL AND SHALL BE DESIGNED T^ RESTRICT VERTICAL M^VEMENT (UP ^R DOWN). 4. ALL PIPE COUPLING TD BE C^VERED WITH A C^RR^SI^N RESISTANT C^ATING, CN^N-PVC C^UPLING) 5. ALL UNDERGR^UND PIPE TD BE DR14 300 PSI TESTED, ABOVE GR^UND AND UNDER DOCKS, TD BE SCHEDULE 80 WITH UV RESISTANCE COATING. 6. SYSTEM TD BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLL^WING NFPA STANDARDS, -NFPA 303, 1995 EDITION -NFPA-1, 2003 EDITION 7. TRANSITION PIPING BETWEEN UNDERGR^UND AND EXP^SED PIPING TO BE DUCTILE IR^N WITH APPR^PRIATE FITTINGS AND RESTRAINTS 8. FIRE LINE CONTROL VALVES TD BE ^S&Y TYPE WITH EPOXY C^ATING, 3 00 lb. WORKING PRESSURE 9. ENTIRE SYSTEM TO BE TESTED AT 300 PSI F^R 2 HOURS. TESTING SHALL BE WITNESSED BY LOCAL FIRE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL AND A CERTIFICATE ^F TESTING AND FLUSHING FURNISHED WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 PROPOSED DOCK FIRE DETAILS WATERWAY WIDTH 4 0 224 t7ta couNrr Rorer t, suirE 22 DUNEOIN FL 34698 WATERFRONT WIDTH MHyy +t.3' MLW -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 vnx (727) 7ss-7479 'ELElG4770NS REFERENCE NGl~O-1929 SHEET 16 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ~ i N 08 ~O~ ~ ~ •'•~ Zj~ ~` O ~'m ~IY J ~ ~ = •• • ~ o °o m - 3 ~ ~ O PLANNING DEPARTMENT .~ ~ a. ~ ~ = w `~ N c~~v o~ cLEaRw~TER _ F-KN : s ~ _ ~ n ' ~ ~ U Q ~ ~ ,may • . REVISION 2: 11-7-05 "~ '~y^ ~ ~ ~~ -~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 , , ~ .. , ~~~, , ~~ SCALE: 1"=100' ~IBI 1 ~ Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ® OPPOSITE SHORELINE OCATION OF 7 MOORING BUOYS SUPPORTING UP TO 5 VESSELS EACH, FOR A TOTAL OF 35 WET SLIPS AVAILABLE. ~ ~V~~V~~~ , - ~. ~. ,~ ' CLEARWATER MARINE SCIENCE CENTER .. I~ I~ . . ~. I o Q I ~ ' m'o o'o ®'o o I I I ~ i I 9 I coon I I I I . I_ •.xfo. o I I I ~~ I II _ ~ ~ ~ o~ ,` 0Y O I ~ yo, • ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ III ' Y ~~ ~ ~ I I I i \ ~ am II WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 EXISTING MOORING AREAS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224 1714 COUNTY ROAD 1, suRE 22 WATERFRQNT WIDTH DUNEDIN FL 34698 MHW +1.3~ MLW -D•7 PH. (727y 786-5747 rAx (727) 7es-747a "ELElG4T/ONS REFERENCE NCI/0-1929 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ~~ ~ ~~ ~~\11111,~~ // \\ \ WAS ~ \,:~.. I~ ~ Wv I~O~ 0 t3 1005 _~\~``~ ~ S~'•~ ~i omrvm ~ ~ , y„ " 'V~c.• ~ ~ PL14NNINGD EPARTMEN g oo~m ~_S'. : ~JS - ~~~~ ~`~~~ Na s8 ; ~ - ~~ T Cl~if'OF ClE~IRW ~ER ~ .~, , ~~ 65 ,~ : - w ~~ • ~' F-0[NN ~ : ~ : = n i ~ ~ ~ ~,. Q ; ~.: ,,n .~.: o~w~ /J • • f \ N HIL " ' \ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 REVISION 1: 10-18-05 , ;;~'~,, %. : ~~~ "~ ;, ~s.°'k..~~ •• w~~ , ~Us1o}j hL. ORiGlNAL ~ a~~ b~~ FLD2005-09093 279 WINDWARD PSG Date Received: 09/08/2005 HARBOUR WATCH DOCKS i2ECEIVED ZONING DISTRICT: C LAND USE: CG ATLAS PAGE: 267B PLANNER OF RECORD: WW ~a-a NOV 0 8 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CIN OF Cl.EARWATER CLWCoverSheet _° ~Cle~rwater U Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-562-4865 O SUBMIT GRIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION O SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION including 1) collated, 2) stapled and 3) folded sets of site plans O SUBMtTAPPLICATION FEE $ 1,205.00 -b5n DATE RECEIVED: RECEIVED BY (staff initials): ATLAS PAGE #: ZONING DISTRICT: LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: SURROUNDING USES OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES: NORTH: SOUTH: WEST: * NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS 51TE PLAN SETS) U ~ ~-'~' w FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLIC N S~~ ~~ 100 L (Revised 2/02/2004) ~ITX OF CI< ,~..~',4~'~I El's SVG PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT ~~-~- A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME: Harbour Estates, LLC, Barry Greenfield, VP MAILING ADDRESS: 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444, Tampa, FL 33607 PHONE NUMBER: (813) 877-4444 FAX NUMBER: PROPERTY OWNER(S): Harbour Estates, LLC, Barry Greenfield, VP, 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444, Tampa, FL 33607 {Must Include ALL owners as listed on the deed - provide origlnat slgnature(s} on page 6) AGENT NAME: Bill Woods, Pres.,Woods Consulting, Inc. and/or Terri Skapik, Woods Consulting, Inc. MAILING ADORESS; 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22., Dunedin, FL 34698 PHONE NUMBER: 727-786-5747 CELL NUMBER: 727-871-0084 FAX NUMBER; 727-786-7479 E-MAIL AooRESS: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-2Q2.A) STREET ADDRESS of subject site: 247 Windward Passage, Clearwater, FL 33767 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached warranty deeds (if not listed here, please note the Cation or this document in the submittal) PARCEL NUMBER: 08 / 29 / 15 / 43380 / 003 / 0050 and 60 feet of parcel 0060 PARCEL SIZE: 1.18 acres (acres, square feet) PROPOSED USE{S) AND SIZE(S): Construct amulti-use dock consisting of 1818 sf of new decking and 8 wet slips for the (number of dwelling units, hotel rooms or square footage of nonresidential use) exclusive use of the residents of upland condominium development. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST(S): Remove existing docks consisting of 1325 sf of decking and 12 wet slips. Construct amulti-use Attach sheets and be specific when identifying the request (inGude all requested code deviations; e.g, reduction in required number of parking spaces, specific use, elC.) dock consisting of 1818 sf of decking and 8 wet slips. The net gain will be 493 sf of new decking and the net lose of 4 slips. Please see attached plans for scope and details. Page 1 of 6 - Flexible Development Application- Ciky of Clearwater 0 DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS fTDR), A PRE DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED {CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES _ NO documents) . ~_ C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5) ~ SUE3MIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN page 6) D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A) ~ Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA -Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulb, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The proposed docks are located in an area already containing docks that are similar in design. The docks (9 slips) at the Island Estates Public docks are located in an area immediately adjacent to the site on the east. The Marine Science Center with slips is located immediately to the site on the west. 2. The propased development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. The construction of the condominiums and the docks (as amenities to the condominiums) will increase the value of properties that are not being redeveloped at this time. The docks will not hinder the construction of docks on the adjacent properties. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The docks are for the exclusive use of the owners of the upland condominiums. The construction of the docks should have no negative impact on the health and safety of persons working or residing in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. As the dock and slips are an amenity to the condominium development and for the exclusive use of the condominium residents, there will be no impact on traffic. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed far development. Please see item 1 above. The community in the vicinity consists of condominiums with docking facilities. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. The proposed condominiums and docks will enhance the area and will not have any adverse impacts visually or acoustically. ^ Provide complete responses to the applicable flexibility criteria for the specific land use as listed in each Zoning District to which the waiver is requested (use separate sheets as necessary) -Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: Please see attachments A & B Page 2 of 6 - Flexible Development Application- City of Clearwater E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Desig 4-202.A.21) D L'~ ~ V N in ludin the followin re uirements: ^ STORMWATER Pl.A c g g q _ Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines; ~~~ ~ ~ ~ s _ Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; j _ All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control ' ~P~NG & DEVEIOF'MENT SVCS~ stormwater calculations for attenuation and water quaGry; 'n(~ C~.EA.RY~tA~l;~'3 Signature of Florida registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations ^ GOPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT SUBMITI"AL (SWFWMD approval is required priorto issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable ^ COPY OF STATE AND COUNTY STORMWATER SYSTEM TIE-IN PERMIT APPLICATIONS, if applicable F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Gods Section 4-202.Aj Q SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (inGuding legal description of property) -One original and 74 copies; ^ 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; Q LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY; ^ PARKING DEMANb STUDY in conjunction w ith 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 khe Community Development Coordinator and shall be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to the parking standards are approved; ^ GRADING PLAN, as applicable; ^ PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided); ^ COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; G. SITE PC.AN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A) ^i SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): _ All dimensions; North arrow; _ Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet}, and date prepared; ____ 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; _ All required sight triangles; _ Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, ana spec+men trees, including description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; _ Location of all public and private easements; ____ Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site; i Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines., manholes and uft stations, yes and water tines; All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas; _ Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking l04 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 alt landscape material; ~_ Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities; Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; and Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks. ^ StTE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in writtenltabular form: ____ Land area in square feet and acres; _ Number of EXISTING dwelling units; Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; Gross floor area devoted to each use; Page 3 of 6 - Flexible Development Application- City of Gleanvater 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 pave ve i ul r Size and species of all landscape material; - Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easement; - Building and structure heights; _ Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and ,_ Floor area ratio (F.A.R.}for all nonresidential uses. ' Q REDUCED SITE PLAN to scale (8 Y~ X 11) and color rendering if possible; ^ FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site pla S~'Q 'Q __ One-foot contours or spot elevations on site; ~' _ Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormy~rater management for the parcel, All open space areas; ~ PtaNNG'VG ~ D Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms; ~---- GNk~ ~~ tOHMENTgVC$ Lot lines and building lines {dimensioned); - Streets and drives (dimensioned}; ,_____. Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); ' -_ Structural overhangs; H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A) ^ LANDSCAPE PLAN: _ All existing and proposed structures; .___ Names of abutting streets; Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations; Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers; ,_ Sight visibility triangles; -,~, Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing; Proposed and required parking spaces; _ Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including tlnpbne (as indreated on required tree survey); ~,,,, 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; )nterior 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 tANDSCAPE PLAN to scale {8'/: X 11 } (color rendering if possible); ^ IRRIGATION PLAN {required for level two and three approval); ^ COMPREHENSIVE tANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 420~.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 Infill Redevelopment Project or a Residential Infill Project. ^ BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -all sides of all buildings including height dimensions, colors and materials; ^ REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS -four sides of building with colors and materials to scale (8'/z X 11) (black and white and color rendering, if possible) as required. J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS /Section 3-1806) ^ All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be removed or to remain. ^ Ail PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing; freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals) ^ Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required). ^ Reduced signage proposal (8 %z X 11) (colorj, if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application. Page 4 of 6 - Flexible Development Application- City of Clearwater r r~ /~: its c ~«c l~ ORIGINAL K: •TRAitF4G iMPAG"f BTUDY: If8ectian 4~f12A43 and 4-804.0) I i 0 lhdude 8s required if proposed devetapmertt wNi degrade the axeptailte level of st3rviae iar sny.roadwsy, a6 adopted Al the Comprehensive Plan. 'T.rtp,ganeratlon tshat! ba•based on the most regent edltlon of the Ina!&ute of TransportaBott t.ngtnears 7dp Gsttentl Manual, Refer to Section 4801 C of the Communlfy Qpvalppmant Code t'or eXCepdona to thle r+equfrement. L. 8ildiVpYEiitE: t, in9 undersigttep, actmowredpe ir-.et alt rtepreaerttation9 mace In thla .. • ~ t9't'A'!'~ 13F PL.dF~DA, CQ~~ p~~n OGCG~,~t applicettdn are true and accurate to the beat .. rn and subscribed before ms Ihla~• day of authoclze Clly rept+esegtatfVeB to vit:tt attd p t the . COPLON D• 2d~ to ~]e~~ by dsercribed in fhb application.~~," Commtss3on # DD28431~ a!2~ wha 18 natty known . as / , 'h ~= Expires 2/2/08 p ttcatf as G ,~C~~ i~l~t~l.tt/Y r'ye' ~~~ ~ eded througgh p lY ti0/ J _ ~. Old Re bUc Surety Com en ~ My commfaatlon expires: ,~- ~~~~~ ~ S~~oB~ Page ~5•of 8 - hlexibla DeveltSptnent App!lcetion- City o! Clearwtdtar ORIGINAi. q1=FtDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AdtwNT: Harbour Estates, Li_C, Barry Greenfield, VP, 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444, 7ampg, FL 33607 (Names of aN vroaaAv owners on esd -- please PRINT fuu names) , ! . 'T'hat (t amnve aro) the owner(s) and retmrd title holder(s) of the ivUowlRq des4ribed property (address or general lotRation): 279 Windward Passage, Clearwater, Florida 337ti7 2. That this for which A request fora: describ~~raquest) ~ ~ ! ' " ` .r u a IJ ~~~ 8os# Uause docking faafity to replace existing facility ~1 !14 ~ _ __ _ _ ____ 3. That the undersigned (ittie/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: _....~ Bill Woods and/or Terri Skapik of Woods Consulting, Inc. as (ltlalihelr) agenE(s) to execute any pet~tons or other documents necessary to affect such petfteon; 4. That this atRdavlt hgffiAeett ezecutad to induce the Clty of Clearwater, ~lorlda to consider and act on the above dascrfbed property; fi. 1'hAt site visits to the.propetty are rteCeasary by City, representatives !n order to process this application and the owner authorizes City representeth~ee to Visit and photograph the pr+tlperty deaorlbed in this ajipllmtlon; ti. Tt:at (!!wa), the undersigned aulhartty, hereby catvfy that the tbrepoing >s true and correct. l~~(~ou~J 1^ COUNTY t7F Befo me tba untlereigned, an otf-aer duty Comr ~n~ ~"~' personally appears spores and sgys that hefAhe fully understands MY Comtxtisalan tarp~es: ~ J2 ` ^~ s~~rE o~ ~ro~~~, the laws off Stets of F~prids,-os this ~ ~ day of ~i.l1.J ~~r°fn~~~ ~~Y _ who having peen frret duly sworn Commission # OD2843i4 Expires 2/2!08 ljonded thiat OM Republic Surety parry St(~annrng Ltep8rtmenllApplicetron f'ornrsttlevelopmen= reviewlpaxlble tleyelopMent epp/ieetron 2003.rkC (6 Page 6 of 6 - Flexible Oevtinpment AppilcAtian- City of Clearndfar !~ GRIGBNA~~ ,~,r PROPOSED HARBOR WATCH MULTI-USE DOCKS """"""' COMMERCIAL / MULTI-USE DOCK CRITERIA S~? 0 8 2~ SECTION 3-601C.3.(a) through (g) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (~ (g) Use and Compatibility 4..:~'1 The docks will be for the sole use of the occupants of the 31 unit condominium community. The existing community, in the immediate vicinity, consists of the Island Estates Public Docks on the east and the Clearwater Marine Science Center on the west. To the north of the facility are condominiums that have docking facilities. The entire area is a boating community such that the proposed development is in harmony with the character of the area. Impacts on Existing Water Recreation Activities The dock is designed so as to not create any adverse impact on persons using the adjacent waterways for recreational or commercial purposes. The only boat traffic to in front of an to the east of the facility consists of boat traffic ingressing and egressing the Island Estates Public Docks (9 slips). The facility is designed so that the most waterward structure extends no more than 25% of the waterway width at this location, leaving 75% of the waterway open for the general boating public. Impacts to Navigation As noted in item (b) above, the dock does not create any hazard to navigation as the area waterward of the docks is open water. Impacts on Marine Environment A complete underwater benthic survey was performed to check for the presence of any valuable submerged resources. None were found. A bathymetry check was also performed and the depths of waterwere determined to be sufficient for the intended use, being greater than 3 feet at mean low water. The proposed development represents a net improvement to the marine environment in that the condominium developmentwith 8 wet slips is replacing a heavy maintenance boatyard that had 12 slips. In addition the boat yard had 7 mooring buoys, each of which could moor up to 5 vessels. Impacts on Water Quality As noted in (d) above, there is a net improvement in water quality given that 12 wet slips and up to 35 mooring slips, represented by the 7 anchoring buoys, are being replaced by 8 wet slips for use by recreational boaters. Also, and more importantly, the heavy maintenance boatyard is being replaced by a condominium. Any pollution that may have been discharged into the waters due to the maintenance activities will cease. Impacts on Natural Resources The dock is designed to avoid any impacts on existing resources, primarily existing seagrasses as discussed above. Impacts on Wetlands Habitat/Uplands As noted under (c) and (e) above, the docking facility should have no adverse impact on the adjacent waters or the uplands. ATTACHMENT B PROPOSED HARBOR WATCH MULTI-USE DOCKS 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8 FACT SHEET AND DIMENSIONAL CRITERIA SECTION 3-601 C.3.(h) Proposed Use: ORiGIN~]i The proposed use is a multi-use dock to provide 8 slips for the exclusive use of residents of the proposed 31 unit condominium development on the uplands. I~1 ~~ ~ Property Width: >' ~ +. ~.' ^`~ t #~ r~ ;,. The property width measured at the shoreline is 224.0' (MOL). 'i ~ ~.~ S~~ ~ $ F Setbacks: `".~r~: ~ ` ~ r~EVf I.pPMENT SVGS :i71! tai ti.::,~ ~. The property to the east is commercial, being the Island Way Grill, and also the locat~o~ri~ie 9 slip Island Estates Public Docks. The setback on the eat side is 1.5'. The required setback is 10% of the property width as measured at the shoreline or 22.4'. Actual setback as proposed is 1.5'. The property to the west is the Clearwater marine Science Center. The required setback is 10% of the property width as measured at the shoreline or 22.4'. Actual setback as proposed is 81.5'. Length: The docking facility extends a total of 92' from the seawall, which is less than 75% of the width of the waterfront (75% of the waterfront width is 168'). Width: The proposed width of the docking facility is 141.8', which is less than 75% of the width of the waterfront (75% of the waterfront width is 168'). Area: The total deck area of the proposed docks is 1,818 square feet. Width of Waterway: The 25% of width of waterway line is 99.5'. The proposed docks are landward of the 25% line. Docks Being Removed The docking facility supporting 12 boat slips located adjacent to the uplands are being removed as well as the 7 mooring buoys in the open water. The 7 mooring buoys can moor up to a total of 35 boats, 5 at each buoy. The square footage of deck area being removed is 1,325 sf. 9. Seagrass Survey A benthic survey of the site was pertormed by Woods Consulting, Inc. Under the direction of a Senior Hydrogeologist. No valuable submerged resources were found. • ~ ORIGIN;' BENTHIC SURVEY Harbour Watch Dock Prepared for: Harbour Watch, LLC c/o Joseph W. Gaynor, P.A. 302 Monroe Street Dunedin, Florida 34698 f~ L~l~."LUUI~ SEQ Q ~ 20~ pLEWNfNG 8 D~VELOPr~iElVT SvC ~~,..... C.iTY QE ~L.k'~A~~ Submitted by: Woods Consulting, Inc. April 1, 2005 Woods Consul~ina ~ Environmental Permitting Marine Engineering Hydrogeology Land Planning 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 April 1, 2005 Dunedin, FL 34698 Mr. Joseph Gaynor Harbour Watch, LLC 302 Monroe St. Dunedin, FL 34698 Re: Benthic Survey Report Dear Mr. Gaynor: ORIGINAL Woods Consulting, Inc. performed a Benthic Survey for the Harbour Watch Condominium site. Staff, underthe guidance of Sherry Bagley, Senior Permitting Specialist, performed the Benthic Survey on March 22, 2005. The area was swam to note the occurrence of sea grasses, worm tubules, fish, crabs, oysters, algaes,~etc. and to determine depths. The survey area exhibits a sand bottom with overlying silts. Barnacles (Balanomorpha) and oysters (Crassotrea virginica) were present along the existing seawall from the mean high water line to the bottom. Oysters were also attached to all the existing dock pilings. Assorted rubble was found on the bottom. If you have any questions, please call. My regards, ~~~~ Sherry Bagley Senior Permitting Specialist Woods Consulting, Inc. D ~ OMC~ SEP 0 81005 ~I U \\Woodsserver\projects\Harbour Watch Docks (115-04) (Gaynor)\Benthic report.wpd Office: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 Email:billwoodsC~3woodsconsulting.org ~» Woods Consult~n ~ Environme f ~ 9~ ~..~ f ./~ ~, 9' ,.../ f'/ ~, 5~ _, ~Y. ~:. k PLANNING 8 DEVEIOPMEN7 SVCS~ ~ ~~ 4 County Road 1, Suite 22 ~...__._ ~d11l.pE ~.>~AE~~YAI~A __.__ a Dunedin, FL 34698 "' ~-~. .~ n r ~~ ~ ~ ro nt ~ f WOODS CONSULTING 1714 COUNTY ROAD 1, SURE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 PH. 727 786-5747 FAX 727 766-7479 L' Z- 6' ~' -- l- Ql~:ajn 'ng Hydrogeology Land Planning /I X Imo' l Ire v I x C7 ~m ro ~'vl ~~ l t ~1~. 1 a ~~ ,1 ~ •~ I ..~ I ~- -E-- ~ ...~_....__.w.______.__,__ ~ { t ~ ~:n~ ~ .....,,.....~.._......_~.._.~w...~....«., ,; ` : . .} _... ._ .. .... ~ .,~..,>,,~. ,,,.~,.,r . -~ D ...._...~. ..,..._... .....~~. -- , i STORAGE ~i ;i ~ I STORAGE HARBOUR WATCH CONDOMINIUMS TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1794 BENTHIC & BATHYMETRY DATA WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 170 MHW +t.3' MLW -0.7' ''ELE-~fiTl'ONS REFERENCE NCl~O-19?9 SHEET 6 Office: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 Email:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org 42QQ W. Cypress Sfi., Suifie 444 Tampa, FL 33607 (~ TeIe: (813) X77-4444 ~ R ~ G ~ I V ~ ~., Fax: (813) 877-1222 September 1, 2005 Harbour Estates, L.L.C. 4200 W: Cypress Street, Suite 444. Tampa, FL 33607 To Whom It May Concern: Per the above referenced property, please be advised that Barry Greenfield, Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer, is hereby authorized to act on my behalf to sign any and all documents relating to State, County or other governing agencies. This shall include but not be limited to all water-related permits, leases or licenses related to the above referenced property. Sincerely. Jose J. au rst ~ ' Pr i nt ~ O ~~ ; AR/lip S~Q 0 8 ZOt~ P':.klv~:..~~~c ~ ~;c-~,;s.~r~ti:-NT SVGS STATE OF FLORIDA ~n ~' ~t.J.::?`u~1tF.E COUNTY OF ~~-c~n ~~flLt• Before me the undersigned, an office duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this 1~7 day of vEPTEm t3 L ~ 2005 personally appeared Joseph J. Rauenhorst, who having been first duly sworn deposes and says that he fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he has signed. Notary Public: ~~'" ~ ' Signature r~ OHNSON Notary Public: Typed or Printed Name ~~A~ENISE S J ~ DD409902 ~~,~p~ COMMISSION # EXPIRES: June 20, 2009 (40~ 398~ib3 FloAdR Notary $KVlcecorn My Commission Expires: ~~~ ~ ~-1 `~~? g Affidavit of Authorized Agent Name of Property owner; Narbour Estates, L.L.C. ®~ ~ ~ ~ (~ 0 200 W Cypress St., Suite ~a i V Tampa, FL 33607 1. That we the owner and record title holder of the following property 279 Windward Pass cue Cle nivater FL 33767 2. That this property constitutes the property forwhich permit application(s) and request(s) are being made. 3. The undersigned has appointed and does appoint Woods Consulting, Inc, as their agents to execute petitions, permit applications, ar other documents as necessary for permitting. They are also guthorized to represent us as our agents at any required public hearings. 4. This affidavit has been executed to induca the various regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over. such matters to consider and act on the above described property. 5- That we the undersigned authority, hereby, certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Property Owner (Signature) Property Owner (Print): B ry Green eld Title: Date: ~ l~/os STATE OF FLORIDA County ohs ~j`/~S~~FOG~(l~-~ r't?~r Before the undersigned, an office duly commissioned by the laws of the fate o Florida, on this i Sf day of D~/Y(,~,~ , 2005, personally appeared N~ rYiC~~r't~j'P ~ who having been first duly sworn deposes and says that he fully under tands the contents of the affidavit that he has signed. ,t / ~ /( ~ Notary Public ,~LC~~[G•~ ~/ , (~.~ ~'C../y ",r~,~"."ti:;~k I.AURAJ.COPLON t "'-~ j~° ais Commission # DD284314 i'' '9 Expires 2/2/08 My Commission Expires: _ °~~/~-1(.~~ '''~; ,~;~~ OldRepublcesureyCompany I#: 2005224344 BK: 14371 P~728, 06/09/2005 at 04:17 PM, ~ORDING 5 PAGES $44.00 KEN BURKE, CLERK O COURT PINELLAS COUNTY, FL BY DEPUTY CLERK: CLKDM82 . •,. ., ~ ' `•;k i ' !'; 4, ,.,' Prepared by: Investors Realt~,~'~~leCompany, LLC Return to: Investors Realty,~~i~I~;CtSmpany, LLC Attn: Thomas 1lgcbaL~hlin 304 Monroe Stree't~°•'~ Dunedin,F~_:3~16~8, Pazcel ID # 08/29/IS/a~3$'0/003/0050 ` 141,,' ~ .. ,. ~. ;~ ~~~- SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED i 't1, '.,M ORIGINAi- KEN BURKE, CLERK OF COURT PINEL.LAS COUNTY FLARIDA INS?`# 200620660106/27/2006 at 02:23 PM OFF REC BK: 14343 PG: 2061-2064 DocType:DEED RECORDING: =36.60 • D DOC STAMP: 521000.00 I$:'INDENTURE made as of the 23`~ day of May, 2005, by and between Quality Boats of Clearwat~r'~Iric., a Florida corporation ("Grantor"), whose address is 235 Windward Passage, Clearui%~~er;;Florida 33767, for and in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and val~able`'~bnsiderations in hand paid, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, barg~itls;~sells, aliens, remises, releases and conveys unto Harbour Estates, L.L.C., a Delaware ,1%fnifed liability company ("Grantee") whose address is 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444, °~~~~iripa, Florida 33607, the following described real property in the County of Pinellas, State of ;.~iprida, to-wit: { ; ~..,. See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. Subject to the matters set for on Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof TOGETHER with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances, with every privilege, right, title, interest and estate, reversion, remainder and easement thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same in fee simple forever. And the Grantor does hereby covenant that Grantor does fully warrant the title to the above described real estate so hereby conveyed and will defend the same against the lawful claims, arising out of events occurring prior to the recording of this Deed, of all persons claiming by, through or under the Grantor, but against none other. This Special Warranty Deed is being re-recorded to correct Exhibit A. ~ (~G ~ SFp 0 ~ 200 ~ 'i ~-~qr;: ;:, g per" ; ;~~ ~-zic.p.~.~y • PINELLAS COUNTY FL OFF. REC. 14371 PG 1729 t:`s~~.~, O R ~ G I N~, ,~ ~ ,.. r 4',r tt IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the~Cicantor aforesaid has set its hand and seal as of the a-S~ day of May, 2005. %'~ ~~ `'';;' , ti ;~•'! WITNESSES: ~.~` ° ;% Quality Boats of Clearwater, Inc. , a Florida corporation '~. N Name• ~ ' ~f~i~~ ~tle: CEo ~ ; k•4..' ;(/! ' C Y J~rIL~.(/L ':p'~e"'i1 - r"~ riir.- ~c:w~•,.is..~.. u ~ Name• A •O~l~4CZ~J D ~` ..4 i. a~~, ~'r ~~~ ~~~. SF~ 0 8 2~5 .,,« ; ;' -; <mR~`,~, ' PLANN~IiN~G &~Ep~EIOPME - ~AFiYYAI7 c:; ~~T13TE OF FLORIDA ;~;'~ . ,~bUNTY OF PINELLAS '~...,- ~ Tie foregoing instnunent was acknowledged before me this ~~ day of May, 2005, by DANIEL. M BAIR the -~.$a _ Of 1)IIAi.TTV RAATS (1F ('T.F.ARwATF~•~ TNn ~T~Iley fife per$Onal]3r knOWn t0 me or have produced as identification and did (did not) take an oath. My Commission Expires: /) Name: Kathleen A. O'Hearn Notary Public "t16_ KlthbenA.O'Heam F My Commlttlon 00224974 ~o-w~ Explret July 20, 2007 2 PINELLAS COUNTY FL OFF. REC. 14371 PG 1730 ,% i t, ~, ... ,. •t. ~•; ~ ~•.; 4, °~ ~C•~[R[Crr"1 tom' i ,'+:.w ORIGINAi. ma or lat thereof record@d in~Plat Book 51, Pa a 34, of the Public Rec Y,-~ P p g ounty, Florida. .. -,~; TOGETHER W `~'• save easement created by Reciprocal Easements and Maintenance Agreement •.'~ iti ~'~ ' ,i j ~,"i :, ` ~'_~, ~ ;,; '~•. ~. ~. ,, 'Le.~, ^ti.} ~ ~'.~ .. ''~.., '" •> ,,ti. w~f •. ' '``,` 'S. (~ ~'~?w 1 ~ ~.,, e' ~F~ 0 ~ ~ . t'LANN^^I'N'G/&/~~~~D-EVEtOp~9tcdTSVC~ PINELLAS COUNTY FL OFF. REC. 14371 PG 1731 '~~~ ,... '',. .v ~~~~~ DR~G~N ~~~ ~ ~. ;~'~~`~ Exhibit "A" r k.~ ' ~'. The West 50 feet gfT~ts~~sne (1) and four (4) and all of Lot 5, Block C, ISLAND ESTATES OF Ci~LA~~VATER, UNIT FIVE, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book S1, Page~34, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. ~~ :,,` .` .. ,~, `~ 4,` (~~'` 4 i'1 ~~ ~r!~~~~J `. ~, .` .y ~1. ~ }/~ i ' S j~•. f. ., <, ~4~ ... t. i1 ~„ e,4 ti^ !L ~'` ~~`,~y :o is U U I.S ! PIANNlNG & DEVEIOPM~NT SVCS~ }PINELLAS COUNTY FL OFF. REC.~C 14371 PG 1732 ~~ :~ 4 ,., `~q. Z .. ..fit..; 1 ~ /'''~ "ti`' ® ~ ~ V i ~. ~ ~ ~ ~7 J ~'`~ ~'~ Exhibit "B" :•, F' . ~; '~ .? Taxes and assessments for`the•~ear 2005 and subsequent years. ~~. ; :, Restrictions, conditioirs,'Yeservations, easements, and other matters contained on the Plat of ISLAND ESTATES s~ ,~~, ~~• OF CLEARWA,'FERt'L7NIT FIVE, as recorded in Plat Book 51, Page 34 and in O.R. Book 586, Page 235. .~~ . ;, ~'~' { • ., ; ,~ . Restriction~'e~?nt~,ried in Deed recorded in O.R. Book 2308, Page 44. '~ ` '1''' ZOSO ' ~%-•~; Reciprocal"•3~ase'ments and Maintenance Agreement recorded in O. R. Boolcl~,~-age _ of the Public,-~eebr¢s of Pinellas County, Florida. v `~, ~~'~ .~ i r <~ t4a,, , p. • .,. a .tt ..," L h.~ .~•, ~l. +.. .. ~~.,. V IJ t_J 1~ I 8 DEVE~UP~,iI~N f S1 QE ~.~At?1N~+S~ - i ~ ~ ~ ,I ., ~ I ,b \ oa I 1 ~ I `~ - , t r I I " „~, ,o,•~ I ~ ~, y .~ i mioe ~ ~ 1 ~ LOT 6~ ea® v~ J \ motes \ ;;.a ' !€ ,~ * '~ '~ ' a\ J ham.. ~.."" © ~ '~.'., ,.:',~'+':\~', ~ • ,a ® r~ ` D ESTATES QF I \ ^'. ~ ~;`~'~ w ~/ a-*y ~Y ,ti. r ~ ~. I ~ 1 D `~ may, ` d \ ~ ~-J ~Y'' i ~ _ I rMS Un T 9 /J' }tiQp ,~ _ 11 I I ~~rr ~ ~ I \ O, ~~ ti st~~~~ F /~ Q Y i ~~~ ` I I .,:_„ C ~ I r ' r I w pS • ~ ~~iwi~o ~ ~ ,~T1 I •- I 1 , G ,:, _ ,~ , _ .~ °. 4 a~• , I ~ ~ - - ,,.. ~ wep ~~ .. .;~, • r s _ -- r,.e..n, ~ r ' \\ I i ° '' _ • ..ter rr ~ + •~~ \` 'SS I I ,~ ~ ~ r V sn I f'o rr s .+ / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' I I \ ' \ \ `` --_~c~~~ I ~ ISLAND EST TES OF ~.e.o \a,~ I I CLEARWATE UNIT 5 ~ ~ li P851, IG34 \ //~ ! io~i . FRDNT~GE SEC710N A I a . } i i \ I I t~ \ ~O °` ~ '~' FLORIDA DESIGN CONSULTANTS, IN ~p MAReoua wATp1, uc ~~ FIARBOUR WATCH CONDOMINIUMS ~ wWO~nrtwe~ aw~cmn ~ nwwm zal or ur ow~c anc m nn 'y.: j..'C~"~a;'S ~wlo° naoA smo SITE PLAN " 3 n~oc fm) a~~wo rwr (~ ew-ww uwr~ q. 10 SCALE: 1"=100' EXHIBIT A Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ OPPOSITE SHORELINE OCATION OF 7 MOORING BUOYS SUPPORTING UP TO 5 VESSELS EACH, FOR A TOTAL OF 35 WET SLIPS AVAILABLE. ORI~~N~ ~~ CLEARWATER MARINE SCIENCE CENTER . ~ ~ e e ,~ ., o 0 _ 0~o e o o l I I I I .,,,.., I .«~ ... I ~ ~E 9 I I ~ ~ ~ 0 0~^ ~ ~~ t i I I o^ ~ 4y . I ~ WOODS CONSULTIN HARBOUR WATCH G INC . TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 ~7~a couNrr Bono ~, surtE 22 EXISTING MOORING- AREAS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEDIN FL 34698 PH. 727 788-5747 ~ MHyy +1.3' MLW -0.7' FAX ~727 786-7479 "ELEl64770NS REFERENCE N6l~D-1929 SHORELINE Engineers Seol . ~ * _. No. 75586 • STATE OF ~••. ~gt10P •~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~, I . ~ i szo cnAttAUwooo owve CIURWAttR FLORIDA 99741 '~~` ~L< ~~,I j 7, 1 ~27 909 90 ~'~ SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) J t 1 1 ' ' ~1 ~ „i- - 1I _ ,` ~ ~, ~ ~ _ ~ S • ~ -y ~ ~ ?. ~ ~4 51 ', ~ 1 ~~ f 4.. J~ ~ • 1 r f.. .y~ ~ ` • ~ ~ I CLEARWATE ~~ 1 "_ ' ~`~ ~ ` ~" r " E~2 SCIENCE ~ 1 ^- * '1,1 ~ ` 4 1- f ~ - f- HARBOUR WAT~t~ CQNDO~- ,~`~~ :PUBLIC OCK - - 279 WINDWARD PA$S~GE ,~' FL~`3~37fi~'~ ~ r ~ ~ CLEARWATER , ~ , (FORMERLY ROSS YACH ) .,.. ~,~~ ~` f _,.,. •t ._ ~ _~ti ,, ~" .} ~y ~,. .. i ~~ ~~L ,4l \ • .~t ~ ~` , •~ 1 4. ~~. ~ ~1~ti ~' 1 WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 LOCATION MAP WATERWAY WIDTH 400 ' t7ta courrrr Roan t, surtE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224 HUN(727 7ss sia7 MHyy +t.3' MLyy -0.7' Fax (727 7ss-7a7s "ELEIiAT/ONS REFERENCE NGl~D-1929 SHEET ~ SHORELINE Engineers Seal ,-.._ it ' -;-.` ``` ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ i i ii ~ y [ ~ r,, t~~,~~~ c- :~~~ SVGS ~~ • ~ • ~ ` 9~ _ ~ ~. N I n 2~ 'V fATEAUWOOD DRIVE 'S'~ ~ ~ .` 1520 CI ~~~ ~ ` 4 ~ ~~ CLEARWATER. FLORIDA 33764 a/ ~~ ~ 1 ! e A, ~ TEL: (727) 580434 I ~` ` fAX: (727) 530-3790 41° .. ~ ;4 SCALE: 1 "=100' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) I, ~, i~~ .~:,__ _ ~ ~~_ '~ _~4(~w rte' ~r ~wr- ,'A »~ ~~^ ~~ t I r , ~ ~ <~ ! a,l D -- ~ ~ i z I ~*, _ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I~ • i _ ~ "~ ~ ~f i ~ ,~ - ~ ` {;, '.,~~ r' . i ;- .~ J ~ ~ •: `~ s J .a~ - a... WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 EXISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 4~ t7ta couNrr RonD t, surrE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEDIN FL 34698 W/ AERIAL MHyy +1.3' M~yy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 F,~,x (7z7) 7es-7479 "ELEl64T/ONS REFERENCE NG!?7-1929 SHEET ? SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ' D r ~'-~ r tV ,-~i~,, i ~ ~ •• ~ /~ r^ R , ~ • '~ ~L.Alva"x; 8 DE1IEl.~F~.. `.:Y 5,~~ ~ _ r .,: s+ l T ~ ` :, •. ~~ . ~ • .s:ocnnrenuwor r, rrzi:e // ~ ~ l 1 ! ~~ 1 A ~ ~ • rqi i-`z~i ssos~eo -- ~- ~-- - SCALE: 1"=100' MULTI-USE DOCK :~~ .~ i .I r ,~'-_ Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) :: ~~ ~_ _ o e o ~~ ~ o u o "tf~,-t ii ~ ° i di .. ; ~I ~:: a '~~ I!~ ~. .wl~ ~.. 9 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ I ~~ ~ ~~ m 3.&# ._ ... . _.. m WOODS CONSULTING INC. _ HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 PROPOSED DOCKS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 t7ta couNly RonD t, surrE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEDIN FL 34698 W/ AERIAL MHyy +1.3' M~yy -0.7' PH. (7275 786-5747 Fnx (727) 7as-7479 "ELEI%4 T/OrVS REFERENCE NGI~D-1929 SHEET 3 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal { ~ ~\ $ '~~ t ,~ PLANNING ~ DEVELOPMtNT SVCS ., t ~n ~i T~ • I ~ ~ i ~~ • ~ ~ A, ~ ~ f',.. i ~'•• .m.•• ~ '/ I ~ i 5~0 CMATUUV.1"JOD DRJVf ~.~ ~' ~~ C.EAVWATER RpVDA 33>Gd 1 1 1 17 \ `A*' (>2>) 530-3>90 1 i ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ t l~ E~•~ 1 l Y SCALE: 1"=40' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ z m ° l to m ~~ I o m ~p ~ I r z ~-EMISTI , ";C3CK m ~~~ Im ° ~ 6 ~k:X ' :NG It[I[:K ~s ~-~y ~.~ ~. y b I XISTING I DOCK O O ~ •• `i i ~' ~ ` . ~ I v i - P° ~ ~' 6 ~4. ~ ~ °6 ~ ag o. Q3 ~ytp~ v ~ ~t9 i r6 ~ r ,s Y•~. ~ ~i~6 S b ~ O~ °; a 3 • °P' PLC ~+ ~ ~ 's i~4y ~ °6 ~ ~b r z *;~ µ 6 ~ WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 XISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' rna couNrr RoAO t, suITE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 ~ W PROPOSED OVERLAI WATERFRONT WIDTH D MHW +,.3~ MLW _p,7' PH, (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 "ELEli.4TIONS REFERENCE NGliO-1929 SHEET 4 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ~ ~ " ; '~ ~~iY7 O ~ ~ • ~ . ~~~ ~G ~ ~ +~ .. "• * , • ~r: , +. • ' ..... _ . ~ . ; ,.. '~'r° _ ~ ~ ~ ~~T T .~ i. • -- ~f •. ~ .• ~ i i • I ` /~ ~ ~r ~ ~ ~' `~ 15200FIATEAUW000 DRIVE CIfARWATER, FLORIDA 33764 '''tI ~ ``` • ' 1 FAY: (727)5303790 SCALE: 1"=50' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ CI m I ~ ~ 7 ~ I $I CLEARWATER CAUSEWAY(P) m ~~ ~ i m Im • • • I XISTING DICK • O O O O O O O O O ~O • • iY,^~ ______________ ___ unm n _ ~' ~Z O ~ O ¢ A~ ^~ ~ • D-1 m n ~ m A ~ Z l /I =a o ~ ~~ SI 00go ~ B . . _._ .._ _._ ~ Z ~D c µ e $ m G7 " Wcm ~ z ~ o f I ~ ~ / I ~, I $ ~ r m O ~ I iF p~ s ~ / I ~ ~ I I ogj I ~ I "s O~ = I Y '^ D _ - - - y ~ ,~ . WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 188 PROPOSED DOCKS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' ~7~a couNrr ROAD ~, suITE 2z DUNEDIN FL 34698 W/ SITE PLAN WATERFRONT WIDTH MHW +1.3' M~yy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 *ELElG4770NS REFERENCE NGl/0-1929 SHEET 5 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal \.'.J t ~ ~ lJ ~ \ r t ~I \\ ~~i ) ~ ~ I ~~ ii . \ 1 / ~~ / '/ S~' O ~i ~ a. ' `~~~~~~`/~ ~ I.VM~ ~i ... •~ ~~.' ~ 5 ;' ~ 1'1 _- _ sa, ,' ~~~ ~~•~ei~~~~ ~ I \ ~ ! \ ~ „} / ~ 1520 OHATEAUWOOD DRIVE ~ ~~ f ~, ~ ,` OLEARWATER. FLOR10A 33764 7 0 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ `` / 1 fAX: (727) 530 3 9 SCALE: 1 "=30' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ SEE SHEET 8 F^R ("~ ~ n CR^SS-SECTI^ N ~ ~ ~ 1.,,! 'v I ~ ~~ xl z~ Iv m~ 25% LINE ~v I v ~ I r ~ 20 20.5 O 20.5 20,5 20.5 20.5 m ~ A I 46,0- ~r r o z l N m 0 N o IZ N m I 18,0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 o I 4.0 0 ~ 4,0 \°0 4.0 o 0 5,0 \o ro l0 0 ro 0 oo 15.5 c~ o,N~~o;3.0 o I ~ 24.0 6.0'x8,0' PLA 141.8 I 4.0'x22.0' RAMP - ~D WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 PROPOSED DOCK DETAIL WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' ~7ia couNTr RoAO i. suRE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 (727 786-5747 PH MHW +1.3' MLW -D.7' . FAX (727) 786-7479 '"ELEV,4TIONS REFERENCE NGl~O-1929 SHEET 6 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal `~~-~i~i ... .,~,~ , w~..: .. .,. ,,. Q~ t; . r . - ;~,.~ ~.~. rx •~ S *' ~ ~ ~ ~ • .• ` ' . ~~ ...:.~r \. \ ~' ` ~ 1520 GHATEALIWOOD DRIVE ''~~ 4~ r ~~~ ` IEARWATER. FLORIDA 33764 \ ~ ~ ~{ ~ - ~ ~ TEL: (727) 580-4341 ' ~ ~ ~ FAX: (7 271 5 30-3790 ~P1t/19Afl A A SCALE: 1 "=30' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) 1 .V A~ ± N tb ± ~ O N I ~ + + V ~, I + ± ~ ~ + I I `'' ov, I ,~ ~ ± ~ ~ + .~ v I I ,tn + I+ I ~' N I V V ~ •~ O W O I I + I v + ~ I `" I + ~ + + + ~ I I °' + + I I V .V ,V ,OD .V ± N ~ I 1 au I V V V I cn v {p ,+ ' I' f00 I N ' F' ~ I I I V a+ .~ I "~ V v V W I, N ± N I v + I 1 '~- -~ ± I w+ o I ~ I V± O '~- v . Irn .o ± I ~,° I '± O '~ V A I o or I 1 N ..'" T W ± O t0 .;,-i- O W + W 'i 'i" V O V 1 ( O a ~ V .L N 00 ~- t' ~ ..F # I I V ~ ~ •v ~I ~ 'i- w 2 ~ o : '+'~ + t ,w v 1 + ,V +r° ~ V '~- v V ..F '~ ,v a I I I •N 1-~- o, o, Z I A W '~'~-I ~ ~1 A A W O I N I ~ O I~ ~ ~ ~ A pi ~ ± ~ O I ,V .V ~ ~ ~ ,N ~ -~ 1 ~ j . •`) ~ ~ f- ,#. I - f- in V - a f}'w o' -~- o ~ ~ I 1 ~ ~ ..F v v o to 'I- I jV I rn~~ ou~~ I , o ;p A rn -i- -}- cn m+ I XISTING DDCK j I rn I ~ pp V + ~ '+ .N j V "~' ~ a o~ o ~ - - I I ~ O O O O v ~~ I 3.0' MLW a O . . ,rn ,± ~ ,., ~ o, cn o I A ~ I i„ o ~ cn ± + ~ ~ A ,p I V + I Lb N ~, I ~. N (l~ W I '{' cD N 1 ~ 1 N W N ~ ~ I I O V O rT p'~ 4i ;p O A ~ O W 8 tWD (Ali ~ W _A N W N O Owi V WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TQTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 BATHYMETRY DATA WATERWAY WIDTH 400' 224' t7ta couNrr ROAD t, surtE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 WATERFRONT WIDTH MHyy +1.3' MLW -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 *ELEliATIONS REFERENCE NGl/0-1929 SHEET SHORELINE Engineer's Seal , ~-, O ' ~ "~~~~ I ~ ~r i ` Q~il ,tiv ~ ~ ~ . i ~• ` ' 5~ _ p ~ 2~~3 ~; ~'aa~ ~~ { _~ . :1 ~~nR .. ~ _ .. .,, ~ • i ~ i ^J 4 i S` i ~iJ~ ~~~~~~~ ~ ~I~ ~ U`.,~~A'y, `~~ i s2o cnarenuwooo orwe .,,+~ ~ 4 `~ CIfARWA(727) SBO-4343764 ' ~. ('' " ` PW(: (727) 530-3790 SCALE: 1"=10' MULTI-USE DOCK Appiicotion # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ " ' ~ ~ ~ ~~ SEE SHEET 6 F^R CR^SS-SECTION LOCATI^N ELEVATI^N. MAX, 10.0' NGVD-29 4,0' X 2z.0' RAMP 36,0 8.0 6,0 WITH RECAP-ELEV,=5.4' EXISTING ELEV.=4.4' +1.3' MHW - ,3. APPROXIMATE B^TT^M ~ f -0,7' MLW 8' TIP PILING 2.5 C.C.A, RET, SET BUTT D^WN, 8.0' PENETRATI^N, 6.0' AT WALL, AND 10,0' MIN, FOR TIE PILES CROSS-SECTION A- A' WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TQTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' ilia couNrr Bono ~, sunE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 WATERFRONT WIDTH MfjW +1.3' MLyy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 7es-7a7s "ELEl~,4770NS REFERENCE NGliO-1929 SHEET 8 SHORELINE Engineer's Seol - ~ ~ r-r. r1 (~ j' . F\ ,.• ~ ~~4 . 5 0 ~ ~?~~ ' f~ Ndb 5s ~ :• _ ` .: ,~ •~ :: •• ' % ~ ~ ,n~~, ` ~, 1520 CMATEAIPNOOD DRIVE ~ y ll Ik ~ L ~ ~, OLEARWATER. FLORIDA 33764 ~~ l , , ~ TESL: (727) 530-3790 SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) POLYETHYLENE TUB FLOATING SYSTEMS LENGTH - 45' MA% ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n, ~ ~j S ~~' kQ' ~U ~~ 2 z 2 7WE RDIDED DRgW AT f~ 6 DOq( B ~ 7,{~ {40 '- ~ T 1 A A B • CNANIlEL . TYP x-NDR P0.YETNYLENE nn>s salDLr PDlED VITN TYP CLEAT LDCATIQ/ PDLYY,YRENE DEARS PLAN VIEW ~ aoLLEa PDT °~ N^TE~ ALL C^NSTRUCTI^N T^ ~.• RAZ ~°°`~' ~~ ALTEDlNTE DELXING ~"' Nt PER STRDiGER RIDDED DECKIG PER 10 D MEET OR EXCEED REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN n ~~L SECTIONS 166-C332, 33, & P . 334) OF THE PINELLAS C^UNTY . %~,„, 'YP"A` WATER AND NAVIGATI^N C^NTR^L AUTH^RITY PDIYETNYLENE TU-S ParsrYaENE DEADD mL'°`Y """ "'" REGULATIONS MANUAL SECTI ^ N A - A WIDTH >P % 3 CLEAT 2 z E TLDIE RWDED DECKING ~. CNANN0. V[ vO1N DYDI Y 2zDPT V® IIDPER 3/B' SS LILTS VITN LDCIC NUT AND /EHDER VASIQK 3/D' SS. 7LT t /' 0.C. PDLYETNriE1E 71AS 50.1DLY PILLED VITN PDLYSTYRENE DEARS SECTI^N B-B HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL S QUARE FEET 1818 WOODS CONSULTING INC. FLOATING DOCK DETAILS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 1714 CR1, SUITE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224 MHW +1'3 MLW -o•~ DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34698 9 PH. (727) 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 SHEET SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ("~ (~ (~ t ~J' L~ ~ 1~ vyy ~ \~ / ' • ~ ~ • ~ 5G~ Q ~ ~ ~ '~ • ~IG & DEL'_,L>- .,.~!~rt 5VC5 I PLAAIN . _ : ~io- : ^ ' . ~ //// ~ /~~ (1 , . 1~`A \\ 1520 CIIATEALWOOD DRIVE ~ } ` CIPPRWATER, FLORIDA 33764 ' S / ' ` < ` TEL: (727) SBOi341 ' 1 , , FAX: (/27) 530-3790 SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) RIDDED GUSSET e x 3 % 1/e TusES ARIES - IB' AND / RDD TYPICAL AT EACH VF-TIGL PRST - /B' ANO LP 2-1/e' SCHD /0 PIPE OTHER S1ZES ARE AVAILABLE -1 RUH RAIL ~ 2 X 2 X 3/16 TUBES, ~ ~ ~~~ DESIGNS 1 , = = ~ LDNGITUDDLLL J vIDTNS GREATER THAN / i'EET Oq a, W W q a~ q Y W J .K. 11 A=A RAID LIP vI7N UGNT KNI1R1. ~~D ~"'°"` PLAN VIEW A"~ S ELEVATI^N '~~~ ales' LI' PLATE V/NQJ-SKID TAPE - 18' LRJG 3/1 % 3 ~ DAR 1/e' DIA ^L~ RoD z-vr 0 x r UNMV ROD UHMV R0.LER cwER a EACH TREAD PLATE END DETAIL 2-1/e' SLNO 10 PIPE ALT. ADA GRADRAILS RuDRAIL - e X 2 X 3/16 TUBES 34' VIDTN { RIDDED DECKING ~-3' 'E' CHANIEL~ TP- e % 3 % 1/9 TUDE e X 3 % 1/e TUBE IDI VIDTNS > /' SECTI^N A - A s 'E' cIwNNEL A L1GNr DR HEAVY IS' ORIGIN~,.I 3/16' 1-1/r SERRATIONS E D VIE ~ sI nEm 1-3/16' /' ALTERNATE GRATING DETAIL z x e TUBE BRACKET AP BACK 10 PIPE GRABRAIL DETAIL 8be5 10.311 1N' ~~ 59.170 DID L373 RIBBED DECKING war xNUd TD Aw rvavlmauR TD Raba 9' RIDBED DECKDiG 7'X3' RIDDED ANGLE H1NGE POCKET 3' i' LTIANEL 1/Y X 1' DAR MAY DE ADDED SH^RE SIDE HINGE DETAIL 3/6' SS BDLT 1-1/e' SCND DO PD'E ------------ -------- yr i» SCND 10 PIPE - 1' LONG HINGE PIN -GANGWAYS HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 WOODS CONSULTING INC. FLOATING DOCK DETAILS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 1714 CR1, SUITE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224 DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34698 MHW +1.3 MLW -0•~ PH. (727) 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 SHEET 10 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ,- ~ / >" ~ .t.• VVV ~L /r~~ ~ `fir , v ,~ R ' =f~~ e • " ~ ~ ~ ~= ~~ . .. ' •• ~ ••. ' . /// ' ~; /I ` ,. ; .~ `~` 1520 CMATEAUWCUD DPJVE ~ ( ~ ~ ` `~ TREI:A(727) 58p-4343764 1 ~ ` FA%: (727)530-3790 1 1/r TUBE O GRADRAA. GRADRAA TO VR 70 2 1/e' $CHD A7 ENDS SCALE: 1"=40' MULTI-USE DOCK Appli cation # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ I I I I I WEIGHED TURBIDITY CURTAINS I SEE SHEET 12 FOR DETAILS I PROJECT AREA=0.25 ACRES I ~I I~ ml t AI o I O m I~ I~ f-E.XISTtu T1~I::K IZ m v, I 0 y h"~-x '~`~' DU~~ ~ y ~~~ ~. y y I XISTING I DOCK O O ~i llJ ~ e O ~ a 0 ~ ~ Tll~d:; I °y • ~O ° `3 I O O . iV~ I ~. ~~,~ fir, 3 ~ 7 I P . ~. b . 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,I b5 ~ `-,` ~ y :, ~3'' 6 +)~ ~ ~ v d rq~s .. °~ y •b ~+ :. ebb °r vb -w-y'-- *6-w---- K+-----w-----w- i•-- w~~v ~'w~~}4C~rb---w • e', ~ yy RS y qp V ~ 'ri p~Qa Pb P3 Vi t~~~ y ~6 ~ ~ / • • i V py Pb ~~;4 ~ ~i~6 v P ~L ~A p~ a; v; ob ~ b ~ ~ ~ ; i ~ `~ m Q6 ~, `b t~yPe y ~ °4 0 m H' 4b~ I G WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TQTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 ~7ia couNtY RonD ~. suITE 22 TURBIDITY CURTAIN LOCATION S WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEDIN FL 34698 PH. (727 786-5747 " MHyy +1.3' MLyy -0.7' 11 FAX (727) 78s-7a7s ELElG4770NS REFERENCE NGl/0-1929 SHEET SHORELINE Engineer's Seal `~~-rli~~~~~ ' ~ a, r ~~~,~~/// I o c~ c~.~ v a .~ . ~ ~~.. - ~ ~ ~ ~ _ LANNING & DEVELOPMENTSVCS _ N i ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ; ,~ . . ~ ~ ¢~~~ ~~~~, ' ~ ' ` ~ ~ ~ 1520 GFIATEAUWOOD DRIVE / ~ . /' 1 , I ~ ``~ QEAR`ATE2 )580-0343]64 ' ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ` FAX: (]2]) 530-3790 SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application - # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) C~R~~~N~i~ WEIGHED TURBIDITY CURTAINS SEE SHEET 11 FOR LOCATION WATER LEVEL CONNECTING R^DS FLOAT LAMINATED SEA FL^^R VINYL-P^LYE STE LENGTH AS REQUIRED FABRIC CHAIN WEIGHTE TYPICAL FLOATING TURBITY CURTAINS (DESIGN BY AER-FLO INC.) WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 TURBIDITY CURTAIN WATERWAY WIDTH 400' 224' ~7~a couNn Rona ~, sutrE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 STANDARD DETAILS WATERFRONT WIDTH MHW +,.3~ MLW _p,7~ PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 ''ELElG4T/ONS REFERENCE N61i0-1929 SHEET 12 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal •w- ~,., ~ • PUWN/~I~N/'G~&~~D/E'~VEI~~.}r=i~Y;;-~°di~VCB \Al~ I ~.NS" 41 ""4 il l ~~": ~ ~ ~wt r• •. %~ '•. f'~ ~ \ ~ ~^'• ~ ..~.,.. +e4 ~ ] t . ~ _ ~ `(~ J n, ~ `' `~\ ` QEARWATER FLORIDA 337V64 ' ` ~ , ` , ' ~-/) ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ` TEL: 0727) SAO-4341 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` FAX: (727) 530-3790 ~~~ . ORIGINAL 3~Q~ G FLD2005-09093 279 WINDWARD PSG Date Received: 09/08/2005 HARBOR WATCH CONDO DOCKS D ZONING DISTRICT: C LAND USE : C G s~~ o ~ goo, ATLAS PAGE: 267B PLANNER OF RECORD: NOT ENTERED CLWCoverSheet MEMORANDUM TO: File ~`,~ I FROM: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III ~ V@' DATE: April 22, 2010 This case has been on hold, needing to go back to the CDB, since 2008. This proposal is not going anyplace. Staff is changing its status to WITHDRAWN. a ~ , ~, Page 1 of 2 • • Wells, Wayne From:. bwoodsconsulting@aol.com Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 11:44 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: pattyconsoli@woodsconsulting.org Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Wayne, I need to forward your email to my client, Joe Gaynor, and get his input. I am on vacation but have my laptop so I will forward your email now. I will get back with you as soon as Joe advises me. My regards, Bill Woods Patti: Pl forward this email to Joe Gaynor and also update PTS. Tx bill File themaiil under Habor Watch. -----Original Message----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com To: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: michael.delk@MyClearwater.com; Gina.Clayton@myClearwater.com; Leslie.Dougall- Sides@myClearwater. com Sent: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 11:26 am Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Joe/Bill - The above referenced Flexible Development (FLD) application was filed September 8, 2005, to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601. This application has been on five Community Development Board (CDB) agendas in 2006, with the last meeting on July 18, 2006. At all of these CDB meetings the FLD application was continued in an effort to address legal issues of the proposed docks and the submerged land issues. On May 27, 2008, an Amended Final Summary Judgment was signed by Judge Khouzam estopping the City from requiring a referendum under our Charter for the rebuilding of the docks at the subject property, removing the main legal issue. This FLD application was for the construction of a multi-use dock for eight boat slips in conjunction with an attached dwelling (condominium) project on the upland (Harbour Watch Condominiums) (Case No. FLD2004-06042). Applications for that approved, upland condominium project were submitted for building permits to construct the 31-unit building under BCP2005-02671 (site improvements), BCP2005-09475 (foundation only) and BCP2005-09829 (building). However, all of these building permits have been now been voided by Development Services due to a lack of response to comments. The voiding of the upland permits voids the FLD approval for the upland project. As such, the current proposed dock, as an accessory use to the upland attached dwelling (condominium) project, can no longer be processed for such in its 6/16/2008 • Page 2 of 2 present form. An alternative, should you desire to continue to pursue the construction of the dock, is to amend the request to be a principal use of "marina facilities". Compliance with all requirements for a "marina" would then be applicable, including the provision of off-street parking. Should this option be desired, an amended application (and application material) would need to be submitted and additional DRC review would be required. Given these circumstances, could you bring me up to speed with your current intentions regarding this dock application? Alternately, you could withdraw the FLD application from further review by sending me a letter for such. Thanks. Wayne M. Wells, AICP Planner III City of Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756-5520 Phone: 727-562-4504 Fax: 727-562-4865 Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news, & more! 6/16/2008 r • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 11:27 AM To: Joseph W. Gaynor (E-mail); Bill Woods (E-mail) Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Joe/Bill - The above referenced Flexible Development (FLD) application was filed September 8,.2005, to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601. This application has been on five. Community Development Board (CDB) agendas in 2006, with the last meeting on July 18, 2006. At all of these CDB meetings the FLD application was continued in an effort to address legal issues of the proposed docks and the submerged land issues.. Ori May 27, 2008, an Amended Final Summary Judgment was signed by Judge Khouzam estopping the City from requiring a referendum under our Charter for the rebuilding of the docks at the subject property, removing the main legal issue. This FLD application was for the construction of a multi-use dock for eight boat slips in conjunction with an attached dwelling (condominium) project on the upland (Harbour Watch Condominiums) (Case No. FLD2004-06042). Applications for that approved, upland condominium project were submitted for building permits to construct the 31-unit building under BCP2005-02671 (site improvements), BCP2005-09475 (foundation only) and BCP2005-09829 (building). However, all of these building permits have been now been voided. by Development Services due to a lack of response to comments. The voiding of the upland permits voids the FLD approval for the upland project. As such, the current proposed dock, as an accessory use to the upland attached dwelling (condominium) project, can no longer be processed for such in its present form. An alternative, should you desire to continue to pursue the construction of the dock, is to amend the request to be a principal use of "marina facilities". Compliance with all requirements fora "marina" would then be applicable,. including the provision of off-street parking. Should this option be desired, an amended application (and application material) would need to be submitted and additional DRC review would be required. Given these circumstances, could you bring me up to speed with your current intentions regarding this dock application? Alternately, you could withdraw the FLD application from further review by sending me a letter for such. Thanks. Wayne M. Wells, A/CP Planner III City of Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756-5520 Phone: 727-562-4504 Fax: 727-562-4865 ~ • Wells, Wayne From: Tefft, Cathy Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 9:40 AM To: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina Cc: Hull, Dick; Wells, Wayne Subject: LT07-0-016 : Harbour Watch LLC v. City of Clearwater -Disposition IbINumAttach: 1 MessageGUID: {8612704E-4501-4123-A733-BOBA6246E512} OriginalDate: None Originator: SQL Style: Harbour Watch LLC v. City of Clearwater Dear Michael and Gina: Dick asked me to provide you with a copy of the Amended Final Summary Judgment in the above-referenced matter, entered in favor of the Plaintiff. We appreciate you and your staff's time and assistance in resolving this matter. Should you have any questions about the Amended Final Summary Judgment, please contact Dick. Lastly, I will be returning the attorney-client privilege correspondence which we removed from the Planning case files. Kindest regards, Cathy Cathy H. Tefft Legal Staff Assistant, City Attorney's Office City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4014 Fax: (727) 562-4021 <m ail.to:cathv.te.EftC~mvcIearwater.com> Amended Final nmary Judgmei • IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA Civil Division HARBOUR WATCH, LLC, a foreign Limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CLEARWATER, a municipal corporation, Defendant. Case No. 07-9316-CI-20 AMENDED FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff s Motion for Summary Judgment on Count I of its Complaint having come on for consideration by the Court on April 30, 2008, and the Court having considered the affidavits, depositions and other documentary evidence on file and having heazd azgument of counsel and being fully advised in the premises makes the following findings of fact which aze uncontroverted and undisputed in this record: Plaintiff owns the property, more particularly described on the legal description attached as Exhibit "A" ("the Property") which abuts the submerged land owned by the City of Clearwater described in Exhibit "B".(submerged land"). Formerly, the Property was the site of a business known as Ross Yachts, which sold, maintained and repaired boats. 2. When Plaintiff acquired the Property, there were eight docks on submerged land adjacent to the property and those docks were in place since approximately 1967. 3. Plaintiff acquired the Property for purposes of building a 31-unit condominium on the 1 Plaintiff is Harbour Watch, LLC. As managing member of Harbour Estates, LLC, which is included as Plaintiff. Page 1 of 3 • • Property and the docks were a vital and material part of the decision to acquire the Property and the proposed development plan. 4. The City of Clearwater approved Plaintiff s development plan for the condominiums on the Property and the Development Order specifically provided that any docks would be for the exclusive use of the condominium unit owners. 5. Consistent with its plan to use the docks on the Property, Plaintiff obtained a repair and rebuild permit for the docks in 2005. The City signed off on the repair and rebuild permit which was issued by Pinellas County, Florida. The City did not impose any conditions on the permit and the repair and rebuild permit allowed Harbour Watch to build docks in the same footprint as the existing docks. Although the City's Charter required a referendum before docks could be constructed, Plaintiffwas not specifically advised of this requirement during the permit application process. 6. In reliance on the City's signoff on the repair and rebuild permit, Plaintiff incurred expense to obtain an exemption from the Southwest Florida Water Management District and a Nationwide Authorization from the Army Corp of Engineers for the repair and rebuild of the docks. 7. During the development approval process for rebuilding or reconfiguring the docks, the City became concerned that the docks could cause a reversion of the submerged lands to the State of Florida under the original land grant from the State of Florida. In June, 2007, the legislature passed a special act which ratified existing private uses on the submerged land, including the docks involved in this matter. 8. After the City signed offon the repair and rebuild permit, a storm damaged the docks and Plaintiff, at the request of the City's harbormaster, tore down the docks at its own expense. At the time Plaintiff tore down the docks, it fully intended to rebuild the docks under its existing repair Page 2 of 3 • • and rebuild permit or as reconfigured if approved. 9. It is uncontroverted that Plaintiff acquired the Property, obtained a loan and spent over $4,000,000 inland acquisition, design, development and marketing costs in reliance in part on the docks associated with the Property and Plaintiff's right to repair and rebuild them. 10. Plaintiff reasonably relied on the repair and rebuild permit and its ability to repair and rebuild docks in the existing footprint of the eight (8) docks, which were adjacent to the Property at the time Plaintiff acquired it. It is undisputed that Plaintiff's reliance was in good faith and reasonable. Based on the foregoing undisputed and uncontroverted facts, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the City is estopped from requiring a referendum under its Charter for the rebuilding of the docks at the Property. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida, this day of May, 2008. ORIGINAL 51GNE~ NELLY N. KHOUZAM Circuit Court Judge Copies furnished to: Darryl R. Richards, Esq. Paul Richard Hull, Esq. Pamela Akin, Esq. MAY 2 i 2008 fV. KHOU~nr U!T JUDGE,...,,_ . _ Page 3 of 3 • • LEOAL DESCRiPfION UPLAND PARCELS: PARCEL I: THE EAST 60 FEET OF LO? 6, BLOCK C, ISLAND ESTATES OF CLEARWATER, UNIT FIVE, ACCORDING TO THE MAP OR PLAT THEREOP RECORDED IN PLAT BOOKS 1, FAGS 34, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLA$ COUNTY. FLORIDA. TOGETHER WITH THE NON - EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT CREATED BY RECIPROCAL EASEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT RECORDED M OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 14343. PAGES 2050-20SE OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLA.S COUNTY, FLORIDA. • PARCEL lt: - THB WEST SO FEET OF LOTS ONB (1) AND FOUR (4) AND ALL OF LOT S. • BLOCK C, ISLAND ESTATES OF CLEARWATER, UNIT FIVE, ACCORDAVG TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 51, PAGE 34, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA. PLALNTIFF'S EX IT • _ ~' LEGAL DESCRIFI'ION SUBMERC3Eq PARCEL: FROM THE SW'LY CORNER OF TRACT A OF UNIT' 2. ISLAND ESTATES OF CLEARWATER (PLAT BOOK 47. PAQES 19A AND 20, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA) AS POINT OF BEGINNING, RUN S. 49.23' 4l" E. ALONG THE N'LY RIOH'f-OF-WAY LWB OF CLEARWATER CAUSEWAY 2343.11 FEET; TRENCH RUN S. 40° 36' 19" W. S~ FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID CAUSEWAY; THENCE N. 49' 23' 4l" W. ALONG SAID .CENTERLINE 3123.1 t FEET; THENCE N. 40° 36' 19" E. SOO FEET; THENCE S. 49° 23' 41" E. i ALONG SAID R-OHT-0F-WAY LME 575.00 FEET TO P.OB. LESS EXISTING FILLS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY. LESS ?HEFOLLOWINO DESCRIBED PARCEL: FROM THE SW'LY CORNER OF TRACT A OF UNIT 2, ISLAND ESTATES OF C[.EARWATER (PLAT BOOK 47. PAQES 19A AND 20, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PQ~LLA3 COUNTY, FLORIDA) A3 POMT OF BEGINNING. RUN S. 49°23.41"E. ALONG THE N'LY RIGHT-0F-WAY LINE OF CLEARWA'FER CAUSEWAY 2543.1 t FEET; THENCE RUN S. 40.36' 19" W. S00 FEET TO THE CENTERLINB OF SA>D CAUSEWAY; THENCE N. 49° 23' 4l" W. ALONG SAID GE14'IERLINE 3123.11 FEET; THENCE N. 40° 36' 19" E. S00 FEET; THENCE S. 04° 23' 41" E. A DISTANCE OF 141A2 FEET; THENCE S. 49' 23' 41" t~ A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET; THENCE N. 40' 36' 19" E. !00.00 FEET T'O A PO1NT ON SAlD RIQEIT-0E: WAY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-0F-WAY LINE S. 49.23' 41" E. A DISTANCE OF 350.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. :~ p !FF'S T • • Wells, Wayne From: Tefft, Cathy Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 10:24 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Watkins, Sherry Cc: Delk, Michael; Hull, Dick; Lipowski, Laura; Tormeno, Donna Subject: LT07-0-016 : Harbour Watch, LLC v. City; Exhibits A-C IbINumAttach: 1 MessageGUID: {29551 BFF-5F52-4D47-9301-C2520F602533} OriginalDate: None Originator: SQL Style: Harbour Watch LLC v. City of Clearwater Dear Wayne and Sherry: In further reviewing the Exhibits to Wayne's Subpoena Duces Tecum, I noticed that opposing counsel did not include the attachments referenced in Exhibit B. They have since emailed the attachments and I have included them below for you. Please contact Dick, Donna or me should you have any questions. Regards, Cathy ~. ~, Wells ~poena Exhibits. Cathy H. Tefft Legal Staff Assistant, City Attorney's Office City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4014 Fax: (727) 562-4021 <mailto:cath~tefft@myclearwater.com> • • EXHIBIT "A" • • CITY OF CLEAKWAT~R Pc~~n tJFncr. I3ax 474ti, Gr~atF~t, runurln 33?St3-974;:3 ll'er.~anuler! (?27) 562-/+7jA Fax (7l7) 56'L-4755 Ptvuc Waary Arusersre~rwr: July 18, 2t)G1 Mr. Joseph Gaynor, P.A. 29399 U.S. Highway 19 !North Suite 320 Ctearwater, Florida 33761-2137 1:;8: Pools at Windward Passage Dear Mr. Gaynor: City Staff has reviewed your request to extertd the private docks at the subject townhvme location. There is a 1y58 deed whereby the Cily dedicated to the public the ~vaterway adjoining your project. This deed prohibits improvements in or obstruction of the waterway, but does allow docks whtch have the proper permits from the City. t3ased on this deed, City legal staff has determined that your docks can be extended. n addition. the City Harbormaster has no concerns with regard to navigation. You wilt be required to obtain permits for each dock from the City and the Pinellas County Water and Navigation Control Authority. Ai their July 12 meeting, the City • Commission adopted new regulations regarding permitting of docks. 1 would suggest you prepare a sketch showing the proposed dock locations and schedule a meeting with Gina Clayton, Senior Planner (5G2-4587), to review the impact of these new regulations. Attached is pertinent documentation I have collected. If you have any questions, please feet free to contact me at (727) 562-4743. Sincerely, :ii ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ Michael G. Quillen. P.E. City Engineer cr.: John Carassas, Assistant City Attorney 8111 Morris, Harbormaster Lisa Fierce, Planning Manager Gina Clayton, Senior Planner y,. ~~ Ituue). At7,r.,T, rrUr„x•I .u~laativn~r.n tiu 11.+kt. V:rr \tn~ti IK.C,a,.tklc<lu~rar W1in~t,• c;w.,~•. la,+tst:.'+u,•7~c Fhn•rila>u:rl,. t.,>I~Ir.yns,;R ~ rt!Il.tnPc/l::•r.l>u•dhJ(j~!'.' ,•tlt;1 ,I. t1.\!1'IA)1a11~:\"I AN1;:1F1°IF~1.\!l\'I° r\t.R~:~ t'.?Il'LUYLfi•• 1/E OOlP96lLEL 61r u21 t~ol~~eur Nd 60~E1 000E/10/00 • • EXHIBIT "B" ~. • • Status: Case Status Page 1 of 2 ePermit Home View Permit View Business Tax Receipt View Planning Case View Parcel The information below summarizes the case you selected. Case Status: Comment Number:-;i1IS2Q05- ..._ Planner: ^ GIS View Aerial photo, zoning infarmation r Application Date: 11/17J2005 Parcel: 08-29-15-43380-003-0050 Address: 279 WINDWARD PASSAGE Project Name: HARBOUR WATCH Description: FIX AND REPAIR EXISTING DOCKS Fees: Item 'Fee Amount Fee Remaining _ Date Paid Type Completed Status Done 8y Marine Permit Complete 9/8/2005 DONE WW Application received 11%17/2005 DONE WW Notes: ACTUALLY SUBMITTED AND SIGNED OFF ON 9/8/05, BUT WAS NOT ENTERED ON THAT DATE. ^ GIS View Aerial photo, zoning information ¢ac,~tp Search http://epermit.myc learwater. com/tm_bin/tmw_cmd.pl?tinw_ cmd=Status V iewCasePlan&sh... 7/30/2007 • • EXHIBIT "C" r • October 20 , 2005 Mr. Joseph w. Gaynor Joseph W. Gaynor P.A. 304 Monroe St. Dunedin, Florida 24698 Re: Harbour Watch, A Condominium (Former Ross Yacht Parcel and the easterly 60feet of the Clearwater Marine Aquarium Parcel) Dear Mr. Gaynor, This letter confirms that the City of Clearwater (City) acknowledges the existence of the eight boat slips at the above location. There is a 1958 deed whereby the City dedicated to the Public the waterway adjoining the above project. The deed prohibits improvements in or obstruction of the waterway, but it does allow docks which have the proper permits from the City. The Ciry does further acknowledge the upland owners' right to use the above described boat slips so long as they maintain them in accordance with the applicable maintenance permits and section 3-601 of the City Code. Historically, the City has not granted submerged land leases on City owned submerged land for the purpose of privately owned residential docks. If you change the design of the existing slips and dock facilities, you will be required to obtain permits for the docks from the City and the Pinellas County Water and Navigation Control Authority. Your dock site plan must be approved by the Community Development Board (CBD). Based on my discussions with you, your consultant Bill Woods has received favorable comments from the City staff and will be presenting your new design to CBD. Your attorney should also be aware the City's own boat slips abutting the. East (Island Way Grill) and West (CMA)of Harbour Watch, and all of the slips on the South side of Windward Passage, including the eleven docks that the City permitted for your project at the Pools at Windward Passage, which are all on City submerged land are 50 or 50+ feet notwithstanding the 35 foot deed restriction which shows up on Island Estates as well as parts of Clearwater Beach. If you or your attorney have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (727) 562-4743. Sincerely, Michael D. Quillen, P.E. cc: Bill Morris, Harbor Master Bill Woods • • IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA HARBOUR WATCH, L.L.C., ) a Florida limited liability company, ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) CITY OF CLEARWATER, ) Defendant. ) CASE NO. ~~'~ (`~~C~Cr DIVISION ~~ ~ COMPLAINT Plaintiff, HARBOUR WATCH, L.L.C., a Florida limited liability company ("Harbour Watch"), by its undersigned counsel, files this action against the CITY OF CLEARWATER ("The City") and alleges the following: GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 1. Harbour Estates is a Florida limited liability company which. owns property and maintains its principal office in Pinellas County, Florida. Harbor Watch, LLC, is the managing member of Harbour Estates. 2. The City is a Florida municipality located in Pinellas County, Florida. 3. All conditions precedent to the institution, maintenance and prosecution of this action have occurred, have been performed or have been waived. 4.. The property which is the subject of this action and all of the actions or omissions which give rise to the claims in this matter occurred or arose in Pinellas County, Florida. ~ ~ HARBOUR ESTATES'S PROPERTY 5. Harbour Estates acquired and owns property adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Science Center ("the Property"). The Property is more particularly described in the legal description attached as Exhibit "A." 6. For many years before Harbour Estates acquired the Property, there was a business known as "Ross Yachts" located on the Property. Ross Yachts sold, maintained and repaired boats.. 7. When Harbour Estates acquired the Property, there were eight boat docks, containing twelve boat slips, a ramp and twenty one moorings on submerged land adjacent to the Property. Ross Yachts had used and maintained the docks, ramp and moorings since 1955. The submerged land on which the eight docks and ramp were located is more particularly described in the legal description attached as Exhibit "B" (the "Submerged Land"). ~8. In 1925, the State of Florida granted to Pinellas County and The City of Clearwater the property necessary to build Memorial Causeway ("the 1925 Grant").That grant included the Submerged Land as well as other submerged lands adjacent to the Property. The 1925 Grant provided that the property could revert to the State if not used for public parks or places of recreation. 9. In July 1958, The City dedicated, granted and conveyed to the public in general the Submerged Land. A copy of the Deed of Dedication is attached as Exhibit "C." That deed specifically allowed The City to permit docks, boat slips and piers on the Submerged Land. 2 • • 10. The eight docks on the Submerged Land used and maintained by Ross Yachts were built, repaired and replaced with the knowledge, consent and permission of The City as well as all other governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the docks. 11. On part of the adjacent submerged lands, The City permitted a number of other private docks and piers. In fact, one of the representatives of Harbour Estates, Joseph Gaynor, acquired a townhome, which came with a dock on submerged land near the Property ("the Townhome Acquisition"). 12. As President of the Townhome Association, Mr. Gaynor requested permission from The City to extend five of the existing docks to fifty four feet and to build five new docks to a length of fifty four feet to. match the length of the docks that the City had constructed on the South side of Windward Passage on which the townhomes are located. In response to that request, The City engineer stated the following: There is a 1958 deed whereby The City dedicated to the public the waterway adjoining the project. This deed prohibits improvements in or obstruction of the waterway, but does allow docks which have the proper permits from The City. Based on this deed, City legal staff has determined that your docks can be extended. In addition, The City Harbour master has no concerns with regard to navigation. See Exhibit "D." 13. After the Townhome Acquisition, Harbour Estates purchased the Property with the existing eight docks on the Submerged Land. Harbour Estates acquired the Property based in part on reliance on The City's representation in the Townhome Acquisition that it "does allow docks which have the proper permits from The City," the long history of eight docks on the Submerged Land and the many other docks permitted by The City on adjacent submerged lands. 3 ~ D THE CONDOMINIUM PLAN 14. In June, 2004, Harbour Watch, LLC, the managing member of Harbour Estates, filed a Flexible Development Application seeking approval to construct a 31- unit condominium complex on the Property ("the Condominium Plan"). Harbour Estates incurred significant expenses to acquire the Property and prepare the Condominium Plan. 15. In October, 2004, The City's Community Development Board ("CDB") issued a development order approving with conditions the Condominium Plan to build 31 condominium units. A copy of that conditional approval is attached as Exhibit "E." One of the conditions specifically required that "boats moored at any docks be for the exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the condominiums," a clear recognition that docks were part of Harbour Estates' development plan. 16. The City's CDB later issued an amended development order which contained the same condition requiring boats docked on the Submerged Land be for the exclusive use of residents and/or guests. A copy of the amended development order is attached as Exhibit "F." 17. As part of its development plan for the Property, Harbour Estates then applied to Pinellas County for arepair/rebuild permit for the existing eight docks on the Submerged Land adjacent to the property. In October, 2005, Pinellas County issued a repair and rebuild permit for the docks. 18. In September, 2005, SWFTMD also approved the repair and rebuild permit by issuing an exemption letter, Exemption Letter 2520. 4 • • 19. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also issued a nationwide authorization, SAJ-2005-9869 for the repair and rebuild of the docks. 20. The City then approved the repair and rebuild of the existing docks by a municipal signoff on the Pinellas County repair/rebuild permit. The City signed off on the repair/rebuild permit under case number MIS-2005-11012. A copy of the signoff from The City's official website is attached as Exhibit "G." 21. In 2005, Harbour Estates began considering reconfiguration of the existing docks for navigational purposes and the use of floating docks. Harbour Estates approached The City about the possibility of reconfiguring the docks. In response, The City's professional engineer, Michael Quillen, again confirmed "that The City of Clearwater (City) acknowledges the existence of the eight boat slips" at the Property. Mr. Quillen further stated that "The City does further acknowledge the upland owners' right to use the above-described boat slips so long as they maintain them in accordance with the applicable maintenance permits in Section 3-601 of The City Code." A copy of the letter from Mr. Quillen is attached as Exhibit "H." 22. Mr. Quillen further informed Harbour Estates that if it elected to change the design of the existing slips, it would be required to obtain permits for the docks from The City and its dock site plan would have to be approved by The City's CDB. 23. The City favorably encouraged Harbour Estates to consider reconfiguring the docks for navigational purposes since the City owned and operated public boat slips abutting the Submerged Land. As a result, Harbour Estates submitted to The City's CDB an application to reconfigure the docks to conform to the request of The City with respect to navigation (the "Dock Application"). It also asked the CDB to approve a 5 O repair and rebuild design as allowed under the repair and rebuild permit in the event the reconfigured docks were not approved by the reviewing. agencies or the decision was made to repair and rebuild, not reconfigure. 24. The City's staff reviewed the Dock Application and concluded that the proposal complied with the flexible development criteria and the general applicability criteria under The City's Land Development Code and recommended approval of the Dock Application. 25. The City's staff, however, recommended as a condition of approval that no signoff on a dock permit issue unless and until The City received sufficient assurances that a signoff would not result in a reversion of the Submerged Land or any other submerged land parcels to the State of Florida or any other entity under the 1925 Grant. 26. Harbour Estates then undertook a lengthy and costly effort to obtain sufficient assurances that approval of the Dock Application would not result in a reversion of the Submerged Lands to the State of Florida or any other entity. In that process, Harbour Estates first learned that The City and the State for some time had been in discussions concerning various issues regarding the reversion of property to the State under the 1925 Grant. 27. While The City continued its discussions with the State of Florida, The City then requested Harbour Estates to place on hold its discussions to obtain assurance that approval of the Dock Application would not result in a reversion of land to the State of Florida. City representatives told Harbour Estates that they were in negotiations with the State of Florida that would resolve issues concerning the reversion of land to the 6 • • State of Florida. The City requested a six month hold on Harbour Estates' discussions with state representatives concerning the reversion issue. Harbour Estates complied. 28. After six months, The City and the State of Florida had not reached an agreement to resolve the issue concerning reversion of land to the State of Florida. Harbour Estates then resumed its negotiations with the State to obtain assurance that approval of the Dock Application would not result in a reversion of the Submerged Lands. By December, 2006, Harbour Estates had reached an agreement with the State to provide assurance that approval of the Dock Application would not result in a reversion of the Submerged Land or any other land to the State of Florida. At the end of those negotiations, Harbour Estates learned that The City was pursuing passage of a bill, which ratified any use of the Submerged Land on or before the effective date of the bill regardless of whether the use was for a public purpose or not ("Ratification Bill"). The Florida Legislature passed the Ratification Bill. As a result, Harbour Estates' continued use of the Submerged Land for the eight docks was. ratified by the State of Florida and would not result in a reversion of the Submerged Land to the State of Florida. 29. The bill also allowed The City to authorize those additional private uses of the submerged land granted to The City by the State of Florida for which The City had received an application on or before December 31, 2006, if the private uses were consistent with the laws and rules governing the management of sovereignty submerged lands. The City received the Dock Application before December 31, 2006, and the Dock Application, therefore, was exempt under the Ratification Bill. 7 o 30. With assurance in hand that approval of the Dock Application would not result in a reversion of land to the State of Florida, Harbour Estates again asked the CDB to approve the Dock Application. 31. It was then that The City for the first time and after years of development effort and expense by Harbour Estates, took the position that the Dock Application could not be approved without a referendum under §2.01(d)(6) of The City Charter, which requires a referendum on development on certain submerged lands. 32. The existing eight docks, however, were in place long before The City passed the referendum requirement in §2.01(d)(6) of The City Charter and those docks were not subject to the referendum requirement. The City, moreover, had signed off on the permit to repair and rebuild the existing docks without any referendum requirement. The Dock Application also proposed to reconfigure the docks for navigational purposes which The City encouraged and for which The City did not require a referendum until years into the process. 33. Harbour Estates spent significant sums of money to acquire the property, to prepare and obtain approval of the Condominium Plan and obtained assurance that a reversion Submerged Lands to the State of Florida in reliance,, in part, on the actions, omissions and representations of The City regarding the right to have, maintain and repair docks on the Submerged Land. 34. As the owner of the Property, Harbour Estates has vested riparian rights in the submerged land adjacent to the property. Harbour Estates and its predecessors in title used their riparian rights long before the 1999 referendum requirement. Application 8 • • of the 1999 referendum to Harbour Estates' riparian rights would be an unconstitutional delegation of power and a taking without due process and just compensation. COUNTI 35. This is an action for declaratory relief. 36. Harbour Estates realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-34. 37. Harbour Estates reasonably relied on The City's signoff on its repair and rebuild permit for the existing eight docks on the Submerged Lands. It purchased the Property and submitted the Condominium Plan for 31 condominium units. with the reasonable belief and understanding that it had the right to repair and rebuild the existing eight docks on the Submerged Land. 38. A storm severely damages the eight docks with the City requested Harbour Estates to remove the remaining damaged portions of the docks. ~ Harbour Estates did so based on the reasonable belief that it could rebuild the docks under its repair/rebuild permit. 39. There is a bona fide, present and practical need for a declaration of Harbour Estates' rights to rebuild the eight docks under the previously issued repair/rebuild permit. On information and belief, The City is refusing to approve the repair and rebuild design unless and until there is a referendum approving it. 40. Harbour Estates acted in good faith and reasonably relied on the actions, omissions and representations of The City regarding the repair and rebuild permit to its detriment. The City is now estopped from preventing Harbour Estates from repairing or rebuilding the eight docks on the Submerged Land under the repair and rebuild permit. 9 0 0 41. The parties are in doubt as to their rights and obligations regarding the repair/rebuild permit for the eight docks on the Submerged Land. WHEREFORE, Harbour Estates respectfully requests the Court to enter a judgment declaring that Harbour Estates may repair or rebuild the existing eight docks under the repair/rebuild permit and that The City is estopped from refusing to recognize Harbour Estates' right to the repair/rebuild permit and such other relief as the Court may deem appropriate. COUNT II 42. This is an action for declaratory relief. 43. Harbour Estates realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 34 above. 44. Despite The City's staff recommendation for approval of the Dock Application, The City's CDB has refused to approve the Dock Application without a referendum approving the Dock Application. 45. With the knowledge and encouragement of The City, Harbour Estates undertook a lengthy and costly effort to obtain assurance that approval of the Dock Application would not result in a reversion of any of the Submerged Lands to the State of Florida. While Harbour Estates was successful in its effort to obtain that assurance, that assurance became moot with the passage of the Ratification Bill. 46. Harbour Estates acted reasonably and in good faith based on the representations of The City and its representatives that it could build the reconfigured docks if it did not result in a reversion of Submerged Lands to the State or that it could 10 • • repair and rebuild the existing eight docks if Harbour Estates elected not to build the reconfigured docks. 47. The City is now estopped from preventing Harbour Estates from building the reconfigured docks or requiring a referendum of approval before approving the Dock Application. 48. There is a bona fide, present and practical need for declaration of Harbour Estates' rights to build the reconfigured five. docks as requested under the Dock Application. On information and belief, The City is refusing to approve the Dock Application for the reconfigured docks unless and until there is a referendum approving it. The City is now estopped from applying the referendum requirement to the Dock Application. 49. The referendum requirement, moreover, is not applicable to the Dock Application since the Charter allows for 140 dedicated boat slips for recreational-non- commercial vessels, such as those which would be using the existing boat slips or the reconfigured boat slips on the Submerged Land. 50. The development on the Submerged Land of the boat slips, moreover, occurred long before passage of the referendum requirement and the Submerged Land, therefore was developed before the referendum requirement and is not subject to its terms or conditions. Harbour Estates has a vested right in the boat slips which were permitted long before the referendum requirement in §2.01(b)(6) of The City's Charter. WHEREFORE, Harbour Estates respectfully requests the Court to enter a judgment declaring that the referendum requirement is not applicable to Harbour 11 s • Estates' Dock Application and that The City is estopped from denying approval of the Dock Application and such other relief as the Court may deem appropriate. Dated: September , 2007. Respectfully submitted, JOHNSON, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, LLP By: Darryl R. ichards FBN 348929 SPN 238092 911 Chestnut Street Clearwater, FL 33756-5643 (727) 461-1818 (727) 441-8617 (Fax) Attorneys for Plaintiff File No. 114033/mlr # i ia.~o9 12 LEGAL DESCR~ON UPLAND PARCELS: • PARCEL 1: THE EAST 60 FEET OF LOT 6, BLOCK C, ISLAND ESTATES OF CLEARWATER, UNIT FIVE, ACCORDING TO THE MAP OR PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 51, PAGE 34, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY. FLORIDA. TOGETHER WITH THE NON - EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT CREATED $Y RECIPROCAL EASEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK !4343, PAGES 2050-2058 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL ll: THE WEST SO FEET OF LOTS ONE (1) AND FOUR (4) AND ALL OF LOT S. BLOCK C, ISLAND ESTATES OF CLEARWATER, UNIT FIVE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 31, PAGE 34, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA. LEGAL DESCRIPTION SUBMERGED PARCEL; FROM THE SW'LY CORNER OF TRACT A OF UNIT 2. ISLAND ESTATES OF CLEARWATER (PLAT BOOK 47, PAGES 19A AND 20. PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA) AS POINT OF BEGINNING, RUN S. 44° 23' 41" E. ALONG THE N'LY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CLEARWATER CAUSEWAY 2548.11 FEET; THENCE RUN S. 40° 36' 19" W. 500 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID CAUSEWAY; THENCE N. 49° 23' 41" w. ALONG SAID .CENTERLINE 3123.11 FEET; THENCE N. 40° 36' 19" E. 500 FEET; THENCE S. 49' 23' 4I" E. ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 575.00 FEET T4 P.O.B. LESS EXISTING FILLS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY. - LESS THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL: FROM THE SW'LY CORNER OF TRACT A OF UNIT 2, ISLAND ESTATES OF CLEARWATER (PLAT BOOK 47, PAGES !9A AND 20, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA) AS POINT OF BEGINNING, RUN S. 49° 23' 41" E. ALONG THE N'LY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CLEARWATER CAUSEWAY 2548.11 FEET; THENCE RUN S. 40° 36' 19" W. 500 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID CAUSEWAY; THENCE N. 49° 23' 4l" W. ALONG SAID CENTERLINE 3123.11 FEET; THENCE N. 40° 36' 19" E. 500 FEET; THENCE S. 04° 23' 4l" E. A DISTANCE OF 141.42 FEET; THENCE S. 49° 23' 41" E. A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET; THENCE N. 40° 36' 19" E. L00.00 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID RIGHTAF- WAY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE S. 49° 23' 41" E. A DISTANCE OF 350.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. sllE>;r z of Z L. R P~ltiY t ARSOCIAT88, INC. IOYJO tOandAVF.NUENORTN FLORIDA 9>177i LICBl/S8D SUBDrESS !6579 E IBIT b a a 9 • LEGAL pESCR1PT10N SUBMERGER PARCEL: FROM THE SW'LY CORNER OF TRACT A OF UNIT 2, ISLAND ESTATES OF CLEARWATER (PLAT BOOK 47, PAGES 19A AND 20, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA) AS POINT OF~BEGINNING, RUN S. 49° 23' 41" E. ALONG THE N'LY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CLEARWATER CAUSEWAY 2548.11 FEET; THENCE RUN S. 40° 36' 19" W. 500 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID CAUSEWAY; THENCE N. 49° 23' 41 ° W. ALONG SAID .CENTERLINE 3123.11 FEET; THENCE N. 40° 36' 19" E. 500 FEET; THENCE S. 49' 23' 41" E. ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 575.00 FEET TO P.O.B. LESS EXISTING FILLS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY. EX BIT • • • , ~ OPFtC'~ COPY, , IIE~ OF DEl)ZCATIO~i . ~~ ~ ~ 'fN7S vOhV~,YAN.t2F, made thi s ~ h'" day off' JuIY, 1958, from Lhe Gitq of Clearwater, ~a ~zunicipal cor- poration, in the County of }'inellaE, Stata of Florida, as Lhe party of the Sirst part, to the Public in Aen- i oral, as partiQS o~ the second part, 'i!I'1'NESSE'1'1{~• '1'hxt the party of the first apart has, after flue cansiderati on in authorised rel;ular aneetinl;, round and deterni~~ed that ii in in the best tnterest of the Public ~ ~~ '~' «u, in general, the citizens and taxnaycrs of Lhe City oi' •~ •J ~ ''~' Clearwater, ar~d the party of tho first part Lhat it do ss p i .i ~., dedicate, grant. and convey, arul it aloes hereby dedicate, ~;~ grant and convey pinto Lhe Public in ~:ereral, sub;iect 5 ~ u onlq to the terms, conditions and vrov3sions heroof, i~ y ~ and aub~ect to a_rplicahle terms, conditions ani proviS- fons of law, that rortion of the !`ollowing described land in the Ci.l.y of Clearwater, which portion is present- ly not raised above mean high ttdeby Lhe fill upon which i t~.emorial Cau:~cway is located, descr,fbed as follows: From the StV~ly cornor of Traat A o!' pnit 2 7slund H:staL•es of Clearwater, {T'lat gook t,~, Pa~;os 19A and 2C1, Public Records of Pincl3as County, Florid!ay.ns Point of Pe- ginnin~, run S, k9° 23' 41" E, along the t2~ly ri ht-of-way line ~f Clearwater Gause_ rray 251r~.11 feet, thence run 5 b0° 3b' l°" '1! 500 feet to the centerline oP said Cause- rlay; thence N lrpO 23 f 4.l't Y! along said center- linc 3123.11 feet thence N l,Do 36' lore E 500 feet; thence ~ 49° ?3' 41n_~l along sai3 right-of-way line ~?rj.00 feet to POS less exisLinF fills and rights-of-way. rig DOlB9¢1C~L R~~s4a s, v:~.rru, EXHIBIT D D wd eo~a~ ~ooaieoiao o.R 3b~ Fa;~.~r~~ 1'U fiAYE AN1) TA HOIA the dams to tha Fublic in gt±neral in perpetuity i`6r~usc' as a, waterway far boating and boat trAffic, within which no fillinrt, im- provements oz• obstruction of any nature coy be cones structed or all,;awed, with the exceptic;rt of docks, Baal, slips or picra vrhich m,~y bo constructieci tai.thout fill- ing by p<~rty nt the first, part,, its lt;ssees, tenant3, pt:rmittees or assiJ;ns, an tho Northerly silo of tht above dcscribca area, providinJ; the sane comply with all ordinances, laws, rules and ragulations.ot' the City of Clear,,r3tor and any other govarn.~tental agency or authority c;avernin~ the sage. t1i lT"1FJLSS ;~}iE'REQF, the City of Clearwater has cat:ced these presants to be executed by its Acting City Dlanaecr, cauntersigr:ed by its }~~a,yar•-Commissioner, attested by its City Clerk, and approved as to form and correctness by its City Attorney at Clearwater, Pint:llas County, F3.orida, the day aryl year i`irst above written. •Atteet;~^ 'v ~ -' lit .erk ' approved •as to form and correctness: ..~ ,,.--" ity A torn / S7'ht'E AF FI.U+tI4)A CO'Ji~l1`Y 4F PIlrc:LLA5 t:19`Y Q1~ ~ AIt1JA't'Eti F],L'BIDA fly. ct n~ C ty Manager C oust er sigr-ed ;ayor ot~. s oner Before me; the undersigned authority, personally appt:ared Gerald UJeitner, Lewis F?. No:ner, d. G. i~ihitehead and Ben 14rentz~nan, who. upon being by n:c duly sworn, depose and say that they are respectively tie duly constituted Acting City hiatiager, ~13yor-Jommi ssioner, City t;lerk and City Attorney a:' tho:Lity oJ' Clearwater, a municipal corpporatior, in the utate • ,of Florida, and that they have full right and authority to • execute the f aregof,nF Deed of Dedi catiari and that they exe- cured the •sa:~e for the purposes.. herein expressed. iJrtary Public, State o!' Florida floury D~+b6t, $l+le of ft~alc d lnpr 1Ay (oramittipn Ic~~tn IA.y 6. 19L0 7t ic'!r+?C t/> OOt89CG131 .ti~>t~a :tot,.«nut yYd 80:Ei SOOE/QO/90 ~ • Ptvtac W~tus ADldlt`tSTx~TIE,1K C~~r.~~a~ -~~.~.~u~xr~.T~.R Pcnw QFnc~ C3Ux 4'?48, C:raxw~A~•:+1, I;ix>}ultin ~3?58-47~ '['I~.I:a~ncnr! (?27) 562~t7~C) Fax (Ili) SQL-47S~ July 38, 2flC1 Mr. Joseph Gaynor, P.A. 29399 U.S. Highway 19 North Suite 32b Ctearvvater, Florida 33761-2137 fr'e: Pools at Windward Passage Dear Mr. Gaynor: City Staff has reviewed your request to extend tits private docks at the subject townhome location. There is a 1y88 deed whereby the City dedicated to the public the waterway adjoining your project. This deed prohibits improvements in or obstruction of the waterway, but does allow docks which have the proper permits from the City. -3ased on this deed, City legal staff has dekermined that your docks can be extended. n addition. the City Harbormaster has no concerns with regard to navigation. ~! You will be required to obtain permits for each dock from the 'City and the Pinellas County Water and Navigation Control Authority. At their Juty 12 meeting, the Ciiy Commission adopted new regulations regarding permitting of docks. 1 would suggest jrou prepare a sketch showing the proposed dock locations and schedule a meeting with Gina Clayton, Senior Planner (SG2-4587), to review the i pact of these new regulations. Attached is pertinent documentation I h2ve collected. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (727) 562-4743. Sincerely, • ~ ~__..- ~%~~~ ~~ Michael G. Quillen. P.E. City Engineer cc: Jahn Carassas, Assistant City Attorney Bill Morris, Harbormaster Lisa Fierce, Planning Manager Gina Clayton. Senior Planner s< ~; , , I tjk~,,.i, a::,r;,~r. ~r~~~,~.1 „~!,~:~,,,: t.~h E IBIT litill.alrt.l':rt:~~tn~y~K•t:r~~:~!ICaurtx ~lirtnt•~•c~a.~i'.I:~,+IVC~~IU~'n~ ~ ' hhn•rklus:::r~~, t:,tit~a•~tilmag, {31E1.IrIFklF,la)tf'.1r4~II~~Lf D ••ti~fl'~L1:1!PLt)l~lii~'1 ASI%aH°IF~L~:'!YI°:1t.1'~sK I:~IPLr~YI'h" . 4/l bOl@9CLLxL ~11~oH ~toti~oeul Wd 80~iS1 gODZ/@D/90 3 October 22, 2004 Mr. Mark A. Jonnatti, AIA Jonnatti Architecture, Inc. 21021 US Highway 19 N Clearwater, Florida 33765 RE: Development Order -Case FLD2004-06042 - 279 Windward Passage Dear Mr. Jonnatti: This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206D.6 of the Community Development Code. On October 19, 2004, the Community Development Boazd reviewed your Flexible Development application to permit 31 attached residential units with a front (north) setback along Windward Passage of 6.6 feet (to pavement) and 26.12 feet (to building), a side (east) setback of 22.75 feet (to building), a rear (south) setback of 20 feet (to pool and cabana) and 53.56 feet to building, and a side (west) setback of to zero feet (to pavement) and 22.74 feet (to building), and an increase building height of 85 feet from base flood elevation to midpoint of the roof, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sections 2-704.C. for the site at 279 Windward Passage. Based on the application and the Staff recommendation, the Community Development Boazd (CDB) APPROVED the application with the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. That the site plan data table be revised to state the existing and proposed building coverage (if the proposed floor area exceeds the existing floor area by 50 percent or more, Open Space Impact Fees will apply), prior to building permit issuance; 2. That the site plan be revised to correct the typo error (proposed standazd pazking) within the data table and that the sidewalks and deck (including materials composition) be labeled on Sheet 3 of the site plan set, prior to building permit issuance; 3. That a revised landscape plan be submitted to the satisfaction of Planning staff, prior to any building permit issuance; 4. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB; 5. That Open Space, Recreation Land and Recreation Facility impact fees be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits or final plat, whichever occurs first (Recreation Land and Recreation Facilities, impact fees will be assessed for the 31 residential units); EXHIBIT • • October 22, 2004 Mark Jonnatti, Page Two 6. That the SWFWMD Permit and NPDES Notice of Intent be' provided to Planning Department staff prior to any building permit issuance; 7. That prior to building permit issuance, a site plan sheet be submitted that demonstrates a minimum 24-foot unobstructed width will be maintained for the drive aisle on the north side of the proposed building at the location of the gate; ~ 8. That prior to building permit issuance, a site plan sheet indicate the proposed location of the Fire Department Connection (FDC) for the proposed building; 9. That all Fire Department requirements be addressed prior to building ;permit issuance; 10. That prior to building permit issuance, a site plan sheet be submitted to show the location of the existing gas service main along Windward Passage; 11. That dumpster service with the City of Clearwater be arranged prior to building permit issuance; 12. That the condominium plat be recorded with Pinellas County prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy; 13. That all proposed utilities (from the rights-of--way to the proposed buildings) be placed underground and installation of conduit(s) along the entire length of the site's street frontages be completed prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; ,- 14. That Traffic Impact Fees be determined and paid prior to Certificate o~ Occupancy issuance; 15. That covered boat lifts be prohibited (uncovered boat lifts may be reviewed at an administrative level provided that all requirements of Section 3-601 are met); 16. That there be no jet ski or other like watercraft rental businesses at this location; 17. That boats moored at any docks be for the exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the condominiums; 18. That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code b'e met related to seawall setbacks; and 19. That all signage meet Code and be architecturally integrated into the design of the site and building. Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of Flexible Development approval (by October 19, 2005). All required certificates of occupancy shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do not change with successive owners. The 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 • • October 22, 2004 Mark Jonnatti, Page Three 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 Community Development Board 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 November 2, 2004. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Planner III, at 727-562-4836. You can access zoning information for parcels within the City through our website: www.clearwater-fl.com. Sincerely, Cynthia H. Tarapani, AICP Planning Director S: IP/arming DepartmentlC D BIFLEXVnactive or Finished Applrcationsl Windward Passage 279 Harbour Watch (C) 10.19.04 CDB - ApprovedlWindward Passage 279 Development Order October 22, 2004.doc • ~i November 18, 2005 Mr. Bill West C/o Opus South Corp. 4200 W. Cypress Street Tampa, FL 33607 RE: Amended Development Order -Case FLD2004-06042 - 279 Windward Passage Dear Mr. West: This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206D.6 of the Community Development Code. On October 19, 2004, the Community Development Board reviewed your Flexible Development application to permit 31 attached residential wits with a front (north) setback along Windward Passage of 6.6 feet (to pavement) and 26.12 feet (to building), a side ~~, (east) setback of 22.75 feet (to building), a rear (south) setback of 20 feet (to pool and cabana) and 53.56 feet to building, and a side (west) setback of to zero feet (to pavement) and 22.74 feet (to building), and an increase building height of 85 feet from base flood (elevation to midpoint of the roof, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sections 2-704.C. for the site at 279 Windward Passage. Based on the application and the Staff recommendation, the Community Development Board (CIDB) APPROVED the application with the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. That the site plan data table be revised to state the existing and proposed building coverage (if the proposed floor area exceeds the existing floor area by 50 percent~or more, Open Space Impact Fees will apply), prior to building permit issuance; ~ 2. That the site plan be revised to correct the typo error (proposed standard parking) within the data table and that the sidewalks and deck (including materials composition) be labeled on Sheet 3 of the site plan set, prior to building permit issuance; 3. That a revised landscape plan be -submitted to the satisfaction of Plai Wing staff, prior to any building permit issuance; 4. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB; ~ ~ November 18, 2005 Bill West, Page Two 5. That Open Space, Recreation Land and Recreation Facility impact fees be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits or final plat, whichever occurs first (Recreation Land and Recreation Facilities impact fees will be assessed for the 31 residential units); 6. That the SWFWMD Permit and NPDES Notice of Intent be provided to Planning Department staff prior to any building permit issuance; 7. That prior to building permit issuance, a site plan sheet be submitted that demonstrates a minimum 24-foot unobstructed width will be maintained for the drive aisle on the north side of the proposed building at the location of the gate; 8. That prior to building permit issuance, a site plan sheet indicate the proposed location of the Fire Department Connection (FDC) for the proposed building; 9. That all Fire Department requirements be addressed prior to building permit issuance; 10. That prior to building permit issuance, a site plan sheet be submitted to show the location of the existing gas service main along Windward Passage; 11. That dumpster service with the City of Clearwater be arranged prior to building permit issuance; 12. That the condominium plat be recorded with Pinellas County prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy; 13. That all proposed utilities (from the rights-of--way to the proposed buildings) be placed underground and installation of conduit(s) along the entire length of the site's street frontages be completed prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 14. That Traffic Impact Fees be determined and paid prior to Certificate of Occupancy issuance; 15. That covered boat lifts be prohibited (uncovered boat lifts may be reviewed at an administrative level provided that all requirements of Section 3-601 are met); 16. That there be no jet ski or other like watercraft rental businesses at this location; 17. That boats moored at any docks be for the exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the condominiums; 18. That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks; and 19. That all signage meet Code and be architecturally integrated into the design of the site and building. Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of Flexible Development approval (by October 19, 2005). 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 maybe required. In order to facilitate the issuance • • November 18, 2005 Bill West, Page Three 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 Community Development Board meeting. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of the decision pending the fmal determination of the case. The appeal period for your case expires on November 2, 2004. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Planner III, at 727-562-4836. You can access zoning information for parcels within the City through. our i website: www.myclearwater.com. Sincerely, ~ . , Michael L. Delk, AICP ~ Planning Director i i S.•IPlanning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)Ilnactive or Finished ApplicationslWlndward Passage 279 Harbour Watch (C) - Approved) Windward Passage 279 Amended Development Order 11.18.05, doc Status: Case Status f ~_. ,~~ ~ ,. Page 1 of 2 --,~ ~ '~.~~' ~' ~~~ d'^~'~x.t ~• ~'z'+.~,s4, +a ~• sf~~xe ;yea ~ ~y;;,- F. ~ j.: ,r ~ ~t'j t ~ 3b fit . • • ~ }* e c ePermit Nome View Permit View Business Tax Receipt View Planning Case View Parcel GIS View The information below summarizes the case you selected. Aerial photo, zoning information Case Status: Comment Number. ~I~1I520OS- '~ ~1~012 ~.~ _ Planner: Application Date: 11/17/2005 Parcel: 08-29-15-43380-003-0050 Address: ____~ 279 WINDWARD PASSAGE Project. Name: HARBOUR WATCH Description: FIX AND REPAIR EXISTING DOCKS rees: item ~ Fee Amount Fee Remaining ~ Date Paid Activities _- Type Completed Status . Done By Marine Permit Complete 9/8/2005 DONE WW Application received 1117/2005 DONE WW wores: Aci UALLY SUBMITTED AND SIGNED OFF ON 9/8/05, BUT WAS NOT ENTERED ON THAT DATE. e GIS View Aerial photo, zoning F' information m Back to Sea. rch = - x W .sa~QQei http://epermit.myclearwater.com/tm_bin/tmw cmd.pl?tmw- etnd=StatusViewCasePlan&sh... .7/30/2007 ' Status: Cases Matching Your ~ch Page 1 of 2 C] !~ 4 w ePermit Home View Permit View Business Tax Receipt View Planning Case View Parcel Permits/Licenses Matching Your Search ~' Below is a list of cases matching your search criteria. Up' to 50 cases are displayed per page. To see details, click the case number below, Total cases: 24 Displayed cases: 24 Page: 1 of 1 t?rev Next CASE ADDRESS STATUS NUMBER TMP2006- 279 03044 WINDWARD Complied/Complete _...._._.._.. _ PASSAGE 279 0CL9333981 WINDWARD PASSAGE 279 0CL9Z16721 WINDWARD PASSAGE 279 0CL900.0331 WINDWARD PASSAGE 279 OCL- WINDWARD 0004643 ------ --~ PASSAGE i+7IT52005-- °"' ~7'~ I A°l,~-N D¢411 A R D 1"1fl12 ~ ;R~~SSAGE ~~~ MIS2005,"- ,~ aNINL~VdARD 09DD3 ' .PASSAGE ;: 279 MIS2Q05- WINDWARD 04017 pASSAGE FLD3005- 279 09093 WINDWARD --- PASSAGE Business Closed in Clearwater Business Closed in Clearwater DESCRIPTION TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER Lic: 00978, Bus phone: (813) 442-6627 Bus phone: 462-8021 Business Closed in ROSS YACHT SALES: A DIVISION OF Clearwater QUALITY BOATS OF CLEARWATER, INC. - SALES & SERVICE Business Closed in 1 VENDING MACHINE Clearwater t~~i~iim`ent ~. Fix and i"epair~exist~ng hocks::. ;'; Cbmmen"t Ooat rampuTr+ con junction with l-iarbor 1Natch " condGs ati~'d Cl.earnrater MarJn~~<gquari~urn'.- _ _ Approved Minor Lot Adjustment with Clearwater Marine Aquarium Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight Received boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601. i BCP2006- 279 03873 WINDWARD ._.._...._._...._ PASSAGE 279 BCP2005- WINDWARD Complied/Complete 2ND CONSTRUCTTON TRAILER Complied/Complete 2" WATER METER http://epermit.myclearwater.com/tm bin/tmw_cmd.pl?tmw_crnd=StatusHitLitPlan i 7/30/2007 Status: Cases Matching Yc~eazch Page 2 of 2 11473 PASSAGE BCP2005- 279 ONE 12 X 60 CONSTRUCTION - -- ~- 1,1 415 WINDWARD Complied/Complete TRAILER/TEMP ELECTRIC WILL BE NEEDED. .... pASSAGE PLEASE SEE DOCUMENTS BCP2005- 279 NEW CONSTRUCTION OF AN 8 STORY 31 ~9$2g WINDWARD Received UNIT CONDO BUILDING (SITE ON BCP2005- -- ~---~ PASSAGE 02671) (FOUNDATION BCP2005-09475) BCP2005- 279 PLAN AMENDMENT REVISION TO QUANTTY 0947SA WINDWARD Complied/Complete IF CUISSMS FROM 81 TO 69 AT AN PASSAGE AVERAGE OF 50 FEET BCP2005- 279 09475 WINDWARD Expired FOUNDATION ONLY -~- PASSAGE BCP200~- WINDWARD Complied/Complete .SEWER CAP PERMIT (DEMO ON BCP2005- ~9472 PASSAGE 09401) BCP2005 - 279 COMPLETE DEMOLITION AND/OR REMOVAL _ X9401 WINDWARD Complied/Complete OF (1) 2-STORY METAL & MASONRY pASSAGE BUILDING WITH PILE OF DEBRIS B.C I?2005- 279 . 09103 WINDWARD Complied/Complete TREE REMOVAL OF 26 + -PALMS -~---- PASSAGE BCP200.5- 279 WINDWARD Complied/Complete ADDITION TO CONSTRUCTION FENCE 300' 06.793A, PASSAGE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY BCP2005- 279 06793 WINDWARD Complied/Complete CONSTRUCTION FENCE -- - PASSAG E PLAN AMENDMENT: "REVISE FORCE MAIN BCP20Q5- 279 ROUTING FROM CMA AND NEW 02571A WINDWARD Void/No Violation CONNECTION AT WINDWARD PASSAGE; --~- PASSAGE ALSO ADDED 4" FIRE LINE SERVICE FROM PUMP ROOM TO PROPOSED DOCKS" 279 SITE WORK FOR 31 UNIT CONDOMINIUM BCP2005- WINDWARD Expired BUILDING (WORK TO INCLUDE, WATER, 02671 pASSAGE SEWER, FIRE PROTECTION, STORM, PARKING AND ACCESS DRIVES) BCP1991- 279 WINDWARD Retired REMOVE 2 550 GALLON UNDERGROUND 1,1Q079 PASSAGE STORAGE TANKS AT ROSS YACHT SALES Back to Search ' If you have any questions or suggestions for our site, please contact Development Services at (727) 562-4567 or E-mail us City of Clearwater Home Page Review, City of Clearwater Web Site. Legal Disclaimers Version: 3.5.1.20051221.03 http://epermit.myclearwater.com/tm_bin/tmvv_cmd.pl?tmw_cmd=StatusHitListP(an 7/30/2007 • October 20 , 2005 Mr. Joseph w. Gaynor Joseph W. Gaynor P.A. 304 Monroe St. Dunedin, Florida 24698 • Re: Harbour Watch, A Condominium (Former Ross Yacht Parcel~.and the easterly 60feet of the Clearwater Marine Aquarium Parcel) Dear Mr. Gaynor, This letter confirms that the City of Clearwater (City) acknowledges the existence of the eight boat slips at the above location. There is a 1958 deed whereby the City dedicated to the Public the waterway adjoining the above project. The deed prohibits improvements in or obstruction of the waterway, but it does allow docks which have the proper permits from the City. The City does further acknowledge the upland owners' right to use the above described boat slips so long as they maintain them in accordance with the applicable maintenance permits and section 3-601 of the City Code. Historically, the City has not granted submerged land leases on City owned submerged land for the purpose of privately owned residential docks. If you change the design of the existing slips and dock facilities, you vvill be required to obtain permits for the docks from the City and the Pinellas County Water and Navigation Control Authority. Your dock site plan must be approved by the Community Development Board (CBD). Based on my discussions with you, your consultant Bill Woods has received favorable comments from the City staff and will be presenting your new design 'to CBD. Your attorney should also be aware the City's own boat slips abutting the East (Island Way Grill) and West (CMA)of Harbour Watch, and all of the slips on the South side of Windward Passage, including the eleven docks that the City permitted for your project at the Pools at Windward Passage, which are all on City submerged land are 50 or 50+ feet notwithstanding the 35 foot deed restriction which shows up on Island Estates as well gas parts of Clearwater Beach. If you or your attorney have any questions, please feel free to contact~me at (727) 562-4743. Sincerely, Michael D. Quillen, P.E. cc: Bill Morris, Harbor Master Bill Woods EXHIBIT a L' T07-0-016 : Harbourwatch - oena Duces Tecum Page 1 of 2 •~~ Watkins, Sherry From: TefFt, Cathy Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 3:07 PM To: Watkins, Sherry; Wells, Wayne; Delk, Michael Cc: Hull, Dick; Lipowski, Laura; Tormeno, Donna Subject: RE: LT07-0-016 : Harbourwatch -Subpoena Duces Tecum IbINumAttach: 0 MailNickName: cathy.horak MessageGUID: {D93317C7-1316-401A-8430-1E6978FCAC64} MsgHeaderlD: <80F72182073070479C86FC6AD53E3FEC42D4E0@MSB-EML ~1.clearwater-fl.com> OriginalDate: None Originator: SQL Style: Harbour Watch LLC v. City of Clearwater Dear Sherry: Thanks for inquiring about the records requested in Wayne's Subpoena Duces Tecum. I've spoken with Dick, Assistant City Attorney, & Donna, Paralegal. Dick advised the following. While some of the requests appear vague (ex.: Item (1), Exh. B), instead of supplying opposing counsel with a copy of the entire Harbourwatch file, please have Wayne bring the file to his preparatory meeting with Dick on Jan. 24th. Dick's response to opposing counsel may be that the request is too vague anti must be redefined in order to be fulfilled. Also, in the instance of Items (4) and (5), Exh. B. If the documents are maintained by another department, Dick may inform opposing counsel of the appropriate departmental Records Custodian. Dick will formulate his response after meeting with Wayne on the 24th. ~. Please keep in mind that since this is a litigation matter, the typical rules for public records requests may not apply. Dick will oversee all document production to opposing counsel and prepare the final response. Consequently, should you, Wayne or Mike have any questions about this legal action, please do not hesitate to contact Dick directly. This matter may become quite involved. Rest assured, we will do our best to providetunely follow-up and legal counsel to safeguard the interests of the City. ' Many thanks for your assistance with this matter! Sincerely, Cathy Cathy H. Tefft Legal Staff Assistant, City Attorney's Office City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4014 Fax: (727) 562-4021 <mailto:cathy.tefftQmyclearwater.com> -----Original Message----- From: Tefft, Cathy Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 4:29 PM 1/10/2008 r L`T07-0-016 : Harbourwatch - oena Duces Tecum Page 2 of 2 • ': To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Hull, Dick; Tormeno, Donna Subject: LT07-0-016 : Harbourwatch -Subpoena Duces Tecum Wayne: We received a fax copy of the Subpoena Duces Tecum (attached) for your deposition on the 29th. I am forwarding it so that you have immediate nonce. Keep in mind, you might still be served by a process server. Please review the document, especially Exhibits A & B, and advise as to which documents you can produce. Also, can you confirm that the documents will be ready by 1/24/08, your meeting with Dick? As usual, please let us know if you have any questions. ', -Cathy «doc 6 1180.tif» Cathy H. Tefft Legal Staff Assistant, City Attorney's Office ~ City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4014 Fax: (727) 562-4021 <mailto:cathy.tefftC~?myclearwater.com> ~~ 1/10/2008 ' ~ ~ ~~ IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL~CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION HARBOUR WATCH, LLC, A foreign limited liability company, Plaintiff, vs. CITY OF CLEARWATER, a municipal corporation, and Defendant. Case No: 07-9316-CI Division: 20 SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FOR 1.310(b1(6) DEPOSITION THE STATE OF FLORIDA: TO: Wayne Wells Planning Department Municipal Services Building 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, 2"d Floor Clearwater, FL 33756 ~(a~o~ a ; o~ ~"~ ~ZSe. ~s#s~tao YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear before a person authorized by law to take depositions on January 29, 2008 at 10:00 a.m., for th,e taking of your deposition at the following location: Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP, 911 Chestnut Street, Conference Room 9136, Clearwater, FL 33756 in this action and you will testify as to the specific issues described ~ in the attached Exhibit "A." In addition, at that time and place you will bring with you the documents described in the attached Exhibit "B," if not already produced. • • It is the intent of this Subpoena that each and every document and thing in your care, custody, or control, or available to you, no matter how insignificant that item might appear to whom this subpoena is directed be produced. This Subpoena encompasses all documents and things, regardless of how old, including anything that might be on microfilm/micro-fiche or kept at another location. TO COMPLY WITH THIS SUBPOENA YOU ARE TO PRODUCE EACH AND EVERY DOCUMENT OR THING WHICH HAS EVER BEEN A PART OF YOUR FILE. If any document or thing is not produced, you are to identify that document or thing by date, title, author, and recipient; and identify the person, pursuant to whose instructions the documents or things were not produced, by name, address and employer. You will not be required to surrender the original items. You may provide photostatic copies of your documents. You have the right Ito object to the production pursuant to this subpoena at any time before production by giving written notice to the attorney whose name appears on this subpoena. These records are being requested for the purpose of discovery for use at trial, and/or for such other purposes as are permitted under the ':Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. If you fail to: (1) to furnish the records identified on the subpoena at the time and place specified; or (2) object to this subpoena, • you may be in contempt of Court. You are subpoenaed by the attorneys whose names appear on this subpoena and unless excused from this subpoena by the attorneys of the Court, you shall respond to this subpoena as directed. DATED on this ,_6~ day of January, 2008. JOHNSON, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, LLP "~ Darryl R. Richards FBN 348929 JOHNSON, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, LLP P.O._ Box 1100 Tampa, Florida 33601 (813) 225-2500, (813) 223-7118 Counsel for Plaintiff cc: D & D Reporting Service, Inc. ~ 915 Chestnut Street Clearwater, FL 33756 Paul Richard Hull, Esquire Pamela Akin, Esquire Clearwater City Hall ~ 112 S. Osceola Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 • • EXHIBIT A ISSUES 1. Facts and allegations in the Complaint; 2. Facts and allegations in the City's Answer and Affirmative Defenses; 3. The docks referenced in the Complaint in paragraph's 10 and 13; 4. The Flexible Development Application filed by Harbour Watch, LLC; 5. The Development Order and Amended Development Order referenced in paragraphs 15 and 16 of the Complaint; 6. The repair/rebuild permit referenced in Paragraphs X17, 18, 19 and 20 of the Complaint; 7. Discussions regarding reconfiguring docks as referenced in paragraph 13 of the Complaint; 8. The discussions regarding the extension of docks referenced in paragraphs 11 and 12 of the Complaint; 9. Plaintiffs efforts to obtain assurances from The, State of Florida referenced in paragraphs 25 and 26 of the Complaint; 10. The City's discussions with the State of Florida and Plaintiff referenced in paragraphs 26, 27, 28 and 29 of the Complaint; 11. The referendum requirement under The City Charter referenced in paragraphs 31 and 32 of the Complaint; 12. The Deeds of Dedication from the State of Florida to the City of Clearwater and from the City of Clearwater to the general public regarding submerged lands. s • EXHIBIT B 1. Any and all documents relating to Harbor Watch, LLC. 2. Any and all documents to or from any representatives of Harbor Watch, LLC. 3. Any and all- documents related to, referencing' or discussing the request to extend the private docks referenced in the letter attached as Exhibit A. 4. Any and all documents related to, referencing or identifying the sign off on the permit and application referenced in Exhibit B, attached hereto. 5. Any and all documents referencing, discussing or identifying docks on submerged land constituting the Memorial Causeway or lands immediately contiguous thereto. 6. All documents that related to, referencing or discussing the contents of the letter attached hereto as Exhibit C. 7. All documents related to, referencing or discussing repair/rebuild permit M-36437-05 issued by Pinellas County, Florida. i. i .~ LL ~ O _} ~, earwa er U City Attorney's Office Interoffice Correspondence Sheet TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Pamela K. Akin~N~ City Attorney SUBJECT: Harbour Watch LLC v. City of Clearvvater Case No.: 07-9316-CI-020 DATE: October 16, 2007 Please be advised we were served with the above lawsuit on October 2, 2007, the defense of which has been assigned to Assistant City Attorney Paul Richard Hull. BRIEF SUMMARY: Action for declaratory relief from the referendum requirements regarding the eight docks which existed at the Harbour Estates development before the referendum was passed. The plaintiff alleges the City should be estopped from denying approval of their Dock Application. ~ PKA/PRH/ch cc: William B. Horne, II, City Manager Michael Delk, Planning Department Director Bill Morris, Marine and Aviation Department Director Michael Quillen, Engineering Department Director ~~~~~ air ~ s ~ ~ L__~___--_-- PIANNING & DEVELOPMENT ~ SERVICES CITY OF CLEARWATER ___ Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 7:46 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: ed@jpfirm.com Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, Docks for 279 Windward Passage i Thanks Wayne-Ed Armstrong's firm is preparing the appropriate law suit as discussed with Pam-I hope to see a draft this week. ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed!laolcom30tour i 7/24/2007 ~I Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 9:13 AM To: Joseph W. Gaynor (E-mail) ~ Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FLD2005-09093, Docks for 279 Windward Passage ' Joe - ~ On May 8, 2007, you requested the above referenced application be placed on the Community Development Board (CDB) agenda for August 21, 2007. Subsequent to your request, on June 4, 2007, a meeting was held at City Hall where it was discussed that a referendum is required. Since a referendum is required to authorize the' use prior to CDB action, I am informing you that the above referenced application will not be placed on the August 2007 CDB agenda. If I can be of further service, please let me know. Wayne i ~ ti ,~ £ ~"~"~ Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 11:53 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Garriott, Kevin; Lopez, Michael; Horne, William; Lipowski, Laura Subject: Re: House Bill Right now the project is on hold because of the market and I am meeting, with Bill Horne this week because there seems to be some confusion with respect to the House Bill! In any event, I will be working with the Building Dept. to extend all of the permits. Without pres~ales, we can not get a construction loan. I am sure most developers are in the same position. Without a construction loan we can not pay all of the permit and impact fees. Joseph W. Gaynor -----Original Message----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com To: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Cc: michael.delk.@MyClearwater.com; Gina.Clayton@myClearwater.com; neil.thompson@MyClearwater.com; Kevin.Garriott@myClearwater.com; Michael.Lopez@myClearwater.com; William.Horne@myclearwater.com; Laura. Lipowski@myClearwater.com Sent: Tue, 8 May 2007 2:03 PM Subject: RE: House Bill Joe - I understand that you want to restart the FLD case for CDB review/action in August. I can place this case on the August CDB agenda. I will need to review the case to see where we were at when we stopped and as to what changes need to be made to the staff report (if any). However, I do have a question as to the issue of the upland development of the 31 condominium attached dwellings. Building Permit BCP2005-09829 is still in received status, but the last entry was in September 2006. The Building Department is going to want to know when a resubmittal for this permit will be made, or the permit will be voided, which then voids the upland CDB approval under FLD2004-06042. Additionally, the "foundation only" permit has expired (BCP2005-09475), as well as the "site work" permit (BCP2005-02671). If the upland condominium attached dwellings are not going to be built, I might question going forward with the docks (which are accessory to the attached dwellings). Could you let me know whati is happening with the construction of the 31 condominium attached dwellings (Building Department will also want to know)? Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa aol.com [mailto:Josephwgavnorga aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 1:34 PM To: Horne, William; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: House Bill Bill and Laura, I called on Monday to thank the City for following up on the House Bill which got 5/22/2007 ,~ ~ o Page 2 of 2 • • passed last Friday. I do not have a copy of the final Bill, but I was told by Ed blooper that the Senate Bill and the House Bill were the same. In any event, should you or Laura have the final Bill, I would appreciate a copy. It is my understanding from Ed Hooper that the Bill goes into law if it is not signed by the Governor in 30 days and since it was approved unanimously in both the House and the Senate, there should not be any problem with a potential veto. By copy of this a-mail I am requesting Wayne Wells to schedule the CDB hearing for the first available date in month of August. I believe all of the stipulations have been previously satisfied except for the language pertaining to evidence form the State. Shoul d this not be the case, I would appreciate you or Wayne advising me so that I can satisfy any outstanding items in the month of June or July. Joe I i See what's free at http://www.aol.com. AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. 5/22/2007 ~:~, ~ • Page 1 of 3 Wells, Wayne From: Horne, William Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 2:05 PM ' To: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Horak, Cathy Cc: Wells, Wayne; 'Ehooper1 @aol.com'; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: House Bill Thanks to all of you for working with Mr Gaynor. The response we want from him is a well informed one. I am confident that he will feel better after his consultation with you. Bill Bill Horne, ICMA-CM City Manager Clearwater, FL (727) 562-4046 -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 12:06 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Horak, Cathy Cc: Wells, Wayne; 'Ehooperl@aol.com'; Horne, William; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: House Bill FYI -Cathy Horak will be arranging an internal meeting (hopefully later this week) to address Mr. Gaynor's issues as described below. Laura Lipowski Assistant City Attorney City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4015 Fax: (727) 562-4021 mailto:laura.lipowski@myclearwater.com -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 12:03 PM To: 'josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Wells, Wayne; Ehooperl@aol.com; Horne, William; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: House Bill Mr. Gaynor, With all due respect, my name is Laura. As to your property and project, the referendum requirement I refer to is unrelated to the House Bill. The House Bill deals with use of the property as between the City.and State's interest while declaring certain limited private uses are not in violation of any restriction. The House Bill helps 5/22/2007 c.r •4a ~ . Page 2 of 3 i you. At the same time, the House Bill declares, in Section 4, that the Bill doves not supersede the City Charter. Staff is currently reviewing your file so that we may have a discussion with you, as requested, regarding the Charter restriction and your property. A phone conference would be preferred. My assistant Cathy will be contacting you after she coordinates staff schedules. You know I have dedicated significant time and effort to resolving these issues. I continue to do all that I can to resolve these issues. I trust I can rely on your continued cooperation. Thank you. Laura Lipowski Assistant City Attorney City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4015 Fax: (727) 562-4021 mailto:laura.lipowski@myclearwater.com ----Original Message----- ~ From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 9:23 PM To: Horne, William; Lipowski, Laura ~ Cc: Wells, Wayne; Ehooperl@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; btrice@investorsrealtyadvisors.com; pdoganiero@pods.com Subject: Re: House Bill ~ I am available Wednesday from noon to 3PM and Thursday from 10AM until noon-hope we can handle this by a telephone conference earlier if possible-when I received Laurie's response about the referendum I was extremely upset-you know the the history so I won't go into it again except everything was done except Opus was the one who raised the reverter issue-ipermits were in hand for 2 years site plans were approved on the upland with the only condition being the docks needed to go before CDB, and the staff recommended approval subject only to the standard stipulations and the State sign off-the House Bill excluded applications submitted to the City before December31,2006-I spoke with Ed Hooper and he assured me that our property was not subject to the referendum amendment and that Pam is aware of that-we have been very patient and in fact have lost Opus because of the delays on the docks and subsequent decline in the market.We would have never agreed to the House Bill if we were not grandfathered in-there is no way a referendum would be passed to allow private docks-it took 4 years to get public docks approved. Bill we need an immediate sign off by the City to allow us to go to CDB -at no time since 2003 has the City ever raised the requirement of a referendum on this parcel and if they had $6,500,000 would not have been invested in this project.Your immediate attention will be greatly appreciated so we avoid having to go to the governor before the bill is sig ned into law or take whatever action is nedeed to protect our rights. Joseph W. Gaynor -----Original Message----- i From: William.Horne@myclearwater.com To: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; Laura.Lipowski@myClearwater.com Cc: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com 5/22/2007 .., ~ ~ • !, Page 3 of 3 Sent: Tue, 8 May 2007 2:32 PM Subject: RE: House Bill Joe, Wayne and Laura will be in touch with you to discuss all of your questions. Thanks. Bill Bill Horne, ICMA-CM City Manager Clearwater, FL (727) 562-4046 -----Original Message----- From: JosephwgaynorpaC~aol.com [mailto:Jos~hwgaynorpaC~aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 1:34 PM To: Horne, William; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: House Bill Bill and Laura, I called on Monday to thank the City for following up on the House Bill which got passed last Friday. I do not have a copy of the final Bill, but I was told by Ed Hooper that the Senate Bill and the House Bill were the same. In any event, should you or Laura have the final Bill, I would appreciate a copy. It is my understanding from Ed Hooper that the Bill goes into law if it is not signed by the Governor in 30 days and since it was approved unanimously in both the House and the Senate, there should not be any problem with a potential veto. By copy of this a-mail I am requesting Wayne Wells to schedule the CDB hearing for the first available date in month of August. I believe all of the stipulations have been previously satisfied except for the language pertaining to evidence form the State. Shoul d this not be the case, I would appreciate you or Wayne advising me so that I can satisfy any outstanding items in the month of June or July. Joe See what's free at http://www.aol.com. 5/22/2007 • Wells, Wayne . ' Page 1 of 2 From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 9:23 PM To: Horne, William; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne; Ehooper1 @aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; btrice@investorsrealtyadvisors.com; pdoganiero@pods.com Subject: Re: House Bill I am available Wednesday from noon to 3PM and Thursday from 10AM until noon-hope we can handle this by a telephone conference earlier if possible=when I received Laurie's response about the referendum I was extremely upset-you know the the history so I won't go into it again except everything was done except Opus was the one who raised the reverter issue-permits were in hand for 2 years,site plans were approved on the upland with the only condition being the docks needed to go before CDB, and the staff recommended approval subject only to the standard stipulations and the State sign off-the House Bill excluded applications submitted to the-City before December31,2006-I spoke with Ed Hooper and he assured me that our property was not subject to the referendum amendment and that Pam is aware of that-we have been very patient and in fact have lost Opus because of the delays on the docks and subsequent decline in the market.We would have never agreed to the House Bill if we were not grandfathered in-there 'is no way a referendum would be passed to allow private docks-it took 4 years to get public docks approved. Bill ,we need an immediate sign off by the City to allow us to go to CDB -at no time since 2003 has the City ever raised the requirement of a referendum on this parcel and if they had $6,00,000 would not have been invested in this project.Your immediate attention will be greatly appreciated so we avoid having to go to the governor before the bill is sig ned into law or take whatever action is nedeed to protect our rights. ~. Joseph W. Gaynor -----Original Message----- From: William.Horne@myclearwater.com To: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; Laura. Lipowski@myClearwater.com Cc: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com Sent: Tue, 8 May 2007 2:32 PM Subject: RE: House Bill Joe, Wayne and Laura will be in touch with you to discuss all of your,questions. Thanks. Bill Bill Horne, ICMA-CM City Manager Clearwater, FL (727) 562-4046 -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol,com [mailto•Josephwgavnorpa@aol com] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 1:34 PM To: Horne, William; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne 5/14/2007 • ~ Page 2 of 2 Subject: House Bill Bill and Laura, I called on Monday to thank the City for following up on the House Bill which got passed last Friday. I do not have a copy of the final Bill, but I was told by Ed Hooper that the Senate Bill and the House Bill were the same. In any event, should you or Laura have the final Bill, I would appreciate a copy. It is my understanding from Ed Hooper that the Bill goes into law if it is not signed by the Governor in 30 days and since it was approved unanimously in both the House and the Senate, there should not be any problem with a potential veto. By copy of thin a-mail I am requesting Wayne Wells to schedule the CDB hearing for the first available date in month of August. I believe all of the stipulations have been previously satisfied except for the language pertaining to evidence form the State. Shoul d this not be the case, I would appreciate you or Wayne advising me so that I can satisfy any outstanding items in the month of June or July. Joe ' See what's free at http://www.aol.com. AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. 5/14/2007 ', • Wells, Wayne • Page 1 of 2 From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 2:36 PM To: 'JosephWGaynorpa@aol.com' • Cc: Horne, William; Wells, Wayne; Akin, Pam Subject: FW: Harbour Watch Legislation Joe, I have attached my email of April 17, 2006 which included the most recent copy of the legislation with amendments. Please note that Section 4 of the Act specifically provides that the Act does not supersede the City Charter provisions cited. Therefore, in accordance with Section 2.01(6) of the City Charter, Council will need to determine at a public hearing, that the contemplated development is in the best interest of the citizens of the City, and that Council agrees to conduct a referendum. Then, a positive vote at referendum will be required prior to development or maintenance of the subject property. I have been advised that you should contact the City Manager's office should you choose to pursue a referendum to develop. Thanks, ' Laura ~~ Laura Lipowski Assistant City Attorney City of Clearwater ~ Tel: (727) 562-4015 ' Fax: (727) 562-4021 mailto:laura.lipowski(a~myclearwater.com -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 11:48 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Legislation Hi Joe - I can email you the latest version I have with amendments (as of this morning). I really don't know anything about Thomas' position or motivation. I understand the vote will go tomorrow and hopefully the result will be beneficial to all. ' Laura Lipowski Assistant City Attorney City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4015 ' Fax: (727) 562-4021 mailto~laura.li~owski(a~myclearwater.com -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 12:52 PM To: Lipowski, Laura 5/11/2007 ,+ • ~ Page 2 of 2 Cc: tidewaterre@tampabay.rr.com Subject: Harbour Watch Legislation Ed Hooper contacted me several weeks ago and indicated that the House bill was now supported by the delegation and that it would come up for a vote this week. Ed called and indicated the bill was revised and was currently stuck in committee mainly because Fred Thomas was opposing the bill. Ed was on the road and could not send to me the revised bill. Could you a-mail me the last draft you have? Are you aware of Thomas's position so that we can use our lobbyist in Tallahassee to help out. I understand Thomas may be upset with the City regarding the Cheezem!bottom land deal but that is only speculation on Ed's part. Any update you can give me would be greatly appreciated. SWFWMD has our permit on hold pending the outcome of the vote and the Board of Trustees has our agreement on hold also pending the outcome of the vote. As you can imagine this has been extremely frustrating that the issue of the docks is going into the fourth year and unlike everyone else, we are not asking for new docks, just replacing twelve old docks and twenty-one moorings with eight slips. In any event, we appreciate your help. See what's free at http://www.aol.com. 5/11/2007 • • AMENDMENTS TO CLEARWATER LOCAL BILL (H,B 1585) Amendment # 1: On page 3, lines 66-74, strike said lines and insert: chapter 11050 Laws of Florida 1925 for which it has received an application on or before December 31 2006 if the private uses are consistent with the laws and regulations governing the management of sovereignty submerged lands of this state by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund, including rules of the board concerning private marinas and docking facilities. If the use of any area under the control of the portions of the property granted under chapter 11050 Laws of Florida 1925 including any portion of the property that may include the Clearwater City Beach Marina Property is altered from the existing public intended open space recreation or any other existing public land use designation, the change of use must first be approved by a site specific referendum put before the voters of the City of Clearwater. A dock or mooring facility for a multifamily dwelling or a dock for a single-family dwelling authorized under this act which is consistent with such laws and rules does not violate this act. The City of Clearwater Amendment # 2: On page 4, lines 89-90, delete said lines and insert: the requirement of a referendum for the use of waterfront property that is owned by the City of Clearwater which shall include the causeway as provided in section 2 of the act. • • • i FLORIDA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HB 1585 2007 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14' 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 A bill to be entitled An act relating to the City of Clearwater, Pinellas County; ratifying certain uses of property granteCl to the city by the state which were authorized by the city; providing that certain uses of such property are ~~ consistent with a grant made by the state; providing for limited private use of certain undeveloped submerged portions of the property if the city determines that the use is consistent with the laws governing the management of sovereignty submerged lands by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund; requiring the, city to use revenues from any such limited private use to fund certain water-related activities; providing for a right of reverter in the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund; providing that the act does not modify or supersede the city's charter concerning , waterfront property owned by the city; providing ari effective date. WHEREAS, the right-of-way for the causeway to Clearwater Beach known as Memorial Causeway and certain adjacent submerged lands was granted to the City of Clearwater under chapter 11050, Laws of Florida, 1925, to be owned and maintained as provided in the 1925 special act, and WHEREAS, the 1925 special act limits the use of property granted to public purposes and uses as specified in~the act and provides for reversion of such property to the state in circumstances involving use of the property in a maniner that is CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions, Page 1 of 2 I, .• F• IDA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATI ES~ HB 1585 2007 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 inconsistent with those specifications, and WHEREAS, chapter 86-345, Laws of Florida, released a portion of the property granted by the 1925 special act from the reverter in order to permit the development and maintenance of a portion of the property as a marine science center as approved by the city commission and electors of the City of Clearwater, and ' WHEREAS, the property granted by the 1925 special act now consists of uplands and submerged lands adjacent to those uplands, which have been developed for public purposes and uses, plus additional submerged lands that are adjacent~to the developed uplands and that remain undeveloped, and WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater wishes to make uses of portions of the undeveloped adjacent submerged lands for public purposes and certain limited private uses as specified in this act which are consistent with the laws and rules governing the management of sovereignty submerged lands by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund and the City of Clearwater desire that tvhe extent and manner of the use of the adjacent portions of the submerged lands be consistent with the use of other sovereignty submerged lands of the state, NOW, THEREFORE, ure of the State of Florida: Be It Enacted by the Legislat ~. Section 1. Any use of the property described in chapter 11050, Laws of Florida, 1925, and authorized by thelCity of CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions. Page 2 of 2 • F• IDA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HB 1585 2007 59 i 60 Clearwater on or before the effective date of thus act is 61 ratified notwithstanding whether the use is for a~public 62 purpose. In addition, any use of that portion of .the property 63 described in chapter 86-345, Laws of Florida, which was 64 undertaken on or before the effective date of this act has been 65 and is consistent with the grant made in that act for the 66 purpose of developing and maintaining a marine science center. 67 ~ 68 Section 2. The City of Clearwater may authorize those additional 69 private uses of the submerged portions of the property granted i 70 under chapter 11050, Laws of Florida, 1925, ~tY}ie~se~-a~~= 71 men ~e~~e-i~=rr-, H, e~-a~~e~i ~ ~ _ _ ~~ 72 for which it has received an application on or 73 before December 31, 2006 if the private uses I 74 are consistent with the laws and rules governing the management 75 of the sovereignty submerged lands of this state ~y the Board of 76 Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, including rules 77 of the board concerning private marinas and docking facilities. 78 If the use of any area under the control of the portions of the 79 property granted under chapter 11050,, Laws of Florida, 80 1925,including any portion of the property that may include ~s 81 i~~'r•~'^ •-•'~~} ~ ^ '"'e~a~the Clearwater City Beach Marina 82 Property, is altered from the existing intended open space i 83 recreation or any other existing land use designation, the 84 change of use must first be approved by a site specific 85 referendum put before the voters of the City of Clearwater. A 86 dock or mooring facility for a multifamily dwelling or a dock 87 for a single-family dwelling which is consistent with such laws CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions. Page 3 of 2 F~IDA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HB 1585 2007 i 88 and rules does not violate this act. The City of iClearwater 89 shall use any revenue generated by authorizing any private use 90 of the submerged land to fund water-related activities for the 91 benefit of the public. ~ 92 i 93 Section 3. If the Board of Trustees of the Internal 94 ~ 95 i 96 Improvement Trust Fund finds that any use of a portion of the 97 submerged lands granted under chapter 11050, Lawslof Florida, 98 1925, which was authorized by the City of Clearwater and not 99 ratified by Section 1 of this act is inconsistent with the laws 100 and rules governing the board's management of the state's 101 sovereignty submerged lands, that portion shall, notwithstanding 102 the 1925 special act, revert to the state to be held and managed 103 by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund. 104 105 Section 4. This act does not modify or supersede any 106 provision of the Charter of the City of Clearwater; concerning 107 the requirement of a referendum for the use of waterfront I 108 property that is owned by the City of Clearwater which shall 109 include the causeway property. ~ 110 Section 5. This act shall take effect upon becoming a law. I i I CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions. Page 4 of 2 ~ ~..- ~ • I Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 2:04 PM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Garriott, Kevin; Lopez, Michael; Horne, William; Lipowski, Laura Subject: RE: House Bill Joe - I understand that you want to restart the FLD case for CDB review/action in August. i I can place this case on the August CDB agenda. I will need to review the case to see where we were at when we stopped and as to what changes need to be made to the staff report (if any). However, I do have a question as to the issue of the upland development of the 31 condominium attached dwellings. Building Permit BCP2005-09829 is still in received status, but the last entry was in September 2006. The Building Department is going to want to know when a resubmittal for this permit~will be made, or the permit will be voided, which then voids the upland CDB approval under FLD2004-06042. Additionally, the "foundation only" permit has expired (BCP2005-09475), as well as the "site work" permit (BCP2005-02671). If the upland condominium attached dwellings are not going to be built, I might question going forward with the docks (which are accessory to the attached dwellings). Could you let me know what is happening with the construction of the 31 condominium attached dwellings (Building Department will also want to know)? Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 1:34 PM To: Horne, William; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: House Bill Bill and Laura, I called on Monday to thank the City for following up on the House Bill which got passed last Friday. I do not have a copy of the final Bill, but I was told by Ed Hooper that the Senate Bill and the House Bill were the same. In any event, should you or Laura have~the final Bill, I would appreciate a copy. It is my understanding from Ed Hooper that the Bill goes into law if it is not signed by the Governor in 30 days and since it was approved unanimously in both the House and the Senate, there should not be any problem with a potential veto. By copy of this a-mail I am requesting Wayne Wells to schedule the CDB hearing for the first available date in month of August. I believe all of the stipulations have been previously satisfied except for the language pertaining to evidence form the State. Should this not be the case, I would appreciate you o'r Wayne advising me so that I can satisfy any outstanding items in the month of June or July. Joe ~ See what's free at http://www.aol.com. 5/8/2007 • • CITY OF CLE~AI'~.WATER ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT 'F ry ,' ' P(>s~r Orr-u;l: Box 4748, CL+iAKWA•I IiK, FL<)Itlf)A 33758-4748 n• Yr. ri ~ ~ ~ ~,.,d 6 }~ , ,e "`r.=,.~. ~'' Mur.ICrnA+. Sr:KVU:r•_ti Buu.n+~c., 100 Sour+a MvK•r+.+: Ave~l;l:, C+.I:nKWn'r+ai, ProKlr~n 3375C> '1'la.l:~l+o~r•, (727) 562-4567 FA~C (727) 5<2-4$65 I,o~c Rn~cr: Plnn~+~c ~, I July 18, 2006 Mr. Bill Woods Woods Consulting, Inc. 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 ~ Re: Community Development Board Meeting (Case No. FLD2005-09093 - 279 Windward Passage) Dear Mr. Woods: The Community Development Board (CDB) at their meeting on July 18, 2006, continued the above referenced request to a date uncertain. When the legal issues of the submerged land have been resolved, this case will be scheduled for the next available CDB meeting and readvei-tised. The request is for Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock ,for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for property located at 279 Windward Passage. ~ If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Wayne M. Wells, AIC1?, Planner III, at 727-562- 4504. i Sincerely, ' ~~ /'f" Michael Delk, AICP ~ Planning Director Cc: Joe Gaynor i S: (Planning DepartmentlCD BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cnseslReviewed and PendinglWindward Passnge 279 Harbour Wntch Docks (C) - go back to CDB - WWIWindward Pnssage 279 CDB Continuance Letter 7.18.06.doc i I r:~x~ i luar:u;u, \t:~i~n: I~~+i.n !)r~i;:~.a, (:rn ~r:n_~n:~nrra; I lui r I I:~>ni:rci~, (;c ii ~,~rai_~u:wu:r, liu.i. Jrix><~~, (:nr~cu.>nt>n,rr, C~ri.it~ ;\. I'rn;rsr~, G~i xr:n.~ut>nn;r: 'I':nl:Ai.I•:>fru~i>u:~°r;~xi~i\rrn,~+:~rnftr\rrir~.~ I?.~IrLCweK„ • Wells, Wayne Page 1 of 1 From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 11:08 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; richardb@hgslaw.com; Wells, Wayne; Akin, Pam; Dougall-Sides, Leslie;'.Horne, William Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Stipulation Joe, Leslie Dougall-Sides, Pam Akin and myself have reviewed your proposed Stipulatioh and met to discuss it. For various reasons, the City cannot agree to the Stipulation but is still willing to follow the course of action previously agreed to, which would be to deed the submerged lands back to the State, thereby removing that portion of property from the applicable reverter provision. You could then, presumably, enter into a submerged lands lease with the State in order to fulfill your goals regarding docks. Note also that when we initially looked at the issues surrounding the submerged lands in the subject area, it was concluded that the proper way to "undo" the restrictions created by the 1925 Legislative Act (which placed the public purpose restriction on the property), was via the Legislature. The City intends to pursue this solution during the 2007 legislative session. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 4:12 PM ~. To: Lipowski, Laura; Horne, William Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; 'richardb@hgslaw.com; Wells, Wayne ~ Subject: Harbour Watch Stipulation , Attached is a draft of the proposed Stipulation. Exhibit B is the legal based on the submerged land survey that has been submitted to the City. The legal description encompasses less property than in the Deed of Dedication since we imposed the 25% rule and there is no reason to give the State more property than what is needed for the dock facilities and State Ground Lease. Hopefully you will agree the attachment is a solution. Once again we really appreciate the City's cooperation. Based on the staff report, we would rather stay within the City's jurisdiction and I am still trying to get the State to agree that neither the Deed of Dedication nor the Chahge of Use triggered the reverter. That would be the best of all worlds. We are prepared to pay the State compensation for their release or purchase other aquatic preserve land so that we can stay within the jurisdiction of the City. The way I read the staffs recommendation is that they are recommending approval for our 8 slips and ramp, subject to the conditions, so long as the State indicates there has not been a reverter. However, should the State insist there is a reverter, then we agree to construct the 5 slips and the ramp. pursuant to the conditions imposed under the staffs report. In order for the State to issue a Ground Lease, the construction of the improvements must be consistent with the local laws and that is why I worded the Stipulation by incorporating the facts, findings, recommendation and conditionsiset forth in the staff report. 7/18/2006 • • Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 11:42 AM To: Joseph Gaynor ~ Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: Staff Report for FLD2OO5-09093; 279 Windward Passage Joe: We reviewed the City staff report and sent the check in the amt of $75.00 to Wayne Wells for the CDB continuance to a "date uncertain." Regards, Bill Woods '. -----Original Message----- From: Dianne Magee (mailto:diannemagee@woodsconsulting.org) Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 11:29 AM To: 'Bill woods' Subject: RE: Staff Report for FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage It appears that the report is in order. The report states that the applicant has requested a continuance to a date uncertain. I have sent Wayne Wells the check for $75.00 and I've updated PTS. -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods (mailto:billwoodsC~woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 2:13 PM To: 'Dianne Magee' Subject: FW: Staff Report for FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage i Please print out the report and review it for me. Send check to Wells for $75.00 for continuance. Tx Bill --Original Message----- From: Wayne.WellsC~myClearwater.com (mailto:Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 11:45 AM To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com ~ Subject: Staff Report for FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill - Attached is a copy of the Staff Report for the above referenced case (where you are asking to be continued to a date uncertain), to be heard by, the CDB at 1:00 pm on Tuesday, July 18, 2006, in City Council chambers at City Hall, 112 S. Osceola Avenue, Clearwater. ~ A continuance fee of $75.00, payable to the City of Clearwater, needs to be submitted. ~ Wayne « Windward Passage 279 Staff Report for 7.18.06 CDB.doc» 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 11:45 AM ~ To: Bill Woods (E-mail) Cc: Joseph W. Gaynor (E-mail) Subject: Staff Report for FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill - ' Attached is a copy of the Staff Report for the above referenced case (where you are asking to be continued to a date uncertain), to be heard by the CDB at 1:00 pm on Tuesday, July 18, 2006, in City Council'.chambers at City Hall, 112 S. Osceola Avenue, Clearwater. A continuance fee of $75.00, payable to the City of Clearwater, needs to be submitted. Wayne ~: Windward Passage ~I 279 Staff Rep... 1 ' • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 2:41 PM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Subject: Harbour Watch Page 1 of 1 Joe - This project was approved by the CDB on October 19, 2004 (FLD2004-06042). Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit had to be submitted within one year of Flexible Development approval (by October 19, 2005). BCP2005-09829 was submitted September 30, 2005, meeting the time frame of the Code to keep your CDB approval valid. BCP2005-09475 has been issued as a foundation only permit. The CDB approval of FLD2004-06042 will not become null and void unless the building permit is deemed null and void by the Building Official, which means that you need to continue to work toward revising the plans to meet the review comments in order to obtain the permit. Questions regarding the building permit (and any extensions) would need to be addressed to Kevin Garriott, Building Official (kevin.garriott myclearwater.com). Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 1:02 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Harbour Watch Wayne, the inability to resolve the dock issue created a problem converting some of our reservations to contract and we have not been able to replace them because of the current real estate slump. Therefore I would appreciate your refreshing me on some time deadlines-we received site plan approval in mid-October 2004-we cannot start construction until we hits our presales-in this market that could easily be a year or more-what is our time frame between CDB approval of our site plan and the commencement of construction and if expired what do we need to'do to get it extended ?-Opus believes our permit and impact fees are close to $900,000 so~it would be crazy to pull the permit if we can't start construction for a year or more. As always thanks for your help. 7/10/2006 • • ' Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 6:33 PM ' To: Wells, Wayne ~ Cc: Joseph Gaynor Subject: Harbour Watch CDB Date Dear Wayne: ' As the agent for Harbor Watch, Woods Consulting requests that the date for the CDB meeting addressing our multi-use dock application be moved forward to a date',"uncertain." Should you have any questions, please give me a call. My regards, Bill Woods ' ~~ ,,~ '' ~__ Bill Woods Woods Consulting ' 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 ~ Phone: (727) 786-5747 i Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods@woodsconsulting.org 7/9/2006 r _. • • Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 4:29 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Joseph Gaynor Subject: RE: Harbour Watch CDB i Wayne: I just spoke with Joe Gaynor and we would like to go forward to a date "uncertain." Thanks for your assistance. My regards, Bill Woods From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com [mailto:Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 2:30 PM To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Subject: Harbour Watch CDB Bill - i If continued to a date uncertain, once the case is ready to go back to the CDB, we would need to advertise such to surrounding property owners and add it to the next available CDB agenda. If we have already gone past an advertising dated for a CDB, we would have to wait to the next available CDB agenda. i If it was continued to the next CDB in August, you will be placed on that agenda and we do not readvertise to the surrounding property owners. I can understand Joe's desire to have it on the August agenda so that the delays are minimized, such that construction could potentially proceed more quickly. If the August CDB agenda is desired, the CDB needs to be educated as to why this desired relative to the issues of permitting and construction. Wayne i -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] ~ Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 2:24 PM To: Wells, Wayne ~ Cc: Joseph Gaynor Subject: Harbour Watch CDB Wayne: What is the disadvantage if any to go to date "uncertain" as when I read the email from Joe he is telling me to stay with August.......(Sorry but I just read that). Bill ,3 .- ~ f, . Bill Woods Woods Consulting ~ 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 7/9/2006 _ Page 2 of 2 w Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoodst~woodsconsulting.org 7/9/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 2:01 PM To: 'Bill Woods' Subject: RE: FW: 279 Windward Passage Bill - Since the email train below includes what I would classify as internal emails between you and Joe, could you please send me a separate email asking for the continuance, so the CDB can have a "clean" request. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 2:00 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: FW: 279 Windward Passage Wayne: With Joe unavailable I will make the call to postpone to a date uncertain. My regards, Bill Woods From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com [mailto:Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 1:45 PM To: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: Sherry.Watkins@myClearwater.com Subject: RE: FW: 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - Once again I am asking for confirmation that you are asking for a continuance of this case to the date of the CDB (August 15, September 19 or date uncertain). I need to know ASAP as 1 have to send out information to the CDB Monday. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 1:03 PM To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: FW: 279 Windward Passage I agree it may be optimistic to believe that the State and the City will be ready for the August CDB hearing but lets shoot for it until next week when we get the City's comments to the stipulation- Also I would to talk to Jim Stoudimier ASAP as to my suggestion for an alternative approach 7/7/2006 • ~ Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 2:00 PM ~ To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: FW: 279 Windward Passage Wayne: With Joe unavailable I will make the call to postpone to a date~uncertain. My regards, Bill Woods From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com [mailto:Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 1:45 PM To: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: Sherry.Watkins@myClearwater.com ~ Subject: RE: FW: 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - Once again I am asking for confirmation that you are asking for a continuance of this~case to the date of the CDB (August 15, September 19 or date uncertain). I need to know ASAP as I have to send out information to the CDB Monday. Wayne ~ -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 1:03 PM j To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: FW: 279 Windward Passage I agree it may be optimistic to believe that the State and the City will be ready for the August CDB hearing but lets shoot for it until next week when we get the City's comments to the stipulation- Also I would to talk to Jim Stoudimier ASAP as to my suggestion for an alternative approach 7/7/2006 • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 1:45 PM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com'; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: Watkins, Sherry Subject: RE: FW: 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - Once again I am asking for confirmation that you are asking for a continuance of this case to the date of the CDB (August 15, September 19 or date uncertain). I need to know ASAP as I have to send out information to the CDB Monday. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 1:03 PM To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: FW: 279 Windward Passage I agree it may be optimistic to believe that the State and the City will be ready~'for the August CDB hearing but lets shoot for it until next week when we get the City's comments to the stipulation- Also I would to talk to Jim Stoudimier ASAP as to my suggestion for an alternative approach 7/7/2006 • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 12:46 PM To: Joseph Gaynor Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: FW: 279 Windward Passage Joe: I suggest we go for a date uncertain. What do you think. Please advise Wayne and cc me. Tx Bill Woods From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com [mailto:Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com] Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 11:20 AM To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Cc: Laura.Lipowski@myClearwater.com; Leslie.Dougall-Sides@myClearwater.com; michael.delk@MyClearwater.com; Gina.Clayton@myClearwater.com; neil.thompson@MyClearwater.com Subject: 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - I am forwarding this email to you that was sent by Nick Fritsch, CDB member, regarding this case. Frustration with numerous continuances has also been voiced by at least one other member of the CDB. Actually, this will be the fifth appearance of this case on the July 18, 2006, CDB agenda, and it appears you are asking for a sixth appearance for the August 15, 2006, CDB agenda by a prior email (Joe). The CDB appears to be unaware of the legal intricacies of this proposal and some amount of education as to why amonth-to-month continuance is desired over the CDB continuing this case to a date uncertain (ie: once the legal issues are resolved, then we schedule the case for the next available CDB meeting and properly advertise it). I am awaiting confirmation that you are requesting an additional continuance of this case and to which date of the CDB (August 15 or September 19, 2006). Perhaps you can provide some written explanation as part of your request to continue the request as to why a continuance to a particular date of the CDB is preferable over a date uncertain. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Nick Fri [mailto:natbeach@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, July O5, 2006 7:48 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: 279 Windward Passage Wayne, This is the fourth appearance for this item. I will not support an extension. Usually, we trigger our "patience depleted" indicator on the third request; I hope you understand. Nick 7/7/2006 • Page 1 of 1 i Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 11:36 AM To: Wells, Wayne; 'Bill Woods (E-mail)'; 'Joseph W. Gaynor (E-mail)' Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe: Leslie and I have discussed your proposed Stipulation, but must meet with Pam Akin on it when she returns next week from vacation. Unfortunately, that is all of the feedback I can provide before next week. Laura -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 11:20 AM To: Bill Woods (E-mail); Joseph W. Gaynor (E-mail) Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Tho pson, Neil Subject: 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - I am forwarding this email to you that was sent by Nick Fritsch, CDB member, regarding this case. Frustration with numerous continuances has also been voiced by at least on i other member of the CDB. Actually, this will be the fifth appearance of this case on the July 18, 2006, CAB agenda, and it appears you are asking for a sixth appearance for the August 15, 2006, CDB agenda by a prior email (Joe). The CDB appears to be unaware of the legal intricacies of this proposal and some amount of education as to why amonth-to-month continuance is desired over the CDB continuing this case to a date uncertain (ie: once the legal issues are resolved, then we schedule the case for the next available CDB meeting and properly advertise it). am awaiting confirmation that you are requesting an additional continuance of this case and to which date of the CDB (August 15 or September 19, 2006). Perhaps you can provide some written explanation as part of your request to continue the request as to why a continuance to a particular date of the CDB is preferable over a date uncertain. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Nick Fri [mailto:natbeach@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 7:48 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: 279 Windward Passage Wayne, This is the fourth appearance for this item. I will not support an extension. Usually, we trigger our "patience depleted" indicator on the third request; I hope you understand. Nick 7/7/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 11:20 AM To: Bill Woods (E-mail); Joseph W. Gaynor (E-mail) Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - I am forwarding this email to you that was sent by Nick Fritsch, CDB member, regarding this case. Frustration with numerous continuances has also been voiced by at least one other member of the CDB. Actually, this will be the fifth appearance of this case on the July 18, 2006, CDB agenda, and it appears you are asking for a sixth appearance for the August 15, 2006, CDB agenda by a prior email (Joe). The CDB appears to be unaware of the legal intricacies of this proposal and some amount of education as to why amonth-to-month continuance is desired over the CDB continuing this case to a date uncertain (ie: once the legal issues are resolved, then we schedule the case for the next available CDB meeting and properly advertise it). I am awaiting confirmation that you are requesting an additional continuance of this case and to which date of the CDB (August 15 or September 19, 2006). Perhaps you can provide some written explanation as part of your request to continue the request as to why a continuance to a particular date of the CDB is preferable over a date uncertain. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Nick Fri [mailto:natbeach@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 7:48 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: 279 Windward Passage Wayne, This is the fourth appearance for this item. I will not support an extension. Usually, we trigger our "patience depleted" indicator on the third request; I hope you understand. Nick 7/7/2006 • ~ Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 9:00 AM To: Joseph W. Gaynor (E-mail) Cc: Bill Woods (E-mail); Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Joe - For clarification purposes, by the following email you are requesting a continuance of this case to the August 15, 2006, CDB meeting. Correct? Wayne From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 3:19 PM ~ To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Lipowski, Laura; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Laura has agreed to review the suggested Stipulation from the State but I have not yet gotten their comments on the first draft so it will have to be pushed to August-hopefully either the Stipulation or some other resolution will be finalized by that time so the CDB can vote • • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 3:19 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Lipowski, Laura; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org ', Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage ~ Laura has agreed to review the suggested Stipulation from the State but I have not yet gotten their comments on the first draft so it will have to be pushed to August-hopefully either the Stipulation or some other resolution will be finalized by that time so the CDB can vote 7/4/2006 • • ~ Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne ~ From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 4:12 PM To: Lipowski, Laura; Horne, William I Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; phildog@tampabay.rr;com; richardb@hgslaw.com; Wells, Wayne Subject: Harbour Watch Stipulation Attached is a draft of the proposed Stipulation. Exhibit B is the legal based on the submerged land survey that has been submitted to the City. The legal description encompasses less property than in the Deed of Dedication since we imposed the 25% rule and there is no reason to give the State more property than what is needed for the dock facilities and State Ground Lease. Hopefully you will agree the attachment is a solution. Once again we really appreciate the City's cooperation. Based on the staff report, we would rather stay within the City's jurisdiction and I am still trying to get the State to agree that neither the Deed of Dedication nor the Change of Use triggered the reverter. That would be the best of all worlds. We are prepared to pay the State compensation for their release or purchase other aquatic preserve land so that we can stay within the jurisdiction of the City. The way I read the staffs recommendation is that they are recommending approval for our 8 slips and ramp, subject to the conditions, so long as the State indicates there has not been a reverter. However, should the State insist there is a reverter, then we agree to construct the 5 slips and the ramp. pursuant to the conditions imposed under the staffs report. In order for the State to issue a Ground Lease, the construction of the improvements must be consistent with the focal laws and that is why I worded the Stipulation by incorporating the facts, findings, recommendation and conditions set forth in the staff report. 7/4/2006 y ~~ ~ IN THE CIRCIUT COURT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA State of Florida Plaintiff, vs. CASE NO. The City of Clearwater, a political subdivision of the State of Florida and Harbour Estates, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Defendants, STIPULATION THIS STII'ULATION is made and entered into this day of July, 2006 by and between the State of Florida ("Plaintiff ') and City of Clearwater (the "(City") and Harbour Estates, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Owner"), (collectively the "Defendants"), ~ WHEREAS, the Owner is the record title owner of the property described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Harbour Watch Parcel"), and ~ WHEREAS, the City is the owner of the submerged land abutting the Harbour Watch Parcel, more particularly described in Exhibit B, attached hereto, (the "Submerged Land Parcel"), and ~ WHEREAS, the City received title from the State of Florida to the Submerged Land Parcel and other submerged land by virtue of that certain resolution, dated May 25, 1925, a copy of which is attached hereto and marked Exhibit C (the "Resolution"), the terms of which are incorporated herein by reference, and ~ WHEREAS, the City recorded a deed of dedication dated the 7th day of July 1958, wherein the City declared that the construction of docks are a permitted use under the terms of the Resolution, a copy of which is attached hereto and marked Exhibit D (the "Deed"), the terms of which are incorporated herein by reference, and ~ ~' WHEREAS, the City through its Clearwater Development Board (the "CDB") approved a change of use (the "Change of Use") of the Harbour Watch Parcel from a yacht repair and brokerage facility, including twelve (12) boat slips and seven (7) moorings buoys to a thirty one (31) unit condominium project known as Harbour Watch, a Condominium (the "Condominium"). A copy of the Community Development Board • • 7 ~ Resolutio LD2004-06042, dated the 9 day of October, 2004 attached hereto and arke xhibit E, the terms of which are incorpora e erem y reference, and ~+ WHEREAS, a building permit was issued by the City on February 8, 2006 to construct the site improvements (BCP2005-02671) for the Condominium ~ WHEREAS, the Owner has made application to the CDB for the approval five 7 5 ,dock nd related marina facilities as part of the Condominium together with a boat ramp to serve the Condominium and the Clearwater Marine Aquarium ("CMA") ("the "CDB Application"), and g WHEREAS, the City has required proof that their granting approval of the CDB Application will not violate the right of reverter set forth in the Resolution, and q WHEREAS, the State of Florida alleges that the actions of thel City with respect to the Deed and/or the granting of the Ch se have individually or collectively precipitated the reverter clause under th esolution, nd~ ~ G o ~ ~ w .~ ~ WHEREAS, the City de ~ s that either action by the City is in violation of the terms and conditions of th Resolution and ~~ WHEREAS, the Owner desires to construe five (5) dock and a boat ramp in accordance with the plans it has submitted to the State an e B (the "Docking Facilities"), and IL WHEREAS, the City's Planning Department Staff Report, dated June 20, 2006 (the "Staff Report"), a copy of which is attached hereto and marked Exhibit F, indicated that the proposed improvements for the Docking Facilities are consistent and in compliance with the City's flexibility criteria (Section 3-601.C.3), and I y WHEREAS, the City Staff concluded that the Owner's proposal is in compliance with the City's General Applicability Criteria, per Section 3-913, and recommended approval of the Owner's CDB Application, and l~ WHEREAS, all parties have resolved the jurisdictional issues regarding the Submerged Land Parcel and the rights and obligations with respect to the Submerged Land Parcel and Harbour Watch Parcel. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions provided for herein, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Plaintiff and Defendants do agree as follows: All parties agree that entering into a stipulated judgment is the most expeditious means for resolving the title and jurisdictional issues pertaining to the Submerged Land Parcel and enabling this solution o be recorded in the ~ ti • • Official Record and enter the chain of title under the Marketable Record Title Act. 2. The C' ereby consents to the release of the Submerged Land Parcel from the esolution nd the entry of the form of judgment, attached hereto, subject only to the formatting requirements of the Clerk of Court for Pinellas County, Florida, and the discretion of the presiding Judge. 3. The Plaintiff agrees that in consideration of the City releasing and thereby conveying the Submerged Land Parcel to the Plaintiff through t din of the Judgment, the remaining submerged lands covered by th esolution will not have reverted to the Plaintiff. 4. All parties affirm they shall not unilaterally seek a material change to the terms of the stipulated Judgment. 5. All parties affirm and acknowledge they have and are currently acting in good faith as it applies to the resolution of this dispute. i The Plaintiff and the City affirm and the parties acknowledge the purpose of this Stipulation is to enable the Plaintiff to proceed with the issuance of a submerged ground lease in favor of the Owner with respect to the Submerged Land Parcel and the City affirms and acknowledges that the design of the contemplated Docking Facilities conform to the requirements of the City code ~~ ~ and that the stipulated Judgment satisfies the jurisdictional issues pertaining to the Owners CDB Application. ( 7. J The City affirms that the Owner's proposed Docking Facilities complies with ~ the City's Flexible Criteria, with other standards in the City's Code including the General Applicability Criteria, per Section 3-913, and the dock and ramp development is compatible with the surrounding area. The City affirms that this Stipulation and the Judgment satisfy Paragraph 1 of the City's Conditions of Approval and the Owner affirms that it will construct said Docking Facilities in accordance with Paragraph's 2 through and including 7 of the City's Conditions of Approval. j 9. This Agreement maybe executed by facsimile signatures and each signature shall be deemed as an original. (Signature page to Stipulation, Next Page) •" ~ • i (Signature page to Stipulation, This Page) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto executed this Escrow Agreement on the date first above written. Joseph W. Gaynor Joseph W. Gyanor, P.A. 304 Monroe Street Dunedin, FL. 34698 (727) 736-8500 Florida Bar No. 133765 Attorney for Defendant Harbour Estates, LLC Name: Department of Environmental Protection Laura Lipowski ~ City Attorney 112 S. Osceola Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 (727) 562-4010 Florida Bar No. Attorney for Defendant The City of Clearwater U _ Florida Bar No. Attorney for Plaintiff The State of Florida ~ • • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Sunday, July 02, 2006 6:01 PM To: Bill Woods (E-mail); Joseph W. Gaynor (E-mail) Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Watkins, Sherry; Thompson, Neil Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - It is that time of the month again when I ask the status of this case....so, what is the status? We are scheduled for the July 18, 2006, CDB meeting. I need to update the staff report (which is scheduled to be sentiout this week) from the standpoint IF an additional continuance is going to be requested. If an additional continuance is necessary, will you be asking to have it continued to the August 15, 2006, CDB meeting, to the September 19, 2006, CDB meeting or will it be continued to a date uncertain? I need a letter (or email) of request to continue the request (plus $75.00). Please note, this case has already been continued four times by the CDB. If it is ready to go the CDB, just let me know. Please let me know either way no later than 10:00 pm on Thursday, July 6, 2006. Wayne }}711 it i c ~'`~ , ` ~i/ Y '~~'`~'~~~~~ ITY O F ~ LEAFZWATE R :,+- ~.. a~~ ~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT -~a'`.. ,,fib; __ ._ .~ ~ `- q R ~,~~~ Posr OI'Iacr•. Box 4748, CLrnkWn"rl:u, FLUKIDn 33758-478 ~ !'~.~ ~~ ' ~'~ ~,, MUMCIPAI. SIiRVIGIiS 13liILDING, 100 SOU'ffi MYIt'I'I,Ii /\Vli~l,li, CLIinkWA'I'lilt, 1'LURII)n 33756 '1'la.l;r>uo~l: (727) 562-4567 Fnx ,(727) 562-4865 I,O\~G RANGIi PIANNI\G i DIiVIi1.OPMli:\"f RIVII:W June 20, 2006 Mr. Bill Woods ~ Woods Consulting, Inc. ~ 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Re: Community Development Board Meeting (Case No. FLD2005-09093 - 279 Windward Passage) Dear Mr. Woods: The Community Development Board (CDB) at their meeting on June 20, 2006, continued the above referenced request to their July 18, 2006, meeting. The request is for Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for property located at 279 Windward Passage. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III, at 727-562- 4504. i Sincerely, .~ Michael Delk, A P Planning Director Cc: Joe Gaynor S. IP/arming DepnrrmenilC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cnsesl Up for the next CDBI Windward Passnge 279 Harbour Watch Docks (C) - 7.18.06 CDB -WWI Windward Passage 279 CDB Continuance Letter 6.20.06.doc i I~rnxh I luuc.~ru. ~i:wu~: ~c>n,~ (k~r,:~~, Cur~r.n_w_~ncr;i; I Ica r I L~wi:rrn. Crn ~~~cn_~u[~nn:r. lin.l. ~c~xw~, Cnrx~.n.>n:~licri; ® C:~ri.r:x :\. I'rrr•.rtir:~, Cal ~r.n.>ut~u+er, "I:chi:nl.l{,~Iricw>u:~rn~nArrir~c:~rn~itr\<.rul~ i•:,~ti~i.o~c:r" ~ Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 1:19 PM To: Bill Woods (E-mail) Cc: Joseph W. Gaynor (E-mail) Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage ' i Bill/Joe - Attached is the Staff Report that we are sending to the CDB (the only thing that has changed is in the Update on Page 2). The CDB meeting will be at 1:00 pm on Tuesday, June 20, 2006. Since this case is requested to be continued to the July 18, 2006, CDB agenda, it will be first on the agenda. Wayne f~ Windward Passage ~ 279 Staff Rep... 1 ~ • ~ i Page 1 of 3 Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 10:39 AM To: 'josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; Akin, Pam; Wells, Wayne; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Horne, William Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks MessageGUID: {BCC5F2D3-OC30-45C5-BA05-9DOA65722BC5} OriginalDate: None Joe, The City remains willing to work to finalize an acceptable solution to your problem and offered just such a solution via the proposed deed to the State (subject to Council approval). I can not recommend that the City stipulate that the reverter in the 1925 Legislative Act has been triggered -because it is the City's position that the reverter has not been triggered. You suggest that such a stipulation accomplishes the same [result] as the deed we have contemplated providing. From a legal perspective, the City does not agree. As to a stipulation expediting the process, such a stipulation would require the same Council review and in my opinion, an even higher level of scrutiny/consideration as the City would thereby be stipulating to a violation of a deed restriction. If you would like to pursue the previously proposed deed to the State, please provide all documents requested in the May 10 meeting. Specifically, the City has requested COMPLETE supporting documentation on the ramp permit, repair and rebuild permit and/or the proposed reconfiguration. The requested documentation should include all correspondence with SWFMD and the Army Corp exemption you referred to in our meeting. Lastly, you have repeatedly mentioned use of the ramp by Fire and Rescue. To date I have not been able to confirm that City staff has had any discussions with your office regarding such a use and certainly no formal documents have been contemplated or executed. At minimum, an easement would be needed for legal access. Please advise as to your intentions. Thank you, Laura -----Original Message----- From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 11:41 AM To: Lipowski, Laura; Horne, William Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; Akin, Pam; Wells, Wayne; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: Re: Harbour Watch Docks Richard is our consultant and was retained because of his prior experience with submerged land issues-we are not contemplating litigation just a solution so I am authorizing the City and its staff to continue to communicate with me to follow up on his suggestions-what we need now is the proceedure for the City to consent to the stipulation which accomplishes the same as a deed but without the land being categorized as surplus(which appears to be causing the delay)I see no reason why the City should not be willing tb cooperate with the State since it protects the balance of the City's submerged lands and does create a vehicle 6/8/2006 • • Page 2 of 3 for any similar or future situation.In any event i would like another ;meeting or telephone conference with you and Bill ~ Joseph W. Gaynor -----Original Message----- From: Laura.Lipowski@myClearwater.com To: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; William.Horne@myclearwater.com Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.wes~t@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; HamptonInv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; Pam.Akin@myClearwater.com; ' William.Horne@myclearwater.com; Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com; Leslie.Dougall- Sides@myClearwater.com Sent: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:44:12 -0400 Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks Mr. Gaynor, City staff will now communicate through your attorney. Thank you, Laura Lipowski -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.comj Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 3:24 PM To: Horne, William Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; Lipowski, Laura; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; HamptonInv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com Subject: Harbour Watch Docks Bill- After our last meeting I discussed the City's timeframe with Opus and the State of Florida. As I mentioned, our sales and marketing have been adversely affected by keeping the dock issue in limbo while the City and the State resolve their issues concerning the Right of Reverter. Even purchasers who do not have a boat, want the ability to walk on a common dock with related dock facilities and because the ramp is tied into the seawall we can not meet our deadline under our seawall contract. We retained Richard S. Brightman Esq., in Tallahassee, to review our position in light of the City's position. I appreciate the fact that the City understands our position and is willing to deed back the property to the State. However, I have been concerned that the mechanism is by classifying the land as "surplus", which requires a vote of the City Council. It is because of this mechanism the City wants to wait until after the referendum. Our project is in a different position then Mike Cheezems. For thirty years there were 12 slips and 21 moorings at that location. Bill Woods has sent to the City copies of all our permits and governmental approvals for a repair and rebuild. The only reason we are on hold is because of a "change of use" which resulted from going to residential, even though that use is within the current zoning category. Even the State can not figure out how the docks were constructed without their approval back in 1958 nor can anyon a find a basis for the 1958 Deed. Its a stretch to say that a private yacht broker and repair yard is for a public purpose just because the public uses it. The same could be said for a supermarket. Having given the thirty year history, Bud Vielhauer, DEP's lawyer, has agreed with Jim Stoutamire and our counsel that in order to expedite the process and avoid the City having to vote on deeding back surplus property, it would be best for the State to trigger the reverter, but agree it only applies to the Harbour Watch basin, which is the subject of the 1958 Deed. The limitation on the area affected by the reverter would be done through a stipulation between the State and the City. Once the stipulation is signed, 6/8/2006 „ , • • Page 3 of 3 the State would file a Quiet Title Claim, or similar action, strictly based wn the reverter without the need of a vote since the reverter is automatic based on the 1925 legislative resolution. realize you are out of town until next week, but I would need to speak with you on the mechanics of how the City could execute such a stipulation. I think its pretty easy because CBD approved the change of use over 14 months of public hearings, during which there were no objections to the project and in fact we had 100% neighbor support. The Right of Reverter is triggered for one or two reasons. 1. The City violated the resolution back in 1958 and all subsequent build and repair permits or 2. Approving the change of use in 2004. Obviously neither the assistant City Attorney back in 2001 nor the City Engineer in 2001 or 2004 nor the CDB had any concerns that a "change of use" could trigger the reverter but we are where we are. The State has informed us that this is the best solution but it requires that the City not contest the State's claim. If the City is not willing to stipulate then the State does not want to commence action against the City but would support our lawsuit against the State and the City for a declaratory judgement. The State will argue that the reverter was triggered on at least one occasion. Our position will be that we want the court to decide was it triggered or not. If it was triggered, then the City will have to argue whether or not it affects the entire bottom land, not just Harbour Watch. Our position is very simple. If it was triggered, I get a ground lease from the State. If the City prevails, and it was not triggered, then I currently have permits that are good for 5 years to rebuild what has been historically there or at worse, under the 30 to 1 rule, 5-6 slips. In either case, there is a court order upon which title insurance can now be issued. Therefore, I would like to discuss how the City would like to proceed but I can not be put in the same position as Cheezem or risk and adverse vote if the referendum fails or the political climate is such that a vote would not be successful based on the surplus land theory. Please give me a call so that we can discuss this matter further. I was hoping to discuss this on the phone rather then by a-mail but since you are out of town and I was also traveling, I thought it best to further clarify our position with the hopes that everyone will agree that a stipulation is the best way to go and sets a great precedent for the City if any other City property is in a similar position. 6/8/2006 ~ ~ ~I Woods Consu Ong Environmental Permitting Marine Engineering Hydrogeology Land Planning June 5, 2006 Sent via US Mail and fax (727) 562-4865 Wayne Wells City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Suite #200 Clearwater, Florida 33756-5520 Re: Request for Continuance of CDB Hearing E Harbor Watch Cc^dorr;iriums - FLD2005-09093 Dear Wayne: ORIGINAL RECENED JUN 0 71006 PLANNING DEPAR~ENr CRY OF CLEARyyATER Enclosed please find check no. 2727 in the amount of $75.00. Per the applicants a-mail dated June 2, 2006, (enclosed for your reference) we are requesting a continuance of the above referenced project to a date uncertain. My regards, G7Y~ Bill Woods Woods Consulting, Inc. cc: Joe Gaynor via fax (727) 736-8600 P:\Harbour Watch Docks (115-04)\Harbour Watch Condominiums 52 City of Clwr check for continuance of CDB.ipd 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Office: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 Email:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org +~ ~ . ,~ i Dianne Magee ~ From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 5:16 PM To: Trout Creek Subject: Fw: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods@woodsconsultingorg -----Original Message ----- From: Josephwgaynorp~aol.com To: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com ; billwoods(a~woodsconsulting.org Cc: Laura _Lipowsk@myClearwater.com ; Leslie.._Dougall-Sides.@myClearwater corn Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 2:55 PM Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Page 1 of 1 ORK3INAL RECENE® JIJN 0 7 2006 PUWNING DEPARTIyIEM CITY OF CI EARWATER Please treat this a-mail as a formal request to extend once again the CDB hearing and i will have a $75 check delivered to you by Bill Woods since I am out of town. Bill Horne is out of the office until next week. I have written him an a-mail regarding the position of the State and should the City agree, we could easily meet the next hearing the deadline. 6/5/2006 ~. ~ ~! • UVaods Consulting Environrnen~al Permitting Marine Engineering Hydrogeoiogy Land Planning June 5, 2006 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Sent via US Mail and fax_(~) 562.4865 wayne wells City of Clearwater i Planning Department 'l00 South Myrtle Suite #200 Clearwater, Florida 33756-5520 Re: Request #or Continuance of CDB Hearing Harbor Watch Condominiums - FLD2005-09093 Dear Wayne: ~nclased please find check no. 2727 in the amount of $75.00. Per the applicants a-mail dated June 2, 2006, (enclosed for your referencE) we are requesting a continuance of the $bove referenced project to a date uncertain. My regards, U(~,~.' III Woods Woods Consulting, Inc. cc: Joe Gaynor via fax (727) 736-8600 P;1Harbour Watch DOdcs (1 i 5-04)tiMarbaur Welch GondomMVums 52 Gty of Cnxr check for eondnuance of Cbf3.wpd Office: (727) 786-5747 Fax; {727) 78fi-7479 Ernail:billwoods~woodsconsulting.org • • Page 1 of 1 Dianne Magee From: Bill Woods [biilwoods®woodsconsultfng,org~ Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 5:16 PM Ta: Trout Creek Subject: Fw: FLD2005-0909x, 279 Windward Passage 8ifl Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: {727) 788-7479 billwo~d~„~wood.$ronsultmg ;org ---Original Message ---- From: ,1~sephwgay0orpa aal cam To: Wayne.~lleils mytha~,~y+ater•com ; billw ds woodscansul in .o Cc: Lauri,.k.ipowskl.(~my~leanaater.cam, ; L,~slie._I7ougall,~Sides(~myClearwaYe,,,r.com' Sent: Friday, June 02, 2008 2:55 PM SubJect: Re: Ft.02005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Please treat tt1i5 a-mail as a formal request to extend once again the COg hearing and i will have a $75 check delivered to you by Bill Woods slnae I am out of town. Bill Norne is out of the office until next week. i have written him an a-mail regarding the position of the State and should the City agree, we could easily meet the next hearing the deadline. 61S/2006 --- .. _,/ -~~ • s ... c[7 o- ap O O cD ru O f_• CQ c0 0 !n f~ N fL A ~ { fU 1 Q ~ O s 7 = 6 Y A - ~~, • ~ Page 1 of 3 Wells, Wayne From: Horne, William Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 1:59 PM To: 'josephwgaynorpa@aol.com ;Lipowski, Laura Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; Akin, Pam; Wells, Wayne; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks Joe, At the end of the day, I have to be confident that all of our questions have been answered before we move forward. We are waiting for information that you said you would provide. Until then, we must proceed as we have indicated. Thanks for your understanding. Bill Bill Horne, ICMA-CM City Manager Clearwater, FL (727) 562-4046 -----Original Message----- From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 11:41 AM To: Lipowski, Laura; Horne, William Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; Akin, Pam; Wells, Wayne; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: Re: Harbour Watch Docks Richard is our consultant and was retained because of his prior experience with submerged land issues-we are not contemplating litigation just a solution so I am authorizing the City and its staff to continue to communicate with me to follow up on his suggestions-what we need now is the proceedure for the City to consent to the stipulation which accomplishes the same as a deed but without the land being categorized as surplus(which appears to be causing the delay)I see no reason why the City should not be willing to cooperate with the State since it protects the balance of the City's submerged lands and 'does create a vehicle for any similar or future situation.In any event i would like another meeting or telephone conference with you and Bill Joseph W. Gaynor -----Original Message----- From: Laura.Lipowski@myClearwater.com To: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; William.Horne@myclearwater.com Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; Pam.Akin@myClearwater.com; William.Horne@myclearwater.com; Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com; Leslie.Dougall- 6/5/2006 f' ti ~ . Page 2 of 3 Sides@myClearwater.com Sent: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:44:12 -0400 Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks Mr. Gaynor, City staff will now communicate through your attorney. Thank you, Laura Lipowski -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 3:24 PM To: Horne, William Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; Lipowski, Laura; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; HamptonInv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com Subject: Harbour Watch Docks Bill- After our last meeting I discussed the City's timeframe with Opus and the State of Florida. As I mentioned, our sales and marketing have been adversely affected by keeping the dock issue in limbo while the City and the State resolve their issues concerning the Right of Reverter. Even purchasers who do not have a boat, want the ability to walk on a common dock with related dock facilities and because the ramp is tied into the seawall we can not meet our deadline under our seawall contract. We retained Richard S. Brightman Esq., in Tallahassee, to review our position in light of the City's position. I appreciate the fact that the City understands our position and is willing to deed back the property to the State. However, I have been concerned that the mechanism is by classifying the land as "surplus", which requires a vote of the City Council. It is because of this mechanism the City wants to wait until after the referendum. Our project is in a different position then Mike Cheezems. For thirty years there were 12 slips and 21 moorings at that location. Bill Woods has sent to the City copies of all our permits and governmental approvals for a repair and rebuild. The only reason we are on hold is because of a "change of use" which resulted from going to residential, even though that use is within the current zoning category. Even the State can not figure out how the docks were constructed without their approval back in 1958 nor can anyon a find a basis for the 1958 Deed. Its a stretch to say that a private yacht broker and repair yard is for a public purpose just because the public uses it. The same could be said for a supermarket. Having given the thirty year history, Bud Vielhauer, DEP's lawyer, has agreed with Jim Stoutamre and our counsel that in order to expedite the process and avoid the City having to vote on deeding back surplus property, it would be best for the State to trigger the reverter, but agree it only applies to the Harbour Watch basin, which is the subject of the 1958 Deed. The limitation on the area affected by the reverter would be done through a stipulation between the State and the City. Once the stipulation is signed, the State would file a Quiet Title Claim, or similar action, strictly based on the reverter without the need of a vote since the reverter is automatic based on the 1925 legislative resolution. I realize you are out of town until next week, but I would need to speak with you on the mechanics of how the City could execute such a stipulation. I think its pretty easy because CBD approved the change of use over 14 months of public hearings, during which there were no objections to the project and in fact we had 100% neighbor support. The Right of Reverter is triggered for one or two reasons. 1. The City violated the resolution back in 1958 and all subsequent build and repair permits or 2. Approving the change of use in 2004. Obviously neither the assistant City Attorney back in 2001 nor the City Engineer in 2001 or 2004 nor the CDB had any concerns that a "change of use" could trigger the reverter but we are where we are. ' The State has informed us that this is the best solution but it requires than the City not contest the State's claim. If the City is not willing to stipulate then the State does not want to commence action 6/5/2006 ,, ,' ~, ~ ~ Page 3 of 3 against the City but would support our lawsuit against the State and the City for a declaratory judgement. The State will argue that the reverter was triggered on at least one occasion. Our position will be that we want the court to decide was it triggered or note.. If it was triggered, then the City will have to argue whether or not it affects the entire bottom land, not just Harbour Watch. Our position is very simple. If it was triggered, I get a ground lease from the State. If the City prevails, and it was not triggered, then I currently have permits that are good for 5 years to rebuild what has been historically there or at worse, under the 30 to 1 rule, 5-6 slips. In either case, there is a court order upon which title insurance can now be issued. Therefore, I would like to discuss how the City would like to proceed bu,t I can not be put in the same position as Cheezem or risk and adverse vote if the referendum fails or the political climate is such that a vote would not be successful based on the surplus land theory. Please give me a call so that we can discuss this matter further. I was hoping to discuss this on the phone rather then by e-mail but since you are out of town and I was also traveling, I thought it best to further clarify our position with the hopes that everyone will agree that a stipulation is the best way to go and sets a great precedent for the City if any other City property is in a similar position. 6/5/2006 t, ; , ~ ~ ~ Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 11:41 AM To: Lipowski, Laura; Horne, William Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; Akin, Pam; Wells, Wayne; Dougafl-Sides, Leslie Subject: Re: Harbour Watch Docks Richard is our consultant and was retained because of his prior experience with submerged land issues-we are not contemplating litigation just a solution so I am authorizing the City and its staff to continue to communicate with me to follow up on his suggestions-what we need now is the proceedure for the City to consent to the stipulation which accomplishes the same as a deed but without the land being categorized as surplus which appears to be causing the delay)I see no reason why the City should not be willing to cooperate with the State since it protects the balance of the City's submerged lands and does create a vehicle for any similar or future situation.In any event i would like another meeting or telephone conference with you and Bill Joseph W. Gaynor -----Original Message----- From: Laura.Lipowski@myClearwater.com To: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; William.Horne@myclearwater.com Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; Pam.Akin@myClearwater.com; William.Horne@myclearwater.com; Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com; Leslie.Dougall-Sides@myClearwater.com Sent: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 08:44:12 -0400 Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks Mr. Gaynor, City staff will now communicate through your attorney. Thank you, Laura Lipowski -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 3:24 PM To: Horne, William Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; Lipowski, Laura; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com Subject: Harbour Watch Docks Bill- After our last meeting I discussed the City's timeframe with Opus and the State of Florida. As I mentioned, our sales and marketing have been adversely affected by keeping the dock issue in limbo while the City and the State resolve their issues concerning the Right of Reverter. Even purchasers who do not have a boat, want the ability to walk on a common dock with related dock facilities and because the ramp is tied into the seawall we can not meet our deadline under our seawall contract. 6/5/2006 ,, ~ ~ ~ ~ Page 2 of 2 We retained Richard S. Brightman Esq., in Tallahassee, to review our position in light of the City's position. appreciate the fact that the City understands our position and is willing to deed back the property to the State. However, I have been concerned that the mechanism is by classifying the land as "surplus", which requires a vote of the City Council. It is because of this mechanism the City wants to wait until after the referendum. Our project is in a different position then Mike Cheezems. For thirty years there were 12 slips and 21 moorings at that location. Bill Woods has sent to the City copies of all our permits and governmental approvals for a repair and rebuild. The only reason we are on hold is because of a "change of use" which resulted from going to residential, even though that use is within the current zoning category. Even the State can not figure out how the docks were constructed without their approval back in 1958 nor can anyon a find a basis for the 1958 Deed. Its a stretch to say that a private yacht broker and repair yard is for a public purpose just because the public uses it. The same could be said for a supermarket. Having given the thirty year history, Bud Vielhauer, DEP's lawyer, has agreed with Jim Stoutamire and our counsel that in order to expedite the process and avoid the City having to vote on deeding back surplus property, it would be best for the State to trigger the reverter, but agree it only applies to the Harbour Watch basin, which is the subject of the 1958 Deed. The limitation on the area affected by the reverter would be done through a stipulation between the State and the City. Once the stipulation is signed, the State would file a Quiet Title Claim, or similar action, strictly based on the reverter without the need of a vote since the reverter is automatic based on the 1925 legislative resolution. I realize you are out of town until next week, but I would need to speak with you on the mechanics of how the City could execute such a stipulation. I think its pretty easy because CBD approved the change of use over 14 months of public hearings, during which there were no objections to the project and in fact we had 100% neighbor support. The Right of Reverter is triggered for one or two reasons. 1. The City violated the resolution back in 1958 and all subsequent build and repair permits or 2. Approving the change of use in 2004. Obviously neither the assistant City Attorney back in 2001 nor the City Engineer in 2001 or 2004 nor the CDB had any concerns that a "change of use" could trigger the reverter but we are where we are. The State has informed us that this is the best solution but it requires that the City not contest the State's claim. If the City is not willing to stipulate then the State does not want to commence action against the City but would support our lawsuit against the State and the City for a declaratory judgement. The State will argue that the reverter was triggered on at least one occasion. Our position will be that we want the court to decide was it triggered or not. If it was triggered, then the City will have to argue whether or not it affects the entire bottom land, not just Harbour Watch. Our position is very simple. If it was triggered, I get a ground lease from the State. If the City prevails, and it was not triggered, then I currently have permits that are good for 5 years to rebuild what has been historically there or at worse, under the 30 to 1 rule, 5-6 slips. In either case, there is a court order upon which title insurance can now be issued. Therefore, I would like to discuss how the City would like to proceed but I can not be put in the same position as Cheezem or risk and adverse vote if the referendum fails or the political climate is such that a vote would not be successful based on the surplus land theory. Please give me a call so that we can discuss this matter further. I was hoping to discuss this on the phone rather then by a-mail but since you are out of town and I was also traveling, I thought it best to further clarify our position with the hopes that everyone will agree that a stipulation is the best way to go and sets a great precedent for the City if any other City property is in a similar position. 6/5/2006 _ : ~ j ~ • Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 8:44 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com'; Horne, William Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; Akin, Pam; Horne, William; Wells, Wayne; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks Mr. Gaynor, City staff will now communicate through your attorney. Thank you, Laura Lipowski -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, June O1, 2006 3:24 PM To: Horne, William Cc: richardb@hgslaw.com; Lipowski, Laura; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; bill.west@opussouth.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; phildog@tampabay.rr.com Subject: Harbour Watch Docks Bill- After our last meeting I discussed the City's timeframe with Opus and the Stag of Florida. As I mentioned, our sales and marketing have been adversely affected by keeping the dock issue in limbo while the City and the State resolve their issues concerning the Right of Reverter. Even purchasers who do not have a boat, want the ability to walk on a common dock with related dock facilities and because the ramp is tied into the seawall we can not meet our deadline under our seawall contract. We retained Richard S. Brightman Esq., in Tallahassee, to review our position in light of the City's position. I appreciate the fact that the City understands our position and is willir5g to deed back the property to the State. However, I have been concerned that the mechanism is by classifying the land as "surplus", which requires a vote of the City Council. It is because of this mechanism the City wants to wait until after the referendum. Our project is in a different position then Mike Cheezems. For thirty years there were 12 slips and 21 moorings at that location. Bill Woods has sent to the City copies of all our permits and governmental approvals for a repair and rebuild. The only reason we are on hold is because of a "change of use" which resulted from going to residential, even though that use is within the current zoning category. Even the State can not figure out how the docks were constructed without their approval back in 1958 nor can anyone find a basis for the 1958 Deed. Its a stretch to say that a private yacht broker and repair yard is for a public purpose just because the public uses it. The same could be said for a supermarket. Having given the thirty year history, Bud Vielhauer, DEP's lawyer, has agreed with Jim Stoutamire and our counsel that in order to expedite the process and avoid the City having to vote on deeding back surplus property, it would be best for the State to trigger the reverter, but agree it only applies to the Harbour Watch basin, which is the subject of the 1958 Deed. The limitation on the area affected by the reverter would be done through a stipulation between the State and the City. Once the stipulation is signed, the State would file a Quiet Title Claim, or similar action, strictly based on the reverter without the need of a vote since the reverter is automatic based on the 1925 legislative resolution. I realize you are out of town until next week, but I would need to speak with you on the mechanics of how the City could execute such a stipulation. I think its pretty easy because CB;D approved the change 6/5/2006 Y ~ . . , . ~ • I Page 2 of 2 of use over 14 months of public hearings, during which there were no objections to the project and in fact we had 100% neighbor support. The Right of Reverter is triggered for one or two reasons. 1. The City violated the resolution back in 1958 and all subsequent build and repair permits or 2. Approving the change of use in 2004. Obviously neither the assistant City Attorney back in 2001 nor the City Engineer in 2001 or 2004 nor the CDB had any concerns that a "change of use" could trigger the reverter but we are where we are. The State has informed us that this is the best solution but it requires that the City not contest the State's claim. If the City is not willing to stipulate then the State does not want to commence action against the City but would support our lawsuit against the State and the City for a declaratory judgement. The State will argue that the reverter was triggered on at least one occasion. Our position will be that we want the court to decide was it triggered or not. If it was triggered, then the City will have to argue whether or not it affects the entire bottom land, not just Harbour Watch. Our position is very simple. If it was triggered, I get a ground lease from the State. If the City prevails, and it was not triggered, then I currently have permits that are good for 5 years to rebuild what has been historically there or at worse, under the 30 to 1 rule, 5-6 slips. In either case, there is a court order upon which title insurance can now be issued. Therefore, I would like to discuss how the City would like to proceed but I can not be put in the same position as Cheezem or risk and adverse vote if the referendum fails or the political climate is such that a vote would not be successful based on the surplus land theory. Please give me a call so that we can discuss this matter further. I was hoping, to discuss this on the phone rather then by a-mail but since you are out of town and I was also traveling, I thought it best to further clarify our position with the hopes that everyone will agree that a stipulation is the best way to go and sets a great precedent for the City if any other City property is in a similar position. 6/5/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 2:30 PM To: Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Yes it is to be continued and Bill Woods will deliver the check on our behalf Joseph W. Gaynor -----Original Message----- From: Laura. Lipowski@myClearwater.com To: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Cc: Leslie.Dougall-Sides@myClearwater.com Sent: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 14:00:44 -0400 Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Mr. Gaynor can respond as the applicant. My understanding is that the item was to be continued. > -----Original Message----- > From: Wells, Wayne > Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 11:59 AM > To: Bill Woods (E-mail); 'josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' > Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie > Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage > Bill/Joe - > It is that time of the month again when I ask the status of this case....so, what is the status? We are scheduled for the June 20, 2006, CDB meeting. I need to update the staff report (which are scheduled to be sent out next Tuesday) from the standpoint IF an additional continuance is going to be requested. If an additional continuance is necessary, will you be asking to have it continued to the July 18, 2006, CDB meeting or will it be continued to a date uncertain? I need a letter of request to continue the request (plus $75.00). If it is ready to go the CDB, just let me know. Please let me know by 4:30 pm on Monday, June 5, 2006. > Wayne 6/4/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 2:56 PM To: Wells, Wayne; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage ' Please treat this a-mail as a formal request to extend once again the CDB hearing and i will have a $75 check delivered to you by Bill Woods since I am out of town. Bill Horne is out of the office until next week. I have written him an a-mail regarding the position of the State and should the City agree, we could easily meet the next hearing the deadline. 6/2/2006 • C7 Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 2:01 PM To: Wells, Wayne; 'Bill Woods (E-mail);'josephwgaynorpa@aol~com' Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Mr. Gaynor can respond as the applicant. My understanding is that the item was to be continued. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 11:59 AM To: Bill Woods (E-mail); 'josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - It is that time of the month again when I ask the status of this case....so, what is the status? We are scheduled for the June 20, 2006, CDB meeting. I need to update the staff report (which are scheduled to be sent out next Tuesday) from the standpoint IF an additional continuance is going to be requested. If an additional continuance is necessary, will you be asking to have it continued to the July 18, 2006, CDB meeting or will it be continued to a date uncertain? I need a letter of request to continue the request (plus $75.00). If it is ready to go the CDB, just let me know. Please let me know by 4:30 pm on Monday, June 5, 2006. Wayne • • Weils, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 11:59 AM To: Bill Woods (E-mail); 'josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - It is that time of the month again when I ask the status of this case....so, what is the status? We are scheduled for the June 20, 2006, CDB meeting. I need to update the staff report (which are scheduled to be sent out next Tuesday) from the standpoint IF an additional continuance is going to be requested. If an additional continuance is necessary, will you be asking to have it continued to the July 18, 2006, CDB meeting or will it be continued to a date uncertain? I need a letter of request to continue the request (plus $75.00). If it is ready to go the CDB, just let me know. Please let me know by 4:30 pm on Monday, June 5, 2006. Wayne 1 '~. ~~ ~ • Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 9:26 AM To: 'Dianne Magee'; 'Bill Woods' Cc: 'Joseph W Gaynor' Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Dianne Magee [mailto:diannemagee@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 9:09 AM To: 'Bill Woods'; Wells, Wayne Cc: 'Joseph W Gaynor' Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage I've prepared the check and it will go out in the mail this afternoon -Dianne From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 8:49 AM To: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Dianne Magee Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Wayne: We will mail the check this date to your attention. Regards, Bill Woods Internal Email: Dianne, please cut check to City of Clwr for $150.00 and place FLD # on the memo section of check. Thanks Bill Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods@woodsconsulting_org ----- Original Message ----- From: Wa~ne.Wells~a myClearwater.com To: billwoods~a woodsconsulting.org Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 6:52 AM Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill - No, the case records do not show any $150.00 payment. 5/24/2006 • Page 2 of 2 Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 7:21 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc:Joseph W Gaynor Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Wayne: Were the monies ($150.00) ever submitted. Please advise. Bill Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods(a~woodsconsultin~org ----- Original Message ----- From: Wayne.Wells(a~myCtearwater.com To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org ; josephwgaynorpa a aol.com Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:16 PM Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - Attached is the Staff Report that we are sending to the CDB (the only thing that has changed is in the Update on Page 2. The CDB meeting will be at 1:00 pm on Tuesday, May 15, 2006. Since this case is requested to be continued to the June 20, 2006, CDB agenda, it will be first on the agenda. This will be the third continuance of this case. Code requires a~$75.00 fee be paid for each CDB continuance. I only find records that one continuance fee has been paid. Please remit a check for $150.00 (made out to the City of Clearwater). Thanks. Wayne «Windward Passage 279 Staff Report for 5.16.06 CDB.doc» 5/24/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 6:53 AM To: 'Bill Woods' Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill - No, the case records do not show any $150.00 payment. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 7:21 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc:Joseph W Gaynor Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Wayne: Were the monies ($150.00) ever submitted. Please advise. Bill Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods c(o,woodsconsulting.or~ ----- Original Message ----- From: Wayne.Wells(a~myClearwater.com To: billwoodst~woodsconsulting.org ; 'ose hwgaynorpa a aol.com Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:16 PM Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage BilUJoe - Attached is the Staff Report that we are sending to the CDB (the only thing that has changed is in the Update on Page 2. The CDB meeting will be at 1:00 pm on Tuesday, May 15, 2006. Since this case is requested to be continued to the June 20, 2006, CDB agenda, it will be first on the agenda. This will be the third continuance of this case. Code requires a $75.00 fee be paid for each CDB continuance. I only find records that one continuance fee has been paid. Please remit a check for $150.00 (made out to the City of Clearwater). Thanks. Wayne «Windward Passage 279 Staff Report for 5.16.06 CDB.doc» 5/24/2006 • • c ° ° `J)}}~°`~~~dh6 ~,~;. ~N •.~~,~ ~. LONG RAI~IGE PLANNING I~IVIi1.OPMENT REVIEW CITY OF C LEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CI.I:ARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL. SERVICES BUILDING, ZOO SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 May 17, 2006 Mr. Bill Woods Woods Consulting, Inc. 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Re: Community Development Board Meeting (Case No. FLD2005-09093 - 279'. Windward Passage) Dear Mr. Woods: The Community Development Board (CDB) at their meeting on May 16, 2006, continued the above referenced request to their June 20, 2006, meeting. The request is for Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for property located at 279 Windward Passage. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III, at 727-562- 4504. Sincerely, ~ '~ > ~d~ r''~ ~~ Michael el1CP Planning Director Cc: Joe Gaynor S.•IPfanning DepartmentlCD BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cnseslUp for the next CDBIWinriward Passage 279 Harbour Watch Docks (C) - 6.20.06 CDB - WWIWindwartf Passage 279 CDB Continuance Letter S./7.06.~1oc I'KANK I~IISRAItI), Mrwc)K 13u.i. ~s)NSt)N, Vacs-,'Nrw<)r. JOssN Dtntrw, C<~nncu.nu:nusr:K. ic)rr I IA\tlia'<)N, Ct)nn(:u.nu•:~ussat ® CAKLIiN A. Plil'IiKtiliN, COnN<:u.nu•ausr:K "1':O1IAI. ISh1PLOYMF.N'1• AND AI'PIRMA•I•IVIi A("LION I;~9PLO1'1?it' ~i • • Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 1:15 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: 'billwoods@woodsconsulting.org'; Horne, William; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com ;Akin, Pam Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Sorry - 1st sentence below should say "potential uses for the ramp" Page 1 of 1 -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 11:57 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Horne, William; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage I do not recommend splitting the ramp from the docks. Mr. Gaynor did reiterate potential uses for the dock that may be interpreted as public purpose, but I do not have assurances from they State to that effect. The State's letter only discusses its position should the submerged lands be deeded back to the State - in which case, they would not consider the reverter to be triggered by the construction of the ramp. Short of that conveyance taking place, I do not feel comfortable with the City taking any final steps in addressing the status of this property. Further, I do recognize that Mr. Gaynor has entered into a deal with Clearwater Marine Science Center to build the referenced ramp in exchange for an easement, but there are nor formal documents in place setting out that Clearwater Fire and Rescue would also utilize the ramp to fulfill any public service in that area should such use be warranted. I have also been unable to confirm that City staff has formally considered this proposed public use. Thank you, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 9:21 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Lipowski, Laura Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Thanks-is there anyway we can split the ramp from the docks?-I met with Bill Horne and Laura and the docks are the only issue-the ramp is for a public purpose and does not involve the reverter so by the June meeting I can have the State approval in writing as to the ramp or the CDB can vote just on the ramp tomorrow subject to getting State approval .since this would not have to go to City Counsel on the surplus issue. ~. 5/15/2006 •~, • ~ Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Rick Hardwick [tidewaterre@verizon.net] Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 5:45 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Joe: Very good narrative here. Rick From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com [mailto:Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 8:25 AM To: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; Leslie.Dougall-Sides@myClearwater.com Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; tidewaterre@verizon.net; HamptonInv@aol.com; ' pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com; BiII.West@opussouth.com; Christine.lemons@opussouth.com; Sherry.Watkins@myClearwater.com; neil.thompson@MyClearwater.com; michael.delk@',MyClearwater.com Subject: Harbour Watch Joe and Leslie - Thank you for your request for continuance of your application at the April 18, 2006, CDB meeting. There is a $75.00 fee to continue the request at the CDB. Please send the check as soon as possible, made out to the City of Clearwater. Since the CDB meets only monthly, the next CDB meeting is May 16, 2006, and then after that it is June 20, 2006. Is there any idea as to when the City Council may meet to decide such issue, so that we can appropriately continue this application to the most applicable CDB meeting? If unclear, we will recommend the application be continued by the CDB to a date uncertain, which will require readvertiseme,nt of the request. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 8:55 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; tidewaterre@verizon.net; HamptonInv@aol.com; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com; BiII.West@opussouth.com; Christine.lemons@opussouth.com Subject: Harbour Watch After speaking with Pam (please forward this to her since I could not pull up her a-mail address) I understand the CDB cannot direct the City Counsel to issue the Deed so I am caught in a catch 22 situation-I agree with the stipulation and I am confident that the City will recognize how we got where we are, and what is the fair and proper way to resolve all pending matters with us and the State-however in order to make sure we are preserving our rights and remedies, the proper order would be to go the City Counsel first, so I have asked Bill Woods to prepare the appropriate application to get before the City Counsel in May and I will speak with the City Manager to make sure that we can get on the agenda- the issue that Pam raised was the City, in accordance with its Charter,can convey bottom land to another governmental entity, if it is for a public purpose-we believe settling the issues at Harbour Watch which also set a precedent for other sovereign land disputes coupled with developing the ramp for saving the manatees, dolphins and turtles and the fact we are cleaning up the water by removing a commercial use are a public purpose, but more importantly the State has advised us that the Board of Trustees holds the bottom land in an aquatic preserve for the benefit of all Florida citizens and therefore, a donation of land by the City is for a public purpose,even though the State will later enter into a ground lease for a private purpose.Bill will quote the sections of our Constitution that Jim Stoutimire recited that supports this position. This together with a recommendation from the City Attorney, and the proposed language pending before the CDB should be enough for the City Counsel to bless the transaction-Therefore, please treat this as a formal request to postpone CDB action on the 18th of April to the CDB meeting following the 5/11/2006 .p ~ • Page 2 of 2 date upon which the City votes on our application. Once again thank you for all of your help and guidance. 5/ 11 /2006 • • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:16 PM To: Bill Woods (E-mail); 'josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - Attached is the Staff Report that we are sending to the CDB (the only thing that has changed is in the Update on Page 2. The CDB meeting will be at 1:00 pm on Tuesday, May 15, 2006. Since this case is requested to be continued to the June 20, 2006, CDB agenda, it will be first on the agenda. This will be the third continuance of this case. Code requires a $75.00 fee be paid for each CDB continuance. I only find records that one continuance fee has been paid. Please remit a check for $150.00 (made out to the City of Clearwater). Thanks. Wayne L~J Windward Passage 279 Staff Rep... Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 12:32 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage We will not get on the May City agenda so the CDB in late June will be better but if we can wait until we have our meeting with Bill Horne next week we will know our timing better but if we have to extend you are hereby authorized to do so since we need to go to the City Counsel first Joseph W. Gaynor -----Original Message----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com To: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Sherry.Watkins@myClearwater.com Sent: Wed, 3 May 2006 09:53:17 -0400 Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Joe It's that time of the month again. At their meeting on April 18th, the CDB' continued the above referenced case to their May 16th meeting. It was continued to allow you to go to City Council first to have the submerged land be declared surplus. It is my understanding from Laura Lipowski that the necessary information has not yet been submitted to her to place an item on the next available City Council agenda. Based on the City Council schedule, it appears that such an item could be placed on the June 1st or June 15th City Council meetings at the earliest (or potentially July 20th). Any which way, the above request will need to be continued from the May 15th CDB agenda if you want City Council action first. I need a letter (or email) of request to continue this case for the CDB. Show,ld it be continued to the June 20th or July 18th CDB agenda? There will be a fee for such continuance. Please let me know today, as I need to get an updated Staff Report to the CDB. Wayne 5/3/2006 • ~' a . ,~ ~ ~"~~~' ~F ~LE.~RWA'I'E~ ` l~%ANNING DEPARTMENT f~i ,,.,,; "n'1 ~~~/~, POST 4~FFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 I~~~; ~ ~ ~~~ J~1 MUNSCIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, lOO SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHOr?E (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 LONG PANGS PLANNING T%r ~TLOPMENT REVIF,W April 19, 2006 Mr. Bill Woods Woods Consulting, Inc. 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Re: Community Development Board Meeting (Case No. FLD2005-09093 - 279' Windward Passage) Dear Mr. Woods: The Community Development Board (CDB) at their meeting on April 18, 2006, continued the above referenced request to their May 16, 2006, meeting. The request is for Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for property located at 279 Windward Passage. 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 Cc: Joe Gaynor S.•IPlanning DepartmentlCD BIFLEX (FLD)IPending casesl Up for the next CDBIWindward Passage 279 Harbour Watch Docks (C) - 5.16.06 CDB - WWIWindward Passage 279 CDB Continuance Letter 4.19.06.doc t'R1N1< H11313AItD, MAYOR i311.I. JONSON, VICIi-1YIAYOK JOHN 1)OKeW, COlINC11.b11iM11131iK HOYC HAAAII:iY)N, CUUNCILMHMBI:It CAR1.IiN A. PI:I'IiKSIiN, COUNCIL\tliMl3liK "I.QUAI. I;MPI,OYMIiN'f AND API~iRMA"I'IVIi ACTION EMPLOYI?R" r , A ~ ~ Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 2:03 PM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com ; 'billwoods@woodsconsulting.org' Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne; Barrett, Earl Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Hi Joe, I gather from your email below that Bill Woods will be presenting some information for purposes of moving forward with the agenda item to declare the subject bottomlands surplus -including whatever basis Jim Stoutimire provided supporting the State's position. In addition, we will need you to provide a survey. Please communicate with me regarding the agenda item since a declaration of surplus will be handled by myself and Mr. Earl Barrett, the City's Real Estate Manager. I will wait to hear more. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 8:56 AM To: Akin, Pam Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Delk, Michael Subject: FW: Harbour Watch FYI. i -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 8:55 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; tidewaterre@verizon.net; HamptonInv@aol.com; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com; BiILWest@opussouth.com; Christine.lemons@opussouth.com Subject: Harbour Watch After speaking with Pam (please forward this to her since I could not pull up her a-mail address) I understand the CDB cannot direct the City Counsel to issue the Deed so I am caught in a catch 22 situation-I agree with the stipulation and I am confident that the City will recognize how we got where we are, and what is the fair and proper way to resolve all pending matters with us and the State-however in order to make sure we are preserving our rights and remedies, the proper order would be to go the City Counsel first, so I have asked Bill Woods to prepare the appropriate application to get before the City Counsel in May and I will speak with the City Manager to make sure that we can get on the agenda- the issue that Pam raised was the City, in accordance with its Charter,can convey bottom land to another governmental entity, if it is for a public purpose-we believe settling the issues at Harbour Watch which also set a precedent for other sovereign land disputes coupled with developing the ramp for saving the manatees, dolphins and turtles and the fact we are cleaning up the water by removing a commercial use are a public purpose, but more importantly the State has advised us that the Board of Trustees holds the bottom land in an aquatic preserve for the benefit of all Florida citizens and therefore, a donation of land by the City is for a public purpose,even though the State will later enter into a ground lease for a private purpose.Bill will quote the sections of our Constitution that Jim Stoutimire recited that supports this position. This together with a recommendation from the City Attorney, and the proposed language pending before the CDB should be enough for the City Counsel to bless the transaction-Therefore, please treat this as a formal request to postpone CDB action on the 18th of April to the CDB meeting following the date upon which the City votes on our application. Once again thank you for,all of your help and 4/13/2006 ~,~. ~ ~ guidance. Page 2 of 2 4/13/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 9:08 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; tidewaterre@verizon.net; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com; BiII.West@opussouth.com; christine.lemons@opussouth.com; Watkins, Sherry; Thompson, Neil; Delk, Michael Subject: Re: Harbour Watch Wayne-Bill will be getting you our check since I am out of town-the City clerk has indicated that only the City Attorney can get us on the agenda for May so I have asked Pam to see what she can do for us, 4/13/2006 . ~ Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 9:25 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com'; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; tidewaterre@verizon.net; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com; BiII.West@opussouth.com; christine.lemons@opussouth.com; Watkins, Sherry; Thompson, Neil; Delk, Michael Subject: Harbour Watch Joe and Leslie - Thank you for your request for continuance of your application at the April 18, 2006, CDB meeting. There is a $75.00 fee to continue the request at the CDB. Please send the check as soon as possible, made out to the City of Clearwater. Since the CDB meets only monthly, the next CDB meeting is May 16, 2006, and then after that it is June 20, 2006. Is there any idea as to when the City Council may meet to decide such issue, so that we can appropriately continue this application to the most applicable CDB meeting? If unclear, we will recommend the application be continued by the CDB to a date uncertain, which will require readvertisement of the request. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 8:55 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; tidewaterre@verizon.net; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com; BiII.West@opussouth.com; christine.lemons@opussouth.com Subject: Harbour Watch After speaking with Pam (please forward this to her since I could not pull up her a-mail address) I understand the CDB cannot direct the City Counsel to issue the Deed so I am caught in a catch 22 situation-I agree with the stipulation and I am confident that the City will recognize how we got where we are, and what is the fair and proper way to resolve all pending matters with us and the State-however in order to make sure we are preserving our rights and remedies, the proper order would be to go the City Counsel first, so I have asked Bill Woods to prepare the'appropriate application to get before the City Counsel in May and I will speak with the City Manager to make sure that we can get on the agenda- the issue that Pam raised was the City, in accordance with its Charter,can convey bottom land to another governmental entity, if it is for a public purpose-we believe settling the issues at Harbour Watch which also set a precedent for other sovereign land disputes coupled with developing the ramp for saving the manatees, dolphins acid turtles and the fact we are cleaning up the water by removing a commercial use are a public purpose, but more importantly the State has advised us that the Board of Trustees holds the bottom land in an aquatic preserve for the benefit of all Florida citizens and therefore, a donation of land by the City is for a public purpose,even though the State will later enter into a ground lease for a private purpose.Bill will quote the sections of our Constitution that Jim Stoutimire recited that supports this position. This together with a recommendation from the City Attorney, and the proposed language pending before the CDB should be enough for the City Counsel to bless the transaction-Therefore, please treat this as a formal request to postpone CDB action on the 18th of April to the CDB meeting following the date upon which the City votes on our application. Once again thank you for all of your help and guidance. 4/12/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 8:55 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; tidewaterre@verizon.net; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com; BiII.West@opussouth.com; christine.lemons@opussouth.com Subject: Harbour Watch After speaking with Pam (please forward this to her since I could not pull up her a-mail address) I understand the CDB cannot direct the City Counsel to issue the Deed so I am caught in a catch 22 situation-I agree with the stipulation and I am confident that the City will recognize how we got where we are, and what is the fair and proper way to resolve all pending matters with us and the State-however in order to make sure we are preserving our rights and remedies, the proper order would be to go the City Counsel first, so I have asked Bill Woods to prepare the appropriate application to get before the City Counsel in May and I will speak with the City Manager to make sure that we can get on the agenda- the issue that Pam raised was the City, in accordance with its Charter,can convey bottom land to another governmental entity, if it is for a public purpose-we believe settling the issues at Harbour Watch which also set a precedent for other sovereign land disputes coupled with developing the ramp for saving the manatees, dolphins and turtles and the fact we are cleaning up the water by removing a commercial use are a public purpose, but more importantly the State has advised us that the Board of Trustees holds the bottom land in an aquatic preserve for the benefit of all Florida citizens and therefore, a donation of land by the City is for a public purpose,even though the State will later enter into a ground Lease for a private purpose.Bill will quote the sections of our Constitution that Jim Stoutimire recited that supports this position. This together with a recommendation from the City Attorney, and the proposed language pending before the CDB should be enough for the City Counsel to bless the transaction-Therefore, please treat this as a formal request to postpone CDB action on the 18th of April to the CDB meeting following the date upon which the City votes on our application. Once again thank you for all of your help and guidance. 4/12/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 11:27 AM i To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: Harbour Watch Wayne I agree and I understand the City's position-I just want Lesley to know that I can't take the risk if the CDB agrees to this language, I give up my position then the City does not issue the deed to the State-I think we have a win for everyone so I just don't want to be caught without a remedy 4/11/2006 • ~ Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 1:12 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Subject: Fwd: Harbor Watch Condominium Submerged Land Question re :Reverter Clause - ... Attached is the response we received from the State-they believe a change of use would trigger a reverter, however a deed negates the reverter so we have accomplished what we both need-I hope CDB agrees how important it is for the State to recognize that the reverter has not been previously triggered and this ruling not only puts to rest any prior allegations that a reverter was triggered by Ross Yacht or other parcels but also sets a precedent that if one parcel triggers the reverter then a deed to that parcel negates the reverter on the balance, notwithstanding some prior case law from other jurisdictions-hopefully this matter can now stay on the consent agenda-than you for all of your help and guidance Joseph W. Gaynor 304 Monroe Street Dunedin, Florida 34698 Office: 727-736-8500 Fax: 727-736-8600 Cell: 727-599-3527 4/10/2006 ~_~, ,, ~ ~ Page 1 of 3 Wells, Wayne ~ From: Stoutamire, Jim [Jim.Stoutamire@dep.state.fl.us] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 12:43 PM To: Bill Woods; Vielhauer, Harold; karen.west@swfwmd.state.fl.us Cc: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; karen.gruenhagen@swfwmd.state.fl.us; Stacklyn, Julie; Woolam, Scott; Maddox, Rod Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condominium Submerged Land Question re :Reverter Clause -City Information Bill - I spoke to our General Council's office about the concept of deeding the land back. Preliminary thoughts are: - yes this is possible; it would have to go through what the Division of State Lands calls the "donation" process. It's likely, but not absolutely certain, that this would not need BOT action (e.g. could be done in-house); - if this was done than the land in question would once again be titled in the BOT at the applicable provisions of 18-21 and 18-20, F.A.C., would apply to the project; - yes the original transfer of ownership was by legislative act rather than a BOT deed but the reverter is, as I understand it, self-executing. However, if the land is deeded back the reverter does not apply. - as I understand it the prior use did have some arguably public recreation component but the new use is exclusively private residential multi-family which is not consistent with the legislative act. It's the new use that's the issue not repair/replace vs. reconfiguration. If you want to send materials up so we can talk, feel free. I am available: - tomorrow afternoon; - most anytime Wednesday; - Thursday from 11-1:30 and after 2:30 - Friday but only if I can not avoid it as the Legislature has the day off so I'm hoping to do the same. From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 4:49 PM To: Stoutamire, Jim; Vielhauer, Harold; karen.west@swfwmd.state.fl.us Cc: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; karen.gruenhagen@swfwmd.state.fl.us; Stacklyn, Julie; Woolam, Scott; Maddox, Rod; Stoutamire, Jim Subject: Harbor Watch Condominium Submerged Land Question re :Reverter Clause -City Information Jim: The City of Clearwater has met with us numerous times and have worked out the language they will place as a condition on our permit approval (approval at the City level). The language is shown below. As the City has made their decision, my client, Joe Gaynor, still believes, it prudent for us to visit with you and present out thoughts one-on-one. One of the major questions to be addressed is whether or not the reverter would be triggered if we simply rebuild what is there 4/10/2006 .. , d • • Page 2 of 3 now and has been there for some 50 to 60 years. We have all exemptions in hand for a repair and rebuild. The SWFWMD exemption that was granted was silent to any proprietary concerns. Jim, we have also been informed by someone at the city that the city was told that the 1925 document was not a warranty deed but the land was transferred via an act of the legislature. As such, we were told only the legislature could trigger the reverter. Makes not a whole lot of sense to me, but thought I would throw that in. Again, we are short on time, so please advise when we could meet in your offices. I previously notified you of days that were not good for us but we can meet your schedule if need be. City Condition to be Imposed on their Permit Approval That no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application be issued unless and until the City receives sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity, or in the alternative, should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) results in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the City Council may release, at their sole discretion, the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Prior to any such action by the City Council, the applicant shall submit a survey describing the submerged land area adjacent to the upland application parcel which is to be reverted; Regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods(cr~woodsconsulting.org ----- Original Message ----- From: Stoutamire, Jim To: billwoods(p~woodsconsulting.org ; Vielhauer, Harold ; karen.west@swfwmd.state.fl.us Cc: fosephwgaynorp~aol.com ; karen.gruenhagen swfwmd.state.fl.us ; Stacklyn,~Julie ; Woolam, Scott ; Maddox, Rod ;Stoutamire, Jim Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 11:43 AM Subject: Re: Harbor Watch Condominium Submerged Land Question re :Reverter clause -MEETING Bill -preliminary evaluation of the material indicates that the proposed condo docking facility would likely trigger the reverter. That said we would be happy to discuss the project further in light of your remarks below. However, given that the WMD is the processing agency and the land in question currently belongs to Clearwater it would appear a teleconference might be better than the expense of a Tally trip and easier to coordinate. In any case 4/10/2006 T t, ~ ~ Page 3 of 3 to have an effective conversation we need to involve the city and the WMD. If you or the WMD could provide a city contact I can have Julie get the ball rolling on a time next week. Of course if you wish to participate from up here thatjs fine too. Sent from my B1ackBerry Wireless Handheld -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods <billwoods@woodsconsulting.org> To: Stoutamire, Jim <Jim.Stoutamirena,dep.state.fl.us> CC: Joseph W Gaynor <josephwgaynorpa~a,aol.com>; Karen Gruenhagen <Karen. rug enhagen(a~swfwmd.state.fl.us> Sent: Thu Apr 06 00:42:20 2006 Subject: Harbor Watch Condominium Submerged Land Question re :Reverter Clause Jim: My client, Joseph Gaynor, and I met with the City of Clearwater on Wednesday, Apri15 and were able to reach a resolution as to how to address the submerged lands at the Harbor Watch Condominium project. The public hearing for this project is scheduled for April 18. In earlier correspondence you noted you needed to get a full briefing and information package from Karen Gruenhagen before you could meet with us. As the time frame to obtain your input prior to the April 18th hearing is getting short, we would like to inquire if you would have an opportunity to meet with Joe Gaynor and me in your offices in the next week or so. Please advise if this is possible. My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods(a~woodsconsulting.org 4/10/2006 :~~ -' • . Page 1 of 3 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2006 4:52 PM To: 'Bill Woods' Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Problem(3) Bill - At this point, since the Staff Report has already been sent with the application and site plan that we had (with the floating dock), go ahead and send me the new site plans for the fixed docks. We will not change the Staff Report at this time, but will issue a memorandum to the CDB (which we will hand out at the meeting) letting them know that the docks are intended under the proposal to now be fixed (not floating), attaching the new site plan, and letting them know of any corrections to the conditions of approval. I thought you had a problem with the condition regarding signage? We can modify the condition through the memorandum. Thanks. Wayne , -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 6:57 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: Harbor Watch Problem(3) Tx Well. The conditions are fine as is. We will get 14 copies of fixed docks vs floating. They are almost identical the same footprint, just fixed. Do not know how we missed this. I will have Kyle Myrmel, the designer, go through your staff report and change everything that regards fixed vs floating. Maybe no meeting is needed if we do this. Again, conditions are o-k. Bill Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoodsnwoodsconsultin .or ----- Original Message ----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 5:22 PM Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Problem(2) Bill - By email on Aprii 6, 2006, in sending the Staff Report to you, I asked to know by 10 am on Monday, April 17, 2006, if the conditions of approval were acceptable so that we could place.you on the Consent Agenda. If there is some changes to the conditions (signage) we can do a memorandum that we would give to the CDB at the meeting with the amended conditions. As to the fixed versus floating, the only signed and sealed drawings we have for the proposal for eight slips is for floating docks. You might have a different proposal (fixed) for the repair and rebuild (?). Let me know when ydu want to meet. Wayne ~ -----Original Message----- 4/11/2006 ,' ~ . ~ Page 2 of 3 • From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 4:28 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: Harbor Watch Problem(2) O-k by me as I thought you had to have all by Monday 10':00 AM. Problem is we believe what we submitted last was all fixed docks as the,decision was made on 02-28-06 to not go with floaters. So it is the 8 slip design that you should have with fixed docks. As we for some reason cannot find a copy of our last submittal to you, we do not know if your narrative is right or wrong. Let me know when we can meet and I will be there or Kyle Myrmel the designer can meet with you. Thanks and have a good weekend. Bill Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods~a~,woodsconsulting. org ----- Original Message ----- From: Wayne.Wells(a~myClearwater.com To: billwoods(c~woodsconsulting.org Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 4:22 PM Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Problem Bill - The packages have already been sent to the CDB members. Suggestion -why not meet some time next week and you can get what you submitted and we can talk about what needs to be brought out at the CDB meeting, if necessary (if pulled off consent). Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 3:12 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Harbor Watch Problem Wayne: I have attached the staff report with two sections shown ion blue which we need to revise if possible. They state that we must have dock-mounted signage addressed protection of sea grass and manatees. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission in Tallahassee is now in charge of signage and must approve signage. They will normally only approve the minimum signage. They require "Caution -Manatee" signage. However, there is no seagrass in the immediate vicinity so that I do not believe they will approve a sign nor, in my opinion, should a sign be required. Wayne: PROBLEM: I do not believe we kept a file copy of what we 4/11/2006 2' ~ , ~ Page 3 of 3 • submitted last as I know we went to all fixed docks, with no floating docks in any of the designs. Your staff report discusses floating docks. I have my people driving my there about 3:30 today. Could they stop and get copy of what we submitted as for the 8 slips only. Alternatively, can you fax me the plan view of what we submitted for the 8 slips design. We may have to immediately get 15 copies of a new plan to you. We can mark up your report from here and resend it. Need input ASAP. Tx Bill Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods(c~woodsconsulting.org 4/11/2006 • ,~, ~. • ~ Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 5:23 PM To: 'Bill Woods' Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Problem(2) Bill - By email on April 6, 2006, in sending the Staff Report to you, I asked to know by 10 am on Monday, April 17, 2006, if the conditions of approval were acceptable so that we could place you on the Consent Agenda. If there is some changes to the conditions (signage) we can do a memorandum that we would give to the CDB at the meeting with the amended conditions. As to the fixed versus floating, the only signed and sealed drawings we have for the proposal for eight slips is for floating docks. You might have a different proposal (fixed) for the repair and rebuild (?). Let me know when you want to meet. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 4:28 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: Harbor Watch Problem(2) O-k by me as I thought you had to have all by Monday 10:00 AM. Problem is we believe what we submitted last was all fixed docks as the decision was made on 02-28-06 to not go with floaters. So it is the 8 slip design that you should have with fixed docks. As we for some reason cannot find a copy of our last submittal to you, we do not know if your narrative is right or wrong. Let me know when we can meet and I will be there or Kyle Myrmel the designer can meet with you. Thanks and have a good weekend. Bill Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 bitlwoods(~woodsconsulting. org ----- Original Message ----- From: Wa~e.WellsCc~myClearwater.com To: billwoods(a~woodsconsulting.org Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 4:22 PM Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Problem Bill - The packages have already been sent to the CDB members. Suggestion -why not meet some time next week and you can get what you submitted and we can talk about what needs to be brought out at the CDB meeting, if necessary (if pulled off consent). Wayne 4/7/2006 y . ~. . ~ Page 2 of 2 -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 3:12 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Harbor Watch Problem Wayne: I have attached the staff report with two sections shown ion blue which we need to revise if possible. They state that we must have dock-mounted signage addressed protection of sea grass and manatees. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission in Tallahassee is now in charge of signage and must approve signage. They will normally only approve the minimum signage. They require "Caution -Manatee" signage. However, there is no seagra~ss in the immediate vicinity so that I do not believe they will approve a sign nor, in my opinion, should a sign be required. Wayne: PROBLEM: I do not believe we kept a file copy of what we submitted last as I know we went to all fixed docks, with no floating docks in any of the designs. Your staff report discusses floating docks. I have my people driving my there about 3:30 today. Could they stop and get copy of what we submitted as for the 8 slips only. Alternatively, can you fax me the plan view of what we submitted for the 8 slips design. We may have to immediately get 15 copies of a new plan to you. We can mark up your report from here and resend it. Need input ASAP. Tx Bill Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods a~woodsconsulting.org 4/7/2006 • • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 10:15 AM To: Bill Woods (E-mail) Cc: 'josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill/Joe - Attached is the Staff Report that we are sending to the CDB. The CDB meeting will be at 1:00 pm on Tuesday, April 18, 2006. In order to be placed on the CDB Consent Agenda, please let me know if the conditions are acceptable, or not, by 10:00 am on Monday, April 17, 2006. To date, I have not received any letters of objection to thus request. Wayne Windward Passage 279 Staff Rep... • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 2:15 PM To: 'Bill Woods' Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Materials for 04/18/06 CDB Meeting Bill - Probably sometime in the morning would be better. I have a meeting from 8:30 to 9:30 am. As to the boat ramp, I believe the drawings for the upland development shows the ramp. I would deal with it through narrative. I did have Nick Fritsch, CDB member, express concern to me after the last CDB meeting regarding the "openness" of the design under the preemption circumstance. While you gave one example, his concern was it might not be the one that gets permitted and stated he would prefer to see/approve the one that's going to be built. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 2:05 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc:]oseph W Gaynor Subject: Harbor Watch Materials for 04/18/06 CDB Meeting Wayne: Please see the attached revised narrative and the two exhibits A and B. We are essentially requesting eh CDB to approve the original multi-use reconfigured dock with 8 slips, or some form of reconfigured multi-use dock that conforms; with the 30:1 preemption ratio for use of sovereign lands, should the reverter clause be triggered or approve the repair and rebuild design which is enclosed also. (Exhibit B, 2 sheets). Wayne, it might be best for me to plan to come to your offcie tomorow and go over these amterails and make sure we are also onte hsame page. Question: We did nt supply a sheet addresing teh boat ramp that is proposed. How do you think we should address this item? Please advise. My regards, Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods anwoodsconsulting.org 4/6/2006 ., • ~ Page 1 of 1 Weds, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 2:05 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Joseph W Gaynor Subject: Harbor Watch Materials for 04/18/06 CDB Meeting Wayne: Please see the attached revised narrative and the two exhibits A and B. We are essentially requesting eh CDB to approve the original multi-use reconfigured dock with 8 slips, or some form of reconfigured multi-use dock that conforms with the 30:1 preemption ratio for use of sovereign lands, should the reverter clause be triggered or approve the repair and rebuild design which is enclosed also. (Exhibit B, 2 sheets). Wayne, it might be best for me to plan to come to your offcie tomorow Wand go over these amterails and make sure we are also onte hsame page. Question: We did nt supply a sheet addresing teh boat ramp that is proposed. How do you think we should address this item? Please advise. My regards, Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 '~ Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods@woodsconsulting.org 4/4/2006 • REVISION 1 (04-04-2006) NARRATIVE HARBOR WATCH CONDOMINIUMS MULTI-USE DOCKS I FLD 2005-09093 Proposed Reconfigured Multi-Use Docks The Applicant, though their agent, Woods Consulting, submitted in September of 2005 a Flexible Development application for multi-use docks to be located in Island Estates, immediately to the west of the Island Estates Public Docks. The proposed docks will be amenities for the exclusive use of the residents of the Harbor Watch Condominiums. The proposed multi-use docks are also under review by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). SWFWMD has informed the applicant, in a request for additional information (RAI), that the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) will review the dock design and make a determination as to whether or not the "reverter" clause contained in the 1925 deed of conveyance of the submerged lands to the City of Clearwater by the State of Florida. Should the Department of Environmental Division of State Lands make the determination that the reverter is "triggered," then the dock design must conform with the requirements for docks located on sovereign lands within an Aquatic Preserve (note: all sovereign submerged lands within Pinellas County are part of the Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve as set forth in Section 18-20, F.A.C.). The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulations contain a state lands preemption requirement which states that the area of submerged lands an Applicant may use must not exceed the area calculated as 30 times the linear feet of Applicant-owned or controlled shoreline bordering sovereign lands. In the case of the Harbor Watch Condominiums, the shoreline length is 224 feet. Thus the total area allowed for preemption is 6,720 square feet (sf). Please note that preemption must include the entire Afootprint@ of the mooring facility, including not only the deck area but also the area where boats moor. The design submitted to the City, that is to go before the Community Development Board, was based on the assumption that the submerged lands were owned by the City of Clearwater and thus the preemption limit was not applicable. Should the reverter clause be triggered, the allowable area for preemption would be limited to 6,720 sf. The area (footprint) of the design to be considered by the CDB represents 10,142 sf and must be increased by 805 sf to address the boat ramp as discussed below. Thus the current design represents a total preempted area of sovereign lands of 10,947 sf., which is well in excess of the allowable preemption area. (This amount of submerged land use would be acceptable if the Aquatic Preserve regulations were not applied). Shown in Exhibit A is a design that reflects imposition of the preemption limit. Note the number of slips is reduced from 8 to 5 and the slip sizes are smaller. It should be noted that the design shown in Exhibit A is just one example of a mooring design that would satisfy the preemption rules. The design of the facility actually becomes a Anumbers game@ in that there are a myriad of designs that would meet the preemption requirements, as long as the preemption limit of 6,720 sf is not exceeded. The actual design shown in Exhibit A preempts a total square footage of 5,907 square feet. The 5,097 sf of the mooring facility must be combined with the square footage of the boat ramp, as discussed below, which is 805 sf. Thus the total area of submerged land preemption is 6,712 sf for the combined mooring facility and boat ramp. The 6,712 sf is less than the limit of 6,720 sf. • • At the present time it is not known whether or not the reverter clause will be~~ triggered. However, in the event it is, the Applicant requests the City of Clearwater approve at the CDB hearing a mooring facility that would be smaller and meets the preemption regulations. As noted above, the design shown in Exhibit A conforms to the sovereign land rules but represents just one design out of a myriad of designs that would meet the sovereign land regulations. Should the Applicant not decide to pursue the exact design as depicted in Exhibit A, the Applicant commits that the revised design will meet the important parameters that pertain to the current reconfigured multi-use dock design as addressed above, those being as follows: The slips cannot extend beyond a distance of 25% of the width of the waterway. This limit is shown on Exhibit A; and $ The slips cannot impact the ingress/egress of the vessels that are currently moored at the City facility to the immediate west of the proposed facility. In addition the Applicant commits that:: $ The revised facility will meet all City regulations pertaining to a multi-use docking facility; $ The footprint (total area over water of mooring facility) of the revised facility will be less than the area of the footprint of the reconfigured multi-use docks (docks for which the 30:1 preemption limit does not apply) which is 10,142 square feet as addressed under the heading above entitled "Proposed Reconfigured Multi-Use Docks;" and The revised design will not exceed a maximum of 8 slips. Repair and Rebuild of Exis_ting Docks and Slips The Applicant obtained a repair and rebuild permit from Pinellas County for repair and rebuild of the existing docks and boat slips. The permit was signed off at the county by the City personnel and the county issued the permit on October 3, 2005 (Permit No: M-36437-05). An application for repair and rebuild was also submitted to the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) and the permit was received on September 24, 2005 (Permit No: EX 2520). Note the permit is actually an exemption. A repair and rebuild permit allows the Applicant to repair and rebuild the existing docks in the exact same footprint or within a smaller footprint that is contained within the present footprint. Attached as Exhibit B (comprised of 2 sheets) is the repair and rebuild footprint the Applicant is currently considering. It represents an 8 slip docking facility. The Applicant requests that the CDB also approve this repair and rebuild design which will be used in the event the reconfigured dock is either not approved by the reviewing agencies or the decision is made to repair and rebuild, not reconfigure. Boat Ramp It should be noted that the Applicant has committed to the Marine Science Aquarium to construct a boat ramp for use by the Aquarium to load and unload injured mammals. The boat ramp will be a replacement for the fork lift loadout ramp that is currently located at the site. As the ramp is also located on sovereign lands, should the reverter clause be triggered, the ramp will be located on sovereign lands and, as such, the area represented by the ramp (805 square feet) will impact the preemption area available for the boat slips. Thus the Applicant has the 30:1 preemption limit less the 805 square feet for use by the multi-use docking facility, if the reverter clause is triggered. ., •~ • SCALE: 1"=30' EXHIBIT A RE-CONFIGURATION MULTI-USE DOCK WITH 30:1 PREEMPTION LIMIT LAND LEASE 30:1 = 6,720 sf AS IS = 5,907 sf XI m z vl m 0 20.0 CS 25% LINE 17.5 CS i~~ ~;mooooo ~~~ 104. 7 0 ~`~,. 3.0' MLW 522A41Ap1.3~ A p1,3g1.3g1' \3~. 1 ~ _3. .191-22~2~~' 1 .14T.1 q1,1 A9TA91.1 WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1~,3 PROPOSED DOCK WITH WATERWAY WIDTH WATERFRONT WIDTH 400 224' t7ia couNTY rmAD i, surrE 22 DUNEDIN FL 54698 30:1 LAND LEASE MHW '}1.3' MLW -0.7~ PH. 727 78s-s747 FAX (727 786-7479 ''ELElG4770NS REFERENCE NCI/D-1929 SHEET ~ Tue, 04 Apr 2006 - 1:47pm P:\Harbour Watch Docks (115-04)\CAD\Dock Master.dwg • • SCALE: 1"=30' EXHIBIT B (SHT 1 OF 2) Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) V ! ' ~ ` t ~ ~ ~ NOTE: CONTOURS SHOWN ~ r ~ ' ~ AS DEPTHS AT MLW ~ (//J f, r } j } t \ ! { f i ZI f! ,~f~1 J~ il( 4 ~ ~ ~~6 ~ m~ ~~ SO.~ ~ `~_., ~ 1 r ~~ ,~ ~ ~ t + m~ 3.0 ~ #_ ,,. / ~ e ~ ., y" ~ ~F ~ o a \~o ~ A t \ ~~ ~" i ..W._ ~ f,~`~ 19.5 O ~ ~ .r- ~y r' ~ 4 ~ ~`71~.3--19.3 ~ t" /cam ~.._ ~ ~~..'= 17.8 ~ I ° .-- --~ : r ~ ~,p~ Z<3 \~~2 a \c° ~ .,fit N rn w,_.__ mo I 5 \ 18.4,-,~ ,..w 23.0. , a, ~°``-~,...I,-..I~ r ~ M :____.____... ~ rn N~f..-~ ~_IT _ J \ ~ , 2.n ° '~ ~ N ~ ~~ ' Y \ \ 3.0' DEPTH AT MEAN LOW WATER (MLW) 0 -n rrl r Z m H• WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH CONDOS TOTAL SQUARE FEET 772 REPAIR/REBUILD t7~a couNly Roan ~, surrE 22 DUNEDIN ~ aasss OPTIMIZED LAYOUT WATERWAY WIDTH aoo WATERFRONT WIDTH 170 ~Hyy +,.a' M~yy -0.7' PH. 727 786-5747 FAX f 727 786-7479 *ELEl64T/ONS REFERENCE NGIiD-1929 SHEET ? SHORELINE Engineers Seal REVISION 2: 4-3-06 ~, REVISION 1: 3-29-06 ~ • SCALE: 1"=40' EXHIBIT B (SHT 2 OF 2) Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ I SLIP -DIMENSIONS NOTE: LANDWARD EXTENT OF I 1 15' x 40' SLIP CONSIDERED TO BE THE I 2 20' x 50' 3.0' MLW LINE I 3 22' x 60' ~ 4 18.5'x60' ~I 5 18.3' x 50' of 6 18.3' x 50' °I 7 16.8' x 40' ~I 8 17.4' x 40' 3.0' DEPTH AT MEAN ~i LOW WATER (MLW) r z m l o ~tio~ ~~A O o O ~S \ A~~ ® ~ 7 \~ % F .° M 50 © ` 0 0 0 `~ I ~ N } 'a' 16.0 44.0 19.5 38.6 17.8 74.7 AA ro ~ A r ~ r fZ~l µ ~ A C Z I µ WOODS CONSULTING H ARBOUR WATCH CONDOS TOTAL SQUARE FEET 772 REPAIR/REBUILD WATERWAY WIDTH WATERFRONT WIDTH 400 170 1714 COUNTY ROAD 1, sufTE DUNEDIN FL 34698 z2 OPTIMIZED LAYOUT MHw +,.3' MLW -0.7' PH. 727 786-5747 FAx ~7z7 786-747s *ELEl07AONS REFERENCE NCl~D-1929 SHEET ~ SHORELINE Engineers Seal REVISION 2: 4-3-06 REVISION 1: 3-29-06 ' ` ~ • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 8:06 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Lipowski, Laura Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Leslie/Laura - I have attached the Draft Staff Report for the April 18, 2006, CDB meeting. I have revised the conditions to what I know as the most current directives. Could you check the conditions of approval to ensure these are acceptable. The Staff Report is going out tomorrow (Thursday). Wayne Windward Passage 279 Staff Rep... 1 - ~ ~ Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 5:43 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage ' I need to get additional info to you . Will do tomorrow and will call in advance. Thanks and my regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods(a~woodsconsulting.org ----- Original Message ----- From: Wayne.Wells(a~myClearwater.com To: billwoods(cr~woodsconsulting.org Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 11:00 AM Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill - Just wondering how we are doing with this request. I am preparing the Staff Report for the April 18, 2006, CDB agenda and am looking to send it out Thursday. Any words of wisdom? Wayne 4/6/2006 • • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 11:00 AM To: Bill Woods (E-mail) Subject: ~ FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill - Just wondering how we are doing with this request. I am preparing the Staff Report for the April 18, 2006, CDB agenda and am looking to send it out Thursday. Any words of wisdom? Wayne 1 • • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:56 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Bill Woods (E-mail) Subject: RE: HarbourWatch Joe - I can make your request for continuance known to the CDB today to the April 18, 2006 agenda. Thanks. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:53 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Lipowski, Laura; bill.west@opussouth.comphildog@tampabay.rr.com; Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; HamptonInv@aol.com; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com Subject: HarbourWatch Pam, Leslie and Laura and I have agreed on the revised stipulation but Leslie will not have time to redraft it prior to today's CDB hearing so I hereby request an extension until the next CDB hearing which I believe to be April 18th. Please confirm by a-mail or call 599-3527 to confirm the extension and that I don't need to attend to make a formal request at the hearing,(however Imay go anyway just in case Leslie needs to speak to me). 3/21 /2006 • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com ' Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:53 AM ' To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Lipowski, Laura; bill.west@opussouth.comphildog@tampabay.rr.com; ' Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; Hamptonlnv@aol.com; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com Subject: HarbourWatch Pam, Leslie and Laura and I have agreed on the revised stipulation but Leslie will not have time to redraft it prior to today's CDB hearing so I hereby request an extension until the next CDB hearing which I believe to be April 18th. Please confirm by a-mail or call 599-3527 to confirm the extension and that I don't need to attend to make a formal request at the hearing,(however Imay go anyway just in case Leslie needs to 'speak to me). 3/21/2006 • • ..,.~r .~~. r ;~.; ':. ,,~.. .~~/j' 1+~ i ~ ','tl' ~, t' y I •~ ~~ ~r xis' - :7~~1a .. TER, ,, ~~~r~t~ LONG RANGE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CITY OE CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 474H, CI.EARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, LOO SOUTH MYRTLE AV$NUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 March 22, 2006 Mr. Bill Woods Woods Consulting, Inc. 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Re: Community Development Board Meeting (Case No. FLD2005-09093 - 279 Windward Passage) Dear Mr. Woods: The Community Development Board (CDB) at their meeting on March 21, 2006, continued the above referenced request to their April 18, 2006, meeting. The request is for Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for property located at 279 Windward Passage. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III, at 727-562- 4504. Sincerel Michael Delk, AICP Planning Director ~ ' Cc: Joe Gaynor S: (Planning DepnrtmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cnseslUp for the next CDBIWindwnrd Passage 179 Harbour Watch Docks (C) - 4.18.06 CDB -WWI Windward Passage 279 CDB Continuance Letter 3.22.06.doc FRANK H11313ARD, MAYOK I311.L~ONSON, VI(ai'MAYOK ~OHN DOKAN, COUNCILMI:M131iK HOPI' HAMII:IY)N, COUNCILMIiM131i1j ® CAKLIiN A. PI:"fEKS1iN, COUNCIIh1EM131iK ~~I]QUAI, I:MI'LOYMEN'I' AND AI'FIRMA'1'IVIi ACI'lON ISMPLOYIiK~~ ' Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Kyle Myrmel [kylecmyrmel@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 1:53 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Bill Woods Subject: Fw: Harbor Watch Dock Layouts Wayne, In preparation for your meeting with Joe Gaynor on Monday, please find attached PDF files showing the existing dock configuration along with an optimized layout of the existing docks minus unnecessary decking. Should you have any questions, please call Mr. Gaynor or Bill Woods. Sincerely, Kyle C. Myrmel Woods Consulting (727) 786-5747 ----- Original Message ----- From: Kyle Myrmel To: Josh W Gaynor ~ Cc: Bill Woods Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:33 AM Subject: Harbor Watch Dock Layouts Dear Joe, Please find attached two PDF files per phone request this date. The first layout contains only the existing dock layout with an estimate on slip locations. The second is an optimized layout, cutting out nonessential dockage. Should you have any questions, please call or email me. Sincerely, Kyle C. Myrmel Woods Consulting (727) 786-5747 3/17/2006 ' ~; ` SCALE: 1"=30' FIX AND REPAIR Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) I~ 5 7,5'x18,0' FLOATER O O RAMP a~ ,o MLW TD BE REMOVED -34.7 DocK I WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH CONDOS TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1.325 EXISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH WATERFRONT WIDTH 400 170 t7u COUNiY ROAD t, SurtE 22 DUNEDIN R 34698 MHW +t3' MLW -o.T PH. 727 786-5747 Fnx ~7z7 76s-747s "ELEl~i4AONS REFERENCE NGl?7-1929 SHEET 4 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal f .v w • • • SCALE: 1 "=30' ~e 0 s,o ~2 -' 11,7~~~`~- 3 O 1 ~7 WOODS CONSULTING 1714 COUNTY ROAD 1, SURE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727 786-7479 FIX AND REPAIR Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) 4, 2,0 Y O 19, 19,3---~-19,3 r 2,~ 4 - 17,s ~ ~ ~O ©~ ~ M 8,4-' o O ~0 M N k s ~ HARBOUR WATCH CONDOS REPAIR/REBUILD OPTIMIZED LAYOUT +'ELEl~i4 AONS REFERENCE NG'l~D-1929 SHORELINE MLW TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1,325 WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 170 MHW +1.3' MLW -0.7' SHEET 4 s Seal • ~ Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 11:14 AM To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage I spoke to Laura Lipowski yesterday and she filled me in on Pam's discussions with the State-I am not sure she will have it in writing by next Wednesday and Pam was out sick yesterday but is to get back with Laura and me either today or tomorrow.The jist is that the State has not previously triggered the Reverter and SWFMD had no authority to say that-I believe that Pam may suggest some language that states that so long as we rebuild the existing structure the CDB would have authority to approve it without any concerns-but I cannot confirm that without talking to Pam and Laura ' 3/16/2006 . Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 9:35 PM ' To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Joseph W Gaynor Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Wayne: Wayne: As always, a very well written staff report! Wayne, there have been very recent discussions between Joe Gaynor and the City attorney as regards the reverter clause. The discussions may bear on the staff report. As I was out of town this date and not a party to the discussions, you may want to check with the City Attorney. Also, Joe Gaynor may wish to provide input on the staff report. My regards, Bill Woods Joe: Do you wish to add to this info to Wayne. If so, please cc me on your response. Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods owoodsconsultin ----- Original Message ----- From: Wa.y_ne.._Wells m Clearwater.com To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 6:47 PM Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill - Attached is the Staff Report that we are sending to the CDB. The CDB meeting will be at 1:00 pm on Tuesday, March 21, 2006. In order to be placed on the CDB Consent Agenda, please let me know if the conditions are acceptable or not by 10:00 am on Monday, March 20, 2006. To date, I have not received ',any letters of objection to this request. Wayne «Windward Passage 279 Staff Report for 3.21.06 CDB.doc» 3/16/2006 • • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne - Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 6:56 PM To: 'josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Subject: FW: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage FYI -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 6:47 PM To: Bill Woods (E-mail) Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill - Attached is the Staff Report that we are sending to the CDB. The CDB meeting will be at 1:00 pm on Tuesday, March 21, 2006. In order to be placed on the CDB Consent Agenda, please let me know if the conditions are acceptable or not by 10:00 am on Monday, March 20, 2006. To date, I have not received any letters of objection to this request. , Wayne Windward Passage 279 Staff Rep... 1 • • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 6:47 PM To: Bill Woods (E-mail) Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill - Attached is the Staff Report that we are sending to the CDB. The CDB meeting will be at 1:00 pm on Tuesday, March 21, 2006. In order to be placed on the CDB Consent Agenda, please let me know if the conditions are acceptable or not by 10:00 am on Monday, March 20, 2006. To date, I have not received any letters of objection to this request. Wayne Windward Passage 279 Staff Rep... 1 i r. ~I f- ~ - f° I , ~ r r - 1 1 ~r = w 1 ` . 0,~. '. ,~ ~i" ,~ry~ ;C ',, +• LONG RANGE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT Rf:V1EW r CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CI,EARWATF,R, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL. SERVICES BUILDING, LOO SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLFARWATF,R, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 February 14, 2006 Mr. Bill Woods Woods Consulting, Inc. 1714 CR 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Re: Community Development Board Meeting (Case No. FLD2005-09093) Dear Mr. Woods: The Case No. FLD2005-09093 for Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for property located at 279 Windward Passage, has been scheduled to be reviewed by the Community Development Board on March 21, 2006. The meeting will take place at 1:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 3rd 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, ~ w ~ M. ~~ Way~M. Wells, AICP Planner III S: (Planning DepnrtmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cnseslUp jor the next CDB( Windwnrd Pnssnge 279 HnrGour Watch Docks (C) - 3.2/.06 CDB - WWIWindward Passage 279 CDB Letter.doc I~RnNK HntisnaD, Mnvoit I3u.LJonsoN, VR:r-Mnvoit JonN DoknN, CciuN<;u.>u:>utisR Horn HAA11I:fON, COUNCII,MF,MRP:It ® Cniti,rN A. Pr'rritsr:N, C(iun(ai nu=.auliat ~~ISQUAI. I?MPLOYMIiN'1' AND AIl~IRMA'I'IVIi ACTION IIMPLOY'IiR~~ ', • w Woods Consultin Environmental Permitting Marine Engineering November 8, 2005 Wayne Wells City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Suite #200 ' C'~~1~" ~~ Clearwater, Florida 33756-5520 Re: Response to DRC Comments Harbor Watch Condominiums - FLD200.5-09093 Dear Wayne: Land Planning 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Please find enclosed the revised City of Clearwater Flexible Development application package addressing the DRC comments: Engineering:. 1. Please see Sheet 5 that has been revised to include specific notes addressing construction within the 10 ft easement and access for City employees to the 12" force main. Flre: 1. Please see Sheet 16 with the required fire details to meet NFPA 1 and NFPA 303 requirements; Planning: 1. Please note the address has been corrected. 2. Please note the adjacent (eastern) affected property owner has provided a letter of no objection for not meeting the required 10% side setback to the east. The proposed docks were shifted to the east to allow proper turning distances for the boats moored at the Clearwater Marine Science center. By shifting the proposed docks to the east, this resulted in a decreased side setback to the east and an increased side setback to the west. 3. Please note that floating docks are preferred as other docks in the area are also floating structures. The applicant wishes to remain in character with the existing docks in the area. Additionally, floating docks require less maintenance. Due to the location of the proposed docks in this protected basin, we believe minimal noise will be generated from the floating docks. Also note, current plans are to use aluminum docks with 3" concrete surface for noise abatement. 4. Please note Attachment B #3 has been revised. ORIGINAL 5. Please note Attachment A (f) has been revised. RECEIVED Please call should you require additional information: FEB 0 8 2006 Mi~gardsA (~ pI,ANNING DEPARTMENT ~. I 1 l1 cITY OF CLEARWATER Bill Woodsy V -=--- Woods Consulting,. Inc. cc: Joe Gaynor (via fax) Christine Hagen (via fax) P:\Harbour Watch Docks (115.04) (Gaynor)\Harbour Watch Condominlums 40 Clty of Clwr DRC response.wpd Office: (7271 786-5747 Fax: (7271 786-7479 Email:billwoods~woodsconsultinq.orq Page 1 of 3 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 1:09 PM To: 'Bill Woods' Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Bill - I would still change the last paragraph, starting with line 1 from "Marine Science Aquarium to construct a boat ramp for use by the Center" to "Clearwater Marine Aquarium to construct a boat ramp for use by the Aquarium". Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 12:46 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Joseph W Gaynor Subject: Re: Harbor Watch Wayne: Sorry we made a number change. See the revised pdf exhibit.The preemption area in the Exhibit is 6,694 sf. I made the revisions per your email . Please see attached revised narrative. I will be out of town next week so let me know if the enclosed materials meet your needs. I will be back in the office today at 3:30 and will have a last opportunity to amend the materials. My regards, Bill Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 bil lwoods~woodsconsulting. org ----- Original Message ----- From: Wayne.Wells~Clearwater.com To: billwoods woodsconsulting_org. Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 10:55 AM Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Bill - I am still confused. This 6,508 square feet you state below is a total for what, since the revised Exhibit A indicates a preemption area shown of 6,694 square feet (6,394 + 300 = 6,694 sf)? Additionally, I am assuming on the drawings somewhere the distance the east/west dock area is located from the seawall is indicated. If it isn't, then please add. 2/10/2006 • • Page 2 of 3 Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 9:10 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: Harbor Watch Wayne: The 6720 is simply the limit based on 30 times the waterfront width (224 x 30 = 6720). A limit, not real numbers for any of the designs. We just cannot exceed this number. I corrected the exhibit to show 300 Sf preemption for the boat ramp. Thus the Exhibit A design represents 6,508 sf total, which is, and must be, less than 6,720 sf. I hope this clarifies things. I did not get any attachment with your email so cannot see your changes. Bill Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods(a~woodsconsultin~.or ----- Original Message ----- From: Wavne.Wells a(~.myClearwater.com To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 5:50 PM Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Bill - I have reviewed the narrative and have made some changes (track changes in Word under Tools). Looks fine otherwise. As to the drawing (Exhibit A), it shows the dock preemption area = 6,208 sf and the ramp preemption = 465 sf. These numbers are not consistent with the narrative numbers (6,720 sf for the dock and 300 sf for the ramp). Also, the 6,208 + 465 sf = 6,673 sf which doesn't equal 6,720 sf. Don't understand the numbers (if correct on Exhibit A) in relation to the narrative. Potentially additional explanatory language is necessary for these other numbers. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 4:59 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Morris, William D.; Joseph W Gaynor; Lipowski, Laura Subject: Harbor Watch Please find attached a draft narrative and Exhibit A addressing the proposed Harbor Watch multi-use docks and the proposed boat ramp. Please comment back and I will follow through. 2/10/2006 • • Regards, Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 ~ Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods woodsconsulting.org Page 3 of 3 2/ 10/2006 e . • ~ Narrative Harbor Watch Condominiums Multi-Use Docks FLD 2005-09093 The Applicant, Harbor Watch, LLC, though their agent, Woods Consulting, 'submitted in September of 2005 a Flexible Development application for multi-use docks to be located in Island Estates, immediately to the west of the Island Estates Public Docks. The proposed docks will be amenities for the exclusive use of the residents of the Harbor Watch Condominiums. The proposed multi-use docks are also under review by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). SWFWMD has informed the applicant, in a request for additional information (RAI), that the State of Florida considers the submerged lands at the project site to be sovereign (state-owned) lands. They therefore require that the docks be designed to conform with the requirements for docks located on sovereign lands within an Aquatic Preserve (note: all sovereign submerged lands within Pinellas County are part of the Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve as set forth in Section 18-20, F.A.C.). The State=s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) made this determination based on the 1925 deed wherein the state deeded the submerged lands to the City of Clearwater. The deed contained what is referred to as a Areverter dlause@ which states that if the submerged lands are not used for the public good, the ownership of the submerged lands is to revert to the state. The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulations contain a state lands preemption requirement which states that the area of submerged lands an Applicant may use must not exceed the area calculated as 30 times the linear feet of shoreline bordering sovereign lands. In the ease of the Harbor Watch Condominiums, the shoreline length is 224 feet. Thus the total area allowed for preemption is 6,720 square feet (sf). Please note that preemption must include the entire Afootprint@ of the mooring facility, including not only the deck area but also the area where boats moor. The design submitted to the City, that is to go before the Community Development Board, was based on the assumption that the submerged lands were owned by the City of Clearwater and thus a preemption limit was not applicable. With the imposition of the SWFW~VID-mandated preemption regulation, the mooring facility footprint is limited to 6,720 sf. The area (footprint) of the design to be considered by the CDB represents 10,142 sf and must be increased by 300 sf to address the boat ramp as discussed below. Thus the current design represents a total preempted area of sovereign lands of 10,442 sf., which is well in excess of the allowable preemption area. (This amount of submerged land use would be acceptable if the Aquatic Preserve regulations were not applied). Shown in Exhibit A is a design that reflects imposition of the preemption limit. Note the number of slips is reduced from 8 to 6 and the slip sizes are smaller. It should be noted that the design shown in Exhibit A is just an example of one mooring design that would satisfy the preemption rules. The design of the facility actually becomes a Anumbers gamed in that there are a myriad of designs that would meet the preemption requirements, as long as the preemption limit of 6,720 sf is not exceeded. The actual design shown in the exhibit preempts a total square footage of 6,694 sf which is less than the limit of 6,720 sf. It is the Applicant=s understanding that the City of Clearwater is currently negotiating with the Department of Environmental Protection for the potential purchase of the' submerged lands. The results of the negotiation may not be known for some time. As the Applicant must move forward in the permitting process so that the slips will be available when the condominium construction is complete, ~ • the Applicant requests the CDB to approve the design submitted as part oaf the Flexible Development application, but also approve the Applicant to construct a mooring facility that would be smaller and one that meets the preemption regulations. The Applicant commits that the revised design will meet the important parameters that pertain to the current design, those being as follows: $ The slips cannot extend beyond a distance of 25% of the width of the waterway. This limit is shown on Exhibit A; and i $ The slips cannot impact the ingress/egress of the vessels that are currently moored at the City facility to the immediate west of the proposed facility. ~ In addition the Applicant commits that: $ The revised facility will meet all City regulations pertaining to a multi-use docking facility; $ The footprint of the revised facility will be less than the existing footprint; and $ The revised design will not exceed a maximum of 8 slips. It should be noted that the Applicant has committed to the Marine Science Aquarium to construct a boat ramp for use by the Center to load and unload injured mammals. The boat ramp will be a replacement for the fork lift loadout ramp that is currently located at the site. As the ramp is also located on sovereign lands, it will impact the preemption area available for the boat ,slips. This impact is 300 square feet. Thus the Applicant has the 30:1 preemption limit less the 300 square feet for use of the multi-use docking facility. Narrative for Dock Options at CDB (o2-io-o6) \v ,_ F ~ • • MULTI-USE DOCK & RAMP EXHIBIT Application # SCAB: 1»-40• (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ ~ TOTAL ALLOWABLE PREEMPTION AREA = 6,720 sf I TOTAL PREEMPTION AREA SHOWN = 6,694 sf I I i ~ I ml H U ZI ~ Q of ~-zsx urn W ~ ~' o U ml Q m ~I DOCK PREEMP110N=6,394 sf ~ ~ z -a o .-- ~ --- B --- a •-- fl --- ~ •-- oho lo~loo~lo 0 ~~ I ~ 2 .4 RAMP PREEMPTION=300 sf PROPOSED BOAT RAMP . ~~'4. y,., '' 8 h$r.• UR11Y ---------- .S• ---- -~- ~ ~ W ,~ O ~ ~ ; ~~ ~ ~- V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ 8 H- ~ v M ~ ~ ~ I C 2 ~ I H- S 1 .T. WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH CONDOMINIUMS t7ta couHrv Bono t, sum: 2z PROPOSED DOCK DUNEDIN ~ 3as99 AND RAM P PH. 727 786-5747 FAX 727 786-7479 W Z ~ W H W W QU W ~U Q Z W ~U U c~ ----r I I I I ~I ~ ~~i I e WATERWAY WIDTH 400' WATERFRONT WIDTH 224 MHW +t.3' MLW -o.T • • Page 1 of 1 . , Wells, Wayne ~ From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 11:18 AM To: 'Bill Woods' Subject: RE: Revisions i Bill - It appears that my revisions did not make it to you 1. In the first paragraph, line 2 -change "Flexible Development Order application" by removing the word "Order"; ~~ 2. In the sixth paragraph, starting with line 4 -change the Applicant can request the CDB to approve the design submitted in the Flexible Development Order," to "the Applicant requests the CDB approve the design submitted as part of the Flexible Development application,"; and 3. Last paragraph, starting with line 1 -change Marine Science Center to construct a boat ramp for use by the Center" to "Clearwater Marine Aquarium to construct a boat ramp for use by the Aquarium". Wayne -----Original Message----- ~ From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 9:44 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Revisions i Wayne: I made the attached revisions based on your comments in your a-mail. Please review. Regards, Bill Woods Woods Consulting ~ 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods(a~woodsconsulting.or 2/10/2006 • Narrative • Harbor Watch Condominiums Multi-Use Docks FLD 2005-09093 The Applicant, Harbor Watch, LLC, though their agent, Woods Consulting, submitted in September of 2005 a Flexible Development Order application for multi-use docks to bey located in Island. Estates, immediately to the west of the Island Estates Public Docks. The proposed docks will be amenities for the exclusive use of the residents of the Harbor Watch Condominiums. The proposed multi-use docks are also under review by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). SWFWMD has informed the applicant, in a request for additional information (RAI), that the State of Florida considers the submerged lands at the project site to be sovereign (state-owned) lands. They therefore require that the docks be designed to conform with the requirements for docks located on sovereign lands within an Aquatic Preserve (note: all sovereign submerged lands within Pinellas County are part of the Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve as set forth in Section 18-20, F.A.C.). The State=s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) made this determination based on the 1925 deed wherein the state deeded the submerged lands to the City of Clearwater. The deed contained what is referred to as a Areverter clause@ which states that if the submerged lands are not used for the public good, the ownership of the submerged lands is to revert to the state. The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulations contain a state lands preemption requirement which states that the area of submerged lands an Applicant may use must not exceed the area calculated as 30 times the linear feet of shoreline bordering sovereign lands. In the ,case of the Harbor Watch Condominiums, the shoreline length is 224 feet. Thus the total area allowed for preemption is 6,720 square feet (sf). Please note that preemption must include the entire Afootprint@ of the mooring facility, including not only the deck area but also the area where boats moor. The design submitted to the City, that is to go before the Community Development Board, was based on the assumption that the submerged lands were owned by the City of Clearwater and thus a preemption limit was not applicable. With the imposition of the SWFWMD-mandated preemption regulation, the mooring facility footprint is limited to 6,720 sf. The area (footprint) of the design to be considered by the CDB represents 10,142 sf and must be increased by 300 sf to address the boat ramp as discussed below. Thus the current design represents a total preempted area of sovereign lands of 10,442 sf., which is well in excess of the allowable preemption area. (This amount of submerged land use would be acceptable if the Aquatic Preserve regulations were not applied). Shown in Exhibit A is a design that reflects imposition of the preemption limit. Note the number of slips is reduced from 8 to 6 and the slip sizes are smaller. It should be noted that the design shown in Exhibit A is just an example of one mooring design that would satisfy the preemption rules. The design of the facility actually becomes a Anumbers gamey in that there are a myriad of designs that would meet the preemption requirements, as long as the preemption limit of 6,720 sf is not exceeded. The actual design shown in the exhibit preempts a total square footage of 6,694 sf ~lhich is less than the limit of 6,720 sf. It is the Applicant=s understanding that the City of Clearwater is currently negotiating with the Department of Environmental Protection for the potential purchase of the submerged lands. The results of the negotiation may not be known for some time. As the Applicant must move forward in the permitting process so that the slips will be available when the condominium construction is complete, ~ • • the Applicant can request the CDB to approve the design submitted in the Flexible Development Order, but also approve the Applicant to construct a mooring facility that would be smaller and one that meets the preemption regulations. The Applicant commits that the revised design will meet the important parameters that pertain to the current design, those being as follows: $ The slips cannot extend beyond a distance of 25% of the width of the waterway. This limit is shown on Exhibit A; and $ The slips cannot impact the ingress/egress of the vessels that are currently moored at the City facility to the immediate west of the proposed facility. In addition the Applicant commits that: $ The revised facility will meet all City regulations pertaining to a multi-use docking facility; $ The footprint of the revised facility will be less than the existing footprint; and $ The revised design will not exceed a maximum of 8 slips. It should be noted that the Applicant has committed to the Marine Science Center to construct a boat ramp for use by the Center to load and unload injured mammals. The boat ramp will be a replacement for the fork lift loadout ramp that is currently located at the site. As the ramp is also located on sovereign lands, it will impact the preemption area available for the boat slips. This impact is 300 square feet. Thus the Applicant has the 30:1 preemption limit less the 300 square feet for use of the multi-use docking facility. MULTI-USE DOCK & RAMP EXHIBIT Application # SC~ILE: 1„=40' (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ ~ TOTAL ALLOWABLE PREEMPTION AREA = 6,720 sf ~ TOTAL PREEMPTION AREA SHOWN = 6,694 sf I I i I ~ I m Q v ZI w w ~ °) ~ ~ Z ~' o U ml ~ W Q m ~I DOCK PREEMPTION=6,394 sf ~ Z J ~ ZI W W Via. QU iao-~-fl-i ao--1L- i ~ ?) W ~ U a i W W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ~~ I RAMP PREEMPTION=300 sf I PROPOSED BOAT RAMP ~: •{e4 f --------- a ~~~' ---- - -- --- --- ~,r,n -- -- -- --- - -------- ~ ------r - . - _ ~ " ~ ~ - ~ ,~ ~ - -- - ~i z~ ------ ----- - ~ ~i :~i I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ .r. ~' I WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH CONDOMINIUMS PROPOSED DOCK WATERWAY WIDTH 400' t7t4 couNTY ROAD t. suftE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEDIN FL 3assa AND RAMP MHW +t.a' MLw -o.T PH. 727 786-5747 FAX 727 786-7479 ,_ ~ _ } ~ . I Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 10:56 AM To: 'Bill Woods' Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Bill - I am still confused. This 6,508 square feet you state below is a total for what, since the revised Exhibit A indicates a preemption area shown of 6,694 square feet (6,394 + 300 = 6,694 sf)? Additionally, I am assuming on the drawings somewhere the distance the east/west dock area is located from the seawall is indicated. If it isn't, then please add. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 9:10 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: Harbor Watch Wayne: The 6720 is simply the limit based on 30 times the waterfront width (224 x 30 = 6720). A limit, not real numbers for any of the designs. We just cannot exceed this number. I corrected the exhibit to show 300 sf preemption for the boat ramp. Thus the Exhibit A design represents 6,508 sf total, which is, and must be, less than 6,720 sf. I hope this clarifies things. I did not get any attachment with your email so cannot see your changes. Bill Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods cr woodsconsulting.org ----- Original Message ----- From: Wavne.Wells(a~myClearwater.com To: billwoods anwoodsconsulting.org Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 5:50 PM Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Bill - I have reviewed the narrative and have made some changes (track changes in Word under Tools). Looks fine otherwise. As to the drawing (Exhibit A), it shows the dock preemption area = 6,208 sf and the ramp preemption = 465 sf. These numbers are not consistent with the narrative numbers (6,720 sf for the dock and 300 sf for the ramp). Also, the 6,208 + 465 sf = 6,673 sf which doesn't equal 6,720 sf. Don't understand the numbers (if correct on Exhibit A) in relation to the narrative. Potentially additional explanatory language is necessary for these other numbers. Wayne 2/10/2006 • • !~ Page 2 of 2 -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 4:59 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Morris, William D.; Joseph W Gaynor; Lipowski, Laura Subject: Harbor Watch Please find attached a draft narrative and Exhibit A addressing the proposed Harbor Watch multi-use docks and the proposed boat ram. Please comment back and I will follow through. Regards, Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods~a woodsconsultin .org 2/10/2006 A •• ` • MULTI-USE DOCK & RAMP EXHIBIT Application # SC~I~' 1»-40• (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ ~ TOTAL ALLOWABLE PREEMPTION AREA = 6,720 sf ~ TOTAL PREEMPTION AREA SHOWN = 6,694 sf I w~ Q Y U ~O wo DU Q m J ~ ~a 0 DOCK PREEMPTION=6,394 sf ova I~~loo~lo 0 RAMP PREEMPTION=300 sf - ' PROPOSED BOAT RAMP ..~~ >~ tt '~;~p °' vnnr -~- ~ ~ - ~ O r m ~ 8 µ ~ -o I ~ I C ~ Fmt• I 5 ~ .r. ,z I .~ W Z ~w H W W Q W ~U Q Z W W -~ U U c~ ------r ~~ ~ ~~I WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH CONDOMINIUMS PROPOSED DOCK ' WATERWAY WIDTH 400' t7t4 CDUNTY ROAD t, SufiE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEDIN FL 34ssa AND RAMP MHW +t.s' MLW -~•7' PH. 727 786-5747 FAX 727 786-7479 . . • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 5:50 PM To: 'Bill Woods' Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Bill - I have reviewed the narrative and have made some changes (track changes in Word, under Tools). Looks fine otherwise. As to the drawing (Exhibit A), it shows the dock preemption area = 6,208sf and the ramp preemption = 465 sf. These numbers are not consistent with the narrative numbers (6,720 sf for the dock and 300 sf for the ramp). Also, the 6,208 + 465 sf = 6,673 sf which doesn't equal 6,720 sf. Don't understand the numbers (if correct on Exhibit A) in relation to the narrative. Potentially additional explanatory language is necessary for these other numbers. Wayne ~ -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 4:59 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Morris, William D.; Joseph W Gaynor; Lipowski, Laura Subject: Harbor Watch Please find attached a draft narrative and Exhibit A addressing the proposed Harbor Watch multi-use docks and the proposed boat ramp. Please comment back and I will follow through. Regards, Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods woodsconsulti_n.g_._org 2/9/2006 • • Narrative Harbor Watch Condominiums Multi-Use Docks FLD 2005-09093 The Applicant, Harbor Watch, LLC, though their agent, Woods Consulting, submitted in September of 2005 a Flexible Development 9r~eFapplication for multi-use docks to be located in Island Estates, immediately to the west of the Island Estates Public Docks. The proposed docks will be amenities for the exclusive use of the residents of the Harbor Watch Condominiums. The proposed multi-use docks are also under review by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Sou#hwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). SWFWMD has informed the applicant, in a request for additional information (RAI), that the State of Florida considers the submerged lands at the project site to be sovereign (state-owned) lands. They therefore require that the docks be designed to conform with the requirements for docks located on sovereign lands within an Aquatic Preserve (note: all sovereign submerged lands within Pinellas County are part of the Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve as set forth in Section 18-20, F.A.C.). The States Department of Environmental Protection {DEP) made this determination based on fihe 1925 deed wherein the state deeded the submerged lands to the City of Clearwater.- The deed contained what is referred to as a reverter clauseL~ which states that if the submerged lands are not used for the public good, the ownership of the submerged lands is to revert to the state. The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulations contain a state lands preemption nsquirement which states that the area of submerged lands an Applicant may use must not exceed the area calculated as 30 times the linear #eet of shoreline bordering sovereign lands. In the case of the Harbor Watch Condominiums, the shoreline length is 224 feet. Thus the total area allowed for preemption is 6,720 square feet (sf). Please note that preemption must include the entire ~footprint~ of the mooring facility,'including not only the deck area but also the area where boats moor. The design submitted to the City, that is to go before the Community Development Board, was based on the assumption that the submerged lands were owned by the City of Clearwater and' thus a preemption limit was not applicable. With the imposition of the SW~WMD-mandated preemption regulation, the mooring facility footprint is limited to 6,720 sf. The area (footprint) of the design to be considered by the CDB represents 10,142 sf and must be increased by 300 sf to address the boat ramp as discussed below. Thus the current design represents a total preempted area of sovereign lands of 10,442 sf., which is well in excess of the allowable preemption area. Shown in Exhibit A is a design that reflects imposition of the preemption limit. Note the number of slips is reduced from 8 to 6 and the slip sizes are smaller. It should be noted that the design shown in Exhibit A is just an example of one mooring design that would satisfy the preemption rules. The design of the facility actually becomes a numbers gamed in that there are a myriad of designs that would meet the preemption requirements. It is the Applicant='s understanding that the City of Clearwater is currently negotiating with the Department of Environmental Protection for the potential purchase of the submerged lands. The results of the negotiation may not be known for some time. As the Applicant must move forward in the permitting process so that the slips will be available when the condominium construction is complete, the Applicant san-requests the CDB t~approve the design submitted in-as part of the Flexible Development 9~application, but also approve the Applicant to constnact a mooring facility that would be smaller and one that meets the preemption regulations. •~ J • • The Applicant commits that the revised design will meet the important parameters that pertain to the current design, those being as follows: $ The slips cannot extend beyond a distance of 25% of the width of the waterway. This limit is shown on Exhibit A; and ~ $ The slips cannot. impact the ingress/egress of the vessels that are can-entry moored at the City facility to the immediate west of the proposed facility. In additions the Applicant commits tha#: $ The revised facility will meet all City regulations pertaining to a multi-use docking facility; $ The footprint of the revised facility will be less than the existing footprint; and $ The revised design will not exceed a maximum of 8 slips. It should be noted that the Applicant has committed to the learwater Marine Aquarium to construct a boat ramp for use by the Se~terAguarium to load and unload injured mammals. The boat ramp wi11 be a replacement for the fork lift loadout ramp that is currently located at the site. As the ramp is also located on sovereign lands, it will impact the preemption area available for the boat slips. This impact is 300 square feet. Thus the Applicant has the 30:1 preemption limit less the 300 square feet for use of the multi-use docking facility. ,. ,. , ~ • Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 2:11 PM To: Bill Woods (E-mail) Subject: FW: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration -FLD 2005-09b93 Bill - I know we are meeting tomorrow morning at 10:00 am, but thought I would forward this email string to you. If we want to proceed to the March 21, 2006, CDB meeting, I will need 15 sets of application packages to be submitted no later than Thursday noon to be considered for that CDB meeting (don't know if you resubmitted before, but we can't find the copies here). Just thought I would give you a heads up. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 1:36 PMT To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Lipowski, Laura Subject: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration -FLD 2005-09093 Leslie - This project went to the November 3, 2005, DRC meeting. Perhaps you still have that packet of information available to you for your information. I am attaching the Final DRC comments for this case. Should this case go forward and they resubmit soon, it most likely at this time be placed on the March 21,2006, CDB agenda. You may email me any conditions of approval that you feel necessary and I will include in the Staff Report. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 11:50 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - I think this answers the question Bill Woods is asking below as to whether the applicant can move forward with the application for conditional approval. Please let me know what the schdduling is on the reactivation and timing of whatever processes need to occur during the application process so that I may provide input on language re the conditions. I expect to have more information early next week on the real estate issue. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 11:43 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - If the applicant wants to go forward and submits a complete app, I believe that the City should process it. I would like to work with assigned staff to develop language conditioning approval on the various state, county, and agency actions which will be required for the project toy go forward without risk to the City of triggering the reverter clause. -----Original Message----- 2/7/2006 ,.a ,, . • . Page 2 of 2 From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 9:09 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - Leslie, I believe this requires your input. I am not sure exactly how the process works and do not feel comfortable advising the applicant. Perhaps we can meet in the next few days (after you settle down from returning from vacation) and discuss. Wayne found the ramp file and I have had preliminary discussions with Pete Dunbar. Let me know how your schedule is ...thanks Laura -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 6:54 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: FW: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - Laura - Do you have any concerns with going forward with the dock reconfiguration FLD application to the CDB? Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 4:48 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Hagen, Christine; West, Bill Subject: HArbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - Wayne: We would like to take the Harbor Watch dock reconfiguration permit application off of hold and proceed to go before the CDB. I need to discuss with you next week thoughts as regards the CDB hearing. As an example, we want to go forward with our design as is but gain approval from the CDB that if the City does not purchase the bottomlands, and as a result, due to preemption ratio limitations, we are forced to reduce the number of slips, that the CDB will concur that we do not have to appear before them again. Will discuss further when you call. My regards, Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods a(~woodsconsulting.oro 2/7/2006 __ _ • • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 4:48 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Hagen, Christine; West, Bill Subject: HArbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - Wayne: We would like to take the Harbor Watch dock reconfiguration permit application off of hold and proceed to go before the CDB. I need to discuss with you next week thoughts as regards the CDB hearing. As an example, we want to go forward with our design as is but gain approval from the CDB that if the City does not purchase the bottomlands, and as a result, due to preemption ratio limitations, we are forced to reduce the number of slips, that the CDB will concur that we do not have to appear before them again. Will discuss further when you call. My regards, Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoodsCcilwoodsconsulting.org 2/6/2006 • • ~V o 04~ ~ Cos ui t(~ M _.__.._.,_._.__~....._. _~_ _..__..._ Environ~iVi/eiital Permrttir?g Mar.~Re Errgrneerrrac~ H}t~rr~y~~ohgy land Fl~?nni,a~t 1'714 County f~oaci 1. SEite 2~' G'!~itedist, Pt_ 346°8 November 16, 2005 Wayne Wells City of Clearwater Senior Planner Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Suite #200 Clearwater, Florida 33756-5520 Re: FLD 2005-09093 Multi-Use Dock Application for Harbor Watch Condominiums Request to Place Project Review on Hold Dear Wayne: As a followup to our telephone conversations, the Applicant for the Harbor Watch Condominium project would like to request the City of Clearwater to place the project on hold. There are several legal issues which we are addressing with the City Attorney's offide. Once these issues are resolved we will provide you notice to reactivate the review. Should you have any questions, please give me a call. My regards, Bill Woods Woods Consulting, Inc. cc: Joe Gaynor (via email) Laura Lipowski (via email P:\Harbour Watch Docks (115-04) (Gaynor)\Harbour Watch Condominiums 44 Itr to Wells re place project on hold.wpd Qtfice: X727) 73cs-747 Fax: (72`l1 7£i~-;473 Cmail:biliw~~oot~sL~v~~o~:~US~;~~sultir,c~.UrG . Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 8:48 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Lipowski, Laura Subject: Harbor Watch Condominiums Multi-Use Dock Application Wayne: Please see attached letter requesting the Harbor Watch Condominiums multi-use dock application review to be placed on hold. My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods@woodsconsulting._o~ 11/28/2005 ` ~ ~ . • Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 12:52 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Re: Harbor Watch Condominium Project - 279 Windward Passage Thanks Wayne. I appreciate you keeping me in the loop. Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods(a~woodsconsulting.org ----- Original Message ----- From: Wayne_Wel_Is@m.yClearwater_com. To: billwoods woodsconsulting.org ' Cc: michael.delk(a~MyClearwater.com ; Gina.Clayton@~Clearwater.com ; neil_thom~son@My_Clearwater com Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 10:52 AM Subject: FW: Harbor Watch Condominium Project - 279 Windward Passage ' Bill - This applies to the repair signoff from the Planning Department. May also apply toithe boat ramp (?) signoff. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 10:48 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Akin, Pam; Brumback, Garry; Horne, William Subject: Harbor Watch Condominium Project - 279 Winward Passage Wayne, City management has met and determined that there are concerns and potential serious implications of allowing new docks or repair of the existing docks at the above referenced location. City staff is moving forward to resolve the issue. In the meantime, any application that has been filed to build new docks or permits issued for the repair of the existing docks should be put on hold. I will be meeting with Mr. Woods and Mr. Gaynor Thursday to discuss the City's concerns and potential resolution of the issue. I will keep you informed of our progress and any change that should be made to the status of the application or permit. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 10:10 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Dianne Magee 11 /28/2005 y r ~~ • ~ Page 2 of 2 Subject: Request for Meeting Re: Harbor Watch Condominium Project Dear Ms. Lipowski: Joe Gaynor and I would like to request a meeting to discuss the submerged lands issue impacting the proposed boat ramp at the Clearwater Marine Science Center and the proposed docks for the Harbor Watch Condominiums. We were planning to immediately withdraw our application for the new docks and stay with the repair and rebuild of the existing docks, which are fully permitted by the City and County, as well as the Southwest Florida Water Management District. We would like to meet ASAP as I will be out of town all of next week. Joe Gaynor is unavailable Wednesday morning and also Thursday morning from 10:00 to 12:00. I am also unavailable Wednesday and Thursday mornings. Thus Wednesday or Thursday afternoon of this week would be best. We trust you can schedule a meeting on such short notice. We would note that due to question sets from SWFWMD which we need to either respond to or withdraw our applications, our time frames are very tight. Please give me a call at your earliest convenience to see if we can schedule a meeting. My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 b.il Iwood~woodsconsulting_org. 11/28/2005 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 10:28 AM To: 'Bill Woods' Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Dianne Magee; Horak, Cathy; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Request for Meeting Re: Harbor Watch Condominium Project Bill, would be happy to meet with you on Thursday afternoon. Is 2:00 good for you? Laura -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 10:10 AM ~ To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Dianne Magee Subject: Request for Meeting Re: Harbor Watch Condominium Project Dear Ms. Lipowski: Joe Gaynor and I would like to request a meeting to discuss the submerged lands issue impacting the proposed boat ramp at the Clearwater Marine Science Center and the proposed docks for the Harbor Watch Condominiums. We were planning to immediately withdraw our application for the new docks and stay with the repair and rebuild of the existing docks, which are fully permitted by the City and County,; as well as the Southwest Florida Water Management District. We would like to meet ASAP as I will be out of town all of next week. Joe Gaynor is unavailable Wednesday morning and also Thursday morning from 10:00 to 12:00. I am also unavailable Wednesday and Thursday mornings. Thus Wednesday or Thursday afternoon of this week would be best. We trust you can schedule a meeting on such short notice. We would note that due to question sets from SWFWMD which we need to either respond to or withdraw our applications, our time frames are very tight. Please give me a call at your earliest convenience to see if we can schedule a meeting. My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 ~ billwoods woodsconsultin~__org. 11/28/2005 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 4:34 PM To: 'Bill Woods' Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Lipowski, Laura;. Morris, William D.; Yellin, Catherine Subject: RE: FLD 2005-09093 -Multi-Use Dock 279 Windward Passage (Harbor Watch Multi-Use Docks) Bill - Thanks. I will consider this email your official request to withdraw this case. I will show it as "Request to Withdraw" on the CDB agenda. . Wayne I -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 4:13 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: FLD 2005-09093 -Multi-Use Dock 279 Windward Passage (Harbor Watch Multi-Use Docks) Wayne: Opus South has purchased the property and have requested me to withdraw the multi- use permit application to the city. They have elected to simply repair and rebuild the existing boat slips and docks. i My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods@woodsconsulting,org 11/28/2005 Environmental Permitting Marine Engineering Hydrogeology Land Planning Wayne Wells City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Suite #200 Clearwater, Florida 33756-5520 November 8, 2005 11714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Ur fGliJ OL. Re: Response to DRC Comments Harbor Watch Condominiums - FLD2005-09093 Dear Wayne: Please find enclosed the revised City of Clearwater Flexible Development application package addressing the DRC comments: Engineering: Please see Sheet 5 that has been revised to include specific notes addressing construction within the 10 ft easement and access for City employees to the 12" force main. Fire: Please see Sheet 16 with the required fire details to meet NFPA 1 and NFPA 303 requirements; Planning: Please note the address has been corrected. 2. Please note the adjacent (eastern) affected property owner has provided a letter of no objection for not meeting the required 10% side setback to the east. The proposed docks were shifted to the east to allow proper turning distances for the boats moored at the',Clearwater Marine Science center. By shifting the proposed docks to the east, this resulted in a decreased side setback to the east and an increased side setback to the west. I 3. Please note that floating docks are preferred as other docks in the area are also floating structures. The applicant wishes to remain in character with the existing docks in the area. Additionally, floating docks require less maintenance. Due to the location of the proposed docks in this protected basin, we believe minimal noise will be generated from the floating docks. Also note, current plans are to use aluminum docks with 3" concrete surface for noise abatement. 4. Please note Attachment B #3 has been revised. 5. Please note Attachment A (f) has been revised. ~~~~~~~~~ I Please call should you require additional information. ~~V 0 ~ 2~~~ My gards, pI.ANNING DEPARTMENT Bill woods CITI(UF CLEARWATEp Woods Consulting, Inc. i cc: Joe Gaynor (via fax) Christine Hagen (via fax) P:\Harbour Watch Docks (115-04) (Gaynor)\Harbour Watch Condominiums 40 City of Clwr DRC response.wpd i Office: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 Email:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org • • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 5:23 PM To: Bill Woods (E-mail) Subject: Draft 11.3.05 DRC comments, 279 Windward Passage Bill - Attached are the Draft comments for the November 3, 2005, DRC meeting for FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage, at 3:10 pm. Note: I have not heard from our Legal Department yet. This case may not bey scheduled for the next CDB meeting in December (12/20/05) due to legal issues. I may know more Thursday. Wayne draft 11.3.05 dre action agend... LL ~ CITY OF CL~RWATER } earwater PLANNING DEPARTMENT - MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING `' 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE: (727) 562-4567 FAX: (727) 562-4576 WWW.MYCLEARWATER.COM October 04, 2005 Woods Consulting, Inc. 1714 Cr 1 Suite 22 Dunedin, F134698 RE: FLD2005-09093 -- 279 WINDWARD PSG -- Letter of Completeness Dear Woods Consulting, Inc. The Planning Staff has entered your application into the Department's filing system and assigned the case number: FLD2005-09093. 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 November 03, 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 maybe 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 W ayne. W ells@myclearwater.com. Sincerely yours, ~ ~. M .1~~ Wayne Wells, AICP Planner III Letter of Completeness - FLD2005-09093 - 279 W/NDWARD PSG • • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 6:12 PM To: Bill Woods (E-mail) Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bill - Attached is the Letter of Completeness. Original being mailed: Wayne >,~:~ letter of ~mpleteness 10.4.05 Woods Consu ~ ing Environmental Permitting Marine Engineering ~ Hydrogeology Land Planning September 7, 2005 City of Clearwater D Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Suite #200 Clearwater, Florida 33756-5520 Re: Submittal of Flexible Development Application for a Multi-Use Docking Facility Harbor Watch Condominiums Dear Sir/Madam: '1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 ~~~~~~ ! Please find enclosed an application for amulti-use docking facility that exceeds 500 square feet in total decking area. Should you have any questions concerning the application, pease give me a call. My regards, C`;`';~ Bill Woods Woods Consulting, Inc. ORIGINAL cc: Joe Gaynor (via fax) Christine Hagen (via fax) P:\Harbour Watch Docks (115-04) (Gaynor)\Harbour Watch Condominiums 26 Submittal Itr to City of Clwr.wpd i Office: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 Email:billwoodsC«~Vvoodsconsulting.org /~ • • Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 12:07 PM To: Wells, Wayne; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Hull, Dick Subject: GM06-1420-001 : RE: Harbour Watch LLC vs City of Clearwater IbINumAttach: i 0 MessageGUID: {24A7EC2D-B95E-4E9D-B6AB-B3C387633834} OriginalDate: None Originator: SQL Style: Harbourwatch Docks (Joe Gaynor) agree that the application for accessory use to the upland dwelling use does not seem appropriate any longer, and resubmit#al as a primary "marina facilities" use would be in order. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 10:53 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Hull, Dick; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: Harbour Watch LLC vs City of Clearwater Laura - At the Downtown Boat Slip meeting yesterday we briefly discussed the above property. The Amended Final Summary Judgment issued relieves the applicant of the need for a referendum for the rebuilding of the boat slips. It did not relieve the applicant of obtaining other appropriate City approvals for its construction.] We still have in a "received" status Case No. FLD2005-09093, which has yet to be approved by the Community Development Board (it has been in a "pending" status awaiting resolution of the legal issues). This application is for the construction of a multi-use dock for eight boat slips in conjunction with an attached dwelling (condominium) project on the upland (Harbour Watch Condominiums). That approved, upland condominium project had submitted for a building permit to construct the 31- unit building, but that building permit was never obtained and has been voided by Development Services. We now have an issue for the docks that are accessory to the upland attached dwelling use, in that the approvals for that upland use have expired. While the Amended Final Summary Judgment has been issued, the docks have not been approved by the CDB and now we have no approved upland use. Use of the boat slips as a "multi-use" dock is restricted to owners or tenants of the attached dwellings or their guests, not where they are rented out to non- owners/tenants. This presents an issue of further processing the FLD application to the CDB, assuming that is what Joe Gaynor will now want to do. Based on the circumstances of the upland use approvals, it is our position that we no longer have aviable/acceptable "dock" application for this property at this point in time, at least in its present form. An option may be to resubmit as a "marina facilities" use as a primary use in the Commercial District rather than a multi- use dock accessory to an upland use. Future use of the upland will be determined later based on the applicants' desires. Your thoughts? Wayne M. Wells, AICP Planner III City of Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756-5520 Phone: 727-562-4504 Fax: 727-562-4865 • • Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008.1:10 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton,. Gina; Hull, Dick; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbour Watch LLC vs City of Clearwater I have no idea what Joe Gaynor's intent is after the summary judgment having been ordered. In any event, this sounds like aplanning/CDB issue, so Leslie would be the appropriate attorney to review. Thanks. Laura Lipowski Assistant City Attorney City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4015 Fax: (727) 562-4021 mailto:laura.lipowski@myclearwater.com -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 10:53 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Hull, Dick; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: Harbour Watch LLC vs City of Clearwater Laura - At the Downtown Boat Slip meeting yesterday we briefly discussed the above property. The Amended Final Summary Judgment issued relieves the applicant of the need for a referendum for the rebuilding of the boat slips. It did not relieve the applicant of obtaining other appropriate City approvals for its construction. We still have in a "received" status Case No. FLD2005-09093, which has yet to be approved by the Community Development Board (it has been in a "pending" status awaiting resolution of the legal issues). This application is for the construction of a multi-use dock for eight boat slips in conjunction with an attached dwelling (condominium) project on the upland (Harbour Watch Condominiums). That approved, upland condominium project had submitted for a building permit to construct the 31- unit building, but that building permit was never obtained and has been voided by Development Services. We now have an issue for the docks that are accessory to the upland attached dwelling use, in that the approvals for that upland use have expired. While the Amended Final Summary Judgment has been issued, the docks have not been approved by the CDB and now we have no approved upland use. Use of the boat slips as a "multi-use" dock is restricted to owners or tenants of the attached dwellings or their guests, not where they are rented out to non- owners/tenants. This presents an issue of further processing the FLD application to the CDB, assuming that is what Joe Gaynor will now want to do. Based on the circumstances of the upland use approvals, it is our position that we no longer have aviable/acceptable "dock" application for this property at this point in time, at least in its present form. An option may be to resubmit as a "marina facilities".use as a primary use in the Commercial District rather than a multi- use dock accessory to an upland use. Future use of the upland will be determined later based on the applicants' desires. Your thoughts? Wayne M. Wells, AICP Planner III City of Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756-5520 Phone:. 727-562-4504 Fax: 727-562-4865 • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, June 12; 2008 10:53 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Hull, Dick; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: Harbour Watch LLC vs City of Clearwater Laura - At the Downtown Boat Slip meeting yesterday we briefly discussed the above property. The Amended Final Summary Judgment issued relieves the applicant of the need for a referendum for the rebuilding of ~~the boat slips. It did not relieve the applicant of obtaining other appropriate City approvals for its construction. We still have in a "received" status Case No. FLD2005-09093, which has yet to be approved by the Community Development Board (it has been in a "pending" status awaiting resolution of the legal issues). This application is for the construction of a' multi-use dock for eight boat slips in conjunction with an attached dwelling (condominium) project on the upland (Harbour Watch Condominiums). That approved, upland condominium project had submitted for a building permit to construct the 31-unit building, but that building permit was never obtained and has been voided by Development Services. We now have an issue for the docks that are accessory to the upland attached dwelling use, in that the approvals for that upland use have expired. While the Amended Final Summary Judgment has been issued, the docks have not been approved by the CDB and now we have no approved upland use. Use of the boat slips as a "multi-use" dock is restricted to owners or tenants of the attached dwellings or their guests, not where they are rented out to non-owners/tenants. This presents an issue of further processing the FLD application to the CDB, assuming that is what Joe Gaynor will now want to do. Based on the circumstances of the upland use approvals, it is our position that we no longer have aviable/acceptable "dock" application for this property at this point in time, at least in its present form. An option may be to resubmit as a "marina facilities" use as a primary use in the Commercial District rather than amulti-use dock accessory to an upland use. Future use of the upland will be determined later based on the applicants' desires. Your thoughts? Wayne M. Wells, A/CP Planner III City of Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756-5520 Phone: 727-562-4504 Fax: 727-562-4865 • • Wells, Wayne From: Delk, Michael Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 1:22 PM To: Wells, Wayne; Clayton, Gina Subject: RE: LT07-0-016 : Harbour Watch LLC v. City of Clearwater -: Disposition IbINumAttach: 1 MessageGUID: {8612704E-4501-4123-A733-BOBA6246E512} ~, OriginalDate: None Originator: SQL Style: Harbour Watch LLC v. City of Clearwater I would think not. Michael L. Delk, AICP Planning Director City of Clearwater, Florida myclearwater.com -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 10:33 AM To: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina Subject: LT07-0-016 : Harbour Watch LLC v. City of Clearwater -Disposition The Judgment states they do not have to have a referendum for such docks, which were to be accessory to the 31- unit condominium project. The CDB approval for the 31-unit upland condominium project has lapsed and is now expired. I don't know if they want to go forward to the CDB. with their FLD application for docks {FLD2005-09093), now that there is the Judgment. Any thoughts? -----Original Message----- From: Tefft, Cathy Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 9:40 AM To: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina Cc: Hull, Dick; Wells, Wayne Subject: LT07-0-016 : Harbour Watch LLC v. City of Clearwater -Disposition Dear Michael and Gina: Dick asked me to provide you with a copy of the Amended Final Summary Judgment in the above- referenced matter, entered in favor of the Plaintiff. We appreciate you and your staff's time and assistance in resolving this matter. Should you have any questions about the Amended Final Summary Judgment, please contact Dick. Lastly, I will be returning the attorney-client privilege correspondence which we removed from the Planning case files. Kindest regards, Cathy Cathy H. Tefft Legal Staff Assistant, City Attorney's Office City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4014 Fax: (727) 562-4021 <mailto:cathy. tefft@myclearwater.com> « File: Amended Final Summary Judgmentl.pdf » ~ ~ Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 4:21 PM To: Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Watkins, Sherry; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, Docks for 279 Windward Passage Yes, that approach makes sense. The City is actually in the posture of a co-applicant or signatory to the application because of the submerged land ownership and therefore it would be appropriate to take the position that the application should not proceed until the applicant meets City requirements which include voter approval. Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney City of Clearwater P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, Florida 33758 (727) 562-4010 phone (727) 562-4021 fax Board Certified in City, County and Local Government Law Admitted in Florida, Oregon, and the District of Columbia Senior Professional in Human Resources -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 2:16 PM ' To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Watkins, Sherry; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Akin; Pam Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, Docks for 279 Windward Passage A referendum is required before Mr. Gaynor can proceed. Leslie -would you agree, then, that the CDB should not consider the application until such time as the referendum has already taken place and passed? Thanks Laura Lipowski Assistant City Attorney City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4015 Fax: (727) 562-4021 mailto:laura.lipowski@myclearwater.com -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 1:57 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Watkins, Sherry; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FLD2005-09093, Docks for 279 Windward Passage Laura - Joe Gaynor previously requested to have the above referenced Flexible Development case rescheduled for the August 21, 2007, CDB meeting. This case has previously been continued from the March 21, April 18, May 16, June 20 and July 18, 2006, CDB meetings due to the issue of ownership of the submerged lands. Based on the discussion at the last meeting in the City Manager's conference room, should this case be rescheduled for the August 21, 2007, CDB meeting? My recollection is that a referendum is necessary to be approved first. Please let me know on Monday, as we need to finalize the August 2007 CDB agenda and send it to the City Clerk's office on Monday. Thanks. • ~ Wayne • ~ Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 2:16 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Watkins, Sherry; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, Docks for 279 Windward Passage A referendum is required before Mr. Gaynor can proceed. Leslie -would you agree, then, that the CDB should not consider the application until such time as the referendum has already taken place and passed? Thanks Laura Lipowski Assistant City Attorney City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4015 Fax: (727) 562-4021 mailto:laura.lipowski@myclearwater.com -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 1:57 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Watkins, Sherry; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FLD2005-09093, Docks for 279 Windward Passage Laura - Joe Gaynor previously requested to have the above referenced Flexible Development case rescheduled for the August 21, 2007, CDB meeting. This case has previously been continued from the March 21, April 18, May 16, June 20 and July 18, 2006, CDB meetings due to the issue of ownership of the submerged lands. i3ased on the discussion at the last meeting in the City Manager's conference room, should this case be rescheduled for the August 21, 2007, CDB meeting? My recollection is that a referendum is necessary to be approved first. Please let me know on Monday, as we need to finalize the August 2007 CDB agenda and send it to the City Clerk's office on Monday. Thanks. Wayne • r Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 5:26 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: Joe Gaynor, 279 Windward Passage Laura - This is in response to your phone message at about 10:00 am today: 1. When you set up a meeting with Joe Gaynor, include Michael Delk and myself. That way, we can answer any Code or procedural questions he may have and provide support to you. 2. Regarding 521 S. Gulfview Blvd., I sent you a separate email response to a prior email. Any additional questions, bring 'em on. Wayne 1 • • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:10 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: RE: Harbourwatch Application(s) Yes -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 8:36 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbourwatch Application(s) today at 2:30 in the CM"s conference -sorry if you were not included somehow. Can you make it? Laura Lipowski Assistant City Attorney City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4015 Fax: (727) 562-4021 mailto:laura.lipowski@myclearwater.com -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 7:14 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: RE: Harbourwatch Application(s) Laura - Please remind me when the meeting is, as I do not find it on my calendar (has it been postponed or not even scheduled yet?). Wayne ~ -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 10:31 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Akin, Pam Subject: Harbourwatch Application(s) In anticipation of next week's meeting, I am preparing a summary of the City's legal file on the above. It would be very helpful if we had a summary of planlning's file, specifically the status/disposition of any application Mr. gaynor has filed regarding: 1) the upland at 279 Winward Passage; 2) a ramp at the same location ;and 3) docks at the location -including supporting documentation from agencies that he would need approval from prior to a CDB approval (SWFMD, County, etc.). Thanks Laura Lipowski Assistant City Attorney City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4015 Fax: (727) 562-4021 mailto:laura.lipowski@myclearwater.com Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 9:06 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage Thanks, that was pretty much my conclusion. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 1:30 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage Leslie - I was given additional information this morning by Michael Delk. The attached dwelling FLD case is now vested, as they submitted within the Code timeframes for building permits and permits for the construction of the site improvements as well as the foundation have been issued. Should they decide to go in a different direction, that would be their prerogative. Should they want to do "high and dry" storage, potentially with wet slips, these uses fall under Level 2 applications requiring CDB approval (Table 2-704 and the criteria under Section 2-704.6). The dry storage of boats falls under the definition of "marina facilities". If the Flexibility criteria for marina facilities cannot be met, then the request would need to be filed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project application (Section 2-7O4.C). Any docks/marina would also require compliance with the provisions under Section 3-6O1.C. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 12:11 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: FW: 279 Windward Passage So Mr. Gaynor is correct that no rezoning occurred, the residential project was approved to be built as Comprehensive Infill within the C District. The next question is: can he simply forego the approved residential project [we would want a written withdrawal at some point] and build a "high and dry" marina as now proposed without any further approvals? Looking at the Code sections governing C, Marina use requires a Level Two CDB approval and he would have to meet the setback and parking requirements in Table 2-704 and meet the other requirements in 2-7048 [among which, 2. limits marine activities where adjacent to residential]. Alternatively Planning might allow another application as Comprehensive Infill, although where there is a specific Marina category set forth that may not be allowable. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 4:11 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage Laura - The property at 279 Windward Passage is zoned Commercial (C) District, consistent with the Commercial General (CG) land use category on the property. The Community Development Board (CDB) approved an FLD case to permit attached dwellings as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Program application over Planning Department opposition. There has been no rezoning of the property (much as the Planning Department recommended). I am not aware of any changes to the proposed development of the property (still to be attached dwellings). Wayne •.~ r -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 1:55 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: 279 Windward Passage Hi all: Apparently Mr. Gaynor is re-thinking how he will development the above referenced property. He met with Bill Horne late last week and represented to Mr. Horne that the property had NOT been rezoned from Commercial to Residential. I think he is under the impression that the rezoning had not been "officially" completed via the normal process. Can you please confirm one way or the other? Thanks, Laura ~ ~ Wells, W~lyne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 1:30 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage Leslie - I was given additional information this morning by Michael Delk. The attached dwelling FLD case is now vested, as they submitted within the Code timeframes for building permits and permits for the construction of the site improvements as well as the foundation have been issued. Should they decide to go in a different direction, that would be their prerogative. Should they want to do "high and dry" storage, potentially with wet slips, these uses fall under Level 2 applications requiring CDB approval (Table 2-704 and the criteria under Section 2-704.6). The dry storage of boats falls under the definition of "marina facilities". If the Flexibility criteria for marina facilities cannot be met, then the request would need to be filed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project application (Section 2-7O4.C). Any docks/marina would also require compliance with the provisions under Section 3-6O1.C. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 12:11 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: FW: 279 Windward Passage So Mr. Gaynor is correct that no rezoning occurred, the residential project was approved to be built as Comprehensive Infill within the C District. The next question is: can he simply forego the approved residential project [we would want a written withdrawal at some point] and build a "high and dry" marina as now proposed without any further approvals? Looking at the Code sections governing C, Marina use requires a Level Two CDB approval and he would) have to meet the setback and parking requirements in Table 2-704 and meet the other requirements in 2-7048 [among which, 2. limits marine activities where adjacent to residential]. Alternatively Planning might allow another application as Comprehensive Infill, although where there is a specific Marina category set forth that may not be allowable. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 4:11 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage Laura - The property at 279 Windward Passage is zoned Commercial (C) District, consistent with the Commercial General (CG) land use category on the property. The Community Development Board (CDB) approved an FLD case to permit attached dwellings as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Program application over Planning Department opposition. There has been no rezoning of the property (much as the Planning Department recommended). I am not aware of any changes to the proposed development of the property (still to be attached dwellings). Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 1:55 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: 279 Windward Passage Hi all: ;„,, 1. Apparently Mr. Gaynor is re-tI"!Rking how he will development the above re'I~enced property. He met with Bill Horne late last week and represented to Mr. Horne that the property had NOT been rezoned from Commercial to Residential. I think he is under the impression that the rezoning had not been "officially" completed via the normal process. Can you please confirm one way or the other? Thanks, Laura 2 • ~ Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 4:18 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage Thanks alot Wayne. My understanding is that he wants to sell to a developer that will develop dry dock boat storage -but that is subject to successful termination of a deed restriction on the subject property which forbids dry boat storage. I will keep you posted as I receive info. Laura -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 4:11 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage Laura - The property at 279 Windward Passage is zoned Commercial (C) District, consistent with the Commercial General (CG) land use category on the property. The Community Development Board (CDB) approved an FLD case to permit attached dwellings as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Program application over Planning Department opposition. There has been no rezoning of the property (much as the Planning Department recommended). I am not aware of any changes to the proposed development of the property (still to be attached dwellings). Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 1:55 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: 279 Windward Passage Hi all: Apparently Mr. Gaynor is re-thinking how he will development the above referenced property. He met with Bill Horne late last week and represented to Mr. Horne that the property had NOT been rezoned from Commercial to Residential. I think he is under the impression that the rezoning had not been "officially" completed via the normal process. Can you please confirm one way or the other? Thanks, Laura • CDB Meeting Date: Case Number: Agenda Item: Owner/Applicant: Representative: Address: July 18, 2006 FLD2005-09093 D1 Harbour Estates, LLC Bill Woods/Tern Skapik, Woods Consulting, Inc. 279 Windward Passage CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi- use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a re- duction to the side (east) setback from 22.4~feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601. EXISTING ZONING/ Commercial (C) District; Commercial General (CG) Category LAND USE: PROPERTY SIZE: 1.45 acres PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Vacant (31 attached dwellings approved by CDB on October 19, 2004 - FLD2004-06042) Proposed Use: Multi-use dock for eight boat slips in conjunction with attached dwellings ADJACENT ZONING/ North: Commercial and Medium Density Residential Districts; LAND USES: Retail sales and services and attached dwellings East: Commercial District; Restaurant South: Preservation District; Water West: Commercial District; Vacant and Clearwater Marine Aquarium CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY: The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public docks surrounding the Aquarium. Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 1 of 10 • • UPDATE: At their meeting on March 21, 2006, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the April 18, 2006, agenda in order to address the legal issues of the submerged land and proposed conditions of approval. On April 18, 2006, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the May 16, 2006, agenda in order to address the legal issues of the submerged land and proposed conditions of approval. The applicant desires City Council act on a request to declare the submerged land surplus to resolve the legal issues prior to CDB action. ~ Due to scheduling issues for such a request, the CDB continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the June 20, 2006, and then to the July 18, 2006, CDB agenda. The applicant has requested a continuance to a date uncertain (see attached email). Once the issues regarding the submerged land have been resolved, this application will be scheduled and advertised for the next available CDB meeting. ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 1.45-acre site is located on the south side of Windward Passage, approximately 300 feet west of Island Way. The site was previously developed with a boat yard. On October 19, 2004, the Community Development Board approved a request to construct 31 attached dwellings on this property (FLD2004-06042). All existing upland improvements have been demolished in anticipation of the construction of the building and site improvements for the 31 attached dwellings. A building permit was issued on February 8, 2006, to construct the site improvements (BCP2005-02671) for the condominiums. There exist docks on the property consisting of 1,325 square feet and 12 wet slips. The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are ;located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public docks surrounding the Aquarium. There is aCity-operated, commercial dock (nine slips) located directly to the east at 20 Island Way (Island Way Grill), approved by the Community Development Board on May 20, 2003 (FLD2003-03013). i The unstaffed dock is available on a first come/first served basis and is free to the public (no overnight mooring). There were seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor up to five vessels, which existed for the prior boat repair business that operated from the subject property but were removed when the public docks were installed. Proposal: Section 3-601.C.3 requires docks over 500 square feet in area (in association with a multi-family development or condominium) be treated as a commercial dock and be approved as part of a Level Two, Flexible Development review. The applicant seeks to remove the existing docks and slips in order to construct new docks consisting of 1,818 square feet and eight boat slips. The seven mooring buoys in the open water that were for the prior business on this property have already been removed, as they are no longer necessary, which represents a net improvement to the marine environment. The proposed dock will be constructed with a floating platform for the main eight-foot wide access platform parallel with the seawall and the catwalks. In order to have at least three feet of water depth at mean low water for moored boats, a ramp will connect the dock platform with the upland/seawall. The main platform will be 22 feet from the seawall. Three of the catwalks will be 36 feet in length for six of the slips and the westernmost catwalk will be 23 feet in length for the Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 2 of 10 ~ • • other two slips. The catwalk and slip length on the western side is shorter due to the existing public slips at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and to accommodate the boat ramp in the corner. Tie poles are proposed on the east side of the property at a one-foot setback, meeting Code requirements. The dock on the east side is proposed 1.5 feet from the east property line. A minimum side setback of 22.4 feet is required for the docks/catwalks. The reduced setback is to the main platform of the dock, which is used as an area for dock boxes, electric pedestals, fire extinguishers and hose racks. The reduction on the east side is a function of providing adequate vessel maneuvering area for the existing docks and the boat ramp to the west at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium, thereby pushing the docks eastward. The proposed west side setback is 81.5 feet, greatly exceeding the required minimum setback of 22.4 feet. The adjacent property owner to the east has submitted a letter of no objection to the proposed reduced side (east) setback. The public docks to the east at the Island Way Grill were approved at a 23-foot west side setback, meeting the required setback of 22.9 feet. Most slips are 18 feet wide, abut slip 7 is 15.5 feet in width. Code dock provisions limit the width of docks to a maximum of 75 percent of the lot width (224 feet), or 168 feet in this case. The proposed overall dock width is 63.3 percent of the lot width (141.8 feet). Code provisions restrict dock length to a maximum of 75 percent of the lot width (168 feet). The longest catwalks are proposed to be 92 feet in length from the seawall (41 percent of the lot width). The dock length of 92 feet is also less than the 25 percent of the waterway width (99.5 feet). While not consistent with existing, older and shorter docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium, the proposed docks are consistent with newer docks required to meet today's Codes, wherein the length takes into account the water depth at mean low water and sea grasses (if any). There are no issues regarding navigation with the proposal and the other criteria for docks have been met. An issue with this proposal is that the submerged lands upon which the docks will be constructed are owned by the City of Clearwater. The City received the submerged lands by deed from the State in 1925, but it included a "reverter clause," whereby the ownership of the submerged lands is to revert back to the State if the submerged lands are not used for the public good. The submerged lands deeded to the City in 1925 cover a very large area, including the area projected for a downtown public marina. From a legal standpoint, the City does not warit to trigger any reverter clause, other than the submerged land area immediately adjacent to the upland application parcel. Any approval of the request should include a condition where there would be no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application unless and 'until the City receives sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such sgnoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. As an alternative, should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then Staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council. Prior to such action by City Council, the applicant will need to submit a survey describing the submerged land area adjacent to the upland application parcel which is to be reverted. The applicant is proposing to reconstruct a boat ramp on the western portion of the property. This ramp was used in conjunction with the boat works operation previously on the property and is used Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 3 of 10 • • by the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to load and unload injured mamrilals with a forklift. The applicant has committed to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to replace the existing forklift load out ramp. Use of this reconstructed boat ramp should be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, but is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp, as there are parking and other issues for such latter use. The applicant has submitted the proposed docks to the Army Corp of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). The issue of the reverter clause is under discussion and negotiation with the State. When the submerged lands are sovereign (State- owned), SWFWMD requires the docks to be designed to the requirements for docks within an Aquatic Preserve. The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulations contain a State lands preemption requirement that the area of submerged lands cannot exceed 30 times the linear feet of shoreline bordering sovereign lands. The preemption area for this site is 6,720 square feet, which must include the entire "footprint" of the mooring facility (including the area where the boats moor). The proposed dock design being presented to the CDB with this application is based on the submerged land being owned by the City, wherein the preemption restriction is not applicable. However, in the event the reverter is triggered, then the preemption restriction will be in effect. The proposed dock design "footprint" being presented to the CDB represents 10,142 square feet, which is well in excess of the preemption area of 6,720 square feet. However, the "footprint" must also include the 805 square feet of the boat ramp (see above). Therefore, the imposition of the preemption limit restricts the dock area to 5,907 square feet. The applicant has submitted an alternative dock design if the preemption limitation is applicable which reduces the number of slips to five and the slip sizes are smaller. This is just one example of an alternative dock design that will comply with the preemption limitation. The applicant is requesting "flexibility" within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB review so long as it meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted with this application, does not extend beyond the 25 percent of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium. The building permit to construct the site improvements for the condominium project does not provide utility extensions for required fire risers for the proposed dock. Either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-02671) or a separate utility permit application to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock must be submitted to the Development Services Department prior to the Planning Department signing off on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the fire riser permit must be finalized. Dock supported signage will need to be permanently installed warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site. Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 4 of 10 • • COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: (Section 3-601.C.3): STANDARD PERMITTED PROPOSED CONSISTENT INCONSISTENT REQUIRED MAXIMUM 24 dwelling 31 dwelling units X DENSITY units per acre (approved) 34 units) ' IMPERVIOUS 0.95 0.79 (approved) X SURFACE RATIO ISR SETBACKS 10 percent of East: 1.5 feet X* (minimum) the width of West: 81.5 feet the property 22.4 feet LENGTH (maximum) 75 percent of 92 feet X the width of the property 168 feet) ' WIDTH (maximum) 75 percent of 141.8 feet X~ the width of the property ' 168 feet) * Reduction requested on east side. Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 5 of 10 ' • • COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA (Section 3-601.C.3): Consistent Inconsistent 1. The proposed dock shall be subordinate to and contribute to. the X comfort, convenience or necessities of the users or the occupants of the rinci al use of the ro ert . 2. The proposed dock shall be in harmony with the scale and character of X adjacent ro erties and the neighborhood in general. 3. The proposed dock shall be compatible with dock patterns in the X general vicinit . 4. Impacts on Existing Water Recreation Activities. The use of, the X proposed dock shall not adversely impact the health, safety or well being of persons currently using the adjacent waterways ~ for recreational and/or commercial uses. Furthermore, it shall not hinder or discourage the existing uses of the adjacent waterway by uses including but not limited to non-motorized boats and motorized boats. 5. Impacts on Navigation. The existence and use of the proposed dock X shall not have a detrimental effect on the use of adjacent waters for navigation, trans ortation, recreational or other ublic conveniences. 6. Docks shall be sited to ensure that boat access routes avoid injury to X marine assbeds or other a uatic resources in the surroundin areas. 7. Docks shall not have an adverse impact upon natural marine habitats, X grass flats suitable as nursery feeding grounds for marine life, or established marine soil suitable for producing plant growth of a type useful as nursery or feeding grounds for marine life; manatee sanctuaries; natural reefs and any such artificial reef which has developed an associated flora and fauna which have been determined to be approaching a typical natural assemblage structure in both density and diversity; oyster beds; clam beds; known sea turtle nesting site; commercial or sport fisheries or shell fisheries areas; and habitats desirable as ~uvenile fish habitat. 8. All turning basin, access channels, boat mooring areas and any other X area associated with a dock shall have adequate circulation and existing water depths to ensure that a minimum of a one foot clearance is provided between the lowest member of a vessel (e.g. skegs, rudder, prop) and the bottom of the water body at mean or ordinary low water -0.95 NGVD datum . 9. The dock shall not effectively cause erosion, extraordinary storm X drainage, shoaling of channels, or adversely affect the water quality presently existing in the area or limit progress that is being made toward improvement of water quality in the area in which the dock is ro osed to be located. 10. The dock shall not have a material adverse impact upon the X conservation of wildlife, marine life, and other natural resources, including beaches and shores, so as to be contrary to the public interest. Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 20,06 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 6 of 10 • Consistent Inconsistent 11. The dock shall not have an adverse impact on vegetated areas; X vegetative, terrestrial, or aquatic habitats critical to the support of listed species providing one or more of the requirements to sustain their existence, such as range, nesting or feeding grounds; habitats which display biological or physical attributes which would serve to make them rare within the confines of the City; designated preservation areas such as those identified in the comprehensive land use plan, national wildlife refuges, Florida outstanding waters or other desi ated reservation areas, and bird sanctuaries. 12. Impacts on Wetlands Habitat/LTplands. The dock shall not have a X material adverse affect u on the u lands surroundin . *See discussion under Analysis. C'CIMPI,iANCF, WITH GF,NF.RAL STANDARDS (Section 3-9131: 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 residin or workin in the neighborhood. 4. Develo ment is desi ed to minimize traffic con estion. X 5. Development is consistent with the community character of the X immediate vicinit . 6. Design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, X including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent ro erties. *See discussion under Analysis. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject 1.45 acres is zoned Commercial (C) District; 2. The upland has been approved to permit 31 attached dwellings, which is currently under construction; 3. Seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor up to five vessels, that were connected to the prior business on this parcel have already been removed, representing a net improvement to the marine environment; 4. The proposal is to remove the existing docks with 12 slips and permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips; 5. The proposed dock complies with maximum dock width ands maximum dock length requirements of the Code; Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 7 of 10 • • 6. The proposal includes a reduction to the minimum side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet; 7. The reduced east side setback is due to the need to provide ingress/egress for vessels moored at the public docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to the west of the subject property; 8. The abutting property owner to the east has submitted a letter indicating he does not oppose this request; 9. There will be no adverse impact upon the recreational or commercial use of the waterway and the dock does not impose any navigational hazards; 10. Fire protection is required for these docks, which must be permitted prior to or in conjunction with the dock construction; 11. The submerged lands upon which these docks are proposed are owned by the City of Clearwater, which was deeded to the City 1925. Such deed includes a "reverter clause," which from a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger with any approval of this request. Sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity are necessary should this request be approved; or in the alternative should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the Staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council; 12. In order to meet potential SWFWMD preemption regulations, the applicant is requesting "flexibility" within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB approval, as so long as it meets certain guidelines; and 13. There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Staff concludes that the proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria of Section 3-601; 2. Staff further concludes that the proposal is in compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913; and 3. Based on the above findings and the proposed conditions, Staff recommends approval of this application. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on November 3, 2005. The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for the site at 279 Windward Passage, with the following bases and conditions: Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 8 of 10 • • Bases for Approval: 1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria under the provisions of Section 3-601. 2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general applicability criteria per Section 3-913. 3. The dock development is compatible with the surrounding area. Conditions of Approval: 1. That no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application be issued unless and until the City receives sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity, or in the alternative, should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair acid rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) results in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the City Council may release, at their sole discretion, the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back Ito the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Prior to any such action by the City Council, the applicant shall submit a survey describing the submerged land area adjacent to the upland application parcel which is to be reverted; 2. That this approval includes the ability to administratively modify the submitted design with Planning Department review and concurrence [without additional review and approval by the Community Development Board (CDB)] so long as the revised design meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted with this request, does not extend beyond the 25 percent of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium; 3. 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; 4. That use of the reconstructed boat ramp in the southwest corner be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, and is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp. Access to such boat ramp shall be restricted though measures deemed acceptable to the Planning Department and shown as a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005- 02671); 5. That dock-supported signage be permanently installed containing wording warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity; 6. That a copy of the SWFWMD and/or FDEP Permit, Corps of Engineer's Permit and proof of permission to use State submerged land, if applicable, be submitted to the Planning Department prior to commencement of construction; and ~ 7. That either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-026'11), or a separate utility permit application, to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock be submitted to the Development Services Department prior to the Planning Department signoff on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the permit for the fire risers must be finalized. Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 9 of 10 • • Prepared by: Planning Department Staff: Wayne .Wells, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Location Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Existing Surrounding Uses Map Application S:IPlanning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cased Up for the next CDBIWindward Passage 279 Harbour Watch Docks (C) - 7.18.06 CDB -WWI Windward Passage 279 Staff Report for 7.18.06 CDB.doc Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 10 of 10 • Wells, Wayne . Page 1 of 1 From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 6:33 PM ' To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Joseph Gaynor Subject: Harbour Watch CDB Date Dear Wayne: As the agent for Harbor Watch, Woods Consulting requests that the date for the CDB meeting addressing our multi-use dock application be moved forward to a date "uncertain." Should you have any questions, please give me a call. My regards, Bill Woods .~ ~~ Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 bil lwoods@woodsconsulting.org 7/9/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 1:46 PM To: 'Carl Wagenfohr' Subject: RE: Windward Passage docks -----Original Message----- From: Carl Wagenfohr [mailto:cart@clearwatergazette.com] Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 1:39 PM To: Wells, Wayne ~ Cc: Castelli, Joelle Wiley Subject: Windward Passage docks Wayne, Please forward to me the email referenced in the most recent staff report that requests continuance to a date uncertain. Thanks...Carl 7/13/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Delk, Michael Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 9:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage Sir Wayne: Neil and I discussed this yesterday. I told him to check with Leslie (and Gina Grimes probably as well) suggesting this be continued to a date "uncertain" and not go thought until it is known to be ready to come back to the Board. At this point, I believe the ne2w policy dictates they will have to re-advertise regardless. Coordinate with Neal so you don't both duplicate effort. The applicant definitely needs to be aware of Board fatigue regarding this matter. michael -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 7:03 AM To: Delk, Michael Cc: Thompson, Neil; Clayton, Gina Subject: FW: 279 Windward Passage Michael - Actually, this will be the fifth appearance of this case on the July 18, 2006, CDB agenda, and it appears they are asking for a sixth appearance for the August 15, 2006, CDB agenda. Should I forward Mr. Fritsch's email (below) to the applicants Bill Woods and Joe Gaynor, with a copy to Laura Lipowski and Leslie Dougall-Sides in the City Attorney's office? Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Nick Fri [mailto:natbeach@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 7:48 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: 279 Windward Passage Wayne, This is the fourth appearance for this item. I will not support an extension. Usually, we trigger our "patience depleted" indicator on the third request; I hope you understand. Nick 7/6/2006 • • Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 4:04 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Thank you for your comments Wayne. We'll keep you posted. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 9:47 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Laura - I am reviewing the Stipulation offered by Mr. Gaynor and have the following comments: 1. In the fifth "Whereas" paragraph, in the second/last sentence it references a copy of the Community Development Board "Resolution FLD2004-06042." There are no CDB resolutions. There is a "Development Order." I believe this is what should be referenced in the Stipulation as Exhibit C. I am attaching a copy of the Development Order, dated October 22, 2004, and an Amended Development Order, dated November 18, 2005, for your use. 2. In the seventh "Whereas" paragraph, it references "five (5) docks." It is noted that) the request under FLD2005- 09093 is to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips. Under the preemption limitations of the State, the applicant has indicated that the square footage of the dock is reduced and the number of slips also is reduced to five slips. Proposed condition of approval, if adopted by the CDB, would allow administrative modification of the square footage of the dock and the number of slips under certain limitations, which includes no more than eight slips. The proposed condition of approval is to give some flexibility, within certain parameters, to meet alternative State requirements. 3. In the ninth and tenth "Whereas" paragraphs, it references the "Resolution." It is unclear which "Resolution" he is referencing, as Exhibit C is referenced as "Resolution" but he also references Resolution FLD2004-06042 in Exhibit E (which apparently is not aResolution -see comment #1 above). 4. In the eleventh "Whereas" paragraph, it references "five (5) docks). See comment.#2 above. 5. In Paragraph 1 after the "NOW THEREFORE" paragraph, it references "the Submerged Land Parcel and enabling this resolution to be recorded..." Shouldn't "resolution" be "Stipulation"? 6. In Paragraph 1 after the "NOW THEREFORE" paragraph, it references the "Resolution," but is unclear as to which resolution it references (Exhibit C or see comment #5 above). 7. In Paragraph 1 after the "NOW THEREFORE" paragraph, it references the "Resolution" (see comment #6 above). 8. In Paragraphs 6 and 7 after the "NOW THEREFORE" paragraph, it is noted that this Stipulation cannot be completed and recorded until the CDB takes action on the application, since a determination of conformance to the City's Code and approval is vested in the CDB (not City Council or a City Staff member). Wayne « File: Windward Passage 279 Development Order October 22, 2004.doc » « File: Windward Passage 279 Amended Development Order 11.18.05.doc » • • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 9:47 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Laura - I am reviewing the Stipulation offered by Mr. Gaynor and have the following comments: 1. In the fifth "Whereas" paragraph, in the second/last sentence it references a copy of the Community Development Board "Resolution FLD2004-06042." There are no CDB resolutions. There is a "Development Order." I believe this is what should be referenced in the Stipulation as Exhibit C. I am attaching a copy of the Development Order, dated October 22, 2004, and an Amended Development Order, dated November 18, 2005, for your use. 2. In the seventh "Whereas" paragraph, it references "five (5) docks." It is noted that the request under FLD2005-09093 is to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips. Under the preemption (limitations of the State, the applicant has indicated that the square footage of the dock is reduced and the number of slips also is reduced to five slips. Proposed condition of approval, if adopted by the CDB, would allow administrative modification of the square footage of the dock and the number of slips under certain limitations, which includes no more than eight slips. The proposed condition of approval is to give some flexibility, within certain parameters, to meet alternative State requirements. 3. In the ninth and tenth "Whereas" paragraphs, it references the "Resolution." It is unclear which "Resolution" he is referencing, as Exhibit C is referenced as "Resolution" but he also references Resolution FLD2004-06042 in Exhibit E (which apparently is not aResolution -see comment #1 above). 4. In the eleventh "Whereas" paragraph, it references "five (5) docks). See comment #2 above. 5. In Paragraph 1 after the "NOW THEREFORE" paragraph, it references "the Submerged Land Parcel and enabling this resolution to be recorded..." Shouldn't "resolution" be "Stipulation"? 6. In Paragraph 1 after the "NOW THEREFORE" paragraph, it references the "Resolution," but is unclear as to which resolution it references (Exhibit C or see comment #5 above). 7. In Paragraph 1 after the "NOW THEREFORE" paragraph, it references the "Resolution" (see comment #6 above). 8. In Paragraphs 6 and 7 after the "NOW THEREFORE" paragraph, it is noted that this Stipulation cannot be completed and recorded until the CDB takes action on the application, since a determination of conformance to the City's Code and approval is vested in the CDB (not City Council or a City Staff member). Wayne ~~ ~ Windward Passage Windward Passage 279 Developme... 279 Amended D... Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Nick Fri [natbeach@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 7:48 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: 279 Windward Passage Wayne, This is the fourth appearance for this item. I will not support an extension. Usually, we trigger our "patience depleted" indicator on the third request; I hope you understand. Nick 7/7/2006 • ~ CDB Meeting Date: June 20, 2006 Case Number: FLD2005-09093 Agenda Item: Dl Owner/Applicant: Harbour Estates, LLC Representative: Bill Woods/Terri Skapik, Woods Consulting, Inc. Address: 279 Windward Passage CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: Gi;~Gi~JA.L REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a '1,818 square foot multi- use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a re- duction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601. EXISTING ZONING/ Commercial (C) District; Commercial General (CG) Category LAND USE: PROPERTY SIZE: 1.45 acres PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Vacant (31 attached dwellings approved by CDB on October 19, 2004 - FLD2004-06042) Proposed Use: Multi-use dock for eight boat slips in conjunction with attached dwellings ADJACENT ZONING/ North: Commercial and Medium Density Residential Districts; LAND USES: Retail sales and services and attached dwellings East: Commercial District; Restaurant South: Preservation District; Water West: Commercial District; Vacant and Clearwater Marine Aquarium CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY: The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public docks surrounding the Aquarium. Staff Report -Community Development Board -June 20, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 1 of ] 0 • • UPDATE: At their meeting on March 21, 2006, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the April 18, 2006, agenda in order to address the legal issues of the submerged land and proposed conditions of approval. On April 18, 2006, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the May 16, 2006, agenda in order to address the legal issues of the submerged land and proposed conditions of approval. The applicant desires City Council act on a request to declare the submerged land surplus to resolve the legal issues prior to CDB action. Due to scheduling issues for such a request, the CDB continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the June 20, 2006, CDB agenda. The applicant has requested a continuance to the July 18, 2006, CDB meeting (see attached email). • ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 1.45-acre site is located on the south side of Windward Passage, approximately 300 feet west of Island Way. The site was previously developed with a boat yard. On October 19, 2004, the Community Development Board approved a request to construct 31 attached dwellings on this property (FLD2004-06042). All existing upland improvements have been demolished in anticipation of the construction of the building and site improvements for the 31 attached dwellings. A building permit was issued on February 8, 2006, to construct the site improvements (BCP2005-02671) for the condominiums. There exist docks on the property consisting of 1,325 square feet and 12 wet slips. The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public docks surrounding the Aquarium. There is aCity-operated, commercial dock (nine slips) located directly to the east at 20 Island Way (Island Way Grill), approved by the Community Development Board on May 20, 2003 (FLD2003-03013). The unstaffed dock is available on a first come/first served basis and is free to the public (no overnight mooring). There were seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor up to five vessels, which existed for the prior boat repair business that operated from the subject property but were removed when the public docks were installed. Proposal: Section 3-601.C.3 requires docks over 500 square feet in area (in association with a multi-family development or condominium) be treated as a commercial; dock and be approved as part of a Level Two, Flexible Development review. The applicant seeks to remove the existing docks and slips in order to construct new docks consisting of 1,818 square feet and eight boat slips. The seven mooring buoys in the open water that were for the prior business on this property have already been removed, as they are no longer necessary, which represents a net improvement to the marine environment. The proposed dock will be constructed with a floating platform for the main eight-foot wide access platform parallel with the seawall and the catwalks. In order to have at least three feet of water depth at mean low water for moored boats, a ramp will connect the dock platform with the upland/seawall. The main platform will be 22 feet from the seawall. Three of the catwalks will be 36 feet in length for six of the slips and the westernmost catwalk will be 23 feet in length for the other two slips. The catwalk and slip length on the western side is shorter due to the existing Staff Report -Community Development Board -June 20, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 2 of ] 0 • • public slips at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and to accommodate the boat ramp in the corner. Tie poles are proposed on the east side of the property at a one-foot setback, meeting Code requirements. The dock on the east side is proposed 1.5 feet from the east property line. A minimum side setback of 22.4 feet is required for the docks/catwalks. The reduced setback is to the main platform of the dock, which is used as an area for dock boxes, electric pedestals, fire extinguishers and hose racks. The reduction on the east side is a function of providing adequate vessel maneuvering area for the existing docks and the boat ramp to the west at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium, thereby pushing the docks eastward. The proposed west side setback is 81.5 feet, greatly exceeding the required minimum setback of 22.4 feet. The adjacent property owner to the east has submitted a letter of no objection to the proposed reduced' side (east) setback. The public docks to the east at the Island Way Grill were approved at a 23-foot west side setback, meeting the required setback of 22.9 feet. Most slips are 18 feet wide, but slip 7 is 15.5 feet in width. Code dock provisions limit the width of docks to a maximum of ~5 percent of the lot width (224 feet), or 168 feet in this case. The proposed overall dock width is 63.3 percent of the lot width (141.8 feet). Code provisions restrict dock length to a maximum of 75 percent of the lot width (168 feet). The longest catwalks are proposed to be 92 feet in length from the seawall (41 percent of the lot width). The dock length of 92 feet is also less than the 25 percent of the waterway width (99.5 feet). While not consistent with existing, older and shorter docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium, the proposed docks are consistent with newer docks required to meet today's Codes, wherein the length takes into account the water ~ depth at mean low water and sea grasses (if any). There are no issues regarding navigation with the proposal and the other criteria for docks have been met. An issue with this proposal is that the submerged lands upon which the docks will be constructed are owned by the City of Clearwater. The City received the submerged lands by deed from the State in 1925, but it included a "reverter clause," whereby the ownership Hof the submerged lands is to revert back to the State if the submerged lands are not used for the public good. The submerged lands deeded to the City in 1925 cover a very large area, including the area projected for a downtown public marina. From a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger any reverter clause, other than the submerged land area immediately adjacent to the upland application parcel. Any approval of the request should include a condition where there would be no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application unless and until the City receives sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. As an alternative, should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up toeight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then Staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council. Prior to such action by City Council, the applicant will need to submit a survey describing the submerged land area adjacent to the upland application parcel which is tq be reverted. The applicant is proposing to reconstruct a boat ramp on the western portion of the property. This ramp was used in conjunction with the boat works operation previously on the property and is used by the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to load and unload injured mammals with a forklift. The Staff Report -Community Development Board -June 20~, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 3 of 10 • • applicant has committed to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to replace ithe existing forklift load out ramp. Use of this reconstructed boat ramp should be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, but is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp, as there are parking and other issues for such latter use. ' The applicant has submitted the proposed docks to the Army Corp of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). The issue of the 'reverter clause is under discussion and negotiation with the State. When the submerged lands are sovereign (State- owned), SWFWMD requires the docks to be designed to the requirements for docks within an Aquatic Preserve. The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulations contain a State lands preemption requirement that the area of submerged lands cannot exceed 30 times the linear feet of shoreline bordering sovereign lands. The preemption area for this site is 6,720 square feet, which must include the entire "footprint" of the mooring facility (including the area where the boats moor). The proposed dock design being presented to the CDB with this application is based on the submerged land being owned by the City, wherein the preemption restriction is not applicable. However, in the event the reverter is triggered, then the preemption restriction will be in effect. The proposed dock design "footprint" being presented to the CDB represents 10,142 square feet, which is well in excess of the preemption area of 6,720 square feet. However, the "footprint" must also include the 805 square feet of the boat ramp (see above). Therefore, the imposition of the preemption limit restricts the dock area to 5,907 square feet. The applicant has submitted an alternative dock design if the preemption limitation is applicable which reduces the number of slips to five and the slip sizes are smaller. This is just one example of an alternative dock design that will comply with the preemption limitation. The applicant is requesting "flexibility" within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB review so long as it meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted with this application, does not extend beyond the 25 percent of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium. The building permit to construct the site improvements for the condominium project does not provide utility extensions for required fire risers for the proposed dock; . Either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-02671) or a separate utility permit application to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock must be submitted to the Development Services Department prior to the Planning Department signing off on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the fire riser permit must be finalized. Dock supported signage will need to be permanently installed warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding enforcement 'issues associated with this site. i Staff Report -Community Development Board -June 20, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 4 of 10 COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: (Section 3-601.C.3): STANDARD PERMITTED PROPOSED CONSISTENT INCONSISTENT RE UIRED MAXIMUM 24 dwelling 31 dwelling units X DENSITY units per acre (approved) 34 units IMPERVIOUS 0.95 0.79 (approved) ~ SURFACE RATIO SR SETBACKS 10 percent of East: 1.5 feet X* (minimum) the width of West: 81.5 feet the property 22.4 feet LENGTH (maximum) 75 percent of 92 feet X the width of the property 168 feet WIDTH (maximum) 75 percent of 141.8 feet X the width of the property ~' 168 feet * Reduction requested on east side. Staff Report -Community Development Board -June 20, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 5 of 10 i • • i COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA (Section 3-601.C.3): Consistent Inconsistent 1. The proposed dock shall be subordinate to and contribute to ~ the X comfort, convenience or necessities of the users or the occupants of the rind al use of the ro ert . 2. The proposed dock shall be in harmony with the scale and character of X adjacent ro erties and the nei hborhood in eneral. 3. The proposed dock shall be compatible with dock patterns in the X eneral vicini 4. Impacts on Existing Water Recreation Activities. The use of the X proposed dock shall not adversely impact the health, safety or well being of persons currently using the adjacent waterways ~ for recreational and/or commercial uses. Furthermore, it shall not hinder or ,discourage the existing uses of the adjacent waterway by 'uses includin but not limited to non-motorized boats and motorized boats. 5. Impacts on Navigation. The existence and use of the proposed dock X shall not have a detrimental effect on the use of adjacent waters for navi ation, trans ortation, recreational or other ublic conveniences. 6. Docks shall be sited to ensure that boat access routes avoid injury to X marine assbeds or other a uatic resources in the surroundin areas. 7. Docks shall not have an adverse impact upon natural marine habitats, X grass flats suitable as nursery feeding grounds for marine life, or established marine soil suitable for producing plant growth of a type useful as nursery or feeding grounds for marine life; manatee sanctuaries; natural reefs and any such artificial reef which has developed an associated flora and fauna which have been determined to be approaching a typical natural assemblage structure in both density and diversity; oyster beds; clam beds; known sea turtle nesting site; commercial or sport fisheries or shell fisheries areas; and habitats desirable as 'uvenile fish habitat. 8. All turning basin, access channels, boat mooring areas and any other X area associated with a dock shall have adequate circulation ;and existing water depths to ensure that a minimum of a one foot clearance is provided between the lowest member of a vessel (e.g. skegs, rudder, prop) and the bottom of the water body at mean or ordinary low water -0.95 NGVD datum . 9. The dock shall not effectively cause erosion, extraordinary storm X drainage, shoaling of channels, or adversely affect the water quality presently existing in the area or limit progress that is being made toward improvement of water quality in the area in which the dock is ro osed to be located. 10. The dock shall not have a material adverse impact upon the X conservation of wildlife, marine life, and other natural resources, including beaches and shores, so as to be contrary to the public interest. Staff Report -Community Development Board -June 20;, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 6 of 10 • Consistent Inconsistent 11. The dock shall not have an adverse impact on vegetated areas; ~ X vegetative, terrestrial, or aquatic habitats critical to the support of listed species providing one or more of the requirements to su~tain their existence, such as range, nesting or feeding grounds; habitats which display biological or physical attributes which would serve to make them rare within the confines of the City; designated preservation areas such as those identified in the comprehensive land use plan, national wildlife refuges, Florida outstanding waters or other desi ated reservation areas, and bird sanctuaries. 12. Impacts on Wetlands Habitat/Uplands. The dock shall not have a X material adverse affect u on the u lands surroundin . *See discussion under Analysis. ('(1MPT,TANf'F. WTTH (:F,NFRAT, STANT)ARnS (Section 3-9131: 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 residin or workin ~in the nei borhood. 4. Develo ment is desi ed to minimize traffic con estion. X 5. Development is consistent with the community character of the X immediate vicinit . 6. Design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, X including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent ro erties. *See discussion under Analysis. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject 1.45 acres is zoned Commercial (C) District; 2. The upland has been approved to permit 31 attached dwellings, which is currently under construction; 3. Seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor up to five vessels, that were connected to the prior business on this parcel have already been removed, representing a net improvement to the marine environment; 4. The proposal is to remove the existing docks with 12 slips and permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips; 5. The proposed dock complies with maximum dock width and maximum dock length requirements of the Code; Staff Report -Community Development Board -June 20, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 7 of 10 • • 6. The proposal includes a reduction to the minimum side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet; 7. The reduced east side setback is due to the need to provide ingress/egress for vessels moored at the public docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to the west of the subject property; 8. The abutting property owner to the east has submitted a letter indicating he does not oppose this request; 9. There will be no adverse impact upon the recreational or commercial use of the waterway and the dock does not impose any navigational hazards; 10. Fire protection is required for these docks, which must be permitted prior to or in conjunction with the dock construction; 11. The submerged lands upon which these docks are proposed are owned by the City of Clearwater, which was deeded to the City 1925. Such deed includes a "reverter clause," which from a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger 'Iwith any approval of this request. Sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged band parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity are necessary should this request be approved; or in the alternative should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the Staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council; 12. In order to meet potential SWFWMD preemption regulations, the applicant is requesting "flexibility" within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB approval, as so long as it meets certain guidelines; and 13. There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Staff concludes that the proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria of Section 3-601; 2. Staff further concludes that the proposal is in compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913; and 3. Based on the above findings and the proposed conditions, Staff recommends approval of this application. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on November 3, 2005. The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for the site at 279 Windward Passage, with the following bases and conditions: Staff Report -Community Development Board -June 20,12006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 8 of 10 • • Bases for Approval: 1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria under the provisions of Section 3-601. 2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general applicability criteria per Section 3-913. 3. The dock development is compatible with the surrounding area. Conditions of Approval: 1. That no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application be issued unless and until the City receives sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity, or in the alternative, should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) results in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the City Council may release, at their sole discretion, the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Prior to any such action by the City Council, the applicant shall submit a survey describing the submerged land area adjacent to the upland application parcel which is to be reverted; 2. That this approval includes the ability to administratively modify the submitted design with Planning Department review and concurrence [without additional review and approval by the Community Development Board (CDB)] so long as the revised design meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted with this request, does not extend beyond the 25 percent of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium; 3. 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; 4. That use of the reconstructed boat ramp in the southwest corner be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, and is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp. Access to such boat ramp shall be restricted though measures deemed acceptable to the Planning Department and shown as a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005- 02671); 5. That dock-supported signage be permanently installed containing wording warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity; 6. That a copy of the SWFWMD and/or FDEP Permit, Corps of Engineer's Permit and proof of permission to use State submerged land, if applicable, be submitted to the Planning • Department prior to commencement of construction; and 7. That either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-02671), or a separate utility permit application, to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock be submitted to the Development Services Department prior to the Planning Department signoff on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the permit for the fire risers must be finalized. Staff Report -Community Development Board -June 20, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 9 of 10 • • Prepared by: Planning Department Staff: D Wayne .Wells, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Location Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Existing Surrounding Uses Map Application S: IP[anning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cased Up for the next CDBI Windward Passage 279 Harbour Watch Docks (C) - 6.20.06 CDB - WWIWindward Passage 279 Staff Report for 6.20.06 CDB.doc Staff Report -Community Development Board -June 20, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 10 of 10 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 2:56 PM To: Wells, Wayne; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage i Please treat this a-mail as a formal request to extend once again the CDB hearing and i will have a $75 check delivered to you by Bill Woods since I am out of town. Bill Horne is out of the office until next week. I have written him an e-mail regarding the position of the State and should the City agree, we could easily meet the next hearing the deadline. 6/2/2006 • ~ ~ ~ Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Carl Wagenfohr [carl@clearwatergazette.com] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 2:22 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Morris, William D.; Thompson, Neil; Clayton, Dane; Delk, Michael; Castelli, Joelle Wiley; Dougall- Sides, Leslie; Lipowski, Laura Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093 Laura, Leslie et al, Please forward to me the details of the applicants request for the City Council to declare the submerged lands adjacent to the upland property at 279 Windward Passage surplus. Is there a staff recommendation on this request? If not, when will staff have a recommendation to the Council on this request? Assuming a staff recommendation of approval, at what Council Meeting might this be voted on? Thanks...Carl -----Original Message----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com [mailto:Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 1:55 PM To: cart@clearwatergazette.com Cc: Laura.Lipowski@myClearwater.com; Leslie.Dougall-Sides@myClearwater.com; Joelle.Castelli@myClearwater.com; michael.delk@MyClearwater.com; Dane.Clayton@MyClearwater.com; neil.thompson@MyClearwater.com Subject: FLD2005-09093 Carl - ~ I am attaching the email requesting this continuance. As for the request to have City Council declare the submerged land surplus, I would recommend contacting Laura Lipowski and Leslie Dougall-Sides for the appropriate emails or other documentation, as they have been dealing with those issues. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Carl Wagenfohr [mailto:cart@clearwatergazette.com] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 12:24 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Castelli, Joelle Wiley; Watkins, Sherry Subject: FLD2005-09093 Wayne, The staff report for this CDB agenda item makes reference to two requests issued by the applicant. Please provide copies of the email(s) or other communications that document these requests: 6/19/2006 .' « . ~ ~ Page 2 of 2 -The applicant has requested a continuance to the July 18, 2006, CDB meeting (see attached email). - The applicant desires Ciry Council act on a request to declare the submerged land surplus to resolve the legal issues prior to CDB action. Thanks...Carl Wagenfohr, Clearwater Gazette, 446-0271 6/ 19/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 1:55 PM To: 'Carl Wagenfohr' Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Castelli, Joelle Wiley; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Dane; Thompson, Neil Subject: FLD2005-09093 Carl - I am attaching the email requesting this continuance. As for the request to have City Council declare the submerged land surplus, I would recommend contacting Laura Lipowski and Leslie Dougall-Sides for the appropriate emails or other documentation, as they have been dealing with those issues. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Carl Wagenfohr [mailto:carl@clearwatergazette.com] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 12:24 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Castelli, Joelle Wiley; Watkins, Sherry Subject: FLD2005-09093 Wayne, The staff report for this CDB agenda item makes reference to two requests issued by the applicant. Please provide copies of the email(s) or other communications that document these requests: - The applicant has requested a continuance to the July 18, 2006, CDB meeting (see attached email). - The applicant desires City Council act on a request to declare the submerged land surplus to resolve the legal issues prior to CDB action. Thanks...Carl Wagenfohr, Clearwater Gazette, 446-0271 6/19/2006 • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 11:19 AM To: Castelli, Joelle Wiley Cc: Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: St. Petersburg Times Reporter Joelle - Today I spoke to DeMorris Lee with the St. Petersburg Times regarding two items where I am the case planner on tomorrow's Community Development Board (CDB) agenda: 1. FLD2005-09093 - 279 Windward Passage - I told him this case was being requested to again continue the public hearing to the July 18th CDB meeting. This case has legal issues related to City ownership of the submerged land where the docks are proposed and the reverter clause in the deed from the State. 2. FLD2006-02009 - 490 Mandalay Avenue - I told him this case was being requested to'continue the public hearing to the August 15th CDB meeting in order to continue working with Staff for an acceptable project. This case is not supported by Staff for architectural and building location reasons. Wayne • CDB Meeting Date: May 16, 2006 Case Number: FLD2005-09093 Agenda Item: D 1 Owner/Applicant: Harbour Estates, LLC Representative: Bill Woods/Terri Skapik, Woods Consulting, Inc. Address: 279 Windward Passage CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: ORIGihAL REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi- use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a re- duction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601. i EXISTING ZONING/ Commercial (C) District; Commercial General (CG) Category LAND USE: PROPERTY SIZE: 1.45 acres PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Vacant (31 attached dwellings approved by CDB on October 19, 2004 - FLD2004-06042) Proposed Use: Multi-use dock for eight boat slips in conjunction with attached dwellings ADJACENT ZONING/ North: Commercial and Medium Density Residential Districts; LAND USES: Retail sales and services and attached dwellings East: Commercial District; Restaurant South: Preservation District; Water West: Commercial District; Vacant and Clearwater Marine Aquarium ~ CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY: The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public docks surrounding the Aquarium. Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 16, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 1 of 10 • • UPDATE: At their meeting on March 21, 2006, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the April 18, 2006, agenda in order to address the legal issues of the submerged land and proposed conditions of approval. On April 18, 2006, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the May 16, 2006, agenda in order to address the legal issues of the submerged land and proposed conditions of approval. The applicant desires City Council act on a request to declare the submerged land surplus to resolve the legal issues prior to CDB action. ,Due to scheduling issues for such a request, the applicant is requesting this case be continued to the June 20, 2006, CDB agenda (see attached email). ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 1.45-acre site is located on the south side of Windward Passage, approximately 300 feet west of Island Way. The site was previously developed with a boat yard. On October 19, 2004, the Community Development Board approved a request to construct 31 attached dwellings on this property (FLD2004-06042). All existing upland improvements have been demolished in anticipation of the construction of the building and site improvements for the 31 attached dwellings. A building permit was issued on February 8, 2006, to construct the site improvements (BCP2005-02671) for the condominiums. There exist docks on the property consisting of 1,325 square feet and 12 wet slips. The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public docks surrounding the Aquarium. There is aCity-operated, commercial dock (nine slips) located directly to the east at 20 Island Way (Island. Way Grill), approved by the Community Development Board on May 20, 2003 (FLD2003-03013). The unstaffed dock is available on a first come/first served basis and is free to the public (no overnight mooring). There were seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor up to five vessels, which existed for the prior boat repair business that operated from the subject property but were removed when the public docks were installed. Proposal: Section 3-601.C.3 requires docks over 500 square feet in area (in association with a multi-family development or condominium) be treated as a commercial dock and be approved as part of a Level Two, Flexible Development review. The applicant seeks to remove the existing docks and slips in order to construct new docks consisting of 1,818 square feet and eight boat slips. The seven mooring buoys in the open water that were for the prior business on this property have already been removed, as they are no longer necessary, which represents a net improvement to the marine environment. The proposed dock will be constructed with a floating platform for the main eight-foot wide access platform parallel with the seawall and the catwalks. In order to have at least three feet of water depth at mean low water for moored boats, a ramp will connect the dock platform with the upland/seawall. The main platform will be 22 feet from the seawall. Three of the catwalks will be 36 feet in length for six of the slips and the westernmost catwalk will be 23 feet in length .for the other two slips. The catwalk and slip length on the western side is shorter due to the existing public slips at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and to accommodate the boat ramp in the corner. Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 16, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 2 of 10 • • Tie poles are proposed on the east side of the property at a one-foot setback, meeting Code requirements. The dock on the east side is proposed ~ 1.5 feet from the east property line. A minimum side setback of 22.4 feet is required for the docks/catwalks. The reduced setback is to the main platform of the dock, which is used as an area for dock boxes, electric pedestals, fire extinguishers and hose racks. The reduction on the east side is a function of providing adequate vessel maneuvering area for the existing docks and the boat ramp to the west at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium, thereby pushing the docks eastward. The proposed west side setback is 81.5 feet, greatly exceeding the required minimum setback of 22.4 feet. The adjacent property owner to the east has submitted a letter of no objection to the proposed reducediside (east) setback. The public docks to the east at the Island Way Grill were approved at a 23-foot west side setback, meeting the required setback of 22.9 feet. Most slips are 18 feet wide,. but slip 7 is 15.5 feet in width. Code dock provisions limit the width of docks to a maximum of 75 percent of the lot width (224 feet), or 168 feet in this case. The proposed overall dock width is 63.3 percent of the lot width (141.8 feet). Code provisions restrict dock length to a maximum of 75 percent of the lot width (168 feet). The longest catwalks are proposed to be 92 feet in length from the seawall (41 percent of the lot width). The dock length of 92 feet is also less than the 25 percent of the waterway width (99.5 feet). While not consistent with existing, older and shorter docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium, the proposed docks are consistent with newer docks required to meet today's Codes, wherein the length takes into account the water depth at mean low water and sea grasses (if any). There are no issues regarding navigation with the proposal and the other criteria for docks have been met. An issue with this proposal is that the submerged lands upon which the docks will be constructed are owned by the City of Clearwater. The City received the submerged lands by deed from the State in 1925, but it included a "reverter clause," whereby the ownership of the submerged lands is to revert back to the State if the submerged lands are not used for the public good. The submerged lands deeded to the City in 1925 cover a very large area, including, the area projected for a downtown public marina. From a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger any reverter clause, other than the submerged land area immediately adjacent to the upland application parcel. Any approval of the request should include a condition where there would be no Planning Department signoff on .the County dock permit application unless and until the City receives sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. As an alternative, should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to' eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then Staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council. Prior to such action by City Council, the applicant will need to submit a survey describing the submerged land area adjacent to the upland application parcel which is to be reverted. The applicant is proposing to reconstruct a boat ramp on the western portion of the property. This ramp was used in conjunction with the boat works operation previously on the property and is used by the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to load and unload injured mammals with a forklift. The applicant has committed to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to replace the existing forklift load Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 16, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 3 of 10 • • out ramp. Use of this reconstructed boat ramp should be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, but is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp, as there are parking and other issues for such latter use. The applicant has submitted the proposed docks to the Army Corp of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). The issue of the reverter clause is under discussion and negotiation with the State. When the submerged lands are sovereign (State- owned), SWFWMD requires the docks to be designed to the requirements for docks within an Aquatic Preserve. The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulation's contain a State lands preemption requirement that the area of submerged lands cannot exceed 30 times the linear feet of shoreline bordering sovereign lands. The preemption area for this site isi 6,720 square feet, which must include the entire "footprint" of the mooring facility (including the area where the boats moor). The proposed dock design being presented to the CDB with this application is based on the submerged land being owned by the City, wherein the preemption restriction is not applicable. However, in the event the reverter is triggered, then the preemption restriction will be in effect. The proposed dock design "footprint" being presented to the CDB represents 10,142 square feet, which is well in excess of the preemption area of 6,720 square feet. However, the "footprint" must also include the 805 square feet of the boat ramp (see above). Therefore, the imposition of the preemption limit restricts the dock area to 5,907 square feet. The applicant has submitted an alternative dock design if the preemption limitation is applicable which reduces the number of slips to five and the slip sizes are smaller. This is just one example of an alternative dock design that will comply with the preemption limitation. The applicant is requesting "flexibility" within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB review so long as it meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted with this application, does not extend beyond the 25 percent of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium. The building permit to construct the site improvements for the condominium project does not provide utility extensions for required fire risers for the proposed dock. Either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-02671) or a separate utility permit application to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock must be submitted to the Developrrient Services Department prior to the Planning Department signing off on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the fire riser permit must be finalized. Dock supported signage will need to be permanently installed warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site. Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 16, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 4 of 10 CJ • COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: (Section 3-601.C.3): STANDARD PERMITTED PROPOSED CONSISTENT INCONSISTENT REQUIRED ' MAXIMUM 24 dwelling 31 dwelling units X DENSITY units per acre (approved) (34 units) IMPERVIOUS 0.95 0.79 (approved) X SURFACE RATIO ISR SETBACKS 10 percent of East: 1.5 feet X* (minimum) the width of West: 81.5 feet the property 22.4 feet LENGTH (maximum) 75 percent of 92 feet X the width of the property 168 feet WIDTH (maximum) 75 percent of 141.8 feet X the width of the property 168 feet) * Reduction requested on east side. Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 16, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 5 of 10 • • COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA (Section 3-601.C.3~): Consistent Inconsistent 1. The proposed dock shall be subordinate to and contribute to the X comfort, convenience or necessities of the users or the occupants of the rinci al use of the ro ert . 2. The proposed dock shall be in harmony with the scale and character of X ' adjacent ro erties and the neighborhood in general. 3. The proposed dock shall be compatible with dock patterns in the X eneral vicinit . 4. Impacts on Existing Water Recreation Activities. The use of~ the X proposed dock shall not adversely impact the health, safety or well being of persons currently using the adjacent waterways for recreational and/or commercial uses. Furthermore, it shall not hinder or discourage the existing uses of the adjacent waterway by uses includin but not limited to non-motorized boats and motorized boats. 5. Impacts on Navigation. The existence and use of the proposed dock X shall not have a detrimental effect on the use of adjacent waters for navigation, trans ortation, recreational or other ublic conveniences. 6. Docks shall be sited to ensure that boat access routes avoid injury to X marine grassbeds or other a uatic resources in the surroundin areas. 7. Docks shall not have an adverse impact upon natural marine habitats, X grass flats suitable as nursery feeding grounds for marine life, or established marine soil suitable for producing plant growth of a 'type useful as nursery or feeding grounds for marine life; manatee sanctuaries; natural reefs and any such artificial reef which has developed an associated flora and fauna which have been determined to be approaching a typical natural assemblage structure in both density and diversity; oyster beds; clam beds; known sea turtle nesting site; commercial or sport fisheries or shell fisheries areas; and habitats desirable as 'uvenile fish habitat. 8. All turning basin, access channels, boat mooring areas and any other X area associated with a dock shall have adequate circulation ~ and existing water depths to ensure that a minimum of a one foot clearance is provided between the lowest member of a vessel (e.g. skegs, rudder, prop) and the bottom of the water body at mean or ordinary low water -0.95 NGVD datum . 9. The dock shall not effectively cause erosion, extraordinary storm X drainage, shoaling of channels, or adversely affect the water quality presently existing in the area or limit progress that is being made toward improvement of water quality in the area in which the dock is ro osed to be located. 10. The dock shall not have a material adverse impact uponi the X conservation of wildlife, marine life, and other natural resources, including beaches and shores, so as to be contrary to the public interest. Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 16', 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 6 of 10 • • Consistent Inconsistent 11. The dock shall not have an adverse impact on vegetated areas; X vegetative, terrestrial, or aquatic habitats critical to the support of listed species providing one or more of the requirements to sustain their existence, such as range, nesting or feeding grounds; habitats which display biological or physical attributes which would serve to make them rare within the confines of the City; designated preservation areas such as those identified in the comprehensive land use plan, national wildlife refuges, Florida outstanding waters or other desi ated reservation areas, and bird sanctuaries. 12. Impacts on Wetlands Habitat/LTplands. The dock shall not have a X material adverse affect u on the u lands surroundin . *See discussion under Analysis. f'(IMPT.TANf'F. WTTTT CiF.NFRAT, CTAN>)ARn~ (fiectinn 3-913L• 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 nei hborhood. 4. Develo ment is desi ed to minimize traffic con estion. X 5. Development is consistent with the community character of the X immediate vicinit . 6. Design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, X including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent ro erties. *See discussion under Analysis. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject 1.45 acres is zoned Commercial (C) District; 2. The upland has been approved to permit 31 attached dwellings, which is currently under construction; 3. Seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor, up to five vessels, that were connected to the prior business on this parcel have already been removed, representing a net improvement to the marine environment; 4. The proposal is to remove the existing docks with 12 slips and permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips; 5. The proposed dock complies with maximum dock width and maximum dock length requirements of the Code; Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 16, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 7 of 10 • • 6. The proposal includes a reduction to the minimum side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet; 7. The reduced east side setback is due to the need to provide ingress/egress for vessels moored at the public docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to the west of the subject property; 8. The abutting property owner to the east has submitted a letter indicating he does not oppose this request; 9. There will be no adverse impact upon the recreational or commercial use of the waterway and the dock does not impose any navigational hazards; 10. Fire protection is required for these docks, which must be permitted prior to or in conjunction with the dock construction; 11. The submerged lands upon which these docks are proposed are owned by the City of Clearwater, which was deeded to the City 1925. Such deed includes a "reverter clause," which from a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger with any approval of this request. Sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity are necessary should this request be approved; or in the alternative should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the Staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council; 12. In order to meet potential SWFWMD preemption regulations, the applicant is requesting "flexibility" within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB approval, as so long as it meets certain guidelines; and 13. There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Staff concludes that the proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria of Section 3-601; 2. Staff further concludes that the proposal is in compliance with th,e General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913; and 3. Based on the above findings and the proposed conditions, Staff recommends approval of this application. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee- reviewed the application and supporting materials on November 3, 2005. The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for the site at 279 Windward Passage, -with the following bases and conditions: Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 16, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 8 of 10 • • Bases for Approval: 1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria under~the provisions of Section 3-601. 2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general applicability criteria per Section 3-913. 3. The dock development is compatible with the surrounding area. Conditions of Approval: 1. That no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application be issued unless and until the City receives sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity, or in the alternative, should the 'State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) results in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the City Council may release, at their sole discretion, the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject 'submerged parcel. Prior to any such action by the City Council, the applicant shall submit a survey describing the submerged land area adjacent to the upland application parcel which is to be reverted; 2. That this approval includes the ability to administratively modify the submitted design with Planning Department review and concurrence [without additional review and approval by the Community Development Board (CDB)] so long as the revised design meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted with this request, does not extend beyond the 25 percent of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium; 3. 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; 4. That use of the reconstructed boat ramp in the southwest corner be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, and is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp. Access to such boat ramp shall be restricted though measures deemed acceptable to the Planning Department and shown as a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005- 02671); 5. That dock-supported signage be permanently installed containing wording warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity; 6. That a copy of the SWFWMD and/or FDEP Permit, Corps of Engineer's Permit and proof of permission to use State submerged land, if applicable, be submitted to the Planning Department prior to commencement of construction; and 7. That either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-02671), or a separate utility permit application, to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock be submitted to the Development Services Department prior to the Planning Department signoff on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the permit for the fire risers must be finalized. Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 16, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 9 of 10 i ~ • Prepared by: Planning Department Staff: , Wayne .Wells, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Location Map ' Aerial Map Zoning Map Existing Surrounding Uses Map ' Application S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cases) Up for the next CDB( Windward Passage 279 Harbour Watch Docks-(C) - 5.16.06 CDB -WWI Windward Passage 279 Staff Report for 5.16.06 CDB. doc Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 16, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 10 of 10 ~..J Wells, Wayne From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 12:32 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Subject: Re: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Page 1 of 1 We will not get on the May City agenda so the CDB in late June will be better but if we can wait until we have our meeting with Bill Horne next week we will know our timing better but if we have to extend you are hereby authorized to do so since we need to go to the City Counsel first Joseph W. Gaynor -----Original Message----- From: Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com To: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Sherry.Watkins@myClearwater.com Sent: Wed, 3 May 2006 09:53:17 -0400 Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Joe - It's that time of the month again. At their meeting on April 18th, the CDB continued the above referenced case to their May 16th meeting. It was continued to allow you to go to City Council first to have the submerged land be declared surplus. It is my understanding from Laura Lipowski that the necessary information has not yet been submitted to her to place an item on the next available City Council agenda. Based on the City Council schedule, it appears that such an item could be placed on the June 1st or June 15th City Council meetings at the earliest (or potentially July 20th). Any which way, the above request will need to be continued from the May 15th CDB agenda if you 'want City Council action first. I need a letter (or email) of request to continue this case for the CDB. Should it be continued to the June 20th or July 18th CDB agenda? There will be a fee for such continuance. Please let me know today, as I need to get an updated Staff Report to the CDB. Wayne 5/3/2006 • • Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 1:11 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Postpone Harbouurwatch Dock App -CDB An e-mail or letter to Planning requesting an indefinite continuance should be sufficient. -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 10:57 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne Subject: Postpone Harbouurwatch Dock App -CDB Mr. Gaynor needs to indefinitely postpone the above application. (It may go sometime in the fall). He needs to know how he goes about doing so. Thanks • • Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 9:12 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage OK -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 9:05 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage Based on your information, this has not yet been approved by City Council and has yet to be placed on a City Council agenda. I assume, therefore, that such agenda item will be potentially June 1 or June 15 at the earliest. As such the CDB item will need to be continued to at least June 20 (or potentially July 18). I will contact Joe Gaynor as to when he anticipates submitting whatever information you need. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 8:56 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Akin, Pam; Thompson, Neil; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: 279 Windward Passage Mr. Gaynor has been instructed to consult with City Management to request consideration on moving forward. Once I receive direction from management that they are on board with proceeding, I will oversee an agenda item (coordinated with Earl Barrett) to declare the property surplus and convey the property back to the State. I have not heard any more from Mr. Gaynor on the status -but have received a letter from the State confirming their position which supports the proposed transaction. I will keep you posted. LL -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 7:58 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Akin, Pam; Thompson, Neil; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: 279 Windward Passage Laura - At their meeting on April 18, 2006, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued Case FLD2005- 09093 for the subject property to their May 16, 2006, meeting. The purpose for the delay was in order to have City Council first take action on declaring the submerged land surplus. I need to prepare and sent an update to the Staff Report for Case FLD2005-09093 for the CDB. Do you know the status of what date the City Council will hear (or has heard) the request to declare the submerged land surplus? Could you let me know today (Wednesday)? If it hasn't already occurred and is scheduled for May 18th, then I would have to assume that the CDB case needs to be continued again, presuming Joe Gaynor wants~the City Council action before the CDB decision. Thanks. Wayne • • CDB Meeting Date: April 18, 2006 Case Number: FLD2005-09093 Agenda Item: D2 Owner/Applicant: Harbour Estates, LLC Representative: Bill Woods/Tern Skapik, Woods Consulting, Inc. Address: 279 Windward Passage CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a' 1,818 square foot multi- use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a re- duction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601. EXISTING ZONING/ Commercial (C) District; Commercial General (CG) Category LAND USE: PROPERTY SIZE: 1.45 acres PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Vacant (31 attached dwellings approved by CDB on October 19, 2004 - FLD2004-06042) Proposed Use: Multi-use dock for eight boat slips in conjunction with attached dwellings ADJACENT ZONING/ North: Commercial and Medium Density Residential Districts; LAND USES: Retail sales and services and attached dwellings East: Commercial District; Restaurant South: Preservation District; Water West: Commercial District; Vacant and Clearwater Marine Aquarium CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY: The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public 'docks surrounding the Aquarium. Staff Report -Community Development Board -April 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 1 of 10 ~ • UPDATE: At their meeting on March 21, 2006, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the April 18, 2006, agenda in order to address the legal issues of the submerged land and proposed conditions of approval. ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 1.45-acre site is located on the south side of Windward Passage, approximately 300 feet west of Island Way. The site was previously developed with a boat yard. On October 19, 2004, the Community Development Board approved a request to construct 31 attached dwellings on this property (FLD2004-06042). All existing upland improvements have been demolished in anticipation of the construction of the building and site improvements for the 31 attached dwellings. A building permit was issued on February 8, 2006, to construct the site improvements (BCP2005-02671) for the condominiums. There exist docks on the property consisting of 1,325 square feet and 12 wet slips. The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are' located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public docks surrounding the Aquarium. There is aCity-operated, commercial dock (nine slips) located directly to the east at 20 Island Way (Island Way, Grill), approved by the Community Development Board on May 20, 2003 (FLD2003-03013). The unstaffed dock is available on a first come/first served basis and is free to the public (no overnight mooring). There were seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor up to five vessels, which existed for the prior boat repair business that operated from the subject property but were removed when the public docks were installed. Proposal: Section 3-601.C.3 requires docks over 500 square feet in area (in association with a multi-family development or condominium) be treated as a commercial dock and be approved as part of a Level Two, Flexible Development review. The applicant seeks to remove the existing docks and slips in order to construct new docks consisting of 1,818 square feet and eight boat slips. The seven mooring buoys in the open water that were for the prior business on this property have already been removed, as they are no longer necessary, which represents a net improvement to the marine environment. The proposed dock will be constructed with a floating platform for the main eight-foot wide access platform parallel with the seawall and the catwalks. In order to have at least three feet of water depth at mean low water for moored boats, a ramp will connect the dock platform with the upland/seawall. The main platform will be 22 feet from the seawall. Three of the catwalks will be 36 feet in length for six of the slips and the westernmost catwalk will be 23 feet in length for the other two slips. The catwalk and slip length on the western side is shorter due to the existing public slips at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and to accommodate the boat ramp in the corner. Tie poles are proposed on the east side of the property at a one-foot setback, meeting Code requirements. The dock on the east side is proposed 1.5 feet from the east property line. A minimum side setback of 22.4 feet is required for the docks/catwalks. The reduced setback is to the main platform of the dock, which is used as an area for dock boxes, electric pedestals, fire extinguishers and hose racks. The reduction on the east side is a function of providing adequate vessel maneuvering area for the existing docks and the boat ramp to the ,west at the Clearwater Staff Report -Community Development Board -April 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 2 of 10 • • Marine Aquarium, thereby pushing the docks eastward. The proposed .west side setback is 81.5 feet, greatly exceeding the required minimum setback of 22.4 feet. The adjacent property owner to the east has submitted a letter of no objection to the proposed reduced side (east) setback. The public docks to the east at the Island Way Grill were approved at a 23-foot west side setback, meeting the required setback of 22.9 feet. Most slips are 18 feet wide, but slip 7 is 15.5 feet in width. Code dock provisions limit the width of docks to a maximum of 75 percent of the lot width (224 feet), or 168 feet in this case. The proposed overall dock width is 63.3 percent of the lot width (141.8 feet). Code provisions restrict dock length to a maximum of 75 percent of the lot width (168 feet). The longest catwalks are proposed to be 92 feet in length from the seawall (41 percent of the lot width). The dock length of 92 feet is also less than the 25 percent of the waterway width (99.5 feet). While not consistent with existing, older and shorter docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium, the proposed docks are consistent with newer docks required to meet today's Codes, wherein the length takes into account the water depth at mean low water and sea grasses (if any). There are no issues regarding navigation with the proposal and the other criteria for docks have been met. An issue with this proposal is that the submerged lands upon which the docks will be constructed are owned by the City of Clearwater. The City received the submerged lands by deed from the State in 1925, but it included a "reverter clause," whereby the ownership of the submerged lands is to revert back to the State if the submerged lands are not used for the public good. The submerged lands deeded to the City in 1925 cover a very large area, including the area projected for a downtown public marina. From a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger any reverter clause, other than the submerged land area immediately adjacent to the upland application parcel. Any approval of the request should include a condition where there would be no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application unless and until the City receives sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. As an alternative, should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subj ect ~ submerged land parcel, then Staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council. Prior to such action by City Council, the applicant will need to submit a survey describing the submerged land area adjacent to the upland application parcel which is to be reverted. The applicant is proposing to reconstruct a boat ramp on the western portion of the property. This ramp was used in conjunction with the boat works operation previously on the property and is used by the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to load and unload injured mammals with a forklift. The applicant has committed to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to replace the existing forklift load out ramp. Use of this reconstructed boat ramp should be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, but is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp, as there are parking and other issues for such latter use. The applicant has submitted the proposed docks to the Army Corp of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). The issue of the reverter clause is under Staff Report -Community Development Board -April 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 3 of 10 • • discussion and negotiation with the State. When the submerged lands are sovereign (State- owned), SWFWMD requires the docks to be designed to the requirements for docks within an Aquatic Preserve. The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulations contain a State lands preemption requirement that the area of submerged lands cannot exceed 30 times the linear feet of shoreline bordering sovereign lands. The preemption area for this site is 6,720 square feet, which must include the entire "footprint" of the mooring facility (including the area where the boats moor). The proposed dock design being presented to the CDB with this application is based on the submerged land being owned by the City, wherein the preemption restriction is not applicable. However, in the event the reverter is triggered, then the preemption restriction will be in effect. The proposed dock design "footprint" being presented to the CDB represents 10,142 square feet, which is well in excess of the preemption area of 6,720 square feet. However, the "footprint" must also include the 805 square feet of the boat ramp (see above). Therefore, the imposition of the preemption limit restricts the dock area to 5,907 square feet. The applicant has submitted an alternative dock design if the preemption limitation is applicable which reduces the number of slips to five and the slip sizes are smaller. This is just one example of a~ alternative dock design that will comply with the preemption limitation. The applicant is requesting "flexibilit}~' within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB review so long as it meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted with this application, does not extend beyond the 25 percent of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium. The building permit to construct the site improvements for the condorriinium project does not provide utility extensions for required fire risers for the proposed dock. Either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-02671) or a separate utility permit application to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock must be submitted to the Development Services Department prior to the Planning Department signing off on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the fire riser permit must be finalized. Dock supported signage will need to be permanently installed warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site. Staff Report -Community Development Board -April 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 4 of 10 • • COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: Section 3-601.C.3 STANDARD PERMITTED PROPOSED CONSISTENT INCONSISTENT / , REQUIRED MAXIMUM 24 dwelling 31 dwelling units X DENSITY units per acre (approved) 34 units IMPERVIOUS 0.95 0.79 (approved) X SURFACE RATIO ISR SETBACKS 10 percent of East: 1.5 feet X* (minimum) the width of West: 81.5 feet the property ' (22.4 feet LENGTH (maximum) 75 percent of 92 feet X the width of the property , 168 feet WIDTH (maximum) 75 percent of 141.8 feet X the width of the property (168 feet * Reduction requested on east side. Staff Report -Community Development Board -April 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 5 of 10 ' • • CnMPi,iANCF, WITH Fi,F,XiRiLiTY CRITERIA (Section 3-601.C.31: Consistent Inconsistent 1. The proposed dock shall be subordinate to and contribute to the X comfort, convenience or necessities of the users or the occupants of the rinci al use of the ro ert . 2. The proposed dock shall be in harmony with the scale and character of X adjacent ro erties and the nei hborhood in eneral. 3. The proposed dock shall be compatible with dock patterns iri the X eneral vicinit . 4. Impacts on Existing Water Recreation Activities. The use of the X proposed dock shall not adversely impact the health, safety orwell being of persons currently using the adjacent waterways for recreational and/or commercial uses. Furthermore, it shall not hinder or discourage the existing uses of the adjacent waterway by uses includin but not limited to non-motorized boats and motorized boats. 5. Impacts on Navigation. The existence and use of the proposed dock X shall not have a detrimental effect on the use of adjacent waters for navi ation, trans ortation, recreational or other ublic conveniences. 6. Docks shall be sited to ensure that boat access routes avoid injury to X marine assbeds or other a uatic resources in the surroundin areals. 7. Docks shall not have an adverse impact upon natural marine habitats, X grass flats suitable as nursery feeding grounds for marine life, or established marine soil suitable for producing plant growth of a type useful as nursery or feeding grounds for marine life; manatee sanctuaries; natural reefs and any such artificial reef which has developed an associated flora and fauna which have been determined to be approaching a typical natural assemblage structure in both density and diversity; oyster beds; clam beds; known sea turtle nesting site; commercial or sport fisheries or shell fisheries areas; and habitats desirable as 'uvenile fish habitat. 8. All turning basin, access channels, boat mooring areas and any other X area associated with a dock shall have adequate circulation and existing water depths to ensure that a minimum of a one foot clearance is provided between the lowest member of a vessel (e.g. skegs, rudder, prop) and the bottom of the water body at mean or ordinary low water -0.95 NGVD datum . 9. The dock shall not effectively cause erosion, extraordinary storm X drainage, shoaling of channels, or adversely affect the water quality presently existing in the area or limit progress that is being made toward improvement of water quality in the area in which the dock is ro osed to be located. 10. The dock shall not have a material adverse impact upon the X conservation of wildlife, marine life, and other natural resources, including beaches and shores, so as to be contrary to the public interest. ~ Staff Report -Community Development Board -April 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 6 of 10 • • Consistent Inconsistent 11. The dock shall not have an adverse impact on vegetated areas; X vegetative, terrestrial, or aquatic habitats critical to the support of listed species providing one or more of the requirements to sustain their existence, such as range, nesting or feeding grounds; habitats which display biological or physical attributes which would serve to make them rare within the confines of the City; designated preservation areas such as those identified in the comprehensive jland use plan, national wildlife refuges, Florida outstanding waters or other desi ated reservation areas, and bird sanctuaries. 12. Impacts on Wetlands Habitat/Uplands. The dock shall not have a X material adverse affect u on the u lands surroundin . *See discussion under Analysis. f'(IMPT.iANfF. WTTA f_F,NF.RAT, CTANnART)C (CP.(`tinn ~-91~1~ 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 workin in the nei hborhood. 4. Develo ment is desi ed to minimize traffic con estion. X 5. Development is consistent with the community character of the X immediate vicinit . 6. Design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, X including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on ad~acent ro erties. *See discussion under Analysis. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject 1.45 acres is zoned Commercial (C) District; 2. The upland has been approved to permit 31 attached dwellings, which is currently under construction; 3. Seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor up to five vessels, that were connected to the prior business on this parcel have already been removed, representing a net improvement to the marine environment; j 4. The proposal is to remove the existing docks with 12 slips and permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips; 5. The proposed dock complies with maximum dock width and maximum dock length requirements of the Code; Staff Report -Community Development Board -April 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 7 of 10 • • 6. The proposal includes a reduction to the minimum side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet; 7. The reduced east side setback is due to the need to provide ingress/egress for vessels moored at the public docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to the west of the subject property; 8. The abutting property owner to the east has submitted a letter indicating he does not oppose this request; 9. There will be no adverse impact upon the recreational or commercial use of the waterway and the dock does not impose any navigational hazards; 10. Fire protection is required for these docks, which must be permitted prior to or in conjunction with the dock construction; 11. The submerged lands upon which these docks are proposed are owned by the City of Clearwater, which was deeded to the City 1925. Such deed includes a "reverter clause," which from a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger with any approval of this request. Sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity are necessary should this request be approved; or in the alternative should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the Staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council; 12. In order to meet potential SWFWMD preemption regulations, the applicant is requesting "flexibility" within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB approval, as so long as it meets certain guidelines; and 13. There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ' 1. Staff concludes that the proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria of Section 3-601; ~ 2. Staff further concludes that the proposal is in compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913; and 3. Based on the above findings and the proposed conditions, Staff recommends approval of this application. ~ SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on November 3, 2005. The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for' eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for the site at 279 Windward Passage, with the following bases and conditions: Staff Report -Community Development Board -April 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 8 of 10 • • Bases for Approval: 1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria under' the provisions of Section 3-601. 2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general applicability criteria per Section 3-913. 3. The dock development is compatible with the surrounding area. Conditions of Approval: 1. That no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application be issued unless and until the City receives sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity, or in the alternative, should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) results in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the City Council may release, at their sole discretion, the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Prior to any such action by the City Council, the applicant shall submit a survey describing the submerged land area adjacent to the upland application parcel which is to be reverted; 2. That this approval includes the ability to administratively modify the submitted design with Planning Department review and concurrence [without additional review and approval by the Community Development Board (CDB)] so long as the revised design meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted with this request, does not extend beyond the 25 percent of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium; 3. 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; 4. That use of the reconstructed boat ramp in the southwest corner be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, and is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp. Access to such boat ramp shall be restricted though measures deemed acceptable to the Planning Department and shown as a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005- 02671); 5. That dock-supported signage be permanently installed containing wording warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity; 6. That a copy of the SWFWMD and/or FDEP Permit, Corps of Engineer's Permit and proof of permission to use State submerged land, if applicable, be submitted to the Planning Department prior to commencement of construction; and 7. That either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-02671), or a separate utility permit application, to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock be submitted to the Development Services Department prior to the Planning Department signoff on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the permit for the fire risers must be finalized. Staff Report -Community Development Board -April 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 9 of 10 • Prepared by: Planning Department Staff: ATTACHMENTS: Location Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Existing Surrounding Uses Map Application • Wayne M Wells, AICP, Planner III S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cased Up for the next CDB( Windward Passage 279 Harbour Watch Docks (C) - 4.18.06 CDB -WWI Windward Passage 279 Staff Report for 4.18.06 CDB. doc Staff Report -Community Development Board -April 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 10 of 10 • ~ Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Nick Fri [natbeach@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 10:43 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: 279 Windward Passage Wayne, I'm late expressing this, but I have a concern which I will voice today that I am not comfortable in approving an plan that is not fully defined. While some may view this as OK, what is the impact of this as a precedent? Remembering the recent Dr's. office on McMullen Booth........ it can be overly intensive on staff and board time. Nick 4/18/2006 • • ~ Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Akin, Pam Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 1:04 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Brumback, Garry Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch I just spoke to Joe Gaynor on the phone. I believe he agrees that only Council has tl~e authority to donate the submerged land back to the state. He wants to go to Council first. I told him briefly about the Charter requirements for declaring land surplus and finding a public purpose for the donation'. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 9:19 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Akin, Pam; Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne; 'ggrimes@hwhlaw.com' Subject: FW: Harbour Watch Importance: High Joe, the "sole discretion" language was inserted at the direction of the City Attorney and will remain unless I receive other direction. The City Council would have to approve a property conveyance in any case; the CDB does not have the authority to issue such an approval. Our office therefore never recommends a condition that would require the City 'Council to take some future action. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 7:38 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com'; Dougall-Sides, Leslie ' Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.orgtidewaterre@verizon.net; hamptoninv@aol,com.; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.comwayne.wells@myclearwater.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org (tidewaterre@verizon.net; hamptoninv@aol.com.; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Joe - Just for the record so it is clear, since the upland use was requested to be changed from boat repair to attached dwellings AND there was no request for a marina at this property (wherein additional parking would have been required) AND since the existing docks were proposed to remain (presumably for the attached dwelling usage), the use of the docks would therefore be required to be accessory to the attached dwellings. Hence, Staff routinely includes as a standard condition of approval irti these types of requests the restriction that the docks be used by condominium residents or guests only. In these scenarios, Staff and the CDB are not looking at the docks and who owns the submerged land, bUt rather are focused at the change of use of the upland property and conformance with Code provisions. Normally, a request for the tearing down of the existing docks and the construction of new docks lags behirid the a request to change to the upland use. It is unusual that a request for new docks is applied for at the same time as the request to change the use of the upland. Wayne -----Original Message----- ' From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 5:51 PM 4/11/2006 • • Page 2 of 2 To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Wells, Wayne; billwoods@woodsconsulting.orgtidewaterre@verizon.net; hamptoninv@aol.com.; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.comwayne.wells@myclearwater.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org(tidewaterre@verizon.net; hamptoninv@aol.com.; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com Subject: Harbour Watch ' Now that we know the position that the State is taking, I went back and reviewed the proposed language for the CDB and realized that under the present language we would have to go back again to the CDB to get the deed since you have added the City"may release in their sole discretion" the parcel, where I believed the City "would deed back the property if got from the State that the balance of the submerged land would not be affected. Which I have done.So I believe the stipulation should state that the City will deed back the parcel as a donation as requested in Jim Stoutamire's a-mail. I want to make sure CDB understands that we relied on the 1958 Declaration when we did our due diligence since in 2001 the City issued me a letter confirming that the 1958 document allowed docks and that letter was updated again by the City before Opus took over the project as part of their due diligence.The data was confirmed when I got 11 permits to build docks west of this property and again confirmed when the CDB approved our site plan subject to making the slips exclusive to the residents.The City's authority was never raised at that hearing or in the stipulation. At that time we had all of the permits that are needed from the City to rebuild the existing docks,so I hope the CDB would see that giving the bottom land back to the State solves a lot of problems with no loss to the City. 4/11/2006 ~. ~ • • Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 2:08 PM To: Wells, Wayne; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Sorry to not have gotten back to you sooner. Everything looks good to me. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:59 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Lipowski, Laura Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Yes, I will change that language in the Staff Report to reflect this discussion/negotiation. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:56 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Wayne, are you able to amend Staff Report to indicate that the matte is under discussion/negotiation instead of making statement of State ownership? -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:42 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch On Wayne's staff report, I am a little uncomfortable that it states that SWFMD considers the property to be sovereign (which would mean the reverter had been triggered). I have not received documentation to the effect. In passing I believe Mr. Gaynor has stated that, but the SWFMD letter I have from October 2005 actually asks the applicant to produce documentation as to ownership SWFMD does not draw a conclusion in that letter. In addition, Mr. Gaynor had stated in my most recent conversationlthat SWFMD retracted whatever statement had been made to him to that effect. I don't know that we want to include that statement in the staff report - (it may be confused going forward to be a valid conclusion of some sort.) Wayne is probably only repeating what has been represented to him. I'm not sure. ' -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:33 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Importance: High 4/6/2006 ~. ~ • Page 2 of 2 Here is our suggested language for Condition 1. Underlined language is new. Condition 2. re owner approval would remain as is. The submerged lands upon which these docks are proposed are owned by the City of Clearwater, which was deeded to the City 1925. Such deed includes a "reverter clause," which from a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger with any approval of this request. Sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity are necessary should this request be approved; or in the alternative should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council. -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 9:50 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Wells, Wayne Subject: Harbour Watch I am leaving for our meeting with Wayne at 10:45 AM at his office if you can a-mail your changes to Wayne and me -I can read them while I am there-Thanks 4/6/2006 • • Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 12:07 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Wayne, it looks good. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne i Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 4:32 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Watkins, Sherry Subject: FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Leslie/Laura - I have revised the Staff Report in light of the emails I have received and the discussions we have had, today or in the past, for the above referenced project. Could you take a quick look at it and make sure that I have said things properly, either in the Analysis, Findings of Fact or Conditions sections. Since the packages are going out to the CDB tomorrow (I think late morning), could you do such as soon as possible. Thanks. Wayne « File: Windward Passage 279 Staff Report for 4.18.06 CDB.doc » i 1 ~ ~ .~ • • Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:59 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Lipowski, Laura Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Yes, I will change that language in the Staff Report to reflect this discussion/negotiation. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:56 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Wayne, are you able to amend Staff Report to indicate that the matte is under discussion/negotiation instead of making statement of State ownership? ~ -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:42 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch On Wayne's staff report, I am a little uncomfortable that it states that SWFMD considers the property to be sovereign (which would mean the reverter had been triggered). I have not received documentation to the effect. In passing I believe Mr. Gaynor has stated that, but the SWFMD letter I have from October 2005 actually asks the applicant to produce documentation as to ownership SWFMD does not draw a conclusion in that letter. In addition, Mr. Gaynor had stated in my most recent conversation that SWFMD retracted whatever statement had been made to him to that effect. I don't know that we want to include that statement in the staff report - (it may be confused going forward to be a valid conclusion of some sort.) Wayne is probably only repeating what has been represented to him. I'm not sure. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:33 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Importance: High Here is our suggested language for Condition 1. Underlined language is new. Condition 2. re owner approval would remain as is. The submerged lands upon which these docks are proposed are owned by the City of Clearwater, which was deeded to the City 1925. Such deed includes a "reverter clause," which from a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger with any approval of this request. Sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will 4/5/2006 ~ ; • • Page 2 of 2 not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity are necessary should this request be approved; or in the alternative should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council. -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 9:50 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Wells, Wayne Subject: Harbour Watch I am leaving for our meeting with Wayne at 10:45 AM at his office if you can e- mail your changes to Wayne and me -I can read them while I am there-Thanks 4/5/2006 . ~ • ~ Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 11:47 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: FW: Harbour Watch Importance: High Per our meeting with Messrs. Gaynor and Wood: 1. Delete Condition No. 2, since proof of ownership/lease/site control will be required,by permit condition per City policy; 2. Reword below language to delete narrative, leaving condition-type wording beginning with "Sufficient assurances..." -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:43 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch This is the language suggested by Mr. Gaynor, which reads as narrative, but has been approved by CA with underlined changes, so it would be the actual language for Condition 1. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:38 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Is this narrative to be included in the Analysis section of the Staff Report, which would then be translated into a Condition 1, or is this the actual language for Condition 1? This reads as narrative language. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:33 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Importance: High Here is our suggested language for Condition 1. Underlined language is new. Condition 2. re owner approval would remain as is. The submerged lands upon which these docks are proposed are owned by the City of Clearwater, which was deeded to the City 1925. Such deed includes a "reverter clause," which from a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger with any approval of this request. Sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the~~ State of Florida or 4/6/2006 ~ ~ • ~ Page 2 of 2 other entity are necessary should this request be approved; or in the alternative should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council. -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 9:50 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Wells, Wayne Subject: Harbour Watch I am leaving for our meeting with Wayne at 10:45 AM at his office if you can a-mail your changes to Wayne and me -I can read them while I am there-Thanks 4/6/2006 . • Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:43 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch This is the language suggested by Mr. Gaynor, which reads as narrative, but has been approved by CA with underlined changes, so it would be the actual language for Condition 1. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:38 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Is this narrative to be included in the Analysis section of the Staff Report, which would then be translated into a Condition 1, or is this the actual language for Condition 1? This reads as narrative language. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:33 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Importance: High Here is our suggested language for Condition 1. Underlined language is new. Condition 2. re owner approval would remain as is. The submerged lands upon which these docks are proposed are owned by the City of Clearwater, which was deeded to the City 1925. Such deed includes a "reverter clause," which from a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger with any approval of this request. Sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity are necessary should this request be approved;' or in the alternative should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of F~orida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council. -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 9:50 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Wells, Wayne Subject: Harbour Watch 4/5/2006 i ~ ~ Page 2 of 2 I am leaving for our meeting with Wayne at 10:45 AM at his office if you can a-mail your changes to Wayne and me -I can read them while I am there-Thanks 4/5/2006 ~ • Wells, Wayne From: Morris, William D. Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 1:32 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REVIEW He probably left it in there from when he wrote up the installation of the public docks permitting as it makes it sound like we are taking more boats out and allowing easier access. Bill M -----Original Message----- From: .Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 1:27 PM To: Morris, William D. Subject: RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REVIEW Bill - It was mentioned as such in the Staff Report because Bill Woods indicated it as such. I was unaware of the removal as part of the public docks at the Island Way Grill. With the Staff Report for the April 18, 2006, CDB agenda, I will make necessary corrections. Thanks for the information. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Morris, William D. Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 1:24 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REVIEW « File: Windward Passage 279 Staff Report for 3.21.06 CDB highlighted.doc» Wayne, first I had seen this, it mentions the mooring buoys which were removed to make room for safe passage in and out of the public docks. I highlighted the sections, just to make them stand out, not sure who wrote the item. I personally do not have a problem with any of the language and am not opposed to the docks. Environmentally they create significantly less environmental stress and boat traffic than the commercial boat yard (Ross Yachts) did. Bill M r Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 1:27 PM To: Morris, William D. Subject: RE: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REVIEW Bill - Itwas mentioned as such in the Staff Report because Bill Woods indicated it ~as such. I was unaware of the removal as part of the public docks at the Island Way Grill. With the Staff Report for the April 18, 2006, CDB agenda, I will make necessary corrections. Thanks for the information. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Morris, William D. Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 1:24 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REVIEW « File: Windward Passage 279 Staff Report for 3.21.06 CDB highlighted.doc » Wayne, first I had seen this, it mentions the mooring buoys which were removed to make room for safe passage in and out of the public docks. I highlighted the sections, just to make them stand out, not sure who wrote the item. I personally do not have a problem with any of the language and am not opposed to the docks. Environmentally they create significantly less environmental stress and boat traffic than the commercial boat yard (Ross Yachts) did. Bill M - • • Case FLD2005-09093 Amended Condition Amend Condition 1. to read as follows: 1. That no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application be issued unless and until the City receives, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney's Office, the following: a. sufficient assurances that such signoff will not result in reverter of submerged land, other than the submerged land area immediately adjacent to the upland application parcel, to the State of Florida or other entity; b. a survey describing the submerged land area immediately adjacent to the upland application parcel which is to be reverted; and c. approval of the City Council for such reverter to the State of Florida or other entity. CDB Meeting Date: Case Number: Agenda Item: Owner/Applicant: Representative: Address: i March 21, 2006 FLD2005-09093 E1 Harbour Estates, LLC Bill Woods/Terri Ska~ik, Woods Consulting, Inc. 279 Windward Passage CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: cR~cir~ai_ REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi- use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a re- duction to the side (east) setback from 22.4, feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601. EXISTING ZONING/ Commercial (C) District; Commercial General (CG) Category LAND USE: PROPERTY SIZE: 1.45 acres PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Vacant (31 attached dwellings approved by CDB on October 19, 2004 - FLD2004-06042) Proposed Use: Multi-use dock for eight boat slips in conjunction with attached dwellings ADJACENT ZONING/ North: Commercial and Medium Density Residential Districts; LAND USES: Retail sales and services and attached dwellings East: Commercial District; Restaurant South: Preservation District; Water West: Commercial District; Vacant and Clearwater Marine Aquarium CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY: The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public docks surrounding the Aquarium. Staff Report -Community Development Board -March 21, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 1 of 8 • • ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 1.45-acre site is located on the south side of Windward Passage, approximately 300 feet west of Island Way. The site was previously developed with a boat yard. On October 19, 2004, the Community Development Board approved a request to construct 31 attached dwellings on this property (FLD2004-06042). All existing upland improvements have been demolished in anticipation of the construction of the building and site improvements for the 31 attached dwellings. A building permit was issued on February 8, 2006, to construct the site improvements (BCP2005-02671) for the condominiums. There exist docks on the property consisting of 1,325 square feet and 12 wet slips. The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public docks surrounding the Aquarium. There is aCity-operated, commercial dock (nine slips) located directly to the east at 20 Island Way (Island Way Grill), approved by the Community Development Board on May 20, 2003 (FLD2003-03013). The unstaffed dock is available on a first come/first served basis and is free to the public (no overnight mooring). There are also seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor up to five vessels, which existed for the prior boat repair business that operated from the subject property. Proposal: Section 3-601.C.3 requires docks over 500 square feet in area (in association with a multi-family development or condominium) be treated as a commercial dock and be approved as part of a Level Two, Flexible Development review. The applicant seeks to remove the existing docks and slips in order to construct new docks consisting of 1,818 square feet and eight boat slips. The seven mooring buoys in the open water will also be removed, as they are no longer necessary, which represents a net improvement to the marine environment. The proposed dock will be constructed with a floating platform for the main eight-foot wide access platform parallel with the seawall and the catwalks. In order to have at least three feet of water depth at mean low water for moored boats, a ramp will connect the dock platform with the upland/seawall. The main platform will be 22 feet from the seawall. Three of the catwalks will be 36 feet in length for six of the slips and the westernmost catwalk will be 23 feet in length for the other two slips. The catwalk and slip length on the western side is shorter due to the existing public slips at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and to accommodate the boat ramp in the corner. Tie poles are proposed on the east side of the property at a one-foot setback, meeting Code requirements. The dock on the east side is proposed 1.5 feet from the east property line. A minimum side setback of 22.4 feet is required for the docks/catwalks. The reduced setback is to the main platform of the dock, which is used as an area for dock boxes, electric pedestals, fire extinguishers and hose racks. The reduction on the east side is a function of providing adequate vessel maneuvering area for the existing docks and the boat ramp to the west at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium, thereby pushing the docks eastward. The proposed west side setback is 81.5 feet, greatly exceeding the required minimum setback of 22.4 feet. The adjacent property owner to the east has submitted a letter of no objection to the proposed reduced side (east) setback. The public docks to the east at the Island Way Grill were approved at a 23-foot west side setback, meeting the required setback of 22.9 feet. Most slips are 18 feet wide!, but slip 7 is 15.5 feet in width. Code dock provisions limit the width of docks to a maximum of 75 percent of the lot width Staff Report -Community Development Board -March 21, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 2 of 8 • • (224 feet), or 168 feet in this case. The proposed overall dock width is 63.3 percent of the lot width (141.8 feet). Code provisions restrict dock length to a maximum' of 75 percent of the lot width (168 feet). The longest catwalks are proposed to be 92 feet in length from the seawall (41 percent of the lot width). The dock length of 92 feet is also less than the 25 percent of the waterway width. (99.5 feet). While not consistent with existing, older and shorter docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium, the proposed docks are consistent with newer docks required to meet today's Codes, wherein the length takes into account the water depth at mean lot water and sea grasses (if any). There are no issues regarding navigation with the proposal and the other criteria for docks have been met. An issue with this proposal is that the submerged lands upon which the docks will be constructed are owned by the City of Clearwater. The City received the submerged lands by deed from the State in 1925, but it included a "reverter clause," whereby the ownership of the submerged lands is to revert back to the State if the submerged lands are not used for the public good. The submerged lands deeded to the City in 1925 cover a very large area, including the area projected for a downtown public marina. From a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger any reverter clause. Any approval of the request should include a condition where there would be no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application unless and until the City receives, to . the satisfaction of the City Attorney's Office, sufficient assurances that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. The applicant is proposing to rebuild a boat ramp on the western portion of the property. This ramp was used in conjunction with the boat works operation previously on the property and is used by the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to load and unload injured mammals with a forklift. The applicant has committed to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to replace the existing forklift load out ramp. Use of this reconstructed boat ramp should be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, but is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp, as there are parking and other issues for such latter use. The applicant has submitted the proposed docks to the Army Corp of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). SWFWMD considers the submerged lands to be sovereign (State-owned) lands and requires the docks to be designed to the requirements for docks located on sovereign lands within an Aquatic Preserve. The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulations contain a State lands preemption requirement that the area of submerged lands cannot exceed 30 times the linear feet of shoreline bordering sovereign lands. The preemption area for this site is 6,720 square feet, which must include the entire "footprint" of the mooring facility (including the area where the boats moor). The proposed dock design being presented to the CDB with this application is based on the assumption ,that the City, wherein the preemption restriction is not applicable, owns the submerged lands. The proposed dock design "footprint" being presented to the CDB represents 10,142 square feet, which is well in excess of the preemption area of 6,720 square feet. However, the "footprint" must also include the 805 square feet of the boat ramp (see above). Therefore, the imposition of the preemption limit restricts the dock area to 5,907 square feet. The applicant has submitted an alternative dock design if the preemption limitation is applicable which reduces the number of slips to five and the slip sizes are smaller. This is just one example of an alternative dock design that will comply with the Staff Report -Community Development Board -March 21, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 3 of 8 ' • • preemption limitation. The applicant is requesting "flexibility" within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB review so long as, it meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted, does not extend beyond the 25 percent of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium. The building permit to construct the site improvements for the condominium project does not provide utility extensions for required fire risers for the proposed dock. Either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-02671) or a separate utility permit application to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock must be submitted to the Development Services Department prior to the Planning Department signing off on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the fire riser permit must be finalized. Dock supported signage will need to be permanently installed warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: (Section 3-601.C.3): STANDARD PERMITTED PROPOSED CONSISTENT INCONSISTENT REQUIRED MAXIMUM 24 dwelling 31 dwelling units X DENSITY units per acre (approved) (34 units) IMPERVIOUS 0.95 0.79 (approved) X SURFACE RATIO (ISR) SETBACKS 10 percent of East: 1.5 feet ' X* (minimum) the width of West: 81.5 feet the property (22.4 feet) LENGTH (maximum) 75 percent of 92 feet X the width of the property (168 feet) WIDTH (maximum) 75 percent of 141.8 feet X the width of the property (168 feet) * Reduction requested on east side. Staff Report -Community Development Board -March 21, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 4 of 8 • • COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA (Section 3-601.C.~): Consistent Inconsistent 1. The proposed dock shall be subordinate to and contribute to the X comfort, convenience or necessities of the users or the occupants of the rind al use of the ro erty. 2. The proposed dock shall be in harmony with the scale and character of X adjacent ro erties and the neighborhood in general. 3. The proposed dock shall be compatible with dock patterns in the X general vicinity. 4. Impacts on Existing Water Recreation Activities. The use of the X proposed dock shall not adversely impact the health, safety or well being of persons currently using the adjacent waterways' for recreational and/or commercial uses. Furthermore, it shall not hinder or discourage the existing uses of the adjacent waterway by uses including but not limited to non-motorized boats and motorized boats. 5. Impacts on Navigation. The existence and use of the proposed dock X shall not have a detrimental effect on the use of adjacent waters for navigation, trans ortation, recreational or other ublic conveniences. 6. Docks shall be sited to ensure that boat access routes avoid injury to X marine grassbeds or other aquatic resources in the surrounding areas. 7. Docks shall not have an adverse impact upon natural marine habitats, X grass flats suitable as nursery feeding grounds for marine life, or established marine soil suitable for producing plant growth of a type useful as nursery or feeding grounds for marine life; manatee sanctuaries; natural reefs and any such artificial reef which has developed an associated flora and fauna which have been determined to be approaching a typical natural assemblage structure in both density and diversity; oyster beds; clam beds; known sea turtle nesting site; commercial or sport fisheries or shell fisheries areas; and habitats desirable as 'uvenile fish habitat. 8. All turning basin, access channels, boat mooring areas and any other X area associated with a dock shall have adequate circulation and existing water depths to ensure that a minimum of a one foot clearance is provided between the lowest member of a vessel (e.g. skegs, rudder, prop) and the bottom of the water body at mean or ordinary low water (-0.95 NGVD datum). 9. The dock shall not effectively cause erosion, extraordinary storm X drainage, shoaling of channels, or adversely affect the water quality presently existing in the area or limit progress that is being made toward improvement of water quality in the area in which the dock is ro osed to be located. 10. The dock shall not have a material adverse impact upon the X conservation of wildlife, marine life, and other natural resources, including beaches and shores, so as to be contrary to the public interest. Staff Report -Community Development Board -March 21, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 5 of 8 • Consistent Inconsistent 11. The dock shall not have an adverse impact on vegetated areas; X vegetative, terrestrial, or aquatic habitats critical to the support of listed species providing one or more of the requirements to sustain their existence, such as range, nesting or feeding grounds; habitats which display biological or physical attributes which would serve to make them rare within the confines of the City; designated preservation areas such as those identified in the comprehensive land use plan, national wildlife refuges, Florida outstanding waters or other designated reservation areas, and bird sanctuaries. 12. Impacts on Wetlands Habitat/Uplands. The .dock shall not halve a X material adverse affect u on the u lands surroundin ' *See discussion under Analysis. ('nMPT,TAN('F WTTH GFNF.RAT. STANDARDS (Section 3-9131: 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 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 ad~acent ro erties. *See discussion under Analysis. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject 1.45 acres is zoned Commercial (C) District; 2. The upland has been approved to permit 31 attached dwellings,. which is currently under construction; 3. The proposal includes the removal of the existing docks with 12 slips and the removal of the seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor up to five vessels; 4. The proposal is to remove the existing docks and permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips; 5. The proposed dock complies with maximum dock width and maximum dock length requirements of the Code; Staff Report -Community Development Board -March 21, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 6 of 8 • • 6. The proposal includes a reduction to the minimum side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet; 7. The reduced east side setback is due to the need to provide ingress/egress for vessels moored at the public docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to the west of the subject property; 8. The abutting property owner to the east has submitted a letter indicating he does not oppose this request; 9. There will be no adverse impact upon the recreational or commercial use of the waterway and the dock does not impose any navigational hazards; 10. Fire protection is required for these docks, which must be permitted prior to or in conjunction with the dock construction; 11. The submerged lands upon which these docks are proposed are owned by the City of Clearwater, which was deeded to the City 1925. Such deed includes a "reverter clause," which from a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger with any approval of this request. Sufficient assurances that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity are necessary should this request be approved; 12. In order to meet SWFWMD preemption regulations, the 'I applicant is requesting "flexibility" within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB approval, as so long as it meets certain guidelines; and 13. There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Staff concludes that the proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria of Section 3-601; 2. Staff further concludes that the proposal is in compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913; and 3. Based on the above findings and the proposed conditions, Staff recommends approval of this application. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: ', The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on November 3, 2005. The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for the site at 279 Windward Passage, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria under the provisions of Section 3-601. 2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general applicability criteria per Section 3-913. 3. The dock development is compatible with the surrounding area. Staff Report -Community Development Board -March 21, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 7 of 8 ~ • Conditions of Approval: 1. That no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application be issued unless and until the City receives, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney's Office, sufficient assurances that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity; 2. That no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application be issued by the City unless and until signature of all legal and equitable owners of submerged land parcel(s) proposed for development is obtained by the applicant in accordance with Community Development Code Section 4-202A.2; 3. That this approval includes the ability to administratively modify the submitted design with Planning Department review and concurrence [without additional review and approval by the Community Development Board (CDB)] so long as the revised design meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted with this request, does not extend beyond the 25 percent,of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium; 4. 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; 5. That use of the reconstructed boat ramp in the southwest corner be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, and is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp. Access to such boat ramp shall be restricted though measures deemed acceptable to the Planning Department and shown as a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005- 02671); 6. That dock-supported signage be permanently installed containing wording warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity; 7. That a copy of the SWFWMD and/or FDEP Permit, Corps of Engineer's Permit and proof of permission to use State submerged land, if applicable, be submitted to the Planning Department prior to commencement of construction; and 8. That either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-02671), or a separate utility permit application, to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock be submitted to the Development Services Department prior to the Planning Department signoff on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the permit for the fire risers must be finalized. Prepared by: Planning Department Staff: Wayne .Wells, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Location Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Existing Surrounding Uses Map Application . S: IPinnning DepartmentlCD BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cnseslUp for the next CDBIWindward Passage 279 Harbour Watch Docks (C) - 3.21.06 CDB - WWI Windwnrd Passage 279 Stajf Report for 3.21.06 CDB.doc Staff Report -Community Development Board -March 21; 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 8 of 8 'Y Ci~Rttorney L.c~11r'S U1+' I+'LOIlIll11. 7275f~4b21 to prevent the occupancy- of said bnilcling, structure, or land, or to pz•e~•ecit any illegal act, coitcluct, business, ur, use in or about snclt preittises. See. cJ. G`o1t•~'li~:t 11'it)z Oll~ei• Laws.-1Vltcrerer the regu- lations made under authority of #his Act require a greater rvicltli or size of y*~,•~15, ..v~-rts, or other open spaces, or re- quire a Iower hei;ht of building or less number of stories,. or require a greater percc~ttage of Iot to be left unoccupied, or impose other ltigltcr standards tLan are required in any' other statute or local ordinance or regulation, the provisions of the regulations niadc under authority of this Act shall govern. ~Vhet•ever the• provisions of any other statute or local ordin.anee or regulations rcgttirc a greater width or size of yards, 'courts, or other open spaces, or require a lo~~ cr }teiglit of building or a less number of stories, or require a greater percentage of lot to be left unoccupied, or impose higher stanclai•cls than are requited by the reg- ulations made tinder authority o£ this Act, tltc provis:ons! of such Statute or local ordinance or regulation shall govern. • Sec. 10. '1`hi` Act shall take effect. tlllOtl its passage anti. aPpro~•al by the Governor. Approved Jttne 2, 192. • CIIA:I"1'I+JIt 110:50--{\0. 10~$). Mar 15 06 12:31p AN AC`1' to Autltorizc iutcl Lncottra~;e flit County o£ Pinellas in the State of Florida, to Build and.Dia.intaist a free Bridge anti C:tuse~vtty Acto,~; Clcar~ratcr Bay in the City of Cleat~vater, State of 1+'loriclai, anti to Cxr~tnt the Land I~Tecessar}f for sttcit I'u~posc~::. ~ ~i 1Vltereas, Slmcial ltoatl and 13riclge District No. G of Pinellas County, Florida, has issuccl anti sold bonds o£ said district for tl~e erection of z free briclre anti causeway. from the imainlaitacl in ti-e City of Clearwater to the Island 1Vcst of saiel CitS*, a. distance of about one anti three-guar- te1S 2TIIICS; and 1Vliereas, tits bouttdaries of said Special IZoacl and' Bridge District are ptacticali~• identical «ritlz the botui- dories of the ('ity- of Cleartc~tt.ct~, the said city being etu- braced ~t•holly- ~~-itl,i~t said district; auxl said. bridge aitd' cattsett•ay- Ueitig ~vltol]y `ritl-itt said cite; anti ~3 f!3 r-~--, ci-~~i,, tto:~u. 1J25 .2 Mar 15 06 12:31p Ci~Rttorney p.3 a 3774 r-•~-~ coup. 1100. 1925 LA1VS OI~~ I~~LOIIiDA. 7274021 `'Vlicreas, tlic propert;Y e~nbraced~ in tlae City of Clear- water pays practically nine-tenths of the taxes of said; special road and bridge ciistrict ; and Whereas, full authority has been granted to the County of Pinellas to R~•ect said free bridge and causeway from the ~~'ar Departnt;:;.~ o€ the TJnited States ; ~, 13e It ~~eactcd LTA the Le~islatacre of tlie State of Florida: c•vuF~~nr. Section 1. That in order to secure, encourage and pro- mote the erection and maintenance of said free bridge and causeway by tlic County of Pinnellas across Clearwater Bay, in the City of Clearwater, and County of Pinellas, a strip of the submerged land belonging to the State of Florida, five hundred feet in width, lying and being on' the north side of the following like, to-wit: Commencing at a point 601.65 feet west from the inter- section of the center line of Cleveland Street and Osceola Avenue, according to the map of the City• of Cleazwater, Florida, as of May 1st, 1925 ; thence west 149.5 feel: ; thence follawing the a_rc of an eight degree curve to the ri~Ixt 312.5 feet ; thence north 65 degrees and no minutes west 094.6 feet to the point of a curve thence follow the arc of a one cleeree curve to the right 1400 feet; thence north 51 degrees no ttiinutes «*est 4240.6 feet to the point of a curve; thence follorv the arc of a 5 degree and 30 minute curve to tlic left 808.49 feet; thence south 84 de- green and 32 minutes ~t•est 1538.6 feet to high tide' on Sancl Ivey, said land being in Township 28 Sottth Range I5 East; ~11nc1 also a strip of lane]. seven h~tnclrecl feet.in width lying;,, and being on the south sick of saiu line, be and the saine~ is hereby granted unto the County o£ Pinellas for the pur- pose of erecting, building xncl maintaining said free bridge and causeway. The said county is hereby authorized to enter upon said lands and to excavate, dredge, fill or otherw7se improve the same in such manner as nay be necessary for the nnrPose of building ~n~i mainta2ning sand bridge and causeway; provided that all dredging fori said causeway shall be made and done on and from the' said land on the south side of said line ; and provided further, that this grant shall not affect the riparian rights of the property o«-ners on the. eastern and western ter- mini of said strip ~~€ land; anct proviclecl further, that :;i f 1 . ~ -. -_ K-.~ ~-- i- E I •1 r 6 C ~~ Mar 15 06 12:31p Ci~Rttorney LAWS Oh' I~'LO1t~IDA. 7274021 parties purchasing or otlleri~=isc acquiring the state owned • land abutting said land oll the north and on the south, ~''4 shall have access to said bridge and causeway, and to this end shall have the 1•igllt, under the direction and control of the governing body having jurisdiction of said Iand, to build the neces,~ary streets, roar'.:, bridges, fills any ap- proaches upon anti over said land ;and the owners (present and future) of the Iancl abutting said Iand on the north, the city of Clearwater or the County of Pinellas shall Have the right to fill said land lying Itorth of said line to Jbe used for ~ublic_parks and places of recreation only, the same to be ~alntalned by the said city ol• county, or both. Provided that no carnivals or shows of any ehar.- acter shall be placed or allowed upon the land lying north of said line; and provided further that should said_prop:: erty__ever cease to tie used for~uvlic Lax~ks_ancl__~laces_v~ i~ecreaton_ o~~_samc slistll revel't to the_ State Sec. 2. ~Vdlen said bridge and causeway shall have been completed, or at an~~ time prior thereto that the Board of County Commissioners ~f Pinellas County may determine, the said board shall, by resolution, surrender ---- to the City of Clearwater, 1~'Iorida, concurrent or exclusive supervision and ~tlrl$C11Cti0I1 over and ~ maintenance of said bridge and causeway allcl the grant herein made to the County of Pinellas, shall revel•t to the City of Clear- water and the property herein described and granted shall become the property of the City of Clearwater, to be used • by the said City for public purposes only. Provided that if said property should ever cease to be used for public th same shall revert to the State. 3775 ~~ Chap. I10:~0. 1925 Sec. 3. ti'Polk on said bridge and causeway shall be started within six Ir4onths after this act becomes a la•~v, anti completed on or before July first, ~.. D. 1927. Sec. 4. This Act shall become effective upon its pas- sage and approval by the Governor, or upon its beeolnil~~ a law without such approval. Approved BIa1. 25, 1025. purposes, e .4 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 10:25 AM To: Wells, Wayne . Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: HarbourWatch Importance: High The applicant is requesting a continuance based on my supposed inability. As per my e-mails of yesterday and today I was able to and have drafted language. The language will perhaps be better/more specific if it is fine tuned and the applicant reviews and approves it. If this can happen today, fine. If next month, also fine. But I don't want it represented to the Board that the continuance is "my fault". Thank you for your consideration in this regard. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:57 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Lipowski, Laura Subject: FW: HarbourWatch FYI -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:56 AM' To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Bill Woods (E-mail) Subject: RE: HarbourWatch Joe - I can make your request for continuance known to the CDB today to the Aprill 18, 2006 agenda. Thanks. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:53 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Lipowski, Laura; bill.west@opussouth.comphildog@tampabay.rr.com; Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; HamptonInv@aol.com; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com Subject: HarbourWatch Pam. Leslie and Laura and I have agreed_on the revised stipulation but Leslie will not have time to redraft it prior to today's CDB hearing so I hereby request an extension until the next CDB hearing which I believe to be April 18th. Please confirm by a-mail or call 599-3527 to confirm the extension and that I don't need to attend to make a formal request at the hearing, (however I may go anyway just in case Leslie needs to speak to me). 3/21 /2006 !« f Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:42 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Akin, Pam; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Joe Gaynor will be emailing Wayne Wells asking for a continuance on this item. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:20 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High As we discussed, please call him and ask that he fax or email a written continuance request to Wayne Wells prior to 12:00. -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:17 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Akin, Pam; Thompson, Neil; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Leslie, I just met with Pam. The direction is to describe the parcel immediately adjacent to the upland generally for now - but specific enough to be certain Mr. Gaynor meets the condition. Using the staff report language below which describes the extent of the variance may make sense - I have a call into Wayne to discuss since it is not my area, and I am uncertain on this point. It is also probably prudent to add language that acknowledges that if and when applicant is able to meet the conditions, the adjacent bottomlands will be described in more detail via survey before conveyance and at that time, the City Council will need to approve the transfer. I will call Mr. Gaynor if you'd like. Just let me know. Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:27 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Akin, Pam; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Leslie - The proposal in front of the CDB would allow via Condition #3 an administrative "variance" to that approved by the CDB wherein one part of the condition is that the docks would not extend more than the 25 percent of the waterway width. That 25 percent distance is 99.5 feet (from the seawall). This is discussed on Page 3 of the Staff Report. Don't know if this information helps. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:53 PM To: Akin, Pam; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Thompson, Neil; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report had not written it up that way since there is no separate submerged land parcel and it is difficult to define !~ ~ which area is being addressed. If this is now the direction, I will develop a description such as "the area of submerged land waterward of the upland parcel, bounded by the east property line, the [mean high water line?], the west property line, and a line extending from a line projected waterward of the east property line to a line projected waterward of the west property line and located feet waterward of the mean high water line." [How far out from land does the area go?] Since Engineering and Planning input would be advisable and the conditions will need to be rewritten, I would recommend a continuance. If that is not possible I will draft new language to be read into the record tomorrow. -----Original Message----- From: Akin, Pam Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:39 PM To: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Works for me. Alternatively they can be apart of our fix in 2007 -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:25 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report I just spoke with Joe Gaynor. We are not meeting today. Instead, he has requested that we revise the conditions #3 below to allow for approval as long as the permit issuance will not result in the reverter of the subject submerged lands OTHER THAN THE PARCEL IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO HIS UPLAND - in other words, will not result in reverter of the entire parcel -just the piece where the footprint of his docks are. This way, he can try and negotiate with the State to have that piece released and he can secure a submerged lands lease where the State can make it's $$$. Then, condition # 4 would only be satisfied when the State takes title to that portion back -and he obtains their signature as owner. i Does that make sense? If he needs to pull the item tomorrow and go to the next meeting - he will. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 9:09 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Thanks for the update! -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 3:26 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report FYI - I have spoken with Pam today re: this. She plans to speak personally with Pete Dunbar next week -but is OK with the CDB proceeding as scheduled on Tuesday -with the conditions. I will inform Mr. Gaynor that there is no additional information re: repair v. re- configuration with conditions. Thanks -----Original Message----- i From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 12:08 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina; Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam' Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff. Report After further review, instead of the Dunbar materials mentioned below I am faxing you a copy of Laws of Florida, Ch. 11050, submerged land grant. The reverter language appears on Page 3. Please include in Agenda Packet. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie • Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina; Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High After reviewing the matter with Laura Lipowski, this office's input re submerged land legal issues to be addressed in the Staff Report is as follows: 1. City recommendation of approval with Conditions. 2. Include Standard Conditions. 3. Include Condition previously recommended, namely: That no building permit be issued by the City unless and until the City receives, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney's Office, sufficient assurances that permit issuance will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. 4. Include additional Condition as follows: That no building permit be issued by the City unless and until signature of all legal and equitable owners of submerged land parcel(s) proposed for development is obtained by the applicant in accordance with Community Development Code Section 4-202A.2. Please contact me if you need any further information for the Staff Report. Laura, as we discussed please forward to Wayne any documentation you have received from Pete Dunbar concerning the current submerged lands status, preferably in letter form, for inclusion in the CDB Agenda Packet or if not timely for that, introduction as an Exhibit. • • Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:47 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne Cc: Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report I I think that looks good - (with condition #4 remaining also). -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:42 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch•Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High Wayne: Plan A =Applicant requests a continuance, in writing or verbally. Plan B = If case not continued, read into record Amended Condition 1. [see attached]. If anyone has any changes to the wording please let me know before 1:00. Thanks! « File: Case FLD2005-09093 Amended Condition.doc » -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:27 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Wells, Wayne; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Will do. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:20 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High As we discussed, please call him and ask that he fax or email a written continuance request to Wayne Wells prior to 12:00. -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:17 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Akin, Pam; Thompson, Neil; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Leslie, just met with Pam. The direction is to describe the parcel immediately adjacent to the upland generally for now -but specific enough to be certain Mr. Gaynor meets the condition. Using the staff report language below which describes the extent of the variance may make sense - I have a call into Wayne to discuss since it is not my area, and I am uncertain on this point. It is also probably prudent to add language that acknowledges that if and when applicant is able to meet the conditions, the adjacent bottomlands will be described in more detail via survey before conveyance and at that time, the City Council will need to approve the transfer. I will call Mr. Gaynor if you'd like. Just let me know. • • Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:27 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Akin, Pam; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Leslie - The proposal in front of the CDB would allow via Condition #3 an administrative "variance" to that approved by the CDB wherein one part of the condition is that the docks would not extend more than the 25 percent of the waterway width. That 25 percent distance is 99.5 feet (from the seawall). This is discussed on Page 3 of the Staff Report. Don't know if this information helps. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:53 PM To: Akin, Pam; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Thompson, Neil; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report I had not written it up that way since there is no separate submerged land parcel and it is difficult to define which area is being addressed. If this is now the direction, I will develop a description such as "the area of submerged land waterward of the upland parcel, bounded by the east property line, the [mean high water line?], the west property line,;and a line extending from a line projected waterward of the east property line to a line projected Jvaterward of the west property line and located feet waterward of the mean high water line." [How far out from land does the area go?] Since Engineering and Planning input would be advisable and the conditions will need to be rewritten, I would recommend a continuance. If that is not possible I will draft new language to be read into the record tomorrow. -----Original Message----- From: Akin, Pam Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:39 PM To: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Works for me. Alternatively they can be apart of our fix in 20:07 -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:25 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report I just spoke with Joe Gaynor. We are not meeting today. Instead, he has requested that we revise the conditions #3 below to allow for approval as long as the permit issuance will not result in the reverter of the subject submerged lands OTHER THAN THE PARCEL IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO HIS UPLAND - in other words, will not result in reverter of the entire parcel -just the piece where the footprint of his docksare. This way, he can try and negotiate with the State to have that piece released and he can secure a submerged lands lease where the State can make it's $$$. Then, condition # 4 would only be satisfied when the State takes title to that portion back -and he obtains their signature as owner. Does that make sense? If he needs to pull the item tomorrow and go to the next meeting - he will. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 9:09 AM To: Lipowski, Laura er Subje~ RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application3taff Report Thanks for the update! -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 3:26 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report FYI - I have spoken with Pam today re: this. She plans to speak personally with Pete Dunbar next week -but is OK with the CDB proceeding as scheduled on Tuesday - with the conditions. I will inform Mr. Gaynor that there is no additional information re: repair v. re-configuration with conditions. Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 12:08 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina; Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report After further review, instead of the Dunbar materials mentioned below I am faxing you a copy of Laws of Florida, Ch. 11050, submerged land grant. The reverter language appears on Page 3. Please include in Agenda Packet. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina; Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High After reviewing the matter with Laura Lipowski, this office's input re submerged land legal issues to be addressed in the Staff Report is as follows: 1. City recommendation of approval) with Conditions. 2. Include Standard Conditions. 3. Include Condition previously recommended, namely: That no building permit be issued by:the City unless and until the City receives, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney's Office, sufficient assurances that permit issuance will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. 4. Include additional Condition as fo~Ilows: That no building permit be issued by the City unless and until signature of all legal and equitable owners of submerged land parcel(s) proposed for development is obtained by the applicant in accordance with Community Development Code Section 4- 202A.2. Please contact me if you need any further information for the Staff Report. • Laura, as we discussed please forward to Wayne any documentation you have received from Pete Dunbar concerning the current submerged lands status, preferably in letter form, for inclusion in the CDB Agenda Packet or if not timely for that, introduction as an Exhibit. ~- • • Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:42 AM ~ To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High Wayne: Plan A =Applicant requests a continuance, in writing or verbally. Plan B = If case not continued, read into record Amended Condition 1. [see attached]. If anyone has any changes to the wording please let me know before 1:00. Thanks! Case 05-09093 Amended -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:27 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Wells, Wayne; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Will do. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:20 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High As we discussed, please call him and ask that he fax or email a written continuance request to Wayne Wells prior to 12:00. -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:17 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Akin, Pam; Thompson, Neil; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Leslie, just met with Pam. The direction is to describe the parcel immediately adjacent to the upland generally for now -but specific enough to be certain Mr. Gaynor meets the condition. Using the staff report language below which describes the extent of the variance may make sense - I have a call into Wayne to discuss since it is not my area, and I am uncertain on this point. It is also probably prudent to add language that acknowledges that if and when applicant is able to meet the conditions, the adjacent bottomlands; will be described in more detail via survey before conveyance and at that time, the City Council will need to approve the transfer. I will call Mr. Gaynor if you'd like. Just let me know. Thanks -----Original Message----- • From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:27 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Akin, Pam; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Leslie - The proposal in front of the CDB would allow via Condition #3 an administrative "variance" to that approved by the CDB wherein one part of the condition is that the docks would not extend more than the 25 percent of the waterway width. That 25 percent distance is 99.5 feet (from the seawall). This is discussed on Page 3 of the Staff Report. Don't know if this information helps. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:53 PM To: Akin, Pam; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Thompson, Neil; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report I had not written it up that way since there is no separate submerged land parcel and it is difficult to define which area is being addressed. If this is now the direction, I will develop a description such as "the area of submerged land waterward of the upland parcel, bounded by the east property line, the [mean high water line?], the west property line, and a line extending from a line projected waterward of the east property line to a line projected waterward of the west property line and located feet waterward of the mean high water line." [How far out from land does the area go?] Since Engineering and Planning input would be advisable and the conditions will need to be rewritten, I would recommend a continuance. If that is not possible I will draft new language to be read into the record tomorrow. -----Original Message----- From: Akin, Pam Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:39 PM To: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Works for me. Alternatively they can be apart of our fix in 2007 -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:25 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report I just spoke with Joe Gaynor. We are not meeting today. Instead; he has requested that we revise the conditions #3 below to allow for approval as long as the' permit issuance will not result in the reverter of the subject submerged lands OTHER THAN THE PARCEL IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO HIS UPLAND - in other words, will not result in reverter of the entire parcel -just the piece where the footprint of his docks are. This way, he can try and negotiate with the State to have that piece released and he can secure a submerged lands lease where the State can make it's $$$. Then, condition # 4 would only be satisfied when the State takes title to that portion back - and he obtains their signature as owner. Does that make sense? If he needs to pull the item tomorrow and'go to the next meeting - he will. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 9:09 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Thanks for the update! -----Original Message----- From Lipowski, Laura • Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 3:26 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report FYI - I have spoken with Pam today re: this. She plans td speak personally with Pete Dunbar next week -but is OK with the CDB proceeding as scheduled on Tuesday -with the conditions. I will inform Mr. Gaynor that there is no additional information re: repair v. re-configuration with conditions. Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 12:08 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina; Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report After further review, instead of the Dunbar materials mentioned below I am faxing you a copy of Laws of Florida, Ch. 11050, submerged land grant. The reverter language appears on Page 3. Please include in Agenda Packet. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina; Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High After reviewing the matter with Laura Lipowski, this office's input re submerged land legal issues to be addressed in the Staff Report is as follows: 1. City recommendation of approval with' Conditions. 2. Include Standard Conditions. 3. Include Condition previously recommended, namely: That no building permit be issued by the City unless and until the City receives, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney's Office, sufficient assurances that permit issuance will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. 4. Include additional Condition as follows: That no building permit be issued by the City unless and until signature of all legal and equitable owners of submerged land parcel(s) proposed for development is obtained by the applicant in accordance with Community Development Code Section 4-202A.2. Please contact me if you need any further information for the Staff Report. Laura, as we discussed please forward to' Wayne any documentation you have received from Pete Dunbar concerning the current submerged lands status, preferably in letter form, for inclusion in the CDB Agenda Packet or if not timely for that, • troduction as an Exhibit. • !~ -r' • Welis, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:47 AM ! To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne Cc: Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report I think that looks good - (with condition #4 remaining also). -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:42 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High Wayne: I Plan A =Applicant requests a continuance, in writing or verbally. Plan B = If case not continued, read into record Amended Condition 1. [see attached]. If anyone has any changes to the wording please let me know before 1:00. Thanks! « File: Case FLD2OO5-09093 Amended Condition.doc » -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:27 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Wells, Wayne; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Will do. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:20 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High As we discussed, please call him and ask that he fax or email a written continuance request to Wayne Wells prior to 12:00. -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:17 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Akin, Pam; Thompson, Neil; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Leslie, I just met with Pam. The direction is to describe the parcel immediately adjacent to the upland generally for now -but specific enough to be certain Mr. Gaynor meets the condition. Using the staff report language below which describes the extent of the variance may make sense - I have a call into Wayne to discuss since it is not my area, and I am uncertain on this point. It is also probably prudent to add language that acknowledges that if and when applicant is able to meet the conditions, the adjacent bottomlands will be described in more detail via survey before conveyance and at that time, the City Council will need to approve the transfer. I will call Mr. Gaynor if you'd like. Just let me know. • • Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:27 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Akin, Pam; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Leslie - The proposal in front of the CDB would allow via Condition #3 an administrative "variance" to that approved by the CDB wherein one part of the condition is that the docks would not extend more than the 25 percent of the waterway width. That 25 percent distance is 99.5 feet (from the seawall). This is discussed on Page 3 of the Staff Report. Don't know if this information helps. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:53 PM To: Akin, Pam; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Thompson, Neil; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report I had not written it up that way since there is no separate submerged land parcel and it is difficult to define which area is being addressed. If this is now the direction, I will develop a description such as "the area of submerged land waterward of the upland parcel, bounded by the east property line, the [mean high water line?], the west property line, and a line extending from a line projected waterward of the east property line to a line projected waterward of the west property line and located feet waterward of the mean high water line." [How far out from land does the area go?] Since Engineering and Planning input would be advisable and the conditions will need to be rewritten, I would recommend a continuance. If that is not possible I will draft new language to be read into the record tomorrow. -----Original Message----- From: Akin, Pam Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:39 PM To: Lipowski, Laura; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Works for me. Alternatively they can be apart of our fix in 2007 -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:25 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report I just spoke with Joe Gaynor. We are not meeting today. Instead, he has requested that we revise the conditions #3 below to allow for approval as long as the permit issuance will not result in the reverter of the subject submerged lands OTHER THAN THE PARCEL IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO HIS UPLAND - in other words, will not result in reverter of the entire parcel -just the piece where the footprint of his docks are. This way, he can try and negotiate with the State to have that piece released and he 'can secure a submerged lands lease where the State can make it's $$$. Then, condition #;4 would only be satisfied when the State takes title to that portion back -and he obtains their signature as owner. Does that make sense? If he needs to pull the item tomorrow and go to the next meeting - he will. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 9:09 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Subje• RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Applicatioff Report Thanks for the update! -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 3:26 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report FYI - I have spoken with Pam today re: this. She plans to speak personally with Pete Dunbar next week -but is OK with the CDB proceeding as scheduled on Tuesday - with the conditions. I will inform Mr. Gaynor that there is no additional information re: repair v. re-configuration with conditions. Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 12:08 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina; Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report After further review, instead of the Dunbar materials mentioned below I am faxing you a copy of Laws of Florida, Ch. 11050, submerged land grant. The reverter language appears on Page 3. Please include in Agenda Packet. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina; Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High After reviewing the matter with Laura Lipowski, this office's input re submerged land legal issues to be addressed in the Staff Report is as follows: 1. City recommendation of approval) with Conditions. 2. Include Standard Conditions. 3. Include Condition previously recommended, namely: That no building permit be issued by the City unless and until the City receives, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney's Office, sufficient assurances that permit issuance will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. 4. Include additional Condition as f )lows: That no building permit be issued by~ the City unless and until signature of all legal and equitable owners of submerged land parcel(s) proposed for development is obtained by the applicant in accordance with Community Development Code Section 4- 202A.2. Please contact me if you need any further information for the Staff Report. • • Laura, as we discussed please forward to Wayne any documentation you have received from Pete Dunbar concerning the current submerged lands status, 'preferably in letter form, for inclusion in the CDB Agenda Packet or if not timely for that, introduction as an Exhibit. • • Wells, Wayne Page 1 of 2 From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 10:32 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne Cc: Akin, Pam Subject: RE: HarbourWatch ALL: At the time I spoke to Mr. Gaynor, I was asked to tell him to continue the item. We appeared to have agreed on what the language should say - but I had not been supplied the re-draft yet and thought based on our conversations that you would not be able to dedicate the time to redarft - which I acknowledged was too short of notice (in my phone conversation with you). NO ONE is doubting your ability. Often times there is not enough time to accommodate requests by people. It is not meant as a reflection on your ability. Thanks for your help. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 10:25 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: HarbourWatch Importance: High The applicant is requesting a continuance based on my supposed inability. ~ As per my a-mails of yesterday and today I was able to and have drafted language. The language will perhaps be better/more specific if it is fine tuned and the applicant reviews and approves it. If this can happen today, fine. If next month, also fine. But I don't want it represented to the Board that the continuance is "my fault": Thank you for your consideration in this regard. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:57 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Lipowski, Laura Subject: FW: HarbourWatch FYI -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:56 AM To: 'Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com' Cc: Bill Woods (E-mail) Subject: RE: HarbourWatch Joe - I can make your request for continuance known to the CDB today to the April 18, 2006 agenda. Thanks. 4/7/2006 ~ ~ . Page 2 of 2 Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@adl.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:53 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Lipowski, Laura; bill.west@opussouth.comphildog@tampabay~i rr.com; Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; HamptonInv@aol.com; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com Subject: HarbourWatch Pam Leslie and Laura and I have agreed on the revised stipulation but Leslie will not have time to redraft it prior to today's CDB hearing so I hereby request an extension until the next CDB hearing which I believe to be April 18th. Please confirm by a-mail or call 599-3527 to confirm the extension and that I don't need to attend to make a formal request at the hearing,(however Imay go anyway just in case Leslie needs to speak to me). 4/7/2006 ~_ , ~ ~ Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 11:54 AM To: 'josephwgaynorpa@aol.com'; Wells, Wayne ' Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com; bill.west@opussouth.com; phildog@tampabay.rr.com; Akin, Pam; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Joe, I am available on Monday but cannot schedule for Pam or Leslie. As discussed yesterday, I cannot confirm any direction on the best way to proceed as I do not have the authority to do so. As far as I understand, the CDB item will go forward with the conditions as drafted by Leslie and forwarded to Wayne Wells. You may contact Cathy Horak at 562-4015 to request a meeting with Pam and Gwen! Hollander at 4013 to request that Leslie also be available. Thanks, Laura ----Original Message----- From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] ~ Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 11:23 AM To: Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com; bill.west@opussouth.com; phildog@tampabay.rr.com Subject: Laura- I had to leave for several on -site meetings in Manatee County so I won't have computer access however I will be available by phone-I know Pam is out today so if we all could meet on Monday at anytime(although afternoon is better) we can decide what common direction we can give Wayne Wells-I have instructed Bill Woods office to send to Wayne the existing dock plan so he has it if that is the best approach-Today I spoke with Patricia Frantz who is our reviewer at SWFWMD.She said that there has been a major breakdown in comunication- the position of her office is 1.that the City of Clearwater is the owner of the land and no reverter has been triggered 2. we don't need any more permits to replace what is there 3.if the dock design is changed, we do need SWFWMD permit but not a ground lease since the City owns it only CBD approval for the new design 4. once. we submit the CBD approval, they submit the entire package to the Board of Trustees to verify t hat title is correct in the City as the owner, then they issue the permit, however,if they believe the change in design is not in the public purpose they want title only to that portion of the bottom land that is affected and it does not affect the balance of the City's bottom land, however she did state she has no issue with the ramp because it is clearly in the public interest and only needs CDB's approval of the design of the ramp and they will issue the permit ASAP, lastly 5. she suggested that if the City gave us a lease charging the upland Association for the use of the land that could qualify as a public purpose.She also stated she was aware of the 1958 declaration and believed that docks are a proper improvement and not a violation of the 1925 Resolution which limits all improvements that are not for a public purpose. Hopefully this clears up the postion of the SWFWMD and lets the City and us draft something that protects both going forward 3/1.7/2006 ', Joseph W. Gaynor Page 2 of 2 3/17/2006 • ~ Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 11:23 AM To: Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com; bill.wes4@opussouth.com; phildog@tampabay.rr.com ~ . Laura- I had to leave for several on -site meetings in Manatee County so I, won't have computer access however I will be available by phone-I know Pam is out today so if we all could meet on Monday at anytime(although afternoon is better) we can decide what common direction we can give Wayne Wells-I have instructed Bill Woods office to send to Wayne the existing dock plan so he has it if that is the best approach-Today I spoke with Patricia Frantz who is our reviewer at SWFWMD.She said that there has been a major breakdown in comunication- the position of her office is l.that the City of Clearwater is the owner of the land and no reverter has been triggered 2. we don't need any more permits to replace what is there 3.if the dock design is changed, we do need SWFWMD permit but not a ground lease since the City owns it only CBD approval for the new design 4. once we submit the CBD approval, they submit the entire package to the Board of Trustees to verify t hat title is correct in the City as the owner, then they issue the permit, however,if they believe the change in design is not in the public purpose they want title only to that portion of the bottom land that is affected and it does not affect the balance of the City's bottom land, however she did state she has no issue with the ramp because it is clearly in the public interest and only needs CDB's approval of the design of the ramp and they will issue the permit ASAP, lastly 5. she suggested that if the City gave us a lease charging the upland Association for the use of the land that could qualify as a public purpose.She also stated she was aware of the 1958 declaration and believed that docks are a proper improvement and not a violation of the 1925 Resolution which limits all improvements that are not for a public purpose. Hopefully this clears up the postion of the SWFWMD and lets the City and us draft something that protects both going forward Joseph W. Gaynor 3/17/2006 "' ' Mat'' 15 06 12:31 p Ci~Rttorney 727~4iO21 p. 1 ° ~ r~vater ~_ ~a U City Attorney's Office P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, FL 33758-4748 Telephone: (727) 562-4010 Fax: (727) 562-4021 facsimile transmittal To: Wayne Wells, Planner III Fax: 4865 ~ From: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides, Asst. City Atty Date: 3115!2006 ~ Re: Laws of Florida, Chap. 11050 Pages: 4 ~ ^ Please comment ^ Please reply ^ Please 'recycle ^ Urgent x For review Notes: Attached for your review is a copy of Chapter 11050 of the Laws of Florida.. Confidentiality Notice ~. The information contained in this facsimile message is privileged and confidential, Intended for ~ttre use of fire addressee above. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking tlf action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied information is strlctiy prohibited. If you have received this telecopy in error, please notify counsel above immediately by telephone to arrange for return of the original documents to the counsel named above. ;,•Mar 15 06 12:31p ~~ .Y 727562'4021 • LA~~'S U1~' I+'LOI~Ill~1. to prevent the occupanc3• of said bzzilcling, structure, or land, or to prevezit any illegal act, cozuluct, bttsitzess, dr use in or about such pe•eizzises. Sec. cJ. G'oltifl~c:t 11'it1L Otlccr Lazus.-~Vhcre~er the regu- lations made under authority of this .Act require a greater width or size of ~~1~•~15, ..vnrts, or other open spaces, or re- quire slower hei;Iit of. building or less number of stories. ox• require a greater percentage of lot to be left unoccupied', or impose other Izioltcr standards than are required in any other statute or local orclinanee oz• rcaulation, the provisions of the regulations made under authority of this Act shall govern. ~'Vlzereve: the• provisions of any other statute or Local ordinance or regulations rcgtzhc a greater width or size of yards, 'courts, or other open spaces, or require a lorti er height of building or a less number of stories, or require a greatet• percentage of lot to be left unoccupied, or irnposc ltiglzer stanclai•cls than are required by the reg- ulations made under authority of this Act, the provis:ons~ of such statute or local ordinance or re~ttlation slialL, govern. Scc. 10. 'Phis Act shall take effect uliozt its passage and ahhroval by the Governor. Approved Junc 2, 192. ' Ci~ Rttorney CII11:1"I'h11t li0.i0-(\o. 10~$). tiN 11C'1' to Atztlzorize :zncl Lzzcozu•zzRe the C.'ount~• of Pinellas in the State of I+'lorida, to Build and.Diaintuin a Free Bridge and Causewtz~~ Across Clrar~~•atcr Bay in the City of Cleat~vatcr, State of 1~'loricla, and to Cxrant the Lancl 1\Tecessar}r for such 1'u~posc•:;. Whereas, Special IZoacl and 13riclt;e lli~:t;•ict No. G of Pinellas County, Florida, Lai- itiszzecl :zncl Sold bonds of s~-~.id district for the erection of a free bridge and causeway, from the zmainlauacl in the City of Clearwater to the Island Nest of said City, z. distance of about one anti three-quar- ters miles ; and 1'17'}iereas, the bouizdaries of: said Special Road and Bridge District are pt•acticall}• identical tivith the bOtln- daxies of the ('its- of Clear~t•.ztez=, the said city being eui- braced 1~•lzoll}• ~vitl:i.z said clititrict; zuzcl said. bridge aid caztset~•ar beizzg ~vlzoll~• «•ithin `aici eitr; azzcl :I7?~i ~~ eiu~~~. i to:=~u. 1J2~ .2 „ Mir 15 06 12:31 p C~ Rttorney a 3714 ~-~`--•, cbAr-. iioco. 1925 LAIVS Oi+' i~~`LOI~iDA. 72~~4021 ~'Yherea.4, tlxc propert;y erabracecl' in the City o£ Clear- rvater pays prnctica113~ nine-tenths of the taxes of said fipeClal road and bl•IdfnC [llstrlet; and Whereas, full authority leas been granted to the County of Pinellas t~ A1•ect said free bridge and causeway from the War Departm~;.~ of the T7nited States ; 13e It E~tactcd b;r~ the Le~~slatatre of tltie State of Florida c,n~F~Rny. Section 1. That iii order to secure, encourage and pro- m4ote the erection and maintenance of said free bridge and causeway by the County of Pinnellas across Clearwater Bay, in the City of Clearwater, and County of Pinellas, a strip of the submerged land belonging to the State of Florida, five hundred feet in width, lying and being on the north side of the following Ii~e, to-wit: Commencing at a point 601.65 feet west from the inter- section of the center line of Cleveland Street and Osceola' Avenue, according to the map of the City• of Clearwater, Florida, as of Ma3- 1st, 1925 ; thence west 149.5 feeti ; thence following the a.re of an eight degree curve to the right 312.5 feet ; thence north 65 degrees and no minutes west 994.6 feet to the point of a carve thence follow the arc of a one degree curve to the right 1400 feet; thence' north 51 degrees no n-inuteR «rest 4240.6 feet to the point of a curve; thence follow the arc of a ~5 degree and 30 minute curve to tlic left 808.49 feet; thence south $4 de- grees and 32 minutes ~~•cst 1x38.6 feet to high tide on Sancl Ivey, Said land being in Township 28 ~outli Range 15 • East ; rAnd also a strip of land seven htzncle•ecl feet in width lying and being on the sontli sicla of Sari line, be and the sr"ine is hereby granted- unto the County of Pinellas for the .pur- pose of erecting, building and maintaining said free bridge and causeway. The Said county is hereby authorized to enter upon said lands and to excavate, dredge, fill or otherrc~ise improve the same in such manner as may be necessary for the m~rpose of building ar~~ maintaining said bridge and causeway; provided that all dredging for said causeway shall be made and done on and from the saidland on the south side of said line ; and provided further, that this grant shall not affect the riparian rights of the property or`•nerS on the. eastern and western ter- mini of sa-id strip ~>€ la.nd; and provided further, that p.3 _y 1 1 i -_ X-t ~-- 1 •f r II' ,, Mar 15 06 12:31p t '~ r ~~ C~ Rttorney 7224021 • L~'~~YS Oh' 1~'LO11•lI}~i.. 3775 ~~ parties purchasing or otl~erwisc acquiring the state owned c~~np. uo:,o. land abutting 'said land on the nortll and on the south, 1925 ~''4 shall have access to said bridge and causeway, and to this end shall have the right, under the direction and control of the governing body leaving jurisdiction of said Iand, ~ •~ to build the necesxary streets, roan.:, bridges, fills any ap- proaches upon anti over said land ;and the owners (present and future) of the Iand abutting said Iand on the nortll, the city of Clearwater or the (iOUIlty of Pinellas shall leave the right to fill said land lying north of said line to ~be used for public arks and places of I•ccreation_ only, the same to be ~aintalned by the salecity or county, ~or both. Provided that no carnivals or shows of any char- acter shall be placed or allowed upon tl~e Iand lying north of said line; and provided further that should said prop• --~-J~ •---- .C i~ecreation__oiz~~ same shall revert to the State Sec. 2. ~VQIeu said bridge and causeway shall have been completed, or at any tune prior thereto that the Board of County Commissicnerr of Pinellas County may determine, the said board shall, br resolution, surrender to the City of Clearwater, j~'Iorida, collcurl•ent or exehxsive supervision and jurisdiction over and ~ maintenance of said bridge and causeti~•av and t}Ie grant herein made to the County of -Pinellas, shall revert to the City of Clear- water and the property herein described and granted shall become the property of the City of Clearwater, to be used by the said City for public purposes only. Provided that if said property should ever cease to be used for public purposes, the same shall revert to t11e State. Sec. 3. 'Pork on said bridge and causeway shall be started within six ~ontlrs after this act becomes a lativ, ana completed on or before July first, A. D. 1927. Sec. 4. This Act shall become effective upon its pas- sage and approral by tl-e Governor, or upon its becominh a law without such approval. Approved 11Iati• `_' ~, 7.`1`' ~. .4 • ~ Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 12:08 PM ' To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina; Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report After further review, instead of the Dunbar materials mentioned below I am faxing you a copy of Laws of Florida, Ch. 11050, submerged land grant. The reverter language appears on Page 3. Please include in Agenda Packet. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina; Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High After reviewing the matter with Laura Lipowski, this office's input re submerged land legal issues to be addressed in the Staff Report is as follows: 1. City recommendation of approval with Conditions. 2. Include Standard Conditions. 3. Include Condition previously recommended, namely: That no building permit be issued by the City unless and until the City receives, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney's Office, sufficient assurances that permit issuance will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. 4. Include additional Condition as follows: That no building permit be issued by the City unless and until signature of all legal and equitable owners of submerged land parcel(s) proposed for development is obtained by the applicant in accordance with Community Development Code Section 4-202A.2. Please contact me if you need any further information for the Staff Report. Laura, as we discussed please forward to Wayne any documentation you have received from Pete Dunbar concerning the current submerged lands status, preferably,in letter form, for inclusion in the CDB Agenda Packet or if not timely for that, introduction 'as an Exhibit. C J Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 11:47 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Clayton, Gina; Akin, Pam; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report (Lipowski, Laura] I will provide you with a copy of the 1925 Special Act under which the City took legal title to the subject submerged lands. The Act is still binding and valid law. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 11:22 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina; Lipowski, Laura; Akin, Pam Subject: Harbor Watch Condo Docks Application Staff Report Importance: High After reviewing the matter with Laura Lipowski, this office's input re submerged land legal issues to be addressed in the Staff Report is as follows: 1. City recommendation of approval with Conditions. 2. Include Standard Conditions. 3. Include Condition previously recommended, namely: That no building permit be issued by the City unless and until the City receives, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney's Office, sufficient assurances that permit issuance will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. 4. Include additional Condition as follows: That no building permit be issued by the City unless and until signature of all legal and equitable owners of submerged land parcel(s) proposed for development is obtained by the applicant in accordance with Community Development Code Section 4-202A.2. Please contact me if you need any further information for the Staff Report. Laura, as we discussed please forward to Wayne any documentation you have received from Pete Dunbar concerning the current submerged lands status, preferably yin letter form, for inclusion in the CDB Agenda Packet or if not timely for that, introduction as an Exhibit. ~,: ~ • • Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 11:18 AM To: Clayton, Gina; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks We are going to review with Pam today and get back with Wayne. -----Original Message----- From: Clayton, Gina Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 11:16 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks the consent agenda is not final until the morning of the CDB meeting. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 11:04 AM To: Clayton, Gina; Wells, Wayne Subject: FW: Harbour Watch Docks FYI; How is this on the Consent Agenda when the staff report has not gone out? -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 10:49 AM To: Akin, Pam; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Harbour Watch Docks FYI - I just received this email -----Original Message----- ~ From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 10:39 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: BiII.West@opussouth.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; pdoganiero@tampabay.rr.com; tidewaterre@verizon.net; HamptonInv@aol.com; Jerry.Shaw@opussouth.com Subject: Harbour Watch Docks Laura-Bill Woods leaves for out of town this Wednesday and will miss the CDB hearing next Wednesday- we are on the consent agenda and there have been no objections-we can satisfy all of the stipulations this week-Florida Design is re-drawing the submittal plans to show a line from the pump house to the fire riser which was on the original upland plans but was inadvertently omitted on the structural plans. The only issue that I can see that could result in the request to be removed from the consent agenda would be the stipulation regarding your office getting sufficient assurances that such sign off will not result in the reverter being triggered.As we discussed the State has already taken that position and not as a result of this project. SWFWD has already commented on our multi use permit that the bottom land is already "sovereign land" .So I don't know how we could ever comply with your Ianguage.What I thought we were doing was to have the City settle its dispute with the State.lf the City prevails then you have jurisdiction and we will enter into a license or groundlease with the City subject to any restrictions that may have been imposed by the State which are consistent with the 30 to 1 rule. This would mean we would agree to build to State specifications even though the City has jurisdiction and therefore we would not be in 3/15/2006 ., ~ ~ ~ Page 2 of 2 violation of the State regs.However if the City loses then we will enter into an agreement with the State. Should SWFMD approve our application prior the City's settlement then if the City prevails we would attorn to the City or enter into a new ground lease with the City subject to the terms of your settlement with the State, so long as it is no more restrictive then the State ground lease or 30 to 1 rule, because by that time the docks would have been built. I think the fairest stipulation to all parties would be that the City approve our application (and authorize the County and SWFWMD, if required, to proceed on the ramp approval) based on the following covenant: "The Applicant shall not construct any improvements on the subject property which are not previously approved or permitted, as the case may be, by the appropriate State governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the subject property,if any." This way we could never trigger a reverter if it hasn"t already been triggered and the City can always argue that the State approved everything and it was built to the State's specifications and even if the State takes the position that the Harbour Watch marina is under their jurisdiction the City can always argue that the reverter does not apply to the rest of their bottom lands. It is very important that the City recognizes that we were willing to rebuild the current docks and have received all the approvals from the State and City and Federal Government to do that, but we were cooperating with the City and Harbor Master in changing the design which resulted with SWFWMD challenging the new design, not the old one, based on a 6+/- year old claim that the reverter was already triggered for reasons unbeknown to us. And we relied on that 1958 City Declaration when we purchased the property, especially since it was the basis for previous dock installations, notwithstanding th,e legals now appear to only cover the Harbour Watch basin. If we can agree on this suggested language or something that is consistent with the facts then we will continue to cooperate and if we can help with contributing prorata on the buyout we would do that or pay a sum certain just for our marina based on a cap rate using the current State ground rent as a basis for that calculation. Bill Woods was in a public hearing, so he did not have an opportunity to see my suggestions, so he may have some additional suggestions or comments. Thanks- call me before 1:30 today or leave a voice message- this is high priority for me so I will make myself available at anytime to meet so we can be assured the CBD will not have a reason to get hung up on the reverter clause 3/15/2006 • • Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 10:46 AM To: Akin, Pam; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Horak, Cathy; Wells, Wayne Subject: 1925 Special Act submerged lands I had another conversation with Pete Dunbar this morning to clarify our position. Mr. Dunbar informs me that he has met with both Eva Armstong, Director of the Division of State Lands and Scott Woolam, Bureau Chief of the Bureau of Public Lands Administration. In addition, Mr. Woolam has met with his General Counsel. The results of these informal conversations indicate that the State' reps do not believe the reverter has been triggered based on current conditions on the subject bottomlands. However, the State also does not feel it is in a position to remedy any issues or address any concerns of the City or upland owners, since the State transferred ownership of the lands to the County/City in 1925 via Special Act and the City currently has title. Assurances in writing or otherwise would not override the Act or modify it. The proper way to resolve outstanding issues is to do so by legislation in the 2007 session. j As a result, we will need to discuss further the pending CDB permit application for Harbourwatch Condominiums docks. It is scheduled for 3/21. Direction is needed from our office by end of day Wednesday so that Planning may issue it's Staff Report on time. Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Peter M. Dunbar [mailto:pete@Penningtonlawfirm.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 10:09 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: FW: Follow up Here it is again. From: Peter M. Dunbar Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 5:11 PM To: 'Laura.Lipowski@myClearwater.com' Subject: Follow up Laura, ~~ After discussing it further, Armstrong, Woolam and the Department legal team conclude that the condominium docks are a problem and will trigger the reversion. For the single family docks, they are putting a letter in the file and not considering further action, but while they intend no further action and don't think any is appropriate, the issue remains on what the language in the special act means with these docks in place. There are options we can consider so please give a call at your convenience. Pete 3/15/2006 • • Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 10:35 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: FW: Joe Gaynor Call--Harbor Watch Condominiums Wayne, I spoke with Laura and we are going to review with Pam and get back with you asap today/tomorrow. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 4:36 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Joe Gaynor Call--Harbor Watch Condominiums I think Laura is out today, I will have to get with her tomorrow re the current situation. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 4:26 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Clayton, Gina; Delk, Michael; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: Joe Gaynor Call--Harbor Watch Condominiums Leslie - I gave Bill Woods aheads-up on the proposed condition from you. Obviously, this case is mired in legal issues. At the very latest, we have to send the Staff Report out no later than Thursday. The Staff Report presently (ready to send out) is for approval with the condition suggested by you. If we are going in a different direction, I need to know in order to revise the Staff Report to a denial recommendation. I will be out of the office all day Tuesday and Wednesday morning. I would appreciate some direction (quickly) as to a Staff position in order to complete the Staff Report. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 1:19 PM To: Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina Subject: Joe Gaynor Call--Harbor Watch Condominiums I received a voicemail from Joe Gaynor indicating that he is not comfortable with my suggested condition. Since I drafted that language, I saw an email to you coming out of the printer from Pete Dunbar apparently indicating that DEP's opinion is that any "condo docks" would trigger the reverter, clause in general. Frankly, with that position taken by DEP I feel that the City should recommend denial of the application. I am not willing to dilute the suggested language. Is DEP willing to divide up what area will be triggered? Please advise of the current status and any suggestion. s • Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 9:09 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Clayton, Gina; Delk, Michael; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: Joe Gaynor Call--Harbor Watch Condominiums All - I was on vacation yesterday, so I will review and advise as quickly as possible. I have not seen the language referenced -can someone please email me the language? Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 4:26 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Clayton, Gina; Delk, Michael; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: Joe Gaynor Call--Harbor Watch Condominiums Leslie - I gave Bill Woods aheads-up on the proposed condition from you. Obviously, this case is mired in legal issues. At the very latest, we have to send the Staff Report out no later than Thursday. The Staff Report presently (ready to send out) is for approval with the condition suggested by you. If we are going in a different direction, I need to know in order to revise the Staff Report to a denial recommendation. I will be out of the office all day Tuesday and Wednesday morning. I would appreciate some direction (quickly) as to a Staff position in order to complete the Staff Report. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 1:19 PM To: Lipowski, Laura; Wells, Wayne Cc: Clayton, Gina Subject: Joe Gaynor Call--Harbor Watch Condominiums I received a voicemail from Joe Gaynor indicating that he is not comfortable with my suggested condition. Since I drafted that language, I saw an email to you coming out of the printer from Pete Dunbar apparently indicating that DEP's opinion is that any "condo docks" would trigger the reverter~clause in general. Frankly, with that position taken by DEP I feel that the City should recommend denial of the application. I am not willing to dilute the suggested language. Is DEP willing to divide up what area will be triggered? Please advise of the current status and any suggestion. Welis, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 11:17 AM To: Clayton, Gina; Wells, Wayne Subject: FW: Clearwater Harbor Submerged Lands FYI, it looks as if DEP does have a concern regarding "condo docks". -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 9:00 AM To: Akin, Pam Cc: Goudeau, Cyndie; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Clearwater Harbor Submerged Lands -----Original Message----- From: Peter M. Dunbar [mailto:peteC~Penningtonlawfirm.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 5:16 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: RE: Clearwater Harbor Submerged Lands I have met on separate occasion this week with Eva Armstrong, Director of the Division of State Lands and Scott Woolam, Bureau Chief of the Bureau of Public Lands Administration. The results of the meeting have been helpful to a degree, but they, like we, have questions about how to handle the issues because the property was conveyed by Special Act and not by a more traditional grant from the Trustees. I basically presented them with 3 basic issues: 1) the individual docks that have been permitted over time on Island Estates and on the northwest side of the causeway; 2) the proposed public marina in front of the Harbor View Center; and 3) the proposed condominium docks. A summary of the responses are as follows: 1) Docks. .There is a general feeling that these do not offend the public purpose restrictions in the conveyance and should not trigger the reverter. In similar circumstances on sovereignty lands, these structures are considered a reasonable use by the upland owner without violating the public's use of the waterway or submerged lands. i 2) Marina. The concept of the proposed city marina was welcomed as a good idea. Slips can be leased to help defer the costs of operation and maintenance. Because I had no specific plans to review, the DEP officials were not able to comment on the layout or provide suggestions on what the best approach might be. I did get the impression that) any reasonable proposal would be acceptable. 3) Condominium Docks. The initial view is that the condominium docks are a problem and may trigger the reverter. The question that wasp considered and not answered definitively was "if the reversion would be for the entire submerged land or just that portion where the condominium docks would located?" There have been a few isolated cases with similar fact patterns on sovereignty lands where the reversion related only to the area where the offending conduct occurred. Mr. Woolam wants to discuss this matter in more detail with the General Counsels office and provide me additional information later this week (hopefully tomorrow). One additional consideration that was discussed is a local bill in the 2007 Session of the Legislature to clarify the current activities,imuch like was done with the Marine Science Center, so that the City will have clearer, contemporary guidelines to follow to insure that the reversion ~y,a ~ ~ • li does not occur inadvertently in the future. I am personally unsure whether the conclusions of DEP would be binding even on the docks that they do not have a problem with, and to be safe, it is probably appropriate to resolve those issues as well in future legislation. The question now presents itself on how to deal with the condominium developer. I would be happy to discuss any of these issues with you in more detail at your convenience and I will provide you an update '.after Mr. Woolam has reported to me on the conversation with the Department's legal department. -----Original Message----- From: Laura.Lipowski@myClearwater.com [mailto:Laura.Lipowski@myClearwater.com] Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:44 PM To: Peter M. Dunbar Subject: Clearwater Harbor Submerged Lands Hi Peter, Cathy (my assistant) had passed along some of information regarding the above - but I was hoping to clarify before meeting with Pam. I understand the timing is not favorable to seek the passing of a~Senate Bill to accomplish our goals because we would have to wait until 2007 in order to provide proper notice, etc. (I had come across the Bi11~I faxed over - and just thought it was one alternative.) I do agree, however, that we would prefer a more expeditious solution. Please confirm the timing of your meeting with the DEP next week and update me when you have more to report. Thanks, Laura 2 ~;tif~~t7f N 'L~ .~ 4~~+~, •~'~ ;~, ~~'~~7EP ~~~''`4, Conditions Associated With FLD2005-09093 279 WINDWARD PSG Harbor Master Condition Wayne Wells, AICP 727-562-4504 10/19/2005 I can't give you a complete answer on this one as it involves use of City Bottom Land, While I Not Met have referred it over in hard copy to Bryan Ruff, it may end up with Laura Lipowski as her expertise is more in line with property issues. Background: there are 3 events happening on this site on City Bottom land. 1. the owner has applied for and received a repair permit to repair the existing docks in their existing location. 2. there is a proposal for this development to remove the ramp they have and replace it with a ramp in the western corner of the basin adjacent to the Marine Aquarium but not crossing over a line 45 degrees out from where the properties meet at the seawall. I had sent this separately to legal for the same reason of not being clear on the impact of building on city bottom land. 3. the package in front of me has a proposal to replace the exiting docks with docks to support Eight boat slips. From the navigation standpoint there is no negative impact on navigation, they have made allowances for vessels moored at city moorings along the Marine Aquarium Seawall to have room to maneuver in and out of their slips. The uses as Condo Slips combined with the change in the upland property use will most certainly be less invasive on the environment as there will be significantly fewer boats in the basin and no boat maintenance ongoing on the upland. My only concern is not with the location of number of slips but with the legality of using city bottom land which may depend on how they are used by the Condo Association. I do not believe the slips can be sold, I am not sure if they can be leased, the condo may have to rent them in a fashion similar to what the city does with city slips with a provision that the bottom land remains the cities. property and can be reclaimed at any time in the future with appropriate notice for the benefit of the public. All other slips in this basin are available to the public as either no cost public docks at the Island Way Grille site, or as City Marina Rental Slips as the city slips that surround the marine aquarium. I wish I could give a definitive answer but without a legal review I would be hesitant to say any more than they do not present a hazard to navigation as proposed and leave the "use" and occupancy criteria to legal to provide guidance on. Legal Condition Wayne Wells, AICP 727-562-4504 10/27/2005 This is currently being reviewed by the Legal Department. This is a complicated legal issue, Not Met coupled with important City policy issues. Additional comments are forthcoming. CaseConditons Print Date: 02/13/2006 Page 1 of 1 • ~ Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 4:10 PM To: Fox, MaryJo Subject: 279 Windward Passage MaryJo - I am working on an FLS case for docks for this site and was out today taking photos of the site. The "sign" at the end of the docks that says "Opus" - is this an okay sign? They will soon begin construction of a residential condominium on this site. The sign is approximately 8-feet by 16-feet in size. Photo is attached. If not okay, can you take care of it? Wayne ""J" Windward Passage 279 before 04... 1 T. ~ ~ Wells, Wayne From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 12:02 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Pete Dunbar Thanks, I'll draft some language for your Staff Report condition. Pete Dunbar is the City's lobbyist who is consulting with FDEP re the submerged lands/reverter clause issue. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 9:49 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Pete Dunbar Yes, this case (FLD2005-09093) has been placed on the March 21, 2006, CDB agenda. Placing this item on this agenda was based on email discussions that included Laura Lipowski, Joe Gaynor arid Bill Woods, where any approval would contain a condition requiring resolution of the bottomlands issues between the State and the City (language of the condition to be written/reviewed by Legal). We have the application materials submitted by Woods Consulting for the CDB agenda package. If there are still issues that would force this application to be removed from the March 21, 2006, agenda, let me know ASAP. Otherwise, if this application needs to be continued by the CDB at their March 21, 2006, meeting, let me know. Thanks. (PS: I don't know who Pete Dunbar is [?]). -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 9:32 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: FW: Pete Dunbar Do you have a proposed CDB meeting date? Has there been an application/revised application filed? -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 2:15 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Pete Dunbar It appears that any progress on the submerged lands issue (adjacent to Mr. Gaynor's property at 279 Windward Passage) may still be some time off. Can you confirm the date Mr. Gaynor is scheduled to come with the application for conditional CDB approval for the ramp and/or the docks? You and Twill probably need to discuss what language will work based on the additional information Mr. Dunbar provides after his meeting with the DEP next week. Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Horak, Cathy Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 1:44 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: Pete Dunbar I spoke with Pete RE:to see if he had an update on the submerged lands issue. He said he received the fax you sent last week Re: (Lipowski, Laura] Senate Bill (Lipowski, Laura] (releasing the Marine Science Center from the reverted provision of the 1925 grant to City) . But, we missed the deadline for the pre-publication / 2006 session. If we wanted to go that route it would be for 2007. While there is more certainty this way he wanted to know how Pam would like to proceed as it is very timely. He is also meeting with DAP next week and he can see what they can give us. Cathy Horak Legal Staff Assistant, City Attorney's Office • City of Clearwater Tel: (727) 562-4014 Fax: (727)562-4021 <mailto:cathy.horak@myclearwater.com> • ~ • Wells, Wayne From: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 9:16 AM To: Lipowski, Laura; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne; Reynolds, Mike; Delk, Michael Subject: Re: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Page 1 of 3 As you may be aware we have put our CDB request back on the schedule) for March 21st-Wayne will wait for the legal dept, to word the special condition as to jurisdiction'-we suggested that we advertise the footprint and say not to exceed 8 slips(Bill will calculate the maximum linear feet of the existing docks) so if the State prevails then we would only build 5 based on the 30 to 1 rule without the need of going back to CDB-if the City prevails we will rebuild what we have or use the revised plan- this seems like a practical approach while the City is negotiating with the State Joseph W. Gaynor -----Original Message----- From: Laura. Lipowski@myClearwater.com To: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Cc: josephwgaynorpa@aol.com; Leslie.Dougall-Sides@myClearwater.com; Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com; Mike.Reynolds@myClearwater.com; michael.delk@MyClearwater.com Sent: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 15:38:05 -0500 j Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Bill, I was not suggesting that the ramp be wrapped up in the dock application. However, unless I have completely confused the information I have been provided, it was represented to me that the ramp was a part of the upland application. When Planning staff reviewed the file, it was determined that the ramp had not been contemplated and should have been. I am not the attorney for Planning or the CDB and in any event, this item should really be worked out with the Planning Department - to determine the requirements for the ramp modification approval. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:26 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Joseph W Gaynor Subject: Re: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Laura: Please be advised that the ramp was a separate submittal as we believe it should be. It was a submittal for dredge and fill which is the proper permit type. We have copies of the materials submitted to your staff and also would note it was signed off at the zoning counter, again, as this is the city's 2/10/2006 _- . ~ Page 2 of 3 approach for a minor effort dredge and fill. I thus do not understand why this is being wrapped into the multi-use dock permit application. For us to proceed with the ramp should not require CDB approval. The city has placed a verbal hold on the ramp with the county. If this hold is released, the county will issue the ramp permit administratively as it does not require public hearings at the county. We would like to stay wifh this approach as it it the normal process followed in the past. My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods woodsconsulti~.or ----- Original Message ----- From: Laura.Lipowski(a~myClearwater.com To: Josephwgaynorp~aol.com Cc: BiII.West cr~opussouth.com ;billwoods@woodsconsulting.org ; Christine.Hagen anopussouth.com ; Leslie.Dougall-Sides(c~myClearwater.com ; Mike.Reynolds@myClearwater.com ; Wayne.Wells(a~myClearwater.com Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:14 PM Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp ~ ]oe, Hope all is well -wanted to keep you posted on a few things. I have spoken with Leslie Dougall-Sides and Pam Akin in my office. regarding re-opening the application for repair or reconfiguration of the docks at 279 Windward Passage. I have been directed that it is OK for you to proceed to the CDB to seek a conditional approval of the application, subject to the outcome of a resolution of the bottomlands issues between the State and the City. Please have Bill Woods (or whichever representative you choose) work with the planning department to move forward. Planning will consult with the City legal/staff to confirm the necessary language for such an approval as item progresses. In the meantime, in the course of reviewing the upland file, it has been discovered that the proposed ramp was not submitted as part of the application. City staff does not have any record of the ramp within the Site Plan, staff report, CDB discussioln minutes, etc. As such, please contact planning to proceed with revising that application. Note, however, that the issue of complications due to the ramp sitting on the bottomland have not been resolved to date. As discussed, we are working towards a resolution and I expect more info by next week. I will certainly keep you updated as I hear. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- ~~ From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, February O1, 2006 2:20 PM To: Lipowski, Laura 2/ 10/2006 Page 3 of 3 Cc: BiII.West@opussouth.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Chri,stine.Hagen@opussouth.com Subject: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Laura is there any update since you received the information regarding the ramp from Bill Woods? I instructed Bill to reopen the process for CDB based on our last conversation so that we could at least get a determination from the City even though it may be subject to the jurisdiction issue. 2/ 10/2006 . r *. ~ • . Page 1 of 3 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 1:33 PM To: Delk, Michael Cc: Reynolds, Mike Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Michael - Here is a chronology of events/approvals for this property: 1. On October 19, 2004, the CDB approved the redevelopment of this property to permit 31 attached dwellings in the Commercial District, over Staffs recommendation for denial (FLD2004-06042). The site plan showed an existing boat "concrete ramp to remain" 2. On February 25, 2005, an application was filed for the site construction permit for'this property (BCP2005- 02671). Zoning review comments were entered initially on April 1, 2005, with the final comments shown as "met" on June 22, 2005. Zoning approval was entered as an activity on December 12, 2005 (don't know why the discrepancy of dates between "activities" and "conditions"). This permit was issued on February 6, 2006. A modified boat ramp was shown on the site plans for this project (added by the engineer onto the civil plans May 20, 2005). 3. On May 18, 2005, the Planning Department approved a Minor Lot Adjustment modifying the north property line in accordance with the approved FLD site plan (in conjunction with the Clearwater Marin Aquarium) (MIS2005-04017). 4. On September 8, 2005, I signed off for Planning on a County permit application for a boat ramp in conjunction with the condominium development (MIS2005-09003). While the original FLD approval (FLD2004- 06042) indicated the existing ramp to remain, the modified boat ramp was considered at that time to be a Minor Revision under the provisions of Section 4-406. 5. On September 8, 2005, I signed off for Planning on a County permit application fora "fix and repair of existing docks" (MIS2005-11012) (Note: MIS number different than a September date due to Planning Staff not retaining a copy for our records and finally requesting and receiving a copy from Woods Consulting, whereupon it was entered into our Permit Plan for record purposes.) 6. On September 8, 2005, a Flexible Development application was filed with the Planning Department to permit a multi-use dock for this property consisting of 1818 square feet of dock and eight slips (FLD2005-09093). This application was reviewed by the DRC on November 3, 2005, and has been on hold pending a resolution of the legal issues related to the submerged land. The applicant is now requesting this application be placed on the March 21, 2006, CDB agenda, where apparently there will be a condition(s) of approval relating to the submerged land issue being suggested by the Legal Department. 7. On September 22, 2005, a demolition permit was issued for this property (BCP2005-09401). 8. On September 30, 2005, an application was filed to construct the residential building (BCP2005-09829). This permit is still being reviewed. 9. On November 15, 2005, a foundation only permit was issued (BCP2005-09475). I have emails in the FLD file for the multi-use docks going back February 15, 2005, from Bill Morris regarding the proposed docks. The issue of the submerged land issue surfaced as part of Bill Morris' review for DRC on the FLD application (October 19, 2005, email). There are no 'boat ramp' provisions in the Code. The issue of the ramp appears to me as part of the upland development but has potentially gotten wrapped up into the multi- use dock considerations. I met with Joe Gaynor and Bill Morris yesterday. A permit will be required to reconstruct the seawall and the "returns" for the sides of the ramp (Bill Woods has indicated they have received the Federal and State permits for the seawall reconstruction). No City building permit has been requested to-date. A concern Bill Woods expressed regarding the seawall permit is the need to build the "returns" for the sides of the ramp at the same time as the actual seawall along the property line. Don't know how this can be handled in relation to the submerged land issue. 2/9/2006 • r - • ~ • Page 2 of 3 Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Delk, Michael Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 8:32 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Reynolds, Mike ~ Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Sirs: Comments on this? michael -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura ~ Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:38 PM To: 'Bill Woods' Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne; Reynolds, Mike; Delk, Michael Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Bill, I was not suggesting that the ramp be wrapped up in the dock application. However, unless I have completely confused the information I have been provided, it was represented to me that the ramp was a part of the upland application. When Planning staff reviewed the file, it was determined that the ramp had not been contemplated and should have been. I am not the attorney for Planning or the CDB and in any event, this item should really be worked out with the Planning Department - to determine the requirements for the ramp modification approval. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:26 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Joseph W Gaynor Subject: Re: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Laura: Please be advised that the ramp was a separate submittal as we believe it should be. It was a submittal for dredge and fill which is the proper permit type. We have copies of the materials submitted to your staff and also would note it was signed off at the zoning counter, again, as this is the city's approach for a minor effort dredge and fill. I thus do not understand why this is being wrapped into the multi-use dock permit application.. For us to proceed with the ramp should not require CDB approval. The city has placed a verbal hold on the ramp with the county. If this hold is released, the county will issue the ramp permit administratively as it does not require public hearings at the county. We would like to stay with this approach as it it the normal process followed in the past. My regards, Bill Woods BIII WOOdS 2/9/2006 - , ~ . Page 3 of 3 Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods woodsconsulting.org ----- Original Message ----- ' From: Laura.Lipowski c(D1myClearwater.com To: Joseghwgay_norp~aol.com Cc: BiII.West(a~opussouth.com ; billwoods(cr)woodsconsultin .'g org ; Christine.Hagen ~ussouth._com ; t_eslie.Dou~all_Sides a~~;Clearwater.com ; Mike.Reynolds@myClearwater.com ; Wayne.Wells(a~my_Clearwater.com Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:14 PM Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Joe, Hope all is well -wanted to keep you posted on a few things. I have spoken with Leslie Dougall-Sides grid Pam Akin in my office regarding re-opening the application for repair or reconfiguration of the docks at 279 Windward Passage. I have been directed that it is OK for you to proceed to the CDB to seek a conditional approval of the application, subject to the outcome of a resolution of the bottomlands issues between the State and the City. Please have Bill Woods (or whichever representative you choose) work with the planning department to move forward. Planning will consult with the City legal/staff to confirm the necessary language for such an approval as item progresses. In the meantime, in the course of reviewing the upland file, it has been discovered that the proposed ramp was not submitted as part of the application. City staff does not have any record of the ramp within the Site Plan, staff report, CDB discussion minutes, etc. As such, please contact planning to proceed with revising that application. Note, however, that the issue of complications due to the ramp sitting on the bottomland have not been resolved to date. As discussed, we are working towards a resolution and I expect more info by next week. I will certainly keep you updated as I hear. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 2:20 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: BiII.West@opussouth.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com ' Subject: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Laura is there any update since you received the information regarding the ramp from Bill Woods? I instructed Bill to reopen the process for CDB based on our last conversation so that we could at least get a determination from the City even though it may be subject to the jurisdiction issue. 2/9/2006 • • Wells, Wayne From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 2:38 PM To: Ready, Cky; Reynolds, Mike; Wells, Wayne Subject: FW: Submittals for March 21, 2006 CDB Meeting FYI Sherry L Watkins Plarrrtirtg Department Administrative Analyst (727) 562-4582 sherry. zvatkins @rnyclearwa ter. com -----Original Message----- From: Rickard, Leonard Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 2:32 PM To: Watkins, Sherry Subject: RE: Submittals for March 21, 2006 CDB Meeting -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 10:59 AM To: DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Hufford, Diane; Reid, Debbie; Tracy Harmon; US Post Office (E-mail) Subject: Submittals for March 21, 2006 CDB Meeting ~ DRC Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the March 21, 2006 CDB meeting: FLD2005-09094 1091 Eldorado Avenue FLD2005-09093 279 Windward Passage FLD2005-02018 113 Kenwood Address I jRickard, Leonard) MET ANX2005-12039 3076 Cherry Lane ANX2005-12040 1737 Lucas Drive Planner: Wayne jRickard, Leonard) NOT MET Planner: Wayne jRickard, Leonard] MET hanging to 121, 123 Kenwood Planner: Wayne Planner: Cky jRickard, Leonard) MET Planner: Mike R jRickard, Leonard] MET 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, Monday February 13, 2006. Thank you, Sher--y L Watkins Planning Department Administrative Analyst (727) 562-4582 sherry. zvatkins @nryelearwater. eom • • Wells, Wayne ' From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, February 09; 2006 1:51 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: FW: Submittals for March 21, 2006 CDB Meeting Shea~ry L Watkins Planning Department Administrative Analyst (727) 562-4582 sh err y. zua tkins @ rnyc l eatwa to r. com -----Original Message----- From: Reid, Debbie Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 1:50 PM To: Watkins, Sherry Subject: RE: Submittals for March 21, 2006 CDB Meeting Sherry, P&R has no issues with the below referenced cases. Debbie O -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 10:59 AM To: DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Hufford, Diane; Reid, Debbie; Tracy Harmon; US Post Office (E-mail) Subject: Submittals for March 21, 2006 CDB Meeting DRC Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the March 21, 2006 CDB meeting: FLD2005-09094 1091 Eldorado Avenue Planner: Wayne FLD2005-09093 279 Windward Passage Planner: Wayne FLD2005-02018 113 Kenwood Address Changing to 121, 123 Kenwood Planner: Wayne ANX2005-12039 3076 Cherry Lane Planner: Cky ANX2005-12040 1737 Lucas Drive Planner: Mike R 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, Monday February 13, 2006 . Thank you, Shem~ L Watkins Plartrting Department Administrative Analyst (727) 562-4582 sherry.zuatkins@anycleaawater.coan • • Wells, Wayne From: Rice, Scott Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 12:50 PM To: Watkins, Sherry Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Submittals for March 21, 2006 CDB Meeting Engineering has completed review of resubmittals. Approval conditions for FLD2005-02018 113 Kenwood: ' Prior to issuance of a building permit, show roof drains directing building runoff into the front yard. This requirement is imposed due to the existing grade of the lot draining to the back property line. Prior to CO, comply with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fe,e schedule. D. Scott Rice Land Devel. Engr. Manager 727-562-4781 scott.rice@MyClearwater.com -----Original Message----- ~ From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 10:59 AM To: DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Hufford, Diane; Reid, Debbie; Tracy Harmon; US Post Office (E-mail) Subject: Submittals for March 21, 2006 CDB Meeting DRC Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the March 21, 2006 CDB meeting: FLD2005-09094 1091 Eldorado Avenue Planner: Wayne FLD2005-09093 279 Windward Passage Planner: Wayne FLD2005-02018 113 Kenwood Address Changing to 121, 123 Kenwood Planner: Wayne ANX2005-12039 3076 Cherry Lane Planner: Cky ANX2005-12040 1737 Lucas Drive Planner: Mike R ' 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, Monday February 13, 2006 . Thank you, Sherry L Watkins Planning Department Administrative Analyst (727) 562-4582 she~~ry.zvatkins@nt ycleanvater.coin • • Wells, Wayne From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 10:59 AM To: DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Hufford, Diane; Reid, Debbie; Tracy Harmon; US Post Office (E-mail) Subject: Submittals for March 21, 2006 CDB Meeting DRC Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the March 21, 2006 CDB meeting: FLD2005-09094 1091 Eldorado Avenue Planner: Wayne FLD2005-09093 279 Windward Passage Planner: Wayne FLD2005-02018 113 Kenwood Address Changing to 121, 123 Kenwood Planner: Wayne ANX2005-12039 3076 Cherry Lane Planner: Cky ANX2005-12040 1737 Lucas Drive Planner: Mike R 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, Monday February 13, 2006 . Thank you, ~She17~y L Watkins Planning Department Adrninistrative Analyst (727) 562-4582 sherry.watkinsQmyclearwater.com t ~ • Page 1 of 3 a 3 Wells, Wayne From: Reynolds, Mike Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 8:42 AM To: Delk, Michael Cc: Wells, Wayne; Brown, Steven '. Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Michael, The approved site plan, approved by the CDB on 10-19-04, shows an "existing concrete ramp to remain" (see plan sheet 4 of the plan set). I recall no presentation or discussion of a replacement or new ramp. The Development Order, likewise, has no reference to any ramp. The site plan approved by the CDB in October 2004 did not include a proposal for new docks. Mike -----Original Message----- From: Delk, Michael Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 8:32 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Reynolds, Mike Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Sirs: Comments on this? michael -----Original Message----- ' From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:38 PM To: 'Bill Woods' Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne; Reynolds, Mike; Delk, Michael Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Bill, I was not suggesting that the ramp be wrapped up in the dock application. However, unless I have completely confused the information I have been provided, it was 'represented to me that the ramp was a part of the upland application. When Planning staff reviewed the file, it was determined that the ramp had not been contemplated and should have been. I am not the attorney for Planning or the CDB and in any event, this item should really be worked out with the Planning Department - to determine the requirements for the ramp modification approval. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:26 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Joseph W Gaynor Subject: Re: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp 3/15/2006 • ~ Page 2 of 3 ,' Laura: Please be advised that the ramp was a separate submittal as we believe it should be. It was a submittal for dredge and fill which is the proper permit type. We have copies of the materials submitted to your staff and also would note it was signed off at the zoning counter, again, as this is the city's approach for a minor effort dredge and fill. I thus do not understand why this is being wrapped into the multi-use dock permit application. For us to proceed with the ramp should not require CDB approval. The city has placed a verbal hold on the ramp with the county. If this hold is released, the county will issue the ramp permit administratively as it does not require public hearings at the county. We would like to stay with this approach as it it the normal process followed in the past. My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-57.47 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods(a~woodsconsultinq org ----- Original Message ----- From: Laura.L~owskita'~myClearwater.com To: Josephwga nor a aol.com Cc: BiII.West@~ussouth.com ; billwoods(a~woodsconsulting.org. ; Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com ;Leslie.Dougall-Sides(c~myClearwater.com ; Mike.Reynolds@m r~Clearwater.com ; Wayne.Wells@myClearwater.com Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:14 PM Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Joe, Hope all is well -wanted to keep you posted on a few things. I have spoken with Leslie Dougall-Sides and Pam Akin in my office regarding re-opening the application for repair or reconfiguration of the docks at 279 Windward Passage. I have been directed that it is OK for you to proceed to the CDB to seek a conditional approval of the application, subject to the outcome of a resolution of the bottomlands issues between the State and the City. Please have Bill Woods (or whichever representative you choose) work with the planning department to move forward. Planning will consult with the City legal/staff to confirm the necessary language for such an approval as item progresses. In the meantime, in the course of reviewing the upland file, it has been discovered that the proposed ramp was not submitted as part of the application. City staff does not have any record of the ramp within the Site Plan, staff report, CDB discussion minutes, etc. As such, please contact planning to proceed with revising that application. Note, however, that the issue of complications due to the ramp sitting' on the bottomland have not been resolved to date. As discussed, we are working towards a resolution and I expect more info by next week. I will certainly keep you updated as I hear. Thanks, Laura 3/15/2006 . ~ Page 3 of 3 -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 2:20 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: BiILWest@opussouth.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com Subject: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Laura is there any update since you received the information regarding the ramp from Bill Woods? I instructed Bill to reopen the process for CDB based on our last conversation so that we could at least get a determination from the City even though it may be subject to the jurisdiction issue. 3/15/2006 , . • Page 1 of 3 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:50 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Wells, Wayne Subject: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Lipowski Email re: boat ramp Laura: I believe I did misunderstand you. You may be right in that I am not aware of whether or not the upland site plan addressed a boat ramp. I will look to Wayne Wells to provide us the proper course of action. My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods@woodsconsulting.org ----- Original Message ----- From: Laura.Lipowski(a~myClearwater.com To: billwoodsr'a~woodsconsulting.org Cc: josephwgayn~a a aol.com ;Leslie.Dougall-Sides(c~~Clearwater.com ; ' Wayne.Wells@ ~Clearwater.com ; Mike.Reynolds myClearwater.com ; michael.delk MyClearwater.com Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:38 PM Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp i Bill, I was not suggesting that the ramp be wrapped up in the dock application. However, unless I have completely confused the information I have been provided, it was represented to me that the ramp was a part of the upland application. When Planning staff reviewed the file, it was determined that the ramp had not been contemplated and should have been. I am not the attorney for Planning or the CDB and in any event, this item should really be worked out with the Planning Department - to determinelthe requirements for the ramp modification approval. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsufting.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:26 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Joseph W Gaynor Subject: Re: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Laura: Please be advised that the ramp was a separate submittal as we believe it should be. It was a submittal for dredge and fill which is the proper permit type. We have copies 3/15/2006 • • Page 2 of 3 of the materials submitted to your staff and also would note it vvas signed off at the zoning counter, again, as this is the city's approach for a minor effort dredge and fill. thus do not understand why this is being wrapped into the multi-use dock permit application. For us to proceed with the ramp should not require CDB approval. The city has placed a verbal hold on the ramp with the county. If this hold is released, the county will issue the ramp permit administratively as it does not require public hearings at the county. We would like to stay with this approach as it is the normal process followed in the past. My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods(c~woodsconsulting.org ----- Original Message ----- From: Laura.Lipowski@m~Clearyvater,com. To: Josephwq~nor a aol.com Cc: BiII.West@opussouth.com ;billwoods@woodsconsulting.org ; Christine.Hagen cr.o~ussouth.com ;Leslie.Dougall-Sides(a~myClearwater.'com ; Mike.Reynolds myClearwater.com ; Wayne.Wells(a~myClearwater.com ~ Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:14 PM Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Joe, Hope all is well -wanted to keep you posted on a few things. I have spoken with Leslie Dougall-Sides and Pam Akin in my office regarding re-opening the application for repair or reconfiguration of the docks at 279 Windward Passage. I have been directed that it is OK for you to proceed to the CDB to seek a conditional approval of the application, subject to the outcome of a resolution of the bottomlands issues between the State and the City. Please have Bill Woods (or whichever representative you choose) work with the planning department to move forward. Planning will consult with the City legal/staff to confirm the necessary language for such an approval as item progresses. In the meantime, in the course of reviewing the upland file, it has been discovered that the proposed ramp was not submitted as part of the application. City staff does not have any record of the ramp within the Site Plan, staff report, CDB discussion minutes, etc. As such, please contact planning to proceed with revising that application. Note, however, that the issue of complications due to the ramp sitting on the bottomland have not been resolved to date. As discussed, we are working towards a resolution and I expect more info by next week. I will certainly keep you updated as I hear. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 2:20 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: BiII.West@opussouth.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com 3/15/2006 R ~ ~ ~ Page 3 of 3 Subject: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Laura is there any update since you received the information regarding the ramp from Bill Woods? I instructed Bill to reopen the process for CDB based on our last conversation so that we could at least get a determination from the City even though it may be subject to the jurisdiction issue. 3/15/2006 • ~ Page 1 of 2 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 1:36 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Lipowski, Laura Subject: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration -FLD 2005-09093 Leslie - This project went to the November 3, 2005, DRC meeting. Perhaps you still have that packet of information available to you for your information. I am attaching the Final DRC comments for this case. Should this case go forward and they resubmit soon, it most likely at this time be placed on the March 21,' 2006, CDB agenda. You may email me any conditions of approval that you feel necessary and I will include in the Staff Report. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 11:50 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - I think this answers the question Bill Woods is asking below as to whether the applicant can move forward with the application for conditional approval. Please let me know what the scheduling is on the reactivation and timing of whatever processes need to occur during the application process so that I may provide input on language re the conditions. I expect to have more information early next week on the real estate issue. -----Original Message----- From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 11:43 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - If the applicant wants to go forward and submits a complete app, f believe that the City should process it. I would like to work with assigned staff to develop language conditioning approval on the various state, county, and agency actions which will be required for the project to go forward without risk to the City of triggering the reverter clause. -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 9:09 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration, FLD 2005-09093 - Leslie, I believe this requires your input. I am not sure exactly how the process works and do not feel comfortable advising the applicant. Perhaps we can meet in the next few days (after you settle down from returning from vacation) and discuss. Wayne found the ramp file and I have had preliminary discussions with Pete Dunbar. Let me know how your schedule is ...thanks 2/7/2006 • Page 2 of 2 Laura -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 6:54 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: FW: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - Laura - Do you have any concerns with going forward with the dock reconfiguration FLD application to the CDB? Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 4:48 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Hagen, Christine; West, Bill Subject: HArbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - Wayne: We would like to take the Harbor Watch dock reconfiguration permit application off of hold and proceed to go before the CDB. I need to discuss with you next week thoughts as regards the CDB hearing. As an example, we want to go forward with our design as is but gain approval from the CDB that if the City does not purchase the bottomlands, and as a result, due to preemption ratio limitations, we are forced to reduce the number of slips, that the CDB will concur that we do not have to appear before them again. Will discuss further when you call. My regards, Bill Woods. Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods@woodsconsulting.org 2/7/2006 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 6:54 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Subject: FW: Harbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - Laura - Do you have any concerns with going forward with the dock reconfiguration FLD application to the CDB? Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 4:48 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Hagen, Christine; West, Bill Subject: HArbor Watch Condominiums Dock Reconfiguration FLD 2005-09093 - Wayne: We would like to take the Harbor Watch dock reconfiguration permit application off of hold and proceed to go before the CDB. I need to discuss with you next week thoughts as regards the CDB hearing. As an example, we want to go forward with our design as is but gain approval from the CDB that if the City does not purchase the bottomlands, and as a result, due to preemption ratio limitations, we are forced to reduce the number of slips, that the CDB will concur that we do not have to appear before them again. Will discuss further when you call. My regards, Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods@woodsconsulting.org 2/6/2006 • • Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 3:33 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: 279 Windward Passage Wayne, Thanks for taking the time to talk today. As discussed, the planning file on the upland/ramp development does not include information contemplating the construction of a ramp to replace the existing ramp. I will update Leslie on the file when she returns from vacation. In addition to what we discussed, I was curious if the City would typically receive notice if SWFMD were to approve the developer's application for the upland/ramp development. To my knowledge, SWFMD has conditioned its permit approval on several items including proof of ownership of the bottomlands (they have requested a determination from the State), and clarification on who would be using the ramp (Clearwater Marine Science Center, police, fire, and/or the residents). I just want to make sure that the SWFMD permit doesn't come through without the City's knowledge before we can make a final determination whether the City was properly notified of the modifications to the existing ramp as part of the CDB/City permit process. If the City needs to take action to reverse a prior application approval because improper or insufficient information was provided, we may or may not need act before final SWFMD approval -but I'd prefer to be aware of whether the City's issue is the only unresolved issue. Thanks, Laura • • Wells, Wayne From: Albee, Rick Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 9:32 AM To: Watkins, Sherry; DRC Members Subject: RE: Resubmittals for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting: Sorry if my delay caused any inconveniences. 475 East Shore- No Issues. 400 Poinsettia- Revised condition to be met at building permit. 400 Jones- Condition met. 201 Brightwater- No Issues. 170 Brightwater- No Issues. 279 W indward- No Issues. 907 Ft Harrison- No Issues. 1091 Eldorado- No Issues. 161 Brightwater- No Issues. 2190 NE Coachman- No Issues. 1559 Union- No Issues. -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: , Tuesday, November 08, 2005 3:53 PM To: DRC Members Subject: Resubmittals for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting: DRC Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-10105; 475 East Shore Drive John 2. FLD2005-09096: 400 Poinsettia John 3. FLD2005-09098: 400 Jones Street Robert 4. FLD2005-09102: 201 Brightwater Wayne 5. FLD2005-09101: 170 Brightwater Drive Wayne 6. FLD2005-09093: 279 Windward Passage Wayne 7. FLD2005-07074: 907 S Ft Harrison Wayne 8. FLD2005-09094: 1091 Eldorado Avenue Wayne 9. FLD2005-09095: 161 Brightwater Dr Wayne 10. LUZ2005-090111ANX2005-09033 2190 NE Coachman Cky 11. LUZ2005-09012/ANX2005-09034 1559 Uni on Street Sharon 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, commentslconditionsfnr 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 4:00' pm on Thursday November 10, 2005. Sherry L Watkins Planning Deprzrtfnertt Administrative Analyst (727) 562-4582 shern~.watkires ~~ nzyclea~zvater.co»T Wells, Wayne From: Kambourolias, Sam Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 11:27 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Watkins, Sherry ' Subject: FLD2005-09093 Update ®~' aerial.doc existing.doc FLD Map request location.doc form.doc t. zone.doc 1 ,~ . Page 1 of 2 • Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 10:48 AM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Akin, Pam; Brumback, Garry; Horne, William Subject: Harbor Watch Condominium Project - 279 Winward Passage Wayne, City management has met and determined that there are concerns and potential serious implications of allowing new docks or repair of the existing docks at the above referenced location. City staff is moving forward to resolve the issue. In the meantime, any application that has been filed to build new docks or permits issued for the repair of the existing docks should be put on hold. I will be meeting with Mr. Woods and Mr. Gaynor Thursday to discuss the City's concerns and potential resolution of the issue. I will keep you informed of our progress and any change that should be ri~ade to the status of the application or permit. ~ Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 10:10 AM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Dianne Magee Subject: Request for Meeting Re: Harbor Watch Condominium Project Dear Ms. Lipowski: Joe Gaynor and I would like to request a meeting to discuss the submerged lands issue impacting the proposed boat ramp at the Clearwater Marine Science Center and the proposed docks for the Harbor Watch Condominiums. We were planning to immediately withdraw our application for the new docks and stay with the repair and rebuild of the existing docks, which are fully permitted by the City and County, as well as the Southwest Florida Water Management District. i We would like to meet ASAP as I will be out of town all of next week. Joe Gaynor is unavailable Wednesday morning and also Thursday morning from 10:00 to 12:00. I am also unavailable Wednesday and Thursday mornings. Thus Wednesday or Thursday afternoon of this week would be best. We trust you can schedule a meeting on such short notice. We would note that due to question sets from SWFWMD which we need to either respond to or withdraw our applications, our time frames are very tight. ~, Please give me a call at your earliest convenience to see if we can schedule a meeting. My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 1 l /28/2005 ~ ~ ~ • Page 2 of 2 Dunedin, FL 34698 li Phone: (727) 786-5747 ~ Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods~a woodsconsulting.org ~ I I 11/28/2005 s • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 9:15 AM To: Kambourolias, Sam ', Cc: Herman, Jason Subject: Map Request for 279 Windward Passage Sam - Attached is a map request for Case FLD2005-09093 for the property at 279 Windward Passage. I will bring over the paperwork. The survey that I will bring over you may keep. Thanks - Wayne ®L~:1 ~~ FLD Map request ~, form.doc ~I 1 • ® II I Wells, Wayne ~ From: Lipowski, Laura ', Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 8:38 AM I To: Wells, Wayne; Ruff, Bryan ~ Cc: Morris, William D.; Yellin, Catherine; Delk, Michael; Clayton,IGina; Thompson, Neil; Bill Woods (E-mail) Subject: RE: Case FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage I i I i The item was discussed in the most recent strategy meeting. I need to conduct further review, then I will call you to discuss the proposed strategy later today. ~ I -----Original Message----- ~I From: Wells, Wayne I Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 6:46 PM I To: Lipowski, Laura; Ruff, Bryan Cc: Morris, William D.; Yellin, Catherine; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil; Bill Woods (E-mail) Subject: RE: Case FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Laura - ~ Any word regarding the legal issues regarding this case? I am trying to see if this canl~ go forward to the Community Development Board, potentially with a condition(s) of approval. I have to have the agenda and information to the City Clerk's office on Wednesday, November 16, 2005. Thanks. Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura I Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 9:28 AM I To: Wells, Wayne; Ruff, Bryan Cc: Morris, William D.; Yellin, Catherine; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil I Subject: RE: Case FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage ~ I I am currently reviewing and should be able to provide more direction by the end o~ the day. I -----Original Message----- I From: Wells, Wayne i Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 5:54 PM I To: Ruff, Bryan; Lipowski, Laura I Cc: Morris, William D.; Yellin, Catherine; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil I Subject: Case FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage I I Bryan/Laura - ~ i Is there any way an answer could be given by end of day Wednesday, October' 26, 2005, as we have apre- DRC meeting on Thursday, October 27, 2005. Alternately, the latest I need anllanswer is by end of day on Wednesday, November 2, 2005, since the DRC meeting is on Thursday, November 3, 2005. Wayne I From: Ruff, Bryan Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 12:43 PM To: Morris, William D.; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Yellin, Catherine; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Case FLD 205-09093 Bill, You are correct that Laura has handled submerged lands / bottomland issues regardless of department assignment similar to me handling all construction law issues for our office regardless of department assignment. i However, in all fairness Laura she has not been brought into the loop on this issue until this email and I can't 1 ~ I Y speak for her availability based on her continuously heavy workload. • I' The information I have received from you either below or in the LSR is that the "financial impact is virtually nil," "we receive no rent for the corner," "there is no negative impact on navigation", there is no useful purpose for this area, and the area is essentially muck. The question presented to m'e is "are we giving up our right of ownership by letting them build on city bottom land?" i i Based on the overview I've been provided in LSR and below email, Bill seems to be of the opinion that there is little if any value to this area. Laura, do you have any concerns such as reverter, upland owners, property under code, etc??? ~ i BDR ~~ -----Original Message----- From: Morris, William D. Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 4:14 PM To: Wells, Wayne; Ruff, Bryan Cc: Yellin, Catherine Subject: Case FLD 205-09093 279 Windward PSG Harbor Watch Condos Wayne, I can't give you a complete answer on this one as it involves use of City Bottom Land, While I have referred it over in hard copy to Bryan Ruff, it may end up with Laura Lipowskias her expertise is more in line with property issues. i Background: there are 3 events happening on this site on City Bottom land. ~ 1. the owner has applied for and received a repair permit to repair the existing docks in their existing location. I 2. there is a proposal for this development to remove the ramp they have and replace it with a ramp in the western corner of the basin adjacent to the Marine Aquarium but not crossing Mover a line 45 degrees out from where the properties meet at the seawall. I had sent this separately to legal fo',r the same reason of not being clear on the impact of building on city bottom land. ~ I 3. the package in front of me has a proposal to replace the exiting docks with docks to support Eight boat slips. From the navigation standpoint there is no negative impact on navigation, they have made allowances for vessels moored at city moorings along the Marine Aquarium Seawall to have room to maneuver in and out of their slips: The uses as Condo Slips combined with the change in the upland property use will most certainly be less invasive on the environment as there will be significantly fewer boats in the basin and no boat maintenance ongoing on the upland. My only concern is not with the location of number of slips but with the legality of using city bottom land which may depend on how they are used by tl~e Condo Association. I do not believe the slips can be sold, I am not sure if they can be leased, the condo may have to rent them in a fashion similar to what'the city does with city slips with a provision that the bottom land remains the cities property and can be reclaimed at any time in the future with appropriate notice for the benefit of the public. All other slips in this basin are available to the public as either no cost public docks at the Island Way Grille site, or as City Marina Rental Slips as the city slips that surround the marine aquariuim. I wish I could give a definitive answer but without a legal review I would be hesi~ant to say any more than they do not present a hazard to navigation as proposed and leave the "use" and occupancy criteria to legal to provide guidance on, '~ Bill Morris Wells, Wayne From: Rice, Scott Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 10:29 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Watkins, Sherry I Subject: FLD2005-09093 - 279 Windward Passage I Conditions met. No approval conditions. D. Scott Rice ~ Land Devel. Engr. Manager Ii 727-562-4781 ~, scott.rice@MyClearwater.com i 1 i • ~ ~, Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 11:34 AM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Fw: Harbour Watch Docks Wayne: It looks like the City Attorney simply informed our client as to; their read on the reverter clause.....they may have not yet written a formal opinion. I am forwarding this info however, to keep you in the loop. I'll see you at the DRC meeting. May regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting, Inc. 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods(c~woodsconsulting.or ~ ----- Original Message ----- I From: Jose~hw.gay_norp._a@aol com i To: Bill_West o ussouth_com ; Jerry_Shaw@o~ussouth.com ; Conti as@shutts_law.com Cc: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org ; tidewaterre@verizon.net ; Hamptonlnv@aol.com ; i- ~dpdoganiero@tampaba~.rr.com Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 1:36 PM i Subject: Harbour Watch Docks I just concluded my conference with the City Attorney, who is assigned to bottom lan~ds,regarding the status of our docks and she concluded that it is in the best interest of the City to promote boatGng and use of the waterways it being in the public interest, whether the docks are private or public, and~~ although she has no historical foundation for the 1958 Deed of Dedication, she is relying on her predecessor's opinions that the City can do what it has been doing.She also approved my disclosure paragraph with one typo exception(Dedication vs Declaration)which Ihave corrected and attached.She also indicated that the City has been in negotiations with the State for over 6 years regarding either the buyout of the Reverter Clause orb sublease arrangement whereby the State would get a portion of the rent.Our new design for the docks comes up next Tuesday before CBD and she is going to remind CBD about the Reverter and let them know that we are willing to stay at status quo as a Permittee which is permitted under the Dedication and is clearly a private use, or we would accept a sublease or a direct lease if they finalize their deal with the State before we need to close on the docks.She also said that the City feels strongly with their position and would litigate with the State if they tried to exercise the Reverter clause. ~ Bill and Bill,l did not receive notice of the public hearing and I now plan on attending next Tuesday, please keep me in the loop on the dock issue and I will do the same. Joseph W. Gaynor 304 Monroe Street Dunedin, Florida 34698 Office: 727-736-8500 Fax: 727-736-8600 Cell: 727-599-3527 11/13/2005 • Wells, Wayne ~~ s I From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 3:22 PM ~ To: Planning I Subject: FW: Resubmittals for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting: i i FYI ~~ Sherzy L Watkins Plarrrzing Department Adnzirzistrcz#ive Analyst (727) 562-4582 sherry. zua tkins ~rnyclearwater. cozn -----Original Message----- From: Reid, Debbie Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 3:08 PM To: Watkins, Sherry Subject: FW: Resubmittals for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting: Sherry, P&R has no issues with the below cases. Debbie O -----Original Message----- From: Kader, Art Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 8:36 AM To: Reid, Debbie Subject: FW: Resubmittals for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting: -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 3:53 PM To: DRC Members Subject: Resubmittals for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting: DRC Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-10105; 475 East Shore Drive John 2. FLD2005-09096: 400 Poinsettia John 3. FLD2005-09098: 400 Jones Street Robert 4. FLD2005-09102: 201 Brightwater Wayne 5. FLD2005-09101: 170 Brightwater Drive Wayne 6. FLD2005-09093: 279 Windward Passage Wayne 7. FLD2005-07074: 907 S Ft Harrison Wayne 8. FLD2005-09094: 1091 Eldorado Avenue Wayne 9. FLD2005-09095: 161 Brightwater Dr Wayne 10. LUZ2005-09011/ANX2005-09033 2190 NE Coachman Cky 11. LUZ2005-09012/ANX2005-090341559 Union Street Sharon i 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 4:00 pm on Thursday Novem~er 10, 2005. I ~~ ~ ~ ~ III Slxer-ry L Watkins Pl~nrzisrg De~rar-trnerrt Adrarirristrative Analyst (727) 562-4582 slTerry.watkinsQnrycleanuater.conr 2 • Wells, Wayne _ From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 3:53 PM ~ To: DRC Members ~ Subject: Resubmittals for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting: i DRC Members, ~ Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-10105; 475 East Shore Drive John ~ 2. FLD2005-09096: 400 Poinsettia John 3. FLD2005-09098: 400 Jones Street Robert ~ 4. FLD2005-09102: 201 Brightwater Wayne 5. FLD2005-09101: 170 Brightwater Drive Wayne i 6. FLD2005-09093: 279 Windward Passage Wayne j 7. FLD2005-07074: 907 S Ft Harrison Wayne ~ 8. FLD2005-09094: 1091 Eldorado Avenue Wayne ~ 9. FLD2005-09095: 161 Brightwater Dr Wayne ~ 10. LUZ2005-09011/ANX2005-09033 2190 NE Coachman Cky ~ 11 LUZ2005 09012l ANX2005-09034 1559 Union Street Sharon I i 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 stil'I "not met," please affirm to me via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possible by 4:00 pm on Thursday November 10, 2005. I Slcerry L Watkins ~ Planning Department ~ Administrative Analyst ~ (727) 562-4582 ~ sherry.zvatkins@tnyclearwater.cotn ~ II II Flexible Development Application -Map Request Planner Name: Wayne Wells I~ Case Number: FLD2005-09093 ~ Date Requested: November 14, 2005 ~ Date Requested for (date): November 30, 2005 '~ i Maps Requested '~ x^ Location Map '~ x^ Aerial Map ~ x^ Zoning Map ~~ i x^ Existing Surrounding Uses Map ' Required Documents to be submitted to Engineering ' x^ Legal Description ~~ I x^ Survey ' i x^ Map with Proposed Site Highlighted ' ~, Map Name '~ ' Owner: Harbour Estates, LLC 'Case: i ~ ~, FLD2005-09093 Property site: ~ 279 Windward Passage ~ sizelAcres): ' ~ 1.45 PIN: 08/29/15/43380/003/0050 i Atlas Page: i i 2676 F~C.D~or• O'o93 ® 58A • 2588 ~ . ^r~ '+ lea +, a 5 a9 7 4 , /~ CITY OF CLEAR ER ~` Ip 5t 6t ~li PDEEIlJ~COUNTY F Rt T r r ~ `, / GO DA ~ e /'1 -- -- -- 1 j/0 ,pD '° 82 Iep a PREPARED aY ~ i ~ PUBLIC MORKS ADMINISTRATION " - ~ ~ ENGINEERING A 100 S 4yrtle Ave., Ckawaler, fl 3]]58 9 ~ 'yn~ / -~ y!~ ~- 4s 83 IG ~ (f-(]~//~ C0~ a/12( Q ~ Pn.: (813J582-17aD. Foa: (813)526-1735 nllv://rrrrw.claarxvla-f1.<am/engNer/ 46 4d , J I V L A7FF HARBOR ~ C~~ 41;E ~T ~fHD'E ~` 5 bpC ~~23 lad CO ~~ A~ tae r ~ N e4 Ile " ' d.NOlmer: ~~y~~0 41 C~~r~t,~ 1tt q4 43 {n./n - //~ 35 ~r0 ~ /t/ t0 IS6 85 Ilt = ~ C 1K Pudle Intormotlon dola h Nrnlanad Dy lne Clty of Qwrwalw Pudlc Worts AdmFlslrOlbn/Englnenfnq, pod mutt Da oc<vDtad d d J (, ~ 42 y/ J-(9? IYI d8 lit /R ~1 ~ an use Dy the r clplent Ilh the undertlondN9 tool the dale received •eal cplleCitd 10f lne Purpose of dev[1opNq a gropnlC e a ~ ~ j1~ Cr ~ 66 1° .~/It~ 34 N K V 4 el 17 N 41 b t I Inlroalrvclure Invenlay. b auto, the City of Cleorwol<r PWA/E motU no wwronlNS, aDresstd or Impllad, conaminq Ine vecur l l l II P 1! /9 el 33 /y7, IF Q.q 1fr E.I 87 4D I 8 1 I ac Y• <omde mess rN aD llly, w IloDI111Y of 1hh dolo "r any Diner por Uewor uae. Furthermore. Ine CRy of Clearrvler PwA/E psa~nat no Ibeeuy wnefto..er natoc(eled .Iln m aq n'%isY 50 IOe IoY y ~O ~~ ul .~ n A a7t ~~. ~ ~ let ~ 39 ~ 69 , e e mlauae or auto dolo. d ~ Q Q ~ • ~•` ,,~QQ~~ 100 ~ 4 ~I el 15 d 51 loo /p1 69 - PCOtT ~' N'jp ~ a G~ tA~ N 0 38 i ,G~ w ~ e ~' Thl. Allay It au D ~ to perlodk coon Fa Nlovmalltn aDW/ lolnl ~eNSlant picots call PWA/E or vlail our Web wile. ~D• 52 an r 1 I rt Ts .1`" ~ -d G }7 7 , ~ ~ N C ~it n I C ~¢ Dpr„~ 53 eN ~ ate ' ~' ~~~ 0 1 H ` 1 `IC ,$ 17 ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~6 ~' ao 7~,~ s tte lam, -ll r S4 alt alp aP 0 22 _`~' P/~ l IIDO 0 2t b 4 A>~ a/ 35 ' ~~ i2/Ot 9AY 6 'y5Sa1: mt :a ~ fS I 6 s ~ o too 200 40o soo a d~ 34 ~ ; ~M 4' ./ It 1D P atl ..e,r M Gp pp ~ N , ~ 9 ~ t ~ ~ y "~, ~ ~ 4 O j- tto .~++^ "'•• p3 57 33 °~ t SCALE: I" = 400' !ov avl ~ 11 ~ DOLPE{IN COVE 4aG Q 0 tip r.le 32 coxn \ a L~58 o u ~ a yap »1 D 20-58 ii G~ '+~ 9 ~` ~~' LEGEND: r ~ tte 31 O~O I ~/ PASSAGE $ w,359 Q w ~ ClG r13/o8 DdIY ttt r.x tN e 30 ~ 60 in A N ~ O BLOCK NUMBER ~ N ~ g I '~ ,dt ~ nt o ~A p t10 I e,p .t3/Dt ti ~ 7~ L'1 at T9 ~~ .. ~ ~ N ~ 1234 LOT ADDRESS ~ S w~, 1 m I Y to ra IDO d ~ tt y ;o` in .~ ~ ~/"1 ttp, r ,$ 82 2a I 1 7 ,~ '~ ( ~-._~._ ^<J m m a Ct1 tot toy a 12 'P' s ' ~ ~ D - ~~~~~ CITY LIMITS LINE •` I mt-retp.pw e ~ r t ; tpp i rpr t as '>/ IS ~'~P 1._.S ~1_........ /a a3 too ml T7 s ~ ~ ~ F,'~L.,!:^.;1 SHADED AREA -PROPERTY L~WWJ OUTSIDE CLEARWATER CITY LIMITS o tiA~ NO Ct `~ • i1! ;• -. IS 02 i y ~, ~:~ 4 ST. BRENDAN ~-•ut•- as 64 uD cal Ta a s AGREEMENT TO ANNEX ' s ~ D Ay~b CATHOLIC -/ 4 ^as 2s P f+l G va CHURCH s ~ ' CITY OWNED PR I rl 3 s ~ t A L~a 24 ~i ~ ~ m ae s OPERTY i R.J la W+ ru 4a I tr z ° MDR ZONING DESIGNATION n1 r.n. I 2 4 '9 1 `~, 1~1 ,P ~~G A.~` t3/0511o In ~~~dd •~i h'a7 rla ~ na 23 ZONE LINE ~, °° •g,• ~ ,~ 4 ae n - - - - - - - - - ~ tr t d` 9 13/D4 Ea7 - - roa- - -aoF - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - _ -IS/_OB- _- --2ob-- -J~ _ - - - ~t ~,~ _ - - - - Q - _ q1y ° - - _ ~ - ~ _ - ~ . M,(RtlNf- - - - -l4 - - - - - - - -- - - - V 70 y 6 ~ rof2D ~ z1 `Sj •6 ~ roD F N RE:ON( Ot0 y ~ a ~¢` \~4 ae~ ~11v-apv Jt MlgwARD 8 $ H D R PA p Itm of/u/ar mere. m o~ ~ SSADE $ Iy eT-HI r 7 :. ~' dy 13/07 i~ / ro [~ `,~ 4, e pp ro ti ~3 tt~ ~! 4y it { ryfry.y ~gr Q" 5 i , ~ 1 ,~ y, 2 18 >r 4 2 ~' 19 ~ ~~3„ la 17 c1 m ~ ~~ I ~ ~`y °: ' ~` 6 aaarple C~ ~ / 18 ~ a° i ~ ~ ~~ ~7 ~eumuta.~ain s ti ~ h V s R~ I ,~ ~ y ,a al Is P S° P ~ • H0 ~ ~ P m I Jll7/r'1MT , R17iU11] LO F ' 8 tI f1 ~ ~ 4 ~O?e ~e ° CQ-OP (I ~ ' % 9 n'e m to 0 13 JQf~EL. 03 0899 a .l a 12 ZONING ATLAS ~ 276A • 2768 sE ~~ D 277A ~ e is S 15 E 2678 J ~ c i a 1 3f :10 m Case Number: FLD2005-09093 -- 279 WINDWARD PSG • ~ 0~ P Owner(s): Harbour Estates Llc 4200 W Cypress St Ste 444 ~ ~A E ~ Tampa, Fl 33607 I TELEPHONE: No Phone, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email Applicant Harbour Estates Llc ~ 4200 West Cypress Street ~ Tampa, Fl 33607 TELEPHONE: 813-877-4444, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email Representative: Woods Consulting, Inc. 1714 Cr 1 ~ Dunedin, Fl 34698 TELEPHONE: 727-786-5747, FAX: 727-786-7479, E-MAIL: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Location: 1.45 acres located on the south side of Windward Passage, approximately 300 feet west of Island Way. Atlas Page: 267B Zoning District: C, Commercial ' Request: Flexible Development approval to permit an 1,818 square foot multi-use ~~dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4ifeet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601. 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 I~ Neighborhood Island Estates Civic Association Association(s): Clearwater, Fl 33767 i 140 Island Way TELEPHONE: 442-2237, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email ~~ Neighborhood Islander Condo Inc. i Association(s): Clearwater, Fl 33767 113 Island Way Apt 245 ~~ TELEPHONE: No Phone, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email ~ Presenter: Wayne Wells, Planner III i Attendees Included: City Staff: Wayne Wells, Neil Thompson, Scott Rice, Lenny Rickard, Bill Morris, Tom Glenn Applicant/Rep: Bill Woods ~~ The DRC reviewed this application with the following comments: I General Engineering: ' 1 , 1) Under no circumstances shall any structure be constructed within the 10 ft! easement. I 2) Contractor shall exercise caution working near 12" force main. 3) Access to the 12" force main for city employees shall be maintained at all times. The above notes shall be added to the plan prior to CDB. ~~ i General Note: DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review, additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. Environmental I 1 . No Issues I Fire: 1 , Must meet NFPA 1 & NFPA 303 requirements. In particular, Class I standpipe and fire extinguishers. Acknowledge and show on plan PRIOR TO CDB I Harbor Master: i I I .I I Development Review Agenda -Thursday, November 3, 2005 -Page 61 1 . I can't give you a• plete answer on this one as it involves use of• Bottom Land, While I have referred it over in hard copy to Bryan Ruff, it may end up with Laura Lipowski as her expertise is more in line with property issues. Background: there are 3 events happening on this site on City Bottom land. 1. the owner has applied for and received a repair permit to repair the existing docks in their existing location. 2. there is a proposal for this development to remove the ramp they have and replace it with a ramp in the western corner of the basin adjacent to the Marine Aquarium but not crossing over a line 45 degrees out from where the properties meet at the seawall. I had sent this separately to legal for the same reason of not being clear on the impact of building on city bottom land. 3. the package in front of me has a proposal to replace the exiting docks with docks to support Eight boat slips. From the navigation standpoint there is no negative impact on navigation, they have made allowances for vessels moored at city moorings along the Marine Aquarium Seawall to have room to maneuver in and out of their slips. The uses as Condo Slips combined with the change in the upland property use will most certainly be less invasive on the environment as there will be significantly fewer boats in the basin and no boat maintenance ongoing on the upland. My only concern is not with the location of number of slips but with the legality of using city bottom land which may depend on how they are used by the Condo Association. I do not believe the slips can be sold, I am not sure if they can be leased, the condo may have to rent them in a fashion similar to what the city does with city slips with a provision that the bottom land remains the cities property and can be reclaimed at any time in the future with appropriate notice for the benefit of the public. All other slips in this basin are available to the public as either no cost public docks at the Island Way Grille site, or as City Marina Rental Slips as the city slips that surround the marine aquarium. I wish I could give a definitive answer but without a legal review I would be hesitant to say any more than they do not present a hazard to navigation as proposed and leave the "use" and occupancy criteria to legal to provide guidance on. Legal: 1 . This is currently being reviewed by the Legal Department. This is a complicated legal issue, coupled with important City policy issues. Additional comments are forthconung. Land Resources: t No Issues. Landscaping: 1 , No issues. Parks and Recreation: 1 . No issues -removal of existing docks -construction of multi-use docks. Stormwater: 1 . No Issues. Solid Waste: 1 . No issues. Traffic Engineering: 1 . No issues for docks. Planning: 1 . Revise the address on Page 1 of the application from 247 Windward Passage to 279 Windward Passage. 2 . Provide the justification for the reduction to the east side setback. 3 . Explain why floating docks are proposed rather than fixed docks. Any noise factors? 4 . Revise Attachment B #3 (Setbacks): (1) First paragraph, second sentence: change "eat side" to "east side". (2) Second paragraph: Provide greater explanation as to why the west side setback is so great (81.5 feet) (due to the adjacent docks at the Clearwater Marine Science Center and the boat ramp). 5 . Revise Attachment A: In (d) it is noted there were no valuable submerged resources, yet in (f) it is noted the dock was designed to avoid existing seagrasses. Resolve conflict. Other: No Comments Development Review Agenda -Thursday, November 3, 2005 -Page 62 R Notes: Due to Legal issues, it will be de• ned when this case will be scheduled for CD~ Development Review Agenda -Thursday, November 3, 2005 -Page 63 3:10 pm Case Number: FLD2005-090 -- 279 WINDWARD PSG Owner(s): Harbour Estates Llc 4200 W Cypress St Ste 444 Tampa, F133607 TELEPHONE: No Phone, Applicant Harbour Estates Llc 4200 West Cypress Street Tampa, F133607 • FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email ~~ 11.3.~a~ ~~~ TELEPHONE: 813-877-4444, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email Representative: Woods Consulting, Inc. 1714 Cr 1 Dunedin, F134698 TELEPHONE: 727-786-5747, FAX: 727-786-7479, E-MAIL: billwoods@woodsconsulting.org Location: 1.45 acres located on the south side of Windward Passage, approximately 300 feet west of Island Way. Atlas Page: 267B Zoning District: C, Commercial Request: Flexible Development approval to permit an 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601. 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 Island Estates Civic Association Association(s): Clearwater, F133767 140 Island Way TELEPHONE: 442-2237, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email Neighborhood Islander Condo Inc. Association(s): Clearwater, F133767 113 Island Way Apt 245 TELEPHONE: No Phone, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email Presenter: Wayne Wells, Planner III Attendees Included: City Staff: Wayne Wells, Neil Thompson, Scott Rice, Lenny Rickard, Bill Morris Applicant/Rep: Bill Woods, Terri Skapik, The DRC reviewed this application with the following comments: General Engineering: 1 , 1) Under no circumstances shall any structure be constructed within the 10 ft. easement. 2) Contractor shall exercise caution working near 12" force main. 3) Access to the 12" force main for city employees shall be maintained at all times. The above notes shall be added to the plan prior to CDB. General Note: DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review, additional comments maybe forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. Environmental: 1 , No Issues Fire: 1 . Must meet NFPA 1 &NFPA 303 requirements. In particular, Class I standpipe and fire extinguishers. Acknowledge and show on plan PRIOR TO CDB Harbor Master: Development Review Agenda -Thursday, November 3, 2005 -Page 61 ` 1 . I can't give you a complete answer on this one as it involves use of (,ity Bottom Land, While I have referred it over in hard copy to Bryan Ruff, it may end up with Laura Lipowski as her expertise is more in line with property issues. Background: there are 3 events happening on this site on City Bottom land. 1. the owner has applied for and received a repair permit to repair the existing docks in their existing location. 2. there is a proposal for this development to remove the ramp they have and replace it with a ramp in the western corner of the basin adjacent to the Marine Aquarium but not crossing over a line 45 degrees out from where the properties meet at the seawall. I had sent this separately to legal for the same reason of not being clear on the impact of building on city bottom land. 3. the package in front of me has a proposal to replace the exiting docks with docks to support Eight boat slips. From the navigation standpoint there is no negative impact on navigation, they have made allowances for vessels moored at city moorings along the Marine Aquarium Seawall to have room to maneuver in and out of their slips. The uses as Condo Slips combined with the change in the upland property use will most certainly be less invasive on the environment as there will be significantly fewer boats in the basin and no boat maintenance ongoing on the upland. My only concern is not with the location of number of slips but with the legality of using city bottom land which may depend on how they are used by the Condo Association. I do not believe the slips can be sold, I am not sure if they can be leased, the condo may have to rent them in a fashion similar to what the city does with city slips with a provision that the bottom land remains the cities property and can be reclaimed at any time in the future with appropriate notice for the benefit of the public. All other slips in this basin are available to the public as either no cost public docks at the Island Way Grille site, or as City Marina Rental Slips as the city slips that surround the marine aquarium. I wish I could give a definitive answer but without a legal review I would be hesitant to say any more than they do not present a hazard to navigation as proposed and leave the "use" and occupancy criteria to legal to provide guidance on. Legal: 1 , This is currently being reviewed by the Legal Department. This is a complicated legal issue, coupled with important City policy issues. Additional comments are forthcoming. Land Resources: 1 No Issues. Landscaping: 1 . No issues. Parks and Recreation: 1 , No issues -removal of existing docks -construction of multi-use docks. Stormwater: 1 . No Issues. Solid Waste: No issues. Traffic Engineering: 1 . No issues for docks. Planning: 1 . Revise the address on Page 1 of the application from 247 Windward Passage to 279 Windward Passage. 2 . Provide the justification for the reduction to the east side setback. 3 . Explain why floating docks are proposed rather than fixed docks. Any noise factors? 4 . Revise Attachment B #3 (Setbacks): (1) First paragraph, second sentence: change "eat side" to "east side". (2) Second paragraph: Provide greater explanation as to why the west side setback is so great (81.5 feet) (due to the adjacent docks at the Clearwater Marine Science Center and the boat ramp). 5 . Revise Attachment A: In (d) it is noted there were no valuable submerged resources, yet in (f) it is noted the dock was designed to avoid existing seagrasses. Resolve conflict. Other: No Comments Development Review Agenda -Thursday, November 3, 2005 -Page 62 r 41 • y • Notes: C7 Development Review Agenda -Thursday, November 3, 2005 -Page 63 ~ • Wells, Wayne From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 9:28 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Ruff, Bryan Cc: Morris, William D.; Yellin, Catherine; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: RE: Case FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage I am currently reviewing and should be able to provide more direction by the end of the day. -----Original Message----- From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 5:54 PM To: Ruff, Bryan; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Morris, William D.; Yellin, Catherine; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: Case FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bryan/Laura - Is there any way an answer could be given by end of day Wednesday, October 26, 2005, as we have apre-DRC meeting on Thursday, October 27, 2005. Alternately, the latest I need an answer is by end of day on Wednesday, November 2, 2005, since the DRC meeting is on Thursday, November 3, 2005. Wayne From: Ruff, Bryan Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 12:43 PM To: Morris, William D.; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Yellin, Catherine; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Case FLD 205-09093 Bill, You are correct that Laura has handled submerged lands / bottomland issues regardless of department assignment similar to me handling all construction law issues for our office regardless of department assignment. However, in all fairness Laura she has not been brought into the loop on this issue until this email and I can't speak for her availability based on her continuously heavy workload. The information I have received from you either below or in the LSR is that the "financial impact is virtually nil," "we receive no rent for the corner," "there is no negative impact on navigation", there is no useful purpose for this area, and the area is essentially muck. The question presented to me is "are we giving up our right of ownership by letting them build on city bottom land?" Based on the overview I've been provided in LSR and below email, Bill seems to be of the opinion that there is little if any value to this area. Laura, do you have any concerns such as reverter, upland owners, property under code, etc??? BDR -----Original Message----- From: Morris, William D. Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 4:14 PM To: Wells, Wayne; Ruff, Bryan Cc: Yellin, Catherine Subject: Case FLD 205-09093 279 Windward PSG Harbor Watch Condos Wayne, I can't give you a complete answer on this one as it involves use of City Bottom Land, While I have referred it over in hard copy to Bryan Ruff, it may end up with Laura Lipowski as her expertise is more in line with property issues. Background: there are 3 events happening on this site on City Bottom land. • 1. the owner has applied for and received a repair permit to repair the existing docks in their existing location. 2. there is a proposal for this development to remove the ramp they have and replace it with a ramp in the western corner of the basin adjacent to the Marine Aquarium but not crossing over a line 45 degrees out from where the properties meet at the seawall. I had sent this separately to legal for the same reason of not being clear on the impact of building on city bottom land. 3. the package in front of me has a proposal to replace the exiting docks with docks to support Eight boat slips. From the navigation standpoint there is no negative impact on navigation, they have made allowances for vessels moored at city moorings along the Marine Aquarium Seawall to have room to maneuver in and out of their slips. The uses as Condo Slips combined with the change in the upland property use will most certainly be less invasive on the environment as there will be significantly fewer boats in the basin and no boat maintenance ongoing on the upland. My only concern is not with the location of number of slips but with the legality of using city bottom land which may depend on how they are used by the Condo Association. I do not believe the slips can be sold, I am not sure if they can be leased, the condo may have to rent them in a fashion similar to what the city does with city slips with a provision that the bottom land remains the cities property and can be reclaimed at any time in the future with appropriate notice for the benefit of the public. All other slips in this basin are available to the public as either no cost public docks at the Island Way Grille site, or as City Marina Rental Slips as the city slips that surround the marine aquarium. I wish I could give a definitive answer but without a legal review I would be hesitant to say any more than they do not present a hazard to navigation as proposed and leave the "use" and occupancy criteria to legal to provide guidance on, Bill Morris Y R ~ • Wells, Wayne From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 5:54 PM To: Ruff, Bryan; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Morris, William D.; Yellin, Catherine; Delk, Michael; Clayton, Gina; Thompson, Neil Subject: Case FLD2005-09093, 279 Windward Passage Bryan/Laura - Is there any way an answer could be given by end of day Wednesday, October 26, 2005, as we have apre-DRC meeting on Thursday, October 27, 2005. Alternately, the latest I need an answer is by end of day on Wednesday, November 2, 2005, since the DRC meeting is on Thursday, November 3, 2005. Wayne From: Ruff, Bryan Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 12:43 PM To: Morris, William D.; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Yellin, Catherine; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Case FLD 205-09093 Bill, You are correct that Laura has handled submerged lands / bottomland issues regardless of department assignment similar to me handling all construction law issues for our office regardless of department assignment. However, in all fairness Laura she has not been brought into the loop on this issue until this email and I can't speak for her availability based on her continuously heavy workload. The information I have received from you either below or in the LSR is that the "financial impact is virtually nil," "we receive no rent for the corner," "there is no negative impact on navigation", there is no useful purpose for this area, and the area is essentially muck. The question presented to me is "are we giving up our right of ownership by letting them build on city bottom land?" Based on the overview I've been provided in LSR and below email, Bill seems to be of the opinion that there is little if any value to this area. Laura, do you have any concerns such as reverter, upland owners, property under code, etc??? BDR -----Original Message----- From: Morris, William D. Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 4:14 PM To: Wells, Wayne; Ruff, Bryan Cc: Yellin, Catherine Subject: Case FLD 205-09093 279 Windward PSG Harbor Watch Condos Wayne, I can't give you a complete answer on this one as it involves use of City Bottom Land, While I have referred it over in hard copy to Bryan Ruff, it may end up with Laura Lipowski as her expertise is more in line with property issues. Background: there are 3 events happening on this site on City Bottom land. 1. the owner has applied for and received a repair permit to repair the existing docks in their existing location. 2. there is a proposal for this development fo remove the ramp they have and replace it with a ramp in the western corner of the basin adjacent to the Marine Aquarium but not crossing over a line 45 degrees out from where the properties meet at the seawall. I had sent this separately to legal for the same reason of not being clear on the impact of building on city bottom land. 3. the package in front of me has a proposal to replace the exiting docks with docks to support Eight boat slips. From the navigation standpoint there is no negative impact on navigation, they have made allowances for vessels moored at city .~ moorings along the Marine Aquarium Seawall to have room to maneuver in and outheir slips. The uses as Condo Slips combined with the change in the upland property use will most certainly be less invasive on the environment as there will be significantly fewer boats in the basin and no boat maintenance ongoing on the upland. My only concern is not with the location of number of slips but with the legality of using city bottom land which may depend on how they are used by the Condo Association. I do not believe the slips can be sold, I am not sure if they can be leased, the condo may have to rent them in a fashion similar to what the city does with city slips with a provision that the bottom land remains the cities property and can be reclaimed at any time in the future with appropriate notice for the benefit of the public. All other slips in this basin are available to the public as either no cost public docks at the Island Way Grille site, or as City Marina Rental Slips as the city slips that surround the marine aquarium. I wish I could give a definitive answer but without a legal review I would be hesitant to say any more than they do not present a hazard to navigation as proposed and leave the "use" and occupancy criteria to legal to provide guidance on, Bill Morris • • Welis, Wayne From: Ruff, Bryan Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 12:43 PM To: Morris, William D.; Lipowski, Laura Cc: Yellin, Catherine; Wells, Wayne Subject: RE: Case FLD 205-09093 Bill, You are correct that Laura has handled submerged lands / bottomland issues regardless of department assignment similar to me handling all construction law issues for our office regardless of department assignment. However, in all fairness Laura she has not been brought into the loop on this issue until this email and I can't speak for her availability based on her continuously heavy workload. The information I have received from you either below or in the LSR is that the "financial impact is virtually nil," "we receive no rent for the corner," "there is no negative impact on navigation", there is no useful purpose for this area, and the area is essentially muck. The question presented to me is "are we giving up our right of ownership by letting them build on city bottom land?" Based on the overview I've been provided in LSR and below email, Bill seems to be of the opinion that there is little if any value to this area. Laura, do you have any concerns such as reverter, upland owners, property under code, etc??? BDR -----Original Message----- From: Morris, William D. Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 4:14 PM To: Wells, Wayne; Ruff, Bryan Cc: Yellin, Catherine Subject: Case FLD 205-09093 279 Windward PSG Harbor Watch Condos Wayne, I can't give you a complete answer on this one as it involves use of City Bottom Land, While I have referred it over in hard copy to Bryan Ruff, it may end up with Laura Lipowski as her expertise is more in line with property issues. Background: there are 3 events happening on this site on City Bottom land. 1. the owner has applied for and received a repair permit to repair the existing docks in their existing location. 2. there is a proposal for this development to remove the ramp they have and replace it with a ramp in the western corner of the basin adjacent to the Marine Aquarium but not crossing over a line 45 degrees out from where the properties meet at the seawall. I had sent this separately to legal for the same reason of not being clear on the impact of building on city bottom land. 3. the package in front of me has a proposal to replace the exiting docks with docks to support Eight boat slips. From the navigation standpoint there is no negative impact on navigation, they have made allowances for vessels moored at city moorings along the Marine Aquarium Seawall to have room to maneuver in and out of their slips. The uses as Condo Slips combined with the change in the upland property use will most certainly be less invasive on the environment as there will be significantly fewer boats in the basin and no boat maintenance ongoing on the upland. My only concern is not with the location of number of slips but with the legality of using city bottom land which may depend on how they are used by the Condo Association. I do not believe the slips can be sold, I am not sure if they can be leased, the condo may have to rent them in a fashion similar to what the city does with city slips with a provision that the bottom land remains the cities property and can be reclaimed at any time in the future with appropriate notice for the benefit of the public. All other slips in this basin are available to the public as either no cost public docks at the Island Way Grille site, or as City Marina Rental Slips as the city slips that surround the marine aquarium. I wish I could give a definitive answer but without a legal review I would be hesitant to say any more than they do not present a hazard to navigation as proposed and leave the "use" and occupancy criteria to legal to provide guidance on, A • Bill Morris • • Wells, Wayne From: Morris, William D. Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 4:14 PM To: Wells, Wayne; Ruff, Bryan Cc: Yellin, Catherine Subject: Case FLD 205-09093 279 Windward PSG Harbor Watch Condos Wayne, I can't give you a complete answer on this one as it involves use of City Bottom Land, While I have referred it over in hard copy to Bryan Ruff, it may end up with Laura Lipowski as her expertise is more in line with property issues. Background: there are 3 events happening on this site on City Bottom land. 1, the owner has applied for and received a repair permit to repair the existing docks in their existing location. 2. there is a proposal for this development to remove the ramp they have and replace it with a ramp in the western corner of the basin adjacent to the Marine Aquarium but not crossing over a line 45 degrees out from where the properties meet at the seawall. I had sent this separately to legal for the same reason of not being clear on the impact of building on city bottom land. 3. the package in front of me has a proposal to replace the exiting docks with docks to support Eight boat slips. From the navigation standpoint there is no negative impact on navigation, they have made allowances for vessels moored at city moorings along the Marine Aquarium Seawall to have room to maneuver in and out of their slips. The uses as Condo Slips combined with the change in the upland property use will most certainly be less invasive on the environment as there will be significantly fewer boats in the basin and no boat maintenance ongoing on the upland. My only concern is not with the location of number of slips but with the legality of using city bottom land which may depend on how they are used by the Condo Association. I do not believe the slips can be sold, I am not sure if they can be leased, the condo may have to rent them in a fashion similar to what the city does with city slips with a provision that the bottom land remains the cities property and can be reclaimed at any time in the future with appropriate notice for the benefit of the public. All other slips in this basin are available to the public as either no cost public docks at the Island Way Grille site, or as City Marina Rental Slips as the city slips that surround the marine aquarium. I wish I could give a definitive answer but without a legal review I would be hesitant to say any more than they do not present a hazard to navigation as proposed and leave the "use" and occupancy criteria to legal to provide guidance on, Bill Morris • • Wells, Wayne From: Schodtler, John Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 3:18 PM To: Parry, Mark; Wells, Wayne Subject: HARBOR WATCH/ROSS YACHT PROPOSED DOCKS.:. -----Original Message----- From: Morris, William D. Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 3:13 PM To: Schodtler, John New topic, Harbor Watch/Ross yachts site (adjacent to Island Way Grill) We have an interesting one with Harbor Watch Condo's that are replacing Ross yachts, I have already reviewed with the Marine Advisory Board and they do not support granting a waiver for what Harbor watch had proposed in their draft dock plan, but it had an easy fix, we recommended he leave off the tie poles on the side adjacent to Island Way Grill and just get a side setback waiver without asking for an intrusion into the adjoining property that the tie poles would cause.... have not seen that one come up yet "officially" I got a draft copy to work with him on those docks. Those docks could not effectively be centered because he had to leave room for existing city docks around the Marine Aquarium. Pinellas County Property App~er Information: 08 29 15 43380 003 0~ Page 2 of 5 os ~ ~~ ~ ~~ f 4~~~0 ~ oar ~ oo~o 13-Nov-2005 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 18:02:18 Ownership Information Hon-Residential Property Address, Use, and Sales HARBOUR ESTATES LLC OBK; 14371 OPG; 1728 4200 W CYPRESS ST STE 444 TAMPA FL 33607-4168 EVAC: A EUAC Comparable sales value as Prop Addr: 279 WINDWARD PSG of Jan 1, 2005, based on Census Tract: 260.01 sales from 2003 - 2004; 0 Sale Date OR Book/Page Price {Qual/UnQ} Vac/Imp Plat Information 5 I2, 005 14,34312,046 600,000 {U} I 1959: Book 051 Pgs 034- 5 /2,005 14,34312,061 3,000,000 {Q} I 0040: Book Pgs - 8 12,002 12,1651 877 1,300,000 (U} I 0000: Book Pgs - 0 10 0/ 0 0 ( } 2005 Value EXEMPTIONS Just/Market: 3,257,100 Homestead: NO Dwnership ~ .000 Govt Exem: NO Use ~; .000 AssessedlCap. 3,257,100 Institutional Exem; NO Tax Exempt ~; .000 Historic Exem: 0 Taxable; 3,257,100 Agricultural; 0 2004 Tax Information District: CW Seawall: Frontage: Clearwater View; 05 Millage; 23.2372 Land Size Unit Land Land Land Front x Depth Price Units Meth 05 Taxes; 75,685.88 1} 0 x 0 55.00 63, 831.00 S Special Tax .00 2} 0 x 0 .00 .00 3} 0 x 0 .00 .00 LJithout the Save-Our-Homes 4} 0 x 0 .00 .00 cap, 2005 to}:ES will be 5} p x 0 . 00 . 00 75, 685. 88 6} 0 x 0 . 00 . 00 LJithout any exemptions, 2005 taxes will be ; 75, 685.88 Short Legal ISLAND ESTATES OF CLEARWATE R UNIT 5 Description BLK C, LOT 5 & HW'LY 50FT OF LOTS i & 4 & SE'LY 60FT Building Information http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-scr3?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&... 11/13/2005 Pinellas County Property App~er Information: 08 29 15 43380 003 0~ Page 3 of 5 Propert ay_ nd Land Use Code descriptions a~ ~ ~a ~ ~~ ~ 4~~~a ~ aa~ ~ aa~a :a~ 13-Nov-2005 Jiro Smith, CFR Pinellas County Property Appraiser 18:02:19 Commercial Card 01 of 1 Improvement Type; pre-Engineered Metal Property Rddress; 279 WINDWARD PSG Prop Use: 340 Land Use; 27 Structural Elom~nts Foundation Spread/Mono Footing Floor System Slab on Grade Exterior lJall Prefinished Metal Height Factor 30 Party LJall None Structural Frame Rigid Frame Roof Fraroe Steel Truss & Purlin Roof Cover Corrugated Metal Cabinet & Mill None Floor Finish Concrete Finish Interior Finish Ceiling Fin Only Min Total Units 0 Heating & Air Hone Fixtures 7 Bath Tile Hone Electric Average Shape Factor Rectangle Quality Average Year Built 1,966 Effective Rge 20 Other Depreciation 0 Function Depreciation 0 Economic Depreciation 0 Sub Aromas Description Factor Rrea Description Factor Rrea 1) Base Area 1. 00 4, 080 7} . 00 0 2) Office Area 1.75 1,440 8} .00 0 3) Sales Service Area 1.50 624 9} .00 0 q} Office Area {good} 2.50 204 10} .00 0 5} Canopy . 20 4, 800 11) . 00 0 6} .00 0 12} .00 0 Commercial Extra Features Description Dimensions Price Units Value RCD Year 1} ASPHALT 1600SF 1.50 1,600 2,400 2,400 999 2} BOAT SLIP 10,000.00 5 50,000 50,000 1,980 3} .00 0 0 0 0 4} .00 0 0 0 0 5} .00 0 0 0 0 6} .00 0 0 0 0 TOTAL RECORD VALUE: 52,400 Map With Property Address (non-vacant) http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-scr3?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&... 11 /13/2005 Pinellas County Property App~er Information: 08 29 15 43380 003 0~ Page 4 of 5 24th 2~iJ ~~.2~ 35 .,. ,emu .I ' SIN '~t~?~.F~G~ WI r~JD~~RCi ~---I~>~- a ~. --- ~_ 1+ti~ I ~~J D's~ti~,~ R C~ ~- ,~ tru I h! ~tlrs~ N. R Q ~ I N,~a~~~~~ ~-- 10 0 _ R S C, a~ w `~~ ~~~ I ~~;~.~~ 1~7~ 'Vp r: Y ,_ ~ WIND' V?~RCJ ~,a j'- ~ r~~~c~ Ft.~ . t~ ~ .~' ~.~~i'c~ 1/8 Mile Aerial Photograph (2002) WINDWA~Q :~ `~ ISL h!D ~~ ~~ ~ }~ .irr r~ , r ,. (;: ~' http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-scr3?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&... 11 /13/2005 Pinellas County Proptrt~~ App~cr Information: 08 2~) 1 ~ 43380 003 U'~ ~ l'a~~~ ~ of rte ~ w.,~` r.+ ,., ~~+ ~~ m Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Information Bacl: to Starch Page An explanation of this screen 9 a~yyp "`.c ,iy ~cr ~ ~., http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-scr3?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=4&t3=1 &u=0&... 11/13/2005 a ~ 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, March 21, 2006, 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, nei~hborin~ property owners, etc. will be placed on a consent aEenda and approved by a single vote at the beginning of the meeting. Harbour Estates, LLC is requesting Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 sq ft multi-use dock for 8 boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 ft to 1.5 ft, under the provisions of Sec 3-601. (Proposed Use: Multi-use dock for 8 boat slips) at 279 Windward PassaEe, Island Estates of Clearwater Unit 5, Blk C, Lot 5 & part of Lots 1, 4 & 6. Assigned Planner: ~WayneylVl yWells; AICP, Planner IIL [FUD~005-09093] 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 Deparhnent, 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 ~ YOU ARE BEING SENT THIS NOTICE IF YOU ARE THE APPLICANT OR OWN PROPERTY WITHIN 200 FT OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. 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: 03/06/06 °~ FLD2005- 3, 391 f~~aDAS'~ 09493 ~~ , 1233741 ONTARIO INC ~1 ISLAND WAY CONDO ASSN INC ABATE, SHELLEY 1614 44TH SST JOSEPH ST 51 ISLAND WAY 240 WINDWARD PSE # 406 TORONTO ON M4Y 2W4 00030 - CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2262 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2247 CANADA ALEXIOU, GEORGE N ALLEN, ADDISON E THE ALMAJAN, CRACIUN ALEXIOU, SUSAN L ALLEN, EVELYN M THE ALMAJAN, STELLA 240 WINDWARD PSE # 601 105 ISLAND WAY # 143 31 ISLAND WAY # 605 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2248 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2221 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 AMORATIS, NICHOLAS ANDERSON, ROBERT ANGELIKOUSSIS, EMANUEL AMORATIS, JOHN ANDERSON, PATRICIA ANGELIKOUSSIS, LEON 1060 GOFFLE RD 31 ISLAND WAY # 304 51 ISLAND WAY # 301 HAWTHORNE NJ 07506 - 2020 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 ANGELIKOUSSIS, LEON THE ANTOLAK, RICHARD ANTON, LARRY M 29 N PINE CIR 31 ISLAND WAY # 1003 31 ISLAND WAY # 701 BELLEAIR FL 33756 - 1639 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 ARIPOLI, DOMINICK J ASNER, LANNY AUCK, NANCY ARIPOLI, EMELENE H ~ ASNER, GWENDOLYN M 31 ISLAND WAY# 1106 105 ISLAND WAY # 123 240 WINDWARD PSE # 903 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2219 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2238 B D PROPERTIES LLC BAILEY, CLYDE P JR BAIOCCO, THOMAS J 1634 ARABIAN LN BAILEY, KATHLEEN M 240 WINDWARD PSE # 803 PALM HARBOR FL 34685 - 3340 320 MARKLE RD CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2238 BELLE VERNON PA 15012 - 3125 BAKKER, NICOLAAS BALDAUF, RICHARD W BARLAMAS, FRANCIS 105 ISLAND WAY # 147 BALDAUF, JOAN A BARLAMAS, CONSTANCE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2221 8934 CLEARVIEW DR 219 ELM RD ORLAND PARK IL 60462 - 2768 AMBRIDGE PA 15003 - 2133 BARNARD, ROBERT E BARROWCLIFF, ROBERT L EARTH, ROGER C BARNARD, JUNE A BARROWCLIFF, BETTY W 51 ISLAND WAY # 1102 4511 GLADESDALE PARK LN 31 ISLAND WAY # 702 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 KATY TX 77450 - 6712 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 BELL, BARBARA L BERARDI, LUCIANO BERGE, HARRY D BELL, GORDON L BERARDI, PHYLLIS BERGE, MARY T 121 ISLAND WAY # 3-323 73 CANTON TER 31 ISLAND WAY # 107 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2265 WESTWOOD MA 02090 - 2207 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 BESEDIC, BRANKO Bill Woods / Terri Skapik Bill Woods/Terri Skapik BESEDIC, BOSILJKA Woods Consulting, Inc Woods Consulting, Inc. 31 ISLAND WAY # 1104 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 322 Ridge Road CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 Dunedin, FL 34698 Palm Harbor, FL 34683 ,~ BIUNDO, GAETANO BIUNDO, BARBARA 373 N KESWICK CT ROUND LAKE IL 60073 - 9665 BOTTS, FREDERICK L THE 240 WINDWARD PSE # 702 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2248 ~BLACKWOOD, SANDRA L WOODSIDE, EILEEN E 108 W CHEVALIER CT EIGHTY FOUR PA 15330 - 2694 BOWEN, ROBERT M 51 ISLAND WAY # 1006 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 BRAKER, BRUCE C BRAND, SIEGFRIED F BRAKER, KATHLEEN D 25 ROCKLEDGE AVE # 501W 437 POTOMAC LN WHITE PLAINS NY 10601 - 1212 ELK GROVE VILLAGE IL 60007 - 2763 BRODERICK, RICHARD A BRODERICK, KATHRYN C 31 ISLAND WAY # 1504 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2211 BRUNO, ANGELO BRUNO, CYNTHIA 180 CHEROKEE RD HENDERSONVILLE TN 37075 - BULLEN, ANNE M 65 VERBENA ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1340 CARLIVATI, DAVID 51 ISLAND WAY # 1203 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 CASS, LAVENIA 51 ISLAND WAY # 604 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2215 CHOCHOLA, SANDRA M 51 ISLAND WAY # 701 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2214 CHRISOHOIDIS, IFIGENIA 51 ISLAND WAY # 601 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2213 CAITO, KERRY A 31 ISLAND WAY # 203 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 CARPENTER, DONNA L 31 ISLAND WAY CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2240 CASTEN, ROBERT P CASTEN, VIDA L 240 WINDWARD PSE # 203 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2256 CHOTECHUANG,THONGCHAIF CHOTECHUANG,SOMSRIS 2955 MEADOW OAK DR N CLEARWATER FL 33761 - 3338 CHRISTOPOULOS, JIM CHRISTOPOULOS, ANNE 60 ELVASTON DR TORONTO ON M4A 1 N4 00030 - CANADA ~BLAKELY, JOSEPH E THE BLAKELY, BARBARA L THE 31 ISLAND WAY APT 104 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 BRACCO, JOAN V 240 WINDWARD PSG # 1001 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2239 BREEN, ROBERT D BREEN, MARY E 22 WEDGEWOOD DR SARATOGA SPGS NY 12866 - 2820 BUJAKE, GAIL C 31 ISLAND WAY # 1509 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2211 CALHOUN, JAMES A CALHOUN, PATRICIA 105 ISLAND WAY # 146 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2221 CARROLL, STEPHEN B CARROLL, CHRISTOPHER S 56 WINWARD IS CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2321 CECCHI, ATISTIDE CECCHI, GIOVANNA 24 PANCOAST BLVD DELRAN NJ 08075 - 1437 CHRISMAN, JANICE C 31 ISLAND WAY # 303 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 CHURCH, ANNE B 31 ISLAND WAY # 306 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 CLARK, CONRAD C THE CLARK, BETTY L LEE-CLARK, BRENDA A THE CLARRIDGE, SALLY 113 ISLAND WAY # 225 51 ISLAND WAY # 706 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2222 113 ISLAND WAY # 244 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2214 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2223 „ ~[ CLAYTON, SHARONCLEARWATER MARINE AQUARIUM Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition HOOVER, DOROTHY J INC Sondra Kerr, President 113 ISLAND WAY # 232 249 WINDWARD PASSAGE P.O. Box 8204 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2222 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2244 Clearwater, FL 33758 CLEMENT, JAMES M JR COBOS, PETER COFFEY, JOSEPH C COBOS, CELIA 105 ISLAND WAY # 122 51 ISLAND WAY # 702 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2218 31 ISLAND WAY # 708 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2214 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 COHEE, JOHN J COLLINS, LARRY L COLUCCI, CHRISTINA E 51 ISLAND WAY # 901 COLLINS, VIRGINIA L 51 ISLAND WAY # 200 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 31 ISLAND WAY # 409 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 COOPER, J ROBERT III COPELAND, GLADYS M TRUST COX, BLANCHE B THE DOTTERER, NINA J COPELAND, STEVEN 31 ISLAND WAY # 707 21 CATHERINE ST PO BOX 690353 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 NEWPORT RI 02840 - 3232 TULSA OK 74169 - 0353 CROCKER, VICTORIA K D A M CLEARWATER DALEY, ROBERT C 50 CLOUGH RD 30 JELLIFF LN DALEY, LINDA M BREWSTER MA 02631 -' SOUTHPORT CT 06890 - 1482 2298 BEACONSFIELD AVE MONTREAL PQ H4A 2G8 00030 - CANADA DAVIES, THOMAS C DAVIS, MARK DAY, THOMAS E DAVIES, BONNIE E DAVIS, HANNAH M 240 WINDWARD PSE # 602 51 ISLAND WAY # 303 240 WINDWARD PSG # 1303 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2248 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2249 DE LUCO, DANIEL DE MOTT, H R DE PACE, JOSEPH A DE LUCO, DENISE DE MOTT, MARY T DE PACE, LINDA A 240 WINDWARD PSG # 1201 31 ISLAND WAY # 809 240 WINDWARD PSE # 201 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2249 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2256 DEMOS, DIMITRIOS DI NOBLE, ANTHONY DICKSON, JACK A 6601 N OLIPHANT AVE HABOUSH, LISA DICKSON, JO-BETH CHICAGO IL 60631 - 1515 659 DAY AVE ~ 202 LUMBERTON RD RIDGEFIELD NJ 07657 - 2720 HAINSPORT NJ 08036 - 2954 DIMITRI, SAM DIOCESE OF ST PETERSBURG DONNELLY, JEAN G DIMITRI, PARASKEVI PO BOX 40200 31 ISLAND WAY # 508 51 ISLAND WAY # 401 ST PETERSBURG FL 33743 - 0200 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2213 DORIZAS, VLADIMIROS DOUANGBOUPHA, PHAN DRAKOULIAS, DEMETRA DORIZAS, KOULA DOUANGBOUPHA, PAGE K 18 FOREST ST 1213 HILLSIDE RD 28 DOWNEY CT BELLEVILLE NJ 07109 - 2227 PASADENA MD 21122 - 2414 HUNTINGTON NY 11743 - 5160 DRAPER, CHARLES L DREW, DENNISDUKE, ROBERT N DRAPER, NANCY N DREW, MARGARET JACKSON, MARILYN R 105 ISLAND WAY # 112 PO BOX 779 140 ISLAND WAY # 202 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2218 CLEARWATER FL 33757 - 0779 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2216 DULY, GILDA R EST 323 URBANDALE PARKWAY ROME NY 13440 - 3666 DURSHORDWE, WILLIAM G 51 ISLAND WAY # 610 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2214 EBY, BETTY L 370 KATIEBUD DR CINCINNATI OH 45238 - 5100 EGNER, JOHN EGNER, LINDA 25 MERCER ST # 2A NEW YORK NY 10013 - 5811 ERICKSON, VIVIAN 105 ISLAND WAY # 116 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2218 E-CHLER, WILMER E 105 ISLAND WAY # 114 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2218 EVOE,FREEDAI 51 ISLAND WAY # 904 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 ERICKSON, NEWELL ERICKSON, MARGARET 486 N FRANKLIN ST MONDOVI WI 54755 - 1124 FALCO, ANTONIO F FALCO, LUCY A 27 SUMMER ST QUINCY MA 02169 - 6605 FAROKHMANESH, MASHALLAH THE ERMA C FERGUSON FERRIS, STANFORD FREDRICK, CYNTHIA J THE , 51 ISLAND WAY # 1110 FERRIS, ETTA J 1009 GOLDENROD DR CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 31 ISLAND WAY # 308 IOWA CITY IA 52246 - 8602 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 FEY, WILLIAM H FINKELMAN, ARTHUR J REVOCABLE FINN, JAMES FEY, L BEVERLY FINKELMAN, RAMONA PEREZ FINN, STELLA 113 ISLAND WAY # 235 REVOCA 2265 CHATHAM RD CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2223 31 ISLAND WAY # 503 AKRON OH 44313 - 4313 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 FIRST NATL BANK NAPLES 2150 GOODLETTE RD N STE 800 NAPLES FL 34102 - 4812 FLEITMAN, MARCIA B FLEITMAN, EDWARD 1122 N DEARBORN # 12A CHICAGO IL 60610 - 5066 FLORENCE, CHARLES HEALY, GENEVIEVE 51 ISLAND WAY # 1106 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 FORDE, PETER FORDE, KATHLEEN 240 WINDWARD PSG # 1004 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2239 FRAIN, THOMAS M FRAIN, HELEN M 31 ISLAND WAY # 501 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 FORGIONE, MARCEL FORGIONE, PAULINE 31 ISLAND WAY # 205 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 FREIBERG, GEORGE J THE 2122 ELYSIUM AVE EUGENE OR 97401 - 7428 FRAHMANN, CAROL ANN FRAHMANN, MELTON R 105 ISLAND WAY # 125 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2219 FREUND, GERALDINE THE 51 ISLAND WAY # 111 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 FRY, ROBERT B FUDENS, GARTH J FULGHUM, ELIZABETH THE FRY, DOLORES M FUDENS, LORI 31 ISLAND WAY # 408 240 WINDWARD PSG # 1203 755 SNUG IS CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2249 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1832 FULTON. WAYNE •FUSCO, CHRISTINA •GALIN. JOSEPH E FULTON, EVELYN FRANCO, MARIA GALIN, HELEN L 31 ISLAND WAY # 1006 7 COURTLAND CT 30617 US HIGHWAY 19 N # 1101 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 SOUTH HUNTINGTON NY 11746 - PALM HARBOR FL 34684 - 4410 4309 GARABELI, SILVANA GARCIA, JOSE M GARROW, THERESA S 51 ISLAND WAY # 1107 GARCIA, MARGARET PO BOX 3174 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 41 1/2 BELMONT ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 8174 CARBONDALE PA 18407 - 1639 GEILLINGER, BRONISLAWA GERLUFSEN, HOMER GIARRIZZO, CHARLES 51 ISLAND WAY # 302 51 ISLAND WAY # 908 GIARRIZZO, EVELYN CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 240 WINDWARD PSE # 504 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2258 GILKEY, MARY L GILSDORF, STEVEN M GONDER, ADAM 31 ISLAND WAY # 1503 31 ISLAND WAY # 1404 GONDER, EWA CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2211 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2253 105 ISLAND WAY # 111 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2218 GOODRICH, KATHRYN M THE GRAF, JOAN E THE GRAINGER, DONALD A 31 ISLAND WAY # 606 3504 HAYES BAYOU DR GRAINGER, JANE C CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 RUSKIN FL 33570 - 6154 4 LITTLEBROOK DR PITTSFORD NY 14534 - 3308 GRAMLICH, FREDERICK E GRAY, GARY S GREENFIELD, ALAN R 1436 THIES DR WATERMAN, KELLEY J GREENFIELD, BARBARA PASADENA MD 21122 - 5929 240 WINDWARD PSE # 103 203 JEFFERSON ST CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2246 EAST ISLIP NY 11730 - 1317 GRIFFIN, MARY F HALL, JULIA G HALLA, MARY J TRUST HALL THOMAS 31 ISLAND WAY # 808 701 ISLAND WAY CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 1170 GULF BLVD # 1402 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1816 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2782 HANLEY, FRANK A HARBOUR ESTATES LLC HAUG TRUST 51 ISLAND WAY # 311 4200 W CYPRESS ST STE 444 HAUG, ALBERT N THE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 TAMPA FL 33607 - 4168 51 ISLAND WAY # 809 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 HEAD, THOMAS E THE HEIN, HARRY R HERMAN, JEFFREY L 121 ISLAND WAY # 311 HEIN, CONSTANCE H LIAUW, CUI SAN CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2224 31 ISLAND WAY # 1403 51 ISLAND WAY # 404 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2253 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2213 HERON HOLDINGS INC NESTER, HALL HICKEY, JAMES J THE 2865 EXECUTIVE DR 105 ISLAND WAY # 136 HICKEY, PATRICIA M THE CLEARWATER FL 33762 - 3316 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2220 6327 S LONG AVE CHICAGO IL 60638 - 5616 •HOFFMAN, DONALD C ROCKERS, PATRICIA F HOFFMAN, BARBARA 51 ISLAND WAY # 708 240 WINDWARD PSE # 6-603 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2214 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - HOHENSTEIN, RAMONA L 51 ISLAND WAY # 103 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 HOOKS, JOHN J & ELSIE M TRUST 1644 LUDINGTON ST MARINETTE WI 54143 -1894 HOWLAND, ROBERT G HOWLAND, ANN H 17 SPRINGWOOD MANOR LOUDONVILLE NY 12211 - 1427 INTERVIVOS TRUST UTD 06-24-05 GIOTIS, ALEXANDRA THE 51 ISLAND WAY # 211 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 ISLANDER CONDO ASSN INC 121 ISLAND WAY CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2265 JAGER, ELIZABETH A 331 WINDHAM CIR YORKVILLE IL 60560 - 9038 JENNINGS, DONELL B 31 ISLAND WAY # 804 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 JOHNSON, ROBERT W RYAN, SARA 31 ISLAND WAY # 1202 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2253 KAPITZKE, SIEGFRIED KAPITZKE, OLGA 31 ISLAND WAY # 1506 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2211 HURNEY, F MICHAEL HURNEY, DARLENE J 51 ISLAND WAY # 1111 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 Island Estates Civic Association Frank Dame 140 Island Way #239 Clearwater, FL 33767 Islander Condo Inc. Rex Clark, President 113 Island Way, Apt. 245 Clearwater, FL 33767 JASON, CARLJR JASON, CHRISTINE S 122 MERGANSER CT GEORGETOWN KY 40324 - 9218 JENSEN, HERMAN M JENSEN, BEVERLY ANN 7200 WOLF RD BURR RIDGE IL 60527 - 4973 KACHIAN, MARDIG 7 HARRISON ST # 2D NEW YORK NY 10013 - 2834 KARAMOUNTZOS, KONSTANDINOS 2199 ROSEGATE DR MISSISSAUGA ON L5M 5A5 00030 - CANADA HOGAN, ERNEST C III 31 ISLAND WAY # 105 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 HOUSE, BRETT J 51 ISLAND WAY # 206 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 INDREHUS, DAVID INDREHUS, LINDA 3105 QUINWOOD LN N PLYMOUTH MN 55441 - 2847 ISLAND WAY GRILL INC 18395 GULF BLVD STE 103 INDIAN SHORES FL 33785 - 20U1 JACKSON, DAVID B 1032 HOWELL BRANCH RD WINTER PARK FL 32789 - 1004 JASON, ROBERT A 105 ISLAND WAY # 137 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2220 JOHNSON, HERBERT W JOHNSON, GEORGE A 105 ISLAND WAY # 128 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2219 KALEBICH TRUST KALEBICH, MARY A 8540 S KOLIN AVE CHICAGO IL 60652 - 3537 KARKULAS, CHRIS KARKULAS, GUS 121 ISLAND WAY # 321 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2224 KASIMOS, GEORGE KAZEPIS, CONSTANTINE G KEECH, WILLIAM R KASIMOS, SOPHIE KAZEPIS, GEORGE KEECH, CAROL H 11 MISTLEFLOWER CT 3018 LONNI LN 31 ISLAND WAY #202 RICHMOND HILL ON L4E 3T4 00030 - MERRICK NY 11566 - 5136 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 CANADA KEGEL, MICHAEL K •KENDERES, NANCY E REVOC • KEGEL, JUDI K TRUST KERSTEIN, EVAN C 240 WINDWARD PSG #405 35025 HILLSIDE DR 31 ISLAND WAY # 1408 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2247 FARMINGTON HILLS MI 48335 - 2515 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2253 KING, FRANCES P TRUST KING, SARA N TRUST KISLIA, DORIS W 312 WINDWARD ISL 31 ISLAND WAY # 1402 121 ISLAND WAY # 345 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2327 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2253 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2225 KISTLER, BARBARA J KLINGER, MICHAEL KLOCZKOWSKI, HELEN 105 ISLAND WAY # 124 240 WINDWARD PSE # 502 31 ISLAND WAY # 908 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2219 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2258 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 KNOWLSON, BOYD A THE KOONS, JOHN C KOUTROULIS, ARTS G KNOWLSON, LINDA B THE WARREN, JILL 51 ISLAND WAY #709 6955 E CR 425 N CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2214 31 ISLAND WAY #305 BROWNSBURG IN 46112 - 8936 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 KOVALEVICH, PAUL KOVALEVICH, PAUL KOWENHOVEN, HARRY C BONI, LINDA M BONI, LINDA KOWENHOVEN, WILLIAM H 31 ISLAND WAY # 1203 345 RIVERSIDE DR 31 ISLAND WAY # 407 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2253 NEW YORK NY 10025 - 3404 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 KRALJIC, LINYA KRALL, DAVID E KUDIRKA, THOMAS J KRALL PENNY D 15416 11TH AVE 31 ISLAND WAY # 905 WHITESTONE NY 11357 - 1917 7501 MOSSY GLEN CT CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 RALEIGH NC 27614 - 7208 KURINEC, JOHN A THE LA PORTE, PHILOMINA LANE, ADAM C KURINEC, LORRAINE M THE EVANS, ANN MARIE 51 ISLAND WAY # 210 22897 W LAKE SHORE DR 8541 S KOLIN AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 ANTIOCH IL 60002 - 8752 CHICAGO IL 60652 - 3536 LANGAS, GEORGE W LANKFORD, LILLIAN G LE BLANC, JOSETTE C LANGAS, ANGELINE 31 ISLAND WAY # 1105 240 WINDWARD PSG # 1103 51 ISLAND WAY # 100 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2259 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 LEE, CHARLES E LENZ, GEORGE F LIAUW, CUISAN 51 ISLAND WAY # 806 LENZ, CHRISTINE H HERMAN, JEFFERY L CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 101 WOODSTONE LN # 11 51 ISLAND WAY # 404 NEW KENSINGTN PA 15068 - 4651 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2213 EIGHTY, WENDY ANN BERND LORENTE, MARIA V LOWE, MARGARET L REVOCA FLOYD, TABITHA 926E 78TH ST 49 SMITHFIELD VILLAGE BROOKLYN NY 11236 - 3828 105 ISLAND WAY # 127 E STROUDSBURG PA 18301 - 9055 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2219 LYBRAND, STEPHEN F LYBRAND, LYNN L 240 WINDWARD PSGE # 605 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2248 MADDEN, BEVERLY A THE 240 WINDWARD PSG # 701 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2248 MALAQUIN, ROGER J KEINATH, MARK A 240 WINDWARD PSE # 501 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2258 MARKETOS, GERASIMOS MARKETOS, ELAINE 2341E 69TH ST BROOKLYN NY 11234 - 6501 MC CARTHY FAMILY TRUST MC CARTHY, JOSEPH C THE 47 GLENDALE AVE PEABODY MA 01960 - 6548 MC CLAIN, THOMAS JR 9905 WOODBAY DR TAMPA FL 33626 - 2428 MC PHERSON, GINA M 121 ISLAND WAY # 333 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - MENIS, ELIAS THE 7050 SUNSET DRS # 605 SOUTH PASADENA FL 33707 - 6404 MEYERS, GERTRUDE S 30 TURNER ST APT 1005 CLEARWATER FL 33756 - 5263 • LYNCH, MARYROSE 51 ISLAND WAY # 603 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2215 MAGEE, WILLIAM J 31 ISLAND WAY # 1005 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 MALOPFEY, PETER J TRUST 31 ISLAND WAY # 802 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 MARTIN, MARGARET 1995 HOWARD AVE DES PLAINES IL 60018 - 3167 MC CARTHY, GLENYS M THE 51 ISLAND WAY # 1008 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 MC GRADE, LINDA L 31 ISLAND WAY # 401 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 MEGGESTO, JAMES A 240 WINDWARD PSE # 805 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2238 MERRY, WILMA E THE 31 ISLAND WAY # 909 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 MICR, EDWARD J 55 LANE 585 LAKE JAMES FREMONT IN 46737 - 9762 MAC GILL, ROBERT R MAC GILL, CAROLYN S 240 WINDWARD PSG # 1101 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2259 MAGUIRE, PATRICK 240 WINDWARD PSG # 1304 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2249 MANNING, JOHN A 2 HAWTHORNE CT # D POCASSET MA 02559 - 2318 MAY, BETTY J 105 ISLAND WAY # 134 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2220 MC CARTHY, MATTHEW 51 ISLAND WAY # 308 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 MC KINLEY, BEATRICE THE 31 ISLAND WAY # 705 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 MELIN, ROBERT A MELIN, JOY F 8500 FRANLO RD #110 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 - 3977 METCALFE, JOHN A METCALFE, ARLENE 2140 CLOVER ST ROCHESTER NY 14618 - 4122 MILIHRAM, JULIEN MILIHRAM, BETTY L 4402 COLFAX ST KENSINGTON MD 20895 - 4023 MILLER, DONALD W MIRANDA, LINDA J TRUST MISIUTA, IWONA MILLER, ANDREA WINTER, BECKY J TRUST MISIUTA, JADWIGA 31 ISLAND WAY # 506 1912 COLDSPRING RD 31 ISLAND WAY # 1008 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 ARLINGTON HEIGHTS IL 60004 - CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 7241 MODRAK, JOSEPH R MODRAK, MARGARET R 19241 GUNNERFIELD LN GERMANTOWN MD 20874 - 1564 MORAN, MARYELLEN S 104 BEECHER AVE EAST ISLIP NY 11730 - 1200 MOTT, JOAN H ELLIOTT, RICHARD N PO BOX 870003 STONE MOUNTAIN GA 30087 - 0001 MUELLER, ALICE C 113 ISLAND WAY # 241 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2223 MULVEY, CHARLES F MULVEY, CECILIA F 208 HUNTLEIGH AVE FAYETTEVILLE NY 13066 - 2215 NEAL, EVELYN J THE 31 ISLAND WAY # 1109 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2253 NICHOLS, BRUCE NICHOLS, SHERON 680 ISLAND WAY # 809 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1986 NORGORDT, HANNAH K BUNDY, RUSSELL H 31 ISLAND WAY # 102 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 OLDER, LINDA 2665 WHITE HALL RD CROZET VI 22932 - 2402 MOESSING, HERBERT G 105 ISLAND WAY # 132 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2219 MORAN, SHIRLEY J 121 ISLAND WAY # 335 CL[=ARWATER FL 33767 - 2225 MOULTS, JAMES M MOULTS, SUSAN B 3302 ROCKY BEACH RD MC HENRY IL 60051 - 9669 MULLIGAN, EDWARD 51 ISLAND WAY #405 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2213 MURRAY, JOHN N THE PO BOX 9 CLAYTON WI 54004 - 0009 NEIL, MARIE T 31 ISLAND WAY # 201 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 NICOLAS, STRATTON P NICOLAS, TOULA A 509 PLAINFIELD RD EDISON NJ 08820 - 2600 MOORE, JACKSON 51 ISLAND WAY # 203 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 MORROW, BILL O MORROW, BETTY 244 WILLIAMS ST SALINE MI 48176 - 1549 MUCHIN, JURY 51 ISLAND WAY # 510 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2213 MULVANEY, RONALD E MULVANEY, LOU A 113 ISLAND WAY # 245 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2223 NATSIS, EVANGELOS NATSIS, MARIA 51 ISLAND WAY # 201 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 NEWOUIST, MICHAEL J 880 MANDALAY AVE # G 603 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1242 NORDIN, RICHARD NORDIN, SONDRA K 700 N JOHNSON ST BAY CITY MI 48708 - 6731 NUGENT, EDWARD R & BARBARA A OLBETER, GERARD V T OLBETER, DOLORES NUGENT, EDWARD R THE 6634 FLANARY LN 46 COPPERFIELD LN DALLAS TX 75252 - 2530 DANVILLE CA 94506 - 1131 OLIVET, JOSEPH J JR OLIVET, OLGA M 121 ISLAND WAY # 332 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2225 OLSON, PAUL T SPINDLER, DANNY L 4350 13TH LN NE ST PETERSBURG FL 33703 - 5308 ORTIZ, AMADO D OTTILIE, BARBARA L OWENS, REGINALD W ORTIZ, MARIA OWENS, KATHLEEN A 51 ISLAND WAY # 502 51 ISLAND WAY # 310 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2213 140 SIN SALiDA CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 SEDONA AZ 86351 - 9250 PALENZA, ROSETTA 494 FARMINGTON AVE HARTFORD CT 06105 - 3106 PARODI, EVELYN PARODI, JOHN 51 ISLAND WAY # 902 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 PEREZ, MARTIN A 1638 HILLCREST RD CHATTANOOGA TN 37405 - 3112 PETKANAS, MARY S THE 31 ISLAND WAY # 208 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 PETROU,JANECHE 14420 DULCIMER CT ORLANDO FL 32837 - 7097 PHILLIPS, BARBARA W ZUMBAUGH, GARY W 234 DOLPHIN PT # 5 CLEARWATER FL 33767 •PAPALAS, LEONIDAS PAPALAS, MAUREEN 3339 150TH ST FLUSHING NY 11 354 - 3205 PAYNE, CLARENCE P EST 3550 DILL RD WATERFORD MI 48329 - 2128 PESCOSOLIDO, JOSEPH E PESCOSOLIDO, CHARLOTTE L 51 ISLAND WAY # 1101 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 PETRANTONI, ANGELO CARANNA,CHRISTOPHER 51 ISLAND WAY # 903 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 PETRUCCI,JOSEPH 51 ISLAND WAY # 102 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 PICKFORD, ROBERT C PICKFORD, ELIZABETH A 31 ISLAND WAY # 1507 - 2110 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2211 PRASSINOS, SAM PRASSINOS, ELAINE 7844 CHURCH ST MORTON GROVE IL 60053 - 1626 QUINN, KEVIN J QUINN, VIRGINIA A 105 ISLAND WAY # 121 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2218 REDFERN,JANETJ 5670 CHAMBERS HILL RD HARRISBURG PA 17111 - 3301 QUALITY BOATS CLEARWATER INC 235 WINDWARD PSG' CLEARWATER FL 33767 - RAPP, V EUGENIA THE 31 ISLAND WAY # 706 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 REINHARDT, MARY E SHAL, ARNOLD P 51 ISLAND WAY # 1100 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 • PARHAM, RONALD A 240 WINDWARD PSE # 902 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2238 PEGGS, MARGARET L 31 ISLAND WAY # 1204 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2253 PETERSON, RICHARD J HOWARD, FRANCES J 1938 JEFFERSON AVE ST PAUL M N 55105 - 1662 PETRAS, JAMES 31 ISLAND WAY # 1001 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 PFLUMM, HELENE THE PFLUMM, ADOLF THE 51 ISLAND WAY # 1011 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 PIMENTEL, CHLOE S 1887 NUTHATCH WAY PALM HARBOR FL 34683 - 6666 QUINN, ANN E ROONEY 31 ISLAND WAY # 1207 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2253 RASMUSSEN, RAYMOND A RASMUSSEN, GLORIA L 31 ISLAND WAY # 807 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 RICCI, JOHN F 240 WINDWARD PSE # 303 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2257 RICOTTA, SAMUEL RISLEY, HARRY ROBERTS, JAMES W RICOTTA, PATRICIA ANN RISLEY, LILLIAN V ROBERTS, DIANE L 121 ISLAND WAY # 324 31 ISLAND WAY # 903 240 WINDWARD PSG CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2224 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - ~OLLAND, CLAUDE ~OY, RAYMOND E ROBERTS, RONALD P VARRIALE, VIRGINIA ROY, CATHERINE M 51 ISLAND WAY # 1109 20 WELLINGTON VILLAGE DR 7 HANFORD RD CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 BRISTOL NH 03222 - 3662 STONEHAM MA 02180 - 2128 ROZENITS, FRED RUMSEY, MARY T RUSSELL, HAZEL ROZENITS, ANNA 3920 PECHIN ST 736 ISLAND WAY # 103 31 ISLAND WAY # 1002 PHILADELPHIA PA 19128 - 3620 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1817 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 RUSULIS, ELAINE SADOWSKI, ALFRED SALTARELLI, GARY 31 ISLAND WAY # 602 SADOWSKI, POULHERIA 39 PARK AVE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 PO BOX 85 BLOOMFIELD NJ 07003 - 2609 ROXBURY NY 12474 - 0085 SALTZMAN, STUART SAN FILIPPO, LEE THE SANTORO, MARK J 240 WINDWARD PSE # 403 121 ISLAND WAY # 3-325 TRIER, CINDY M SANTORO CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2247 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2265 1324 HEMPSTEAD TPKE ELMONT NY 11003 - 1127 SANTOS, RENATO SAPORITO, BRENDON SCHER, SYLVIA SANTOS, ADORACION 51 ISLAND WAY # 509 31 ISLAND WAY # 1205 31 ISLAND WAY # 604 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2213 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2253 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 SCHMOLL, LEE W SCHUMACHER, RONALD E SCOTT, GORDON SCHMOLL, FRANK J SCHUMACHER, AMY SCOTT, MARY M 31 ISLAND WAY # 207 51 ISLAND WAY # 707 51 ISLAND WAY # 810 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2214 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 SEIFERT, A WAYNE SELLNOW, ROSEMARIE SHAL, ARNIE P SEIFERT, MARGARET G 51 ISLAND WAY # 1205 51 ISLAND WAY # 1100 31 ISLAND WAY # 907 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 SIDI, OCTAVE LEON SIMPSON, WILL L THE SKENTZOS, JAMES SIDI, CAROLINE D 31 ISLAND WAY # 1007 6 EAGLEWING CT 51 ISLAND WAY # 1103 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 SCARBOROUGH ON MIE 4M1 00030 - CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 CANADA SLADE, ROY SLETTELAND, JESSE SMEULERS, JANWILLEM A SLADE, AGNES SLETTELAND, NICKELLE GUINAN, VERONICA E 31 ISLAND WAY # 801 3827 30TH ST 240 WINDWARD PSE # 401 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 SAN DIEGO CA 92104 - 3609 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2247 SMITH, JERRY L TRUST SMITH, LAYNE SMITH, MARIAN T REVOCABLE 51 ISLAND WAY # 906 SMITH, LEYDA TRUS CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 51 ISLAND WAY # 1204 1611 66TH 1/2 AVE NE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55432 - 4706 SOKOLOVSKY, ZORIK ~PANGOLO, JOE ~PAULDING, KEITH J KILMAN, LARISA SPANGOLO, SHERI SPAULDING, VALERIE A 1663 GRAY BARK DR 51 ISLAND WAY #1207 1055 ST ANDREWS CIR OLDSMAR FL 34677 - 2775 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 GENEVA IL 60134 - 2996 SPINDLER, BRIAN C 51 ISLAND WAY # 300 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 SPINDLER, BRIAN 51 ISLAND WAY # 1105 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2251 STEFOS,STAVROS STEFOS, SOPHIA P O BOX 2404 TARPON SPRINGS FL 34688 - 2404 STEINER, LAWRENCE E STEINER, SHARRON M 6358 SALINE ANN ARBOR RD SALINE MI 48176 - 9063 STRICKLIN, KIMBALL R STRICKLIN, SUZANNE M 5350 BIBURY RD FAIRFIELD OH 45014 - 3642 SWANSON, RICHARD L TRUST SWANSON, RICHARD L THE 7499 PEPPER CREEK WEST BLOOMFIELD MI 48322 - 1071 TARTARONE, VINCENZO TARTARONE,ANNA 123 ISLAND WAY # 242 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2217 TODD, ELINOR V 31 ISLAND WAY # 906 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 TRENDSETTER AQ & DEV INC 1480 BELTREES ST STE 5 DUNEDIN FL 34698 - 8302 TSOLAKIDES, JORDAN A TSOLAKIDES, KONDYLENIA 4617 176TH ST CNTRY CLB HLS IL 60478 - 4534 STEWART, DEBORAH LYNN 31 ISLAND WAY # 406 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 SULLIVAN, ANDREA 51 ISLAND WAY # 411 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2213 TAILLON, FRANK TAILLON, JUDY 75 MICA POINT RD BARRINGTON NH 03825 - 3303 TETZKE, WILLIAM 9215 N PARKSIDE AVE DES PLAINES IL 60016 - 5131 TODROW, ALEXANDER 240 WINDWARD PSE # 101 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2246 TROUT, ROGER L 13000 STAGE COACH RD BUMPASS VA 23024 - 8831 TURNER,GEORGEF TURNER, MADELYNNE D 2020 RAINBOW FARMS DR SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 5226 STOUT, C EDWIN FATH, PATRICIA A 240 WINDWARD PSG # 1102 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2259 SULLIVAN, ROBERT J SULLIVAN, JEANNE 105 ISLAND WAY # 138 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2220 TANSKE, LOUIS R TANSKE, SHARON R 113 ISLAND WAY # 224 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2222 TIERNEY, FLORENCE L THE 31 ISLAND WAY # 1004 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 TRAINI, LOUIS J TRAINI, DAVID J 241 BRANDON RD NORRISTOWN PA 19403 - 5501 TSETSEKAS, HARRIET TSETSEKAS, RIA 400 ISLAND WAY #1604 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2131 NAUGHT, RICHARD M NAUGHT, AVIS L 51 ISLAND WAY # 1003 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 VENTURA, DONNA C VERNAVA, MARION VILLAGE ON ISLAND ESTATES 105 ISLAND WAY # 142 31 ISLAND WAY # 404 COND CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2221 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 251 WINDWARD PSG STE F CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2260 .VITALE, JOSEPH S ~UILLIOMENET, PAUL R VITALE, PATRICIA A VUILLIOMENET, DIANA L 51 ISLAND WAY # 807 3718 LOCUST CIR W CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 PROSPECT KY 40059 - 9234 WAGNER, LARRY H WALKER, ALBERT W 240 WINDWARD PSG # 1202 WALKER, ELOISE CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2249 31 ISLAND WAY # 1209 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2253 WALSER, DEBRA H WARNER, JEFFREY S WALSER, ROBERT L 240 WINDWARD PASSAGE # 901 240 WINDWARD PSG # 1301 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2238 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2249 WEATHERILT, EILEEN M WEST, JOY G 51 ISLAND WAY # 309 51 ISLAND WAY # 1007 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2212 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 WILHELM, LEE J WILKINSON, MARGARET K TRUST WILHELM, EILEEN 31 ISLAND WAY # 1502 31 ISLAND WAY # 902 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2211 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 WILLIAMS, RAYMOND P WILLIARD, JAMES D WILLIAMS, MARILYN P WILLIARD, BETTY J 31 ISLAND WAY # 709 105 ISLAND WAY # 141 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2220 WOODARD, GARY WRIGHT, ROBERT J WOODARD, PATRICIA WRIGHT, DOTTIE A 121 ISLAND WAY # 334 31 ISLAND WAY # 1102 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2225 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2207 YIACHOS, CHRISTOS YOUNG, DANIEL A JR YIACHOS, FOTINI YOUNG, HELEN T 51 ISLAND WAY # 501 13 E FOXWOOD DR CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2213 MORRIS PLAINS NJ 07950 - 2636 ZARRO, THOMAS B ZERKA, IMER 31 ISLAND WAY # 106 ZERKA, ZULFI CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 5 PADDOCK RD WHITE PLAINS NY 10605 - 4500 ZIEL, ROBERT R ZIEL, MARY C 3603 SQUIRREL RUN GREGORY MI 48137 - 9531 ADSWORTH REVOCABLE TRUST WADSWORTH, KENNETH W THE 31 ISLAND WAY # 504 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2206 WALKER, BETTIE J 31 ISLAND WAY # 307 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 WARREN, GLENN T WARREN, CAROL 240 WINDWARD PSE # 105 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2246 WIERSMA, PETER 51 ISLAND WAY # 1005 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2250 WILLIAMS, DANNY PO BOX 1213 NORMANDY BCH NJ 08739 - 1213 WILSON, LARRY J 31 ISLAND WAY # 206 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2205 YAZBECK,JOSEPH YAZBECK, ELISA T 240 WINDWARD PSE # 801 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2238 YUHASE, STEPHEN E YUHASE, VERONICA 31 ISLAND WAY # 1505 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2211 ZIEL, ROBERT R ZIEL, MARY C 11877 SPENCER RD MILFORD MI 48380 - 2787 • • Check list for CDB Agenda & Application sent to City Clerks Office FLD2005-09093 279 Windward Passage INITIALS Application Form Parcel ID Letter of Authorization Survey or Legal Description Copy of 400 scale Zoninq Atlas with property outlined and 500' radius hand drawn from outside perimter of site 2 x 2 Map s required for ANX, LUZ 8 Z LARGE SCALE AMENDMENTS Sherry Watkins v v YES or NO 'I~~27R W~w~ '~\ ~\o ?B B? ~'!, ~ ~ WAT I l0T p \ ~ ~. a+r pew[D I ` ~~ ~~ i I P I JD 1 (n / 78 I I BAY9IDE svH rlo.a ~, ~ a 1 32-89 ~~ ~ $1 ~8 9° " ' s ~ ~~ s W' O i 1~ ~ ~d~As s7 J V L N ~ '~~ e'{yOr` a" .a a .7/D, ,N ~+r ~ N s D°' ii~3'oi D ~'dy ~,~ M ~/I ~ ~ 17/04 y ~ '3~ l~ c ~ 7 N I J K ~Q.4 an owx[D HA IDE +,a_p, I I - 285 L~~~ . .. 268A ~ "' rP ,7 ~.r CITY OF CLEARVYATER - Y AND YICINRY e „ „ +z ~ PRfE11.A9 COUIITY. FLORIDA O tea- PREPARED ev Q p~ PUBIJC 1-ORKS ADbIN137RATION ~- q r ' 11 .iF ENCMEERINC 7i~_ ~V_ 100 S uplle pve., C4urNn, rl ]]75! Pn (Dt3 1 ~~/~ 10 .; 3D2- 730, rac (E+3)St6-1753 ~ nUD: //rww tleorwlsr-Il m/ F . co mg eer/ \ DIlNgmer. \ \ Pudle IMamollon dole Is Nrnranld Dy Ins Clly of Ciwrwolor I P UDI O Worts AdmMlNrollon/Engln!-Inq, and musl De accepted \ and used Dy Ue reNNent rlih lne underslaMNq ,not Ue dole rwN.M rw adleeled fa lne purpox of deMeDinq o gapnlc 1 Inlrosiruelvrt Invwlay. Af wM, lh! City of Clwrroln PWA/C \ moke! no rarrOnl4s, lspn,sed or Implies. Doncvminq IM \ accuracy. cromge,wess. «IloDlllly, a wiloDOlty of Ih4 dole fm ony o,ner DorUeuler u e f ln 11 d1/01 \ a . ur ermore, the Ctty or dwrwoler PWA/E oswmn no IbDDlly wl+alsoever asmdaled rllh the use \ d1Y aAl[p a ml,ux of wsm dplp. SD!-+IT N 1. Thls Allos pogo 4 suD p to perlodb cMnges. Ia Fiamotion paoul lalnl revttlpns Dleax coo PWA/E a Hall cur W!D dte. • N r mn, osae+nar 0 100 Z00 100 600 SCALE: 1' s00' LEGEND: ' O BLOCK NUMBER 1 q N ~ v 1234 .LOT ApDRESS D O __-_ CITY LIMITS LINE ~--1 SHADED AREA -PROPERTY L--~ OUTSIDE CLEARWATER CITY LIMITS ~ AGREEMENT TO ANNEX • CITY OWNED PROPERTY MDR ZONING DESIGNATION ZONE LINE REVISED: 9/10/99 . ZONING ATLA'7SG'p 8E ~ / 29 S SEC 5()E ~ / V B • t" '- ~ 58A • 2588 ~ '~~ ~ Y~ 4 ~° 9 8 T 8 3 / IIIp „I s, _, t,. S~•'- CITY OF CLEAR TER 1,1 r.Y• s 61 a ~~ PINEIJ,A9~COUNTY FLORIDA -- -- __ po Ip a ~~~ / a f •°° PREPARED ey -' 87 lap ~ + _ e PUBLIC RORKS AD111NISTRA710N ~Q / 1 'A ~~ ~ Ipp X N ENCIN[CRINC I I~LQi(X/IiGU-CLLQ/l~ ~~ C0~ 4y 63 ''//~ ~ Pn.: leu)sez asocrP,(B13)376-1733 I 7tXlt4a BDA ~, 8 ~ C~~ g1L8 46 A 44 /N nuv://ww».<L°rw°Irr-R.r°m/mot,.,,/ li- D (~v01YS /uWNDyA1 Iao /sl S°~ CO 10~` ,D It V~4,,uglt 1 ~ p 11 /r~ 84 ,p Dhclolmer: ,p/-~~ /, 88= 1.r .'~-w,r~afa ~~ 17 f3 N 1. a/~t'V'~n 351 CDDw- It1 W Iti 8g Ilt Pugk hrormoPOn polo is Nrnhned by thv CRy or Cborwoter ao IY Puglc Worta Aomhlslralbn/EngMVVring, Ond mucl Dr otteplvd stt ST(I{~. /p 48 /n 111 and uud»pY (ho redplrnl wllh lne underslandh0 tAOI Ine d°Ip .~ 8 /p !w / rcelved ov cdlrclyd !or IM purport or deMODhq o gopnic 3l 11 w 6g /0 Infroslructure Inventory, Aa such, the City or Cleorwnl er PWA/E I 37 +k$~y it 17N III mosvi no worranllvt, veprhvvd ar Impdvd, concvrnhq tn. 49 Ilt I ~~S i>o IP C' o~yuoUv~ COTddmos. rNleDlllly, or Ilob0lly o! this polo rpr ~4. 11 / ~. 87 Dorlleuler use. furthermore. the CII .Y• / ~ 4D oWA orwmet no Ikblllly •whetfeeNr o°sad°Ied wllhrlhe u.r N N Ir~167 80 IN /e> m~uve of w<n polo. ~~„ ~e.~ Q~~p 1~ ~Qr~ Idr 79 68 p~ ~ 4 tl or is d gl /eo rot T Thh Allpv pogo Is wbWp l~ to perlodk enengev. G • t~idw N Ia Inlwmellon oboe/ lolerl rMzlms plmst coN PWA/E or ._ I P~Or~ r 1 ~~ G ~v,IID 38 89 vyil our Wrb sift. ?: I 00 ~ O O~ 1 ~ ~Y CO ~ • gY w as 7 c rC' I~f4N ` ° ~~ G ~1i u ~~ N$3,d ui 37 N ~~~J~ .' ry n ~Qg~~ ~Op°1rDO. aP '~ M Tt 22 ui 1p2-11 ~ Nau al. ~/ 3g fs~ I F ~ 2i ~ t2/Ot: 9AY xggin "'r nor ,- d( ,p" ~ 8 CA~~ 0 100 400 40 '1~ t' y an 11- ~ ~aoa a 34 r I ~ IQ 600 1. 00 PHIN COVE 3t ~ Q ~ryue ,ro r.rie ~~ ia-a~s v app ul 3h+. ~ tc scaLE: I° = aoo' 4~Q ~ ,, C ~T CONDO u ,~, w~ a Dtt s° 3i : . ol, I .dpi 20-58 ii S'~'"GO y~- „ 9 ~ a= ar :~ LEGEND: ~ ~: OO ~ Crll~ ~ t'3jDe D01tY Y855ACE au r.Y. ru M a gy to 3t ; ~ ~~ e ~ '~• `rs tn~°N ~8ona v 30 ~~ .N O BLOCK NUMBER N K ~° Ss70 I ~ •~ '~ Y ~ ,13/01 tli.T .1 ~ 1234 LOT ADDRESS r=~'» - ra, I T y t~l st x9 DD i. ® It ~y ~o'~'F - for ara n >s>,_mv Q,~v q s t2 ~A`~ r ~ Cj ~~ mg ~ 61 ar ao> YB - ~~~~~ CITY LIMITS LINE 4 ~ AD ~ ael li ' s '9 13 } ~ a g3 9t rs"z"~7 SHADED AREA -PROPERTY ' ° '~J+~ ~p . - u/o2 is ° H° X01 ~`"'J OUTSIDE CLEARWATER CITY LIMITS 7 31 t ~ t~ -~ ST. BRENDAN : ~^ 81 zg y ai rap ur • AGREEMENT TO ANNE% ~- ,~~,~ cAn~ouc _ , I 't 4~;~ ~ OA CHURCH ^8S 111 u 4g ' CITY OWNED PROPERTY I . G ~ .... ~ ~ e° z. s q urY,at ~ rw rn MDR zoNlNC DESIGNATION 9 ~{' "' F, w 4] r ~ 1 dt ~ 6~pt $~~~ }~` t3/DS m 67Rf ~ ua ~~ ZONE LINE i r~. s~ bt 9 ~~ 13/01. 13/08 roI °8 rot ~ 47 i w,[nwrt Ifrf4~ ~ g ~ 4 4 p ~ !00 7p s 69 70 Rt ~ ~ 4 apt iy+v->sr ~v ~ ~` NNOWAIID Q sl roo rot V Rao[ olro d,ws ore.-an .~ I 8 r 4 ado 13/07 /t7F+ti ~' 7 VAStAOE ~ Iaa or/IS/n µ~ Pq ~' , • Iy Zp ~ la ~ m tup re/m/pT ' O I y ~~H ~~~'frI ~~' ~ g I~ 2 N 3 ro ~ ~ 4 I ~ ?a m y+ ?~ 4~ try 1° ~ ' t9 ~. ~ 1 ~i ~ ~i0 3 p q t7 ~} 6 ~~ 'P~leamuata,,, «r1.RM 1 A, +i „ t6 .fie` I .~u/n(~n o P s r' ~ I ~ 4 ' ~ d ` otlDl~ b P as ar 13 w '°~B' ~ ~° Ov 1 d Y 9~,n^e ~ CO_ 0 sE . ~, ,. ,, R~ m Io n t3 REVISED: 03/08/99. ®z~sa ~ ° rd r. '= ZONING ATLAS a• 76 NE t/4 OF SECTION 77~A ~ ._ _ y'1 n -fir-. Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 4:28 PM To: Wells, Wayne Subject: Fw: Letter of No Objection from Frank Chivas for Harbor Watch Re: Harbor Watch Condominiums: FLD 2005-09093 Wayne: Please find attached a letter of no objection from Frank Chivas stating his no objection to violation of the eastern setback for the Harbor Watch condominiums. Any questions, please give me a call. My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods Woods Consulting, Inc. 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 bil Iwoods@woodsconsulting.org -----Original Message ----- From: Dianne Magee To: 'Bill Woods' Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 4:18 PM Subject: Letter of No Objection from Frank Chivas for Harbor Watch Dianne Magee Office Manager Woods Consulting, Inc. 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, Florida 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 11/1/2005 LETTER OF NO OBJECTIOf~ Lot Owner's Name: Frank Chivas Lot Owner's Address: 20 Island Way, Clearwater, FL 33767 I certify that I am the owner of the above property which is adjacent to the property owned by the applicant who proposes to construct a {circle one): Commercial Dock Multi-Use Dock. Private Dock at the following address: 279 Windward Passage, Clearwater, FL 33767 [ have no objection to the proposed structure(s) and DO NOT object to any violation of the City of Clearwater setbacks, the Pinellas County setbacks, nor do I object to any setback required by DE nd/or SWFWMD ertainin to a submerged land lease. y~ 1/' ~ - v n~,r=s Signature _ ,,, Dat ner's Name and Title NOTARY: Pinellas County STATE OF FLORIDA, ~,,,~_000NTY, BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personaNy appeared /,i ~ _, well known to me, or who provided a valid Florida Driver's License to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument and that he/she acknowledged to me, under oath, that he/she signed the same freely and voluntarily for the purposes expressed herein. / . ~- /xOUe~6e~ Witness my hand and official seal this day of 2005 Notary ublic ~ K. ~ z ~ comer oDOaort4+ i r /1'1 Q ~ ~~ ~~f ~/~20~ My commission expires: ~ ~. ~ ~/ ,L .~ ~ ~~eoo~r~•+~; t v,~,a, Fkxids Ngtlry Asi+l., lnC t1fU INraU liN1lU lNN!llrl l~Jl~l~aHqu ••~ Z,7 9 Pi's ~ J ~- ~ ~~'~%S- X45 ~®~ - d6~~~. PINELLAS COUNTY WATER & NAVIGATION CONTROL AUTHORITY 31~ COURT STREET, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 ISSUED TO: WOODS CONSULTING INC FOR .HARBOUR ESTATES LLC 279 WINDWARD PASSAGE CLEARWATER FL 33767 DESCRIPTION: 08-29-15-43380-003-0050 TO REPORT START DATE AND COMPLETION: (727) 464-3770 PERMIT NO. M36437-OS CLERK: 1. PERMITS MAY ALSO BE REQUIRED BY THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES: FL D,E.P. & U.S. ARMY C.O.E. 2. THE WATERS OF PINELLAS COUNTY ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE PINELLAS COUNTY & BOCA CIEGA BAY AQUATIC PRESERVE. SPECIAL REGULATIONS EXIST THAT GOVERN THE CONSTRUC- TION WITHIN AN AQUATIC PRESERVE. PLEASE CONTACT THE FL D.E.P. 3. THIS PERMIT IS VALID FOR A DOCK STRUCTURE ONLY. ELECTRICAL & WATER/SEWER INSTALLATIONS WILL REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMITS FROM THE APPROPRIATE (Municipal or County) BUILDING DEPARTMENT. 4. THIS PERMIT IS SUBJECT TO A 30 DAY KEN BURKE ,. By: _ `~ ~ Deputy Clerk DATE OF ISSUANCE: 09 / 27 / 2005 FINAL INSPECTION: APPEAL PERIOD FROM DATE OF ISSUE- CHAPTER 31182, SPECIAL ACTS OF / / FLORIDA, 1955 AS REVISED. THIS PERMIT IS REQUIRED TO BE POSTED IN A CONSPICUOUS IJOCATION AT THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. I SEP 1 6 20Q5 Ei~l~(RQNNiEt~TAI_ i'~(AIUbGEMEN CC33V.CIl~EF~;C A1VT1 ~TJLTY-USA ~C)C~ p'LT,tl'lr,C~~'' AP;PL~CA~xO1V ~?dease.type, o>*:~ia~tcf':~i~~~r~ xzi BLsfG'K irrh ~. ~'1~~PIaI~,TX QW~1~~. ~N~~'U1~1YMA'I'IffiL?' A.:Applicant's Name: Harbour Estates, LLC, Barry Greenfield, VP B': 1VIailing Address: 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444 .. city: Tampa ,„ ,~, ~. 813 8 77-4444 ~ "~ _. . 1~~. Ao~~r o~~rzorr? SE? ~ ~ 2005 ~: Name: Woods Consulting, Inc., Bill Woods or Te i Ska b,, the Cleric of 1. ~ ~~.. r,' .W er nd .. ~, _: Nav~q soon Gontrof 11uf11orrty'. g. Address% 1714 Cougt Road 1 Suite 22 `~ ' city: _Runedin .- __ state: FL z~~ 34698 ~•' T~1e~~ia~xe Na:Ca): _l72_ZJ 786-747, Fax• (_7~7) 786 747A ~. -TII SZ'l'E 7,1~1y ~.0Iti1~1.'~'It3ri3': A. Coaistruckinu site Address: 279_Windward Passage qty:. Clearwater, FL 33767 $, 1z~tended Ilse: Wet slips for use by residents of upland redevelopment C, Parcel ID.Number: 08 129 115 ~ 43.,80 /003 i nn50 See Warranty Deeds _ n. Incar .orated: ~ Ci of Clearwater P i7nincorp.orated: d E. Previous Permits: UrtknOwn F. Date applicant assumed property ownershili: 05/2005 • - Fence rnon'thiyeax G, Obstructions: .(dogs,. fences, etc.) 1I. Atta.ch. 8-1/2"' X:1.1"' vicinity map- showing specific project location.. See attached location map I..All other ini'ortrtation pttrsualYt to P.C.O. 9a-19 (a:ine.~acied), Section Y0.8, as z;<eeded. J". Does. tk-e project abut resicien.tially zoned property? Yes O No ~ l~. Fur projects requiring a public hearing, attACh a copy of the carnplete legal descriptpn.. See attached .warranty deed(s) i 11 .. ;. I„ <2. < x c: ~• pR,tIr,TRCT D$BG'RIIP~',iON: MULTI•LTBg f ~ ~ 1 ~~P4.• r ter-gci~,L uag•oNcn COMM}bRCTAi, A. Nature and Size ofprnject; The applicant is requesting to Fix and Repair an existing facility consisting of 12 wet slips and 1,325 sf of decking. square feet: 1, 325 13. Variance: 'Yes A No Amount is variance: T.•,engtb; Width; 6etb L R Other: ------•-- No~: It is the applicant's responsibility to Ciearly demonstrate tb,at any requested variances are consistent with the variance •crlteria of the Pi;oellsa County'Water and N•xvigation Control AubPtority Rege~Ist,.{ona. Tlee applicant must submit a wrlttets variance request oatltning the nature of ett~d need fbr any variances. Tht® applicant must de:onon,shrate that a literal enforcement of the regulations would result ist an extreme hardship dne to tlra e~nique•naZure of ties project end the applicant's property. The hardship moat not be crashed by actioats) of t>;e property owner(s), The granting oP the variance must be in harmomy with the general 4ntant of the regulations and not in'frirtge upotn the property rights of others. The varianas requested must be the minimum possible to allow for the reasonable use of the app~lican~'s property, Should the applioantfaif to de;ngot~stzate that any variance request is consister<twitl: the crltetia ou~tliaed in the reB'uietions, staff canngt recommend approval of the application, C f v. coz~r~cz'oR rx~'oxav~rxo~: ~~ ...S ..~ T, ~? co ,ra~tQr at this time.. ~~.~,;, state ttaat the dock has not beep conat ~- ~ a certified contractor, requizennet:ta a;nd stdndarda sst forth in t1 a 'Reif s~an~itl3egU1 tioms'r of the Ispi;n ~ as County Water and Nevigatiom Control Aurtherity, e+ad in ac'cordanae witi~ rile attached dravviage which accurately represeeat alt the information required to be fnrr~ished. Sze hhe eveatE that• this clock Is x~ot built in Bccordance ~s-ith the permit or Lhe information Earn;eked is n,ot correct, I agree t'o either remove the look or earreet this detleieaay~. 8lgtad: Cent„ No,: Compatny Name; '[~. OWN~Xt's f~~Q3N~ATV34S: Telephone No.• Add~~ss; I hereby apply for a permit to do the above work and state that the same will 6e done aecordlag to the map or plan attached hereto and made a pert hereof, and agree to abide by the "Rides end Regulations" of the Pinellas County Water and Na,viBation Control Authority for such construction and, if sold canatruetion is within the corporate linxits o!' a rpuaicipality, to first secure aFprova! frotr: said m uaicipality, I fhrtl~er state L3zat said construction will be maintained itn a sal'g aondxt3ori at all times, should this application be epprot+ed, 'that I am the legal o-yner of the upland from which I herein propose Go construct the iwprovecne~ts, ant9 tbtat the above stated agentJcoatractormay act as my representative. Iunderstand that Y, no! ]:'inetla$ County, am.reaponsibte for the $ccuracy of the fnforrntation provided eg part of this application and that it is sty responaibEl;Ety to obtain any necessary permiEs and alsp~va~ appllcab}e for the proposed aativitiea one Dither private or sovereign owned submerged Iand, Dat ~r~`- a,I Owner ~' •--- ~_ -~.,__- ~~ ~~ ~ gnat:u~e i ~. ,~ . ~~ ~7~ nom. 'tu9CI.o8Ut~ Fql~ In order to Qilevlate eny potenllat corrtBot at Interest with Plraellgg County atttft. !t is required t ba P~+Icied vvlth g tiblin® pf p~R60N3 befn hat the Authority who mey hav+s 6ene0clal Inter+s~t in the apPll~ ~onywhichtwrov~td tie affaffected r pattnershtp~ as Well er Qnyone A~~Y (Attach addWonai 8heete tt necessary, by er-y deotslon rendered by the ~ Pt:.o Ba~rr~y G ee~~eld, Vp ~+tame: rbo r Estates LLC Addresq; ress treet u to Namme: Addraas: B. ftSPRE88NTATIYRe: - - Name: Addraaa; ' Atame: Addreea: Ne1°e0 ~ Woods Consultln inc. Address: 1714 County oa u, a Name: Terri Ska ik Woods Consult)n ;Inc. .Q111]~dln FL 34698 Address: 1714 oun oa U: e Dunedin F ivame: Addrasa: Nams• - Addrera: C. 07<',~gg PER6fONS{ SAVINGf OWNEItBHIP.II+ITEREBT IN THE BUBJECT PROPER tnteraet ia: corclingeat Q -. TY: ~~ ~ absolute i• Names epeoiilc tatereat held D. DOfig q, CONT>31-CT FOR BAGS F.~g-p FOR ~•~ g~JECT PROPER ~Ifeo, the contract [a: contingent Q ~'X? Y'ES Q NO ~ ebeotute ~ Ns~mo ofparties to the contract: E• DQEt3 AN OP~`ZON TO PURC$Al9E EYIl3'i'XQR THE SUH.1gflT PROFERTY7 XFt3 ~7 Name of pa<rtiea to the option: Np ~ I+'. 01YNBtR'8 SICiNATiIR$t I hereby certify that the [nformation stated above ie complete, accurate, lcgnwi..t..,. X and true tv the bast ai' my pate ~j~~Q,S .~~~o~ 'frARIANCE 4~I.3EST FORM /` ,~ - App{icalion # V`~l. ~ ~~ ~7 D~ (O~F~~c~~~. us>~ ~?t~ttrj Left Lot Owner'~s.Name: a+~~ili~g.Addr~gs: zx~: I certify that I axn the a~vner of Lot which adjoix;s the ,property owned by th$ applicant who Proposes to cpnat~ruc~t a Cazt;mearctil ~ 1Vluiti-use p' Pz'ivate 9' dock at the io.Ilo.~iri adrlress~ .g I have seen thm plaxks of the .proposed structure(s) with any requested variances (fee Section I:VI3 ofApplcatior~: az~d :therefore: ~O O~JI<rQm i;I DO.;fitOT ABJECT D to :the :aongtruction... O WNER'~ :STGNATU~E: X Date NOrARY°: STAfiE CYF T~'~~?RIDA,, I'TNEI;LAS COi7NTY,. I3EFU~tE ME, the :v.ndersii ed author:tt appeared ~ ~ y, pereona3ly well. known tome, or wh©;prov3ded:e vsliil FIQrfda Dri`ver's License to he #:~e person who .executed the foregoing ~isxstrument and ths~t helshe arknow:ledgdclto me,;under.:aa~th; :that.:he/she signed' the saxrte.freey:and volutttarxly,fpr ~h~ p'~,o,sos expressed therein. Witness, my hand and o~ci`al seal this day of ;; Notary:~?u~lic . ,.,. . .'.; MJ' commiaQion expires: _. .... .... .. ~, .... f .. ... .... Right Lot Owner's:Name -• Maling.Addre. ss; dip: T certify tk;at I axn the owner of Lot which. °ac~joi;xs the property owned by the applicant mho proposes to construct s:Ooznri~srcial b Multiuse: D - Private ~{ dock st the:following address: I have seen the plans o£ the of Application) and therefore: OVYNEA'S ~IGN'ATUIZE; proposed structu.rets) w'xth city xequegted variances (see Sectiaan ~' AO OI3J~ECT D I70 N'OT4BJECT d to the aonstructiori. X I)a.te NOTAIZ:Y: STATE OF FLOTtiITA, PINEI,LAS COUNTY, BEFORE 1VIE, the undersigned au.thcrri.ty, personally appeared ,well known to me, ar who provided a valid Floxida.. Driver's License to be the person .who executed the foregoing instrument and.. the°t he/she aeknowtedged to xne, under aath, that he/she signed the sarn.e freely and. volu::nta:rily for the purposes expressed therein. Witness my hand and. offca~ seal this day of L9 _.,,~, Notary Public D'!~ commission expires: lilfoo~s Consulting . (,~~,~~~ Environmental Permitting Marine Engineering Hydrogeo/ogy Land Planning 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 September 7, 2005 Dunedin, FL 34698 Mr. David Walker Pinellas County Environmental Management 512 S. Ft. Harrison Clearwater, Florida 33756 Re: Harbor Watch Condominiums Fix and Repair Permit Application and Application for Boat Ramp (Dredge and Fill) Dear Mr. Walker: Please find enclosed two permit applications. One is addressing a proposed boat ramp and the other a fix and repair of the existing docks at the site of the Harbor Watch Condominiums. The previous owner of this site was Ross Yachts. Should you have any questions,. please give me a call. My regards, Bill Woods Woods Consulting; Inc. cc: Joe Gaynor (via Fax) Christine Hagen (via fax) P•\Harbour Watch Docks (115-04) (Gaynor)\Harbour Watch Condominiums 27 Submittal Ltr to County.wpd Office: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727).786-7479 Email:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org .~.~~Ca~J~ ~~'.~.'1~5~ ~.L;.~.. 4200 W. Cypress St,, Suite 444 Tampa, FL 33607 Tale: (8~3) 877-4444 Fax: (813).877-1222. September 1, 2005 Harbour Estates, L.L.C. 4200 W: Cypress Street, Suite 444. Tampa, FL 33607 To Whom It May Concern: Per the above referenced property, please be advised that Barry Greenfield, Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer, is hereby authorized to act on my behalf to sign any and all documents relating to State, County or other governing agencies. This shall include but not be limited to all water-related permits, leases or licenses related to the above referenced property. Sincerely„ r Jose J. au rst Pr i nt ~ . ~, JJR/1)c STATE OF FLORIDA _ COUNTY OF ~~-t~r~ r3 ~fl Lt-1 ~ . Before me the undersigned, an office duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this IS??.day of SfpT~Em ~ t ~ _ _... .2005 personally appeared... Jose h Rauenhorst, who having been first duly sworn deposes and says that he fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he has signed. Notary Public: l~'~ Signature ~1 ! r S, Notary Public: ~ Esc, ~ Typed or Printed Name ~~r~o ~ENISE S 10HNSON fA COMMISSION N DD409902 ?pFpo'~ EXPIRES: June 20, 2009 (40~ X88-0763 Florida Notary 3rKVlc~.com My Commission Expires: ~l.~.ct t^ ~-'~, 2~ ~ Affidadit of Authorized Agent Name of Property owner; Harbour Estates, L.L.C. 200 W Cypress St., Suite 4~1 Tampa, FL 33607 ~ • That we the owner and record title holder of the following property 9 Windward Pa~Sag~Cleannrater FL 33787 2. That this property constitutes the property for which permit application(s) and request(s) are being made. 3• The undersigned has appointed and does appoint Woods Consulting, Inc, as their agents to execute petitions, permit applications, or other documents as necessary for permitting. They are also authorized to represent us as our agents at any required public hearings. 4• This affidavit has been executed to induce the various regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over such matters to consider and act on the above de8crlbed property, 5• Than we the undersigned authority, hereby, certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Property Owner (Signature) ~ . Property Owner (Pent): 6 ry Green eld Title: Date:. ~ ~ ~ las SPATE OF FLORIDA County o~.Rii~*, ~`/~~q./'D~,fC,,~~ Before the undersigned, an office duly commissioned by the laws of the fate o Florida, on this ~ St day of /Y( L_, 2005, pecsonall a eared rig ' n*°~~ ~. having been first duly sworn deposes.and says that he fully under tends the co tents of the affidav t that he has signed. Notary Public ,~CC•l ~' h G ~. ~.. `~'~ ' '~~~~ h+t''f~"ry LAURA J.COPLON !~~'• *'. :~ ~: Commission # DD284314 My Commiss(on Expires: __ ~-~.~-1c`~~j ,; w€ Expires 2/2/g08 ~ ~ ,: ~`~`r Old RepublceSureyuCompany I#: 2,OQ5224344 BKc 14371 PG: 1728, 06/09/2005 at 04;17 PM, RECORDING 5 PAGES ,44.00 KEN BURL , CLERK OF COURT PINELLAS COUNTY, FL BY DEPUTY CLERK: CLKDM82 .~ 4~ ,... ~r. ..,' ~ j .` :~'~.ti.` `~Z Prepared by: Investors Real ~~"• et~Com an LLC ~~ Ltl , P Y~ Return to: Investors Realty.,-'~itl~~Cbmpany, LLC Attn: Thomas IVjc~,~llghlin 304 Monroe Stre`e~t••-` Dunedin,F~ ~6~8, ...~. • . , Pazcel ID # 08/29/1'S/~},~3~0/003/0050 ~- ,~` ~`` 1 , ~ ..: , ,, ; ~,, c ;l SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED ~ `~~...,,rr r ;~'~ '~. KEN BURKE, CLERK OF COURT PtNELLAS COUNTY FLORIDA rrlsra zooazo66o~ oan~nooa at oz:xt PM OFF REC BK:11345 PG: 2081-2064 DoeType:DEED RECORDING: 63a.a0 D DOC STAMP: 621000.00 1•?~J:uvDENTURE made as of the 23rd day of May, 2005, by and between Quality goats of aier `Inc., a Florida corporation .("Grantor"), whose address is 235 Windward Passage, ater;;Florida 33767, for and in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and ~cbnsiderations in hand paid, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, s; sells,: aliens; remises, releases and conveys unto Harbour Estates, L.L.C., a Delawaze ~liability~~company`("Grantee" whose address is 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444, ). Florida 33607, the followig,described real property in the County of Pinellas, State of to-wit: e. 4 See:Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. Subject to the.rriatters het for on Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof TOGETHER with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances, with every privilege, right, title, interest and estate, reversion; remainder and easement thereto belonging.or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same in fee simple forever. _ And the Grantor does hereby covenant that Grantor does fully warrant the title to the above described real estate so hereby conveyed and will defend the same against the lawful claims, arising out of events occurring prior to the recording of this Deed, of all persons clauning by, through or under the Grantor, but against none other. This Special Warranty Deed is being re-recorded to correct Exhibit A, ' P,INELLF>,S COUNTY FL OFF. REC. BK 14371. PG 1729 4 ,~ ~ t. ~ l„ } i IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the.:~aiitor aforesaid has set its hand and sea] as of the ~S~ .day of May, 2005. ~'` .,^, ~~~~.~' ,;, ~;t f ,~.~ WITNESSES: ~ ''~-` i . .. Quality Boats of Clearwater, Inc. , a Florida corporation '~, , sy: N - ATR ~tle: CEO ~' ~ ;% ~ ~,~ ~ ~`+ ~ ~ `ti` ..~^'~ . "-^~. ~~ L -,;....... .. ~ '. 'STATE OF FLORIDA ~ ' ~ ; ,;~bUNI'Y OF PINELLAS The foregoing instrument was~:`acknowledged before me this ~~~ nANTEL M BATTt.., ~______ day Of May, 200$, by the r.Fa of n11AT.TTV RAATQ nF [`i FAR ~ATFR' ~ They are personally known to me or have produced as identification and did (did not) take. an oath, My Commission Expires: Name: Kathleen A. O'Hearn Notary Public ~-i"~'y,, Kathleen A. O'Neem ' My Cammlulon DD22~o7~ 2 • PINE,~LD..g COUNTY FL OFF, REC. BK 14371 PG 1730 '1 ;% iw ;,~~_..~ v~ :~ ..::• i~•.., ''~ •, r ~ ._ ~ map or plat thereof record4d in ;plat Book 51, Page 34, of the Public Rec ~~ •.,• ; ounty, Florida. b 'y TOGpTHER WIT save easement created by Reciprocal Easements and Maintenance Agreemcnt ~` , `~'. \ ) a ~ - ~~'• t I,~i J, ..,~ •~.r% ~% ~ \.; .~ ; `i'1 -.~ ~ ~', S r C ~. '~, 1 ,`~~~`~ C•... .t ~,~.'~ i ? ' ' PINFr.~.+LAS COUNTY FL OFF, REC. BK 14371 PG 1731 ,~ ~' .. ',, ~` ...~ .,,, t' ;'';.„,~~~:~~., .Exhibit "A" i 4 1 The West 50 feet1gfT:tz}ts~one (1) and four (4) and all of Lot 5, Block C, ISLAND ESTATES OF CI~)r,~,~tyyATER, UNIT FIVE, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 51, Page.~34, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. •~~, ;-.. ,~V~ S:• .1 , ,~ ~~~rv~., ' ~1,,~~ ~~ ~ ~ i,,y ,,V ~; ' f ~.~,~ 1, ro / {. ; '~,, i ., r~w`~• 1 ~ {4 f i (\ \> 1. ~~ ~~~\: ..l` %. ' - ' FIN~I,LAS COUNTY FL OFF. REC: BK 14371 PG 1732 ' %'ti ,, ~ '~ ' 1` '-~:'•, ; i y; ..~:' , .. ~~ • Y ''.I `-•~'~ Exhibit "B" ~ ~ ~%~` '~ ,... ; Taxes and assessments for`'the~yeaz 2005 and subsequent yeazs, • ~.; ,~. Restrictions, conditioits,`7eservations, easements, and other matters contained on the Plat of ISLAND . ESTATES ~' .~-"~ ~ • ~ - t ,z. ~° OF CLEARWA,7'ER„"'1571VIT F]VE, as recorded in Plat Book 51, Page 34 and in O.R. Book 586, Page 235. ,,_ ~•, `'\,.,' Restrictions cbn~iiried in Deed recorded in O.R. Book 2308, Page 44. ,, ..... ~'11~ ~Y Recipro~~I~~~~asements and Maintenance Agreement recorded in O. R. Bool~,~~ Public~l~gcdr~}s of Pinellas County, Florida. age __._ of the a ~ ,_ ,.., .. ,, ""wa ~~ ~ 4..,~ _ ~\ •,v~ ; •~ „ ~' f1K,6~w~ ~~~-~(~ NARRATIVE RE: DATE OF DOCK CONSTRUCTION The 12 wet slips were constructed in the 1965 to 1967 time frame as evidenced by the enclosed dated historical aerials. It is our understanding that the 7 mooring buoys were also placed in the water in the same time frame. riarb~ur Watch Condos _ 1gg5 Historical Aerial ~~~ds ~~~.~~~,~;~7 ,lr7c~~ t~ . { z r~ # > ~ ..+.. :~„ .~~:X ~+ ~ ~: -'" 'dve~wy: s ~: i ~, .~ ~~'r~vd,~ ~~t~7~~1~,~'i~;li7c: haraour Wafich ~Qndo~ - 1968 Historical Aerial Harbour Watch Gondos - 7975 Historic Aerial b~~~~r~~~1~=~~nsurtirrc~.~frrG. Harbour Watch Candas -195fi Historical Aerial 'Wr~t~~,S'.~t~~~Y~~frr,_~ IBC. SCALE: NTS FIX AND REPAIR: ~ Application # ~-- ! (OFFICIAL USE NLY) .._ ~ _ "~. a ~ y r -.. x ~ ~k r .. .. .. ._ .. .. .. v ~ x'1 j5,. w ~' l t~1 1 . ~~ ~ ~, ti i ~ 1y ~.' 'ne~ . `, ~ '. ~ ~\ ,ry , ~ '.i'rifM 11,5 ~ _ ~ ~ F~ `~~a HARBOUR WAT~y O ~- ~` DC~~_ ~'"~ ~ ~ "~ P ~ ~ , ~ ~~ ~, 5~ 279 WINDWARD P~~;S~,~~~~ ~- r.•~' "~r~r -``~% ~ tl ~~' _~ `~ , ~~ } ;~ CLEA'RWATE R ` FL~ 7 ~ ,~~'°' ~ f~~ ~: _ t', ~~~ ~ /(FORMERLYROSS ~;~(~qR~~F~ .) ,.... x ~~~*~~4~~) r < < na Uta,,, ti°+Y~n~ittf~7~ r ~` ~ ~ - Tt;is`prnjeGt n~a~y~Y~'gw~'~~t~>;~~~"~~' I - ~~~a~t ~r.t~a M~~~~~~^y y~ 3~3r1SnV3E5 fifGCl S~IfI~~r~'1~~~~~~{1Y~% SU ~,~ 4 ~ a -~ ~ ''~ ~~,_ ~,~, ~ Env~t'a~tE'~~~t~1 ~!~~~rr~~~, ~~.~~~~4~i ,~ ~ _'~, .~ '. ,,Y~ t p'l •YbfdYust. a xr ~Yri. ~ ~~`ti.~.%~. t+~~" ~~Ay CI{~ 1~ J( ~~~~r~~~'.~r~I~~~$~n~i ~s~b"r~~ t ~ ~~.~ ~' ~. „ „`~ WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH CONDOS TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1.325 ----LOCATION MAP WATERWAY WIDTH 400 rna courm Rono t. suite 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 170 PH.N(727 786 5747 MHW +1.3' MLySI -0.7' Fnx (7z7~ 7es-7a7e "ELEl69TI'ONS REFERENCE N61i0-1929 SHEET SHORELINE tngmeers Seal ``~~IIIII~IAA ~~~~:pap yl(~'S ~ ~, ~ ~ `4i~! ):, '• ~` ~~~'~ T 'rTA+" y '~ ~~ i ~~ ~ "~ • ` V ' A A • ~ , 1 ~' ' 1~E1 p2]1590~i34'I - - ~ ~_ ~ j ~ ~ ~_ FAY: (727)530-3790 SCALE: 1"=100' FIX AND REPAIR I Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) WOODS CONSULTING INC HARBOUR WATCH CONDOS 1 325 . TQTAL SQUARE FEET . EXISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 1714 COUNTY ROAD 1, suTTE 22 W/ AERIAL WATERFRONT WIDTH ' 170 ' DUNEDIN ~ 34696 (727 786-5747 PH M~yy MHW +T.3 -0.7 . FAx (727) 786-7479 "ELEIi.4T/ONS REFERENCE NG!?7-1929. sHEET ? SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ``~~rl~ii~~~~ P!!`,f~LL~~ ~ SUN ,+t` CITY OF CLEARIti~ATER ENVIRONP~~NTAL ~~~~F~';~+=!`~E~' :~+' ' ~ ' ., ~ t` i I+ Rn ~ {'~t`1N1NG D PT. - ~~ ~o. 'Ey~~~6'~,; ~ t;,~. DATE ~. - i;.31..~-~~C. ~ FOF~ E~~II_L.ii~ .4 ~. ~?A4~1~~, C),~..G: ~ ~ _:I•"o _ :~ STA7'~E+ ~~~ ~~ . I ~ I !!, ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ` `` ' 1' PA%'172') 930~379U ~~ l --T SCALE: 1"=20' .FIX AND REPAIR - Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ao m ~. I -f- ® ~ ( -P IV cn .~' o N I I -~- ~- v I ~ -f- i a° -f- o ~' I c.r- ~, I v ~ ®I cn ~ ~- I I rn w v v v I v l ~ i I w i I I ~ I I I ~ o~ I I I o cn oo ~ ~ cn -~ I I -~- + + `~ t~. ~~'~~ 6 9 I ~ CD .. I ~ ' ~ -~:' 3. ~ CU -{= rn' f ' ~.. `. ~: ~ .. ~ ~ rn .~ .. ' 37.0 ~O Oo I I ~ <,.. . ,... ~ .~ y; ~ ~L 19.5. 16.5 ~ e;.(~' ~~C' i ;•}- 7,5'x18,0' FLOATER 'w ~ '~'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ In u~-~ ~. ~~~~~~ . ,~ ~ ='': ~ 5 5 ( ~~~~~~ 1 <<<<<< -2 11.7 <<~~~ Y; ., .~.. ~~ „~, '~~ , N ~ `'' <<< I ~~' ~ I :; 3. 5.5 0'x9.0' RAMP .; 15.9 •-:' 4 4.5 ;~ .,.. 65 WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH CONDOS TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1.325 r7~a courm Bono ~, suRE 22 .EXISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 170 HUN(727 yes sia7 rnx (727 7ss-7a7e _-..-.._.~-. *ELEI%4170NS REFERENCE NGliO-1929 MHW +1.3T MLW -o.T SHEET 3 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal `~ ~ i~. `~ 3y ~~' PiN~LLA~S COUN~'Y t ~ ' ~'~/ I~q~,. v~ ' ~ ~ " ' IG~MEN ENUIRON~i~NTAL Ml~Ne : : ~ ~ 7~' ll~lo. 1 ~ '' (~ ~~~ ~ -D5 - ' >_~~ wILLi gyn. e~~viS. ~i~~~~-o (~ - F~ ~' ST~T , V .I~ ~ / \\ i szo cnAienuwooo ovave ~~~. CLEAV,:':ATEP., PlC'P.IfiA j~; /A 1 ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ` ice`: isz%j s~ s: co I SCALE: 1"=20' FIX AND REPAIR Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ® I +co v ~ I v - -' rn rn I z I , -P I cn ~ ~ ~, I rn o + v V '~' -i-- c0 ~' ~ -P N + v .+ ~ + -~- I -p -I- -I - \l 'I" ~ v -{- ± •~ I -gyp ~- v -P -P ;~- -P ~ , v~ o f N I N • p) o ~ p I m I (s ~ ~' C~ ° Cn ~ (~ ~ -< I + ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ ~' Cn O) ~ O rn °' I ~' 2,5 • ~ ~ +' 2 5 I {~ 2 5 '~a , 18 1--~ I . , . , ~`~ 1 ~ `° ' 3, ~ I v , ` .,; .; .~ '~ cv 37,0 2,~ 1 ~ .r ~ ~`° •JS.. 19,5 16,5 17,5 I ,: }' O O yy : ~ ~ ~:.~ i ~ ~ ~D ~' ~ P U, ';r. O O .: ~~ III ~ ~'. --~ ( • RAMP -' L^A OUT ~,~ ., - =~ ,. ~ ~ 11 - . T^ B REMOVED I 5,5 `. ~•: ~ N 347 ~~ : ••'~ .~ ~, 65,0 WOODS CONSULT ING INC: HARBOUR WATCH CONDOS TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1.325 couNn RonD ~ surrE ~7~a 22 EXISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 ~NT WIDTH 170 WATERFR . , DUNEDIN FL 34698 PH (727 786-5747 _ ~~" ~ . MHW +~•3 MLW -o.T . Fnx (727) 7e6-7a7e "ELElG4 AONS REFERENCE N61/0-1929 SHEET 4 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ~ ~ ~ ~ / EIVVIRONf~ENTAL ~,~AfiIAGF:B~EC~dT 7~' Na. 15 ~ , , ; it 1T ~ • S ~OFfi V1,~ILL1 Et9 h~~. 17~~~?`3, Coif-~E:t ~"OF~ . ~ ~ =. ~. ~ . ~ ~ ~ \ ~ szo cnATe~uwooo oerv[ ~~Ar?i~ - ~ . - _ \ ~ CLEAY.Y'iA fCP., iLC~FiDh 33-6.: TEL f'~7~590.43<i 'r ~ (~ , ~ , `` FAX. (:2i1 530-37J0 ~ ~ SCALE: NTS FIX AND REPAIR Application # ~ ~.~ . (OF ICIAL USE ONLY) POLYETHYLENE TUB FL^ ATING SYSTEMS LENGTH - 4S' MA% x PO~CZ e x e TUIC PILL GIADE AT f ff DOCK meta ttcanD B ~ T ,; s 1 A A B l ~ irP z~ioR -1YCTNYLCIC TUTS ~ SDL10.Y fILILD VRM M CIlAT LDGTD71 -0.TeTYRE1[ LEADS P L A N~ V I E W ~ 1 tDLLtt Pac alms NDTEI ALL CONSTRUCTION TD v.• ~AII ALTEAMtt DECKIMS ~ P°~ ~~ ~R "'T~ ,,m Dom,,,, MEET OR EXCEED RERUIREMENTS LISTED IN il'DIN"L T ~' SECTIONS 166-C332, 33, & 9IC Al .•K-IOR 334) DF THE PINELLAS COUNTY "P""` WATER AND NAVIGATIDN• , . CONTROL AUTHORITY ~ f0.YSTTAEK tEADs E~°''KDT TM REGULATIONS MANUAL ~. S E C T I^ N A- A WIDTH . Ie z a arAT. .. t z t TutE atzEn DEacDID ~• twwn In wIK DVn r ezen v® tIAKt . S/C SS IDL1S VRN LOCK lell ' Alm fCImLD VASIEFS - ~ S/Q' t.i KT P0.YCTNTLEI[ MS . ! /' OL S0.IDLY f1LLED VIII ~ . -0.YSTTREI[ lCAD3 SECTIL N B-B WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH CONDOS TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1..325 FLOATER DETAILS wATERwAY ~nDTH 400 ma couNrr ROAD ~, sulrE z2 ------~-• WATERFRONT WIDTH 170 DUNEDIN FL 34698 727 786-5747 PH MHyy +1.3~ MLW -0.7 . FAX 727) 786-7478 "ELEV.4T/ONS REFERENCE NGliO-1929. SHEET 5 SHORELINE Engineerls Seol ~~ .~ ~ ~ /i ~ N` .•"1' •• . i V' ~ .• ~ ~ ~,: !~~ ~ is ~ ~ V ~ '~ N' 155 a -. p•* ~~~ : ST~AT~~, TV' :~ ; , ~.. ~ : ~ , e ' _ ~ ~ 520 VII.TE/.NVOtfl UPNE ~L ~ / CIEA/'.•,:'ATEP.. °IDPJpA. :'.:?F.a / ` '' ~ ~ I ' 1 ' , ~ `` PPX: (727') 530.3790 SCALE: NTS FIX AND REPAIR . Application # ~ 7 ~~ 5 OFFICIAL USE ONLY) wnm clttsEi n x a z ve noes actcy s - ~e• um Iq s' 'C' a1~N~L A ur+rt m Nuvr x RRn TromAL Ar EACN ----+ I I VERTICAL POST ~Z W ~~ -=- °• LOlGITUDiNAL LQ~ Y vroTNS GREATER ~c 1 iNAN .PELT S W 9. Ot 12' 7 x 9 Rllnm ~r~ ~ ~ .PLAN VIEW A PAIN~~ PVOCnKCTS RAMP LIP VFAWES - An• AND V i!-1/r SCIaD w FIVE ~ ~ RVn RAIL ipt D6P[RENT 11ESICM . 1 ~ Q X 2 X a/16 TMCS ~. ~' ~s• ELEVATI^N ...L_ anc• r_~„_~ I-vr sERrarlora -_- ~ T E D E i/i 0.1 RUB RAIL 1-vIC• ~, I/~• PLATE V/NON-SKID ~ . TAPE - le• LDIG ALTERNATE GRATING DETAIL Ta ,~ R '~ DA - mama t~0.a~1 tN~ ALUaDNiiN Ran . e-vrD x r ('600 IaTn s•aaD DI• {nnlV ROD ~RCAlER : . . .~. ~ RIBBED DECKING • TREAD PLATE`END DETAIL `' ~,,,,,,,,~,D,~„~~,~,,,,,,,m„ r Rn>m 1)Ee1aIR! ! I/r ruaE ~ 2-vr scNn ~D PIPE e x e TIME T• x a• Rtnnm AN0.c N.T. AOA fiRADRAD.3 ORADRAlI (RACKET NINIE PaCIER ' CRADRAIL Ta VRAP nALTC >tt SCND IO -IVC 7' 'E' CIN1nEL X TT [ N X ADDED /MY RvnRAb GRAHRAIL DETAIL . • SHORE SIDE HINGE DETAIL e x 2 x yls Tunes 34 VIDTN ~ ~ . RmED xcxtNa a/tr ss DOLT I-vr sCND ~ vl-E a' 'C' cNANNCL - I/2• e x a x In ME e x a X ve TUnC a• saro +D vIPE - r LONG `Qt vIDTNS "' HINGE PIN -GANGWAYS SECTION A - A HARBOUR WATCH CONDOS WOODS CONSULTING INC . TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1,325 FLOATER RAMP DETAILS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 1714 COUNTY ROAD ~, suITE i2 --~ - WATERFRONT WIDTH 170 DUNEDIN FL 34696 MHW +1.3~ MLW -0.7 PH (727y 786-5747 . "ELEIiAAONS REFERENCE NGYO-1929 T 6 H Fox (727) 766-747s S EE SHORELINE Engineers Seal . `I-I~II7~ ' ' `` ~ ~ .~ . • . ~ ~ = ~17k ~ ~ ! STOAT O\ ' I ~ A,••~ ~ -~' ~ :~ tcS+S ~ .. ~~a~ ~~~~ ~ ~ 5.0 GhhTE4t~V;[q(/ Ur ~ ~~ i':: i, ~ - ~ 6p ` - CLEG}N'4iE G. ~'LOFI04. ?'.?fa ' ! , ' ~ ' ~ ~' 1 ~ 1 ~ ` FAX (727) 530 3790 r ' I SCALE: NTS FIX AND REPAIR ~ Application # RECYCLED PLASTIC CAPS ON AlL EXPOSED PILE TIPS, FASTEN WITH S.S. NAILS (TYP.), CAPS SHOULD 8E NO MORE THAN 1/4" LARGER THAN TRIMMED PILE DIMENSION. ELEV. = 10.0' MAX. ROPE STOPS 2" X 10" INTERMEDIATE STRINGER MAX. 2.0' O.C. CCA .60 RET. ELEV. _ COUNTERSINK ALL.BOLTS, ADJACENT TO BOATS SL:IP.$. ALL BOLTING TO BE 5/8" ~^HOT DIPPED GALVANIzED MIN, 3/4" STAINLESS STEEL RECOMMENDED CR055 BRACE 2" X 10" #2 S4S CCA .60 RET. ONE EACH SIDE IN WATER DEPTH OVER 8'. CENTER BLOCK FOR SUPPORT. 8' TIP PILING 2.5 C.C.A, RET, SET BUTT DOWN, 8.0' PENETRATION, 6,0' AT WALL, AND 10.0' MIN FOR NON-SUPPORTING PILES -- 2.5' - 3.0' -- OFFICIAL USE ONL DECKING EITHER 5/4" X 6" SAWN BRAZILIAN HARDWOOD, TREX HS24 COMPOSITE OR .EQUIVALENT A 0 DOUBLE STRINGER 2" X 10" ° #2 S4S CCA .60 RET. 0 2" X 10" ~2 S4S CCA o .60 RET. ONE EACH SIDE O~ DECK BOARDS TO BE TRIMMED BOTH SIDES. ° NOTE: ° ALL INTERMEDIATE STRINGERS TO BE LAP JOINTED AT BENTS 2.0' MIN. WOODS CONSULTING INC HARBOUR WATCH CONDOS E 1 32s . TorAL souARE FE T . .y.~~ANDARD DETAILS WATER RO TIwiD 0 rna courm Roao ,, sum zz TH F N 17 PH.N(72I7 786-5747 MHyy +1.3' MLW -0.7' Fnx (7z7~ Tae-747e *ELEV~4T/ONS REFERENCE N6l~D-1929 SHEET ~ SHORELINE tngmeer s aeoi I ~. V ~r. ~~ ~ ~ ~ Nol' . 1 ~ ~6 r~~ ~'~~) - ~~ ST~4~ ~ ~~~'~ ~8 ~F ~/' ~ 1520 GnATEAUWOOD DRIVE IXEARWATEK, fLORIDA 33764 ''' ~ / ~ ~ ~ , ``` FAXe 7271 530 3 790 J l/ ®®ds ®~u/tin Environmental Permitting Marine Engineering Hydrogeology Land Planning 1714 Gounty Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FI- 34693 November 15, 2005 Wayne Wells City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Suite #200 Clearwater, Florida 33756-5520 Re: Pinellas County Fix and Repair Permit for 279 Windward Passage Dear Wayne: Please find enclosed a copy of the above referenced permit for your records. If you need anything else please let me know. My regards, ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~. ~~ ~L Dianne Magee Woods Consulting, Inc. P:1Harbour Watch Docks (115-04) (Gaynor)\Harbour Watch Condominiums 44 Itr to Wayne wells with copy of fix and repair permit.wpd Office: (727) 736-5747 Fax: (727) 736-7479 Email:billwoodsC~woodsconsulting.org `~ SCALE: NTS DREDGE AND FILL 'y~~, y HARBOUR WATCH. C~ 279 WINDWARD PAS CLEARWATER, FL (FORMERLY ROSS YA Application # OFFICIAL USE ONLY) . ~~.--_.-"II `f..~ _ ~i I~...._. I .I ~ ~~__--- i-•- ~~76~ «~:-='~~' ~ ~' ~. ~= -ice {. -' ~~ ` ISLAN~-~EST~TES ~~,~~~~ ,a ~~~... .~~ ~,j PUBLIC Dry-MKS ~ i ~''~, ~, `=„ ~.-,, ~- '` `-, '~ ~ ~: my ~ 3 4~., ti ,,~Y .~~ -~ ~ °^~, . ~t~ ~~ _5~4` "•4 ~ ~ .i WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH LOCATION MAP WATERWAY WIDTH 400' ilia courrn RoAO ~, surrE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEDIN FL 34698 MHyy +1.3' MLyy -0.7' PH. (7275 78fi-5747 FAX (727) 788-7479 "ELElG4T/ONS REFERENCE NG!?7-1929 SHEET 1 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ``~~r,r;iiirii/ ~~ ~RD ~Sl~ // ~ ~11r" ~~.......~. i ' i ~ V' e~~~ 1 ~ ~f~~4~~ i G!'1"Y OF CLEARWATER ~ : ~ f~l~~ ~ PLANNING DEFT. * ,;' Nio. 155~~ ~> DAT~ / ~ ~. ST/~7 ~ ~~, // S~~yt `e 1520 CHATEAUWOOD DPJVE /~ I ~ C ~ ` ~ ' /~~ P~e/ QF.ARWATER. FLORIDA 33]64 {eI~ ~1\ WYI-~ 1 .^V~ ~ '~f~~i ~~~~``, FAX: (/2])5303]90 SCALE: 1 "=100' DREDGE AND FILL WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) EXISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400' ,7,a couNn Rono ,, surtE z2 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEOIN ~. 3assa W/ AERIAL MHW +,.3' MLW _p,7~ PH. (727 786-5747 Fax (727) 7ss-7a7s "ELElG4T/ONS REFERENCE NGI~O-1929 SHEET ? SHORELINE Engineer's Seal i ~~ ~ i 7~ s I~'o. 155, ~ !;' ., _, ~, - ~ ~ ~ E I'p. S,•y t t~ - • ~ 1. i „y71 R %1 - 5TA`tl'~ 0~' ~~ ~ e ~ ~ i szo cnATeAUwooo o~uve • '' `` ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ `~` CfEARWA~2 ) 50 390 64 SCALE: 1"=10' DREDGE AND FILL Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) 21 ~~ I I I I , . I ,52 .~• ,~ ~~ ,3°~~ ,39~ ,2'12 ~~ 22 I 1 1 2' ~~ I 21 1 I ~ ' 1 ,3~ .3• .3~ .3 °`~ .322 .222 .1 2 21 ~~ 1 I I ' I b .3~ ,3• .3~2 .322 .2~2 .1~~ ~ . a~'I I ,3~`~1,3~~~ .3221 .2~2' ,2~~~ .1°~~1 • ~~~ 2 Dc11 I • . I .2~ ,2• .2~2 .2 ~`~ .2,22 ,1 ~~ 1 2 ~' ' ' ' 1 I 1 1 0 l ~ .1°~ .222.22 .1`~~ .1~~ .1,22 1 2 P• I 1 I ~ d ° ~ I ~ 1 I O ~' . C• .: • ^I 0 n n% 1 a' ° a.' .v .0`/ .0` ~1 .1221 .122 .021 ~ ~~1 ~~ u4 4 a . ~ a,o d s. 11 11 11 11 I ., ° ~' ,a •. .0~ .0~ .0~` .0~` .022 p 2' s EXISTING LOAD OUT RAMP TO BE REMOVED WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH EXISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400' i7~a couNTr ROAD ~, sulrE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEDIN FL 34698 MHyy +1.3' M~yy -D.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAx (727) 7ss-7a7s *ELEl64T/ONS REFERENCE NG'ti0-1929 SHEET 3 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal `~~t~i~~iii ~ ` `~ ~ V1~4S i ~~~ r ` G~...•Gy~ ,~ i ~, ;; • • ~ ii '~ S 1 ,. ,. r ~ :' ~~ • S'K'ATE' ; I ~~••..i. ~`i~ ~~ ~ 1520 CMAI uhUWOOD DPJVE CLEAR.WAfiR. FLOPJDA 33764 ''~ ~ G.g f' q 1 ~ `, FA0.x viii s3o 3isa f r ., SCALE: NTS DREDGE AND FILL Application # NOTE: ACCESS RAMP TO BOAT RAMP IS ABOVE MHWL, THUS IS NOT IN ACOE JURISDICTION 40,0 MHW 1.3' MLW -0.7' OFFICIAL USE ONLY) SLOPE: 1.0'/6.6' OR 15%-/ ELEV. -3.7' EXISTING SEAWALL 3.0' MLW SEE SHEET 4 FOR LOCATION PROPOSED RAMP DETAIL NOTE: PERMIT TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO INCREASE RAMP SLOPE FROM 15% TO 17.5% AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTION, IF NEEDED, BASED ON CLEARWATER MARINE SCIENCE CENTERS REQUIRMENTS WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH CROSS SECTION A-A' WATERWAY WIDTH 400' ~7ia couNTY ROAD ~, suiTE zz WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEDIN FL 34698 MHW +~,3' MLW _°,7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAx (7z7) 78s-7a7s '"ELEli.4770NS REFERENCE NGliO-1929 SHEET 6 SHORELINE Engineer"s Seal ~~ ~4 ~ ~~ , ~~ ` ~ .••~ .. • I ~ i * No. 95 ~~, 1,.,~~ •' ,A 1 • - • - STtAYF`I ~` 4•Z '• '~~.~ (~~. ~' ~ 1520 CFIATEAUN/ODD DR1VE ~~' TTT ``, CffARWA'72])5 80-4 3 43 7 64 ' ~ ~ I 1 .~ 1 ~ ~ ` FAY: (]2]) 530-3]90 EXISTING ELEVATION ELEV. 5.2' - ELEV. 2.5' -~ _ SCALE: 1 "=30' DREDGE AND FILL Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) WEIGHED TURBIDITY CURTAINS ` ~~"~~~"`''" ~~'~~ SEE SHEET 8 FOR DETAILS PROJECT AREA=0.04 ACRES t e.t.ISt'_r~u D_I:..~. EXISTING ~..: t,.~ ' ~ DOCK ` ~ .'~ ~. 1 ~~ J...~.::~x^Y:~ rt~~:, JS.:~I\' ' .,~ tr e~ (~ //~~ ~z•' v •~~~ ~ . I r ~ i 00 ~ , , 1 ~ti \~ ~ __ __ 4~ .-_ -- __ ___ __ I Z I ~ / I ,A I I C:W ~ ( L~ O m I III J i I WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TURBIDITY CURTAIN LOCATIONS T~ D 224' ,7,4 courrrr ROAD ,, suIT E 22 WATERFRON WI TH DUNEDIN FL 34698 PH. (727 786-5747 MHW +1.3' MLW _D,7' FAX (727) 786-7479 '~ELEI/,4T/ONS REFERENCE NG'!/0-1929 SHEET SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ` ~ ~` ' I i i ~•ii j ~ ,t • I j ~ a ~ f ~) ~: SYAIi'~! ~~'~ ~~ " ~ ~ + • ~ '~I ~ '' y `` 1520 CHATEAUWOOD DR)VE i CIEARWATER, PIAPJ DA 33764 '' ~ ~ , `` ~ 1 FN(: ( 727) 530 3790 ~h SCALE: NTS DREDGE AND FILL Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) WEIGHED TURBIDITY CURTAINS SEE SHEET 7 FOR LOCATIONS WATER LEVEL CONNECTING R^DS rFL^AT ~u u ~ ~ ~ . LAMINATED SEA FL^^R . VINYL-P^LYESTE LENGTH AS REQUIRED .. FABRIC --- 0 CHAIN WEIGHTED' TYPICAL FLOATING TURBITY CURTAINS <DESIGN BY AER-FLO INCI) WOODS CONSULTING INC. HARBOUR WATCH TURBIDITY CURTAIN WATERWAY WIDTH 400' ~7~a couNrr RoAO i, sulrE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' DUNEDIN FL 34698 STANDARD DETAILS MHW +,.3~ MLW _0,7~ PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 '"ELEIG4770NS REFERENCE NGl/0-1929 SHEET 8 SHORELINE Engineer"s Seal .`~ wAS~~ ~~~ V L tI gr~ '- ~f' 'I I ~ ~, _~ ~` 1520 CMATEAUW000 DRIVE CIPARWATER, FLORIDA 33764 __._ ' ' ' ' ~ 1 1 It F ~ , , , , FAX: 17271530-3790 _ T a BENTHIC SURVEY Harbour Watch Dock Prepared for: Harbour Watch, LLC c/o Joseph W. Gaynor, P.A. 302 Monroe Street Dunedin, Florida 34698 Submitted by: Woods Consulting, Inc. April 1, 2005 w Woods Consultin Environmental Permitting Marine Engineering Hydrogeo/ogy Land Planning 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 April 1, 2005 Dunedin, FL 34698 Mr. Joseph Gaynor Harbour Watch, LLC 302 Monroe St. Dunedin, FL 34698 Re: Benthic Survey Report Dear Mr. Gaynor: Woods Consulting, Inc. performed a Benthic Survey for the Harbour Watch Condominium site. Staff, underthe guidance of Sherry Bagley, Senior Permitting Specialist, performed the Benthic Survey on March 22, 2005. The area was swam to note the occurrence of sea grasses, worm tubules, fish, crabs, oysters, algaes,~etc. and to determine depths. The survey area exhibits a sand bottom with overlying silts. Barnacles (Baianomorpha) and oysters (Crassotrea virginica) were present along the existing seawall from the mean high water line to the bottom. Oysters were also attached to all the existing dock pilings. Assorted rubble was found on the bottom. If you have any questions, please call. My regards, ~~~~ Sherry Bagley Senior Permitting Specialist Woods Consulting, Inc. \\Woodsserver\projectslHarbour Watch Docks (115-04) (Gaynor)\Benthic report.wpd Office: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 Email:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org r .. W®ods Consulfin Environmental Permitting Marine Engineering Hydrogeology Land Planning .~ „` ~~~ t5 ~i 9' r,., rte,. ~ 0, , .._/ ~ /' ~ ~ 5~ °` /`~ 9 ~ __ ~--~ WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH CONDOMINIUMS 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 r~ `'_ l./ ~ .' *'~'~„ ~ .f ''~' ~'~~,, ~~ / ~~ ~1:~ .( f ~ / ` .~. ~~%~~'' 1 ~ •` ° `~ \~ /i/`tfj~ 1 r 1 ~ r ; ((11~~ ~ `f ~1L~~".~ ~ / ' .. ~ er I ,,,.--: 1 ~ '''' .- ''",~ y~ ...r~~~ I'~ ~4.' f I _._._._.__._.____....._._.__~._._...____._._ TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1794 ~.~...._.._.~........... ~ BENTHIC & BATHYMETRY DATA WATERWAY WIDTH 400 1714 COUNTY RDADwt, sutTE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 170 DUNEDIN Fl. 34698 , MLW -~ ~, PH. (727 gas-s~a~ MHW +1.3 FAX (727 786-7479 "ELEl64T/O/liS REFERENCE NGliO->929 SHEET 6 Office: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 Email:billwoodsCwoodsconsulting.org CDB Meeting Date Case Number: Agenda Item: Owner/Applicant: Representative: Address: July 18, 2006 FLD2005-09093 D1 Harbour Estates, LLC Bill Woods/Terri Skapik, Woods Consulting, Inc. 279 Windward Passage CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,8,18 square foot multi- use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a re- duction to the side .(east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601. EXISTING ZONING/ Commercial (C) District; Commercial General (CG) Category LAND USE: PROPERTY SIZE: 1.45 acres PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Vacant (31 attached dwellings approved by CDB on October 19, 2004 - FLD2004-06042) Proposed Use: Multi-use dock for eight boat slips in conjunction with attached dwellings ADJACENT ZONING/ North: Commercial and Medium Density Residential Districts; LAND USES: Retail sales and services and attached dwellings East: Commercial District; Restaurant South: Preservation District; Water West: Commercial District; Vacant and Clearwater Marine Aquarium CHARACTER OF THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY: The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public docks surrounding the Aquarium. Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 1 of 10 UPDATE: At their meeting on March 21, 2006, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the April 18, 2006, agenda in order to address the legal issues of the submerged land and proposed conditions of approval. On April 18, 2006, the Community Development Board (CDB) continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the May 16, 2006, agenda in order to address the legal issues of the submerged land and proposed conditions of approval. The applicant desires City Council act on a request to declare the submerged land surplus to resolve the legal issues prior to CDB action. Due to scheduling issues for such a request, the CDB continued this application, at the applicant's request, to the June 20, 2006, and then to the July 18, 2006, CDB agenda. The applicant has requested a continuance to a date uncertain (see attached email). Once the issues regarding the submerged land have been resolved, this application will be scheduled and advertised for the next available CDB meeting. ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 1.45-acre site is located on the south side of Windward Passage, approximately 300 feet west of Island Way. The site was previously developed with a boat yard. On October 19, 2004, the Community Development Board approved a request to construct 31 attached dwellings on this property (FLD2004-06042). All existing upland improvements have been demolished in anticipation of the construction of the building and site improvements for the 31 attached dwellings. A building permit was issued on February 8, 2006, to construct the site improvements (BCP2005-02671) for the condominiums. There exist docks on the property consisting of 1,325 square feet and 12 wet slips. The areas to the east, west and north are developed commercially, however, attached dwellings are located to the northwest and farther west on Windward Passage. The Clearwater Marine Aquarium exists to the southwest, as well as public docks surrounding the Aquarium. There is aCity-operated, commercial dock (nine slips) located directly to the east at 20 Island Way (Island Way Grill), approved by the Community Development Board on May 20, 2003 (FLD2003-03013). The unstaffed dock is available on a first come/first served basis and is free to the public (no overnight mooring). There were seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor up to five vessels, which existed for the prior boat repair business that operated from the subject property but were removed when the public docks were installed. Proposal: Section 3-601.C.3 requires docks over 500 square feet in area (in association with a multi-family development or condominium) be treated as a commercial dock and be approved as part of a Level Two, Flexible Development review. The applicant seeks to remove the existing docks and slips in order to construct new docks consisting of 1,818 square feet and eight boat slips. The seven mooring buoys in the open water that were for the prior business on this property have already been removed, as they are no longer necessary, which represents a net improvement to the marine environment. The proposed dock will be constructed with a floating platform for the main eight-foot wide access platform parallel with the seawall and the catwalks. In order to have at least three feet of water depth at mean low water for moored boats, a ramp will connect the dock platform with the upland/seawall. The main platform will be 22 feet from the seawall. Three of the catwalks will be 36 feet in length for six of the slips and the westernmost catwalk will be 23 feet in length for the Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 2 of 10 other two slips. The catwalk and slip length on the western side is shorter due to the existing public slips at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and to accommodate the boat ramp in the corner. Tie poles are proposed on the east side of the property at a one-foot setback, meeting Code requirements. The dock on the east side is proposed 1.5 feet from the east property line. A minimum side setback of 22.4 feet is required for the docks/catwalks. The reduced setback is to the main platform of the dock, which is used as an area for dock boxes, electric pedestals, fire extinguishers and hose racks. The reduction on the east side is a function of providing adequate vessel maneuvering area for the existing docks and the boat ramp to the west at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium, thereby pushing the docks eastward. The proposed west side setback is 81.5 feet, greatly exceeding the required minimum setback of 22.4 feet. The adjacent property owner to the east has submitted a letter of no objection to the proposed reduced side (east) setback. The public docks to the east at the Island Way Grill were approved at a 23-foot west side setback, meeting the required setback of 22.9 feet. Most slips are 18 feet wide, but slip 7 is 15.5 feet in width. Code dock provisions limit the width of docks to a maximum of 75 percent of the lot width (224 feet), or 168 feet in this case. The proposed overall dock width is 63.3 percent of the lot width (141.8 feet). Code provisions restrict dock length to a maximum of 75 percent of the lot width (168 feet). The longest catwalks are proposed to be 92 feet in length from the seawall (41 percent of the lot width). The dock length of 92 feet is also less than the 25 percent of the waterway width (99.5 feet). While not consistent with existing, older and shorter docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium, the proposed docks are consistent with newer docks required to meet today's Codes, wherein the length takes into account the water depth at mean low water and sea grasses (if any). There are no issues regarding navigation with the proposal and the other criteria for docks have been met. An issue with this proposal is that the submerged lands upon which the docks will be constructed are owned by the City of Clearwater. The City received the submerged lands by deed from the State in 1925, but it included a "reverter clause," whereby the ownership of the submerged lands is to revert back to the State if the submerged lands are not used for the public good. The submerged lands deeded to the City in 1925 cover a very large area, including the area projected for a downtown public marina. From a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger any reverter clause, other than the submerged land area immediately adjacent to the upland application parcel. Any approval of the request should include a condition where there would be no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application unless and until the City receives sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity. As an alternative, should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then Staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council. Prior to such action by City Council, the applicant will need to submit a survey describing the submerged land area adjacent to the upland application parcel which is to be reverted. The applicant is proposing to reconstruct a boat ramp on the western portion of the property. This ramp was used in conjunction with the boat works operation previously on the property and is used Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 3 of 10 by the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to load and unload injured mammals with a forklift. The applicant has committed to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to replace the existing forklift load out ramp. Use of this reconstructed boat ramp should be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, but is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp, as there are parking and other issues for such latter use. The applicant has submitted the proposed docks to the Army Corp of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). The issue of the reverter clause is under discussion and negotiation with the State. When the submerged lands are sovereign (State- owned), SWFWMD requires the docks to be designed to the requirements for docks within an Aquatic Preserve. The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulations contain a State lands preemption requirement that the area of submerged lands cannot exceed 30 times the linear feet of shoreline bordering sovereign lands. The preemption area for this site is 6,720 square feet, which must include the entire "footprint" of the mooring facility (including the area where the boats moor). The proposed dock design being presented to the CDB with this application is based on the submerged land being owned by the City, wherein the preemption restriction is not applicable. However, in the event the reverter is triggered, then the preemption restriction will be in effect. The proposed dock design "footprint" being presented to the CDB represents 10,142 square feet, which is well in excess of the preemption area of 6,720 square feet. However, the "footprint" must also include the 805 square feet of the boat ramp (see above). Therefore, the imposition of the preemption limit restricts the dock area to 5,907 square feet. The applicant has submitted an alternative dock design if the preemption limitation is applicable which reduces the number of slips to five and the slip sizes are smaller. This is just one example of an alternative dock design that will comply with the preemption limitation. The applicant is requesting "flexibility" within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB review so long as it meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted with this application, does not extend beyond the 25 percent of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium. The building permit to construct the site improvements for the condominium project does not provide utility extensions for required fire risers for the proposed dock. Either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-02671) or a separate utility permit application to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock must be submitted to the Development Services Department prior to the Planning Department signing off on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the fire riser permit must be finalized. Dock supported signage will need to be permanently installed warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site. Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 4 of 10 COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: (Section 3-601.C.3): STANDARD PERMITTED PROPOSED CONSISTENT INCONSISTENT REQUIRED MAXIMUM 24 dwelling 31 dwelling units X DENSITY units per acre (approved) 34 units IMPERVIOUS 0.95 0.79 (approved) X SURFACE RATIO ISR SETBACKS 10 percent of East: 1.5 feet X* (minimum) the width of West: 81.5 feet the property (22.4 feet LENGTH (maximum) 75 percent of 92 feet X the width of the property (168 feet WIDTH (maximum) 75 percent of 141.8 feet X the width of the property 168 feet) * Reduction requested on east side. Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 5 of 10 COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA (Section 3-601.C.31: Consistent Inconsistent 1. The proposed dock shall be subordinate to and contribute to the X comfort, convenience or necessities of the users or the occupants of the rinci al use of the ro ert . 2. The proposed dock shall be in harmony with the scale and character of X adjacent ro erties and the nei borhood in eneral. 3. The proposed dock shall be compatible with dock patterns in the X general vicinit . 4. Impacts on Existing Water Recreation Activities. The use of the X proposed dock shall not adversely impact the health, safety or well being of persons currently using the adjacent waterways for recreational and/or commercial uses. Furthermore, it shall not hinder or discourage the existing uses of the adjacent waterway by uses includin but not limited to non-motorized boats and motorized boats. 5. Impacts on Navigation. The existence and use of the proposed dock X shall not have a detrimental effect on the use of adjacent waters for navi ation, trans ortation, recreational or other ublic conveniences. 6. Docks shall be sited to ensure that boat access routes avoid injury to X marine assbeds or other a uatic resources in the surroundin areas. 7. Docks shall not have an adverse impact upon natural marine habitats, X grass flats suitable as nursery feeding grounds for marine life, or established marine soil suitable for producing plant growth of a type useful as nursery or feeding grounds for marine life; manatee sanctuaries; natural reefs and any such artificial reef which has developed an associated flora and fauna which have been determined to be approaching a typical natural assemblage structure in both density and diversity; oyster beds; clam beds; known sea turtle nesting site; commercial or sport fisheries or shell fisheries areas; and habitats desirable as 'uvenile fish habitat. 8. All turning basin,' access channels, boat mooring areas and any other X area associated with a dock shall have adequate circulation and existing water depths to ensure that a minimum of a one foot clearance is provided between the lowest member of a vessel (e.g. skegs, rudder, prop) and the bottom of the water body at mean or ordinary low water -0.95 NGVD datum . 9. The dock shall not effectively cause erosion, extraordinary storm X drainage, shoaling of channels, or adversely affect the water quality presently existing in the area or limit progress that is being made toward improvement of water quality in the area in which the dock is ro osed to be located. 10. The dock shall not have a material adverse impact upon the X conservation of wildlife, marine life, and other natural resources, including beaches and shores, so as to be contrary to the public interest. Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 6 of 10 Consistent Inconsistent 11. The dock shall not have an adverse impact on vegetated areas; X vegetative, terrestrial, or aquatic habitats critical to the support of listed species providing one or more of the requirements to sustain their existence, such as range, nesting or feeding grounds; habitats which display biological or physical attributes which would serve to make them rare within the confines of the City; designated preservation areas such as those identified in the comprehensive land use plan, national wildlife refuges, Florida outstanding waters or other desi ated reservation areas, and bird sanctuaries. 12. Impacts on Wetlands Habitat/LJplands. The dock shall not have a X material adverse affect u on the u lands surroundin . *See discussion under Analysis. C'nMP>(.iANf'F WTTA f.FNFRAi. CTANnARnS (~ectinn 3-9131 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 residin or workin in the nei borhood. 4. Develo ment is desi ed to minimize traffic con estion. X 5. Development is consistent with the community character of the X immediate vicinit . 6. Design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, X including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent ro erties. *See discussion under Analysis. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject 1.45 acres is zoned Commercial (C) District; 2. The upland has been approved to permit 31 attached dwellings, which is currently under construction; 3. Seven mooring buoys in the open water, each of which could moor up to five vessels, that were connected to the prior business on this parcel have already been removed, representing a net improvement to the marine environment; 4. The proposal is to remove the existing docks with 12 slips and permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips; 5. The proposed dock complies with maximum dock width and maximum dock length requirements of the Code; Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 7 of 10 6. The proposal includes a reduction to the minimum side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet; 7. The reduced east side setback is due to the need to provide ingress/egress for vessels moored at the public docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium to the west of the subject property; 8. The abutting property owner to the east has submitted a letter indicating he does not oppose this request; 9. There will be no adverse impact upon the recreational or commercial use of the waterway and the dock does not impose any navigational hazards; 10. Fire protection is required for these docks, which must be permitted prior to or in conjunction with the dock construction; 11. The submerged lands upon which these docks .are proposed are owned by the City of Clearwater, which was deeded to the City 1925. Such deed includes a "reverter clause," which from a legal standpoint, the City does not want to trigger with any approval of this request. Sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity are necessary should this request be approved; or in the alternative should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) would result in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the Staff will recommend to the City Council that they release the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Such action will be within the sole discretion of the City Council; 12. In order to meet potential SWFWMD preemption regulations, the applicant is requesting "flexibilit}~' within any approval of this request to modify the submitted design without additional CDB approval, as so long as it meets certain guidelines; and 13. There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Staff concludes that the proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria of Section 3-601; 2. Staff further concludes that the proposal is in compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913; and 3. Based on the above findings and the proposed conditions, Staff recommends approval of this application. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on November 3, 2005. The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development approval to permit a 1,818 square foot multi-use dock for eight boat slips in the Commercial District with a reduction to the side (east) setback from 22.4 feet to 1.5 feet, under the provisions of Section 3-601, for the site at 279 Windward Passage, with the following bases and conditions: Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 8 of 10 Bases for Approval: 1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria under the provisions of Section 3-601. 2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general applicability criteria per Section 3-913. 3. The dock development is compatible with the surrounding area. Conditions of Approval: 1. That no Planning Department signoff on the County dock permit application be issued unless and until the City receives sufficient assurances, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, that such signoff will not result in reverter of the subject or any other submerged land parcel(s) to the State of Florida or other entity, or in the alternative, should the State of Florida take the position that reconstructing the existing docks under a repair and rebuild permit or the construction of up to eight docks under a new permit (including the ramp) results in a reverter of only the subject submerged land parcel, then the City Council may release, at their sole discretion, the subject submerged land parcel and deed it back to the State of Florida, whereupon the State of Florida will have jurisdiction over the subject submerged parcel. Prior to any such action by the City Council, the applicant shall submit a survey describing the submerged land area adjacent to the upland application parcel which is to be reverted; 2. That this approval includes the ability to administratively modify the submitted design with Planning Department review and concurrence [without additional review and approval by the Community Development Board (CDB)] so long as the revised design meets the preemption regulations, is smaller than that submitted with this request, does not extend beyond the 25 percent of the width of the waterway, does not exceed a maximum of eight slips, the revised dock facility meets all City regulations for multi-use docks, does not reduce setbacks below that approved by the CDB and the revised dock facility does not impact the ingress/egress of the vessels moored at the City docks adjacent to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium; 3. 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; 4. That use of the reconstructed boat ramp in the southwest corner be restricted to the Clearwater Marine Aquarium and others acceptable to the City, and is not to be used as a general "public" boat ramp. Access to such boat ramp shall be restricted though measures deemed acceptable to the Planning Department and shown as a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005- 02671); 5. That dock-supported signage be permanently installed containing wording warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity; 6. That a copy of the SWFWMD and/or FDEP Permit, Corps of Engineer's Permit and proof of permission to use State submerged land, if applicable, be submitted to the Planning Department prior to commencement of construction; and 7. That either a revision to the site construction permit (BCP2005-02671), or a separate utility permit application, to extend the fire lines for the fire risers for the dock be submitted to the Development Services Department prior to the Planning Department signoff on the County building permit for these docks. Prior to completion of the docks, the permit for the fire risers must be finalized. Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 9 of 10 Prepared by: Planning Department Staff Wayne .Wells, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Location Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Existing Surrounding Uses Map Application S.•IPlanning DepnrtmentlCD BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cased Up for the next CDBIWindward Passage 279 Harbour Watch Docks (C) - 7.18.06 CDB -WWI Windward Passage 279 Staff Report jor 7. /8.06 CDB.doc Staff Report -Community Development Board -July 18, 2006 Case FLD2005-09093 -Page 10 of 10 Page 1 of 1 Wells, Wayne From: Bill Woods [billwoods@woodsconsulting.orgj Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 6:33 PM To: Wells, Wayne Cc: Joseph Gaynor Subject: Harbour Watch CDB Date Dear Wayne: As the agent for Harbor Watch, Woods Consulting requests that the date for the CDB meeting addressing our multi-use dock application be moved forward to a date "uncertain." Should you have any questions, please give me a call. My regards, Bill Woods `~ r'sf~ T....~ Bill Woods Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 bil Iwoods@woodsconsulting.org 7/9/2006 Resume Wayne M. Wells, AICP 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 727-562-4504 warn e.wells(a~myclearwater.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). • 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 %i 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 • ~ v~~ CM6PoA ~~ OLEN4D ~~p£ d PPa' ° Q caEtr~ t /~ ~_7 awAl v O B4Y ~~~ AVALON 4 n _a 0 ~i ~ 0 ^ S ~ g ~'O Ne BAY ESPIANIOE m ~ PWf' ~~yt19 -R'o~ocuYAr ~ PPVA ~ama. BAYMOM Sf `~1FF ~~ ~~` ~ ° PROJECT SITE ~P,,,N pp1M ~ ~ < £ 0 PPPAgYA r Sr £ a iu ul OOHY Ph`+SP6E Z Y ~ ` 8 5^ fr ~~ O Ca~sereaY ena OJYARO P E 6Q O E~+sr sr o TNrROO ~~ ~ L S7 ^ ~ ~ a /L~ ~ q~ 9y 8~ p N VQ T ~~~ WATER OR y FlFM ST OW 84YSIOE ~rn'AY s ~. BLVD ~ ~ ~~ BlVO O 3 Location Map Owner. I Harbour Estates, LLC Case: FLD2005-09093 Site: 279 Windward Passage Property 1.45 Size(AcresJ PIN: 08/29/15/43380/003/0050 Atlas Page: 2676 • • rt ^4 .. + t w ,--- f ~ r y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~+~ 4' ~ ~~ ~ ~ 1 } ~ ~ r r Y .. . r ~' ~ _ , <~, . ' ~ ~ ( .. .. .. ' ~ A > i 111 , t ~ y .Y~ . S ~1! r• ~' r 9 '/ w ,* r ~ ~ ' I I't , ~ h` ~~ L h `~ ~t ?~ ~~ P f~ ~`/y~ f _ \ r j ~ ~, ~' i \ ~ ` ' ,,* , = '~ L.. ,4 .L / 'W i YJ 1 4 ~` . ' a~ \ , /INS-~ •...un •~• `~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` '~ ~ ,~ _ x ~~ ' i~l _,~ a Ar ~ ~ r+1~1) ~ ~/ + ~ ~ r - h ~~~ ~ A - y~ ~ h `. .~'~~,1 `;` j +~ R "~ ~ ,y f Aerial Map Owner: Harbour Estates, LLC Case: FLD2005-09093 Site: 279 Windward Passage Property Size(Acres): 1.45 PIN: 08/29/15/43380/003/0050 Atlas Page: 267B • View looking northeast at subject property (under construction) View looking east at existing docks and ramp on the subject property 279 Windward Passage FLD2005-09093 • View looking east at existing docks on the subject property (Island Way Grill Restaurant in background) View looking east at public docks to the east of the subject property (located at the Island Way Grill Restaurant) Page 1 of 2 ,~i ~=:.`: _ _..- • • `~ tt 1 ~r~~ ~ ~--i_i 1 146 ~- ~ \\ ~R~ ~, 5~\ \ j 144 i 12t~__ / l~ ~p c > l 142 I I I L~ . el 1 Q ~ ~ 1 A~ ry t_ 6 1 ' I I t `' ~ ir' ' ~ I 13 O o . __ j 1 134 ~ ~ , ° 1 ` ~ I_ ~~ f IA j wNA~ 13~2p1 I --- '~ ~N '~ ' w ~ t 129{ X121 1 scK \ I `~' ~ ti M .__~ ~ \ 7 ~lj c ^^\ \~\ \ 14 . 9 ' s ---- - f ~ \ SF ~ i / / ~\ ` \~ ~ "t ~ ^yr \ ~ h ~ ~ 105 / / ti \~ ~~ t^t r ~i~ ~ ~ -~ `g\\ vyb pl-U~SE~\0 ~~/' I jc°py `/~~/100 ~_ ---------- ` ~~ ~" 6 WINDWARD PSGE ~. ~ ~ t / ~ / / \\ I _ / ~ i /J i \ / `\\\\yi ~\~ / \~` ~ / /%f C7 ., 2 c / , /. 32 ~~ i / ~, / / ~ / HDR'/ p e -= ; 2~ \ \ \ r ' \ ~P \ 0 \ \ \ \ ~~ ~,; P ; P ,; Zoning Map Cfwner: I Harbour Estates, LLC ~ Case: FLD2005-09093 Site: 279 Windward Passage Property 1.45 Size(Acres): PiN: 08/29/15/43380/003/0050 Atlas Page: 2676 • • ~Z E~ttaCllPd ~_~~ Z~ 1 4-J i 150 ~ i _ \ ~ 1 1 - i tae , /~ ! ! Plac bf ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ,aB ,- g ~~ `vilwe ins i ~ g ~ g t ~ ,~ s Q~~ \; wt-rship a o ~ Re t~il'1 ' ' , tao 1 ~ ~. tin@ ' ,-,` `' ; rc~_ y i 139 ~- 1 - )1~9`4l~ t L ~ ~ 138 1 , ` y ~ 134 ---- 1 3 ,w\ ~~`' ~yq gFell ngs,,,,~,~'' ~ ~ L^__---~- 1 114 ` .~~~ ` 2 J '" "~ F` 1 ° t' sale ~ n~ ; ~ , cF -\ ti~~ ARaC)Bne t ' ~-----, ffiC s C ~ ! wellin~s ~ L_------~- , ~ v ~~ A,b~ached ` ~ ' ; '~~. F ~:.. _ '~~ ~ Retail ' ~~ d~v!ellmgs ©~tices 0 PruLSE 10 ~\l~ IJ - i ~ y~~"'100 , -_--_^- v6 . 6~ ti ti ~~ ~~'~`~ B Vacant ro ~0 " Auk ~ ice ~, Clearwater, ' p ; . , ~; Marine ®p0 /, •`, aft~dn`-, - uarium~~ O ; ~ s ~_, r ~~Aq ~ ,~ ~~` ~ , . ~ ~` ' `~ ~°' z ,~ . r ~~ . AttaCl3e~d ~ % Re~uran ^~ ~ ~ dwellings ,, , ., . e a, J ,-~ ~F p~ ~ Atta~ed\ ~o ~ \ •Q, dwellil~gs \\ s~ ~ `, \ , ~ , ~~~ \ \~--' Existing Surrounding Uses Map Owner: Harbour Estates, LLC Case: FLD2005-09093 Site: 279 Windward Passage Property Size(Acres): 1.45 PIN: 08/29/15/43380/003/0050 Atlas Page: 267B • ~.._ - _. - ~. _ ~~ =• - as~~~'t~1=~i ea View looking northeast at existing docks on the subject property and the public docks to the east at the Island Way Crrill Restaurant ~. View looking northwest at existing docks on the subject property 279 Windward Passage FLD2005-09093 • View looking southeast at existing docks on the subject property (left side) and the marina at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium (right side) View looking west at open water south of subject property and marina at the Clearwater Marine Aquarium (right side) Page 2 of 2 • r ,/. ~~ n ~o~ / j 8~ i~ ~0 ~ ~r~~ °~~ ~~ ,r t RECEIVED FEB 0 8 2006 ~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT ~ CITY OF CLEARV~JATER ~ ~aa ~i ~~ ~;, SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) . r rL- , .' .~. ~ -~ ~ ~ , J" }., ~'4 ~ ' f ~ J-S. + r ~ I ~ ` .. J. .. 1 !~~" r ~~ CLEARWATE~ ~~ ~~ , ' ' R •. ~ ` f `' 7~ `" ' EF~~ • ~ SCIENCE 7 ~, °,,> 4` ` q 1 ' 1 ~ ~,~, , , `5ti ~ ~ • t ~' ~ ~~ t ~ ; -~.,.ti - ~ D STAT HARBOUR WATc~C`O,N ©©~ ~~ ' ~'`~ `PUBLIC OCK 279 WINDWARD P~SS~GE ,.~~'~ ~• ~. FL~3~~79~``~ ~ ~~` ,~ CLEARWATER . , ,,, r ~ (FORMERLY ROSS YACH )`'~,~,~`~.,~,,~~ f ~ ' -~. l ~' _, -- ~ . ~ ~ ~ .;~, ~~:A ~.~ ~ ~ i WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 LOCATION MAP WATERWAY WIDTH t7ta couNn Rona t, surtE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH DUNEDIN FL 34696 MHW +1.3' MLW (727 786-5747 PH 400 224' -0.7' . Fnx (727) 786-7a7s 'ELElii4AONS REFERENCE NGI~D-1929 SHEET ~ SHORELINE Engineer's Seal OC IUD \\\\~..,~~,:N.~,~~~, ~ ~ ; ~~~ ~d FEB 0 8 2006 t~\ r > ~ n PiANNiNG DEPARTMENT ' F CLEARWATER Y ~. ` 7$ o. ~, ~ ~ ~ 1 y v jo°w~° ~ CITY O ~ ~ ~• b ~ ~. F y.. ;- i ••~ ~ •! ~ ~~ ~, i • •• ,ts; ~. ~~ . f7 •a~ ~ • a W nN =~,_C U Q xx O ~ w cal f- t~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 : /i • ~ ~ ,~ ~•` •' "~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 '~,,!~~N, t~`,~` SCALE: 1"=100' MULTI-USE DOCK 1 I ;, t. ~~ ~ `~ ?~~ ~ ~_ '~ ~i i .' , t "! '~?`.'' , `_~ •r v~ Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) i WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 188 ~ EXISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 4~l) 1714 couNiY ROAD ~, suITE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' W/ AERIAL • ' MAW -0.7 MHw +,.s N(727~ 88 5747 PH . FNC (727) 7ss-747a ''ELElG4AONS REFERENCE NG'!?7-1929 SHEET ? SHORELINE Engineer's Seal i7RIGINAL RECEIVED \\`~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~, ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ FED 0 8 2006 ~~• ~ ~~ `~ •• I ~• i ~ °av~ • PLANNING DEPARTMENT = * t No. ~ * = 300 " CITY OF CLEARWATER -- w .~^ S r C ~ HKNN ' v ••. 1 .'• o3J~ ~ •••• •.•.•••• \ N Q H IL ' ~ ' REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~, ~ \~ "~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 '~~, , , , , , , ~ ~ `` 1~ ,. w ~r ~~~ r WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 PROPOSED DOCKS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 ' 1714 COUNTY ROAD ~, sufTE 22 WATERFRONT NADTH 224 DUNEDIN FL 34698 W/ AERIAL MHyy +1.3' M~yy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAx (727) 786-7479 *ELE!/.4770NS REFERENCE NG1/D-1929 SHEET 3 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ORIGINAL RECEIVED ~~~`~ ~ I I I ~ `~~~, ~~ ~< ~'. W n ~ c(~ Q n FCD 08 206 ~ ~ ~~ •^ 1f•E . ~~ am-O PLANNING DEPARTMENT r ° _ * ~ o', ~ ~ * _ jo°~° CITY OF CLEARUJATER - •- .~ ~ - ~~~~ • - F-OCNN . ~iF..' =~n^ $ ~y \ J REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ,"~` ~' `~ " REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~~~, ,:~~~ SCALE: 1"=40' MULTI-USE DOCK Applica Ion # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ® ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ml Io of Iv o ~ I z ~ Ir C m XISTI G DOCK z Im ° EX ING DDCK I XISTING DOCK ~ ~ O O O 4 O XISTING DOCK ~ ~ M :` i r ~ _ .~ A 0 r Z m µ WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 XISTING CONDITIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' Ilia couNTr ROAD ~, suITE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 VII PROPOSED OVERLA ID WATERFRONT WIDTH MHW +1.3' MLW -0.7 PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 *ELEl64T/ONS REFERENCE NG'!/0-1929 SHEET 4 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ORIGINAL ~~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ , RECEIVED \~~` 5~ ~~~. w FED ~ $ 1006 ~ • ~''° ~ ° ~ ~ % °m~-° _ ~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT ~ is j~=.~0~0 -:~~° ± )f CITY OF CLEARWATER '~ ~" ' ' - a~--^ '.Z7 ~ U i <~ Q W N N ~, =~rlr `. a '% ` ~°°° ~ ~ ~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ,;; ~ ~ ~~ ; ~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 %~~, ,~~`,•,.•• SCALE: 1"=80' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) I~ 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~© ~ O . I I 10' UTILITY EASEMENT ~ ~ on ~ ~ y ~ ~ 9 ~ NOTE: o^ °~ ~'' -NO STRUCTURES SHALL BE ~ CONSTRUCTED WITHIN 10' ~ UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG ~ • SHORELINE. I# V - - ,, ~ CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE CAUTION WORKING NEAR 12" i FORCE MAIN. ~' -ACCESS TO THE 12" FORCE ~ MAIN FOR CITY EMPLOYEES '- / SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT ALL C i TIMES. WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 PROPOSED DOCKS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' t7ta couNrr ROAD t, sulrE 2z DUNEDIN FL 34696 W/ SITE PLAN MHyy +7,3' MLyy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 '"ELEliA71'ONS REFERENCE NGliO-1929 SHEET 5 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ORIGINAL ~ RECEIVED ~ ~ `.~.,.I ~ ~~~ ~S \~ ~ ~ I~ i wv ~ •• FEB 0 8 2066 { A ~y PiANNING DEPARTMENT \ , . r a m `y = ~` ? N ~ * _ 3 0 0~ o CITY OF CLEARV'JATER ~ ,r ~~, . ~ ~ N N o; y ins l,~ ~ =crr ••. ~ .•' ` 3 ~' ~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 sf~ '~ ~ \\ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 '^~~/~," t~,~~~` SCALE: 1"=30' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ SEE SHEET 8 FOR ~ ~ CROSS- SECTION ~ ~ ~ m . Im ~~ z~ ~v m~. 25% LINE ~v ~~ I'0 OI ~ r 5 20 5 5 20 5 20 ~ m 20.5 20. , . 20, . ~ ~ ~ I 46,0- ~~ ~ r ° ° IZ m ~ N fU m 18.0 18.0 18.0 18,0 18.0 18,0 4,0 °o 4.0 0 ~ 5.0 25.7 4,0 ~ ` p 15,5 0 I ~ ~ O O O O7 N "' O I ~ 24,0 I 6.0'x8.0' PLA 141.8 I 4.0'x22,0' RAMP U-~D WOO DS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET~- PROPOSED DOCK DETAIL WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' 1714 COUNTY ROAD 1, suITE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34696 WATERFRONT WIDTH MHyy +1.3' MLyy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 Fax (727) 7ss-747s *ELEl64T/ONS REFERENCE NGl~O-1929 SHEET 6 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ORIGINAL RECEIVED ~~`~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~~~, \ ~ _~tD SI i wv FEB 0 8 2006 ~ Ste: ~ ~ °mv~ ~ '•• • • Q` . ~ QM~ s~ ~ E * ~ ' ° ° PiANNING DEPARTMENT ~ . ,F ~~- ~o ~ In ' ' CITY OF CLEARWATER _ ~~Ul - i~ ~ r- <~ ~ - • • ~ • • - •- ~ `~ ~ ~ , w ' i i =H~~ n •~ •• y ~ ~ i.at ~ .~ ~ O~w~ ••••f~ • ~ ~ 4~~ / REVISION 2: 11-7-05 " ~ " ~ t~ -~ ^~ ~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 %!~ "~' ;~~`"~ SCALE: 1"=30' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) W Cl + + ~ V I O + W 1 V1 + 1' '~- ,V ,V + V U ~ ,V ~ ,V + N I + w I ~ -I- f I v + ~ ~ ~ ± I °' 1 .V W ± ± + N ± ~ w ~ ~ •;, I ± ~± --- v I I •~ + I + I ~ N I V •~ ~ v °f 1 NO I + 1 v v <,, + bo ,+ v rn I o, o ~ N I o v -~- + w v + + ° I m w co + °° ~ ± I °° V v I v v V Ito V ro + l •°' I -~ so I N v I ~ o+ ± ± ~ •ro v I ~ v C°+ I + V W N " J + v v~ v N I ~ + 1 _ + 1 + + I I w+ I `1 .~. ~ I ~ I 0° I ° •tio ~± I ~,° I I ~ V + + ~ + o O + V ~+ V co ,tn I I N N ~- ~ W I I ro •v+00 pp +V W ~o.~ ~.L~ p a I ~ I I N W ~I A t A p + ~+ +(;;+ ~ •V ~+~, '+~ 1+I ~ ± + + + I i n w Im A ~ + I~ p ~ ~ +1 N ~I ~ A W po I ~ N I m o ~ U °' a w w •oi .L rn rn o A I I .+ •v ,v N •tn~~ ,A •P °~ a+ I XISTING ~ ~Q n +~ ± ~0 0 ~ ~ O t , + ~ I I U I O1 0 + W I ? +'~ I - O/ W O ~ I A W N I+ I~ N W ~ +f0 ..I~ ~ W N `T I I N N ~ N I ~ V O + W O W J. p P O W 8 tW0 ~ N W ••A•• W ('~l~ ~ OWi V WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 BATHYMETRY DATA WATERWAY WIDTH 400' 224' I7Ia couNTr RonD I, suITE zz DUNEDIN FL 34698 WATERFRONT WIDTH MHW +I.3' MLW -0.7' PH. (727 766-5747 FAX (7z7) 7s6-7a7s 'ELEliA770NS REFERENCE NGl~O-1929 SHEET ~ SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ORIGINAL \ ~ ~ , I I I I / ~ ~ RECEIVED \ ~ ~~~ ~5~~ ~,~ w~ p FED 08 X006 ~ ~ . ~ ••,~ "~, ~ a 1• o .~~r• ° ~ N'~' ,"~ ; °",~a' -~r m . ~! oo . ~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT . •* ; ~ ;`k . ~~~N CITY OF CLEARWATER . ' =b ~ : ~ -, ~ FW- ~ N N Qw ~ ~ ~~ F.`~ .! \ va^y ..ryy•` .....~••• ~. ~a REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~~~ -~ u~;~ 1 REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ; !~~ iii ~'~~` ,,•~~- t11 ~` SCALE: 1"=10' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) SEE SHEET 6 FAR CRASS-SECTION L~CATI~N ELEVATIONI MAX, 10.0' NGVD-29 ~- -- - 36.0 4.0' X 22,0' RAM -8.0--r--6.0-, WITH RECAP-ELEV.=5.4' EXISTING ELEV.=4.4' ~ +1.3' MHW APPROXIMATE SURVEY ELEVATIONS -6.3' MLW ~---6.0' MLW -3.0' MLW -4.0' MLW ~ 8' TIP PILING 2,5 C.C.A, RET, SET ~ BUTT DOWN, 8.0' PENETRATION, 6.0' AT WALL, AND 10.0' MIN, FOR TIE PILES CRASS-SECTION A-A' WOODS CONSULTING 1714 COUNTY ROAD 1, SUITE 22 DUNEDIN n. 34698 PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 HARBOUR WATCH CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW 'ELEVAAONS REFERENCE NGIQ7-1929 SHORELINE ORIGINAL RECEIVED FEQ o 8 zoos PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER REVISION 2: 11-7-05 REVISION 1: 10-18-05 TOTAL SQUARE FEET 18~ WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' MHW +1.3' MLW -0.7' SHEET 8 Engineer's Seal \\\~1~111,,,~// ~ S~< ~ : w~ ~ ~ 5~:~~ ~ ~mV'~ ~• - o~coo _ ~.y• i~• -~Jl111n W • :.;, ~ uQ ~'~3i ~ I I,~ i ~ ~_~~~~ SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) P^LYETHYLENE TUB FL^ATING SYSTEMS LENGTH - 43' MA% ~ RptER z x R TIAE PILE GIODE AT ~ 6 DOCK wRRED DEtxnc B ~ T 0 s 1 A A B '' p'"""0. ~ ~ TYP z-10R PaYETNYLERE TORS TYD 0.EAT LACATIpI saml.r PILLED VITX P0."STYRENE READS PLAN VIEW , Rp1ER PDt GARDE v.• 1NZ-.{~ ALTEw7ATE DEaaNc PER RDARD PER STRDIGOt NOTE; ALL CONSTRUCTION TG ~` `°`~" I Y`"" ~ ~`~ RileE D DEpOlxi MEET ^R EXCEED REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN -- '- ;;P;~~TM~- SECTIGNS 166-C332, 33, & A•x-emR 334) OF THE PINELLAS COUNTY TYPICAL WATER AND NAVIGATION CONTROL AUTHGRITY ParErNrLErt nns P4YSTYRENE READS ~°"D`" `~"' ""'" REGULATIONS MANUAL SECTION A - A WIDTH lez3auT zxzTURE RIBBED DEpONG ~. C14AIJt/0. vt wTN owe v ZxRDT VWD IIRIDER 7/R' S.3. DlLTS VITR LOCK eur AND FENDER vASecRs S/R' S.S. fLi D0.YETHYLEIE TIM f ~' OL Sp.IDLY IRlED VITX POLYSTYRENE READS SECTION B-B TOTAL SQUARE FEET I~_ WATERWAY WIDTH 400 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224' MHW +1.3' MLW -o.~' SHEET 9 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ~~~ iii RECEIVED ~` _ S j ~~, W ~ ,.. < ~ •-. ..~ o r'.~ ~;~ ; . FEQ 0 8 2006 4 ~E~: ~ ~i~ •~ oQmm v f = 3o~~ *~" . N ~ 1 *' PLANNING DEPARTMENT r ; CITY OF CLEARWATER '~ '; ~ ~ - ,' ~ a w n ~ =Q"" . ; "' ~ v 3 ~ ` ~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~ ,~• ~ ~~. -~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~,``~'~~,, , ~~~`~~• SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application ~ (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) R18HED GUSSET e X 3 % 1/0 TUBES ARIES - /B' AND 3' 'E' CMANN0. / ROD TYPICAL AT EAdI A L[GNT OR NEAW VERTICAL POST OQ W OC ~ 4 as g $ ~ _ _ ci y i LONGITUDINAL i0 3 i wDTNS GREATER ~ J J ~ TNAII / IEET 4 7m VITH LIGHT KNURL ~~' ~`K'"` PLAN VIEW A PAM L P'GLICETS RAMP LID VARIES - IB' A/m w 2-VZ' SCND +0 PIPE BLE ~~ RU8 RAIL 2 X 2 x 3/16 TUBES IOR DIifERE DESIGNS 4 • 30• 1• +3• ELEVATION 3/16' .1 1-Vr I~-mss` I T SERRATIONS END VIEV ~ i pEty' alee• RUB RAIL 1-3/IG• 1• TAPE PI. ;Y ~ SKID ,~ ALTERNATE GRATING DETAIL 3// X 3 ~ BAR eAZs 1.0.3/1 1N~ 1/e• DU ~~ 50.+70 D/• ALUNDAIN RDD e-I/r 0 X Y L37s w'ER°D ~^~ LER RIBBED DECKING TREAD PLATE END DETAIL alort KNBd TD w.N PoeoulmnLAK TD Blw 1 yr TUBE z-vr scND +o PIPE e x e ruBE ~BBED DECKINGDECKING T X 3' RDIBED ANGLE Ali. pDA GRABRAILS GRABRAA BRACKET ~~ POCKET GRABRAR TO VRAP BACK TO 2 1/r sum 10 %PE y 'E' cwua+El 1/+• X +' BAR pT ENDS 1NY ~ ADDED ~~ GRABRAIL DETAIL SH^RE SIDE HINGE DETAIL e x e % 3/16 TUBES 34' vmTN 3/e• SS 80.7 RIDDED DECKING 1-1/e• SCHD 80 PWE Y 'E' CNANIEL e X 3 X 1/0 TUBE e % 3 % 1/D TUBE __ ______________ _______ 1/r 2' SCND 10 PIPE - 1• LWG ~ "'DT"s "' HINGE PIN -GANGWAYS SECTI^N A - A HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 WOODS CONSULTING FLOATING DOCK DETAI LS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 SUITE 22 1714 CR1 WATERFRONT WIDTH 224 ~ , DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34698 MHW +~•3 MLW -~'~ PH. (727) 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 ~ELEV.4770NS REFERENCE NCIiO-1929 SHEET 10 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ORIGINAL \ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~,~ ~~ ~ RECEIVED '4 ~` "'~ . sS;y FEQ 0 8 2006 . ~~~' •• ~`~'~' o-~ m ~ ~ - O ~'0 0 * •~ °' • ~ - ~O~m PiANNING DEPARTMENT = E CIN OF CLEARUJATER ~'•~ "~ ~ N N •' ~' ~ OF ~ =ACC ~ ~ ~~., ~ ~ a ~c •••'i ~ ' ~ " REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~, ~ ~~ ~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 '~~~ ~~`~ , , SCALE: 1"=40' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ WEIGHED TURBIDITY CURTAINS I SEE SHEET 12 FOR DETAILS PROJECT AREA=0.25 ACRES ~ ~I I~ ml Iv o ~~ ~ to ~~ z ~~ XISTI G DOCK Im ° X ING DOCK I XISTING DOCK / X TING ~ DD N ~ ~ O O O O .. 4 I I .~~~ ~ ~~~ r ~ A 0 m C z m H- WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET Isla TURBIDITY CURTAIN LOCATIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' ilia couNTY RoAO i, suRE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 WATERFRONT WIDTH MHyy +1.3' MLyy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 *ELEl64AONS REFERENCE NGliO-1929 SHEET ~~ SHORELINE Engineer's Seol ORIGINAL \\\~~ _..~ ~~:~r~ } RECEIVED \ , ~~ ~ ~~' ' ~' °~' w ~ > C° . N r. 0 OWNERS SIGNATURE _ * •: o ~* - 00 ~"' ~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT = '~ ' ~ • n - _ ~ ~ CITY OF CLEARWATER s ~; Qw ~ ~~ `~' : = ° . _~~ 1 .~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 '~ ~ • •~~~ Q~' ~~ ~ ~ "~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 '~~ -~,..~~~~ SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) WEIGHED TURBIDITY CURTAINS SEE SHEET 11 FOR LOCATION WATER LEVEL CONNECTING RODS ' FLOAT ° LAMINATED SEA FLOOR VINYL-POLYESTE LENGTH AS REQUIRED FABRIC CHAIN WEIGHTE TYPICAL FLOATING TURBIDITY CURTAINS (DESIGN BY AER-EL^ INC.) WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 TURBIDITY CURTAIN WATERWAY WIDTH 400' NT WIDTH 224' FR 1714 COUNTY ROAD i, suITE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 STANDARD DETAILS WATER O MHW +,.3~ MLW -p.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAx (727) 7as-7479 '`ELE!%4T/ONS REFERENCE NG!/0-1929 SHEET 12 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ORIGINAL ~~~iiii~,,, RECEIVED \ ~ ~~ 3. ~ ~~ n '• FEB 08 2QQ6 •. r ~ o ti• 6 ; ~~;~~'~ ~'~ oQmm OWNERS SIGNATURE pIANNING DEPARTMENT ' *~; ' ~° ~ $ ;`~x `~0~~ ~ CITY OF CLEARWATER : ~~NN = ~ i:" ~ •, ~ w . + ~ . ~~ V j J j ~~ / Q REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ' , "'+~~~ ~~' REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~i,'i ~, ,i~ ~; "'`' " .-. SCALE: 1 "=30' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ PEDESTAL = ~ SEE SHEETS 14 & 15 FOR UTILITY PEDESTAL SPECIFIC ATIONS AND ~ REQUIREMENTS P1 P2 P3 P4 ~ ~ O O 4 $ O i~ 3.0'MLW ~ ~ ~ 8 P5 WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 UTILITY PEDESTAL LOCATIONS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' ilia couNTr RonD i, suRE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 WATERFRONT WIDTH MHW +1.3' MLyy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 Fax (727) 7s6-747s *ELElG4770NS REFERENCE NGliO-1929 SHEET ~ 3 SHORELINE i Engineer's Seal ORIGINAL RECEIVED ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .I_ ~.' , ~ ~ <~ ~ ~ ~ FED 0 8 2006 ~ ~~ ~ ~~ •'~ `~ o ~ v m° m~ ~' ' '~, •~y oovm PLANNING DEPARTMENT =;*=~, ~N • * = 30300 CITY OF CLEARWATER _ ~ "• t~ ~ ~ ~~ •' ~ ~ ~ w `~ . `. F-KNN .~ ,; ~,~: F : _~CC 4 ~ '~ ~ ' ~3~ ' '~ ~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~ ~~ ~< ' '"~ ~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~'%~,; 't `1\~~,~ SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS PEDESTALS: - ALL PEDESTALS TO BE INNOVATIVE MARINE PRODUCTS "LIGHTHOUSE" PEDESTALS OR ENGINEER-APPROVED EQUAL. EVERY TWO SLIPS SHALL BE SERVED BY ONE PEDESTAL. WHERE ONE PEDESTAL CANNOT SERVICE TWO SLIPS, A PEDESTAL IS TO BE PROVIDED TO SERVE THE SINGLE SLIP. THE NUMBER OF PEDESTALS REQUIRED AND THEIR POWER REQUIREMENTS ARE: DUAL PEDESTALS PEDESTAL NUMBER POWER REQUIRED EACH PEDESTAL OTHER 2, 3, & 4 QUAD 50 AMP RECEPTACLES DUAL WATER SINGLE 20 AMP GFI RECEPTACLE ILLUMINATION CABLE TV (Optional) TELEPHONE (Optional) NOTE: DOUBLE PEDESTALS MUST BE CAPABLE OF ACCOMMODATING 2 -TWO POLE BREAKERS UP TO 60 AMP CAPACITY SINGLE PEDESTALS PEDESTAL NUMBER POWER REQUIRED EACH PEDESTAL OTHER 1 & 5 DUAL 50 AMP RECEPTACLES SINGLE WATER SINGLE 20 AMP GFI RECEPTACLE ILLUMINATION CABLE TV (Optional) TELEPHONE (Optional) NOTE: SINGLE PEDESTALS MUST BE CAPABLE OF ACCOMMODATING 1 -TWO POLE BREAKER UP TO 60 AMP CAPACITY SEE SHEET 13 FOR UTILITY PEDESTAL LOCATIONS WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 UTILITY PEDESTAL WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' ~7ia couNn ROAD ~, suITE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH DUNEDIN FL 34698 SPECIFICATIONS MHyy +1.3' M~yy -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 '"ELEl64T/ONS REFERENCE NG!/0-1929 SHEET ? 4 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal RIGINAL RECEIVED I' ~ ~ ~ \~~ ~~~ ~ S i We - FEB 0 8 2006 . ~~.~~ .' ...., > n ,.r~° ~' om~'m PLANNING DEPARTMENT `_- N ; * _ X000 cp trl • CITY OF CLEARUJATER ~ _ _ : ,i ~ : - w~rr _ ii K ~, f L ~ • - FKNN • w - =Qr~ te ~~ ` V • ~ ,r REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ` '~i 'D~,~, ,~ ~ ~.~~ "-~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~ y ,~~, ~ ;..{~ ~', ~ ~~ n~~'- ,.-., SCALE: NTS MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) OTHER ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS: 1. POWER TO DOCK SERVICE DISTRIBUTION PANEL(S) TO BE PROVIDED VIA UNDERGROUND SERVICE. 2. POWER FOR,PEDESTAL ILLUMINATION TO BE FED FROM COMMON SERVICE PANEL FOR DEVELOPMENT VIA UNDERGROUND SERVICE. 3. CABLE ENTRANCES INTO BASES OF PEDESTALS AND CABLE EXITS FROM SERVICE PANELTO BE SEALED WITH SILICONE CAULK. 4. ALL ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE MANUFACTURED BY SQUARE D COMPANY. 5. ALL CONDUCTORS AND BUS BARS TO BE COPPER. NO ALUMINUM PERMITTED. 6. ILLUMINATION TO BE ON COMMON LINE FOR NIGHT ILLUMINATION. 7. DISTRIBUTION PANELS (IF REQUIRED) TO BE OF ALL STAINLESS STEEL CONSTRUCTION. 8. ELECTRICAL CONDUIT LOCATED ABOVE GROUND (INCLUDING CONDUIT LOCATED BENEATH DOCKS) TO BE SUPPLIED WITH AN EXPANSION JOINT PER SECTION 347.6 OF THE NEC. AS A MINIMUM, ONE EXPANSION JOINT, ALLOWING HORIZONTAL MOVEMENT UP TO 6", IS TO BE PLACED IN EVERY 100 FOOT RUN O F CO NDUIT. 9. HANGER STRAPS FOR CONDUIT TO BE STAINLESS STEEL AND DESIGNED SO AS TO ALLOW FREE HORIZONTAL MOVEMENT (EXPANSION) OF CONDUIT. 10. CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN APPROVAL OF ELECTRICAL PLANS BY A PROFESSIONAL ELECTRICAL ENGINEER AND PLANS ARE TO BE SIGNED AND SEALED BY THE PROFESSIONAL ELECTRICAL ENGINEER. 11. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE PROPOSED LOCATIONS OF ELECTRICAL SERVICE PANELS (IF REQUIRED) AND GAIN ENGINEER APPROVAL. WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL souARE FEET 1818 ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' ~7~a couNrr ROAD i, suITE 22 WATERFRONT WIDTH DUNEDIN FL 34698 MF{y~ +1.3' MLW -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 766-7479 '`ELElG4170NS REFERENCE NGliO-1929 SHEET ~ 5 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ORIGINAL RECEIVED ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I " ~ ~ ~ FED 0 8 2006 ~ ~ ,, `~ '' S~< ~'~ w o ~i ,,-L~,~~... .... •~ S• • . ~ ~ omvm , ~ ~ . r ~ ~ ~ ~/~ ~ oo~m ` ~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT ~ $ b'7.r .~. = 3p~° : _ ~''.~ ?• CITY OF CLEARV~JATER ` ~ ':~ _ ? ~~ _. ;; _ ~~NN ~S' . • l 'S a~CC REVISION 2: 11-7-05 p ~' ' ` ' ~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 '~,q ~,~ ~• ,,~~~ _!r ~.., ~ti.. .w4+r r SCALE: 1"=30' MULTI-USE DOCK Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ i O O O, 4 5 ~ ~ 8 ~ lOlb.-ABC FIRE lOlb.-ABC FIRE • EXTINGUISHER EXTINGUISHER CABINET NFPA CABINE A EDITI FIRE LINE N^TES 1. ALL FIRE MAINS T^ BE 6' ^R 4' PVC, AWWA 2. ALL FIRE LINES T^ BE PRESSURE TESTED TO 300 PSI FOR 2 H^URS, FLUSHED BEF^RE CONNECTING T^ STANDPIPE SYSTEM, 3. PIPING THRU SEAWALL T^ BE GALVANIZED SC 40 WITH GALVANIZED FITTINGS AND HANGERS. FIRE LINE HANGERS AND ATTACHMENTS T^ BE STAINLESS STEEL AND SHALL BE DESIGNED T^ RESTRICT VERTICAL MOVEMENT CUP ^R D^WN). 4. ALL PIPE C^UPLING T^ BE COVERED WITH A C^RR^SI^N RESISTANT COATING. (N^N-PVC COUPLING) 5, ALL UNDERGROUND PIPE T^ BE DR14 300 PSI TESTED, ABOVE GROUND AND UNDER DOCKS, T^ BE SCHEDULE 80 WITH UV RESISTANCE COATING. 6. SYSTEM T^ BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING NFPA STANDARDS, -NFPA 303, 1995 EDITION -NFPA-1, 2003 EDITION 7. TRANSITI^N PIPING BETWEEN UNDERGR^UND AND EXP^SED PIPING T^ BE DUCTILE IR^N WITH APPROPRIATE FITTINGS AND RESTRAINTS 8. FIRE LINE C^NTR^L VALVES T^ BE ^S&Y TYPE WITH EPOXY C^ATING, 300 lb. WORKING PRESSURE 9. ENTIRE SYSTEM T^ BE TESTED AT 300 PSI FOR 2 HOURS. TESTING SHALL BE WITNESSED BY LOCAL FIRE DEPARTMENT PERS^NNEL AND A CERTIFICATE OF TESTING AND FLUSHING FURNISHED WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH ~ TOTAL souARE FEET 1818 - PROPOSED DOCK FIRE DETAILS WATERWAY WIDTH NT WIDTH FR 4 00 224 O ~7~a couNrr ROAD ~, suITE 22 WATER DUNEDIN FL 34698 MHW +t•3~ MLW -~•7~ PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 '`ELElG4770NS REFERENCE NG!/0-1929 SHEET 16 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ORIGINAL RECEIVED ~~` ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~, ~ FEB 0 8 ZU06 ... „ > n ' ~ 0 PLANNING DEPARTMENT ;~* ~ * A N = 30 CITY OF CLEARWATER ~ i ~ J t ~•~~ 7, .; = ~ - _ `~~ NN _ • ~ .r~A F ~ + W ~ _~~~ a ~ REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~~~~~ ''' ~\\ - ~~ REVISION 1: 10-18-05 '~' ~~~,~ ~ ~~ ~ • . SCALE: 1"=100' H I~ I T ~ Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) ~ OPPOSITE SHORELINE OCATION OF 7 MOORING BUOYS SUPPORTING UP TO 5 VESSELS EACH, FOR A TOTAL OF 35 WET ~• X\ ~~\ - ~ SLIPS AVAILABLE. , ~ , ~ ~~ ~ , ~ iC ~ '"S i ..'~ ' ~~ ~ ~ ;~, `~; v,.~~<~ , CLEARWATER MARINE • ~,~~ ^~ ~ ~ W SCIENCE CENTER •• >> ,+ ~~. x~ . .. e . . ~ I~ I ° ° ' I - m o ®'o o'o a I I' ~ I I~ II ~ I - -~-~~-.- "'""' ~ ..»~.. I I _ p ~ s °^ g °,~ i gi i I ~ ~ y ~ . ~y°~ ~ ~ ~ I °^ y ~ I I g I - ~ ~ ~ ~ .. III ~ , WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH TOTAL SQUARE FEET 1818 EXISTING MOORING A REAS WATERWAY WIDTH 400 224' ~7~a couNn ROAD i, suRE 22 DUNEDIN FL 34698 WATERFRONT WIDTH MHW +1.3• MLW -0.7' PH. (727 786-5747 FAX (727) 786-7479 '"ELEVATIONS REFERENCE NGl/O->929 SHORELINE Engineer's Seal ORIGINAL \~~ i i i„ i ~ ~ RECEIVED \\ ~ ~ / ' •••~ \ FEB 0 81006 ~ o m v' m ~{ a ~;~ . ~! ~' ~`~ 'J f' ~(~: 'f` o m~ ~ •' '"~ ~ ~ oo~m ~~ °0 't PiANNING DEPARTME NT * ; •, ~ * = 30 ' = ~ • ' CITY OF CLEARWATE R ~ l~ ~ _ ~{ ~' - `~` ~~ jl7,h ~ i ~ HKNN F w ~~ ~~: ~ rs F~.•~ ~ a r ~ ~, .... REVISION 2: 11-7-05 ~. ~~ '~~ '` ` REVISION 1: 10-18-05 ~ :., ,•• ~,,,~~ ~y,~~t-* • • REVISION 1 (04-04-2006) NARRATIVE HARBOR WATCH CONDOMINIUMS MULTI-USE DOCKS FLD 2005-09093 Proposed Reconfigured Multi-Use Docks The Applicant, though their agent, Woods Consulting, submitted in September of 2005 a Flexible Development application for multi-use docks to be located in Island Estates, immediately to the west of the Island Estates Public Docks. The proposed docks will be amenities for the exclusive use of the residents of the Harbor Watch Condominiums. The proposed multi-use docks are also under review by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). SWFWMD has informed the applicant, in a request for additional information (RAI), that the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) will review the dock design and make a determination as to whether or not the "reverter" clause contained in the 1925 deed of conveyance of the submerged lands to the City of Clearwater by the State of Florida. Should the Department of Environmental Division of State Lands make the determination that the reverter is Ntriggered,° then the dock design must conform with the requirements for docks located on sovereign lands within an Aquatic Preserve (note: all sovereign submerged lands within Pinellas County are part of the Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve as set forth in Section 18-20, F.A.C.). The Pinellas County Aquatic Preserve regulations contain a state lands preemption requirement which states that the area of submerged lands an Applicant may use must not exceed the area calculated as 30 times the linear feet of Applicant-owned or controlled shoreline bordering sovereign lands. In the case of the Harbor Watch Condominiums, the shoreline length is 224 feet. Thus the total area allowed for preemption is 6,720 square feet (sf). Please note that preemption must include the entire "footprint" of the mooring facility, including not only the deck area but also the area where boats moor. The design submitted to the City, that is to go before the Community Development Board, was based on the assumption that the submerged lands were owned by the City of Clearwater and thus the preemption limit was not applicable. Should the reverter clause be triggered, the allowable area for preemption would be limited to 6,720 sf. The area (footprint) of the design to be considered by the CDB represents 10,142 sf and must be increased by 805 sf to address the boat ramp as discussed below. Thus the current design represents a total preempted area of sovereign lands of 10,947 sf., which is well in excess of the allowable preemption area. (This amount of submerged land use would be acceptable if the Aquatic Preserve . regulations were not applied). Shown in Exhibit A is a design that reflects imposition of the preemption limit. Note the number of slips is reduced from 8 to 5 and the slip sizes are smaller. It should be noted that the design shown in Exhibit A is just one example of a mooring design that would satisfy the preemption rules. The design of the facility actually becomes a "numbers game" in that there are a myriad of designs that would meet the preemption requirements, as long as the preemption limit of 6,720 sf is not exceeded. The actual design shown in Exhibit A preempts a total square footage of 5,907 square feet. The 5,097 sf of the mooring facility must be combined with the square footage of the boat ramp, as discussed below, which is 805 sf. Thus the total area of submerged land preemption is 6,712 sf for the combined mooring facility and boat ramp. The 6,712 sf is less than the limit of 6,720 sf. • At the present time it is not known whether or not the reverter clause will be triggered. However, in the event it is, the Applicant requests the City of Clearwater approve at the CDB hearing a mooring facility that would be smaller and meets the preemption regulations. As noted above, the design shown in Exhibit A conforms to the sovereign land rules but represents just one design out of a myriad of designs that would meet the sovereign land regulations. Should the Applicant not decide to pursue the exact design as depicted in Exhibit A, the Applicant commits that the revised design will meet the important parameters that pertain to the current reconfigured multi-use dock design as addressed above, those being as follows: The slips cannot extend beyond a .distance of 25% of the width of the waterway. This limit is shown on Exhibit A; and • The slips cannot impact the ingress/egress of the vessels that are currently moored at the City facility to the immediate west of the proposed facility. In addition the Applicant commits that:: The revised facility will meet all City regulations pertaining to a multi-use docking facility; The footprint (total area over water of mooring facility) of the revised facility will be less than the area of the footprint of the reconfigured multi-use docks (docks for which the 30:1 preemption limit does not apply) which is 10,142 square feet as addressed under the heading above entitled "Proposed Reconfigured Multi-Use Docks;" and The revised design will not exceed a maximum of 8 slips. Reaair and Rebuild of Existing Docks and Slips The Applicant obtained a repair and rebuild permit from Pinellas County for repair and rebuild of the existing docks and boat slips. The permit 'was signed off at the county by the City personnel and the county issued the permit on October 3, 2005 (Permit No: M-36437-05). An application for repair and rebuild was also submitted to the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) and the permit was received on September 24, 2005 (Permit No: EX 2520). Note the permit is actually an exemption. A repair and rebuild permit allows the Applicant to repair and rebuild the existing docks in the exact same footprint or within a smaller footprint that is contained within the present footprint. Attached as Exhibit B (comprised of 2 sheets) is the repair and rebuild footprint the Applicant is currently considering. It represents an 8 slip docking facility. The Applicant requests that the CDB also approve this repair and rebuild design which will be used in the event the reconfigured dock is either not approved by the reviewing agencies or the decision is made to repair and rebuild, not reconfigure. Boat Ramp It should be noted that the Applicant has committed to the Marine Science Aquarium to construct a boat ramp for use by the Aquarium to load and unload injured mammals. The boat ramp will be a replacement for the fork lift loadout ramp that is currently located at the site. As the ramp is also located on sovereign lands, should the reverter clause be triggered, the ramp will be located on sovereign lands and, as such, the area represented by the ramp (805 square feet) will impact the preemption area available for the boat slips. Thus the Applicant has the 30:1 preemption limit less the 805 square feet for use by the multi-use docking facility, if the reverter clause is triggered. • • • • • SCALE: 1"=40' EXHIBIT B (SHT 2 OF 2) Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) SLIP -DIMENSIONS NOTE: LANDWARD EXTENT OF 1 15' x 40' SLIP CONSIDERED TO BE THE I 2 20' x 50' 3.0' MLW LINE ~ 3 22' x 60' I 4 18.5' x 60' ~^ 5 18.3' x 50' ~~ 6 18.3' x 50' ~I 7 16.8' x 40' ~I 8 17.4' x 40' 3.0' DEPTH AT MEAN ~ LOW WATER (MLW) CI ' 'Z" ~'f? • a I (---~ \y~FO 0 O O O O N O 16.Oy-44. m ~m 9 ~OI© 38.6 L17.8~ ~-74.7 C z I} WOODS CONSULTING HARBOUR WATCH CONDOS TOTAL SQUARE FEET 772 ,7,a coUNTY Bono ,, sUrrE zz REPAIR/REBUILD WATERWAY WIDTH 400 DUNEwN R 34688 OPTIMIZED LAYOUT WATERFRONT WIDTH 170 PH. ((727 786-5747 MF{yy +~.3' MLW -o.r Fax (7z7 7ss-747a "ELEl~f1770NS REFERENCE NGI~D-1919 SHEET 1 SHORELINE REVISION 2: 4-3-06 REVISION 1: 3-29-06 Welis, Wayne Page 1 of 3 From: Wells, Wayne Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 1:33 PM To: Delk, Michael Cc: Reynolds, Mike Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Michael - Here is a chronology of events/approvals for this property: 1. On October 19, 2004, the CDB approved the redevelopment of this property to permit 31 attached dwellings in the Commercial District, over Staffs recommendation for denial (FLD2004-06042). The site plan showed an existing boat "concrete ramp to remain" 2. On February 25, 2005, an application was filed for the site construction permit for this property (BCP2005- .~2671). Zoning review comments were entered initially on April 1, 2005, with the final comments shown as "met" on June 22, 2005. Zoning approval was entered as an activity on December 12, 2005 (don't know why the discrepancy of dates between "activities" and "conditions"). This permit was issued on February 6, 2006. A modified boat ramp was shown on the site plans for this project (added by the engineer onto the civil plans May 20, 2005). 3. On May 18, 2005, the Planning Department approved a Minor Lot Adjustment modifying the north property line in accordance with the approved FLD site plan (in conjunction with the Clearwater Marin Aquarium) (M IS2005-04017). 4. On September 8, 2005, I signed off for Planning on a County permit application for a boat ramp in conjunction with the condominium development (MIS2005-09003). While the original FLD approval (FLD2004- 06042) indicated the existing ramp to remain, the modified boat ramp was considered at that time to be a Minor Revision under the provisions of Section 4-406. 5. On September 8, 2005, I signed off for Planning on a County permit application fora "fix and repair of existing docks" (MIS2005-11012) (Note: MIS number different than a September date due to Planning Staff not retaining a copy for our records and finally requesting and receiving a copy from Woods Consulting, whereupon it was entered into our Permit Plan for record purposes.) 6. On September 8, 2005, a Flexible Development application was filed with the Planning Department to permit a multi-use dock for this property consisting of 1818 square feet of dock and eight slips (FLD2005-09093). This application was reviewed by the DRC on November 3, 2005, and has been on hold pending a resolution of the legal issues related to the submerged land. The applicant is now requesting this application be placed on the March 21, 2006, CDB agenda, where apparently there will be a condition(s) of approval relating to the submerged land issue being suggested by the Legal Department. 7. On September 22, 2005, a demolition permit was issued for this property (BCP2005-09401). 8. On September 30, 2005, an application was filed to construct the residential building (BCP2005-09829). This permit is still being reviewed. 9. On November 15, 2005, a foundation only permit was issued (BCP2005-09475). I have emails in the FLD file for the multi-use docks going back February 15, 2005, from Bill Morris regarding the proposed docks. The issue of the submerged land issue surfaced as part of Bill Morris' review for DRC on the FLD application (October 19, 2005, email). There are no "boat ramp" provisions in the Code. The issue of the ramp appears to me as part of the upland development but has potentially gotten wrapped up into the multi- use dock considerations. I met with Joe Gaynor and Bill Morris yesterday. A permit will be required to reconstruct the seawall and the "returns" for the sides of the ramp (Bill Woods has indicated they have received the Federal and State permits for the seawall reconstruction). No City building permit has been requested to-date. A concern Bill Woods expressed regarding the seawall permit is the need to build the "returns" for the sides of the ramp at the same time as the actual seawall along the property line. Don't know how this can be handled in relation to the submerged land issue. 2/9/2006 ' it Wayne -----Original Message----- From: Delk, Michael Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 8:32 AM To: Wells, Wayne; Reynolds, Mike Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Sirs: Comments on this? michael -----Original Message----- From: Lipowski, Laura Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:38 PM To: 'Bill Woods' Cc: Joseph W Gaynor; Dougall-Sides, Leslie; Wells, Wayne; Reynolds, Mike; Delk, Michael Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Bill, Page 2 of 3 I was not suggesting that the ramp be wrapped up in the dock application. However, unless I have completely confused the information t have been provided, it was represented to me that the ramp was a part of the upland application. When Planning staff reviewed the file, it was determined that the ramp had not been contemplated and should have been. I am not the attorney for Planning or the CDB and in any event, this item should really be worked out with the Planning Department - to determine the requirements for the ramp modification approval. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woods [mailto:billwoods@woodsconsulting.org) Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:26 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: Joseph W Gaynor Subject: Re: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Laura: Please be advised that the ramp was a separate submittal as we believe it should be. It was a submittal for dredge and fill which is the proper permit type. We have copies of the materials submitted to your staff and also would note it was signed off at the zoning counter, again, as this is the city's approach for a minor effort dredge and fill. I thus do not understand why this is being wrapped into the multi-use dock permit application. For us to proceed with the ramp should not require CDB approval. The city has placed a verbal hold on the ramp with the county. If this hold is released, the county will issue the ramp permit administratively as it does not require public hearings at the county. We would like to stay with this approach as it it the normal process followed in the past. My regards, Bill Woods Bill Woods 2/9/2006 Page 3 of 3 Woods Consulting 1714 County Road 1, Suite 22 Dunedin, FL 34698 Phone: (727) 786-5747 Fax: (727) 786-7479 billwoods@woodsconsulting_org. ----- Original Message ----- From: Laura Li.povvski@m r~Clearwater_com To: Josephw~aynorpa~aol.com Cc: BiII.West opussouth.com ;billwoods@woodsconsultin_g.o~ ; Chri.stine.Hage~~ussouth._com_ ; Leslie.Dougall-Sides a~m.yClearwater.com ; Mike_Reynolds@myClearwater.com ; WaXne_Wells~a myClearwater.com Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:14 PM Subject: RE: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Joe, Hope all is well -wanted to keep you posted on a few things. I have spoken with Leslie Dougall-Sides and Pam Akin in my office regarding re-opening the application for repair or reconfiguration of the docks at 279 Windward Passage. I have been directed that it is OK for you to proceed to the CDB to seek a conditional approval of the application, subject to the outcome of a resolution of the bottomlands issues between the State and the City. Please have Bill Woods (or whichever representative you choose) work with the planning department to move forward. Planning will consult with the City legal/staff to confirm the necessary language for such an approval as item progresses. In the meantime, in the course of reviewing the upland file, it has been discovered that the proposed ramp was not submitted as part of the application. City staff does not have any record of the ramp within the Site Plan, staff report, CDB discussion minutes, etc. As such, please contact planning to proceed with revising that application. Note, however, that the issue of complications due to the ramp sitting on the bottomland have not been resolved to date. As discussed, we are working towards a resolution and I expect more info by next week. I will certainly keep you updated as I hear. Thanks, Laura -----Original Message----- From: )osephwgaynorpa@aol.com [mailto:Josephwgaynorpa@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 2:20 PM To: Lipowski, Laura Cc: BiII.West@opussouth.com; billwoods@woodsconsulting.org; Christine.Hagen@opussouth.com Subject: Harbour Watch Docks and Ramp Laura is there any update since you received the information regarding the ramp from Bill Woods? I instructed Bill to reopen the process for CDB based on our last conversation so that we could at least get a determination from the City even though it may be subject to the jurisdiction issue. 2/9/2006