09/21/2010
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
September 21, 2010
Present: Nicholas C. Fritsch Chair
Frank L. Dame Board Member
Brian A. Barker Board Member
Kurt B. Hinrichs Board Member
Norma R. Carlough Acting Board Member
Absent: Thomas Coates Vice Chair
Doreen DiPolito Board Member
Richard Adelson Board Member
Also Present: Morris Massey Attorney for the Board
Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney
Michael L. Delk Planning & Development Director
Robert Tefft Development Review Manager
Patricia O. Sullivan Board Reporter
The Chair called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Invocation
and Pledge of Allegiance. The Chair offered applicants the opportunity to continue cases as
four votes are required to approve items.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: August 3 and 17, 2010
Member Dame moved to approve the minutes of the special Community Development
Board meeting of August 3, 2010, as recorded and submitted in written summation to each
board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Member Hinrichs moved to approve the minutes of the regular Community Development
Board meeting of August 17, 2010, as recorded and submitted in written summation to each
board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
D. CONSENT AGENDA: The following cases are not contested by the applicant, staff,
neighboring property owners, etc. and will be approved by a single vote at the beginning of the
meeting: (Items 1 – 3)
1. Case: FLD2008-05012 – 2855 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: BVG Acquisition Inc.
Agent: Marc Mariano, Cardno TBE (380 Park Place Blvd, Suite 300, Clearwater, FL
33759; phone: 727-531-3505; fax: 727-531-1294; email: Marc.Mariano@cardnotbe.com).
Location: 31.12 total acres located generally at 2855 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (south side of
Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard between Cross Boulevard [east] and Sky Harbor Drive [west]).
Atlas Page: 300 A and 300B.
Community Development 2010-09-21 1
Zoning Districts: Commercial (C), Office (O) and Medium High Density Residential
(MHDR) Districts.
Request: Extend the time frame of the Development Order.
Proposed Use: 229 attached dwellings (Independent Living Units) (73 units existing to remain;
156 units proposed), a total of 40 nursing home beds (proposed) and a total of 170 beds of
assisted living facility (94 beds existing to remain; 76 beds proposed).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
See Exhibit: Staff Memorandum FLD2008-05012 2010-09-21.
See page 3 for motion of approval.
2. Case: FLD2010-07002 – 2135 NE Coachman Road Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Patrick J. Flynn.
Agent: Braulio Grajales, High Point Engineering (630 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL
33756; phone: 727-723-3771; fax: 727-723-7150; email: bgrajales@hpe-fl.com).
Location: 0.402 acre located on the south side of NE Coachman Road, approximately
1,400 feet west of N. Belcher Road and 600 feet east of Graham Drive.
Atlas Page: 280B.
Existing Zoning: Office (O) District.
Request: Flexible Development application to permit office and medical clinic uses in a building
totaling 4,060 square-feet of floor area in the Office (O) District with a lot area of 17,500 square-
feet (0.402 acre), a lot width of 100 feet, a front (north) setback of 15 feet (to pavement), a side
(east) setback of eight feet (to building), six feet (to door landing) and five feet (to pavement), a
side (west) setback of eight feet (to building), six feet (to door landing) and five feet (to
pavement and dumpster enclosure), a rear (south) setback of five feet (to building), a building
height of 15 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof) and 17.67 feet (to top of parapet) and 19 parking
spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community
Development Code Section 2-1004.B; and to allow interior landscape islands of less than 150
square-feet and less than eight feet in width from back of curb to back of curb, as a
Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Community Development Code
Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Office and Medical Clinic.
Neighborhood Associations: Coachman Ridge Homeowners and Clearwater Neighborhoods
Coalition.
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
See Exhibit: Staff Report FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21.
See page 3 for motion of approval.
3. Case: FLD2010-03006 – 1377-1395 S. Missouri Avenue Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Dennis R. DeLoach, Jr. - Trustee.
nd
Agent: Brent Perkey, Chase Central Construction (10930 62 Avenue North, Seminole,
FL 33772; phone: 727-729-0813; fax: 727-327-7250; email:
brent.perkeyccc@gmail.com).
Location: 0.62 acre located on the east side of S. Missouri Avenue, approximately 1,100
feet south of Lakeview Road and 200 feet northeast of Kingsley Street.
Atlas Page: 306B.
Community Development 2010-09-21 2
Existing Zoning: Commercial (C) District.
Request: Flexible Development application to permit a multiple-tenant building with office, retail
sales and services and limited vehicle service uses in the Commercial (C) District with a lot area
of 27,153 square-feet (0.62 acre), a front (west) setback of two feet (to existing pavement), a
side (north) setback of 1.7 feet (to existing building) and 2.7 feet (to existing pavement), a side
(south) setback of five feet (to existing pavement), a rear (east) setback of 3.2 feet (to existing
building), a building height of 19.08 feet (to top of existing roof deck) and 22 parking spaces, as
a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development
Code (CDC) Section 2-704.C; and a reduction to the perimeter buffer (west) along S. Missouri
Avenue from 15 to two feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the north perimeter buffer from
five to 1.7 feet (to existing building) and 2.7 feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the east
perimeter buffer from five to 3.2 feet (to existing building), a reduction to the foundation planting
area from five to zero feet and a reduction to the percentage of interior landscape area from
10% to 0%, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3-
1202.G.
Proposed Use: Multiple-tenant building with office, retail sales and services and limited vehicle
service uses.
Neighborhood Associations: Lake Bellevue and Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition.
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
See Exhibit: Staff Report FLD2010-03006 2010-09-21.
Member Dame moved to approve Cases FLD2008-05012, FLD2010-07002, and
FLD2010-03006 on today’s Consent Agenda based on evidence in the record, including the
application(s) and the Staff Report(s), and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law stated in the Staff Report(s), with conditions of approval as listed. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
E. LEVEL TWO APPLICATION: (Item 1)
1. Case: FLD2010-07001 – 27001 U.S. Highway 19 North Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Bellwether Properties of Florida, LTD; Sears Roebuck & Co.; Dillard
Department Stores, Inc.; Allied Stores General Real Estate Co.; J.C. Penney Corporation,
Inc.; Florida Power Corporation.
Agent: Edward Mazur, Jr., P.E. (3030 Starkey Boulevard, New Port Richey, FL 34655;
phone: 727-849-7588; fax: 727-848-3648; email: emazur@fldesign.com).
Location: 80.896 acres located east of U.S. Highway 19 N between S.R. 580 and
Countryside Boulevard.
Atlas Page: 221B.
Existing Zoning: Commercial (C) District and Institutional (I) District.
Request: Flexible Development Application to permit an addition with 33,465 square-feet of indoor
recreation and entertainment (12 screen theater), 35,102 square-feet of restaurant and retail sales
and service in the Commercial (C) and Institutional (I) Districts with a lot area of 3,523,825 square-
feet, a lot width of 2,572 feet along Countryside Boulevard, 1,776 feet along U.S. Hwy 19 North,
and 2,784 feet along S.R. 580, a front setback (north along S.R. 580) of zero feet (to existing
pavement) and 52 feet (to existing building), a front setback (south along Countryside Boulevard)
of 5.4 feet (to existing pavement) and 83.4 feet (to existing building), a front setback (west along
U.S. Hwy 19 North) of 6.2 feet (to existing pavement) and 199.7 feet (to existing building) and a
side (east) setback of 5.5 feet (to existing pavement) and 285.9 feet (to existing building), a
Community Development 2010-09-21 3
building height of 51 feet (to top of flat roof), 63 feet (to top of metal lattice) and 5,719 parking
spaces as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community
Development Code Sections 2-704.C and 2-1204.A, with a reduction to the perimeter landscape
buffer along S.R. 580 from 15 feet to zero feet, a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer
along Countryside Boulevard from 15 feet to 5.4 feet, a reduction to the landscape buffer along
U.S. Hwy 19 North from 15 feet to 6.2 feet, a reduction to the side (east) landscape buffer from 10
feet to 5.5 feet, a reduction to the foundation landscape from five feet to zero feet on the west
facade, to allow more than 15 parking spaces in a row without an interior landscape island, to
allow interior landscape islands of less than 150 square-feet and less than eight feet in width from
back of curb to back of curb as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of
Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G and a two-year development order.
Proposed Uses: Indoor Recreation and Entertainment (12 screen theatre), Retail Sales and
Service, and Restaurant.
Neighborhood Associations: Cypress Bend and Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition.
Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III.
See Exhibit: Staff Report FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21.
Member Barker moved to accept Scott Kurleman as an expert witness in the fields of
zoning, site plan analysis, planning in general, landscape ordinance, tree ordinance, and code
enforcement. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Planner III Scott Kurleman reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends approval.
Representative Rebecca Gagalis, of Westfield, LLC, introduced the project’s
development team and discussed the firm’s recent $12 million investment in mall upgrades.
She hoped this project could begin in early 2011.
Member Dame moved to accept Tom Walsh as an expert witness in the fields of design
oversight, planning, architectural design, and design management, Edward Mazur, Jr., P.E. as
an expert witness in the fields of master planning and infrastructure design, including water,
sanitary sewer and roadway systems, and Cynthia Hardin Tarapani as an expert witness in the
fields of comprehensive planning, project approvals, zoning and land development regulations,
land use litigation and eminent domain and historic preservation. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
Tom Walsh, of Westfield, LLC, reviewed the $33 million project to expand the mall to
include a 12-screen movie theater and space for additional retail stores and restaurants. The
roof will be raised to accommodate the addition, to be located on the property’s southwest
quadrant. He said some new space, accessible only from outside the mall, is proposed for
restaurant use; theaters will be accessible only from inside the mall. He said a security station
will be at the front of the cinema. He said spaces will be added to the reconfigured parking lot.
He anticipated that movie patrons will park on the north side of the mall once they are familiar
with the theater location.
One person spoke in support of the request.
It was noted that the project’s traffic study answers concerns regarding congestion and
parking.
Community Development 2010-09-21 4
Member Barker moved to approve Case FLD2010-07001 based on the evidence and
testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today's hearing, and hereby
adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report with conditions of
approval as listed. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
F. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 1:40 p.m
Ch it
Community Development Board
Community Development 2010-09-21 5
EXHIBIT: MEMORANDUM FLD2008-05012 2010-09-21
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Community Development Board
FROM:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP
Planning III
RE:
Request for Time Extension
FLD2008-05012 – 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
DATE:
September 7, 2010
Attached is information related to the request by Marc Mariano, AICP, Cardno TBE, Agent for
BVG Acquisitions, Inc. (owner), for an extension of time relative to the above referenced project
located at 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard. This application was originally approved by the
Community Development Board on October 21, 2008. It is noted that, pursuant to Section 4-407,
the Planning Director has previously granted a one-year time extension in 2009. A one-year
extension is being requested which would expire on October 21, 2011.
Pursuant to Section 4-407 of the Community Development Code, extensions of time “shall be for
good cause shown and documented in writing.” The Code further delineates that good cause
“may include but are not limited to an unexpected national crisis (acts of war, significant
downturn in the national economy, etc.), excessive weather-related delays, and the like.” In this
particular case, the applicant has indicated that the project is being delayed for economic reasons
as it relates to the downturn of the local and national economy.
The Code further directs that the Community Development Board may consider whether
significant progress on the project is being made and whether or not there are pending or
approved code amendments that would significantly affect the project
Attachments:
Letter of Request
Time Extension Development Order December 24, 2009
Maps and Photos
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Inactive or Finished Applications\Gulf to Bay 2855 Bella Terra (C, O & MDR) 2008.10
- Approved - WW\Gulf to Bay 2855 Time Extension Memorandum for 9.21.10 CDB.doc
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
CDB Meeting Date: September 21, 2010
Case Number: FLD2010-07002
Agenda Item: D.2.
Owner/ Applicant: Patrick J. Flynn
Representative: Braulio Grajales, High Point Engineering
Address: 2135 NE Coachman Road
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development application to permit office and medical
clinic uses in a building totaling 4,060 square-feet of floor area in
the Office (O) District with a lot area of 17,500 square feet (0.402
acre), a lot width of 100 feet, a front (north) setback of 15 feet (to
pavement), a side (east) setback of eight feet (to building), six feet
(to door landing) and five feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback
of eight feet (to building), six feet (to door landing) and five feet
(to pavement and dumpster enclosure), a rear (south) setback of
five feet (to building), a building height of 15 feet (to midpoint of
pitched roof) and 17.67 feet (to top of parapet) and 19 parking
spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under
the provisions of Community Development Code Section 2-
1004.B; and to allow interior landscape islands of less than 150
square feet and less than eight feet in width from back of curb to
back of curb, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the
provisions of Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G.
CURRENT ZONING: Office (O) District
CURRENT FUTURE
LAND USE CATEGORY: Residential/Office General (R/OG)
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Office (no tenant)
Proposed Use: Office and Medical Clinic uses
EXISTING North: Low Medium Density Detached dwellings
SURROUNDING Residential (LMDR)
ZONING AND USES: District
South: Commercial (C) District Self Storage
East: Office (O) District Offices
West: Commercial (C) District Vacant
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 1 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 0.402 acre site is located on the south side of NE Coachman Road, approximately 1,400 feet
west of N. Belcher Road and 600 feet east of Graham Drive. The subject property is currently
developed with an office building (no current tenant) located approximately in the center of the
site and with six angled parking spaces that require motorists to back into the right-of-way (one
parking space is physically located within the NE Coachman Road right-of-way). The site has
100 feet of frontage along NE Coachman Road.
Properties adjacent to the north across NE Coachman Road are zoned Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) District and are developed with detached dwellings. The property to the
south is zoned Commercial (C) District and is developed as a self storage facility. The property
to the east is zoned Office (O) District and is developed with office uses. The property to the
west is zoned Commercial (C) District and is presently vacant.
Development Proposal:
Nonresidential properties along the south side of NE Coachman Road between Drew Street and
Belcher Road can be characterized as having a mix of building and parking lot locations on the
individual properties. Some properties have been designed with the building placed forward on
the property with parking to one side and the rear of the building, while others have the parking
area in front of the building. The proposal is to completely redevelop this site by demolishing the
existing building and parking, generally located in the center and north side of the site, and
construct a new one-story, 4,060 square-foot building at the rear of the site for office and medical
clinic uses. Parking will be located to the front of this new building. This site layout satisfies the
majority of Community Development Code (CDC), Building Code and Fire Code requirements,
albeit with necessary setback reductions.
The proposal includes a front (north) setback of 15 feet (to pavement), a side (east) setback of
eight feet (to building), six feet (to door landing) and five feet (to pavement), a side (west)
setback of eight feet (to building), six feet (to door landing) and five feet (to pavement and
dumpster enclosure) and a rear (south) setback of five feet (to building). Building and parking lot
locations on the properties between Drew Street and Belcher Road do not meet current required
front, side or rear setback requirements. While the proposed setbacks do not meet minimum
setback requirements, the site design with its proposed setbacks can be viewed as an emerging
trend for this area, as the proposed setbacks are consistent with the developed character of the
surrounding nonresidential properties. Required buffer widths, the foundation landscape width
and the square footage amount of interior landscaping included with this proposal meets Code
requirements.
Staff concerns with regard to the parking being proposed forward of the building and any
potential negative impacts this may have upon the residential properties across NE Coachman
Road have been mitigated through the site design to include a four-foot high buffer wall along
the front of the property with enhanced landscaping. This proposed redevelopment of this site
will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding
properties, and it is compatible with both the residential properties across NE Coachman Road
and the nonresidential properties to the east and west of this site.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 2 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-1001.1, the
maximum FAR for properties with a designation of Residential/Office General (R/OG) is 0.50.
The proposal is to construct a total floor area of 4,060 square feet (offices of 2,030 square feet
and medical clinic of 2,030 square feet) for a FAR of 0.232, which is consistent with the above
Code provisions.
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-
1001.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.75. The proposed ISR is 0.668, which is consistent
with the above Code provisions.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, there is no minimum required lot
area or lot width for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of
comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, the minimum lot area for office uses can range
between 3,500 – 10,000 square feet. The same table requires a minimum lot area for medical
clinics of 20,000 square feet. The site is 17,500 square feet of lot area, which exceeds the lot area
for offices, but is slightly less than that required for medical clinics. Pursuant to this same Table,
the minimum lot width for office uses can range between 50 – 100 feet, while medical clinics
require a minimum of 100 feet of lot width. The site has 100 feet of frontage, which is consistent
with these Code provisions. Adjacent properties to the east and west have the same lot area and
lot width.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, there are no minimum required setbacks
for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison,
pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, the minimum front setback for office and medical clinic uses can
range between 15 – 35 feet. The same table provides that the minimum side and rear setbacks for
office and medical clinic uses can range between 10 – 20 feet. The proposal includes a front
(north) setback of 15 feet (to pavement), a side (east) setback of eight feet (to building), six feet
(to door landing) and five feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback of eight feet (to building), six
feet (to door landing) and five feet (to pavement and dumpster enclosure) and a rear (south)
setback of five feet (to building).
Nonresidential properties along the south side of NE Coachman Road between Drew Street and
Belcher Road can be characterized as having a mix of building and parking lot locations on the
individual properties. Some properties have been designed with the building placed forward on
the property with parking to one side and the rear of the building, while others have the parking
area in front of the building. A major Staff concern with this proposal has been real or perceived
impacts on the detached dwellings across NE Coachman Road. Building and parking area
location designs were discussed with the applicant’s design professionals to minimize negative
impacts on these detached dwellings (to avoid future requests to change the land use and zoning
to a nonresidential land use and zoning district). Potential site designs with the building located
at the front setback line produced a thin building with minimal parking to the side of the building
and a majority of the parking to the rear of the building. These designs produced unacceptable
distances for fire and trash trucks entering the site and required truck turnarounds, which were
unable to be provided without reducing required parking. Building and parking lot locations on
the properties between Drew Street and Belcher Road do not meet current required front, side or
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 3 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
rear setback requirements. Some parking areas are located within the right-of-way of NE
Coachman Road.
The proposal includes locating the building at the rear of the property, with parking located
between the building and the front property line. The parking lot is proposed at a front setback of
15 feet, compliant with the provisions under Level One, Flexible Standard Development. A wall
is proposed for the purpose of screening the parking area from the detached dwellings across NE
Coachman Road and to mitigate potential negative impacts (see additional discussion under
Landscaping). The proposal includes locating the parking lot at a five-foot setback from the east
and west property lines, which is consistent with parking lot locations on the nonresidential
properties on this side of NE Coachman Road. A backup flair adjacent to the east property line is
excessively deep and can be reduced by five feet to produce a 10-foot setback, allowing for
additional landscape area. The building is proposed at an eight-foot side and five-foot rear
setback, which is also consistent with surrounding properties. Door landings/stoops on the east
and west sides of the building are designed extending to approximately two feet from the side
property lines. These landings are excessively wide and can be reduced in width to the minimum
required by the Building Code (approximately 3-4 feet in width) which would provide a larger
planting area for perimeter hedging. This should be a condition upon any approval of this request
by the CDB.
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, there is no maximum height for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, the
maximum height for office uses can range from 30 – 80 feet, while medical clinic uses can range
from 30 – 50 feet. The proposal includes a building height of 15 feet (to midpoint of a pitched
roof) and 17.67 feet (to top of the parapet), well below the allowed building height.
Nonresidential buildings within this area are one or two stories in height. With the building’s
location at the rear of the property, this proposed height is compatible with the one-story
detached dwellings across NE Coachman Road, as well as with the adjacent nonresidential
buildings to the east, west and south of the subject property.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, there is no minimum off-street
parking requirement for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of
comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, the minimum required parking for office uses can
range between 2 – 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet, while parking for medical clinic uses requires
five spaces per 1,000 square feet. Based on the high range for office uses and the requirement for
medical clinics, the required parking totals 16 parking spaces. The proposal includes 19 parking
spaces, which exceeds the minimum requirements. A sidewalk is proposed along the site
frontage of NE Coachman Road where none exists today.
Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-201.D.1, all outside mechanical equipment
must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. Based on
the plans submitted, mechanical equipment will be placed on the building roof. The location and
screening of such mechanical equipment by the building parapets will be reviewed at time of
building permit submission.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 4 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the
driveway on NE Coachman Road, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will
obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20-
foot sight visibility triangles. In order to provide enhanced screening of the parking lot the
applicant is proposing a four-foot high wall across the front of the property. Within the sight
visibility triangle, this wall will need to be reduced in height to comply with these requirements
for motorist/pedestrian visibility. Approval of this application will need to be conditioned on the
proposed wall meeting this requirement. The proposal has been reviewed by the City’s Traffic
Engineering Department and been found to be acceptable. Shrubbery planted within the sight
visibility triangles will need to be maintained to meet the Code requirements.
Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-912, for development that does not involve a subdivision,
all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground unless such
undergrounding is not practicable. There exist overhead utility lines along the site frontage of
this property within the NE Coachman Road right-of-way. On-site, utilities will be placed
underground.
Landscaping: The site is presently heavily treed. Due to overhead utilities within the NE
Coachman Road right-of-way, trees along the front of the property have been hatracked. Other
trees are not healthy, while other trees are located such that they restrict the location of proposed
improvements. As such, the proposal includes the removal of a number of existing trees from the
site.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, a 15-foot perimeter buffer is required along NE Coachman
Road and a five-foot perimeter buffer is required along the east, west and south sides of the
property. While the proposal requests reductions to the minimum setbacks along all sides of the
property (see discussion under Minimum Setbacks above), the proposal provides the required
perimeter buffers. CDC Section 3-1202.E.2 requires foundation landscaping along the front of
the building facing the street. This proposal exceeds the minimum requirements by providing a
six-foot wide foundation planting area (minimum five-foot wide area). CDC Section 3-1202.E.1
requires interior landscaping in the amount of 12% of the vehicular use area due to the provided
parking being 110% of the required parking (otherwise only 10% interior landscaping is
required). This site is providing 12.8% of the vehicular use area in interior landscaping. Interior
landscape islands are required to be eight feet in width inside curbing and to be 150 square feet
in area. This proposal includes, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, a request to
allow interior landscape islands of less than 150 square feet and less than eight feet in width from
back of curb to back of curb. There is only one interior landscape island that is less than the
required width, proposed at seven feet in width inside curbing. The provision of additional
interior landscaping in other areas of the site, as well as the reduction to the backup flair (see
discussion under Minimum Setbacks above), compensates for this slight reduction at this
location of the site.
The site is proposed to be planted with a variety of landscape material. Trees include shade trees
(live oak, magnolia and winged elm), accent trees (crape myrtle and weeping yaupon holly) and
palms (royal, queen, Mexican fan and cabbage). Shrubs include sandanqua viburnum, yellow
anise, firebush, Indian hawthorne, dwarf walter’s viburnum and bird of paradise. Groundcovers
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 5 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
include variegated flax lily, sand cord grass and swamp lily. Proposed landscaping materials and
the location of plant materials are demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise
permitted under the minimum landscape standards of the Code.
The proposal includes planting magnolia trees along the front of the property; however, due to
the existence of overhead utilities adjacent to the front property line, planting magnolia trees is
not advised, as limbs would need to be trimmed back similar to the existing trees along the site
frontage (creating new hatracked trees). Shade trees should not be planted within 20 feet of
overhead utilities due to this conflict. The proposal also includes shade trees (live oak, magnolia
and winged elm) at the northwest and northeast corners of the proposed building spaced
approximately 20 feet apart, rather than the 35-foot spacing provided by Code. This proposed
spacing is too close for shade trees, which would result in comingled branches, dead wood and
the trees unable to grow to their natural form. Since this proposal is a complete redevelopment of
the site, proposed site elevations of the parking areas adjacent to the east and west property lines
place the pavement approximately 18-inches above the site elevation of the perimeter buffer.
Retaining walls are proposed along these property lines. This elevation of the parking lot to this
degree renders the proposed shrubbery within the perimeter buffers unable to provide any
meaningful screening of the vehicles within the parking lot, defeating the purpose of the
buffering. Potentially raising the site elevation of the buffers and/or planting shrubs taller than
18-inches at time of planting would alleviate this concern. Finally, there are some inaccurate
plant counts in the planting material table and use of the same plant symbol for more than one
plant material on Sheet L-1. Light pole locations and height of light poles should be coordinated
with the existing and proposed trees to avoid shielding of the lights by the (future) tree canopy.
All of these landscaping concerns should be remedied on revised plans prior to the issuance of
any permits.
Comprehensive Landscape Program: Pursuant to Section 3-1202.G of the Community
Development Code, the landscaping requirements contained within the Code can be waived or
modified if the application contains a Comprehensive Landscape Program satisfying certain
criteria. The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with those
criteria:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. Architectural theme:
a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program shall be designed as a N/A N/A
part of the architectural theme of the principle buildings proposed or developed on
the parcel proposed for development; or
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 6 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
Consistent Inconsistent
b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment X
proposed in the comprehensive landscape program shall be demonstrably more
attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for
development under the minimum landscape standards.
2. Lighting: Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is N/A N/A
automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed.
3. Community character: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive X
landscape program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater.
4. Property values: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape X
program will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate
vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
5. Special area or scenic corridor plan: The landscape treatment proposed in the N/A N/A
comprehensive landscape program is consistent with any special area or scenic
corridor plan which the City of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in
which the parcel proposed for development is located.
1
See Analysis for discussion of consistency/inconsistency.
Solid Waste: The existing building is served by black barrels for solid waste collection. The
proposal includes a dumpster enclosure on the west side of the parcel that will contain a
maximum four-yard rolling dumpster for the tenants of this building. The exterior of the trash
enclosure (material and color) will need to be consistent with the proposed building. The
proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City’s Solid Waste Department.
Signage: There exists a freestanding sign in front of the existing building that will be removed
under this proposal. The proposal includes a new freestanding, monument-style sign in front of
the proposed four-foot high screening wall. Should the CDB approve this request, the
freestanding sign is recommended to be monument-style with a maximum height of six feet and
be designed consistent with the exterior building material and color.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject
property.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 7 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Section 2-1001.1 and
Table 2-1004:
Consistent Inconsistent
Standard Proposed
FAR 0.50 0.232 X
ISR 0.75 0.668 X
Minimum Lot Area N/A 17,500 sq. ft. X
Minimum Lot Width N/A 100 feet X
Maximum Height N/A 15 feet (midpoint of roof) X
17.67 feet (to top of parapet)
Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A North: 15 feet (to pavement) X 1
Side: N/A East: 8 feet (to building) X 1
2 feet (to door landing)
5 feet (to pavement)
West: 8 feet (to building) X 1
2 feet (to door landing)
5 feet (to pavement and
dumpster enclosure)
Rear: N/A South: 5 feet (to building) X 1
Minimum Office: 3 per 1,000 SF 19 parking spaces X
Off-Street Parking
Medical Clinic: 5 per 1,000 SF
(16 required spaces)
1
See analysis in Staff Report
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 8 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-
1004.B (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from X 1
the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X 1
development.
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City’s
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment
of an existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area
that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning
designation; or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or
preservation of a working waterfront use.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X 1
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses
permitted in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines
adopted by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance,
the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the
following design elements:
Changes in horizontal building planes;
?
Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
?
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
Variety in materials, colors and textures;
?
Distinctive fenestration patterns;
?
Building stepbacks; and
?
Distinctive roofs forms.
?
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
1 See analysis in Staff Report.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 9 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards
for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X 1
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X 1
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X 1
immediate vicinity.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X 1
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties.
1 See analysis in Staff Report.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of August 5, 2010, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient to
move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following:
Findings of Fact. The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence
submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that
there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:
1.The 0.402 acre site is located on the south side of NE Coachman Road, approximately 1,400
feet west of N. Belcher Road and 600 feet east of Graham Drive;
2.The subject property is currently developed with an office building (no current tenant)
located approximately in the center of the site and with six angled parking spaces located to
the north of the building;
3.The proposal is to completely redevelop this site by demolishing the existing building and
parking and construct a new one-story, 4,060 square-foot building at the rear of the site for
office and medical clinic uses, with required parking located to the front of this new building;
4.The proposal includes reductions to the front (north) setback for pavement, side (east and
west) setbacks for the building, door landing/stoop and pavement and rear (south) setback for
the building;
5.Comparatively, building and parking lot locations on the properties between Drew Street and
Belcher Road do not meet current required front, side or rear setback requirements;
6.The site design with its proposed setbacks can be viewed as an emerging trend for this area,
as the proposed setbacks are consistent with this developed character of the surrounding
nonresidential properties;
7.Required buffer widths, the foundation landscape width and the square footage amount of
interior landscaping included with this proposal meets Code requirements;
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 10 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
8.Negative impacts of the site design, with its parking forward of the building, upon the
residential properties across NE Coachman Road have been mitigated through the inclusion
of a four-foot high buffer wall along the front of the property with enhanced landscaping;
9.The proposal includes 19 parking spaces, which exceeds the minimum requirements; and
10.There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property.
Conclusions of Law. The Planning and Development Department, having made the above
findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law:
1.That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Section 2-1001.1 and
Table 2-1004 of the Community Development Code;
2.That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-
1004.B of the Community Development Code; and
3.That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two
Approvals as per Section 3-914.A of the Community Development Code.
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends of
the Flexible Development application to permit office and medical clinic uses in a building
totaling 4,060 square-feet of floor area in the Office (O) District with a lot area of 17,500 square
feet (0.402 acre), a lot width of 100 feet, a front (north) setback of 15 feet (to pavement), a side
(east) setback of eight feet (to building), six feet (to door landing) and five feet (to pavement), a
side (west) setback of eight feet (to building), six feet (to door landing) and five feet (to
pavement and dumpster enclosure), a rear (south) setback of five feet (to building), a building
height of 15 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof) and 17.67 feet (to top of parapet) and 19 parking
spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community
Development Code Section 2-1004.B; and to allow interior landscape islands of less than 150
square feet and less than eight feet in width from back of curb to back of curb, as a Comprehensive
Landscape Program under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G,
with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1.That a four-foot high wall, consistent with the exterior material and color of the building, be
constructed along the frontage of the property. Prior to the issuance of any building permits,
the site plan must be revised to indicate the wall extending to the east and west property lines
and complying with the sight visibility triangle requirements;
2.That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, the backup flair adjacent to the east
property line be reduced to three feet in depth to provide a 10-foot side setback to pavement;
3.That the dumpster enclosure be consistent with the exterior material and color of the
building;
4.That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, the landing/stoop on the east and west
sides of the building be reduced in width to the minimum required by the Building Code to
increase the setback/perimeter buffer width at these locations;
5.That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, rooftop mechanical equipment be
screened from view by adequately sized parapets or other screening measures;
6.That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, plans be revised to remedy the following
concerns:
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 11 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07002 2010-09-21
a.Planting of shade trees within 20 feet of the front property line where there exist
overhead utility lines;
b.Adequate spacing of shade trees;
c.Providing adequate buffering plant materials and sizes along the east and west
property lines in relation to proposed site elevations;
d.Ensuring plant symbols and plant counts are accurately depicted on Sheet L-1;
and
e.Coordinating light pole height and locations with the existing and proposed trees
to avoid shielding of the lights by the (future) tree canopy.
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff:
__________________________________________
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map
?
Aerial Map
?
Zoning Map
?
Existing Surrounding Uses Map
?
Photographs of Site and Vicinity
?
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\NE Coachman 2135 Clinical Research (O) 2010.0x - 9.21.10
CDB - WW\NE Coachman 2135 Staff Report.doc
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07002 – Page 12 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-03006 2010-09-21
CDB Meeting Date: September 21, 2010
Case Number: FLD2010-03006
Agenda Item: D.3.
Owner/Applicant: Dennis R. DeLoach, Jr. - Trustee
Representative: Brent Perkey, Chase Central Construction
Address: 1377-1395 S. Missouri Avenue
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a multiple-tenant
building with office, retail sales and services and limited vehicle
service uses in the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of
27,153 square feet (0.62 acre), a front (west) setback of two feet
(to existing pavement), a side (north) setback of 1.7 feet (to
existing building) and 2.7 feet (to existing pavement), a side
(south) setback of five feet (to existing pavement), a rear (east)
setback of 3.2 feet (to existing building), a building height of 19.08
feet (to top of existing roof deck) and 22 parking spaces, as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions
of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-704.C; and a
reduction to the perimeter buffer (west) along S. Missouri Avenue
from 15 to two feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the north
perimeter buffer from five to 1.7 feet (to existing building) and 2.7
feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the east perimeter buffer
from five to 3.2 feet (to existing building), a reduction to the
foundation planting area from five to zero feet and a reduction to
the percentage of interior landscape area from 10% to 0%, as a
Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC
Section 3-1202.G.
CURRENT ZONING: Commercial (C) District
CURRENT FUTURE
LAND USE CATEGORY: Commercial General (CG)
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Office, vacant tenant spaces
Proposed Use: Office, Retail Sales and Services and Limited
Vehicle Service uses
EXISTING North: Commercial (C) District Automobile repair
SURROUNDING South: Commercial (C) District Automobile repair
ZONING AND USES: East: Commercial (C) District Self storage
West: Commercial (C) District Retail sales and vacant
ANALYSIS:
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-03006 – Page 1 of 10
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-03006 2010-09-21
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 0.62 acre site is located on the east side of S. Missouri Avenue, approximately 1,100 feet south
of Lakeview Road and 200 feet northeast of Kingsley Street. The subject property is currently
developed with a 9,514 square-foot commercial building with multiple tenant spaces. The
northern tenant space is occupied by an office use, which has been located here for many years.
The balance of the building has not had any tenants in years. The site has 258 feet of frontage
along S. Missouri Avenue.
Surrounding properties adjacent to this site are zoned Commercial (C) District, with the
exception being a retention pond to the southeast being zoned Recreation/Open Space (R/OS)
and Preservation (P) Districts. Properties to the north and south of the subject property all have
similar parcel depth (105 feet) and are developed with vehicle service establishments. The
property to the east is developed with a self storage facility. Properties to the west across S.
Missouri Avenue are developed with retail sales uses.
Development Proposal:
The proposal is to allow new uses within a building that, for the most part, has not had tenants in
many years. The building presently has four tenant spaces. The northern tenant space of 3,994
square feet is presently occupied by an office use that has been at this location for many years. A
convenience store is proposed to be located within the adjacent 2,004 square feet tenant space.
An oil change company is proposed to be located within the 2,995 square feet tenant space
toward the south that has two overhead doors (this tenant space has had other limited vehicle
service uses in the past). An office use is proposed in 521 square-foot southernmost tenant space.
This site is nonconforming to current Code setback requirements. CDC Section 6-102.E requires
nonconforming structures that have been abandoned for more than six months to be brought into
full compliance with current Code requirements. Due to this site being fully developed (and
partially occupied), this proposal recognizes many of the existing setbacks to the existing
building and pavement that do not meet current Code requirements. Site improvements are being
made where possible and appropriate while providing as many parking spaces as possible. This
proposal reorients the location of some of these parking spaces so that they function and comply
with the parking standards of the Code, providing a one-way traffic flow from the south to the
north. This proposal includes the provision of 22 parking spaces and includes a reduction to the
required amount of parking spaces from 36 to 22 spaces. A Parking Reduction Study, submitted
as part of the application material, analyzed the parking demand against the proposed parking
supply and found the provided number of parking spaces was sufficient for the existing and
proposed uses.
Pavement is being removed in a number of locations in order to meet Code provisions and to
improve sight triangle requirements, including both sides of the northern driveway, along the
south property line to create a continuous five-foot setback and along the south property line
adjacent to the proposed dumpster enclosure. An existing paved area at the northwest corner of
the building that is unnecessary from a site functionality standpoint can be removed to provide
interior landscape area (where the site is deficient). The existing landscape areas, as well as these
proposed landscape areas, are proposed to be landscaped to meet Code requirements, which will
provide needed visual improvements to this site. These improvements, while not meeting the full
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-03006 – Page 2 of 10
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-03006 2010-09-21
Code provisions, will greatly improve the appearance of this site in an area of S. Missouri
Avenue that needs improvement and re-investment. Without the reductions requested, the
redevelopment of this site would be otherwise impractical.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-701.1, the
maximum FAR for properties with a designation of Commercial General (CG) is 0.55. There
presently exists a total floor area of 9,514 square feet for a FAR of 0.35, which is consistent with
the Code provisions.
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-
701.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.95. The overall existing ISR is 0.857 and, after
construction of the improvements, the proposed ISR is 0.837, consistent with the Code
provisions.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, there is no minimum required lot
area or lot width for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of
comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, the minimum lot area for office and retail sales uses
can range between 3,500 – 10,000 square feet and can range between 5,000 – 10,000 square feet
for limited vehicle service uses. The existing site is 27,153 square feet of lot area, which exceeds
these Code provisions. Pursuant to this same Table, the minimum lot width for office and retail
sales uses can range between 35 – 100 feet, while limited vehicle service uses can range between
50 – 100 feet. The site has 258 feet of frontage along S. Missouri Avenue, which exceeds these
Code provisions.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, there are no minimum required setbacks for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to
CDC Table 2-704, the minimum front setback for office, retail sales and limited vehicle service
uses can range between 15 – 25 feet, the minimum side setback can range between 0 – 10 feet
and the minimum rear setback can range between 10 – 20 feet. The proposal includes a front
(west) setback of two feet (to existing pavement), a side (north) setback of 1.7 feet (to existing
building) and 2.7 feet (to existing pavement), a side (south) setback of five feet (to existing
pavement) and a rear (east) setback of 3.2 feet (to existing building).
Due to this site being fully developed, this proposal recognizes many of the existing setbacks to
the existing building and pavement. With the number of parking spaces being less than the
required amount, site improvements are being made where possible and appropriate. Pavement
along the front of the property is presently at a zero-foot setback north of the northern driveway.
Pavement otherwise is at a two-foot front setback adjacent to the proposed parallel parking
spaces. Parking spaces on both sides of the northern driveway are being removed for sight
triangle visibility purposes, which increases the setback to pavement at this location. Pavement
along the south property line is presently at a zero-foot setback, but pavement is being removed
to create a minimum five-foot setback. Additional excess pavement is being removed along the
south property line adjacent to the proposed dumpster enclosure (which will meet the required
10-foot side setback). Removal of the pavement in these locations allows for the installation of
enhanced perimeter landscaping, which will improve the appearance of this site. Surrounding
properties have setbacks to buildings and pavement similar to this site.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-03006 – Page 3 of 10
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-03006 2010-09-21
Minimum Off-Street Parking: The applicant indicates there are 32 existing parking spaces that
are not well marked and don’t meet current Code requirements. This proposal reorients the
location of some of these parking spaces so that they function and comply with the parking
standards of the Code. Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, the minimum required parking for office
uses can range between 3 – 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet, retail sales uses can range between 4
– 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet and limited vehicle service uses can range between 4 – 5 spaces
per 1,000 square feet. CDC Section 3-1405 requires two or more uses to calculate parking based
on a Shared Parking basis. When taking all three uses into account for this site and the Shared
Parking calculation, the required parking is between 28 – 36 parking spaces. The proposed site
plan provides 22 parking spaces. The proposal includes a reduction to the required number of
parking spaces from 36 to 22 spaces. A Parking Reduction Study (Study) has been submitted as
part of the application material, which analyzed the parking demand against the proposed
parking supply. Based on the use characteristics of the existing uses of the property, the Study
indicates a parking ratio of two spaces per 1,000 square feet is adequate. Staff agrees with the
conclusions of the Study.
Driveways for this property will remain in the same location as they exist today. The delineation
and re-orientation of parking on-site provides for a one-way traffic flow from the south to the
north. The location of the handicap parking spaces shown on the site plan fails to account for the
location of pedestrian doors to comply with ADA requirements. As such, due to the location of
the pedestrian doors for the proposed convenience store, the handicap parking spaces will need
to shift to the south one space and the accessible path will shift to the south by one parallel
parking space. This relocation of the handicap parking spaces has been reviewed and been found
acceptable by the Traffic Engineering Department. Any approval of this application will need to
be conditioned on showing this shift on revised plans prior to the issuance of any building
permits.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the existing
driveways on S. Missouri Avenue, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will
obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20-
foot sight visibility triangles. The proposal has been reviewed by the City’s Traffic Engineering
Department and been found to be acceptable. Shrubbery planted within the sight visibility
triangles will need to be maintained to meet the Code requirements.
Landscaping: The applicant indicates there are 32 existing parking spaces that are not well
marked and don’t meet current Code requirements. With the reorientation of parking to institute
a one-way traffic flow, the proposal removes a landscape island on the north side of the southern
driveway in order to allow the parking and traffic flow to function. Parking spaces on both sides
of the northern driveway are being removed for sight visibility triangle purposes, providing areas
to increase landscape area within this area of the site. The existing perimeter buffer along the
north property line is being planted with a hedge (which needs to be changed from hibiscus to
viburnum shrubs) and dahoon holly trees. With the removal of the pavement on the north and
south sides of the northern driveway to create new landscape areas, the applicant proposes one
crape myrtle tree within each of these landscape areas. Due to the size of these created landscape
areas and Code requirements, these crape myrtle trees should be revised to a shade tree that is
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-03006 – Page 4 of 10
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-03006 2010-09-21
acceptable to the Planning and Development Department. Due to these newly created landscape
areas being perimeter buffers, the shrubs proposed within these areas must increase in size to
18”-24” at time of planting. The proposal includes upgrading the existing two-foot wide
perimeter buffer along the street frontage adjacent to the parallel parking spaces with shrubs and
accent and palm trees. Code provisions for this buffer require a total of five shade trees. Code
provisions allow two accent trees and three palms to count the same as one shade tree. As such,
the proposal must add either two more accent trees or three more palms to meet the Code
provisions.
Pavement is being removed along the south property line to provide a minimum five-foot
perimeter buffer, compliant with Code provisions. The proposal includes the removal of excess
pavement adjacent to the proposed dumpster enclosure to create a larger buffer in this area to
offset landscape deficiencies in other areas of the site. The hibiscus shrubs along this southern
buffer and along the southeast property line must be revised to viburnum shrubs.
The proposal includes a reduction to the perimeter buffer (west) along S. Missouri Avenue from
15 to two feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the north perimeter buffer from five to 1.7
feet (to existing building) and 2.7 feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the east perimeter
buffer from five to 3.2 feet (to existing building), a reduction to the foundation planting area
from five to zero feet and a reduction to the percentage of interior landscape area from 10% to
0%, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3-1202.G.
Much like required setbacks, this proposal recognizes many of the perimeter buffers that exist to
the existing building and pavement. While listed as a reduction to the foundation planting area to
zero feet, the applicant proposes nine freestanding planters, each to be planted with an Italian
cypress tree and four flax lilies in-lieu of removing pavement to create a “saw tooth” foundation
planting area in the area between the end of the angled parking space and the sidewalk along the
front of the building. While Staff has concerns regarding an ease of these freestanding planters to
be removed, Staff is willing to work with the applicant due to the built conditions of the site. Any
approval of this request should be conditioned on the provision of these freestanding planters and
the landscape material proposed.
With very little area available to include landscaping, due to the need for every parking space
proposed, there is an area of excess pavement that can be removed to create a triangular interior
landscape island at the northwest corner of the building. The applicant desires to retain an
overhead door on the north side of the building that provides access to a storage area for the
office tenant. The applicant desires to provide an area where a truck could back up to this
overhead door. Provision of this “loading” area (or another parking space) is still possible with
the removal of this triangular area for interior landscaping. Any approval of this application
should be conditioned on requiring the creation of this triangular interior landscape area, to be
planted with a shade tree, shrubs and groundcovers (as required by Code).
Solid Waste: The property is presently served by black barrels for the office use. The proposal
includes the construction of a Code compliant dumpster enclosure on the south side of the
property. With the adjacent building on the parcel to the south close to the common property
line, this proposed dumpster has been located to provide at least a 10-foot separation between the
enclosure and this adjacent building, which minimizes the possibility of a dumpster fire turning
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-03006 – Page 5 of 10
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-03006 2010-09-21
into a structure fire. The exterior of the trash enclosure (material and color) will need to be
consistent with the existing building. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City’s
Solid Waste and Fire Departments.
Signage: There exists a nonconforming (height and setback) freestanding sign approximately
midpoint of the site. At this point the provisions of CDC Section 6-104.A do not apply, however,
circumstances could change that would invoke these provisions and require this freestanding sign
to be brought into compliance with current Code requirements. Should a Comprehensive Sign
Program be desired, nonconforming signage will be required to be brought into compliance.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject
property.
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Section 2-701.1 and
Table 2-704:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
FAR 0.55 0.35 X
ISR 0.95 0.837 X
Minimum Lot Area N/A 27,153 sq. ft. X
Minimum Lot Width N/A 258 feet X
Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A West: 2 feet (to existing pavement) X 1
Side: N/A North: 1.7 feet (to existing building) X 1
2.7 feet (to existing pavement)
South: 5 feet (to existing pavement)
Rear: N/A East: 3.2 feet (to existing building) X 1
Minimum Office: 3 - 4 per 1,000 SF 22 total parking spaces (28 - 36 spaces X 1
Off-Street Parking required per Shared Parking
Retail: 4 - 5 per 1,000 SF
2
calculation)
Limited Vehicle Service: 4 - 5
per 1,000 SF
1
See analysis in Staff Report
2
Based on Parking Reduction Study; See analysis in Staff Report
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-03006 – Page 6 of 10
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-03006 2010-09-21
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-704.C
(Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from X 1
the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X 1
development.
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City’s
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment
of an existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area
that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning
designation; or
a. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a
working waterfront use.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses
permitted in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines
adopted by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance,
the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the
following design elements:
Changes in horizontal building planes;
?
Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
?
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
Variety in materials, colors and textures;
?
Distinctive fenestration patterns;
?
Building stepbacks; and
?
Distinctive roofs forms.
?
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
1 See analysis in Staff Report.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-03006 – Page 7 of 10
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-03006 2010-09-21
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards
for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X 1
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X 1
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X 1
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X 1
immediate vicinity.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X 1
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties.
1 See analysis in Staff Report.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of August 5, 2010, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient to
move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following:
Findings of Fact. The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence
submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that
there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:
1.The 0.62 acre site is located on the east side of S. Missouri Avenue, approximately 1,100 feet
south of Lakeview Road and 200 feet northeast of Kingsley Street;
2.The subject property is currently developed with a 9,514 square-foot commercial building
with four tenant spaces, where only the northernmost tenant space is occupied and the
balance of the tenant spaces have been vacant for years;
3.In addition to the existing office tenant use, the proposal is to allow new uses in the building,
including a convenience store, a limited vehicle service use and an additional office use;
4.This site is nonconforming to current Code setback requirements and site improvements are
being made where possible and appropriate, while providing as many parking spaces as
possible;
5.This proposal includes the provision of 22 parking spaces and includes a reduction to the
required amount of parking spaces from 36 to 22 spaces, which is justified by the submitted
Parking Demand Study;
6.The proposal includes reductions to setback and landscaping requirements;
7.The creation of new landscaped areas, as well as the landscaping of existing perimeter
buffers, while not meeting the full Code provisions, will greatly improve the appearance of
this site in an area of S. Missouri Avenue that needs improvement and re-investment;
8.The proposal includes the construction of a Code compliant dumpster enclosure on the south
side of the site to serve all of the commercial tenants on the subject property; and
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-03006 – Page 8 of 10
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-03006 2010-09-21
9.There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property.
Conclusions of Law. The Planning and Development Department, having made the above
findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law:
1.That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Section 2-701.1 and
Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code;
2.That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-
704.C of the Community Development Code; and
3.That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two
Approvals as per Section 3-914.A of the Community Development Code.
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends of
the Flexible Development approval to permit a multiple-tenant building with office, retail sales
and services and limited vehicle service uses in the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of
27,153 square feet (0.62 acre), a front (west) setback of two feet (to existing pavement), a side
(north) setback of 1.7 feet (to existing building) and 2.7 feet (to existing pavement), a side
(south) setback of five feet (to existing pavement), a rear (east) setback of 3.2 feet (to existing
building), a building height of 19.08 feet (to top of existing roof deck) and 22 parking spaces, as
a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development
Code (CDC) Section 2-704.C; and a reduction to the perimeter buffer (west) along S. Missouri
Avenue from 15 to two feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the north perimeter buffer
from five to 1.7 feet (to existing building) and 2.7 feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the
east perimeter buffer from five to 3.2 feet (to existing building), a reduction to the foundation
planting area from five to zero feet and a reduction to the percentage of interior landscape area
from 10% to 0%, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC Section
3-1202.G, with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1.That, prior to the issuance of any permit, a Declaration of Unity of Title be recorded in the
public record;
2.That electrical equipment on the exterior of the building be painted the same as the building
where located;
3.That, prior to the issuance of any permit, plans be revised to shift the handicap parking
spaces south one space and the handicap accessible path shifted one parallel parking space to
the south;
4.That foundation landscaping, as shown on the landscape plan, include nine freestanding
planters of a sufficient size acceptable to the Planning and Development Department with
each planter planted with an Italian cypress tree and four flax lilies. It shall be the owners
responsibility to ensure these planters are maintained and regularly watered;
5.That, prior to the issuance of any permit, the landscape plan be revised to include the
following:
a.Shrubs along the north property line be revised to viburnum (rather than hibiscus);
b.Shrubs along the south and southeast property lines be revised to viburnum (rather than
hibiscus);
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-03006 – Page 9 of 10
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-03006 2010-09-21
c.Revise the crape myrtle trees in the landscape areas created on the north and south sides
of the northern driveway to a shade tree acceptable to the Planning and Development
Department;
d.The size of the Indian hawthorn shrubs within the landscape areas created on the north
and south sides of the northern driveway be increased to 18”-24” in height at time of
planting;
e.To meet Code requirements for number of trees within the front perimeter buffer, two
accent trees or three palm trees must be added to this buffer area;
f.A triangular interior landscape area be created at the northwest corner of the building,
acceptable to the Planning and Development Department, that is curbed and planted
with a shade tree, shrubs and groundcovers;
6.That, prior to the issuance of building permits, all requirements of the Fire Department be
addressed.
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff:
__________________________________________
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map
?
Aerial Map
?
Zoning Map
?
Existing Surrounding Uses Map
?
Photographs of Site and Vicinity
?
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\Missouri S 1377-1395 Missouri Center (C) 2010.0x - 9.21.10
CDB - WW\Missouri S 1377-1395 Staff Report.doc
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-03006 – Page 10 of 10
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21
CDB Meeting Date: September 21, 2010
Case Number: FLD2010-07001
Agenda Item: D. 1.
Owner: Bellwether Properties of Florida, LTD; Sears Roebuck & Co.; Dillard Dept.
Stores, Inc.; Allied Stores General Real Estate Co.; J.C. Penney Co., Inc;
Florida Power Corporation
Applicant: Bellwether Properties of Florida, LTD, C/O Rebecca Gagalis
Representative: Edward Mazur, Jr., P.E.
Address: 27001 U.S. Highway 19
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development Application to permit an addition with
33,465 square feet of indoor recreation and entertainment (12
screen theater), 35,102 square feet of restaurant and retail sales and
service in the Commercial (C) and Institutional (I) Districts with a
lot area of 3,523,825 square feet, a lot width of 2,572 feet along
Countryside Boulevard, 1,776 feet along U.S. Hwy 19 North, and
2,784 feet along S.R. 580, a front setback (north along S.R. 580)
of zero feet (to existing pavement) and 52 feet (to existing
building), a front setback (south along Countryside Boulevard) of
5.4 feet (to existing pavement) and 83.4 feet (to existing building),
a front setback (west along U.S. Hwy 19 North) of 6.2 feet (to
existing pavement) and 199.7 feet (to existing building) and a side
(east) setback of 5.5 feet (to existing pavement) and 285.9 feet (to
existing building), a building height of 51 feet (to top of flat roof),
63 feet (to top of metal lattice) and 5,719 parking spaces as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions
of Community Development Code Sections 2-704.C and 2-1204A,
with a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer along S.R. 580
from 15 feet to zero feet, a reduction to the perimeter landscape
buffer along Countryside Boulevard from 15 feet to 5.4 feet, a
reduction to the landscape buffer along U.S. Hwy 19 North from
15 feet to 6.2 feet, a reduction to the side (east) landscape buffer
from 10 feet to 5.5 feet, a reduction to the foundation landscape
from five feet to zero feet on the west facade, to allow more than
15 parking spaces in a row without an interior landscape island, to
allow interior landscape islands of less than 150 square feet and
less than eight feet in width from back of curb to back of curb as a
Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of
Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G and a two-year
development order.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07001 – Page 1 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21
CURRENT ZONING:Commercial (C) District and Institutional (I) District
CURRENT LAND USE
PLAN CATEGORY:Commercial General (CG) and Transportation/Utility (T/U)
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Retail Sales and Restaurant
Proposed Use: Retail Sales, Restaurant and Indoor Recreation and
Entertainment
EXISTING North: Unincorporated: Commercial, Commercial Office &
SURROUNDING Mobile Home
ZONING AND USES: Restaurant, Retail Sales, Offices & Mobile Homes
South: Commercial (C) District, Medium High Density
Residential (MHDR) District
Retail Sales, Restaurant & Attached Dwellings
East: Medium Density Residential (MDR) District
Attached Dwellings
West: Commercial (C) District, Office (O) District
Retail Sales, Restaurant & Office
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 80.896-acre subject property, located east of U.S. Highway 19 between S.R. 580 and
Countryside Boulevard, consists of eight parcels and has two zoning districts and two land use
plan categories. The seven westernmost parcels are zoned Commercial (C) District with an
underlying land use plan category of Commercial General (CG), while the easternmost parcel of
the property is zoned Institutional (I) District with an underlying land use plan category of
Transportation/Utility (T/U). The Institutional zoned parcel is owned by Florida Power
Corporation which contains above ground transmission lines. The applicant leases this parcel
from Florida Power and only has parking spaces located on it.
The property is bordered on its east side by attached dwellings (Rustlewood Condominiums); on
the west by retail sales, restaurants and offices; on the south by retail sales, restaurants and
attached dwellings; and on the north by mobile homes, retail sales, restaurants and offices.
The subject property is developed as an enclosed regional mall (Countryside Mall) and is the
only enclosed regional mall within the City of Clearwater as well as the only enclosed regional
mall in north Pinellas County. The mall was constructed in the early 1970’s as the commercial
center of U.S. Homes residential development of the area now known as Countryside. The mall
site was originally reviewed through Pinellas County and both the mall and the Countryside area
have since been annexed into the City of Clearwater. The Countryside Mall site is now
constrained by U.S Highway 19 to the west, S.R. 580 to the north, Countryside Boulevard to the
south and a residential development to the east. Without the ability to expand beyond its current
borders, redevelopment of the existing site is the only option to improve the only enclosed
regional mall in the City.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07001 – Page 2 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21
A major renovation of the mall took place in 1999. Case VAR 1999-F-1008 approved a 73,000
square foot addition to both Dillards and Burdines (currently Macy’s), an increase in building
height to 64.4 feet, 4.4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area and reductions to
the required landscape. Staff has found inconsistencies and errors with some calculations in the
1999 proposal. It is therefore noted that the existing conditions in the site data table attached to
this site plan have been found to be correct.
Development Proposal:
On July 2, 2010, a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project application was submitted to
expand the existing enclosed regional mall as follows:
?Construct a two-story addition on the south side of Sears including 35,102 square feet of
retail and restaurant space on the first floor and 33,465 square feet for a 12-screen theatre on
the second floor;
?Reconfigure and realign parking spaces and aisles to maintain the current parking ratio of 4.4
spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area;
?Increase the allowable building height from 25 feet to 51 feet (to flat roof) and 63 feet (to top
of metal lattice; and
?Provide enhanced landscaping on frontages and entries.
The only building improvements that will take place are located southeast of Sears. The
proposed addition will be attached to the existing mall on the south side of Sears and will contain
68,567 square feet of gross floor area. The building addition will have a setback of 291 feet from
Countryside Boulevard and 609 feet from U.S. Highway 19. No other structural improvements
are proposed with this application. The proposed addition is approximately 212 feet by 167 feet
and consists of two floors. The first floor will contain two restaurants and a mini-anchor retail
tenant. At this time tenants are unknown for the spaces on the first floor. The second floor will be
a state-of-the-art 12-screen movie theater run by Cobb Theatres. The theater will have access
from the malls southwest entry via the mall concourse and escalators, or from the northwest mall
entry which is on level 2. There is no direct outside access into the theater. The restaurants and
retail will be accessible from the south and east sides of the expansion.
Regarding the architecture of the proposed addition, the southeast corner has been designed to
draw attention to the theatre entrance through the use of lattice work in horizontal bands running
from the sign frieze on the first floor to the top of the structure. The lattice work is located on the
south and east facades of the building joining each other at the southeast corner. Located on top
of the lattice work is a four-foot high decorative grill that serves as the “finial” to the building
and completes this architectural feature. A variety of coordinated materials have been proposed
to create architectural interest. The smooth finish of the EFIS panels on each façade is contrasted
with lattice work and the glass storefront on the east and south facades of the first floor. Within
the EFIS facades, horizontal and vertical reveals are proposed to visually divide the façade. The
first floor of the addition is intended to be an inviting pedestrian activity area featuring storefront
windows from floor to ceiling. Additionally, the project proposes an outdoor plaza on the south
and east sides of the addition to allow for outdoor seating for restaurants and a gathering place
for customers.
The development proposal’s compliance with the various development standards of the
Community Development Code (CDC) is discussed below.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07001 – Page 3 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules for the Commercial General
(CG) land use category and CDC Section 2-701.1, the maximum allowable FAR is 0.55. The
existing development along with the proposed addition will result in an FAR of 0.39.
Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules for the Transportation/Utility (T/U) land use category
and CDC Section 2-1201.1, the maximum allowable FAR is 0.70. No buildings exist and none
are proposed.
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to CDC Sections 2-701.1 and 2-1201.1, the maximum
allowable ISR within the CG and T/U land use plan categories is 0.90. The proposed ISR is 0.89
which is less than what may be permitted based upon the above Code provisions.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Tables 2-704 and 2-1204, there is no minimum
required lot area or lot width for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a
point of comparison, the minimum lot area requirement for retail sales and indoor recreation and
entertainment in the Commercial (C) District is 10,000 square feet. The existing lot area for the
subject property is 3,523,825 square feet (80.896 acres). For comparative purposes, the
minimum lot width requirement for retail sales and indoor recreation and entertainment in the C
District is 100 feet. The lot width along U.S. Highway 19 is 1,776 feet, along Countryside
Boulevard it is 2,572 feet and along S.R. 580 it is 2,784 feet. The development proposal exceeds
these comparative Code provisions for restaurants, retail sales and indoor recreation and
entertainment.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Tables 2-704 and 2-1204, there are no minimum setback
requirements for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of
comparison, the minimum setback requirements for retail sales and indoor recreation and
entertainment in the C Districts are front setbacks of 15 – 25 feet and side setbacks of 0 – 10 feet.
Regarding structural setbacks, all buildings greatly exceed the setback requirements. The closest
building to the front (west) is setback 199.7 feet, to the front (south) the closest building is
setback 83.4 feet, to the front (north) the closest building is setback 52 feet and to the side (east)
the closest building is setback 285.9 feet.
Regarding existing pavement setbacks, the pavement on the front (west) is setback 6.2 at the
closest point, to the front (south) the pavement is setback 5.4 feet at the closest point, to the front
(north) the pavement is at a zero setback at the closest point, and to the side (east) the pavement
is setback 5.5 feet at the closest point. As one of the most critical aspects to the success of a mall
and a new theatre is the availability of free and easily accessible parking, no changes are
proposed to the existing setbacks to pavement. Should the mall meet required setbacks to
pavement, it would lose over 400 parking spaces. Currently the mall has 4.4 parking spaces per
1,000 square feet of gross floor area and by reconfiguring the parking the current proposal will
also provide 4.4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Understanding that the mall was
constructed almost 40 years ago and the fact that the site is landlocked by three road frontages
staff has no objections to maintaining the current setbacks.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07001 – Page 4 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Tables 2-704 and 2-1204, there is no maximum
allowable height for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of
comparison, the allowable building height for retail sales and indoor recreation and
entertainment in the C District is 25 feet. The existing structures on the mall site range in height
from 20 feet to 64.4 feet. As discussed earlier, Case VAR 1999-F-1008 approved a building
height of 64.4 for both Dillards and Burdines (currently Macy’s). To accommodate the stadium
style seating and movie theater operations on the second floor, the applicant is requesting an
increase in building height to 51 feet (to top of flat roof) and 63 feet (to top of metal lattice). As
this request is consistent with existing heights at the mall staff supports the increase in building
height.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Tables 2-704 and 2-1204, the minimum required
parking for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project is determined by the Community
Development Coordinator based on the specific use and/or ITE Manual standards. However, for
a point of comparison the off-street parking requirement for retail sales and indoor recreation and
entertainment in the C District is 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Based upon
the above and the proposed 1,298,116 square feet of gross floor area the site would require 6,491
parking spaces. Based on a parking demand study case VAR 1999-F-1008 approved 4.4 parking
spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. The applicant has proposed to maintain the
current ratio of 4.4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area by reconfiguring the
existing parking spaces and aisles and by reducing in size spaces which measure 10 feet by 20
feet today to current parking space dimensional standards. The proposal includes 5,719 parking
spaces to maintain the current parking ratio.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the existing
driveways, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will obstruct views at a level
between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20-foot sight visibility
triangles. The proposal was reviewed by the City’s Traffic Engineering Department and found
to be acceptable.
Landscaping: Further complicating the redevelopment efforts is the fact that the current
landscape standards are more stringent now than they were 40 years ago when the site
developed; therefore, the subject site does not fully comply with the current landscape code
requirements.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D.1, perimeter landscape buffers of 15 feet are required for all
street frontages and a perimeter landscape buffer of 10 feet is required for the east property line.
As discussed previously, parking is critical to have a successful mall and theatre; therefore, to
maintain the current parking ratio of 4.4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area no
parking spaces can be removed. Hundreds of parking spaces would have to be removed to meet
the landscape buffer requirements.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.E.1, ten percent of the gross vehicular use area must be
provided as landscape islands a minimum of 150 square feet in size and shall be designed so that
no more than 15 parking spaces are in a row. While the site has 10.23 percent of the vehicular
use area devoted to interior landscape islands, some of the islands are not eight feet wide, nor are
they a minimum 150 square feet and more than 15 parking spaces are in a row. Again, to
maintain the current parking ratio, no parking spaces are proposed to be removed.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07001 – Page 5 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.E.2, foundation plantings shall be provided for 100 percent of a
building façade with frontage along a street right-of-way, excluding space necessary for building
ingress/egress, within a minimum five-foot wide landscaped area composed of at least two
accent trees (or palm equivalents) for every 40 linear feet of building façade and one shrub for
every 20 square feet of required landscape area. The proposed addition has two facades along
street rights-of-way. The west façade does not provide for any foundation landscape areas as this
side is devoted to service, loading and mechanical access areas. Additionally, this façade is
located over 600 feet from U.S. Highway 19 and is not highly visible from the highway.
To mitigate for reduced buffer widths, size and number of interior landscape islands and lack of
foundation plantings the applicant has proposed a Comprehensive Landscape Program which
includes the addition of over 250 shade, accent and palm trees, over 5,000 shrubs and over 8,500
groundcover plants. It is important to note that the proposed landscape material is in addition to
over 15,000 plants that were installed when the mall addition took place in 1999. The proposed
landscape material will enhance the existing buffer along Countryside Boulevard, all entrances
and the renovated parking areas. By enhancing all the entrances with attractive landscaping, the
landscaped entryways will be more attractive than otherwise would be under minimum code. The
applicant has provided landscape materials of a greater size than required by minimum code.
Specifically, live oaks and bald cypress are proposed to be three and four-inch caliper trees
instead of 2 ½ inch caliper, palm trees are proposed to have up to 16 feet of clear trunk instead of
10 feet of clear trunk, and accent trees are proposed at 2 ½ inch caliper instead of two inch
caliper. Staff concurs that the proposed landscaping will enhance the community character and
will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate vicinity.
Comprehensive Landscape Program: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.G, the landscaping
requirements contained within the Code can be waived or modified if the application contains a
Comprehensive Landscape Program satisfying certain criteria. The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with those criteria:
Consistent Inconsistent
Architectural theme
1. :
a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program shall be designed as a N/A N/A
part of the architectural theme of the principle buildings proposed or developed on
the parcel proposed for development; or
b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment X
proposed in the comprehensive landscape program shall be demonstrably more
attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for
development under the minimum landscape standards.
2. Lighting: Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is X
automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed.
3. Community character: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive X
landscape program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater.
4. Property values: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape X
program will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate
vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
5. Special area or scenic corridor plan: The landscape treatment proposed in the X
comprehensive landscape program is consistent with any special area or scenic
corridor plan which the City of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in
which the parcel proposed for development is located.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07001 – Page 6 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no active Code Enforcement cases for the subject
property.
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards of
the CG and T/U land use categories and the C and I Districts as per CDC Sections 2-701.1, 2-
1201.1, Table 2-704 and Table 2-1204:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
FAR CG 0.55 0.39 X
T/U 0.70 0.00
ISR CG & T/U 0.90 0.89 X
Minimum Lot Area N/A 3,523,825 sq. ft. (80.896 acres) X
Minimum Lot Width N/A 1,776 ft. (U.S. Hwy 19 N) X
2,572 ft. (Countryside Blvd.)
2,784 ft. (S.R. 580)
Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A North: Zero feet (to pavement) X 1
52 feet (to building)
West: 6.2 feet (to pavement) X 1
199.7 feet (to building)
South: 5.4 feet (to pavement) X 1
83.4 feet (to building)
Side: N/A East: 5.5 feet (to pavement) X 1
285.9 feet (to building)
Maximum Height N/A 51 feet (to top of flat roof) X 1
63 feet (to top of metal lattice)
Minimum Off-Street Parking 5 spaces/ 1,000 SF GFA 5,719 parking spaces X 1
(4.4 spaces / 1,000 SF GFA)
1
See analysis in Staff Report
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07001 – Page 7 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility
criteria as per CDC Sections 2-704.C and 2-1204.A (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from X
the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X
development
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City’s
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an
existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is
characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation;
or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a
working waterfront use.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development
and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning
district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted
by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the
proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design
elements:
Changes in horizontal building planes;
?
Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
?
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
Variety in materials, colors and textures;
?
Distinctive fenestration patterns;
?
Building stepbacks; and
?
Distinctive roofs forms.
?
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape
design and appropriate distances between buildings.
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07001 – Page 8 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General
Standards for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X
immediate vicinity.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of August 5, 2010, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient to
move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following:
Findings of Fact. The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence
submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that
there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:
1.The 80.896-acre subject property, is located east of U.S. Highway 19 between S.R. 580 and
Countryside Boulevard;
2.The property consists of eight parcels;
3.The seven westernmost parcels are zoned Commercial (C) District with an underlying land
use plan category of Commercial General (CG);
4.The easternmost parcel is zoned Institutional (I) District with an underlying land use plan
category of Transportation/Utility (T/U);
5.The entire (I) parcel is owned by Florida Power and is leased for parking spaces;
6.The subject property is currently developed with 1,229,549 square feet of gross floor area;
7.The existing structures range in height from 20 feet to 64.4 feet;
8.The proposal includes an addition of 68,567 square feet of gross floor area;
9.The proposal includes an increase to the allowable building height to 51 feet (to top of flat
roof) and 63 feet (to top of lattice work);
10.The proposal includes 5,719 parking spaces (4.4 spaces per 1,000 SF GFA);
11.The proposal includes reductions to all perimeter landscape buffers;
12.The proposal includes reductions to the foundation landscape requirements on the west
façade;
13.The proposal includes a request to allow more than 15 parking spaces in a row without an
interior landscape island;
14.The proposal includes a request to allow interior landscape islands of less than 150 square
feet and less than eight feet in width from back of curb to back of curb;
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07001 – Page 9 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21
15.The proposal includes a two-year development order;
16.This proposal does not include any of the proposed signage; and
17.There are no active Code Enforcement cases for the subject property.
Conclusions of Law. The Planning and Development Department, having made the above
findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law:
1.That the development proposal is consistent with the applicable Standards and Criteria as per
Community Development Code Sections 2-701.1, 2-704, 2-1201.1 and 2-1204;
2.That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Community
Development Code Sections 2-704.C and 2-1204.A;
3.That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two
Approvals as per Community Development Code Section 3-914.A; and
4.That the development proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Landscape Program
criteria as per Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G.
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends of
the Flexible Development Application to permit an addition with 33,465 square feet of indoor
recreation and entertainment (12 screen theater), 35,102 square feet of restaurant and retail sales
and service in the Commercial (C) and Institutional (I) Districts with a lot area of 3,523,825 square
feet, a lot width of 2,572 feet along Countryside Boulevard, 1,776 feet along U.S. Hwy 19 North,
and 2,784 feet along S.R. 580, a front setback (north along S.R. 580) of zero feet (to existing
pavement) and 52 feet (to existing building), a front setback (south along Countryside Boulevard)
of 5.4 feet (to existing pavement) and 83.4 feet (to existing building), a front setback (west along
U.S. Hwy 19 North) of 6.2 feet (to existing pavement) and 199.7 feet (to existing building) and a
side (east) setback of 5.5 feet (to existing pavement) and 285.9 feet (to existing building), a
building height of 51 feet (to top of flat roof), 63 feet (to top of metal lattice) and 5,719 parking
spaces as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community
Development Code Sections 2-704.C and 2-1204.A, with a reduction to the perimeter landscape
buffer along S.R. 580 from 15 feet to zero feet, a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer along
Countryside Boulevard from 15 feet to 5.4 feet, a reduction to the landscape buffer along U.S. Hwy
19 North from 15 feet to 6.2 feet, a reduction to the side (east) landscape buffer from 10 feet to 5.5
feet, a reduction to the foundation landscape from five feet to zero feet on the west facade, to allow
more than 15 parking spaces in a row without an interior landscape island, to allow interior
landscape islands of less than 150 square feet and less than eight feet in width from back of curb to
back of curb as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Community
Development Code Section 3-1202.G and a two-year development order, with the following
conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1.That, all proposed landscaping be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the theatre;
2.That all signage be permitted separately;
3.That any electric and communication panels, boxes, and meters located on the exterior of the
buildings be painted the same color as the building;
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07001 – Page 10 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07001 2010-09-21
4.That, should revisions be requested to this approval, the Community Development
Coordinator is authorized to allow minor revisions to this approval provided they comply
with CDC Section 4-406 , to include tenant elevation modifications that provide identity for
the tenants by adding their tenant design criteria to the building facade; and
5.That the final design and color of the building shall be consistent with the elevations
approved by the CDB.
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: ______________________________
A. Scott Kurleman
Planner III
ATTACHMENTS: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map; and Photographs
Community Development Board – September 21, 2010
FLD2010-07001 – Page 11 of 11
"Clearwater
U
Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet
TO: Community Development Board Members
FROM: Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager
COPIES: Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney; Susan Chase, City Clerk Specialist;
Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for September 21, 2010
DATE: September 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting August 03, 2010 and August
17, 2010
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case: FLD2010-07001 - 27001 U.S. Highway 19 North Level Two Application
Yes No
2. Case: FLD2010-07002 -2135 NE Coachman Road Level Two Application
Yes No X
3. Case: FLD2010-03006 - 1377-1395 S. Missouri Avenue Level Two Application
Yes No X
4. Case: Time Extension - FLD2008-05012 - 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
Yes No X
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties.
Signature: ";71' Date: eg (a
PRINT N
S. (Planning Departmen6C D BWgendas DRC & CDBICDBI2010109 September 21,2010V Cover MEMO 2010.doc
`Clearwater
U
Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet
TO: Community Development Board Members
FROM: Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager
COPIES: Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney; Susan Chase, City Clerk Specialist;
Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for September 21, 2010
DATE: September 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting August 03, 2010 and August
17, 2010
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case: FLD2010-07001 - 27001 U.S. Hig way 19 North Level Two Application
Yea No
2. Case: FLD2010-07002 - 2135 NE Coachman Road
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-03006 - 1377-13 S. Missouri Avenue
No
Yes
4. Case: Time Extension -
Yes
I
PRINT NAME
Level Two Application
Level Two Application
12 - 2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
N
Date:
//C-)
S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICD&2010109 September 21, 201011 Cover MEMO 2010.doc
Clearwater
TO:
FROM:
COPIES:
U
Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet
Community Development Board Members
Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager
Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney; Susan Chase, City Clerk Specialist;
Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for September 21, 2010
DATE: September 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting August 03, 2010 and August
17, 2010
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case: FLD2010-07001 - 27001 U.S. Highway 19 North
Yes No
2. Case: FLD2010-07002 - 2135 NE Coachman Road
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-03006 - 1377-1395 S. Missouri Avenue
Yes No
Level Two Application
Level Two Application
Level Two Application
4. Case: Time Extension- FLD2008-05012 -2855 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
Yes No
the personal site visit to the
Signature:
Date: V / 2 i
PRINT NAME
S: (Planning DepartmentlC D "gendas DRC & CDBICDBQ010109 September 21, 2010V Cover MEMO 2010.doe
Clearwater
TO:
FROM:
COPIES:
U
Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet
Community Development Board Members
Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager
Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney; Susan Chase, City Clerk Specialist;
Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for September 21, 2010
DATE: September 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting August 03, 2010 and August
17, 2010
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case: FLD2010-07001 - 27001 U.S. Highway 19 North
Yes 1.1"" No
2. Case: FLD2010-07002 - 2135 NE Coachman Road
Yes IZ No
3. Case: FLD2010-03006 - 1377-1395 S. Missouri Avenue
Yes 1/ No
Level Two Application
Level Two Application
Level Two Application
4. Case: Time Extension - FLD2008-05012 - 285 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
Yes No y
S: Tlanning DepartmentlC D BWgendas DRC & CDBICDBI2010109 September 21,20M] Cover MEMO 2010.doc