CAY 1475, LLCBEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA
IN RE: CAY 1475, LLC, APPLICANT: LUP2011-01001/ ORDINANCE
NO. 8254-11; AND REZ2011- 010011ORDINANCE NO. 8255-11,1475
SUNSET POINT ROAD
ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
THIS CAUSE came on to be heard at the May 19, 2011 Clearwater City
Council Meeting on Case No. LUP201 1 -01001 /Ordinance No. 8254-11,
amending the future land use map from Residential Urban (RU),
Residential/Office General (R/OG), and Commercial General (CG) to the
Residential/Office/Retail (R/O/R) classification and Case No. REZ201 1-
01001 /Ordinance No. 8255-11, amending the zoning atlas of the City by rezoning
from the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) and Office (O) Zoning Districts
to the Commercial (C) Zoning District, for the property located at 1475 Sunset
Point Road, consisting of a parcel located in the NW % of the SW % of Section 2,
Township 29 South, Range 15 East, and part of Lot 9, Brentwood Estates. The
matter was properly noticed and advertised pursuant to Community Development
Code Section 4-206.
The City Council conducted its review of the future land use map
amendment request using the procedure specified in Community Development
Code Section 4-603E. and the standards for review set forth in Section 4-603F.
The City Council conducted its review of the rezoning request using the
procedure specified in Community Development Code Section 4-602E. and the
standards for review set forth in Section 4-602F. The Staff Report was presented
by Planner III Catherine L. Lee. Planning and Development Director Michael L.
Delk and Assistant Planning and Development Director Gina L. Clayton also
addressed the City Council. The Record of the quasi-judicial hearing held before
the City's Community Development Board [CDB] and recommendation of the
CDB issued pursuant to Community Development Code Section 4-602D. were
received by the City Council and are attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference. The City Council heard comment or argument from representatives of
the applicant. The applicant presented a PowerPoint presentation and submitted
one exhibit. One member of the public spoke in opposition to the application.
One e-mail in opposition was received by staff and provided to the City Council.
After hearing and considering the evidence, the City Council makes the following
findings:
Findings of Fact
1. This future land use map amendment application and zoning atlas
amendment application involves a 1.52-acre parcel located on the south side of
Sunset Point Road approximately 150 feet west of Highland Avenue. The subject
property has Future Land Use Map classifications of Residential Urban (RU),
Residential/Office General (R/OG), and Commercial General (CG) and zoning
designations of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) and Office (O). The
applicant is requesting to amend the future land use classification to the
Residential/Office/Retail (R/O/R) classification and the zoning district to the
Commercial (C) Zoning District.
2
2. A previous application for future land use map amendment to the
Commercial General (CG) designation and rezoning to the Commercial (C)
Zoning District, involving the same property [LUZ2010-06001], was heard at the
July 20, 2010 Community Development Board meeting [denial was
recommended] and was denied at the August 5, 2010 City Council meeting.
3. The instant application is accompanied by an application for a
Development Agreement [Case No. DVA2011-01001 ]. The Development
Agreement would limit several uses which are either not allowable on the subject
property or are only allowable under restriction. The Development Agreement
restrictions would be applicable for only a ten-year period.
4. The subject property is located on the section of Sunset Point Road
between Kings Highway and North Highland Avenue. The character of the
neighborhood is a mix of single-family residences, multi-family residences, retail,
restaurants, offices, and a gas station. To the north and south are single-family
homes with a future land use map category of Residential Urban (RU) and
zoning district of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). To the east is a
vacant automobile service station use not used as such since mid-2003 with a
future land use map category of Commercial General (CG) and a Commercial
(C) zoning district. To the west are nonconforming retail and printing shop uses
with a future land use map category of Residential/Office General (R/OG) and
Office (O) zoning district. Sunset Point Road west of Highland Avenue is
primarily residential with some office, neighborhood retail, and institutional uses.
Nonresidential parcels west of the subject property to King's Highway along
3
Sunset Point Road consist of a nonconforming retail store, a nonconforming
daycare, a dentist office, a veterinary office [all from 1750 square feet to 4688
square feet], and three vacant lots. [A funeral home use was also approved
under the Residential/Office/General category, allowable as an Institutional use
under the Countywide Rules and as Retail under the Community Development
Code; however, the associated development order expired without
implementation of the use.] The subject property is located on a PSTA bus
route, but is not located in or adjacent to an activity center.
5. The Citywide Design Structure, as shown on Map A-14, depicts the
southeast corner of Sunset Point Road and Highland Avenue [currently
developed as Sunset Square Shopping Center] as a Neighborhood Shopping
Center. Such Centers are intended to fulfill the basic needs of residents within
one mile of the Center. The two shopping centers at this southeast corner have
19,490 square feet of vacant commercial space. This designated Neighborhood
Shopping Center does not include the property to the west of Highland Avenue
as it recognizes that there is sufficient commercially designated land currently in
place. The proposal to expand commercial use designations outside the Center
creates more commercial land than is necessary to support basic needs of
surrounding residents. Sunset Point Road is not a traditional commercial
corridor.
6. The subject property functioned as a bank beginning in 1965 and
ending in May 2007 with the closing of a Bank of America branch at the site. The
former bank site contains a building, parking lot, and entrance on the north
4
portion of the property fronting on Sunset Point Road, and a drive-through and
drive isle traversing the eastern portion of the property and connecting to
Highland Avenue. The applicant intends to demolish the current building to
redevelop the site. This future land use map amendment and rezoning
application was accompanied by an application for site redevelopment as an
8230 square foot Family Dollar Store with associated parking, sidewalks, storm
water management system, landscaping, driveways, utilities and associated
infrastructure [FLS2011-02002]. This application was approved pursuant to
Development Review Committee review on March 3, 2011, subject to the
applicant's obtaining future land use map amendment and rezoning approval.
7. The proposed Residential/Office/Retail future land use category
permits 18 dwelling units per acre and a floor area ratio of 0.40 and the proposed
Commercial (C) zoning district primarily permits overnight accommodations,
restaurants, and retail sales and services uses. The proposed future land use
map amendment intensifies the uses allowed on the portion of the property that
abuts single-family homes. If approved, this property would be the only property
in this area with the Residential/Office/Retail designation. The proposed
Commercial (C) Zoning District would permit four additional dwelling units but
6903 fewer square feet of nonresidential floor area on the subject property. The
uses currently allowed in the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) Zoning
District include attached and detached dwellings, community residential homes,
non-residential off-street parking, parks and recreation facilities, schools, and
5
utility/infrastructure facilities. The Office (O) Zoning District primarily permits
office, places of worship, and nursing homes.
8. Clearwater Comprehensive Plan Policy A.2.2.3 provides: Commercial
land uses shall be located at the intersection of arterial or collector streets and
should be sited in such a way as to minimize the intrusion of off-site impacts into
residential neighborhoods .... site plans shall discourage the creation of "strip
commercial" zones by insuring that adequate lot depths are maintained and by
zoning for commercial development at major intersections. Goal A.5. provides:
The City of Clearwater shall identify and utilize a citywide design structure
comprised of a hierarchy of places and linkages. The citywide design structure
will serve as a guide to development and land use decisions while protecting
those elements that make the city uniquely Clearwater. Policy A.5.5.1 provides:
Development should be designed to maintain and support the existing or
envisioned character of the neighborhood. Objective A.6.2. provides: The City of
Clearwater shall continue to support innovative planned development and mixed
land use development techniques in order to promote infill development that is
consistent and compatible with the surrounding development. Map A-14 and
attachment, Neighborhood Shopping Centers and Surrounding Non-residential
Uses, states that Neighborhood Centers typically consist of a limited number of
commercial establishments that fulfill the basic needs of residents within one mile
of the center.
9. The Pinellas County Countywide Plan Rules, Section 2.3.3.4.3.,
specify that the purpose of the proposed Residential/Office/Retail plan category
6
is to depict those areas of the County that are now developed, or are appropriate
to be developed, in residential, office and/or retail commercial use, and to
recognize such areas as well-suited for mixed-use of a residential/office/retail
character consistent with the surrounding uses, transportation facilities and
natural resource characteristics of such areas. Locational Characteristics
specified in that Section indicate that the category is appropriate to locations
where it would serve as a transition from an urban activity center or more
intensive nonresidential use to residential, office or public/semi-public use; and in
areas where the size and scale of development will accommodate true mixed
residential, office and retail use. These areas are typically in proximity to and
served by the arterial and major thoroughfare highway network in and adjacent to
activity centers where mixed-use development allows interaction between uses
and encourages mass transit and nonvehicular trips.
10. Community Development Code Section 4-603, Comprehensive plan
amendments, provides as follows:
A. Purpose and applicability. The city commission is hereby
authorized to amend the text of the City of
Clearwater's Comprehensive Plan and the Future
Land Use Map in accordance with the procedures in
this section and Florida law.
B. Application requirementsrnitiation.
1. An amendment to the City of Clearwater's
Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land use map
may be initiated by the city commission, the
community development board or the city manager.
An amendment to the future land use map may be
proposed by the owner of the property or his
representative which is the subject of the amendment.
An amendment to any other element of the plan may
be proposed by an owner of property who has applied
for development approval when an amendment to the
7
C.
D.
plan appears necessary to resolve a conflict between
one or more provisions of the plan and the application
for development approval.
2. An application shall be submitted in a form provided
by the community development coordinator, setting
forth the purpose, scope and provisions of the
proposed amendment. An application for a
comprehensive plan amendment which does not
affect an individual parcel of land, shall be
accompanied by such data and analysis as would be
required to support such an amendment under Florida
Statutes. An application for a comprehensive plan
amendment which does affect an individual parcel of
land shall include the basic information required in
Section 4-202(A), the fee required in Section 4-202(E)
and the following:
a. The proposed city future land use map
classification or text amendment.
b. An assessment, conducted in accordance
with specific requirements of the community
development coordinator, of the impact of the
proposed change on the adequacy of public facilities,
the environment, community character and the fiscal
condition of the city.
c. Such other information as may be required to
demonstrate the proposed amendment complies with
the standards set forth in 4-603(F).
Staff review and report. After the community
development coordinator has reviewed the application
with the development review committee in
accordance with the provisions of Section 4-202(C)
and (D), he shall send a written report and
recommendation to the community development
board, with a copy of the applicant, setting forth
whether the application should be approved,
approved with conditions or denied and the grounds
for such recommendation.
Community development board review/recommendation.
Upon receipt of the recommendation of the
community development coordinator, the community
development board shall conduct a public hearing on
the application in accordance with the requirements of
Section 4-206 and issue a recommended order to the
city commission setting forth the board's findings in
regard to whether the proposed amendment will
satisfy the standards set forth in Section 4-603(F) and
8
may include any proposed modifications or conditions
to the proposed amendment.
E. City commission review/decision. Upon receipt of the
recommended order of the community development
board, the city commission shall conduct a public
hearing in accordance with the provisions of Section
4-206 in order to determine if the proposed
amendment should be transmitted to other agencies
and governmental entities for review if required by
Florida Statutes. If transmittal to other agencies is
required, the city commission shall conduct another
public hearing after such transmittal in accordance
with the provisions of Section 4-206 in order to
determine if the proposed amendment should be
adopted. In acting on a proposed amendment, the
city commission may accept, accept with
modifications or conditions, or reject the proposed
amendment.
F. Standards for review. No amendment to the
comprehensive plan or future land use map shall be
approved unless it complies with the following
standards:
1. The amendment will further implementation of the
comprehensive plan consistent with the goals,
policies and objectives contained in the plan.
2. The amendment is not inconsistent with other
provisions of the comprehensive plan.
3. The available uses, if applicable, to which the
property may be put are appropriate to the property in
question and compatible with existing and planned
uses in the area.
4. Sufficient public facilities are available to serve the
property.
5. The amendment will not adversely affect the natural
environment.
6. The amendment will not adversely impact the use of
property in the immediate area.
11. Community Development Code Section 4-602, Zoning Atlas
amendments, provides as follows:
A. Purpose and applicability. It is the purpose of this
section to establish a procedure for amending the Zoning
Atlas of the city in accordance with Florida Statutes.
9
B. Applicationlinitiation requirements. An application for an
amendment of the Zoning Atlas of the city may be
initiated by the city commission, the community
development coordinator, the community development
board and by any person in conjunction with an
application for development approval. Proposed Zoning
Atlas amendment applications shall include such
information as is applicable in Section 4-202(A) and the
fee required by Section 4-202(E).
C. Staff review and recommendation. After the community
development coordinator has reviewed the application
with the development r3eview committee in accordance
with the provisions of Section 4-202(C) and (D), he shall
send a written report and recommendation to the
community development board, with a copy to the
applicant, if any, setting forth whether the application
should be approved, approved with conditions or denied
and the grounds for such recommendation.
D. Community development board review/recommendation.
Upon receipt of the recommendation of the community
development coordinator, the community development
board shall conduct a public hearing on the application in
accordance with the requirements of Section 4-206 and
issue a recommended order to the city commission
setting forth the board's findings in regard to whether the
proposed amendment will satisfy the standards set forth
in Section 4-602(F) and may include any proposed
modifications or conditions to the proposed amendment.
E. City commission review/decision. Upon receipt of the
recommended order of the community development
board, the city commission shall conduct a public hearing
in accordance with the provisions of Section 4-206 and
shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the
amendment. Upon adoption of an ordinance amending
the Zoning Atlas, the Zoning Atlas shall be deemed
amended as of the effective date of the ordinance. The
community development coordinator shall revise and
may republish from time to time the Zoning Atlas or
portions thereof as amended, but a failure to revise or
republish shall not affect the validity of any ordinance
amending the Zoning Atlas.
F. Standards for review. No amendment to the Zoning Atlas
shall be approved unless the city commission finds that
such amendment complies with the following standards:
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with and
furthers the goals, policies and objectives of the
10
comprehensive plan and furthers the purposes of this
Development Code and other city ordinances and
actions designed to implement the plan.
2. The available uses to which the property may be put
are appropriate to the property which is subject to the
proposed amendment and compatible with existing
and planned uses in the area.
3. The amendment does not conflict with the needs and
character of the neighborhood and the city.
4. The amendment will not adversely or unreasonably
affect the use of other property in the area.
5. The amendment will not adversely burden public
facilities, including the traffic-carrying capacities of
streets, in an unreasonably or disproportionate
manner.
6. The district boundaries are appropriately drawn with
due regard to locations and classifications of streets,
ownership lines, existing improvements and the
natural environment.
12. The Community Development Board reviewed this application at its
meeting of May 17, 2011. The staff recommendation was that the Board
recommend denial of the application to the City Council. A motion was made by
the Board to recommend approval of the application based upon the Board's
findings of fact and conclusions of law. The motion passed by a vote of four to
three.
Conclusions of Law
1. The Sunset Point Road corridor west of Highland Avenue is not an
area that is developed or is appropriate to be developed in a way that provides
community and countywide commercial goods and services. The site is not
located in or adjacent to an activity center or major transportation facility. The
proposed extension of commercial uses along the predominantly residential
Sunset Point Road corridor could negatively impact the adjacent single-family
11
residential neighborhoods to the north and south by introducing a point of
destabilization.
2. The proposed plan amendment is not consistent with the purpose or
locational characteristics set forth in Countywide Plan Rule 2.3.3.4.3. for the
Residential/Office/Retail (R/O/R) designation.
3. The proposed future land use category is not appropriately located, as
some of the proposed uses are incompatible with the surrounding environment
and envisioned character of the neighborhood. The proposed amendment would
allow for additional uses not allowed by two of the three subject property's
current future land use designations. The proposed use is not a true mixed
office/residential/retail use. A less intensive use, such as office, would be more
appropriate located, as here, contiguous to single-family homes and would be a
better fit with the character of Sunset Point Road west of Highland Avenue. The
existing Residential/Office General designation is more appropriate to the
character of the neighborhood and allows for the transition from commercial
properties to the east to residential properties to the north, south and west. The
request is not compatible with the surrounding area and may unreasonably affect
the use of property in the area.
4. Additional commercial (retail) acreage in the vicinity is unneeded to
serve the neighborhood residents and the existing future land use category
already serves as a transition from the Neighborhood Center to surrounding
residential uses. The potential extension of intensive commercial uses along the
12
predominantly residential corridor could negatively impact adjacent
neighborhoods.
5. The proposed future land use and zoning designations are not in
character with the overall future land use map and zoning designations in the
area, and are not compatible with surrounding uses and not consistent with the
character of the immediate surrounding area and neighborhood.
6. The proposed future land use amendment and rezoning are
inconsistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Clearwater
Comprehensive Plan, in particular Policies A.2.2.3 and A.5.5.1 and Objective
A.6.6.2.
7. Pursuant to Community Development Code Section 4-603E., no future
land use amendment shall be approved unless the City Council finds that the
amendment complies with each and every standard 1. through 6. Because
based upon the above Findings of Fact the application fails to comply with each
and every standard, and in particular does not comply with the standards set
forth in Section 4-603F.1., 4-603F.3., and 4-603F.6., the City Council hereby
determines that the application in Case Number LUP2011-01001 for future land
use map amendment is DENIED.
8. Pursuant to Community Development Code Section 4-602F., no
zoning atlas amendment shall be approved unless the City Council finds that the
amendment complies with each and every standard 1. through 6. Since the City
Council denied the application for future land use map amendment, substantial
competent evidence presented to the City Council demonstrated that the
13
application for rezoning does not comply with the standard set forth in Section 4-
602F.1. Further, the application does not comply with the standards set forth in
Section 4-602F.2., 4-602F.3, and 4-602F.4. Therefore, the City Council hereby
determines that the application in Case Number REZ201 1 -01001 for zoning atlas
amendment is DENIED.
Approved as to form:
Leslie K. Dougall S es
Assistant City Atto ey
r
Frank V. Hibbard
Mayor
Rosemarie Call
City Clerk
14