TA2005-04001--, ~ i
PINELLAS
PLANNING
COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBERS
600 Cleveland Street, Suite 850 • Clearwater, Florida 33755-4160
Telephone 727.464.8250 • Fax 727.464.8212 • www.co.pinellas.fl.us/ppc
May 12, 2005
Ms. Sharen Jarzen, Planner III
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33756
Councilmember Bill Foster, Chairman
Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, Vice-Chairman
Councilmember Sandra L. Bradbury, Treasurer
Mayor Jerry Beverland, Secretary
Councilor Pete Bengston
Mayor Beverley Billiris
Mayor Robert H. DiNicola
Commissioner Bob Hackworth
Mayor Robert E. Jackson, Ph.D.
School Board Member Linda S. Lerner
Commissioner Deborah L. Martohue
Commissioner John Morroni
Commissioner Nadine S. Nickeson
RE: Review of Proposed Community Development Code Amendments
(Ordinance No. 7445-OS) for Consistency with the Countywide Rules
Dear Ms. Jarzen:
David P. Healey, AICP,
Executive Director
We are in receipt of your email dated Apri126, 2005, regarding the proposed amendments
to the City's Community Development Code referenced above.
Pursuant to Division 3.4 of the Rules Concerning the Administration of the Countywide
Future hand Use Plan (Countywide Rules}, Council staff has reviewed the proposed
amendments for consistency with the Countywide Rules as follows:
The proposed amendments to nonconformity provisions of the City of Clearwater
Community Development Code are consistent with the Countywide Rules,
specifically Sections 4.2.3 Density/Intensity Standards, 4.2.4 Use/Locational
Characteristics and 6.5.2 Nonconforming Uses, Structures, and Lots.
Thank you for transmitting these code amendments for review. Please note that upon
adoption, a final copy of the ordinance, and any subsequent codification thereof, must be
filed with us. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 464-8250.
Sincerely,
~~-G c . ~;~..~a
Michael C. Crawford; AICP
Planning Manager
cc: Councilmember Hoyt Hamilton, PPC Representative
PLANNING FOR THE PINELLAS CO
~~~O~i ~ .s~ r
I ~ ~.~~.
MAY i 7 ~5
~ PLANNING & OEVElOPMENT
SERVICES
~ , , , , ~ , , C~tTY OF CLEARWATER
A
5~
~i
-~.
• ~
/Jarzen, Sharen
From: Jarzen, Sharen
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 4:33 PM
To: 'dhealey@co.pinellas.fl.us'
Cc: Clayton, Gina
Subject: Review of Proposed Ordinance
Apri126, 2005
Mr. David Healey, AICP
Executive Director
Pinellas Planning Council, Suite 850
600 Cleveland Street
Clearwater, Fl 33755
Dear Mr. Healy:
Attached is a proposed ordinance that is scheduled for presentation at the May 17, 2005 City of
Clearwater Community Development Board meeting. We are requesting that your agency review it for
consistency with the countywide rules.
4626
Thank you for your help. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me at 727-562-
Sincerely,
Sharen Jarzen, AICP
Planner III
If you need the above in the form of a hard copy letter, please don't hesitate to let me know. Thank you.
General Revised
Ordinance 744...
• •
ORDINANCE NO. 7445-05
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA,
MAKING AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CODE, AMENDING ARTICLE 6,
NONCONFORMITY PROVISIONS, SECTION 6-109,
TERMINATION OF STATUS AS A NONCONFORMITY; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 6526-00 was adopted by the City Commission on
June 15, 2000, which ordinance amended the Community Development Code; and
WHEREAS, a portion of Ordinance No. 6526-00, provided for the termination
of status as a nonconformity to facilitate redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater desires to further refine the termination of
status provision in the Community Development Code; now therefore,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY.
OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Article 6, Nonconformity Provisions, Section 6-109.6, is amended as
follows:
**********
B. A structure which is nonconforming with respect to density may be reconstructed on the
same parcel with the same density provided that:
1. Ssuch reconstruction complies with all other requirements of this Community
Development Code :; and
2. Such reconstruction retains the same current use (i.e., overnight accommodation use to
overnight accommodation use, attached dwellings to attached dwellin sg_ etc.).
**********
Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption.
PASSED ON FIRST READING
Ordinance No. 7445-05
r
PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL
READING AND ADOPTED
•
Frank V. Hibbard
Mayor-Commissioner
Approved as to form:
Leslie K. Dougall-Sides
Assistant City Attorney
2
Attest:
Cynthia E. Goudeau
City Clerk
Ordinance No. 7445-05
i i
Jarzen, Sharen
From: Clayton, Gina
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 8:24 AM
To: Planning
Subject: Termination Ordinance
The ordinance regarding the use of terminated nonconforming density was approved last night by City Council (vote of 3-
2). Attached please find a copy of the ordinance.
Ordinance No.
7445-05.doc
Gina L. Clayton
Assistant Planning Director
City of Clearwater
gina.claytonC~myclearwater.com
727-562-4587
• ~
ORDINANCE NO. 7445-05
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE;
AMENDING ARTICLE 6, NONCONFORMITY PROVISIONS,
SECTION 6-109.B, TERMINATION OF STATUS AS A
NONCONFORMITY; PROVIDING THAT UPON
RECONSTRUCTION OF STRUCTURES WHICH ARE
NONCONFORMING WITH RESPECT TO DENSITY, SUCH
RECONSTRUCTION MUST RETAIN THE CURRENT USE;
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 6526-00 was adopted by the City Council on June 15,
2000, which ordinance amended the Community Development Code; and
WHEREAS, a portion of Ordinance No. 6526-00, provided for the termination of
status as a nonconformity to facilitate redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater desires to further refine the termination of status
provision in the Community Development Code; now therefore,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Article 6, Nonconformity Provisions, Section 6-109.B, is amended as
follows:
B. A structure which is nonconforming with respect to density may be
reconstructed on the same parcel with the same density provided Level Two
approval is obtained and that:
1. Such reconstruction complies with all other requirements of this
Community Development Code-; and
2. Such reconstruction does not constitute a change in use.
Section 2. This Ordinance shall not apply to any applications which have been
submitted and been found to be complete and sufficient as of August 4, 2005 under the
provisions of Community Development Code Article 4, and provided that the application
is approved no later than September 20, 2005 and the project meets the timeframes
required by the Development Order for permit submittal and certificate of occupancy.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption.
Ordinance No. 7445-05
•
PASSED ON FIRST READING
PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL
READING AND ADOPTED
Frank V. Hibbard
Mayor
Approved as to form: Attest:
Assistant City Attorney
Cynthia E. Goudeau
City Clerk
2 Ordinance No. 7445-05
~,
Page 1 of 4
Clayton, Gina
From: Delk, Michael
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 9:54 AM
To: Clayton, Gina
Subject: FW: Revised per City Attorney comment. mld
-----Original Message-----
From: Delk, Michael
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 9:53 AM
To: Wilson, Denise; Brumback, Garry; Akin, Pam
Subject: Revised per City Attorney comment. mld
a
"fir'
!.,
Interoffice Correspondence Sheet
TO: BILL HORNE, CITY MANAGER
FROM: MICHAEL DELK, AICP
PLANNING DIRECTOR
RE: BEACH BY DESIGN REVIEW & REVISIONS
DATE: APRIL 19, 2005
Pursuant to your request, the following is a summation of information related to our experience
to date regarding the Termination of Nonconformity provision as it relates to beach redevelopment. I
have outlined a tentative schedule for modification of the "Termination" provision. Please note that this
process will require a review by the PPC with little room for deviation along the way to maintain the
proposed schedule.
Our initial recommendation is to amend the second Termination section that allows a project to
retain its density and require the same use to be redeveloped. For example, a hotel use to new hotel use
or condominium to new condominium but not hotel to condominium. The benefit of this alternative is
that the new use will generally result in an upgrade of the site improvements such as parking and
stormwater management and could result in an upgrade to overall design.
Clearwater's Termination provision of the Code is a most unusual zoning code provision and its
intent was to facilitate redevelopment. In most cities, the regulations for nonconformities are structured
to bring nonconformities into compliance over time with the current zoning regulations. However, in
this instance, the provision sought to assist redevelopment in two ways. The first section of the
Termination provision allows nonconformities to remain and expand upon approval by the Community
4/22/2005
Page 2 of 4
Development Board (CDB). An example of this section is the pending application on the
Adam's Mark Hotel scheduled for the CDB on April 19, 2005. The Adam's Mark Hotel received severe
hurricane damage in 2004 and their nonconforming status limited their ability to repair the structure and
would have required the property to come into compliance with the current code. On this site, the
provision would have required the elimination of 143 hotel rooms since the existing hotel has 217 rooms
and only 74 rooms are allowed under the current Comprehensive Plan and Code. In addition, the
existing building is 155 feet in height where the current Tourist district would limit the height to 100
feet.
The second section of the Termination provision allows a nonconforming structure which has
nonconforming density to be reconstructed on the same site at the same density, upon approval by the
CDB. This section has been interpreted to allow the conversion of one type of density for another, i.e.,
40 units per acre for hotel is converted to 30 units per acre for condominium use. According to our
preliminary research, there are only two approved projects on the Beach that used the Termination
provision AND converted from hotel use to condominium. In addition, there is one pending case that is
both a termination and conversion: the Sunspree Hotel site. Please find below additional information on
each of these three projects.
Ramada Inn, Gulfview Boulevard-289 existing hotel rooms converted to 241 hotel
rooms and 38 condominiums (South Beach/Clearwater Pass District) .
Clearwater Beach Hotel, Mandalay Boulevard 137 hotel rooms approved to remain as
137 hotel rooms with additional rooms from the density pool, 120 condominium units
approved on the south half of the site (Destination Resort District).
Sunspree Hotel, Gulfview Boulevard-210 hotel rooms converted to 149 condominiums
(includes 13 units by virtue of TDRs). This case is pending for the April 19, 2005 CDB
meeting. (South Beach/Clearwater Pass District)
It should be noted that none of the approved projects on Brightwater have used the Termination
provision although three sites have used TDRs. The Termination provision was not needed on
Brightwater since townhouse development generally does not require the additional density due to its
design characteristics. Many of the Brightwater projects have been conversions from hotel use to
condominium; however, this conversion is specifically a goal for the redevelopment of Brightwater as
stated in Beach By Design.
Also, none of the approved projects in the Old Florida District have used the Termination
provision although some of these projects were conversions from hotel to condominium use. There is
one project pending in Old Florida that is both a conversion and plans to use the Termination provision
to gain one additional dwelling unit (15 Avalon Street, pending the April 19, 2005 CDB meeting). The
major issue in Old Florida appears to be the design challenges presented by the small and irregular lot
configuration coupled with the lack of clear guidance on the redevelopment goals in this district.
Although there are not a large number of approved cases on the Beach that have used the
Termination provision to convert from hotel use to condominium, it is clear that the current market
interest in condominium development is very strong. The Termination provision is a regulatory tool that
provides a strong incentive to developers to facilitate the condominium development. The Termination
provision could function as an incentive for hotel use since it allows the density to be retained, however,
the market conditions at this time make hotel use a less desirable use for the developer.
This provision could establish that only certain uses that are preferred for redevelopment
purposes could use this provision. For example, the code could be amended to allow the termination
4/22/2005
• . Page 3 of 4
provision to be available only if the new use were hotel development. The section that needs to
be revised is Section 6-109 B and a copy is attached. It is recommended that the first Termination
provision that merely allows a nonconforming use to remain be retained as this provision does not create
the concerns identified by the Council and it is a useful tool to allow certain uses to become conforming.
Some additional issues we may want to consider further are as follows:
• There are substantially more projects that are conversions from hotel to condominium
than there are projects using the Termination clause to facilitate the conversion.
• The use of TDRs is a growing trend and the impacts on the different character districts
and infrastructure has not been evaluated.
• Beach By Design has a general lack of clarity on allowable uses and prohibited uses in
each district that results in development that does not necessarily meet the City's
overall redevelopment goals.
• Beach By Design does not have incentives for some uses that the Council may deem as
important to the overall tourist health of the Beach, i.e., small motels. In addition, the
Plan does not contain disincentives to discourage the type of development that is not
desired. A combination of regulatory incentives and disincentives would likely result
in redevelopment that more closely matches the City's goals.
• Design Guidelines-current guidelines do not address the different Districts in Beach By
Design and different types of development, thus resulting in designs that are believed
to be too intense for the site and/or lacking in architecture that is compatible with its
surroundings.
• Height restrictions- current guidelines allow additional height only if using either the
Density Pool or TDRs. Interest has been expressed in allowing additional height under
another condition that is if the project proposes increased setbacks that are related to
the height.
• The redevelopment market will continue to evolve and respond to both market
demands and to adapt to City regulatory requirements. Market changes are clearly out
of the City's control but a more detailed understanding of development choices will
assist the City in developing incentives and disincentives that will implement the city's
goals.
• Beach By Design did not evaluate alternative development scenarios and evaluate the
impact of the alternatives on infrastructure. This analysis of both redevelopment
scenarios and their resultant impact is necessary prior to embarking on any major
revisions to the Plan. A complete analysis will allow the City to develop a plan that
more fully reflects our redevelopment goals and insure that new development can be
adequately served by public facilities.
With regard to a schedule for the above-described code amendment, the next available CDB
meeting for which this amendment can be scheduled is May 17, 2005. This will necessitate a draft
ordinance being provided to the PPC for their review no later than Tuesday, April 26. If the Council
initiates the code amendment by April 21, 2005, the amendment can meet the advertising deadlines for
the May CDB meeting. The proposed ordinance could then be scheduled for first reading at the June 2,
2005 Council meeting and second reading on June 16, 2005. The ordinance must contain transition
provisions to address projects that are in the review process prior to adoption of the ordinance. This
code amendment can be seen as the first part of the larger evaluation and can be completed in a
relatively short time period.
I hope this information has provided you with some background on the issue, several alternatives
4/22/2005
• • Page 4 of 4
in amending the Code and alonger-term more comprehensive solution of evaluation of the
Beach By Design plan. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Thank you.
cc: Garry Brumback, Assistant City Manager
Pam Akin, City Attorney
Gina Clayton, Assistant Planning Director
4/22/2005
• • a`~0~ ~
w
D
}_ ~ar~~ er
r
U
Interoffice Correspondence Sheet
~O; BILL HO~.L1E, CITE' ~?~~~~
FROM: CYNDI TARAPANI, PLANNING DIRECTOR
RE: BEACH BY DESIGN REVIEW & REVISIONS
DATE: APRIL 14, 2005
In accordance with your request, I am providing preliminary information
regarding the redevelopment on Clearwater Beach. As I understand, the City Council has
expressed concerns about the conversion of hotels to condominiums and the use of the
Termination of Nonconformity provision to effect that conversion. The Council is also
concerned about the intensity and design of the new developments in the Beach By
Design plan area.
The City Council identified an amendment to the Community Development Code
to address their concerns about the conversion of hotels to condominiums: to eliminate
the Code provision regarding "Termination of status as a Nonconformity" (Section 6-
109B). You have asked me to evaluate the Council's proposal and outline a schedule to
make that code amendment.
Clear-water's Ter-urination pr-ovision of the Code is a most unusual zoning cods
provision and its intent was to facilitate redevelopment. In most cities, the regulations for
nonconformities are structured to bring nonconformities into compliance over time with
the current zoning regulations. However, in this instance, the provision sought to assist
redevelopment in two ways. The first section of the Termination provision allows
nonconformities to remain and expand upon approval by the Community Development
Board (CDB). An example of this section is the pending application on the Adam's Mark
Hotel scheduled for the CDB on April 19, 2005. The Adam's Mark Hotel received
severe hurricane damage in 2004 and their nonconforming status limited their ability to
repair the structure and would have required the property to come into compliance with
the current code. On this site, the provision would have required the elimination of 143
hotel rooms since the existing hotel has 217 rooms and only 74 rooms are allowed under
the current Comprehensive Plan and Code. In addition, the existing building is 155 feet
in height where the current Tourist district would limit the height to 100 feet.
P~~~ I
•
T~}e secgnd sect~~p of l~ Term~ttation proviston allows ~ nop~grll'ormi~g
,a•...~,.d. ~~s:-s~z?s~ ~as:at c:.~ 9 .s x : .~ea~- tx e,~ Sri sM .~..`ra~3~3,Yt. '; r .FS. 4; .~ :a ~a"s ~., ~.~ . r>v<a9t
structure which has nonconforming density to be reconstructed on the same site at the
same density, upon approval by the CDB. This section has been interpreted to allow the
conversion of one type of density for another, i.e., 40 units per acre for hotel is converted
to 30 units per acre for condominium use. According to our preliminary research, there
are only two approved projects on the Beach that used the Termination provision AND
converted from hotel use to condominium. In addition, there is one pending case that is
both a termination and conversion: the Sunspree Hotel site. Please find below additional
information on each of these three projects.
• Rarnada Inn, Gulf~iew Boulevard-289 existing hotel rooms converted to
241 hotel rooms and 38 condominiums (South Beach/Clearwater Pass
District) .
• Clearwater Beach Hotel, Mandalay Boulevard 137 hotel rooms approved
to remain as 137 hotel rooms with additional rooms from the density
pool, 120 condominium units approved on the south half of the site
(Destination Resort District).
• Sunspree Hotel, Gulfview Boulevard-210 hotel rooms converted to 149
condominiums (includes 13 units by virtue of TDRs). This case is
pending for the April 19, 2005 CDB meeting. (South Beach/Clearwater
Pass District)
It should be noted that none ofl the appr--Dyed pr-ojects on Brightwater- have used
the Termination provision although three sites have used TDRs. The Termination
provision was not needed on Brightwater since townhouse development generally does
not require the additional density due to its design characteristics. Many of the
Brightwater projects have been conversions from hotel use to condominium; however,
this conversion is specifically a goal for the redevelopment of Brightwater as stated in
Beach By Design.
It is also interesting to note that none of the approv®d projects ire the Old Florida
District have used the Termination provision although some of these projects were
conversions from hotel to condo i se. There is one project pending in Old Florida
that is both a conversion and ~ o use the Termination provision to gain one
additional dwelling unit (15 Aval Street, pending the April 19, 2005 CDB meeting).
The rnajor issue in Old Florida ap ears to be the design challenges presented by the small
and irregular lot configuratior~coupled with the lack of clear guidance on the
redevelopment goals in this district.
Although there are not a large number of approved cases on the Beach that have
used the Termination provision to convert from hotel use to condominium, it is clear that
the current market interest in condominium development is very strong. The Termination
provision is a reg~,latory tool that provides a strong incentive to developers to facilitate
~e' condominiumdevelopment. The Termination provision could function as an
incentive for hotel use since it allows the density to be retained, however, the market
conditions at this time make hotel use a less desirable use for the developer.
Page ~ of 4
~~, ~.
•
~o gc~~re~~ l~~ ~p~~~~ r~i~~~ ~~; the ~p~n~~~~ reg~rc~ing the q~nv~r~pn, the
following amendment to the Community Development Code is suggested. The second
Termination section that allows a project to retain its density and redevelop could be
amended to require that the same use be redeveloped, i.e., hotel use to new hotel use or
condominium to new condominium. The benefit of this alternative is that the new use
will generally result in an upgrade of the site improvements such as parking and
stormwater management and could result in an upgrade to the architecture.
Alternatively, this provision could establish that only certain uses that are
preferred for redevelopment purposes could use this provision. For example, the code
could be amended to allow the termination provision to be available only if the new use
were hotel development. The section that needs to be revised is Section 6-109 B and a
copy is attached. It is recommended that the first Termination provision that merely
allows a nonconforming use to remain be retained as this provision does not create the
concerns identified by the Council and it is a useful tool to allow certain uses to become
conforming.
It should also be noted that this amendment to the Ter-urination pr-ovision would
not address all of the concerns that the Council has regarding redevelopment on the
Beach. The Council has indicated an interest in reviewing the entire Beach by Design
plan and that evaluation can address these additional concerns. The evaluation and
eventual revisions to Beach By Design are a major project and would require significant
staffing and consultant resources. A brief listing of major issues is described below.
• There are substantially more projects that are conversions from hotel to
condominium than there are projects using the Termination clause to
facilitate the conversion.
• The use of TDRs is a growing trend and the impacts on the different
character districts and infrastructure has not been evaluated.
• Beach By Design has a general lack of clarity on allowable uses and
prohibited uses in each district that results in development that does not
necessarily meet the City's overall redevelopment goals.
• Beach By Design does not have .incentives for some uses that the
Council may deem as important to the overall tourist health of the
Beach, i.e., small motels. In addition, the Plan does not contain
disincentives to discourage the type of development that is not desired.
A combination of regulatory incentives and disincentives would likely
~~result in redevelopment that more closely matches the City's goals.
• Design Guidelines~t--gigs do not address the different
Districts in Beach By Design and different types of development, thus
resulting in designs that are believed to be too intense for the site and/or
lacking in architecture that is compatible with its surroundings.
e of4
~. rcf., F x ~:~ ~,r .=.~
• •
~-l~ig~t r~~~ri~ti~x~~{ ~tt~:~r~t guidelines all~a~ ~~dit~~~nal ~e~~ht oply if
using either the Density Pool or TDRs. Interest has been expressed in
,~' allowing additional height if the project
proposes increased setbacks that are related to the height.
• The redevelopment market will continue to evolve and respond to both
market demands and to adapt to City regulatory requirements. Market
changes are clearly out of the City's control but a more detailed
understanding of development choices will assist the City in developing
incentives and disincentives that will implement the city's goals.
• Beach By Design did not evaluate alternative development scenarios
and evaluate the impact of the alternatives on infrastructure. This
analysis of both redevelopment scenarios and their resultant impact is
necessary prior to embarking on any major revisions to the Plan. A
complete analysis will allow the City to develop a plan that more fully
reflects our redevelopment goals and insure that new development can
be adequately served by public facilities.
With regard to a schedule for the above-described code amendment, the next
available CDB meeting for which this amendment can be scheduled is May 17, 2005. If
the Council initiates the code amendment by Apri121, 2005, the amendment can meet the
advertising deadlines for the May CDB meeting. The proposed ordinance could then be
scheduled for first reading at the June 2, 2005 Council meeting and second reading on
M~ June 16, 2005. The ordinance must contain transition nrovisions~o~,ddress proiects that
~C are in the review process prior to adoption of the ordinance. This code amendment can
seen as the first part o t e arger eva uation an can e ompleted in a relatively short
time period.
I ho ~ this inforn;atian has rovided = ~QU with some back .round An th~~ issue,
~~ P p Y g
several alternatives in amending the Code and alonger-term more comprehensive
n_ ~Q ~ solution of evaluation of the Beach By Design plan. Please let me know if I can be of
further assistance. Thank you.
°f Garr Brumback, ,Assistant City Manager
Pam Akin, City Attorney
Michael Delk, Assistant Planning Director
~'~ge 4 of
• •
NOTICE OF AMENDMENT TO THE CLEARWATER
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE
The City of Clearwater proposes to adopt the following ordinance:
ORDINANCE NO. 7445-OS
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, MAKING AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CODE, AMENDING ARTICLE 6, NONCONFORMITY PROVISIONS, SECTION 6-1.09, TERMINATION OF
STATUS AS A NONCONFORMITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Schedule of Public Hearings:
Tuesday May 17, 2005 before the Community Development Board, at 1:00 p.m.
Thursday, June 16, 2005 before the City Council (1st Reading), at 6:00 p.m.
Thursday, July 21, 2005 before the City Council (2nd Reading), at 6:00 p.m.
All public hearings on the ordinances will be held in the City Council Chambers, in City Hall, 3rd floor, 112 South Osceola Ave,
Clearwater, Florida. TA 2005-04001
Additional information is available in the Planning Department at the Municipal Services Building, 100 South Myrtle Ave,
Clearwater, Florida.
Florida Statute 286.0105 states: Any person appealing a decision of this board must have a record of the proceedings to support such
an appeal. A person making an appeal will need to ensure that a verbatim record, including testimony and evidence, is made. The
inclusion of this statement does not create or imply a right to appeal the decision to be made at this hearing if the right to an appeal
does not exist as a matter of law.
Citizens may appear to be heard or file written notice of approval or objection with the Planning Director or the City Clerk prior to or
during the public hearing.
A COPY OF THIS AD IN LARGE PRINT IS AVAILABLE IN OFFICIAL RECORDS & LEGISLATIVE SERVICES DEPT.
ANY PERSON WITH A DISABILITY REQUIRING REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE
IN THIS MEETING SHOULD CALL OFFICIAL RECORDS & LEGISLATIVE SERVICES DEPT. WITH THEIR
REQUEST AT (727) 562-4093.
City of Clearwater
P.O. Box 4748
Clearwater, Fl 33758-4748
Cynthia E. Goudeau, CMC
City Clerk
Ad: OS/O1/O5, 05/29/05 & 07/03/05
~t •
ORDINANCE NO. 7445-05
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, MAKING
AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE,
AMENDING ARTICLE 6, NONCONFORMITY PROVISIONS, SECTION
6-109, TERMINATION OF STATUS AS A NONCONFORMITY; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
• •
CDB Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
Case Number: TA2005-04001
Ord. No.: 7445-OS
Agenda Item: G-8
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
TERMINATION OF STATUS AS A NONCONFORMITY
INITIATED BY: Planning Department
BACKGROUND:
As tourism is the leading economic industry in the City of Clearwater, city leaders have
become concerned about .the conversion of beach hotel properties to condominiums, thus
adversely impacting the tourist industry. Several of these conversions have occurred
recently by making use of the Termination of status as a nonconformity (Section 6-
109.B) provision in the Community Development Code. This provision is a most
unusual zoning regulation as its intent is to facilitate redevelopment. In most cities, the
regulations for nonconformities are structured to bring nonconformities into compliance
over time with the current zoning regulations.
Community Development Code Section 6-109.B allows a nonconforming structure that
has nonconforming density to be reconstructed on the same site at the same density, upon
approval by the Community Development Board (CDB). This subsection has been
interpreted to allow the conversion of one type of density for another, i.e., 40 units per
acre for hotel is converted to 30 units per acre for condominium use. There are four
approved projects on the beach that have used the Termination provision and converted
from hotel use to condominium use and are as follows:
• Ramada Inn - conversion of 289 existing hotel rooms to 241 hotel rooms and 38
condominiums;
• Clearwater Beach Hotel -conversion of 137 hotel rooms approved to remain as
1,37 hotel rooms (with additional rooms from the density pool) with 120
condominium units approved on the south half of the site;
• Sunspree Hotel -conversion of 210 hotel rooms to 149 condominiums (includes
13 units by virtue of Transfer of Development Rights); and
• Panorama on Clearwater Beach - conversion of 15 hotel rooms to 11
condominiums (total project - 15 units).
Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 17, 2005 -Case TA2005-04001 1
•
ANALYSIS:
•
Although there are not a significant number of approved cases on the beach that have
used the Termination provision to convert from hotel to condominium use, it is clear that
the current market interest in condominium development is very strong and interest in the
use of the Termination provision is growing. This Code provision provides a strong
incentive to developers to facilitate redevelopment. However, based on current market
conditions, which make residential development more desirable than hotel development,
the current Termination provision may in fact facilitate the loss of hotel units. Market
changes are clearly out of the city's control, but a more refined code related to
development choices will assist the city in developing incentives and disincentives that
will implement the City's goals of maintaining a strong tourism industry.
In an attempt to preclude the use of Code Section 6-109.B as a redevelopment incentive
for hotel to residential conversions, the proposed amendment will require that the
reconstruction of nonconforming density not result in a change of use. A hotel use could
therefore only be converted to a hotel use or a condominium use could only be converted
to a condominium use. A hotel use could not be converted to a condominium use.
Section 2 of proposed Ordinance No. 7445-OS specifies that the revised Termination
provision will not apply to any site plan application that has been submitted and
determined to be complete and sufficient by August 4, 2005 and approved by September
20, 2005 provided timeframes established in the development order for permitting and
issuance of certificate of occupancy are met. This Section allows site plan applications
submitted to the Planning Department by the July 1, 2005 application deadline (after the
adoption of the proposed ordinance on June 2, 2005) to be processed. Any site plans
received after July ls` requesting use of the Termination provision to convert uses will not
be processed.
CRITERIA FOR TEXT AMENDMENTS:
Code Section 4-601 specifies the procedures and criteria for reviewing text amendments.
Any code amendment must comply with the following:
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the goals,
policies, objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
Below is the policy from the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan that is furthered by the
proposed amendment to the Community Development Code.
2.1.2 Renewal of the beach tourist district shall be encouraged through the
establishment of distinct districts within Clearwater Beach, the
establishment of a limited density pool of additional hotel rooms to be
used in specified geographic areas of Clearwater Beach, enhancement of
public rights-of--way, the vacation of public rights-of--way when
appropriate, transportation improvements, inter-beach and intra-beach
Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 17, 2005 -Case TA2005-04001 2
s
transit, transfer of development rights and the use of design guidelines
pursuant to Beach by Design: A Preliminary Design for Clearwater Beach
and Design Guidelines.
The above policy indicates the city's commitment to beach renewal in compliance with
the provisions of Beach by Design, the special area plan for Clearwater Beach. This
regulatory change would likely result in redevelopment that more closely matches the
City's goals of maintaining a vibrant tourist economy.
2. The proposed amendments further the purposes of the Community
Development Code and other city ordinances and actions designed to
implement the Plan.
The proposed text amendment is consistent with the following purposes of the Code:
• Section 1-103.A - It is the purpose of this Development Code to implement the
Comprehensive Plan of the city; to promote the health, safety, general welfare and
quality of life in the city; to guide the orderly growth and development of the city;
to establish rules of procedures for land development approvals; to enhance the
character of the city and the preservation of neighborhoods; and to enhance the
quality of life of all residents and property owners of the city.
• .Section 1-103.E.2 - It is the further purpose of this Development Code to protect
the character and the social and economic stability of all parts of the city through
the establishment of reasonable standards which encourage the orderly and
beneficial development of land within the city.
The proposed amendment will enable the city to define more specific provisions to
govern land use, density and intensity and scale of development within the entire city.
The clarification of these provisions will also assist in the orderly and beneficial
development of land. Clarification of the discrepancies between the land development
regulations normalize developer/property owner expectations and provide more certainty
to the development process which will lead to the economic stability within the area.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The proposed amendment to the Community Development Code is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and the Community Development Code for the reasons cited above.
The use of the amendment will assist in enhancing and maintaining the leading economic
industry of tourism in the City of Clearwater. The provision also incentivizes
redevelopment in general which results in an upgrade of site improvements such as
parking and stormwater management, as well as an upgrade to overall design.
The Planning Department Staff recommends APPROVAL of Ordinance No. 7445-05.
Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 17, 2005 -Case TA2005-04001 3
• •
Pre ared b Plannin De artment Staff: ~--~~:,~ ~--~---1
p Y g p
Sharen Jarzen, Planner ~
Attachments:
Proposed Ordinance No. 7445-OS
Staff Report -Community Development Board -May 17, 2005 -Case TA2005-04001 4