11/16/2010
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
November 16, 2010
Present: Nicholas C. Fritsch Chair
Thomas Coates Vice Chair
Frank L. Dame Board Member
Doreen DiPolito Board Member
Richard Adelson Board Member
Brian A. Barker Board Member
Kurt B. Hinrichs Board Member
Norma R. Carlough Alternate 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.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: October 19, 2010
Member Coates moved to approve the minutes of the regular Community Development
Board meeting of October 19, 2010, as recorded and submitted in written summation to each
board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Board
Member Carlough did not vote.
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 – 4)
1. Case: FLD2010-07003 – 2147 NE Coachman Road Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Clinical Research of West Florida, Inc.
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: 0.573 acre located on the south side of NE Coachman Road, approximately
1,100 feet west of N. Belcher Road and 900 feet east of Graham Drive.
Atlas Page: 280B.
Existing Zoning: Office (O) District.
Request: Flexible Development application to permit a medical clinic in the Office (O) District
with a lot area of 25,000 square-feet, a lot width of 100 feet, a front (north) setback of 18 feet (to
pavement and dumpster enclosure), a side (east) setback of 10 feet (to building) and five feet
(to pavement and sidewalk), a side (west) setback of 10 feet (to building) and five feet (to
pavement, dumpster enclosure and sidewalk), a rear (south) setback of 10.1 feet (to building), a
Community Development 2010-11-16 1
building height of 24.5 feet (to top of flat roof) and 24 parking spaces (including no loading
space),as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community
Development Code (CDC) Section 2-1004.B, with reductions 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 CDC Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Medical Clinic.
Neighborhood Associations: Coachman Ridge Homeowners and Clearwater Neighborhoods
Coalition.
Presenter: Robert G. Tefft, Development Review Manager.
See Exhibit: Staff Report FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
See page 4 for motion of approval.
2. Case: FLD2010-05001A – 113 N Betty Lane Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: SP Country Club Homes, LLC.
Agent: Sean Cashen, Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. (13825 ICOT Blvd, Suite 605,
Clearwater, FL 33760; phone: 727-524-1818; fax: 727-524-6090; email:
scashen@gulfcoastconsultinginc.com).
Location: 2.21 acres located on the south side of Drew Street between Fredrica Avenue
and Betty Lane.
Atlas Page: 287B.
Existing Zoning: Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District.
Request: Delete a condition of approval (#8 on Development Order of July 20, 2010) requiring the
existing overhead utility lines which run along N. Betty Lane to be placed underground and amend
the conditions of approval.
Proposed Use: Attached Dwellings.
Neighborhood Associations: Country Club Addition Neighborhood Association and Clearwater
Neighborhoods Coalition.
Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III.
See Exhibit: Staff Report FLD2010-05001A 2010-11-16
See page 4 for motion of approval.
3. Case: FLD2010-09026 – 2043 N. Highland Avenue Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Highland Glen of Clearwater Home Owners Association, Inc. and
Amanda Day
Agent: Karen Todd (6972 Lake Gloria Blvd. Orlando, FL 32809; phone 727-493-2067;
email: Karen.f.todd@gmail.com) and Michael J. Palmer, Synergy Civil Engineering, Inc.
(3000 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Suite 201, Clearwater, FL, 33759; phone 727-796-1926;
mobile: 727-470-1344; email: mpalmer@synergycivileng.com).
Location: 4.4 acres located on the East side of N. Highland roughly 1,000 feet south of
Union Street.
Atlas Page: 252A.
Existing Zoning: Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District.
Request: Flexible Development application to permit the construction of six additional off-street
parking spaces for an existing 66-unit attached dwelling development in the Medium High
Density Residential (MHDR) District with a front setback of 7.45 feet where 10 feet is allowable
Community Development 2010-11-16 2
as a Residential Infill Project as per Community Development Code Section 2-404.F and a
reduction of the front landscape buffer from 15 feet to 7.45 feet as part of a Comprehensive
Landscape Program as per Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Attached Dwellings.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhood Coalition, Windsor Park Homeowners
Association.
Presenter: Ellen Crandall, Planner II.
See Exhibit: Staff Report FLD2010-09026 2010-11-16
See page 4 for motion of approval.
4. Case: FLD2010-08002 – 2230 Drew Street Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Florida Spine Properties, LLC.
Agent: Gary Young, 2 Young Architects, Inc. (1532 Owls Retreat, Tarpon Springs, FL
34688; phone: 727-943-0080; fax: 727-943-0073; email: gary2ya@verizon.net).
Location: 0.59 acre located on the north side of Drew Street approximately 330 feet east
of the intersection of Belcher Road and Drew Street.
Atlas Page: 281A.
Existing Zoning: Office (O) District.
Request: Flexible Development Application to permit a building addition of 1,371 square-feet to an
existing medical clinic in the Office (O) District with a lot area of 25,662 square-feet, a lot width of
183 feet (along Drew Street), a front (south) setback of 8.7 feet (to existing pavement) and 16.75
feet (to existing building), a side (east) setback of zero feet (to existing pavement) and 10 feet (to
existing building), a side (west) setback of five feet (to existing pavement) and 118.33 feet (to
existing building), a rear (north) setback of seven feet (to existing pavement) and 17 feet (to
existing building), a building height of 27 feet (to top of flat roof), and 32 parking spaces as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development
Code Section 2-1004.B., with a reduction to the south perimeter landscape buffer from 15 feet to
1.5 feet, a reduction to the north perimeter landscape buffer from 12 feet to seven feet, a
reduction to the east perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to zero feet, a reduction to the
interior landscape requirements from 10 percent to eight percent, 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 and a reduction to the foundation landscape requirement from five feet to zero feet as a
Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Community Development Code
Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Medical Clinic.
Neighborhood Associations: Skycrest Homeowners Association and Clearwater Neighborhood
Coalition.
Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III.
See Exhibits: Staff Report FLD2010-08002 2010-11-16 and Memorandum FLD2010-
08002 2010-11-16.
Planner III Scott Kurleman said condition of approval #4 had been amended as reported
in his November 16, 2010 memorandum.
Community Development 2010-11-16 3
Member Coates moved to approve Cases FLD2010-07003, FLD2010-05001A,
FLD2010-09026, and FLD2010-08002 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,
including amended condition #4 for Case FLD2010-08002 as stated in Memorandum FLD2010-
08002. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Board Member
Carlough did not vote.
D. LEVEL TWO APPLICATION: (Item 1)
1. Case: FLD2010-09027 – 1315 Cleveland Street Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Nemishawn, Inc.
Agent: Kevin Bessolo, Bessolo Design Group, Inc. (556 Central Avenue, St. Petersburg,
FL 33701; phone: 727-894-4453; fax: 727-896-8662; email: kbessolo@bessolo.com).
Location: 0.656 acre located at the southeast corner of Chestnut Street and S Fort
Harrison Avenue
Atlas Page: 287B.
Existing Zoning: Commercial (C) District.
Request: Flexible Development application to permit a governmental use (WorkNet Pinellas and
Coordinated Child Care), in the Commercial (C) District within the East Gateway Character District
with a lot area of 91,093 square-feet, a lot width of 250 feet (along Cleveland Street), 364 feet
(along Lady Mary Drive), 363 feet (along Fredrica Drive, a front (north) setback of 17.5 feet(to
existing building), a front (west) setback of 10 feet (to existing pavement) and 83.5 feet (to existing
building), a front (east) setback of 10 feet (to existing pavement) and 85.2 feet (to existing
building), a side (south) setback of 15 feet (to existing pavement) and 155.4 feet (to existing
building), a building height of 23 feet (to midpoint of roof) and 111 parking spaces as
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development
Code Section 2-704.C.
Proposed Use: Governmental Use.
Neighborhood Associations: East Gateway and Neighbors Association and Clearwater
Neighborhood Coalition.
Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III.
See Exhibit: Staff Report FLD2010-09027 2010-11-16
Member Coates 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.
Mr. Kurleman reviewed the Staff report.
The property owner’s agent Kevin Bessolo said the structure is less than 13,000 square-
feet; a 55,000 square-foot building could be constructed on the site. He said the rental
agreement is for a 5-year lease.
In response to questions, Michelle Pineda of WorkNet Pinellas reviewed its workforce
development efforts, stating it is not a social services agency. She estimated 100 people daily
will use WorkNet services at this location, all by invitation. Mary O’Connell of Coordinated Child
Care said her agency provides scholarships and benefits to parents and employers for child
Community Development 2010-11-16 4
care. She said this new location would better serve clients. She estimated 35 clients a day
would visit Coordinated Child Care; all visitors have a reason to come to the office and seek
services. As proposed, the building will house approximately 30 employees. Neither
organization will attract loitering
Economic Development and Housing Manager Director Geri Campos Lopez discussed
City efforts in the East Gateway, the 5-year action plan developed to stabilize the neighborhood,
and improvements. The business previously in this building had to relocate following a fire.
WorkNet Pinellas is a partner with City economic development efforts. Staff did not have a
chance to discuss this use with East Gateway groups. She was surprised to learn that
Coordinated Child Care was part of the proposal and was not familiar with its activities.
Discussion ensued regarding redevelopment needs in the East Gateway and the high
number of vagrants in the area. Concerns were expressed that the proposed use is not a
government office and that Coordinated Child Care is a social services agency. It was stated
the Comprehensive Infill Plan prohibits locating a social services agency within 1,500 feet of
another social services agency; it was felt the proposed location is too close to CHIP
(Clearwater Homeless Intervention Project) and the soup kitchen. Attorney for the Board Morris
Massey reviewed related Code definitions.
Eight people spoke in opposition to the item and two people spoke in support.
Planning and Development Director Michael Delk expressed concern that Code
definitions may conflict with the proposed use. He requested that the item be continued to
provide staff an opportunity to work with the applicant and East Gateway citizen groups to make
certain that the proposed use is proper.
Member Coates moved to continue Case FLD2010-09027 to January 18, 2011. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Alternate Board Member Carlough did not
vote.
Items not on the Agenda
Chair Fritsch requested that members respond to Administrative Analyst Sherry Watkins
regarding the Holiday Luncheon.
D ADJOHRN
The meeting adjourned at 2:22 p.m.
d4aair
Community Development Board
Community Development 2010-11-16 5
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
CDB Meeting Date: November 16, 2010
Case Number: FLD2010-07003
Agenda Item: C.5.
Owner/ Applicant: Clinical Research of West Florida, Inc.
Representative: Braulio Grajales, High Point Engineering
Address: 2147 NE Coachman Road
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development application to permit a medical clinic in the
Office (O) District with a lot area of 25,000 square feet, a lot width
of 100 feet, a front (north) setback of 18 feet (to pavement and
dumpster enclosure), a side (east) setback of 10 feet (to building)
and five feet (to pavement and sidewalk), a side (west) setback of
10 feet (to building) and five feet (to pavement, dumpster
enclosure and sidewalk), a rear (south) setback of 10.1 feet (to
building), a building height of 24.5 feet (to top of flat roof) and 24
parking spaces (including no loading space),as a Comprehensive
Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community
Development Code (CDC) Section 2-1004.B, with reductions 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 CDC
Section 3-1202.G.
CURRENT ZONING: Office (O) District
CURRENT LAND USE
CATEGORY: Residential/Office General (R/OG)
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Medical Clinic
Proposed Use: Medical Clinic
EXISTING North: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District
SURROUNDING
Detached dwellings
ZONING AND USES:
South: Pinellas County zoning
Self Storage
East: Pinellas County zoning
Offices
West: Office (O) District
Offices
ANALYSIS:
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-07003 – Page 1 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 0.573 acre parcel is located on the south side of NE Coachman Road, approximately 1,100
feet west of N. Belcher Road and 900 feet east of Graham Drive. The subject property is currently
developed with a medical clinic building, presently occupied by the applicant, located on the
northern portion of the site with four parking spaces north of the building (two that are within the
right-of-way) and 10 parking spaces to the rear of the building. 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 developed as a self storage facility. The property to the east is developed with office
uses. The property to the west is zoned Office (O) District and is developed with office uses.
Properties to the south and east are presently not located within the city limits of Clearwater.
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 and construct a new two-story, 6,970 square foot building at the
rear of the site for a medical clinic, which will be occupied by the applicant. Parking will be
located to the front of this new building and includes a drop-off area at the building entrance for
clients. This site layout satisfies the majority of Community Development Code (CDC), Building
Code and Fire Code requirements, albeit with necessary setback reductions. The design of this
site and building are similar to another parcel, owned by the same applicant, which was granted
Flexible Development approval at the Community Development Board (CDB) meeting of
September 21, 2010 (FLD2010-07002, 2135 NE Coachman Road).
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 6,970 square feet for a FAR of 0.279, 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 0.709, 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 a medical clinic use is
20,000 square feet. The site is 25,000 square feet of lot area, which exceeds the lot area for
medical clinics. Pursuant to this same Table, the minimum lot width for medical clinic uses is
100 feet. The site has 100 feet of frontage, which is consistent with this Code provision.
Adjacent properties to the east and west have the same lot area and lot width.
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-07003 – Page 2 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
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 medical clinic uses can range
between 15 – 35 feet. The same table provides that the minimum side and rear setbacks for
medical clinic uses can range between 10 – 20 feet. The proposal includes a front (north)
setback of 18 feet (to pavement and dumpster enclosure), side (east) setbacks of 10 feet (to
building) and five feet (to pavement and sidewalk), side (west) setbacks of 10 feet (to building)
and five feet (to pavement, dumpster enclosure and sidewalk), and a rear (south) setback of 10.1
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, which was also shared
with the approved, similar project at 2135 NE Coachman Road (FLD2010-07002), 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.
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
18 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. The building is proposed at a 10-foot side and a
10.1-foot rear setback, which is also consistent with surrounding properties. Door
landings/stoops and required sidewalks on the east and west sides of the building are designed at
a five-foot setback from the side property lines. 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.
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 medical clinic uses can range from 30 – 50 feet. The proposal includes a
building height of 24.5 feet (to the highest point of a flat roof) and 28 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
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-07003 – Page 3 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
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 medical clinic
uses requires five spaces per 1,000 square feet. Based on the high range for medical clinics, the
required parking totals 35 parking spaces. The proposal includes 24 parking spaces. A Parking
Demand Study was conducted for the current site, which is currently occupied by the applicant,
to determine whether adequate parking would be provided for the proposed building. Based on
the findings of this Parking Demand Study, the 24 proposed parking spaces will be adequate for
the 6,970 square-foot building, which will continue to be occupied by the applicant.
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 proposed
building design with its parapets should shield such mechanical equipment. This screening
requirement will also be reviewed at time of building permit submission.
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, 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
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-07003 – Page 4 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
the building facing the street. This proposal exceeds the minimum requirements by providing a
minimum seven-foot wide foundation planting area (minimum five-foot wide area). CDC
Section 3-1202.E.1 requires interior landscaping in the amount of 10% of the vehicular use area.
This site is providing 10.5% 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. The majority of the interior landscape islands adjacent to the east side of the
main ingress/egress drive aisle are less than the required width, proposed at six feet in width
inside curbing. The interior landscape island closest to the building is three-feet in width inside
curbing. The provision of additional interior landscaping in the parking row divider and in other
areas of the site compensates for this slight reduction in the width and area requirement of the
interior landscape islands.
The site is proposed to be planted with a variety of landscape material. Trees include shade trees
(live oak, dahoon holly and drake elm), accent trees (“little gem” southern magnolias, 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 include variegated flax lily, sand cord grass and swamp lily.
Minimum Code requirements for the front perimeter buffer are a continuous hedge, trees every
35 feet and sod. The proposal for this front perimeter buffer includes tiered landscaping of shrubs
and groundcovers, along with the required trees, completely covering the front perimeter buffer.
This 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 shade trees (dahoon holly and drake elm) along the east and west property
lines 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. The Landscape Plan also needs to
accurately depict the required number of accent trees. This proposal includes raising the site
elevations of the parking area pavement adjacent to the east and west property lines
approximately 18-inches above the site elevation of the perimeter buffer, requiring retaining
walls. To compensate for this increased elevation of the parking, the applicant proposes
shrubbery within the perimeter buffers 48-inches in height at time of planting in order to provide
screening of the vehicles within the parking lot. To ensure this screening requirement is fulfilled
in the future when shrubs die and need to be replaced, the increased shrub height should be
included as a condition of approval. Finally, there is an inaccurate plant count for Indian
hawthorne in the planting material table on Sheet L-1. All of these landscaping concerns should
be remedied on revised plans prior to the issuance of any permits.
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:
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-07003 – Page 5 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
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
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 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 the construction of a dumpster enclosure on the west side of the parcel just
inside the front buffer wall that will contain a maximum four-yard rolling dumpster for use by
the applicant. 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 presently is
located within the NE Coachman Road right-of-way. The proposal is to relocate this freestanding
sign to the west side of the driveway in front of the proposed four-foot high screening wall. It is
unclear whether this existing sign complies with current Code requirements. Should the CDB
approve this request, any 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 – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-07003 – Page 6 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
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 0.279 X
ISR 0.75 0.709 X
Minimum Lot Area N/A 25,000 sq. ft. X
Minimum Lot Width N/A 100 feet X
Maximum Height N/A 24.5 feet (top of flat roof) X
28 feet (to top of parapet)
Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A North: 18 feet (to pavement and X 1
dumpster enclosure)
Side: N/A East: 10 feet (to building) X 1
5 feet (to sidewalk)
5 feet (to pavement)
West: 10 feet (to building) X 1
5 feet (to sidewalk)
5 feet (to pavement and
dumpster enclosure)
Rear: N/A South: 10.1 feet (to building) X 1
Minimum Medical Clinic: 5 per 1,000 sf 24 parking spaces 2 X 1
Off-Street Parking (35 required spaces)
1
See analysis in Staff Report
2
Based on a Parking Demand Study
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-07003 – Page 7 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
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
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 – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-07003 – Page 8 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
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 meetings of September 2 and October 7, 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 0.573 acre parcel is located on the south side of NE Coachman Road, approximately 1,100
feet west of N. Belcher Road and 900 feet east of Graham Drive;
2.The subject property is currently developed with a medical clinic building (occupied by the
applicant) located on the northern portion of the site with four parking spaces north of the
building (two that are within the right-of-way) and 10 parking spaces to the rear of the
building;
3.The proposal is to completely redevelop this site by demolishing the existing building and
parking and construct a new two-story, 6,970 square-foot building at the rear of the site for a
medical clinic use, which will be occupied by the applicant, with parking located to the front
of this new building;
4.The proposal includes reductions to the front (north) setback for pavement and the dumpster
enclosure, side (east and west) setbacks for the building, sidewalks, pavement and dumpster
enclosure 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, and where the design of this site and building are similar to another
parcel owned by the same applicant that was granted Flexible Development approval by the
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-07003 – Page 9 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
Community Development Board (CDB) at its meeting of September 21, 2010 (FLD2010-
07002, 2135 NE Coachman Road);
7.Required buffer widths, the foundation landscape width and the square footage amount of
interior landscaping included with this proposal meets Code requirements;
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 24 parking spaces, which is less than the 35 required parking spaces,
but this provided number is justified by a Parking Demand Study; 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.
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 a medical clinic in the Office (O) District with a
lot area of 25,000 square feet, a lot width of 100 feet, a front (north) setback of 18 feet (to
pavement and dumpster enclosure), a side (east) setback of 10 feet (to building) and five feet (to
pavement and sidewalk), a side (west) setback of 10 feet (to building) and five feet (to pavement,
dumpster enclosure and sidewalk), a rear (south) setback of 10.1 feet (to building), a building
height of 24.5 feet (to top of flat roof) and 24 parking spaces (including no loading space),as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development
Code (CDC) Section 2-1004.B, with reductions 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 CDC Section 3-1202., with the
G
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, extending to the east and west property lines
and complying with the sight visibility triangle requirements;
2.That the dumpster enclosure be consistent with the exterior material and color of the
building;
3.That, any freestanding sign be monument-style with a maximum height of six feet and be
designed consistent with the exterior building material and color;
4.That, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the increased shrub height along the
east and west property lines as shown on the Landscape Plan be installed and maintained to
shield views of parked vehicles, acceptable to the Planning and Development Department;
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-07003 – Page 10 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-07003 2010-11-16
5.That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, landscape plans be revised for the
following:
a.Accurately indicate on the Plan and/or Proposed Plant Material Table the number
of Indian hawthorne shrubs;
b.Provision of the required number of accent trees;
c.Adequate spacing of shade trees;
6.That, prior to the issuance of any building permit, the tree removal spreadsheet be modified
to include the tree inventory numbers and tree ratings; and
7.That, prior to the issuance of any building permit, all requirements of General Engineering
and Stormwater Engineering be met.
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: ______________________________
Robert G. Tefft,
Development Review Manager
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 2147 Clinical Research (O) 2010.0x - 11.16.10
CDB - RT\NE Coachman 2147 Staff Report.doc
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-07003 – Page 11 of 11
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-05001A 2010-11-16
CDB Meeting Date: November 16, 2010
Case Numbers: FLD2010-05001A
Agenda Item: D. 5.
Owner/Applicant: SP Country Club Homes, LLC
Representative: Sean Cashen, P.E., Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc.
Addresses: 113 North Betty Lane
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Delete a condition of approval (#8 on Development Order of July
20, 2010) requiring the existing overhead utility lines which run
along N. Betty Lane to be placed underground and amend the
conditions of approval.
ORIGINAL REQUEST: Flexible Development approval for 33 attached dwellings
(townhomes) in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)
District with a lot area of 96,239 square feet, lot widths of 310 feet
(along Drew Street), 310 feet (along Fredrica Avenue) and 310 feet
(along Betty Lane), front (north) setbacks of 15 feet (to building)
and five feet (to pavement and wall) where 10 feet is allowable but
may be varied based on the Flexibility criteria, front (east) setbacks
of 15 feet (to building) and five feet (to wall) where 10 feet is
allowable but may be varied based on the Flexibility criteria, front
(west) setbacks of 20.33 feet (to building) and 10.07 feet (to wall)
where 10 feet is allowable but may be varied based on the
Flexibility criteria, a side (south) setback of 1.36 feet (to pavement
and wall) where zero feet is allowable, a building height of 25 feet
(to midpoint of roof) and 78 parking spaces as a Residential Infill
Project under the provisions of Community Development Code
Section 2.404.F, as well as reductions landscape buffers from 15
feet to seven feet (north), from 10 feet to seven feet (east), and from
10 feet to 1.36 feet (south) as part of a Comprehensive Landscape
Program under the provisions of Community Development Code
Section 3-1202.G.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
At its meeting of July 20, 2010, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved the above
referenced request, subject to the following conditions:
1.That, prior to the submission for a site development building permit, a Release of Unity of
Title and Minor Lot Adjustment application for the division of the original Verizon property
be submitted to and approved by the Planning and Development Department;
2.That, prior to the issuance of any building permit, an outfall separate from the stormwater
collection system shall be provided for Pond #1;
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-05001A – Page 1 of 3
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-05001A 2010-11-16
3.That, prior to the issuance of any building permit, a subdivision plat for the project shall be
recorded;
4.That, prior to the issuance of any building permit, the easternmost 10 feet of the 20 foot
right-of-way easement on the subject property along Betty Lane be vacated;
5.That, prior to the issuance of any building permit, additional pedestrian accesses be provided
to the north of the building at the southeast corner and to the north of the three-unit building
on the west side of the site;
6.That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, any applicable Public Art and Design
Impact Fee be paid;
7.That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, all Parks and Recreation fees be paid;
8.That, prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, the existing overhead utility
lines which run along N. Betty Lane be placed underground;
9.That, prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, the relocation of the existing
overhead utilities serving 22 N. Fredrica Avenue be done in a manner and location
acceptable to, and at no expense to, that property owner;
10.That, prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, all utility and communication
lines be placed underground and electric panels and boxes be painted the same color as the
building; and
11.That the final design and color of the building is consistent with the plans approved by the
CDB.
Subsequent to this approval, the applicant met with representatives of Progress Energy to discuss
the condition of approval #8, the undergrounding of the overhead utilities along N. Betty Lane.
The result of the meeting was that it was determined to be impracticable to underground the
utilities along N. Betty Lane based upon the following reasons:
?The existing power on the overhead lines is 3-phase power. Typical distribution lines have
single-phase power, but this existing 3-phase power connects to the Verizon building to the
south. Undergrounding would require separate distribution lines for both single-phase and 3-
phase power.
?Removing the poles would also result in the elimination of the street lights that are attached
to the poles.
?In order to provide underground service to the residences on the west side of N. Betty Lane,
the lines would need to be directionally bored under the street and carefully located to avoid
the existing gas main and water line which would be costly.
?Once the service lines are undergrounded they will be routed to private property to connect to
the homes. This would require an easement for each home. Further, the meter cans for each
of these homes would have to be upgraded to current requirements and there is the possibility
that the individual homeowners would have to upgrade the entire electrical wiring.
Based upon the above, the applicant has requested to delete condition of approval #8 requiring
the undergrounding of utilities along N. Betty Lane.
RECOMMENDATION:
This request has been found to have no impact upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law
set forth with the original approval granted by the CDB. Moreover, the original condition of
approval requiring the undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities associated with the
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-05001A – Page 2 of 3
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-05001A 2010-11-16
development proposal has been found to be impracticable, and therefore, pursuant to Community
Development Code Section 3-912, need not be installed underground.
APPROVAL
Therefore, the Planning and Development Department recommends of the request
to eliminate condition of approval #8 on the Development Order of July 20, 2010, requiring the
existing overhead utility lines which run along N. Betty Lane to be placed underground.
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: ______________________________
A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-05001A – Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09026 2010-11-16
CDB Meeting Date: November 16, 2010
Case Numbers: FLD2010-09026
Agenda Item: C.4.
Owner/Applicant: Highland Glen of Clearwater Home Owners Association, Inc.
Representative: Karen Todd, President and Michael J. Palmer
Addresses: 2043 N Highland Ave.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development application to permit the construction of six
additional off-street parking spaces for an existing 66-unit attached
dwelling development in the Medium High Density Residential
(MHDR) District with a front setback of 7.45 feet where 10 feet is
allowable as a Residential Infill Project as per Community
Development Code Section 2-404.F and a reduction of the front
landscape buffer from 15 feet to 7.45 feet as part of a Comprehensive
Landscape Program as per Community Development Code Section 3-
1202.G.
CURRENT ZONING Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District
AND LAND USE PLAN Residential High (RH)
CATEGORY:
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Attached Dwellings
Proposed Use: Attached Dwellings
EXISTING
SURROUNDING North: High Density Residential (HDR) District
ZONING AND USES: Attached Dwellings
South: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District
Detached Dwellings
East: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District
Detached Dwellings
West: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District
Detached Dwellings
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 4.4 acre site is located on the east side of North Highland Avenue between Union Street and
Sunset Point Road.
th
At it’s meeting on August 4 2005, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved the
preliminary plat (PLT2005-00014) for Highland Glen, which created 66 attached dwelling
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09026 – Page 1 of 6
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09026 2010-11-16
(townhome) lots and common areas. The site was developed under minimum standards through
building permits.
The property is compromised of 66 units with 2 tandem parking spaces per unit (one driveway,
one garage). There are no guest or handicap parking spaces in the development. Families with
more than two cars have no additional parking. This has led to parking on the 24 foot wide street,
which is the minimum width for two way traffic. The street is not wide enough to accommodate
both on-street parking and two-way traffic. This has been a continual concern for fire and
ambulance services as their path has been blocked by parked cars resulting in lengthened
response time.
Development Proposal:
The proposal is to construct 6 additional off-street parking spaces. A single parking space is
proposed at the north entrance on the private property directly to the south of Bowmore Drive.
The property owner has agreed to the addition of this parking space and entered into a recorded
parking easement and shared parking agreement. The proposed parking space will be three feet
longer than the regularly required 18 feet, a total of 21 feet in length. This additional length is to
keep cars parked in the proposed space out of the site visibility triangle. The extended parking
space also serves to prevent larger vehicles from blocking the fire hydrant which is at the north
east corner of the proposed parking space. This has been found to be acceptable to both the Fire
Department and Traffic Engineering. A reduction from the required front setback of 25 feet to
7.54 feet is necessary to accommodate this parking space. The parking space will be screened
with existing hedges and trees.
A single handicap parking space is proposed at the south entrance on the HOA owned property
directly to the north of Linkwood Drive. This handicap parking space will connect directly to a
public walkway, and will be the only handicap parking space in the development.
Four parking spaces are proposed at the south entrance directly to the west of Linkwood Drive.
The proposed parking spaces will result in the relocation of a fire hydrant and the removal and
relocation of a magnolia tree that will be replaced with two accent trees. A reduction from the
required front setback of 15 feet to 7.95 feet is necessary to accommodate these parking spaces.
The parking spaces as well as a guardrail will be screened with hedges and two accent trees.
Additional groundcover landscaping will also be installed between the two retaining walls in this
area.
Aside from the addition of the six off-street parking spaces there will be no changes to the
existing development. As such, there will be no impact on density, minimum lot size/area or
maximum building height. The development proposals compliance with the remaining applicable
development standards of the Community Development Code (CDC) is discussed below.
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to CDC Section 2-401.1, the maximum allowable ISR
is 0.85. The existing ISR is 0.537 and the proposed ISR is 0.544, which is consistent with Code
provisions.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-404 for Residential Infill Redevelopment
Projects, the minimum front setback can range between 10 – 25 feet, but may be varied based
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09026 – Page 2 of 6
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09026 2010-11-16
upon the Flexibility Criteria. The proposal includes a reduction to the front (west) setback to 7.45
feet (to pavement).
The front (west) setback (to pavement) does not meet the development standard; however that
standard may be varied based on the benefits to the community character and the immediate
vicinity. Staff concurs that the reduced setbacks benefit the community character and the
immediate vicinity as the parking is needed to resolve an emergency service and community
dilemma. The parking will be screened and will have an attractive appearance and enhanced
landscape design.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the
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 single parking space at the north entrance is partially within the site visibility
triangle. The parking space is longer than the standard 18 feet so that vehicles may park outside
of the site visibility triangle. Traffic Engineering is in agreement with the extended parking
space. All landscaping within the site visibility triangle will be maintained at 30 inches in height.
Utilities: The proposed single space at the north entrance will be very close to an existing fire
hydrant. The proposed space is 3 feet longer than required (21 feet total) so that a parked vehicle
will not block the use of the fire hydrant. Also, the four proposed parking spaces at the south
entrance will result in the relocation of an existing fire hydrant. The Fire Department has agreed
to both of the items.
Landscaping: This site currently meets landscape requirements. With the proposed reduction in
front setbacks the required landscape buffer will also be reduced. Pursuant to CDC Section 3-
1202.D.1, this site is required a 15-foot wide landscape buffer along Highland Avenue. The
proposal includes a 7 foot wide landscape buffer along Highland Avenue with continuous hedges
and one tree every 35 feet.
The landscape buffers include trees such as red bud, winged elm and shrubs such as viburmum
and groundcover such as sweet potato vine.
As part of the Comprehensive Landscape Program the applicant has proposed to buffer the
proposed parking spaces with shrubs and trees. The four parking spaces will have sweet potato
vine between the retaining walls facing Highland Avenue.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.E.1. the proposed vehicular area is greater than 4,000 square
feet and is not required to have interior island landscaping. The proposed parking spaces will be
buffered with hedges and trees.
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:
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09026 – Page 3 of 6
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09026 2010-11-16
Consistent Inconsistent
1. Architectural theme:
a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program shall be designed as a X
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 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.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues.
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Tables 2-404:
Standard Existing/Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
Density 30 dwelling units per acre 66 dwelling units X
Maximum ISR 0.85 0.54 X
Minimum Lot Area 15,000 sq. ft. 191,1664 sq. ft. X
Minimum 150 feet Highland Ave. 276 feet X
Lot Width
Minimum Setbacks Front: 10 – 15 feet West: 7.54 feet (to pavement) X 1
Side: 0 – 10 feet
North 15 feet (to building) X
South 20 feet (to building) X
Rear: 10-15 feet
East: 15 feet (to pavement/building) X
Minimum 2.0 spaces per unit 6 additional parking spaces X
Off-Street Parking (66 parking spaces) 2.09 parking spaces per unit
Total of 138 parking spaces
1
See analysis in Staff Report
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-404.F
(Residential Infill Project):
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09026 – Page 4 of 6
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09026 2010-11-16
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is X
otherwise impractical without deviations from one or more of the following:
intensity or other development standards.
2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill X
project will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties.
3. The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in the district. X
4. The uses within the residential infill project are compatible with adjacent land uses. X
5. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill X
project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
6. The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and function X
which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel
proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height, off-street parking, access X
or other development standards are justified by the benefits to community character
and the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of
Clearwater as a whole.
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the attached dwelling use 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 October 7, 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 4.4 acre site is located on the east side of Highland Avenue;
2.That the subject property is located within the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)
District and the Residential High (RH) Land Use Plan category;
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09026 – Page 5 of 6
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09026 2010-11-16
3.The subject property is currently developed as a 66 unit attached dwelling (townhome)
development with 132 tandem parking spaces;
4.The applicant proposes to construct 6 additional parking spaces;
5.The proposal includes a reduction to the front (west) setback from 10 feet to 7.54 feet (to
pavement);
6.The proposal includes a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer on Highland Avenue
from 15 feet to 7.54 feet and;
7.There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with 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 Table 2-401.1 of the
Community Development Code;
2.That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-
404.F. of the Community Development Code;
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; and
4.The development proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Landscape Program criteria
as per Section 3-1202.G of Community Development Code.
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends of
the
Flexible Development application to permit the construction of six additional off-street parking
spaces for an existing 66-unit attached dwelling development in the Medium High Density Residential
(MHDR) District with a front setback of 7.45 feet where 10 feet is allowable as a Residential Infill Project
as per Community Development Code Section 2-404.F and a reduction of the front landscape buffer from
15 feet to 7.45 feet as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program as per Community Development
Code Section 3-1202.G.with the following condition:
Condition of Approval:
1. That all sidewalks shall be a minimum 6-inches thick, 3,000 psi concrete with fiber mesh and
welded wire mesh where vehicles will be driving over sidewalks, and that a note to this effect
will be provided on the proposed plans.
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: ______________________________
Ellen Crandall, Planner II
: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map; and Photographs
ATTACHMENTS
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09026 – Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08002 2010-11-16
CDB Meeting Date: November 16, 2010
Case Numbers: FLD2010-08002
Agenda Item: C. 2.
Owner/Applicant: Florida Spine Properties, LLC
Representative: Gary Young, 2 Young Architects, Inc.
Addresses: 2230 Drew Street
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development Application to permit a building addition of
1,371 square feet to an existing medical clinic in the Office (O)
District with a lot area of 25,662 square feet, a lot width of 183 feet
(along Drew Street), a front (south) setback of 8.7 feet (to existing
pavement) and 16.75 feet (to existing building), a side (east) setback
of zero feet (to existing pavement) and 10 feet (to existing building),
a side (west) setback of five feet (to existing pavement) and 118.33
feet (to existing building), a rear (north) setback of seven feet (to
existing pavement) and 17 feet (to existing building), a building
height of 27 feet (to top of flat roof), and 32 parking spaces as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions
of Community Development Code Section 2-1004.B., with a
reduction to the south perimeter landscape buffer from 15 feet to 1.5
feet, a reduction to the north perimeter landscape buffer from 12 feet
to seven feet, a reduction to the east perimeter landscape buffer from
five feet to zero feet, a reduction to the interior landscape
requirements from 10 percent to eight percent, 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 and a reduction to the
foundation landscape requirement from five feet to zero feet as a
Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of
Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G.
CURRENT ZONING: Office (O) District
CURRENT LAND USE Residential/Office General (R/OG)
PLAN CATEGORY:
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Medical Clinic
Proposed Use: Medical Clinic
EXISTING North: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District
SURROUNDING Detached Dwellings
ZONING AND USES: South: Institutional (I) District
Place of Worship
East: Commercial (C) District
Medical Clinic
West: Commercial (C) District
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-08002 – Page 1 of 8
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08002 2010-11-16
Automobile Service Station
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 0.59 acre site is located on the north side of Drew Street approximately 330 feet east of the
intersection of Belcher Road and Drew Street. The existing 6,943 square foot, two-story structure,
occupying the site is currently vacant due to a major fire in April 2010. This structure is one of
three separate buildings that Florida Spine Institute operates. Florida Spine Institute has been in
business at the subject location since 1990.
To the west of the subject property is an automobile service station (7 Eleven). Detached
dwellings exist to the rear (north) of the subject site and to the east are related offices for the
Florida Spine Institute. Located in the Institutional (I) District across the street is Skycrest
Baptist Church and School.
Development Proposal:
On August 2, 2010, a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment application was submitted for the
subject property due to the existing setbacks not meeting Code provisions. The application
proposes to permit a second floor addition of 1,371 square feet to an existing medical clinic
within the existing footprint. The addition is designed to complement the existing structure and
break the visual impact of the building. The portion of the building with two-story walls is
punctured with a series of open fenestration which adds interest on the wall. The building will be
finished with stucco with white aluminum coping at the roof line. The structure will be 27 feet in
height to the top of the flat roof.
The off-street parking area will remain unchanged with the exception of the restriping of some
parking spaces, the relocation of the refuse dumpster and handicap accessibility modifications to
a walkway.
As there will be no modifications to the existing site improvements, there will be no impact upon
the I.S.R., minimum lot area/size, maximum building height and/or minimum setback
development standards with this proposal. The development proposal’s compliance with the
applicable development standards of the Community Development Code (CDC) is discussed
below.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules for the Residential/Office
General (R/OG) land use category and CDC Section 2-1001.1, the maximum allowable FAR is
0.50. The proposed medical clinic will have a FAR of 0.32.
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules for the R/OG land use
category and CDC Section 2-1001.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.75. The proposed ISR is
0.72, which is consistent with the 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, the minimum lot area for a medical clinic use is 20,000 square feet. Pursuant to the
same Table, the minimum lot width is 100 feet. The lot size is 25,662 square feet and the lot
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-08002 – Page 2 of 8
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08002 2010-11-16
width along Drew Street is 183 feet, both of which are consistent with the Code provisions for
medical clinics.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, there are no minimum setbacks required for
a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, the front
setback for a medical clinic use ranges between 15 - 35 feet, the side setbacks range between 10
– 20 feet and the rear setback ranges between 10 – 20 feet. The existing setbacks include a front
(south) setback of 8.7 feet (to existing pavement) and 16.75 feet (to existing building), a side (east)
setback of zero feet (to existing pavement) and 10 feet (to existing building), a side (west) setback
of five feet (to existing pavement) and 118.33 feet (to existing building), a rear (north) setback of
seven feet (to existing pavement) and 17 feet (to existing building). While all of the existing
setbacks do not meet the criteria of CDC Section 2-1004; they are consistent with the
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment provisions. As mentioned previously there will be no
modifications to the existing site improvements and the building addition is on the second floor
within the existing footprint, therefore there will be no impact to existing setbacks.
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 a medical clinic use can range from 30 – 50 feet. The height of the existing
building is 27 feet (to top of flat roof). The proposal is consistent with this Code provision.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, the minimum required parking for
a medical clinic is five parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. As such, 42
parking spaces are required. The site has 32 parking spaces. The applicant is currently leasing 10
parking spaces across the street at Skycrest Baptist Church. Pursuant to CDC Section 4-1404.A
all required off-street parking spaces shall be located within 600 feet of the principal use. In this
case the off-street parking spaces are located within approximately 100 feet of the medical clinic.
The applicant has agreed to provide a parking agreement, with the City as a party, with Skycrest
Baptist church for these parking spaces. The church currently has an excess of 41 spaces above
code requirements. Staff has found this proposal acceptable.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the
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. No structures or landscaping is proposed within the site triangles.
Solid Waste: The proposal will utilize a refuse dumpster located at the southwestern corner of
the site. The dumpster will be screened from the right-of-way with a white PVC fence. The
proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City’s Solid Waste Department.
Landscaping: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D.1, this site is required a 15-foot wide landscape
buffer along Drew Street, a five foot wide landscape buffer along both the western and eastern
property lines and a rear (north) landscape buffer width of 12 feet. As no parking lot
modifications are proposed or possible, the applicant has proposed to install additional
landscaping in the existing buffers. The existing landscaped buffer along Drew Street is only two
feet wide in some areas due to a walled retention pond. The applicant has proposed to install
some plant material in parts of the retention area to give the appearance of wider landscape
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-08002 – Page 3 of 8
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08002 2010-11-16
buffer along Drew Street. The western property line has the required five foot wide landscape
buffer while the eastern buffer is 10 feet wide with the exception of a patio on the property line
near the rear of the parcel. The proposal provides landscape material for the entire ten foot wide
area on the east property line. The existing rear (north) landscape buffer is seven feet wide and
contains five large oaks trees and a six foot high privacy fence.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.E.2, foundation planting shall be provided for 100 percent of
the building façade along a street right-of-way. A minimum five foot wide landscaped area shall
be provided along the front façade facing Drew Street. Again, as no parking lot modifications
can take place and the building footprint is not changing, the applicant has requested a waiver to
the foundation landscape requirements.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.E.1, ten percent of the vehicular use area must contain
landscape islands a minimum of 150 square feet in size. While the existing site provides eight
percent of the vehicular use area with landscape islands, some are not 150 square feet in size or
eight feet wide from back of curb to back of curb.
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
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
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.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues.
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-08002 – Page 4 of 8
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08002 2010-11-16
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards and
criteria as per CDC Sections 2-1001.1 and 2-1004:
Standard Existing / Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
F.A.R. 0.50 0.32 X
I.S.R. 0.75 0.72 X
Minimum Lot Area 20,000 square feet 25,662 square feet X
Minimum Lot Width 100 feet 183 feet X
Maximum Building Height 25 - 50 feet 27 feet (to top of flat roof) X
Minimum Setbacks Front: 15 - 35 feet South: 16.5 feet (to building) X
8.7 feet (to pavement)
Side: 10 - 20 feet East: 10 feet (to building) X
Zero feet (to pavement)
West: 118.3 feet (to building) X
5 feet (to pavement)
Rear: 10 - 20 feet North: 17 feet (to building) X
7 feet (to pavement)
Minimum Off-Street Parking 5 spaces/1,000 sf GFA 42 parking spaces X
(42 parking spaces)
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-08002 – Page 5 of 8
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08002 2010-11-16
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
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 – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-08002 – Page 6 of 8
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08002 2010-11-16
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the overnight accommodation use 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 October 7, 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.That the 0.59 acre site is located on the north side of Drew Street approximately 330 feet east
of the intersection of Belcher Road and Drew Street;
2.That the subject property is located within the Office (O) District and the Residential/Office
General (R/OG) Land Use Plan category;
3.That the property is presently used as a medical clinic;
4.The applicant, Florida Spine Care Properties, LLC, proposes to expand the medical clinic on
the subject property;
5.That the proposal has no impact upon the following development standards: I.S.R., minimum
lot area/size, setbacks and maximum building height, as they presently exist;
6.The proposal includes 32 parking spaces on site;
7.The proposal includes an off-site parking agreement with Skycrest Baptist Church for 10
parking spaces; and
8.There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with 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 Table 2-1001.1 of the
Community Development Code;
2.That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-
1004.B;
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-08002 – Page 7 of 8
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08002 2010-11-16
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; and
4.The development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 3-1202.G
of Community Development Code.
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends of
the Flexible Development Application to permit a building addition of 1,371 square feet to an
existing medical clinic in the Office (O) District with a lot area of 25,662 square feet, a lot width
of 183 feet (along Drew Street), a front (south) setback of 8.7 feet (to existing pavement) and
16.75 feet (to existing building), a side (east) setback of zero feet (to existing pavement) and 10
feet (to existing building), a side (west) setback of five feet (to existing pavement) and 118.33
feet (to existing building), a rear (north) setback of seven feet (to existing pavement) and 17 feet
(to existing building), a building height of 27 feet (to top of flat roof), and 32 parking spaces as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development
Code Section 2-1004.B., with a reduction to the south perimeter landscape buffer from 15 feet to
1.5 feet, a reduction to the north perimeter landscape buffer from 12 feet to seven feet, a
reduction to the east perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to zero feet, a reduction to the
interior landscape requirements from 10 percent to eight percent, 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 and a reduction to the foundation landscape requirement from five feet to zero feet 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, all landscaping be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy;
2.That any electric and communication panels, boxes, and meters located on the exterior of the
buildings be painted the same color as the building;
3.That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, an off-site parking agreement will
need to be entered into between the owners of the respective properties and the City, and be
recorded in the public records of Pinellas County;
4.That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the 10 leased parking spaces be
clearly identified as such on the Skycrest Baptist Church property;
5.That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the existing storage shed on the
parking lot be removed; and
6.That, all signage be permitted separately.
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: ______________________________
A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III
: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map; and Photographs
ATTACHMENTS
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-08002 – Page 8 of 8
T ° ???Jvv1o ?'?uM -/,P.;,o 10 -- 0 80 0;?- ao 10 - l -- 16
Clearwater
U
To: Community Development Board Members
From: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III ! '2L
Date: November 16, 2010
RE: Amended Condition of Approval for Case FLD2010-08002 (2230 Drew Street)
An amended condition of approval has been proposed for the above referenced case and the
applicant and owner are accepting of the amended condition of approval as follows:
Condition # 4 shall read - That prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the 10 leased off-
site parking spaces be clearly identified as such, be for exclusive use of employees and all on-
site parking spaces be reserved, identified and managed for patients and physicians only.
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09027 2010-11-16
CDB Meeting Date: November 16, 2010
Case Numbers: FLD2010-09027
Agenda Item: C. 3.
Owner/Applicant: Nemishawn, Inc
Representative: Kevin Bessolo, Bessolo Design Group, Inc.
Addresses: 1315 Cleveland Street
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development Application to permit a governmental use
(WorkNet Pinellas and Coordinated Child Care), in the Commercial
(C) District within the East Gateway Character District with a lot
area of 91,093 square feet, a lot width of 250 feet (along Cleveland
Street), 364 feet (along Lady Mary Drive), 363 feet (along Fredrica
Drive, a front (north) setback of 17.5 feet(to existing building), a
front (west) setback of 10 feet (to existing pavement) and 83.5 feet
(to existing building), a front (east) setback of 10 feet (to existing
pavement) and 85.2 feet (to existing building), a side (south) setback
of 15 feet (to existing pavement) and 155.4 feet (to existing
building), a building height of 23 feet (to midpoint of roof) and 111
parking spaces as Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project
under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 2-
704.C.
CURRENT ZONING: Commercial (C) District
CURRENT LAND USE Commercial General (CG)
PLAN CATEGORY:
DOWNTOWN
REDEVELOPMENT
PLAN CHARACTER East Gateway
DISTRICT:
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Vacant
Proposed Use: Governmental Use
EXISTING North: Commercial (C) District
SURROUNDING
Overnight Accommodations
ZONING AND USES:
South: Commercial (C) District
Attached Dwellings
East: Commercial (C) District
Vehicle Service
West: Downtown (D) District
Attached Dwellings
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09027 – Page 1 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09027 2010-11-16
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 2.09 acre site is located on the south side of Cleveland Street between Fredrica Drive and
Lady Mary Drive, which is located in the East Gateway Character District of Downtown. The
East Gateway is characterized by a mixed land use pattern of residential housing interspersed with
pockets of poorly maintained rental properties and outdated strip commercial. The East Gateway
struggles with a negative image of crime due to the location of problematic uses such as day labor
facilities, old motels and social service agencies that provide services to the homeless population.
This parcel was previously occupied by Aqua Clara Water Bottling and most recently as an office
use for Energy Utility Consultant’s which closed in 2009 after a fire gutted the interior of the
building. The building has since been made safe with the necessary interior renovations. The site
contains an existing 12,265 square foot building and 111 parking spaces.
To the north of the subject property, across Cleveland Street, is overnight accommodations
(Regal Motel). To both the south and west are attached dwellings and to the east is vehicle
service.
Development Proposal:
On September 1, 2010, a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment application was submitted for the
subject property. The impetus for the Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment application is the
fact that the existing pavement at both the front (west) and front (east) is setback only 10 feet
instead of 15 feet. Additionally the covered entry at the front (north) is setback only 17.5 feet
instead of 25 feet. The application proposes to establish a governmental use within the existing
12,265 square foot building. WorkNet Pinellas will occupy approximately two thirds of the
western portion of the building and Coordinated Child Care will occupy the remaining eastern
third of the building. WorkNet Pinellas develops strategies to target the needs of employers then
matches them to job seekers across the employment spectrum – from assisting those seeking
entry level positions into the workforce to cultivating workers to fill coveted high skill/high
demand positions. Coordinated Child Care provides resource and referral information for
families seeking subsidized childcare and offers services for preschoolers in child care who have
special needs.
The existing building and associated off-street parking area will remain unchanged with the
exception of the restriping of some parking spaces and a handicap walkway, ADA ramp
modifications and the addition of three doors and two windows.
As there will be no building additions or modifications to the existing site improvements, there
will be no impact upon the F.A.R., I.S.R., minimum lot area/size, maximum building height
and/or minimum setback development standards with this proposal.
Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan:
In addition to the Clearwater Comprehensive
Plan, the Downtown Plan is the official statement of policy regarding the Downtown and in
particular with regard to the use of land and public policies. All development of land, both public
and private, undertaken within the Downtown shall be consistent with and further the goals of
the Plan.
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09027 – Page 2 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09027 2010-11-16
The site is located within the East Gateway character district of the Clearwater Downtown
Redevelopment Plan. This being the case the proposal is governed by the Commercial (C)
District zoning with regard to intensity, density and setbacks while also having to be consistent
with the East Gateway Character District policies. This area is envisioned to be a vibrant, stable,
diverse neighborhood defined by its unique cultural base and mixed land uses. It will continue to
be developed as a low and medium density residential neighborhood supported with
neighborhood commercial and professional offices concentrated along the major corridors of
Cleveland Street, Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, Court Street and Missouri Avenue.
Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies:
A review of the Clearwater Downtown
Redevelopment Plan was conducted and the development proposal has been determined to be
consistent with the following Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies:
Vision: Downtown will be an integrated community with a mix of retail, residential, office
and recreational opportunities. The development of a variety of residential
projects to attract new residents to Downtown is critical to the success of a
revitalized Downtown.
Vision: The elimination of blighting conditions and the revitalization of the existing and
expanded CRA are critical to the future health of Downtown.
Goal 1: Downtown shall be a place that attracts people for living, employment and
recreation. The City shall encourage redevelopment that will attract residents
and visitors to Downtown as a recreation, entertainment and shopping
destination.
Objective 1E: A variety of businesses are encouraged to relocate and expand in Downtown to
provide a stable employment center, as well as employment opportunities for
Downtown residents.
Policy 1: The design guidelines establish the quality and design features expected for
renovation, redevelopment and new construction in Downtown with which all
projects must be consistent.
East Gateway Character District Policies:
The following policies governing development
within the East Gateway character district have been reviewed and have been determined to be
applicable to the development proposal:
Policy 12: Encourage the adaptive re-use of underutilized buildings in the event
redevelopment is not feasible.
Downtown Design Guidelines:
The Downtown Design Guidelines identify both appropriate and inappropriate direction with
regard to various elements associated with new construction and renovations in the Downtown.
A review of these Guidelines within the Plan was conducted and the following applicable items
were identified:
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09027 – Page 3 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09027 2010-11-16
Block and Lot Characteristics: The Downtown Design Guidelines require the retention of the
existing street grid pattern where it contributes to an active pedestrian environment. All three
street frontages are being maintained with sidewalks to contribute to the pedestrian environment.
Vehicular Circulation/Access and Parking: The Downtown Design Guidelines require parking
lots to be as unobtrusive as possible and screened from view from rights-of-ways. The proposal
provides for a landscape screening on all three rights-of-way.
Landscaping: The Downtown Design Guidelines require plant species that are appropriate to the
space in which they will occupy with regard to water needs, growth rates, size, etc. in order to
conserve water, reduce maintenance and promote plant health. The proposal includes some
native species with appropriate maturity size to limit maintenance and conserve water.
Windows and Doors: The Downtown Design Guidelines require windows and doors that are
appropriately sized for the scale and style of the building on which they are located. As discussed
previously the only building modifications are the addition of windows and doors which have
been found to be sized for the scale and style of the existing building.
Community Development Code:
A governmental use project is subject to the relevant review
criteria of (CDC) Sections 2-701.1 and 2-704.C.
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
proposed governmental use will have a FAR of 0.13.
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules for the Commercial
General (CG) land use category and CDC Section 2-701.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.90.
The proposed ISR is 0.74, which is 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, the minimum lot area for a governmental use is 10,000 square feet. Pursuant to the
same Table, the minimum lot width is 100 feet. The lot width along Cleveland Street is 250 feet,
the lot width along Lady Mary Drive is 364 feet and the lot width along Fredrica Drive is 363
feet all of which are consistent with the Code provisions for governmental uses.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, there are no minimum setbacks required for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, the front
setback for governmental uses is 25 feet, the side setback is 10 feet and the rear setback is 20
feet. There is no rear setback as this parcel has three fronts. The existing building has setbacks of
a front (north) setback of 17.5 feet (to existing building), a front (west) setback of 10 feet (to
existing pavement) and 83.5 feet (to existing building), a front (east) setback of 10 feet (to existing
pavement) and 85.2 feet (to existing building), and a side (south) setback of 15 feet (to existing
pavement) and 155.4 feet (to existing building). While all the existing setbacks do not meet the
criteria of CDC Section 2-704; they are consistent with the Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
provisions. As mentioned previously there will be no building additions or modifications to the
existing site improvements.
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09027 – Page 4 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09027 2010-11-16
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, there is no maximum height for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, the
maximum height for a governmental use can range from 25 – 50 feet. The height of the existing
building is 23 feet (to midpoint of roof). The proposal is consistent with this Code provision.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, the minimum required parking for
governmental uses is 4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. As such, 50
parking spaces are required. The site currently has 111 parking spaces. The proposal is consistent
with this Code provision.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the
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. No structures or landscaping is proposed within the site triangles.
Solid Waste: The proposal will utilize a refuse dumpster located in the rear western area of the
parking lot. The dumpster will be screened from the right-of-way with a stucco enclosure. The
proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City’s Solid Waste Department.
Landscaping: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D.1, this site is required a 15-foot wide landscape
buffer along Cleveland Street, a 10-foot wide landscape buffer along both Lady Mary Drive and
Fredrica Avenue and a south landscape buffer width of 10 feet. The existing landscaped buffer
along Cleveland Street is 17.5 wide, the buffers along both Lady Mary Drive and Fredrica
Avenue are 10 feet wide and the south landscape buffer is 15 feet wide. The proposal provides
for replacement of any declining or missing shrubs.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.E.2, foundation planting shall be provided for 100 percent of
the building façade along a street right-of-way. A minimum five foot wide landscaped area shall
be installed along the facades and landscaped with the required trees and shrubs. The proposal
includes foundation landscaping of crape myrtles, viburnum and ground cover.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.E.1, ten percent of the vehicular use area must contain
landscape islands a minimum of 150 square feet in size. However, if the proposal includes 110
percent or more of the required parking, 12 percent of the vehicular use area must contain
landscape islands. As the applicant has provided more than 110 percent of the required parking,
14.8 percent of the vehicular use area has been proposed to be interior landscape plantings.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues.
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09027 – Page 5 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09027 2010-11-16
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards and
criteria as per CDC Sections 2-701.1 and 2-704:
Standard Existing / Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
F.A.R. 0.55 0.13 X
I.S.R. 0.90 0.74 X
Minimum Lot Area 10,000 square feet 91,093 square feet X
Minimum Lot Width 100 feet 250, 363 and 364 feet X
Maximum Building Height 25 - 50 feet 23 feet (to midpoint of roof) X
Minimum Setbacks Front: 25 feet North: 17.5 feet (to building) X
17.5 feet (to pavement)
West: 83.5 feet (to building) X
10 feet (to pavement)
East: 85.2 feet (to building) X
10 feet (to pavement)
Side: 10 feet South: 155.4 feet (to building) X
15 feet (to pavement)
Minimum Off-Street Parking 4 spaces/1,000 sf GFA 111 parking spaces X
(50 parking spaces)
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09027 – Page 6 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09027 2010-11-16
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
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 – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09027 – Page 7 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09027 2010-11-16
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the overnight accommodation use 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 October 7, 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.That, the 2.09 acre site is located on the south side of Cleveland Street between Fredrica
Drive and Lady Mary Drive;
2.That the subject property is located within the Commercial (C) District and the Commercial
General (CG) Land Use Plan category;
3.That the development proposal is subject to the requirements of the Clearwater Downtown
Redevelopment Plan as the property is located within the East Gateway Character District;
4.That, the property is presently vacant;
5.The applicant, Nemishawn, Inc., proposes to establish a governmental use on the subject
property;
6.That the proposal has no impact upon the following development standards: F.A.R., I.S.R.,
minimum lot area/size, setbacks and maximum building height, as they presently exist;
7.The proposal includes 111 parking spaces; and
8.There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with 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 district vision of the East Gateway
Character District of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan;
2.That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Table 2-701.1 of the
Community Development Code;
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09027 – Page 8 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-09027 2010-11-16
3.That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-
704.C of the Community Development Code; and
4.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 a governmental use (WorkNet Pinellas and
Coordinated Child Care), in the Commercial (C) District within the East Gateway Character
District with a lot area of 91,093 square feet, a lot width of 250 feet (along Cleveland Street),
364 feet (along Lady Mary Drive), 363 feet (along Fredrica Drive, a front (north) setback of 17.5
feet(to existing building), a front (west) setback of 10 feet (to existing pavement) and 83.5 feet
(to existing building), a front (east) setback of 10 feet (to existing pavement) and 85.2 feet (to
existing building), a side (south) setback of 15 feet (to existing pavement) and 155.4 feet (to
existing building), a building height of 23 feet (to midpoint of roof) and 111 parking spaces as
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development
Code Section 2-704.C., with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1.That, all landscaping be installed prior to the issuance of a business tax receipt;
2.That any electric and communication panels, boxes, and meters located on the exterior of the
buildings be painted the same color as the building;
3.That a building permit be obtained for the proposed windows and doors; and
4.That all signage be permitted separately.
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: ______________________________
A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III
: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map; and Photographs
ATTACHMENTS
Community Development Board – November 16, 2010
FLD2010-09027 – Page 9 of 9
Clearwater
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 November 16, 2010
DATE: November 8, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-5)
1. Case: FLD2010-05001A - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes No
2. Case: FLD2010-08002 - 2230 Drew Street
Yes x No
3. Case: FLD2010-09027 - 1315 Cleveland Street
Yes r No
4. Case: FLD2010-09026 - 2043 N. Highland Avenue
Yes X No
5. Case: FLD2010-07003 - 2147 NE Coachman Road
Yes ?C No
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties.
Signature: A at? Date: l 04 0
f.leH-4 tom- Qkre--soN
PRINT NAME
S. IPlarnniirg DepartmentlCD BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDB1201011I November 16,201W1 Cover MEMO 201O.doc
Clearwater
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 November 16, 2010
DATE: November 8, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-5)
1. Case: FLD2010-05001A - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes
No
2. Case: FLD2010-08002 - 2230 Drew Street
Yes
No
Case: FLD2010-09027 - 1315 Cleveland Street
Yes No ?x
4. Case: FLD2010-09026 - 2043 N. Highland Avenue
Yes \ No
5. Case: FLD2010-07003 - 2147 NE Coachman Road
Yes
No
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following prop
Signature: Date: 0
510 in arKer
PRINT NAME
S: IPlainioig DeparimentlC D BlAgenrlas DRC & CDBICDBI201011 ! November 16,20M 1 Cover MEMO 2010.doc
Clearwater
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 November 16, 2010
DATE: November 8, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-5)
1. Case: FLD2010-05001A - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes No
2. Case: FLD2010-08002 - 2230 Drew Street
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-09027 - 1315 Cleveland Street
Yes No
4. Case: FLD2010-09026 - 2043 N. Highland Avenue
Yes No
5. Case: FLD2010-07003 - 2147 NE Coachman Road
Yes No
I have conducted Aper1o'naNnv0'stigatiwi on the personal site visit to the following proper
S' ture: I ?n Date:
Finn1 f v
LC
PRINT NAME
S:IPlanningDepartmentlCDBlAgendas DRC& CDBICDBC0MII November 16,201W1 CoveI'MEL102010.dOc
Clearwater
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 November 16, 2010
DATE: November 8, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-5)
1. Case: FLD2010-05001 A - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes No
2. Case: FLD2010-08002 - 2230 Drew Street
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-09027 - 1315 Cleveland Street
E
Yes ' No
4. Case: FLD2010-09026 - 2043 N. Highland Avenue
?r
Yes No
5. Case: FLD2010-07003 - 2147 NE Coachman Road
Yes ' 4 No
I have conducted a nersvnal investigation on
v
Signature: Date: ?4
NAME
S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBI CDB12010111 November 16,201W1 Cover MEMO 2010.doc
Clearwater
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 November 16, 2010
DATE: November 8, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-5)
1. Case: FLD2010-05001A - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes No
2. Case: FLD2010-08002 - 2230 Drew Street
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-09027 - 1315 Cleveland Street
Yes No
4. Case: FLD2010-09026 - 2043 N. Highland Avenue
Yes No
r,_
5. Case: FLD2010-07003 - 2147 NE Coachman Road
Yes No
Sipature:
Date: \" , ,? ("I
S. IPlarnnirng Depm-uiternilC D BlAgeadas DRC & CDBICDM2010V I November 16, 20[01! Coven MEMO 20/0.doc
Clearwater
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 November 16, 2010
DATE: November 8, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-5)
1. Case: FLD2010-05001A - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes No y
2. Case: FLD2010-08002 - 2230 Drew Street
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-09027 - 13 15 Cleveland Street
Yes No 1/
4. Case: FLD2010-09026 - 2043 N. Highland Avenue
Yes No y
5. Case: FLD2010-07003 - 2147 NE Coachman Road
Yes No
I have
Signature:
on the personal site visit to the follo
Date:
w 1 ?? 1r'
PRINT NAME
S. (Planning DepartmentlCD BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDB12010111 November 16,20M 1 Cover MEMO 2010. doe