12/21/2010
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
December 21, 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 Acting/Alternate Board Member
Also Present: Gina Grimes 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 1:30 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: November 16, 2010
Member Coates moved to approve the minutes of the regular Community Development
Board meeting of November 16, 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.
C. 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: FLD2010-05001B – 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: Flexible Development Application to permit 31 attached dwellings (town-homes) in the
Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District with a front (west) setback of 15 feet (to
building) and 74 parking spaces as a Residential Infill Project under the provisions of Community
Development Code Section 2.404.F.
Community Development 2010-12-21 1
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 FLD2010-05001B 2010-12-21
See below for motion of approval.
2. Case: FLD2010-10030 – 1192 Browns Court Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: The Kimberly Home, Inc.
Agent: Patricia Stough, AIA, Patti the Architect, Inc. (1634 San Roy Drive, Dunedin, FL
34698; phone: 727-733-3769; fax: 727-733-3769; email: parch@gate.net).
Location: 0.06 acre located on the north side of Browns Court, approximately 75 feet west
of N. Missouri Avenue.
Atlas Page: 287A.
Existing Zoning: Office (O) District.
Request: Flexible Development application to permit a Residential Shelter in the Office (O)
District with a lot area of 2,640 square-feet, a lot width of 48 feet, a front (south) setback of 15.4
feet (to building and courtyard patio), a side (east) setback of 20.6 feet (to building) and 12 feet
(to courtyard patio), a side (west) setback of 3.2 feet (to building), a rear (north) setback of 3.4
feet (to building), a building height of 20.08 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof) and zero parking
spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community
Development Code (CDC) Section 2-1004.B and reductions to the west and north perimeter
landscape buffers from 10 feet to 3.2 feet and 3.4 feet respectively and to eliminate the required
hedge along the west and a portion of the north property lines, as a Comprehensive Landscape
Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Residential Shelter.
Neighborhood Associations: Skycrest Neighborhood Association and Clearwater Neighborhoods
Coalition.
Presenter: Robert G. Tefft, Development Review Manager.
See Exhibit: Staff Report FLD2010-10030 2010-12-21
Member Coates moved to approve Cases FLD2010-05001B and FLD2010-10030 on
today’s Consent Agenda based on evidence in the record, including the application(s) and the
Staff Report(s), and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the
Staff Report(s), with conditions of approval as listed. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously. Alternate Board Member Carlough did not vote.
3. Pulled from Consent Agenda
Case: FLD2010-08004 – 40 Devon Drive Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Sea Captain, a Florida General Partnership; Donald Eifert, Partner.
Agent: Steve Fowler, Fowler Associates, Architects, Inc. (1421 Court Street, Clearwater,
FL 33756; phone: 727-449-2021; fax: 727-447-5339; email: fowlerarch@aol.com).
Location: 0.829 total acre located on the north side of Devon Drive, approximately 150 feet
east of Coronado Drive.
Atlas Page: 276A.
Community Development 2010-12-21 2
Existing Zoning: Tourist (T) (0.659 acre) and Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR)
(0.17 acre) Districts.
Request: Flexible Development application (1) to permit an 85-unit overnight accommodation
use (hotel) in the Tourist (T) District with a total lot area of 36,137 square-feet (0.829 acre)
(28,733 square feet [0.659 acre] zoned Tourist District and 7,404 square-feet [0.17 acre] zoned
Low Medium Density Residential District), a lot width of 174.94 feet, a front (south) setback of
6.2 feet (to building) and 8.5 feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback of five feet (to building)
and zero feet (to sidewalk), a rear (north) setback of 18.5 feet (to building) and zero feet (to
patio decking), a building height of 75.25 feet (to top of roof deck) and 93 parking spaces, as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of CDC Section 2-803.C, and
approval of a two-year development order; and (2) increase the permitted density by the
allocation of 53 overnight accommodation units from the Hotel Density Reserve created
pursuant to Beach by Design. (Related to DVA2010-08001).
Proposed Use: Overnight accommodation use (hotel) of a total of 85 rooms (128.98 rooms/acre
on the acreage zoned Tourist (T) District, including the allocation of 53 units from the Hotel
Density Reserve), approximately 7,986 square-feet of accessory uses to the hotel and a height
of 75.25 feet (to top of roof deck).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association and Clearwater Neighborhoods
Coalition.
Presenter: Robert G. Tefft, Development Review Manager.
See Exhibit: Staff Report FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
Member Barker declared a conflict of interest
Concern was expressed the parking study’s projection of staff parking needs is
underestimated and forecast that 80% of banquet and meeting room event participants will be
hotel guests is unreasonable. It was stated a significant potential exists for event parking to
overflow eastward into a residential neighborhood.
Member Coates moved to accept Al Carrier as an expert witness in the field of
engineering. The motion was duly seconded. Members Coates, Dame, DiPolito, Adelson,
Hinrichs, Chair Fritsch and Acting Member Carlough voted “Aye”; Member Barker abstained.
Motion carried unanimously.
Applicant representative Al Carrier said the property owner had projected only half of
hotel patrons would use the parking garage. He said the traffic study was based on hotel owner
input, information gathered from four nearby properties, including the Hyatt and Shepherds, and
previous traffic studies in Clearwater. He said the request is consistent with previous approvals
in the City. Applicant representative Steve Fowler said the hotel attracts families and is not
business oriented. He said the banquet room will provide continental breakfast and afternoon
tea to guests only. The meeting room is small and intended for use by long term guests.
Member Coates moved to approve Case FLD2010-08004 based on the evidence and
testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today’s hearing, and hereby
adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report with conditions of
approval as listed. Members Coates, Dame, DiPolito, Adelson, Hinrichs, Chair Fritsch and
Acting Member Carlough voted “Aye”; Member Barker abstained. Motion carried unanimously.
Community Development 2010-12-21 3
4. Pulled from Consent Agenda
Case: DVA2010-08001 - 40 Devon Drive Level Three Application
Owner/Applicant: Sea Captain, a Florida General Partnership; Donald Eifert, Partner.
Agent: Steve Fowler, Fowler Associates, Architects, Inc. (1421 Court Street, Clearwater,
FL 33756; phone: 727-449-2021; fax: 727-447-5339; email: fowlerarch(a)-aol.com).
Location: 0.829 total acre located on the north side of Devon Drive, approximately 150 feet
east of Coronado Drive.
Atlas Page: 276A.
Existing Zoning: Tourist (T) (0.659 acre) and Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR)
(0.17 acre) Districts.
Request: Review of, and recommendation to the City Council, of a Development Agreement
between Sea Captain, a Florida General Partnership (the property owner) and the City of
Clearwater, providing for the allocation of 53 units from the Hotel Density Reserve established in
Beach by Design. (Related to FLD2010-08004).
Proposed Use: Overnight accommodation use (hotel) of a total of 85 rooms (128.98 rooms/acre
on the acreage zoned Tourist (T) District, including the allocation of 53 units from the Hotel
Density Reserve), approximately 7,986 square-feet of accessory uses to the hotel and a height
of 75.25 feet (to top of roof deck).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association and Clearwater Neighborhoods
Coalition.
Presenter: Robert G. Tefft, Development Review Manager.
See Exhibit: Staff Report DVA2010-08001 2010-12-21
Member Barker declared a conflict of interest
Member Coates moved to recommend approval of Case DVA2010-08001 based on the
evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today's hearing,
and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report. The
motion was duly seconded. Members Coates, Dame, DiPolito, Adelson, Hinrichs, Chair Fritsch
and Acting Member Carlough voted "Aye"; Member Barker abstained. Motion carried
unanimously
D. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 1:57 p.m
q " "
Chair
Community Development Board
Community Development 2010-12-21 4
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-05001B 2010-12-21
CDB Meeting Date: December 21, 2010
Case Numbers: FLD2010-05001B
Agenda Item: C.3.
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: Flexible Development Application to permit 31 attached dwellings
(townhomes) in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District
with a front (west) setback of 15 feet (to building) and 74 parking spaces
as a Residential Infill Project under the provisions of Community
Development Code Section 2-404.F.
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 findings of fact, conclusions of law and conditions of
approval:
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-05001B – Page 1 of 4
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-05001B 2010-12-21
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 2.21 acre site is located on the south side of Drew Street between Fredrica Avenue and
Betty Lane;
2.That the subject property is located within the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)
District and the Residential High (RH) 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.The property was previously used as an accessory parking lot for the Verizon building to the
south;
5.The applicant, SP Country Club Homes, LLC, proposes to redevelop the subject property
with 33 attached dwelling units;
6.The structure is proposed at a height of 25 feet to midpoint of the roof;
7.The proposal includes a reduction to the front (north) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to
pavement and wall), a reduction to the front (east) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to wall),
and a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to 1.36 feet (to pavement and wall);
8.The proposal includes a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer on Drew Street from 15
feet to seven feet, on Fredrica Avenue from 10 feet to seven feet and on the south side from
10 feet to 1.36 feet;
9.The proposal includes 78 parking spaces; and
10.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 2-401.1 of the
Community Development Code;
3.That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-
404.F;
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; and
5.The development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 3-1202.G
of Community Development Code.
Conditions of Approval:
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 – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-05001B – Page 2 of 4
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-05001B 2010-12-21
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 requested to delete condition of approval #8 and at its
meeting of November 16, 2010, the CDB approved this request. The applicant has now requested
to reduce the front (west) setback from the previously approved 20.33 feet (to building) to 15
feet (to building). Additionally, the application proposes to reduce the number of attached
dwelling units from 33 units to 31 units and reduce the required parking from 78 spaces to 74
spaces. The proposed parking remains at 2.30 spaces per unit. Previously the CDB approved a
front (east) setback of 15 feet (to building) and a front (north) setback of 15 feet (to building).
The applicant is requesting the reduction in the front (west) setback from 20.33 feet (to building)
to 15 feet (to building) to allow for a larger pool and pavilion amenity center.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based upon the information/justification provided by the applicant, this request has been found
to be consistent with the other front setback reductions previously approved and will not have a
negative impact on the flexibility criteria or standards. The above conclusions of law remain
unchanged and conditions of approval remain unchanged other than the deletion of condition #8.
The above findings of fact have been amended as follows:
5.The applicant, SP Country Club Homes, LLC, proposes to redevelop the subject property
with 33 31 attached dwelling units; and
9.The proposal includes 78 74 parking spaces.
APPROVAL
Therefore, the Planning and Development Department recommends of the request
to permit 31 attached dwellings (townhomes) in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)
District with a front (west) setback of 15 feet (to building) and 74 parking spaces as a Residential
Infill Project under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 2-404.F.
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-05001B – Page 3 of 4
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-05001B 2010-12-21
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: ______________________________
A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-05001B – Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-10030 2010-12-21
CDB Meeting Date: December 21, 2010
Case Number: FLD2010-10030
Agenda Item: C.1.
Owner/ Applicant: The Kimberly Home, Inc.
Representative: Patricia Stough, AIA, Patti the Architect, Inc.
Address: 1192 Browns Court
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development application to permit a Residential Shelter
in the Office (O) District with a lot area of 2,640 square feet, a lot
width of 48 feet, a front (south) setback of 15.4 feet (to building
and courtyard patio), a side (east) setback of 20.6 feet (to building)
and 12 feet (to courtyard patio), a side (west) setback of 3.2 feet (to
building), a rear (north) setback of 3.4 feet (to building), a building
height of 20.08 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof) and zero parking
spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under
the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section
2-1004.B and reductions to the west and north perimeter landscape
buffers from 10 feet to 3.2 feet and 3.4 feet respectively and to
eliminate the required hedge along the west and a portion of the
north property lines, 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: Attached dwellings (two units)
Proposed Use: Residential Shelter (two units)
EXISTING North: Office (O) District
SURROUNDING
Detached dwelling
ZONING AND USES:
South: Office (O) District
Vacant and Attached dwellings
East: Office (O) District
Attached dwellings
West: Office (O) District
Detached dwelling
ANALYSIS:
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-10030 – Page 1 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-10030 2010-12-21
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 0.06 acre parcel is located on the north side of Browns Court, approximately 75 feet west of
N. Missouri Avenue. The subject property is currently developed with a two-unit, two-story
attached dwelling. The site has 48 feet of frontage along Browns Court.
Browns Court is a narrow public right-of-way that dead ends with a “cul-de-sac” that does not
meet current Code requirements. The Kimberly Home Inc. has been acquiring properties on
Browns Court to further their mission of providing housing to young, pregnant women in need of
help. All of the surrounding properties are zoned Office (O) District. The property to the north
(118 N. Missouri Avenue) is not owned by the applicant and is developed with a detached
dwelling. The property to the south (110 N. Missouri Avenue) is not owned by the applicant and
is developed with a duplex attached dwelling. The property to the east (114 N. Missouri Avenue)
is also not owned by the applicant and is developed with a detached dwelling. The property
adjacently to the west (1190 Browns Court), as well as the properties at the end of the cul-de-sac,
are owned by the applicant and are developed with residential shelters and transitional housing
for similar housing to that proposed under this application. The Kimberly Home offices and
counseling center is located to the north of the subject property at 1189 NE Coachman Road. The
property at the intersection of N. Missouri Avenue, NE Coachman Road and Drew Street is
owned by the City of Clearwater and is developed as open space and a parking area for The
Kimberly Home.
Development Proposal:
The subject property was acquired by the applicant in May 2010 and will be an extension of
residential services provided by The Kimberly Home on Browns Court and NE Cleveland Street.
The proposed Residential Shelter is not a use listed as permitted within the Office (O) District;
however, it is an Institutional use permitted by the underlying Residential/Office General (R/OG)
land use category. This use may be permitted within the Office District as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project due to this use allowance under the R/OG land use category. The
proposed use is compatible with the other residential uses along Browns Court. Renovation of
this building and site will expand the provision of affordable housing for pregnant women
seeking the services of The Kimberly Home and will upgrade the appearance of this property
within this neighborhood.
The interior of both the downstairs and upstairs units will be completely renovated. The exterior
of the building will also be renovated, including new stairs to the upstairs unit. The subject
property is currently almost entirely impervious surfaces, but this proposal will remove a
significant amount of pavement and sidewalks. New landscaping will be installed, including
perimeter buffers where possible and appropriate. The applicant is not proposing to provide any
parking spaces for this shelter, as most women they house do not have vehicles.
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 existing two-story building has a FAR of 0.50, which is consistent with the above Code
provisions.
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-10030 – Page 2 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-10030 2010-12-21
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 0.42, 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 2-1003, the minimum lot area for a similar residential-type
use of a community residential home is 6,000 square feet. The site is 2,640 square feet of lot
area. Pursuant to this same Table, the minimum lot width for a similar residential-type use of a
community residential home is 60 feet. The site has 48 feet of frontage. Properties on Browns
Court have similar or less lot area and lot width.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-1004, there are no minimum required setbacks
for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison,
pursuant to CDC Table 2-1003, the minimum front setback for a similar residential-type use of a
community residential home is 25 feet (parking lots may be at a minimum front setback of 15
feet). The same table provides that the minimum side and rear setbacks for a similar residential-
type use of a community residential home is 10 feet. The proposal includes a front (south)
setback of 15.4 feet (to building and courtyard patio), a side (east) setback of 20.6 feet (to
building) and 12 feet (to courtyard patio), a side (west) setback of 3.2 feet (to building) and a rear
(north) setback of 3.4 feet (to building).
Parcels on Browns Court are zoned Office (O) District, are all used residentially, are small in
size and the existing residential buildings do not meet setbacks. The setbacks with this proposal
are primarily to existing structures. The property today includes pavement at a zero-foot side and
rear setback and sidewalks at a zero-foot rear setback. This proposal includes the removal of this
pavement and the sidewalk, which will increase pervious surfaces. The existing building will be
renovated with no additions, with the exception a new stairway to the second floor unit. A new
courtyard patio is proposed on the east side of the building complying with setback requirements.
The proposal is consistent with, or an improvement over, the surrounding properties on Browns
Court. This proposed redevelopment of this site will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding properties, and it is compatible with the
residential properties on Browns Court.
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 similar residential-type use of a community residential home is 30 feet.
The proposal includes an existing building height of 20.08 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof),
which is compatible with the surrounding area. Buildings within this area are one or two stories
in height.
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 2-1003, the minimum required parking for a similar
residential-type use of a community residential home requires one space per two residents. It is
also noted that a Residential Shelter in the Institutional (I) District also requires one space per
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-10030 – Page 3 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-10030 2010-12-21
two residents. Each unit is anticipated to be occupied by one woman. From this comparative
standpoint, one parking space would be required. The proposal does not include the provision of
any parking spaces on-site. The applicant notes that only a few women have had vehicles over
the 10 years The Kimberly Home has been providing housing on adjacent properties. The
applicant also notes that visitors are rare and alternate parking is available on the east side of the
Kimberly Home main building. Based on the nature of the use and the information provided by
the applicant, Staff concurs with the parking reduction to not provide any parking on-site.
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 west side of the building,
adjacent to another residential shelter of The Kimberly Home.
Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-912, all utilities including individual distribution lines must
be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. The existing building is
served by overhead utility lines. The Building/Electrical Code may require these overhead
utilities to be placed underground.
Landscaping: The site is presently devoid of any meaningful landscaping, due to the amount of
existing impervious surfaces. The site has two existing trees and one is proposed to be removed.
This proposal includes the planting of two oak trees and a triple foxtail palm.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, a 10-foot perimeter buffer is required along Browns Court
and a 10-foot perimeter buffer is required along all sides of the property. This proposal provides
the minimum required perimeter buffers along the south (along Browns Court) and along the east
side of the property. This proposal includes, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program,
reductions to the west and north perimeter landscape buffers from 10 feet to 3.2 feet and 3.4 feet
respectively and to eliminate the required hedge along the west and a portion of the north
property lines. The reductions to the perimeter buffer width along the west and north property
lines are due to the location of the existing residential building (coincides with the setbacks).
Perimeter buffer hedging is proposed to be installed along the north property line east of the
existing residential building, along the east property line and along the south property line
adjacent to Browns Court. The request includes the elimination of the required hedge along the
west and north property lines. The existing residential building is located 3.2 feet from the west
property line and the adjacent residential building (1190 Browns Court) is also close to the
property line, placing this area for most of the day within shade. This circumstance is also true
along the north property line where the existing residential building is 3.4 feet from the property
line. The subject residential building is two stories in height and there is an existing fence along
the property line (which is proposed to be replaced due to its failing condition). In both locations,
given these circumstances, a hedge may not survive in these narrow areas and in the shade. The
site is otherwise meeting the minimum landscape standards of the Code. With the proposed
landscaping, this site will be demonstrably more attractive than the other residential parcels on
Browns Court.
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
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-10030 – Page 4 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-10030 2010-12-21
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 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.
Solid Waste: The existing building is served by black barrels for solid waste collection, which
will not change with this proposal.
Signage: There will be no signage for this proposal.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject
property.
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-10030 – Page 5 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-10030 2010-12-21
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Section 2-1001.1 and
Table 2-1004:
Consistent Inconsistent
Standard Proposed
FAR 0.50 0.50 X
ISR 0.75 0.42 X
Minimum Lot Area N/A 2,640 sq. ft. X
Minimum Lot Width N/A 48 feet X
Maximum Height N/A 20.08 feet (midpoint of pitched X
roof)
Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A South: 15.4 feet (to building and X 1
courtyard patio)
Side: N/A East: 20.6 feet (to building) X 1
12 feet (to courtyard
patio)
West: 3.2 feet (to building) X 1
Rear: N/A North: 3.4 feet (to building) X 1
Minimum Residential Shelter: 1 per 2 Zero parking spaces X 2
Off-Street Parking residents (1 required space)
1
See analysis in Staff Report
2
Based on a Parking Demand Study
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-10030 – Page 6 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-10030 2010-12-21
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-
1004.B (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from X 1
the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X
development.
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X 1
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City’s
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment
of an existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area
that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning
designation; or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or
preservation of a working waterfront use.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X 1
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses
permitted in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines
adopted by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance,
the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the
following design elements:
Changes in horizontal building planes;
?
Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
?
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
Variety in materials, colors and textures;
?
Distinctive fenestration patterns;
?
Building stepbacks; and
?
Distinctive roofs forms.
?
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
1 See analysis in Staff Report.
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-10030 – Page 7 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-10030 2010-12-21
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards
for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X 1
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X 1
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X 1
immediate vicinity.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties.
1 See analysis in Staff Report.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of November 4, 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 0.06 acre parcel is located on the north side of Browns Court, approximately 75 feet west
of N. Missouri Avenue;
2.The subject property is currently developed with a two-unit, two-story attached dwelling;
3.The proposal to permit the location of a Residential Shelter on this property will be an
extension of similar uses provided by The Kimberly Home on Browns Court and NE
Cleveland Street;
4.The proposal includes reductions to the front (south), side (west) and rear (north) setbacks for
the existing residential building and to the front (south ) for a courtyard patio;
5.The proposal includes the renovation of both the building and site;
6.Renovation of this building and site will expand the provision of affordable housing for
pregnant women seeking the services of The Kimberly Home and will upgrade the
appearance of this property within this neighborhood;
7.The subject property is currently almost entirely impervious surfaces, but this proposal will
remove a significant amount of pavement and sidewalks;
8.New landscaping will be installed, including perimeter buffers where possible and
appropriate;
9.The applicant is not proposing to provide any parking spaces for this shelter, as most women
they house do not have vehicles; and
10.There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property.
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-10030 – Page 8 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-10030 2010-12-21
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;
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.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 Residential Shelter in the Office (O) District
with a lot area of 2,640 square feet, a lot width of 48 feet, a front (south) setback of 15.4 feet (to
building and courtyard patio), a side (east) setback of 20.6 feet (to building) and 12 feet (to
courtyard patio), a side (west) setback of 3.2 feet (to building), a rear (north) setback of 3.4 feet
(to building), a building height of 20.08 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof) and zero parking
spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community
Development Code (CDC) Section 2-1004.B and reductions to the west and north perimeter
landscape buffers from 10 feet to 3.2 feet and 3.4 feet respectively and to eliminate the required
hedge along the west and a portion of the north property lines, as a Comprehensive Landscape
Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3-1202.G, with the following condition:
Condition of Approval:
1.That existing, on-site overhead utilities serving this building be undergrounded if required by
the Building/Electric Code.
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\Browns Ct 1192 Kimberly Home (O) 2010.xx - 12.21.10 CDB -
WW.RT\Browns Ct 1192 Staff Report.doc
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-10030 – Page 9 of 9
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
CDB Meeting Date: December 21, 2010
Case Number: FLD2010-08004 (Related to DVA2010-08001)
Agenda Item: C.2. (Related to D.1.)
Owner/Applicant: Sea Captain, a Florida General Partnership; Donald Eifert, Partner
Representative: Steve Fowler, Fowler Associates, Architects, Inc.
Address: 40 Devon Drive
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development application (1) to permit an 85-unit
overnight accommodation use (hotel) in the Tourist (T) District
with a total lot area of 36,137 square feet (0.829 acre) (28,733
square feet [0.659 acre] zoned Tourist District and 7,404 square
feet [0.17 acre] zoned Low Medium Density Residential District),
a lot width of 174.94 feet, a front (south) setback of 6.2 feet (to
building) and 8.5 feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback of five
feet (to building) and zero feet (to sidewalk), a rear (north) setback
of 18.5 feet (to building) and zero feet (to patio decking), a
building height of 75.25 feet (to top of roof deck) and 93 parking
spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under
the provisions of CDC Section 2-803.C, and approval of a two-
year development order; and (2) increase the permitted density by
the allocation of 53 overnight accommodation units from the Hotel
Density Reserve created pursuant to Beach by Design.
CURRENT ZONING: Tourist (T) District (0.659 acre) and Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) District (0.17 acre)
CURRENT LAND USE
PLAN CATEGORY: Resort Facilities High (RFH) and Residential Urban (RU)
BEACH BY DESIGN
CHARACTER
DISTRICT:Small Motel
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: 27-room motel
Proposed Use: Overnight accommodation use (hotel) of a total of
85 rooms (128.98 rooms/acre on the acreage zoned
Tourist (T) District, including the allocation of 53
units from the Hotel Density Reserve),
approximately 7,986 square feet of accessory uses
to the hotel and a height of 75.25 feet (to top of roof
deck)
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 1 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
EXISTING North: Preservation (P) District
SURROUNDING Clearwater Harbor (City marina)
ZONING AND USES: South: Tourist (T) District and Low Medium Density Residential
(LMDR) District
Parking lot and Detached dwellings
East: Preservation (P) District
Clearwater Harbor
West: Tourist (T) District
Vacant (approved for Overnight accommodations)
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The total 0.829 acre parcel is located on the north side of Devon Drive, approximately 150 feet
east of Coronado Drive. The subject property is currently developed with a 27-room motel. The
subject site has approximately 175 feet of frontage along Devon Drive. The majority of the
subject property (0.659 acre) is zoned Tourist (T) District, but the eastern portion (0.17 acre) of
the subject property north of the adjacent detached dwelling at 94 Devon Drive is zoned Low
Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District and is not part of Beach by Design. Parking for
the existing motel is primarily located within the LMDR-zoned area. There are 10 existing boat
slips.
The property to the west and southwest at 101 Coronado Drive is currently vacant but was
approved by the CDB on May 19, 2009, for a 108-room hotel (FLD2009-03013/DVA2009-
00001 – Holiday Inn Express, now to be a Hampton Inn). This hotel building will be located on
the property adjacently west of the subject property, at a height of 89 feet (to top of roof deck).
The southern portion of this hotel will be developed with an accessory surface parking lot for the
hotel. The property on the west side of Coronado Drive (100 Coronado Drive) has been approved
for a 450-room hotel (Kirin Grande – FLD2008-05013/DVA2008-00001) at a height of 150 feet
(to top of roof deck). There exists across Devon Drive a 25-space City parking lot (FLD2005-
08089). Other overnight accommodation uses exist to the south of the subject property in the
block between Coronado and Devon/Hamden Drives. Additionally, the Aqualea/Hyatt overnight
accommodation project, attached dwellings and public parking garage is located to the southwest
at 301 S. Gulfview Boulevard. Properties to the south on the east side of Devon Drive are zoned
LMDR District, are not part of Beach by Design and are developed with detached dwellings.
Clearwater Harbor exists to the north and east of the subject property, developed with the City
marina.
Development Proposal:
The proposal is to construct an 85-unit overnight accommodation use at a density of 128.98
rooms/acre (based on only the lot acreage zoned T District), which includes the allocation of 53
units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design. The proposal also includes
approximately 7,986 square feet of accessory uses to the hotel (restaurant/lounge, fitness center,
meeting room and banquet room), which represents approximately 9.91 percent of the gross floor
area of the hotel, in compliance with recently adopted Code provisions. This is the fifth hotel to
be placed on the Community Development Board agenda since the amendment of Beach by
Design in July 2008 creating the Hotel Density Reserve as a means to encourage the construction
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 2 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
of new mid-size hotels on the beach in response to the loss of hotel rooms since 2002. Also on
this CDB agenda is a companion Development Agreement (DVA2010-08001) that must be
approved by City Council, which provides for the allocation of the 53 units from the Hotel
Density Reserve. This Development Agreement provides for mandatory evacuation/closure of
the hotel in the event of the posting of a hurricane watch including Clearwater Beach by the
National Hurricane Center, which also complies with Beach by Design criteria. The applicant
indicates room rates for this hotel will be reasonably priced for a family beach vacation
contrasted with the Sandpearl and Aqualea/Hyatt resorts. This proposal complies with the Beach
by Design criteria to access all rooms through a lobby and internal corridors.
The proposed 85-room hotel is proposed on a total lot acreage of 0.829 acres, however, the east
0.17 acre portion of the site is zoned LMDR District (not part of Beach by Design). The
proposed site design locates the building, pool/pool deck and all other hardscape improvements
on that portion zoned T District. The eastern portion of the site zoned LMDR District is proposed
for only open space and the retention pond. The hotel is proposed at a height of 75.25 feet from
Base Flood Elevation (BFE) to the flat roof deck. Driveway access is from Devon Drive. The
proposal includes a porte cochere and drop-off area off Devon Drive. The ground level of this
hotel provides the hotel lobby and 4,365 square feet of accessory restaurant/lounge. The ground
through third floor of this hotel provides a total of 93 parking spaces. The fourth, fifth, sixth,
seventh and eighth floors provide 17 rooms per floor. All parking garage levels will be open for
natural ventilation. Balconies are provided for guest rooms on the south, east and north sides of
the hotel building. The proposed 75.25-foot building height for this project transitions building
height from the highest on the west side of Coronado Drive (Kirin Grande, 100 Coronado Drive –
150-foot height), to the parcel adjacently west approved for a hotel (Holiday Inn Express/Hampton
Inn, 101 Coronado Drive – 89-foot height), to the to the detached dwellings to the south of this site
on Devon Drive (30-foot maximum height). The exterior base and body colors of the building
will be primarily Sandbank and Lightweight Beige. The applicant also proposes to install a
Boston Blend of applied field stone at the bottom of the base of the building. Window awnings
will be Sprout Green and trim will be Arcade White. There is a proposed panel on the south side
of the building, basically lining up with Hamden Drive for the installation of public art mural. An
existing masonry wall along the west property line is intended to be retained, although a portion
is partially on the adjacent parcel, which will require an easement from the adjacent property
owner.
The proposal includes a front (south) setback of 6.2 feet (to building) and 8.5 feet (to pavement),
a side (west) setback of five feet (to building) and zero feet (to sidewalk) and a rear (north)
setback of 18.5 feet (to building) and zero feet (to patio decking). The main portion of the
building is actually set back further from the front property line a minimum of 17.3 feet, with
only a porte-cochere located at a front setback of 6.2 feet (to the supporting columns). All areas
within the front setback provided will be landscaped to enhance the site and building. Existing
docks on the north side of the site will be retained for guests of the hotel.
The applicant is requesting a two-year development order due to market conditions. Community
Development Code (CDC) Section 4-407 specifies that an application for a building permit must
be submitted within one year of the date the CDB approves the project, unless otherwise
specified under this approval.
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 3 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
Density: Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-801.1, the maximum
density for properties with a designation of Resort Facilities High is 50 overnight
accommodation rooms per acre. Based on the lot acreage of only that portion of the property
zoned T District of 0.659 acre and the base density of 50 rooms/acre, a maximum of 32 rooms is
permitted. Based on the same lot acreage and the maximum density under the Hotel Density
Reserve under Beach by Design (adopted as an amendment to Beach by Design under Ordinance
7925-08) of 150 rooms per acre, a maximum of 98 rooms is permissible. When the base density
number of rooms is subtracted from the overall maximum under the Hotel Density Reserve, the
maximum number of rooms the applicant could request from the Hotel Density Reserve is 66
rooms. The applicant is only requesting 53 rooms from the Hotel Density Reserve. As such, the
proposed density is 128.98 rooms/acre, which is less than the maximum permissible established
in Beach by Design for projects that have acquired units from the Hotel Density Reserve.
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to CDC Section 2-801.1, the maximum allowable ISR
is 0.95. The overall proposed ISR is 0.938, based on only that area zoned T District, which is
consistent with the Code provisions. It is noted that the 0.17 acre zoned LMDR District is
proposed as a retention pond and open space, with no impervious surfaces.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, 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 2-803, the minimum lot area for overnight accommodations
can range between 10,000 – 20,000 square feet. The lot area for that portion of the subject
property zoned T District is 28,733 square feet. The eastern 7,404 square feet of the subject
property is zoned LMDR District. Pursuant to the same Table, the minimum lot width for
overnight accommodations can range between 100 – 150 feet. The lot width along Devon Drive
is approximately 175 feet. The proposal exceeds these Code provisions.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there are no minimum required setbacks for
a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to
the same CDC Table 2-803, the minimum front setback for overnight accommodations uses can
range between 0 – 15 feet, while the minimum side setback can range between 0 – 10 feet and
the minimum rear setback can range between 0 – 20 feet. The proposal includes a front (south)
setback of 6.2 feet (to building) and 8.5 feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback of five feet (to
building) and zero feet (to sidewalk) and a rear (north) setback of 18.5 feet (to building) and zero
feet (to patio decking). The main portion of the building is set back a minimum of 17.3 feet at the
southeast corner of the building, with only a porte cochere located at a front setback of 6.2 feet
(to the supporting columns). The pavement for the hotel drop-off is proposed to be set back 8.5
feet. For a point of comparison, the proposed hotel directly west of this site was approved with a
front setback (to building) of five feet (to both Devon Drive and Coronado Drive, as the adjacent
site is a corner lot). This proposal includes a side (west) setback of five feet (to building) and
zero feet (to sidewalk). It is noted that Building Code provisions for required egress routes be a
paved surface and, in this case, the egress route is from the stairwell at the northwest corner of
the building out to the public sidewalk. This is the reason the sidewalk is located at a zero side
setback. For a point of comparison, the proposed hotel directly west of this site was approved
with a side setback to the same common property line of this site of 2.5 feet (to building)
for only
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 4 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
for two building bump-outs designed to break up the linear
the first four floors of the parking garage
façade on the east side of the buildingrotruding columns from the face of the wall are
, while the p
set back a minimum of 6.1 feet and the majority of the east wall of that building is set back
approximately 7.3 feet from this common property line.The proposal includes a rear (north)
setback of 18.5 feet (to building) and zero feet (to patio decking). For a point of comparison, the
proposed hotel directly west of this site was approved with a setback to the north property line of
19.29 feet (to building) and zero feet (to pool deck). It is noted that there are no proposed setback
reductions on the east side of the property. The pool and pool deck, as well as other hardscape
surfaces, are located at the edge of the T District boundary line and the balance of the property
(zoned LMDR District) on the east side of the property will be developed with a retention pond
and open space. Unit balconies are contained within the main structure, except on the east side of
the building where the balconies cantilever 1.33 feet from the main building structure. The
proposed setbacks to the building and to other structures are not out of scale of the newer hotels
that have been approved and/or constructed on Clearwater Beach.
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there is no maximum height for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to
the same CDC Table 2-803, the maximum allowable height for overnight accommodation uses
can range between 35 – 100 feet. The proposed building is 75.25 feet in height from Base Flood
Elevation (BFE) to the flat roof, which is below the Code maximum. This site is located within
the Small Motel character district of Beach by Design, which does not prescribe any maximum
heights for this area. Good planning practice is to transition building heights from a compatibility
standpoint. The Kirin Grande hotel project (100 Coronado Drive) on the west side of Coronado
Drive has been approved at a building height of 150 feet (to top of roof deck). The Holiday Inn
Express/Hampton Inn overnight accommodation project adjacent to the west at 101 Coronado
Drive was approved with an 89-foot (to top of roof deck) building height. The detached
dwellings on Devon Drive to the south of this site are zoned LMDR District, where the maximum
building height is 30 feet. The proposed building height for this project transitions building height
from the highest on the west side of Coronado Drive to the detached dwellings to the south of this
site.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there is no minimum off-street
parking requirement for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of
comparison, pursuant to the same CDC Table 2-803, the minimum required parking for
overnight accommodations can range between 1.0 – 1.2 parking spaces per room, or a minimum
of 102 required spaces. The parking garage for this hotel includes a total of 93 parking spaces. A
Parking Reduction Study has been submitted as part of the application material, which has
analyzed the parking demand against the proposed parking supply. This study concludes that
adequate parking will be available on-site to service the proposed use for guests and employees.
Forty percent (40%) of the employees are presumed to need to park on-site. From an amenities
standpoint accessory to the hotel, the proposal includes a restaurant/lounge on the first floor of
4,365 square feet, a fitness center of 1,207 square feet on the fifth floor, a meeting room of 1,207
square feet on the sixth floor and a banquet room of 1,207 square feet on the seventh floor, or a
total of 7,986 square feet (9.91% of the gross floor area of the hotel). With such minimal
amenities, the provided parking appears adequate for guests and employees.
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 5 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
The primary driveway on Devon Drive providing access to the parking garage is proposed on the
western portion of the south side of the building. A proposed driveway on the east side of the
property, which lines up with Hamden Drive, will provide access to the drop-off porte cochere
and to the staging area for the solid waste dumpsters. A sidewalk will be constructed along the
frontage of Devon Drive where no sidewalk presently exists, increasing pedestrian safety along
Devon Drive.
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. There will
be mechanical equipment located on top of the flat roof of the building. The location of the
mechanical equipment and the building parapets surrounding the roof appear to be sufficient to
screen the mechanical equipment. This screening of the mechanical equipment will also be
reviewed at time of the building permit submission.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the
proposed driveways on Devon Drive, 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. This proposal has been reviewed by the City’s Traffic Engineering
Department and been found to be acceptable. Shrubbery planted within the sight visibility
triangles, as well as any landscaping planted within the Devon Drive right-of-way, will need to
be maintained to meet the Code requirements. Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.B, to enhance
views of the water, no structures or landscaping may be installed within 20-foot waterfront sight
visibility triangles. This proposal does not propose any landscaping other than turf within the
waterfront sight visibility triangles, complying with this provision.
Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-912, for development that does not involve a subdivision,
all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground unless such
undergrounding is not practicable. Electric and communication lines for this hotel will be
installed underground on-site in compliance with this requirement. There exist overhead utility
lines within the right-of-way along the north side of Devon Drive that will need to be
undergrounded, consistent with the approved hotel adjacently west at 101 Coronado Drive with
similar circumstances of overhead utilities in the Devon Drive right-of-way. It is unknown of the
location of proposed electric panels, boxes and meters for this hotel. If located exterior to the
building, this electrical equipment should be painted the same color as the building to ensure
views are minimized. The location and potential views of such electrical equipment will be
addressed at the building permit stage.
Landscaping: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, there are no perimeter buffers required in the
T District for this site. This proposal meets or exceeds the required minimum five-foot wide
building foundation landscape area along Devon Drive, as the majority of the foundation planting
area is located between the drop-off driveway and the front property line (8.5-foot width). There is
additional foundation planting area adjacent to the building west of the porte cochere and within a
large planting area on the west side of the western driveway. The site will be planted with various
palm trees (pindo, Mediterranean fan and senegal date), shrubs (bird of paradise, firebush and
croton) and ground covers (lily, cardboard fern, liriope, lantana, beach sunflower and
philodendron). Landscaping assists with softening and reducing building massing to both
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 6 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
pedestrians and motorists. Since the sidewalk planned in the Devon Drive right-of-way will be
adjacent to the street curb, landscaping is also planned within the right-of-way of Devon Drive,
which will require a Right-of-Way Use Permit.
Solid Waste: A dumpster enclosure is proposed at the southeast corner of the building. Hotel
housekeeping staff will remove trash from hotel units. The trash staging area is located outside of
the trash enclosure. On trash days, hotel employees will place the dumpster(s) outside the
building in the trash staging area for truck pickup. After dumping, hotel employees will roll the
dumpster(s) back inside the trash enclosure out of view. The proposal has been found to be
acceptable by the City’s Solid Waste Department.
Signage: The proposal does not include a freestanding sign at this time. However, any future
freestanding sign should be designed as a monument-style sign, match the exterior materials and
color of the building and be a maximum height of four feet, unless approved at six-foot height
through a Comprehensive Sign Program. Attached signage must meet Code requirements.
Additional Beach by Design Guidelines: Section C.1 of Beach by Design requires buildings with
a footprint of greater than 5,000 square feet to be constructed so that no more than two of the
three building dimensions in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length. The proposed
hotel building footprint is approximately 16,573 square feet. The project’s overall horizontal
plane dimensions are approximately 126 feet along Hamden Drive and 134 feet deep
(north/south plane), while the vertical plane is 75.25 feet from grade to the top of the flat roof.
None of these dimensions are equal. Modulation of the building massing also provides
considerable dimensional variation.
Section C.2 requires no plane or elevation to continue uninterrupted for greater than 100 feet
without an offset of more than five feet. All façades of the building have been designed in
compliance with this requirement, with the largest linear dimension of approximately 79.67 feet
along the western portion of the north façade of the building. All other portions of the building
façade are modulated with at least a five-foot deviation.
Section C.3 requires at least 60 percent of any elevation to be covered with windows or
architectural decoration. The application indicates compliance with this requirement.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject
property.
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Tables 2-801.1 and 2-
803:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
Density 50 rooms per acre 85 rooms X
1
(128.98 rooms per acre)
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 7 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
Impervious Surface 0.95 0.938 X 2
Ratio
Minimum Lot Area N/A 36,137 sf total (28,733 sf zoned T X 3
District & 7,404 sf zoned LMDR
District)
Minimum Lot Width N/A 174.94 feet X
Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A 6.2 feet (to building) and 8.5 feet (to X 3
pavement)
Side: N/A West: Five feet (to building) and X 3
zero feet (to sidewalk)
Rear: N/A 18.5 feet (to building) and zero feet X 3
(to patio decking)
Maximum Height N/A 75.25 feet (from BFE to flat roof) X 3
Minimum N/A 93 parking spaces X 4
Off-Street Parking
1 Includes 53 units/rooms allocated from the Hotel Density Reserve pursuant to Beach by Design and is based on only the land area zoned
Tourist (T) District
2 Based on only the land area zoned Tourist (T) District
3 See analysis in Staff Report
4 Based on Parking Reduction Study; See analysis in Staff Report
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 8 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-803.C
(Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from X 1
the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X
development.
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X 1
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City’s
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment
of an existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area
that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning
designation; or
a. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a
working waterfront use.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X 1
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses
permitted in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines
adopted by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance,
the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the
following design elements:
Changes in horizontal building planes;
?
Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
?
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
Variety in materials, colors and textures;
?
Distinctive fenestration patterns;
?
Building stepbacks; and
?
Distinctive roofs forms.
?
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
1 See analysis in Staff Report.
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 9 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards
for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X 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, 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 and conclusions of law:
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 total 0.829 acre parcel is located on the north side of Devon Drive, approximately 150
feet east of Coronado Drive;
2.The majority of the subject property (0.659 acre) is zoned T District, but the eastern portion
(0.17 acre) of the subject property north of the adjacent detached dwelling at 94 Devon Drive
is zoned LMDR District and is not part of Beach by Design;
3.The proposal is to construct an 85-unit overnight accommodation use at a density of 128.98
rooms/acre, which includes the allocation of 53 units from the Hotel Density Reserve under
Beach by Design, totally within the area zoned T District (only a retention pond and open
space is proposed within the area zoned LMDR District);
4.A companion Development Agreement (DVA2010-08001) that must be approved by City
Council is also on this CDB agenda, providing for the allocation of the 53 units from the
Hotel Density Reserve;
5.The proposal also includes approximately 7,986 square feet of accessory uses to the hotel
(restaurant/lounge, fitness center, meeting room and banquet room), which represents
approximately 9.91 percent of the gross floor area of the hotel;
6.The hotel is proposed at a height of 75.25 feet from the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) to the
roof deck;
7.The proposed 75.25-foot building height transitions building height from the highest on the
west side of Coronado Drive (Kirin Grande at 100 Coronado Drive – 150-foot height), to the
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 10 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
property adjacently west (Holiday Inn Express/Hampton Inn at 101 Coronado Drive – 89-foot
height) to the detached dwellings to the south of this site (30-foot maximum height);
8.The ground through third floors of this hotel on this subject property provide a total of 93
parking spaces;
9.The proposal includes setback reductions from all property lines, except the east side of the
property zoned LMDR District;
10.The proposal includes a front (south) setback of 6.2 feet (to building) and 8.5 feet (to
pavement), a side (west) setback of five feet (to building) and zero feet (to sidewalk) and a
rear (north) setback of 18.5 feet (to building) and zero feet (to patio decking); and
11.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 Tables 2-801.1 and 2-
803 of the Community Development Code;
2.That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-
803.C 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.That the development proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design.
APPROVAL
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends of
the Flexible Development application (1) to permit an 85-unit overnight accommodation use
(hotel) in the Tourist (T) District with a total lot area of 36,137 square feet (0.829 acre) (28,733
square feet [0.659 acre] zoned Tourist District and 7,404 square feet [0.17 acre] zoned Low
Medium Density Residential District), a lot width of 174.94 feet, a front (south) setback of 6.2
feet (to building) and 8.5 feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback of five feet (to building) and
zero feet (to sidewalk), a rear (north) setback of 18.5 feet (to building) and zero feet (to patio
decking), a building height of 75.25 feet (to top of roof deck) and 93 parking spaces, as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of CDC Section 2-803.C, and
approval of a two-year development order; and (2) increase the permitted density by the
allocation of 53 overnight accommodation units from the Hotel Density Reserve created pursuant
to Beach by Design, with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1.That approval of this Flexible Development case is subject to the approval of a Development
Agreement with the City (Case DVA2010-08001);
2.That application for a building permit to construct the approved project be submitted no later
than December 21, 2012, unless time extensions are granted pursuant to CDC Section 4-407;
3.That, prior to the issuance of any permit, a Declaration of Unity of Title be recorded in the
public records;
4.That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the elevations approved by
the CDB;
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 11 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT FLD2010-08004 2010-12-21
5.That any freestanding sign be a monument-style sign, be designed to match the exterior
materials and color of the building and be a maximum height of four feet, unless approved at
six-foot height through a Comprehensive Sign Program;
6.That the books and records pertaining to use of each hotel room be open for inspection by
authorized representatives of the City, upon reasonable notice, in order to confirm
compliance with the Hotel Density Reserve criteria of Beach by Design as allowed by
general law;
7.That, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a hurricane evacuation plan for the
hotel and accessory docks be submitted and approved by the City for all guests of the hotel;
8.That, prior to the issuance of any permits, an easement be obtained to retain the existing four-
foot high wall along the west property line that extends onto the adjoining parcel;
9.That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, plans be revised to show mirrors and/or
other devices to aid motorists with blind spots in the parking garage;
10.That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, balconies for the President/Bridal Suites be
shown on the floor plans, ensuring a maximum building plane on the north side of 100 feet
before there is a minimum five-foot deviation;
11.That, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, existing overhead utility lines
within the right-of-way along the north side of Devon Drive be placed underground;
12.That site lighting and pedestrian area bollard lighting be shown on plans prior to the issuance
of the building permit;
13.That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, the location and visibility of electric
equipment (electric panels, boxes and meters) be reviewed and, if located exterior to the
building where visible from Devon Drive, be painted the same color as the building;
14.That use of the docks be for exclusive use for the mooring of boats by guests of this hotel and
that the docks are not permitted to be rented, leased or sold separately from use by guests of
this hotel;
15.That, prior to the issuance of any permits, provide a copy of a submerged land lease, if
required;
16.That, prior to the issuance of any permits, a Right-of-Way Use Permit be obtained to permit
landscaping plants within the Devon Drive right-of-way;
17.That all Parks and Recreation fees and any applicable Public Art and Design Impact Fee be
paid prior to the issuance of any permits; and
18.That, prior to the issuance of any permit, all requirements of the General Engineering, Traffic
Engineering and Fire Departments be addressed.
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff:
__________________________________________
Robert G. Tefft, Development Review Manager
ATTACHMENTS: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map; and Photographs
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\Devon 40 Sea Captain Motel (T) 2010-0x - 12.21.10 CDB -
WW.RT\Devon 40 FLD Staff Report.doc
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
FLD2010-08004 – Page 12 of 12
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT DVA2010-08001 2010-12-21
CDB Meeting Date: December 21, 2010
Case Number: DVA2010-08001 (Related to FLD2010-08004)
Agenda Item: D.1. (Related to C.2.)
Owner/Applicant: Sea Captain, a Florida General Partnership; Donald Eifert, Partner
Representative: Steve Fowler, Fowler Associates, Architects, Inc.
Address: 40 Devon Drive
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Review of, and recommendation to the City Council, of a
Development Agreement between Sea Captain, a Florida General
Partnership (the property owner) and the City of Clearwater,
providing for the allocation of 53 units from the Hotel Density
Reserve established in Beach by Design.
CURRENT ZONING: Tourist (T) District (0.659 acre) and Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) District (0.17 acre)
CURRENT LAND USE
PLAN CATEGORY: Resort Facilities High (RFH) and Residential Urban (RU)
BEACH BY DESIGN
CHARACTER
DISTRICT: Small Motel
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: 27-room motel
Proposed Use: Overnight accommodation use (hotel) of a total of
85 rooms (128.98 rooms/acre on the acreage zoned
Tourist (T) District, including the allocation of 53
units from the Hotel Density Reserve),
approximately 7,986 square feet of accessory uses
to the hotel and a height of 75.25 feet (to top of roof
deck)
EXISTING North: Preservation (P) District
SURROUNDING Clearwater Harbor (City marina)
ZONING AND USES: South: Tourist (T) District and Low Medium Density Residential
District (LMDR)
Parking lot and Detached dwellings
East: Preservation (P) District
Clearwater Harbor
West: Tourist (T) District
Vacant (approved for Overnight accommodations)
ANALYSIS:
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
DVA2010-08001 – Page 1 of 4
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT DVA2010-08001 2010-12-21
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The total 0.829 acre parcel is located on the north side of Devon Drive, approximately 150 feet
east of Coronado Drive. The subject property is currently developed with a 27-room motel.
Development Proposal:
The development proposal includes a companion Flexible Development application (FLD2010-
08004) to permit an overnight accommodation (hotel) use of a total of 85 rooms (128.98
rooms/acre on the acreage zoned Tourist (T) District, including the allocation of 53 units from
the Hotel Density Reserve), approximately 7,986 square feet of accessory uses to the hotel and a
height of 75.25 feet (to top of roof deck). This proposed hotel will have 93 parking spaces on
three levels of parking. There are 10 existing boat slips accessory to the hotel.
Development Agreement:
The Development Agreement is a requirement for the allocation of hotel units from the Hotel
Density Reserve, adopted as an amendment to Beach by Design under Ordinance 7925-08 on
July 17, 2008. A total of 1,385 hotel rooms are available under the Hotel Density Reserve and
this proposal requests the allocation of 53 units from it. The City has established the
Development Agreement format as a means to facilitate the allocation of the units and to set
forth appropriate provisions related to the development of the property. The proposed
Development Agreement will be in effect for a period not to exceed ten (10) years, meets the
criteria for the allocation of units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design and
includes the following main provisions:
Provides for the allocation of 53 units from the Hotel Density Reserve;
?
Requires the developer to obtain building permits and certificates of occupancy in
?
accordance with Community Development Code (CDC) Section 4-407;
Requires the return of any hotel unit obtained from the Hotel Density Reserve that is not
?
constructed;
For units allocated from the Hotel Density Reserve, prohibits the conversion of any hotel
?
unit to a residential use and requires the recording of a covenant restricting use of such
hotel units to overnight accommodation usage; and
Requires a legally enforceable mandatory evacuation/closure covenant that the hotel will be
?
closed as soon as practicable after a hurricane watch that includes Clearwater Beach is
posted by the National Hurricane Center.
The Community Development Board (CDB) has been provided with the most recent
Development Agreement.
The City Council may enter into Development Agreements to encourage a stronger commitment
on comprehensive and capital facilities planning, to ensure the provision of adequate public
facilities for development, to encourage the efficient use of resources, and to reduce the
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
DVA2010-08001 – Page 2 of 4
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT DVA2010-08001 2010-12-21
economic cost of development. The CDB is required to review the proposed Development
Agreement and make a recommendation to the City Council.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of September 2, 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 and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact: The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence
submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code (CDC), finds
that there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:
1.That the total 0.829 acre parcel is located on the north side of Devon Drive, approximately
150 feet east of Coronado Drive;
2.That the property is located within the Tourist (T) District (0.659 acre) and Low Medium
Density Residential (LMDR) District (0.17 acre), and the Resort Facilities High (RFH) and
Residential Urban (RU) Future Land Use Plan categories;
3.That the proposed hotel and its accessory uses are located solely within the area zoned
Tourist (T) District (only the retention area is located with the area zoned Low Medium
Density Residential [LMDR] District) and the calculations for density and impervious
surface ratio are based upon only the land area zoned Tourist (T) District; and
4.That the development proposal is subject to the requirements of Beach by Design, the Design
Guidelines contained therein as the proposed hotel is located totally within the Small Motel
character district and the criteria for allocation of units from the Hotel Density Reserve.
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 Agreement implements and formalizes the requirements for the
construction of on-site and off-site improvements under the related site plan proposal
(FLD2010-08004);
2.That the Development Agreement complies with the standards and criteria of CDC Section
4-606;
3.That the Development Agreement is consistent with and furthers the Visions, Goals,
Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan;
4.That the Development Agreement is consistent with the Visions, Goals, Objectives and
Policies of Beach by Design and the Small Motel character district; and
5.That the Development Agreement complies with the criteria in Beach by Design for the
allocation of units from the Hotel Density Reserve.
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends the
APPROVAL
, and recommendation to the City Council, of a Development Agreement between
Sea Captain, a Florida General Partnership (the property owner) and the City of Clearwater,
providing for the allocation of 53 units from the Hotel Density Reserve established in Beach by
Design, for the property at 40 Devon Drive.
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
DVA2010-08001 – Page 3 of 4
EXHIBIT: STAFF REPORT DVA2010-08001 2010-12-21
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff:
__________________________________________
Robert G. Tefft, Development Review Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Development Agreement with Exhibits
?
Location Map
?
Aerial Map
?
Future Land Use Map
?
Zoning Map
?
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FLEX (FLD)\Pending cases\Up for the next CDB\DVA2010-08001 - Devon 40 Sea Captain (T) 2010.0x -
12.21.10 CDB - WW.RT\Devon 40 DVA Staff Report for 12.21.10 CDB.doc
Community Development Board – December 21, 2010
DVA2010-08001 – Page 4 of 4
FORM 813 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE
Baker, Brian City of Clearwater Community Development Board
MAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON
4625 East Bay Drive, Suite 211 WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF:
(
CITY COUNTY CITY O COUNTY ? OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
d
Clearwater, Pinellas NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION:
DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED MY POSITION IS:
December 21, 2010 El ELECTIVE 0 APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 813
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council,
commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting
conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing the reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS. FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea-
sure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the
parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or
to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec, 163.356 or
163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that
capacity.
For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate' means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation
are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you
are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min-
utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you
must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made
by you or at your direction.
IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
• You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side)
CE FORM SB - EFF. 1/2000 PAGE 1
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
• A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
• The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
• You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.
• You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the
meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
I Brian Barker , hereby disclose that on 20
(a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one)
inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate,
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative,
x inured to the special gain or loss of Deuel & Associates Engineers by
whom I am retained; or
inured to the special gain or loss of which
is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
The engineering firm of which I am a "prinicpal" is the Engineer of Record for
Case No. FLD2010-08004 - 40 Devon Drive
December 21, 2010
Date Filed
Signature
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY.REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000.
CE FORM 813 - EFF. 1/2000 PAGE 2
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE
Baker, Brian City of Clearwater Community Development Board
MAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON
4625 East Bay Drive, Suite 211 WHICH 1 SERVE IS A UNIT OF:
r
CITY COUNTY CITY O COUNTY ? OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
d
Clearwater, Pinellas NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION:
DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED MY POSITION IS:
December 21, 2010 R ELECTIVE 0 APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 813
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council,
commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting
conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing 1he reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea-
sure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the
parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or
to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or
163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that
capacity.
For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A 'business associate' means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation
are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
• • • •
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you
are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min-
utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you
must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made
by you or at your direction.
IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
• You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side)
CE FORM 813 - EFF. 112000 PAGE 1
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
• A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
• The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
• You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.
• You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the
meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
I Brian Barker hereby disclose that on 20
(a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one)
inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate,
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative,
X inured to the special gain or loss of Deuel & Associates Engineers by
whom I am retained; or
inured to the special gain or loss of which
is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
The engineering firm of which I am a "prinicpal" is the Engineer of Record for
Case No. DVA2010-08001 - 40 Devon Drive.
December 21, 2010
Date Filed
Signature
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY .REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000.
CE FORM oa - EFr. 1 /2ooo PAGE 2
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;
Sue Diana, Assistant City Clerk; /Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for December 21, 2010
DATE: December 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case: FLD2010-10030 - 1 192 Browns Court
Yes No
2.
Case: FLD201 0-08004 - 40 Devon Drive &
Yes X No
3. Case: FLD2010-05001B - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes /c No
Signature:
Case: DVA2010-08001 Level 3
S.' (Planning DepartmentlC D BWgendas DRC & CDBICDBI2010]2 December 21,201W] Cover MEMO 2010.doc
PRINT NAME
`Clearwater
U
Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet
TO: Community Development Board Members
FROM: Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager
COPIES: Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney; Susan Chase, City Clerk Specialist;
Sue Diana, Assistant City Clerk; /Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for December 21, 2010
DATE: December 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case: FLD2010-10030 - 1 192 Browns Court
Yes
No
2. Case: FLD2010-08004 - 40 Devon Drive & Case: DVA2010-08001 Level 3
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-05001B - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes No
I have conducted a personal investization on the personal site visit to the following properties.
Signature: Date: b
,Fri?n :?Apl<e-r
PRINT NAME
S: IPdanning DepartmentlC D BWgendas DRC & CDBICDBI2010V 2 December 21, 201011 Cover MEMO 2010.doc
Clearwater
U
TO: Community Development Board Members
FROM: Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager
Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet
COPIES: Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney; Susan Chase, City Clerk Specialist;
Sue Diana, Assistant City Clerk; /Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for December 21, 2010
DATE: December 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case''. k'LD2010-10030 -1 192 Browns Court ? K)E o
Yes No
2. Case: FLD2010-08004 - 40 De n Drive & Case: DVA2010-08001 Level 3
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-05001B - 113 etty Lane
Yes No
Sign
PRINT NAME
Date: ( o , ( ? '
S: (Planning DepartmentlC D &4gendas DRC & CDBICDBI2010]2 December 21, 2010] Cover MEMO 2010.doc
Clearwater
0
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;
Sue Diana, Assistant City Clerk; /Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for December 21, 2010
DATE: December 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case: FLD 10-10030 - 1 192 Browns Court
Yes No
Case: 7010-08004 - 40 Devon Drive &
Yes No
Case: DVA2010-08001 Level 3
2.
3. Case: F D 10-05001 B - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes No
Signature:
PRINT N
site visit to three followinP properties.
Date: 1/6 I l? 2 2 i
S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDB120M]2 December 21,201M Cover MEMO 2010.doc
'Clearwater
rJ
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;
Sue Diana, Assistant City Clerk; /Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for December 21, 2010
DATE: December 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case: FLD2010-10030 - 1 192 Browns Court
Yes No
2.
Case: FLD201 0-08004 - 40 Devon Drive &
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-05001B - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes No
Signature:
PRINT
Case: DVA2010-08001 Level 3
S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BWgendas DRC & CDBICDBI20MI2 December 21, 2010V Cover MEMO 2010.doc
' Clearwater
U
Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet
TO: Community Development Board Members
FROM: Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager
COPIES: Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney; Susan Chase, City Clerk Specialist;
Sue Diana, Assistant City Clerk; /Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for December 21, 2010
DATE: December 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case: FLD2010-10030 - 1 192 Browns Court
Yes No ?Z?
2. Case: FLD2010-08004 - 40 Devon Drive & Case: DVA2010-08001 Level 3
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-05001B - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes No
Signature: V-- -141
Date:
PRINT NAME
S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDBI2010V2 December 21, 201011 Cover MEMO 2010.doc
L.L
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;
Sue Diana, Assistant City Clerk; /Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for December 21, 2010
DATE: December 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case: FLD2010-10030 -1192 Browns Court
Yes
2.
No
Case: FLD2010-08004 - 40 Devon Drive &
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-05001B - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes
PRINT NAME
Case: DVA2010-08001 Level 3
No
S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDBI20/0112 December 21, 201011 Cover MEMO 2010.doc
"Clearwater
U
Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet
TO: Community Development Board Members
FROM: Robert Tefft, Development Review Manager
COPIES: Leslie Dougall-Sides, Assistant City Attorney; Susan Chase, City Clerk Specialist;
Sue Diana, Assistant City Clerk; /Pat Sullivan, Board Reporter
SUBJECT: Agenda Items for December 21, 2010
DATE: December 16, 2010
CDB packets being distributed on contain the following items:
Agenda
Site investigation form
Unapproved minutes of previous meeting
Level Two Applications (Item 1-4)
1. Case: FLD2010-10030 -1 192 Browns Court
Yes No
2. Case: FLD201 0-08004 - 40 Devon Drive & Case: DVA2010-08001 Level 3
Yes No
3. Case: FLD2010-05001B - 113 N Betty Lane
Yes No
PRINT NAME
S: (Planning DepartmentlC D BlAgendas DRC & CDBICDB120M]2 December 21,20M] Cover MEMO 2010.doc