The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2013-05018� � �� ,�=�-- , MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: CASE: REQUEST: GENERAL DATA: Agent........................... Applicant / Owner .............. L o ca tion . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Property Size .................... Future Land Use Plan...... Zoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... Special Area Plan ............. Adjacent Zoning... North: South: East: West: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT August 20, 2013 E.1. FLD2013-05018 Flexible Development application to allow a Mixed Use (850 square feet of office space and 850 square feet for one dwelling unit) in the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 8,800 square feet (0.2 acres); a lot width of 80 feet; front (east) setbacks of five feet (to pavement) and 43.6 feet (to building); side (north) setbacks of 2.3 feet (to existing carport) and 12.16 feet (to building); side (south) setbacks of zero feet (to driveway), 1.5 feet (to proposed brick pavers) and 43.5 feet (to building); rear setbacks of nineteen feet (to proposed deck) and twenty-nine feet (to building); a building height of 18.5 feet (to mid-point of pitched roo�; and three off-street parking spaces as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of the Community Development Code Section 2-704.E., as well as a reduction to the east perimeter landscape buffer from fifteen feet to five feet; a reduction to the south perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to 1.5 feet; a reduction to the north perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to 23 feet, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of the Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G. � �► � �� . ��.� Bret Krasman, P.E. � Rosemarie Rem Ceralo- � ?� * O'Donnell , �� ;t west side South Myrtle Avenue � ��f"� at the Lotus Path and South � Myrtle Avenue intersection , �i�� _ � � ��f �� 0.20 Acres �-, i� Commercial General (CG) ;; � ,� Commercial (C) District 1� °`* __-i p � , N/A '^ Commercial (C) District � � � ,��`� Commercial (C) District Office (0) District Commercial (C) District Existing Land Use ............. Detached Dwelling Proposed Land Use......... Mixed Use ' '! :� - ��, • �— _ � — � �.i --,,�w.. r., ar �r � I I , �`"��:� '�i�? "� •� ,�; : ,�',,.� �` � ��: �� li��l ►f [i��l Level II Flexible Development Application Review ' . �a.'�w rs �.... ,.. . . ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 0.20-acre subject property is located on the west side of South Myrtle Avenue at the Lotus Path and South Myrtle Avenue intersection. The property consists of a two-story detached dwelling that according to the applicant has been used as a residence since it was built in 1934. The property is well landscaped and has a U-shaped driveway with ingress from South Myrtle Avenue at the north end of the property and egress onto the adj acent property to the south. The egress onto the adjacent property is due to a vacation of a portion of the Lotus Path right-of-way in 1982 (shown as Davidson Avenue on the survey and site plan). The City granted a request by Concrete Fabricators to vacate a portion of Lotus Path right- of-way because the City found that this portion of the Lotus Path right-of-way was not necessary or required for municipal use. The City determined it to be in the interest and advantage of the City and general public that this portion of Lotus Path be vacated (Ordinance No. 2765-82). However, it retained a drainage and utility easement over the North 40 feet of the vacated right-of-way. As shown on the site plan, this North 40 includes the entire length of the southern property line (from the south property line then north 30 feet; approximately 3,045 square feet of the 8,800 square foot property). There are two parking spaces located on the north side of the property. One space is covered by a carport, and at this time, is closed off and being used as a storage area. The property includes a number of large mature shade trees planted throughout the front, side (south), and rear (west) portions of the property. The subject property is zoned C District and within the CG Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) classification. The L-shaped property to the north and west and the properiy to the south are both zoned C District and contain a furniture store and a small Mexican food market, respectively. The property across South Myrtle Avenue, is zoned O District and includes an office plaza with a PLANN[NG & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION . __ . __ . _._� � E�� -� �r - �� _ ��_ - �� i � — � -- ' -- – - -- -' � � ' ' r � _�� I�'� r ��r - -- -_ �- I� I 'J� li��' � _ I — _ _ _ _ ��,. „�,. ,, _ �� __l�_�oo-- - -�� —;:;- , - - — .uswr<.wr �_ � � ' ' �sw.F w�.r — I L — �SITECT � i � - - ,,. - - - I i' , , ; - _ ._ : �.�� w—e�� — J � — — � — �i— — , — — ,� II � =o TM ,.' — �;�M.� � � _4 _ � � , — � �_ ; - — �� .�o=a — � — _ _ � I ' �� _ �_ �_ _;'; � � -��; � - � ` - _-u - ��,� , � � - � �. �F.,� � , �"- .__� � i � � � "° - i g - < �. � I - � -- - - � �_.-�T � „� _ �_� I€_ _ �_: ;,��,�„� _, � _ �x„�.�us. ; ��, � � � — 1= — �n.�:'! �sr -' � i �,�:.o - - - LOCATION MAP , ��, ' ' • . � � i � �� n � i p� ^ —� � , � i � . L i ,� , i _ �. ,..,. , , , �< � J •---- ' F JASM/MEWAY � � I I � > Y . .. -I I p�..�..� . 1 �� I11 N� �II II � � �� jl .�`�,1Jn"�..i"i.l^�4j.pl,i`�.1'nI' i°i '�,4.ui, I , . ...,, �� ... „� �_�! —�T ��t� i r'�r r+ , „ � , ,�� , Il ..�•�/ „ n , r f .f.. � � i f� IL', 1•� � �� y�I� b pllSh M'' p �� , , , � MAGNOLAOR ��Ii!_�..1 � � I_� � ...�.� � �� i °'°s°i � i i � � � �� _ -- i��R� K—i= � —;; � { : ; �. � it, � -- � �.�,, _ � --_ � - --� -- ;s -��-' „ --- .,,,. � � � � -__ � -- '.s�'= :. ' i.' ' c 1� I __ __ ��n ��,�.u.��.: _._ � y — — .,�, �a. ---'_',. R e 1_ __"aa� ,�� e-' �~ ----' �� 7 conrs Pnnr '�i' --r ' ' — — i i . i � i � �� i� � I =�= t B :i— — m � i ,, � , , . . . --- �o. '4 ,�.�,. � ��R1�1 �. y „�, --- --- ,. �3 � , �$ � �� ci in .�� I � '-- 4'� i i � "'_' " + _ JEFfOR0.43T n �� `�' �i�� E �� i��— �� EXISTING SURROUNDING USES MAP Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 1 Y CI�.Ai littlel Level II Flexible Develo ment lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P APP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION . ��+:zs� ...,r = . . � number of tenant spaces, but according the City Records only one business (administrative office) is currently operating on site. Develonment Pronosal As mentioned the property includes a two-story 1,700 square foot residence with 850 square feet of gross floor area on each floor. The owner of the property has stated that she will live on the second floor of the building and operate an office use on the ground level; the online sale of antique merchandise. Two off-street parking spaces will be located on the south side of the property, with each space constructed of brick pavers. One of the spaces will be ADA- compliant space with a walkway leading to the building. The existing driveway will provide one additional off-street parking space providing bring the total number of parking spaces on the site to three. The site plan also shows that the owner will modify the egress-only driveway by adding pavement that will allow vehicles to exit the subject property directly onto South Myrtle Avenue. The proposal is being reviewed as a Level II Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project because the proposal does not meet the required setbacks and number of parking spaces for a Mixed Use development as set forth in Table 2-704. Communitv Develonment Code Development Parameters Densitv/Intensity: Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-701.1, the maximum allowable density for properties with a FLUP designation of CG is 24 dwelling units per acre. The designation also permits a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.55. The proposed density is one dwelling unit with 850 square feet of commercial space. For Mixed Use projects development potential is determined by first calculating the amount of land needed to support the proposed amount of non-residential GFA. In this case, given a FAR of 0.55, 850 square feet of non-residential GFA requires 1,830.4 square feet of land. This area is subtracted from the overall size of the site (8,800 square feet) resulting in 6,969.6 square feet of land area or 0.16 acres. This is then multiplied by 24 (the number of dwelling units permitted per acre) which yield three dwelling units where one is proposed. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with the Code. Im�ervious Surface Ratio (ISR,� Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-701.1 the maximum allowable ISR is 0.55 within the CG FLUP category. The proposed ISR is 0.39, which is below this code provision. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with the Code. Minimum Lot Area: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, there is no minimum required lot area for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Section 2-704, the minimum lot area for a Mixed Use may range between 5,000 and 10,000 square feet of area. The subject property is 8,800 square feet in area. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with the Code. Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 2 ��l�ul 1'r Rt�t-1 Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION �_. .. �,. Minimum Lot Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, there is no minimum required lot width for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Section 2- 704, the minimum lot width for a Mixed Use may range between 50 and 100 feet. The subject property has a lot width of 80 feet. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with the Code. Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 7-704, there are no minimum front, side and rear setbacks for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects. However, for a point of compaxison, pursuant to CDC Section 2-702, Mixed Uses require a minimum front setback of 25 feet, a side setback of 10 feet, and a rear setback of 20 feet. The request includes front (east) setbacks of five feet (to pavement) and 43.6 feet (to building); side (north) setback of 2.3 feet (to building); side (south) setbacks of zero feet (to driveway), 1.5 feet (to proposed brick pavers) and 43.5 feet (to building); rear setbacks of 19 feet (to proposed deck) and 29 feet (to building). With regard to setbacks to building, these are existing setbacks as the owner is not expanding the building except for a deck at the rear of the property that will be setback 19 feet from the property line. The reduction to the front setback of five feet to driveway and the side (south) setbacks of zero feet to driveway and 1.5 feet to pavers are necessary for the owner of the property to provide two parking spaces and a drive aisle that comply with Code. Staff supports the reductions to setback because no changes are proposed other than additional parking and pavement that will not impede the development and improvement of surrounding properties. Maximum Building Hei� Pursuant to CDC Table 2-704, there is no minimum required height for a Comprehensive Iniill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Section 2-702, the maximum height of a Mixed Use is 25. The subject building is 18.5 feet (to mid-point of pitched roo fl feet from existing grade, which is below the maximum height allowed as a Minimum Standard development in the district. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with the Code. Minimum Off-Street Parkin�: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-703, there is no minimum off-street parking requirement for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-702, the minimum required parking for Mixed Uses is based on the specific use requirements. Accordingly, attached dwellings require two spaces per unit and office uses require three spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. As one unit and 850 square feet of office space are proposed, five (4.55) parking spaces are required. Office uses typically do not generate significant levels of traffic. Specifcally, the proposed office (internet-based sales) will essentially operate as a home-based business with few, if any, customers coming to the site. Furthermore, the submitted floor plan provide that the office use will use will occupy approximately 337 square feet of area with the remaining interior area to be dedicated as storage and a break room. The large storage area (approximately 207 square feet) is significant enough in area to be considered non-parking-generating. Based upon the above, as well as the fact that the residence and office use will be owner occupied, Staff supports the Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 3 � C��1 ��ll.l Level II Flexible Devel ment A lication Review PL^r�r��rrc � nEVELOrMExr �P PP DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION u �N*�.�� '.r.. �.��, ' . . proposal. It is noted, however, that this support is subject to the condition of approval that title to the dwelling unit is vested in the ownership of the office use. With regard to the driveway, the existing ingress-only driveway is 9.3 feet in width. The Engineering Department has determined that this driveway must comply with the standards for an opening onto a local roadway or neighborhood road which is 10 feet in width pursuant to CDC Section 3-1904. The Engineering Department estimates the combined width of the existing driveway in the right-of-way, driveway flares, and existing driveway entrance exceeds the 10 foot wide opening requirement. In addition, it has been determined that the width of the driveway is adequate for the proposed use. However, as the existing driveway is in a state of disrepair it is a condition of approval that the driveway be improved with a permanent all- weather paving material graded to drain stormwater pursuant to CDC Section 3-1403 to the satisfaction of Staff. 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 upon the plans submitted, no mechanical equipment is shown outside the building. The location and screening of any existing or future mechanical equipment will be reviewed at time of building permit submission, should this application be approved by the CDB. Si�ht Visibility Triangles.• Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the driveways; no structures or landscaping may be installed which will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20 foot sight visibility triangles. The submitted site plan shows that a mailbox in brick casing will be located within the northern driveway sight visibility triangles. However, this has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineering Division and been found to be acceptable. Any proposed landscaping within the sight triangles shall also meet this criterion. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with the Code. Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-912, for development that does not involve a subdivision, all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. There are existing overhead utility lines, serving this development, within the rights-of-way along the west side of South Myrtle Avenue that will need to be undergrounded. The only exception will be if the undergrounding of overhead utilities is deemed to be impracticable due to the existence and direct conflict of existing underground utilities and/or if the owning entity refuses to allow the undergrounding of their respective utility. The owner will need to submit documentation stating such from the utility company; if not all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant shall place all service lines leading onto the property underground, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Landscapin� Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D., perimeter buffers required for nonresidential uses adjacent to nonresidential uses along the side and rear property lines to be five feet in width; and the front landscape buffer along South Myrtle Avenue, an arterial right-of-way, is required to be 15 feet in width. The applicant is requesting reduction to the east perimeter landscape buffer width from Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 4 : C��l 1'1'�L�1 Level II Flexible Develo ment lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P APP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � . ... .. : .,,.:"`s�"!4"'a'�:?,c :;: , . fifteen feet to five feet; a reduction to the south perimeter landscape buffer width from five feet to zero feet and a reduction to the north perimeter landscape buffer width from five feet to 2.3 feet. In regard to the north perimeter landscape buffer, the requested reduction in width from five feet to 2.3 feet is to the existing carport which is approximately 23 linear feet in length. The remaining 89 feet of the north buffer varies from four (approximately 35 feet in length) and five feet. In regard to the south perimeter landscape buffer, the requested reduction in width from five feet to zero feet is to the driveway which is approximately 15 linear feet in length. There is a portion of this buffer that varies between three and seven feet (approximately 30 feet in length) while the remaining 63 feet of the south buffer width is five feet in width. The front east perimeter buffer width ranges from five feet to fourteen feet as it follows the curvature of the driveway. The property consists of a 13 mature trees spaced throughout the property including live oak, elm, mango, oleander, and orchid. The existing tree canopy (on the west, east, and north) will not accommodate additional shade trees. The applicant has mitigated the dimensional deficiency with regard to the buffer widths by adding various ground covers (hibiscus, yaupon holly, and dwarf confederate jasmine) in a tiered effect within the front east landscape perimeter to complement while preserving the existing trees. There is also a 45 foot length along the south property line that has no landscaping within the buffer. At this time, there are eight planters in this area; however, landscape materials must be planted in the ground. This area can accommodate shrubs and a number of accent trees. It shall be a condition of approval that prior to the issuance a Certificate of Completion or Occupancy, a landscape plan shall be submitted that shows shrubs and accent trees in the side (south) perimeter buffer that complies with the landscape criteria to be reviewed and approved by Staff. Comprehensive Landscape Pro�ram: Pursuant to Section 3-1202.G of the Community Development Code, the landscaping requirements contained within the Code can be waived or modified if the application contains a Comprehensive Landscape Program satisfying certain criteria. The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with those criteria. Consistent � Inconsistent 1. Architectural theme: a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program shall be designed as a N/A N/A part of the architectural theme of the principle buildings proposed or developed on the pazcel proposed for development; or b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment X proposed in the comprehensive landscape program shall be demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape standards. 2. Lighting: Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is N/A N/A automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed. 3. Communiry character: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive X landscape program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. 4. Properry 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. Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 5 }�1�� 1't �Ll.l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLnxxu�G & DEV�LOPn�rrr P pP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � .,. �.�� Consistent I Inconsistent 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 property will utilize black barrel service which has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste Department. Sipnage: The proposal does not include a formal signage package. The applicant has indicated that any proposed signage will meet the minimum development standards of the CDC. The proposal is supported by the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code as follows: Puipose, Intent and Basic Planning Objectives The proposal is supported by the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code as follows: Section 2-701 Intent of the Commercial District and CG FLUP classification. The intent and purpose of the Commercial District is to provide the citizens of the City of Clearwater with convenient access to goods and services throughout the city without adversely impacting the integrity of residential neighborhoods, diminishing the scenic quality of the city or negatively impacting the safe and efficient movement of people and things within the City of Clearwater. The subject property is within the Commercial District and it is surrounded by commercial uses such as office, retail sales and services. The proposed use will not have negative impact on the surrounding properties or transportation system. The use is less intensive than surrounding land uses. Section 1-103.B.1. Allowing property owners to enhance the value of their property through innovative and creative redevelopment. The property consists of an existing detached dwelling on land zoned for commercial use. Detached dwellings are not allowed in the C District. As such, the use is nonconforming and cannot be expanded or extended. Applying for a Level II Comprehensive infill Redevelopment Project approval to allow for a change of use to a Mixed Use property in a commercial corridor brings the use of the property into conformance with the CDC. Therefore, the proposal is supported by this Code section. Section 1-103.B.2. Ensuring that development and redevelopment will not have a negative impact on the value of surrounding properties and wherever practicable promoting development and redevelopment which will enhance the value of surrounding properties. Surrounding properties have been developed with various types of uses such as retail sales and services and offices. Establishing a Mixed Use consisting of one dwelling unit and 850 square feet of office space within an existing building will be less intensive than the land uses on adjacent properties. There is no proposed activity on the subject property that will negatively Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 6 }��eu� ►1� �L�l Level II Flexible Development Application Review ,�,;�,�.. i , .. � PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION affect adjacent properties. It is unlikely that the proposed use will have a negative impact on the existing or potential value of adjacent properties. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 1-103.B.3. Strengthening the city's economy and increasing its tax base as a whole. The proposal includes adding a commercial use (office) to operate on the site. A new commercial use will contribute to the City's economy and its t� base. The proposal supports this Code section. Section 1-103. D. It is the further purpose of this Development Code to make the beautification of the city a matter of the highest priority and to require that existing and future uses and structures in the city are attractive and well-maintained to the maximum extent permitted by law. The property is attractive due to the existing landscaping on site and will be improved with the proposed landscaping. The continued use of the property should ensure that the building and landscaping are maintained to comply with the property maintenance standards in the Code. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 4-206.D.4: Burden of proof. The burden of proof is upon the applicant substantial competent evidence that he is entitled to the approval requested. The applicant has adequately demonstrated through the submittal of substantial evidence that the request is entitled to the approval requested as required by CDC 206.D.4. to show by competent Section 4- Criteria Requirements The proposal supports of the General Applicability requirements of this Code as follows: Section 3-914.A.1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, densiry and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The applicants are not proposing any significant change to the size, area, or height of the building. The scale of the building and the proposed landscape improvements are consistent with surrounding properties. The proposal is for a Mixed Use in the C District which is consistent with the existing character of the area. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A.2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. The redevelopment of the property will have no impact on the ability of adjacent properties to be redeveloped. The continued use of the property should ensure that the building and landscaping are maintained, such actions should not discourage the use of adjacent properties. The upkeep of the building and property by the owner will not devalue adjacent properties. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A.3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. The proposed use consisting of one dwelling unit and an 850 square foot office will operate much like a home-based business and will likely have no effect on the health and/or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 7 � li�\.R! 1`1' �LLl Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PL^xrra�rG & DEV�LOpMExr p PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � ��..� � Section 3-914.A.4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. The proposal will likely not have an effect, negative or otherwise, as trip generation for the use would be minimal even at peak times. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A. S. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity. Surrounding properties consist of commercial uses. The establishment of a Mixed Use within the C District is consistent with the community character includes a variety of retail and office uses. The intent is to retain as much of the existing structure, which is consistent in scale and use of adjacent properties that have similar structures that are used as a commercial property but retain the existing residential character. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A.6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. The use of the proposed development should not result in any adverse olfactory, visual and acoustic impacts on adjacent properties. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. The proposal meets the specific criteria for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects of this Code as follows: Section 2-803. D. Comprehensive infill redevelopment projects. 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. The project is impractical without deviations to the setbacks to driveway, brick paver parking spaces, and number of parking spaces on site. The vehicular access to the property limits parking locations. The requested reductions will allow the owner to utilize land for parking that can be developed; however, only through a Level II Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project can the applicant request such reductions. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. 2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of 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. The proposal is consistent with Goal A.3, Objective A.6.4 and Policy A.6.2.1 of the City's Comprehensive Plan. As stated earlier, the subject property is within the Commercial District and it is surrounded by commercial uses such as office, retail sales and services, and industrial uses. The proposed Mixed Use is an allowable use in the Commercial District; it will not have a negative impact on the surrounding properties or transportation system. The use is less intensive than surrounding land uses. The proposal will be consistent with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of the CDC. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. The owner proposes to establish a code compliant commercial use to residential property located in a Commercial (C) District. The proposed use and site modifications should have Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 8 � C��Ll.l Level II Flexible Develo ment lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P APP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION u . , ,°�. �. �¢:,�•`�s=.>: � no impact on the ability of adjacent properties to redevelop or otherwise be improved. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the pYOposed development. The redevelopment of the subject property will not cause any harm to adjacent properties. The proposed use should not result in any adverse olfactory, visual, and/or acoustic impacts on adjacent properties. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. S. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use 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 six objectives: The proposed Mixed Use is permissible in the Commercial General (CG) underlying land use designation. The owner proposes no substantial changes to the building so that the scale of the building is consistent with surrounding properties. The proposal is for a Mixed Use in a Commercial District which will not affect the adjacent uses that consist of retail sales and services and offices. The proposed use is consistent with the existing character of the area. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. The proposal complies with the objective below: a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standard or flexible development use; Mixed use development is a permitted use in the Commercial District as a Minimum Development Standard. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. 6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street 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. The proposed use will be more akin to a home-based business than a more intense retail use. The owner of the property proposes no substantial changes to the properly that will deter the development or use of surrounding properties. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the city. There are no design guidelines applicable to the site. Therefore, this provision is not applicable to the proposal. c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area. The property is located along a commercial corridor along South Myrtle Avenue that consists of a variety of retail sales and service and office uses. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding commercial and office properties. It is less intense use than surrounding properties. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 9 Y Cl��l �4' �l�l.l Levei II Flexible Develo ment lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT P APP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION . .. ..�'�� . .:� s , . .s� � � �. � � 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. The owner will provide a new roof structure over the residential entrance on the south fa�ade of the building. The appearance of the building will remain residential, no unusual design elements are proposed on the building exterior. The building has white colored siding on all sides of the building with a grey stone patterned veneer base and a green door. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. The owner wishes to maintain the existing mature trees on site as they offer large amount of greenery and shade on site. The groundcovers added in a tiered effect to the front perimeter landscape buffer complements the existing mature trees. The building has been in place since 1934 and no changes are proposed with regard to its location. The nearest building is approximately 45 feet away. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Comprehensive Plan The proposal is supported by the following Goal, Objective, and Policy of the City's Comprehensive Plan as follows: Future Land Use Plan Element Goal A.3. - The City of Cleaf-water shall ensure that all development or redevelopment initiatives meet the safety, environmental, and aesthetic needs of the City through consistent implementation of the development Code. Traffic engineering has determined that the width of the northern and southern driveway openings comply with the requirement for private driveways as set forth in Section 3-1904. The redevelopment of the property as proposed will improve the safety and aesthetic needs of the City through improvements to the existing driveway and by new landscaping. The project is supported by this Goal. Objective A.6.4 — Due to the built-out character of the city of Clearwater, compact urban development within the urban service area shall be promoted through application of the Clearwater Community Development Code. There is no available land or parking lots around the subject property that will allow the owner additional area to provide the requisite number of parking spaces. Adjacent properties consist of commercial uses that require those owners to maximize their land area to meet their businesses needs. To use the property as desired, the owner is asking for relief to setbacks and landscape buffer widths that will allow parking on-site. For this reason, the proposal is being processed as Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 10 ' C�I.tL� 1'!' LiLl.l Levei II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT p pp DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION ��<�� :, . part of a Level II Flexible Development in accordance with the Clearwater Community Development Code. Therefore, this project is supported by the Objective. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the Mixed Use with the standards as per CDC Tables 2-701.1 and 2-704. (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects): Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent Density 24 du/ac (54 units) 1 units X FAR 0.55 0.20 X ISR 0.90 0.39 X Minimum Lot Area N/A 8,800 square feet X Minimum Lot Width N/A 80 feet X Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A East: 5 feet (to pavement) X' 43.6 feet (to building) Side: N/A North: 23 feet (carport) X' 12.6 (to building) South: Zero feet (pavement) X' 1.5 (to brick pavers) 43.5 feet (to building) Rear: N/A West: 19 feet (to deck) X 29 feet (to building) Maximum Height N/A 18.5 feet (to mid-point of pitched roo fl X Minimum Off-Street Determined by the 3 spaces X' Parking community development coordinator based on the specific use and/or ITE Manual standards See analysis in Staff Report COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2- 704.E. (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project): Consistent I Inconsistent 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from 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 Xl 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 Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 11 ' l��t4i Y� �l�l.� Level II Flexible Development Application Review U <.�"t'� F`�?r�t. � .. . . 5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use 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. 6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street 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 step backs; and ❑ Distinctive roofs forms. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildin�s. I See analysis in Sta„�f'Report PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION Consistent Inconsistent X' X1 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: 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, 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 adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity. Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 12 Consistent Inconsistent X1 X� X1 X' Xt � C�Q�l 17 �Ll.� Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT p pp DEVELOPIv1ENT REVIEW DIV[SION � . .. : �-� � � 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, X� acoustic and olfacto and hours of o eration im acts on ad'acent ro erties. � See analysis in Sta,jf'Report SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of June 6, 2013, and deemed the development proposal to be 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. That the subject 0.20 acre property is located on the west side South Myrtle Avenue at the Lotus Path and South Myrtle Avenue intersection; 2. That the property is located in the C District; 3. The property has a Future Land Use Plan designation of CG; 4. The subject property has a lot area of 8,800 square feet in area; 5. The subject property has a lot width of 80 feet; 6. That the existing use on the subject property is a detached dwelling; 7. That the owner proposes a Mixed Use development including one dwelling unit of 850 square feet and 850 square feet for an office use; 8. That there will be three on-site parking spaces; 9. That the existing width of the driveway openings onto South Myrtle Avenue comply with the minimum width of 10 feet for private driveway openings as set forth in Section 3-1904; 10. That the request includes front (east) setbacks of five feet (to pavement) and 43.6 feet (to building); side (north) setbacks of 2.3 feet (to building); side (south) setbacks of zero feet (to driveway), 1.5 feet (to proposed brick pavers) and 43.5 feet (to building); rear setbacks of 19 feet (to proposed deck) and 29 feet (to building); 11. That the existing building has a height of 18.5 feet (to mid-point of pitched roo fl; 12. That the request includes a reduction to the east perimeter landscape buffer from 15 feet to five feet; a reduction to the south perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to 1.5 feet; and a reduction to the north perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to 2.3 feet; 13. That the allowable ISR is 0.90 and the proposed ISR will be 0.39; and 14. That 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 applicable Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Tables 2-701.1 and 2- 704 of the Community Development Code; 3. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2- 704.E of the Community Development Code; 4. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as per Section 3-914 of the Community Development Code; Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 13 � C1Qtti�►1'L�L�I Level II Flexible Develo ment lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P APP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION U . . $:."`".?a,�^.''�h, t�. xk . . . 5. That the development proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Landscape Program standards as per Section 3-1202.G; and 6. That the application is consistent with the requirement for the submittal of substantial competent evidence as per CDC Section 4-206.D.4 Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development application to allow a Mixed Use (850 square feet of office space and 850 square feet for one dwelling unit) in the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 8,800 square feet (0.2 acres); a lot width of 80 feet; front (east) setbacks of five feet (to pavement) and 43.6 feet (to building); side (north) setbacks of 2.3 feet (to existing carport) and 12.16 feet (to building); side (south) setbacks of zero feet (to driveway), 1.5 feet (to proposed brick pavers) and 43.5 feet (to building); rear setbacks of nineteen feet (to proposed deck) and twenty-nine feet (to building); a building height of 18.5 feet (to mid-point of pitched roo�; and three off-street parking spaces as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of the Community Development Code Section 2-704.E., as well as a reduction to the east perimeter landscape buffer from fifteen feet to five feet; a reduction to the south perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to 1.5 feet; a reduction to the north perimeter landscape buffer from five feet to 2.3 feet, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of the Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G, subject to the following conditions: Conditions of Ap rp oval: General/Miscellaneous Conditions 1. That a building permit be obtained for the parking area improvements, landscaping and building improvements; 2. That any future signage must meet the requirements of Code and be architecturally integrated with the design of the building with regard to proportion, color, material and finish as part of a final sign package submitted to and approved by Staff; 3. That issuance of a development permit by the City of Cleaxwater does not in any way create any right on the part of an applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the City for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law; 4. That all other applicable local, state and/or federal permits be obtained before commencement of the development; Timing Conditions - prior to issuance of permit 5. That application for a building permit be submitted no later than August 20, 2014, unless time extensions are granted pursuant to CDC Section 4-407; 6. That a right-of-way permit be secured prior to any work performed in the public right-of- way; 7. That prior to the issuance of any pertnits all sub-standard sidewalks and sidewalk ramps adjacent to or a part of the project shall be shown on plans to be improved to meet the requirement of Local, State and/or Federal standards including A.D.A. requirements (truncated domes per FDOT Index #304); 8. That prior to the issuance of any permit, all requirements of the General Engineering, Stormwater Engineering, Traffic Engineering and Fire Departments be addressed; Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 14 o Cl�� T'r �LLl Levei II Flexible Development Application Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION u . .. � ^:"��„x� . . . . 9. That prior to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall submit documentation from the utility company that states undergrounding of overhead power lines is impractical or such overhead power lines shall be undergrounded; 10. That prior to the issuance of any building permit, the Fire Department may require the provision of a Water Study performed by a Fire Protection Engineer in order to ensure that an adequate water supply is available and to determine if any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of the project. The water supply must be able to support the needs of any required fire sprinkler, standpipe and/or fire pump. If a fire pump is required, then the water supply must be able to supply 150% of its rated capacity. Prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant shall provide documentation that the Florida Power Corporation easement is vacated or that Florida Power Corporation approves of the construction in the easement. Timing Conditions - prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy/Completion 11. That the final Certificate of Occupancy be obtained within two years of issuance of the first building permit; 12. That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Competition or Occupation, the owner shall provide documentation that the title to the dwelling unit is vested in the ownership of the office use; 13. That prior to the issuance a Certificate of Completion or Occupancy, a landscape plan shall be submitted that shows shrubs and accent trees in the side (south) perimeter buffer that complies with the landscape criteria set forth in CDC Section 3-1202.D. to be reviewed and approved by Staff; 14. That prior to the Certificate of Occupancy or Completion, the driveway on the subject property shall be improved with a permanent all-weather paving material which is graded to drain stormwater as set forth in CDC Section 3-1403; 15. That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or Completion, all service lines leading onto the property underground shall be undergrounded; 16. That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or Completion, all of the proposed landscaping shall be installed; and 17. That prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy that all required Transportation Impact Fees be paid. Pre ared b Plannin and Develo ment De artment Staff: ;�� _;= P Y g P P K�'fn W. Nurnberger, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Photographs of Site and Vicinity Community Development Board — August 20, 2013 FLD2013-05018 — Page 15 , .x �^'�A�w` ,4�k+ :'°k!�r � � � � {�^ ��,' `� �' .�� .. y �.. „F�, � �; � �w .,� w, �. .. S� x � a . .,t }.t,�. ��4!;�' '�•. . ��r e ;,1t r ,�q,�, °>'� . �LY `�/'� '�' �`" �-S"� �' ��N � F � „�,`� ''� T�j v .C:- r�;;i'�t �sw �.._ � %K� � . 'i, � . a ??�� "� 1. '� 4 ��,�' �k� 5 -�y�{ � � �zsi � ;r�"� �( `� � ° �; �.�i. �. ,; _ ...�y , r y Y �� J•s .1 �_ `!i � L „�� t'��X�. 1 ��..� T {,. �• e� .a A :,r � � �'' ',`�,�i ,. �• e_ Q � •F Looking at property to the south of sub_�cct property Looking at front of subject property. 5fr � '.s. r� �,;a t:t w�3'":�f . `` �" e ""^� : A 5 n� ' �a„�,s � _ ` ``i�e�� i R, — "L—"'�'�'—. _ . �� -- . - �� _ 3 � _ �'� I � �'Fii 7itq ilt ,'�.. . � �,.F'" , � _ Looking at adjacent property to north of subject propert� � �� Looking sc�uth on S. �Ylyrtle from across subject property. ,,�' R T . �� j }�� C . l � �• '�.t' ri y� r,� .�y ,, . . . �.c' s �.� ' ` �:.��':T n �t : ♦'n �yy' y. Office use directh� across S. :tii��rtle from subject properh'. 1010 South Myrtle Avenue FLD2013-05018 Kevin W. Nurnberger 100 S Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 727-562-4567ext2502 kevin.nurnberger(c�myclearwater.com PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Planner III March 2011 to present Planner II October 2010 to March 2011 City of Clearrvater, Clearwater, Florida Duties include performing the technical review and preparation of staff reports for various land development applications, the organization of data and its display in order to track information and provide status reports, and making presentations to various City Boards and Committees. Planner County of York, Yorktown, Virginia 2007 to 2009 Reviewed residential, commercial and mixed use development site plans to ensure compliance with planning, zoning, subdivision, historic preservation, and environmental standards as well as design criteria, specifications, regulations, codes and ordinances. Led pre-application meetings with residents, neighborhood organizations, contractors, and developers regarding future projects which included state and local government agencies. Site Assistant Gahan and Long Ltd, Belfast, Northern Ireland 2006 to 2007 Enforced Article 3 of the Planning Order (NI) with land owners, developers and district councils on procedures relating to archaeological and built heritage remains on proposed development sites. On site assistant to project manager during the archeological process throughout the pre-development stage. Development Planner Yersar Inc, Fort Story/Fort Eustis, Virginia 2005 to 2006 Developed survey strategies for the Cultural Resource Manager by reviewing local and state planning documents, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Preservation Planning on Federal installations, the Virginia Deparhnent of Historic Resources, the Virginia Department of Transportation plan, and Virginia Power's public utility plan in the predevelopment stages of new development and building expansion projects to ensure protection of historic properties. City Planner City Planning Commission, New Orleans, Louisiana 2000 to 2005 Primary subdivision planner assisting applicants throughout the subdivision process in accordance with the zoning and subdivision regulations of the City of New Orleans. Reviewed various zoning and conditional use applications. Prepared and presented staff reports to the City Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Adjustments. EDUCATION University of New Orleans, LA MA Urban and Regional Planning (2004) State University of New York at Buffalo, NY BA Anthropology (1999) ,, ,. ° ��rwater �� U Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application Attached Dwellings, Mixed-Uses or Non-Residential Uses IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT COMPLETE AND CORRECT INFORMATION. ANY MISLEADING, DECEPTIVE, INCOMPLETE OR INCORRECT INFORMATION MAY INVALIDATE YOUR APPLICATION. ALL APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE FILLED OUT COMPLETELY AND CORRECTLY, AND SUBMITTED IN PERSON (NO fAX OR DELIVERIES) TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY NOON ON THE SCHEDULED DEADLINE DATE. A TOTAL OF 11 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 10 COPIES) AS REQUIRED WITHIN ARE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. SUBSEQUENT SUBMITTAL FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD WILL REQUIRE 15 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 14 COPIES). PLANS AND APPLICATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE COLLATED, STAPLED AND FOLDED INTO SETS. THE APPLICANT, BY FILING THIS APPLICATION, AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. FIRE DEPT PRELIMARY SITE PLAN REVIEW FEE: $200 APPUCATION FEE: $1,205 PROPERTY OWNER (PER DEED): Rosemarie Rem Ceraolo-0'donnell MAILING ADDRESS: 1350 South Keene Road, Clearwater, FL 33765 PHONE NUMBER: (727) 442-2881 EMAIL' michaeljack1415@yahoo.com AGENT OR REPRESENTATIVE: Bret Krasman, P.E., Krasman and Associates, Inc. MAILING ADDRESS: PO Box 422 Dunedin, FL 34697 PHONE NUMBER: i72�) �38-0359 EMAIL: bret@ksaengr.com ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1010 S. Myrtle AVenue PARCEL NUMBER(S): 15-29-15-54450-036-0061 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROP05ED USE(S) south 50' of lots 6 and 7, Block 36 Magnolia Park Subdivision along with the vacated ROW of . . Mixed use - Single Family and office DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: We would like to change the use of an existing 2-story single family residential structure to a mixed Specifically identify the request use project located in a Commercial zoned area. We are requesting a reduction in parking. (include all requested code flexibifity; we hove provided 1 residential space and 2 commercial spaces. This will be an owner run use. We request a e.g., �eduction in required number of porking spaces, height, setbacks, lot setback reduction to the existing 2.3' to ex carport on the north side and to 1.5' to proposed parking size, lot width, specific use, etc.J: on the south. The front driveway will be modified slightly to correct a City inflicted hardship. Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 1 of 8 Revised 01/12 ,� � o Planning & Development Department ��rr�vater Flexible Develo ment A lication P pp � Data Sheet PLEASE ENSURE THAT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS FILLED OUT, IN ITS ENTIRETY. FAILURE TO COMPLETE THIS FORM WILL RESULT IN YOUR APPLICATION BEING FOUND INCOMPLETE AND POSSIBLY DEFERRED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION CYCLE. ZONING DISTRICT: Commercial FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial General EXISTING USE (currently existing on site): Residential PROPOSED USE (new use, if any; plus existing, ff to remain): Mixed use -Residential and office SITE AREA: 8800 sq. ft. 0.202 acres GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage of all buildings): Existing: 1790 sq. ft. Proposed: No change sq. ft. Maximum Allowable: 4840 sq. ft. GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage devoted to each use, if there will be multiple uses): _ _ First use: 895 sq. ft. Office Second use: 895 sq. ft. residential Third use: sq. ft. FLOOR AREA RATIO (total square footage of all buildings divided by the total square footage of entire site): Existing: ' 0.203 Proposed: No Change Maximum Atlowable: 0.55 _. __ BUILDING COVERAGE/FOOTPRINT (1" floor square footage of all buildings): Existing: 895 sq. ft. ( 0.1 % of site) Proposed: No Change sq. ft. ( No change % of site) Maximum Permitted: 4840 sq. ft. ( 0.55 % of site) GREEN SPACE WITHIN VEHICULAR USE AREA (green space within the parking lot and interior of site; not perimeter buffer): Existing: 420 sq. ft. ( 0.048 % of site) Proposed: sq. ft. -( % of site) VEHICULAR USE AREA (parking spaces, drive aisles, loading area): Existing: 1201 sq. ft. ( 0.136 % of site) Proposed: 2069 sq. ft. ( 0.238 % of site) Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 2 of 8 Revised 01H2 ,, � IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO (total square footage of impervious areas divided by the total square footage of entire site): Existi ng: 0.3 Proposed: 0.39 Maximum Permitted: �•9 DENSITY (units, rooms or beds per acre): BUILDING HEIGHT: Existi ng: 1 Existi ng: 22� Proposed: 2 Proposed: No change Maximum Permitted: 24 Maximum Permitted: OFF-STREET PARKING: Existing: _._ 1 ._ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ Proposed: 4 Minimum Required: 5 WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED TOTAL VALUE OF THE PROJECT UPON COMPLETION? $ 120,000 ZONING DISTRICTS FOR ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY: North: Commercial South: Commercial East: Office West: Commercial STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS �s� I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of representations made in this application are true and �� Zo�3 , to me and/or by accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize ' y representativ to visit and photograph the i�,personally known has r rt describe i this a lication. ' produced I�nwSNti �. Y Pp �O�?� L � as identification. . � /� n � n � / � of property owner or repre�en�tive Notary public, My commission expires: ��1�1fVf� �� =o'�°'aY p��'t,n NOtary Publlc * � * State of Florida �9r Q�°� My Commission # EE 224057 FOF F40 Expires: August 9, 2016 Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Rvenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-5&2-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 3 of 8 Revised 01t12 � o Planning & Development Department ��arr�ater Flexible Develo ment A lication P PP � Site Plan Submittal Package Check list IN ADDITION TO THE COMPLETED FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT (FLD) APPLICATION, ALL FLD APPLICATIONS SHALL INCLUDE A SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL PACKAGE THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION AND/OR PLANS: ❑ Responses to the flexibility criteria for the specific use(s) being requested as set forth in the Zoning District(s) in which the subject property is located. The attached Fiexibie Development Application Fiexibility Criteria sheet shall be used to provide these responses. ❑ Responses to the General Applicability criteria set forth in Section 3-914.A. The attached Flexible Development Application General Applicability Criteria sheet shall be used to provide these responses. ❑ A signed and sealed survey of the property prepared by a registered land surveyor including the location of the property, dimensions, acreage, location of all current structures/improvements, location of all public and private easements including official records book and page numbers and street right(s)-of-way within and adjacent to the site. ❑ If the application would result in the removal or relocation of mobile home owners residing in a mobile home park as provided in F.S. § 723.083, the application must provide that information required by Section 4-202.A.5. ❑ If this application is being submitted for the purpose of a boatlift, catwalk, davit, dock, marina, pier, seawall or other si milar marine structure, then the application must provide detailed plans and specifications prepared by a Florida professional engineer, bearing the seal and signature of the engineer, except signed and sealed plans shall not be required for the repair or replacement of decking, stringers, railing, lower landings, tie piles, or the patching or reinforcing_.of existing piling on private and commercial docks. ❑ A site pian prepared by a professional architect, engineer or landscape archited drawn to a minimum scale of nne inch equals : 50 reet on a sheet size not to exceed 24 inches by 36 inches tnat includesthe following information: ❑ Index sheet of the same size shali be included with individual sheet numbers referenced thereon. .. ❑ North arrow,iscale, location map and date prepared. - ❑ Identification of the boundaries of phases, if development is proposed to be constructed in phases. : ❑ Location of the Coastai Construction Control Line (CCCL), whether the property is located within a Special Flood Hazard Area, and the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of the property, as applicable. ❑ Location, footprint and size of ali existing and proposed buildings and structures on the site. ❑ Location and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems, both on-site and off-site, with proposed points of access. ❑ Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks, curbs, water lines, sanitary sewer lines, storm drains, fire hydrants and seawalls and any proposed utility easements. ❑ Location of onsite and offsite stormwater management facilities as well as a narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including calculations. Additional data necessary to demonstrate compliance with the City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual may be required at time of building construction permit. ❑ Location of solid waste collection facilities, required screening and provisions for accessibility for collection. ❑ Location of off-street loading area, if required by Section 3-1406.' ❑ All adjacent right(s)-of-way, with indication of centerline and width, paved width, existing median cuts and intersections and bus shelters. ❑ Dimensions of existing and proposed lot lines, streets, drives, building lines, setbacks, structural overhangs and building separations. ❑ Building or structure elevation drawings that depict the proposed building height and building materials. Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 4 of 8 Revised 01/12 ❑ Typical floor plans, including floor plans for each floor of any parking garage. ❑ Demolition plan. ❑ Identification and description of watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, specimen trees, and other environmentally sensitive areas. ❑ if a deviation from the parking standards is requested that is greater than 50% (excluding those standards where the difference between the top and bottom of the range is one parking space), then a parking demand study will need to be provided. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to the parking standards are approved. Please see the adopted Parking Demand Study Guidelines for further information. ❑ A tree survey showing the location, DBH and species of all existing trees with a DBH of four inches or more, and identifying those trees proposed to be removed, if any. ❑ A tree inventory, prepared by a certified arborist, of ali trees four inches DBH or more that reflects the size, canopy, and condition of such trees may be required if deemed applicable by staff. Check with staff. ❑ A Traffic Impact Study shall be required for all proposed developments if the total generated net new trips meet one or more of the following conditions: ■ Proposal is expected to generate 100 or more new trips in any given hour (directional trips, inbound or outbound on the abutting streets) and/or 1,000 or more new trips per day; or ■ Anticipated new trip generation degrades the level of service as adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan to unacceptable levels; or ■ The study area contains a segment of roadway and/or intersection with five reportable accidents within a prior twelve month period, or the segment and/or intersection exists on the City's annual list of most hazardous locations, provided . by the City of Clearwater Police Department; or ■ The Traffic Operations Manager or their designee deems it necessary to require such assessment in the plan review process. Examples include developments that are expected to negatively impact a constrained roadway or developments with unknown trip generation and/or other unknown factors. ❑ A landscape plan shall be provided for any project where there is a new use or a change of use; or an existing use is improve� or remodeled in a value of 25% or more of the valuation of the principal strUCture as reflected on the property appraiser's current records, or if an amendment is required to an existing approved site plan; or a parking lot requires additional landscaping pursuant to the provisions of Article 3, Division 14. The landscape plan shall include the following information, if- not otherwise required in conjunction with the application for development approvaL• ❑ Location, size, description, specifications and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names. ❑ Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and location, including drip line. ❑ Interior landscape areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressed both in square feet, exclusive of perimeter landscaped strips, and as a percentage of the paved area coverage of the parking lot and vehicular use areas. ❑ Location of existing and proposed structures and improvements, including but not limited to sidewalks, walls, fences, pools, patios, dumpster pads, pad mounted transformers, fire hydrants, overhead obstructions, curbs, water lines, sanitary sewer lines, storm drains, seawalls, utility easements, treatment of all ground sur'faces, and any other features that may influence the proposed landscape. ❑ Location of parking areas and other vehicular use areas, including parking spaces, circulation aisles, interior landscape islands and curbing. ❑ Drainage and retention areas, including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations: ❑ Delineation and dimensions of ail required perimeter landscaped buffers including sight triangles, if any. Planning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 5 of 8 Revised 01/12 0 � Planning & Development Department � � ��rwater Flexible Development Application � General Applicability Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE SIX (6) 6ENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA EXPLAINING HOW, IN DETAIL, THE CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The existing building constructed in the 1930's is consistant with the area of the city where it is Iocated. 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buiidings or significantly impair the value thereof. Continued use of the existing building will not hinder or discourage or impair the value of the adjacent land and buildings. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. Continued use of ttie existing building will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons in the area. : - '' 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. - The continued use:of the building will not impact traffic congestion. Trip generation is minimaL 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcei proposed for development. This is an old structure similar to the structure just south of it. It is the intent to retain as much of the existing structure as possible. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. This building has been part of the neighborhood since 1934. There are no proposed activities that will cause any adverse effects on adjacent property. Pianning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 6 of 8 Revised 01H2 o Planning & Development Department > ��a�� Flexible Develo ment Application �� P � Flexibility Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO THE APPLICABLE FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA FOR THE SPECIFIC USE�S) BEING REQUESTED AS SET FORTH IN THE ZONING DISTRICT(5) IN WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED. EXPLAIN HOW, IN DETAIL, EACH CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL (USE SEPARATE SHEETS AS NECESSARY). 1. We are requesting a reduction in parking for a mixed use property that was originally constructed in 1934. We are also requesting a reduction in the side setback of 1.5' on the south to new pavement and 2.3 feet on the north to existing carport - 2. The proposed mixed use on a commercially zoned property use is consistant with the code and uses of the comp plan and zoning. 3. This property will not impede normal re-development of surrounding property. The adjacent proerties are already developed. - - - 4. Th�re are ne impacts to adjacent properties. This building has been on this property since 1934 the adjacenTproperties are already developed. 1 _--- - is!sim I to brin into com liance a building constructed in 1934 that has been used as a residence that is located�in a 5. The proposed use p y g P Commercial zoning district. The use of the property as Mixed use office residential wili have no adverse impacts on this or adjacent property. 6. Bringing the use into compiiance wili not impact adjacent properties and compies with city design guidelines. The scale and intensity is .. below typical since an existing building wili be utilized. There are limited changes proposed to the facade. A deck will be added in back. ----- -- 7.-- 8. Planning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 7 of 8 Revised 01/12 � .. � Planning & Development Department � � ��t�� l�lexible Development Application � `°��` Affidavit to Authorize Agent/Representative 1. Provide names of all property owners on deed — PRINT full names: Rosemaria Rem Ceralo-O'donnell 2. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record titie holder(s) of the following described property: 1010 South Myrtle Ave, Clearwater 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for (describe request): Mixed use Residential/Office 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/doj appoint: Bret Krasman, P,E as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 5. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 6. That site visits to the property are necessary ay�i�iorizes City representatives to visit �nd pho� 7., Tha�t.�we), the. Owner Property Owner � representatives in order to process this application and the owner the property described in this appiication; the jforg�oing is true and correct. Property Owner Property Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS � BEFORE ME THE UNDERSIGNED, AN OFFICER DULY COMMISSIONED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ON THIS I s� DAY OF /VI � � , Z� l 3 , PERSONALLY APPEARED ROs� �'�')�r/ ti (_ �r�,QI D"" VG( dr►h ��I � WHO HAVING BEEN FIRST DULY SWORN DEPOSED AND SAYS THAT HE/SHE FULLY UNDERSTANDS THE CONTENTS OF THE AFFIDAV THAT HE/SHE SIGNED. Shawn Dee�z =�PpY a�e`� , Notary Public Nota ic Signature � * State of Florida g / 6 Notary SeN tam �nd� M Commission Expires: /%/ � �e� r�� MY ��mmission # EE 2240 xpires; ugust 9, 2016 Planning £� �eveiopment DepartrnenY, Sfi6 S. fifiyrfcie F+venue, Ciearwa4er, FL 83756, Tel: 72i-562-i567; Fax: i27-562-4865 Page 8 of 8 Revised 01112 IV{YERS & ASSOCIATES �RCHiTECTURE, A►A, P.A. AA-000346 i ARCHITECTt1RE • PLANNING • INTERIOR ARCHITECTURE • LANDSCAPE DESIGN • ARBORICULTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9170 �akhvrst Rd., Suite 3B Seminoie, Fiorida 33776 July 8, 2013 Ellen Crandall City of Clearwater PO Box 4748 Ciearwater, FL 33758 RE: 1010 South Myrtle�Ave. Clearwater Eilen, I believe that I explained in my previous correspondence how to treat the brick pavers and not to compact within 5' of this Mango tree, in my professional opinion as a Cerfified ISA Arborist FL 5542A this method shouid not impact the tree or create a hazards condition. Should you have questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me a# 727-595-7100. 1 Si cerely, / Jay F. yers, A Cerfifie ISA Arb 0 ' �-�n- ,r, �-;'f :"' _ � �'� � I I � I i. � I�I I I �� II�� I� I :. I': ;-��Sr��;�: ! : E -��-! � �.��` E'�?:; !G f _�4�_ % r �� -�c�I}: Y��i�r rc-�r��tr"xi c: � . i ' �. � ;sC�.Y..C?..-.CG�='?"t.Gnm ��j i!�_�.!i � ° �lea _ r�vater U Planning & Development Department Comprehensive Landsca�ping Application IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT COMPLETE AND CORRECT INFORMATION. ANY MISLEADING, DECEPTIVE, INCOMPLETE OR INCORRECT INFORMATION MAY INVALIDATE YOUR APPUCATION. ALL APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE FILLED OUT COMPLETELY AND CORRECTLY, AND SUBMITTED IN PERSON (NO FAX OR DELIVERIES) TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY NOON bN THE SCHEDULED DEADLINE DATE. A TOTAL OF 11 COMPLETE SETS OF PIANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 OR161NAL AND 10 COPIES) AS REQUIRED WITHIN ARE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. SUBSEQUENT SUBMITTAL FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD, IF NECESSARY, WILL REQUIRE 15 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 14 COPIES). PLANS AND APPLICATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE COlLATED, STAPLED AND FOLDED INTO SETS. THE APPLICANT, BY FILING THIS APPLICATION, AGREES TU COMPLY WITH All APPLICABLE REQUtREMENTS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. . PROPERTY OWNER (PER DEEDj: �� ^ ��, C_era�i0� D� %)�nn� I I MAILINGADDRESS: !e'�f/� � /Ll�i�.11o d�..� /� r.,_._ . _ 1__ c► -z�-,�. PHONE NUMBER: EMAIL: AGENT OR REPRESENTATIVE: MAILiNG ADDRESS: � � - — ---- �i ' i . li . . .� • .. ADDRESSOFSUBJECTPROPERTY: �� 5. My�A.V ' �L`t.�Q"�Q(' ��„� 3375 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Specifically identify the �equest (indude all reguested code flexibility; e.g., reduction in required number of parking spaces, height setbacks, lot size, lot width, specific use, etc.): STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS I, the undersigned, acknowledge that ali Sworn to and subscribed before me this representafions made in this applicafion are true and day of accurate to the best of my knowledge and authotize . to me and/or by City representatives to visit and photograph the who is personally known has property described in this application. roduced p as identification. Signature of property owner or representative Notary public, My commission expires: Ptanning � Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 1 of 2 Revised 01/12 � � ° Clearwater � Planning & Development Department Comprehensive Landscaping Application Flexibilitv Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE FIVE (� FLEXIBIUTY CRITERIA EXPLAINING HOW, IN DETAIL, THE CRITERION IS BEING COMPIIED WITH PER THIS COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPING PROPOSAL. 1. Architectural Theme: a. The landscaping in a Comprehensive Landscaping program shall be designed as a part of the architecturai theme of the principal buildings proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for the development. _ . . , � . � . L - - _-�-�_ _ .. ��. ,. _ . , t .' � .. -f�r e • � r �c��-QS;��ct-f'i�l +heme: - OR b. The design, character, location and/o� materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscaping program shall be demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape standards. l R i� �j.� �"� ��] i�� fi0�" �� '�"iP.AT�.d GI�S !� �b M fT1 � CG i A� Siic. aqc� r�� 1� av� a C'�,sid�n-r'�'�r 1-F �t��a • 2. Lighting. Any lighting proposed as a part of a Comprehensive landscaping program is automatically controlled so that the lighfing is turned off when the business is closed. —r'� - ' - — - - � 1 • v _ _ 1 I � _ L 1' ....�. .•,-��, � r� -�t n n O.ti-i-Y��1 ♦ r ' ' ' 3. Community Character. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. �j��S�IGn ��►(� b� iq kP �na A��th th _ �.ornmun�f.i L..�r, r�► � -Ew r 4. Property Values. The landstape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscaping program will have a beneficial impact on the value of the property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 5. Special Area or Scenic Corridor Plan. The landscape treatment proposed in the 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. Not on SGQni� c.o�[� r. Planning & Developmant Departrnent, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562�4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Revised 01112 Page 2 of 2 Boundary Survey , � — — — .— ` � i — — — — — — —'i � LG T 7 � � �0 i 6 I i � 8LC'I< 36 ;S,N�„ _:�,,,,o BLOCK 3G � , . � � �4 P�' ,b ( �4` 1^ h � _�'Lq� EtlGE 0[ a5caali 1,�' �' '!�� i �,ia� ce�,-c�;.ca_ :n.:ic 'a�� '�¢° a°�' ,.� �,� ;r°io cA�_._� ` ' ��o.ot'(�,�j� t to'(P) s.'r-' Flo caa2 y q� b !� 1 V 2' 2a� 'L°� �' NNri +FIICE 2q� . � 'f`}3 � n�� ;I ^Ao ��s�# �. . �7 ry�h � ,L9 � � .. 20' FECMI � 9 �°y � car�c. LOT 8 � �.� o q��LwOT 7 ti m a BIOCK 36 BLOCK 36 � �?,�. P„�„ ,�� c�o, . ,.° A .,�oz ..� ,�aQ, O7 r�a e '�''y h � •�� _ �,01 _ ,�`4 FOP t` NO CAP z. � � .... � � �,' h � �� Y -�i• q2 f c' % np PIXi` a �u 3� ,��°•� ��bA�' ��i .. A I i ^� A��. �� I A V� 2 77.:' {7.�' � I' 1W0 STGR1' �o �� ,��•`b . � WOOD FF.A!,tE ,y,� �°'. .��, �7' o�n �'t� srnucnne n ,,, 8�,� ,�IOT 6 ., � y1010 ' � q �� o� ,� LOWEST Fl.00R r � .��'° '� g ELEV. = 3t.09' � LOCK 36 a I�`�" szr � u.a� � �. aMas . . ,�,'� � �� ,�^ ai•fw o I ,�. uN�co �° ° � � ,�S'� c ��,�n`•nen "1 ,n ro � 25' I�FNiO' 0 �ti \ A �j � �VACATED N 1 /2,�' � � � DAVIDSON AVENUE N O.Ab CIENiWTO9�^ � ... �. .. . . . . °j a�ar� �ct u��c �� LEGEND ' 'A•C. .. Po1nt el Commmesmenl �R ° �wnA Iron Pod (MO Caoj >.0 B� Peln1 of OpNnin S![t1 � Sal NaN k Dlx PLS 1BIb �rj e oam ou oe:ubt9,,, r� + iwnd Open Plpa (NO Cop) N( o N�aeurtC Cela FND 'X' ��wntl �:(� h Cmpato f) 4�lold GolO �.C.H. . Fwntl Ccnvite umument ��.�a = aeQe fs) s.i.a. - sei xcs 8 tca 1/1' Li 1142G O.� a ONIdN Nlcvd Bw+� L9 � Caperota CnUtleab N�m6er P.9. - Flol Boe� F.15. - V�ofof:�onG� Lond Su.reyc� R° Nad!ua C/5 . CO.ered CMS.eIe e � omm n�,p. covc. - eena«o P / Y/ W o Z 7' N:nq YIG —.�--„�_.— �h p�y n�A '�' 109.65�(Ai) (110'(P) qiEE PQU'EO Cv"11CFEtE -^ b �,�h � yq VACATED S 1 /2 DAVID50N AVENUE � � Yr1! y ��. � � £ �o�� ti ' .�T� 8s. � '�� `TOp I �}b p F , A "T 4 1 4'� r 'f� AA "+ ,��Z ' SN/D I 3�Oy I I 1 yb 4 ,� ` �y' '49 ' � A I �6 SECi1CiJ i5 T01'lNSF•!? Z9 SCUTH, RANGE 15 EAST, FIMELLAS COI.^.iY, rLORIDA �.1.� � � ; � �.1.) > Q W F-J— � � i- � � Hf O � � O � � 0 o �_ �L: � � � 4 GRAPHIC SCALE 0' 20' 1" � 20' 40' 60' IEGAI DESCRIPTiON: � THE SOUTH 50 FEET OF I.OTS 6 AND 7, BLOCK 36, tAAGIJOLIA PARK SUBDIVISION, TOGETHER WITH THE VACATED RIGHT–OF–WAY Of OAVIDSON AVENUE APPERT4INING THERETO, ACCORDIhIG TO THE MAP OR PLAT THEREOF, AS RECOROcD IN PLAT 8001< 1, PAGE 70, Of THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELlAS CWNTY, FLORIOA. FLOOD STATEMENT: iFitS PROPEftTY IS LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONE ">:", ACCORDING Tp F.E.t�A.A. FLOOD iNSURANCE RATE MAP # 12103C0108H, DATED MAY 17, 2005. CERTIFIED T0: MICHAEL CERAOLO-0'DONNELL C�' SURVEYOR'S NOTE: i}iE WARRANTY DEED DOES NOT INCLUDE THE VACATED I RIGHT–OF–WAY OF DAVI050N AVENUE, BUT SHOWS ON THE , COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER SITE AS INCLUD NG IT. E. • - Edqe a Pavxmmt NIH d Plyhl-el-.ay Q� C<ntentnc V� sur� � sm,iimy sa.n uonnne o/w . oAw„ o� u.La � Nnmee Ena sa:uc� Crv ., Ccaa � 'M OEriptE� c!.E�u.nON ;.t1p IS BASED qN CITY OF CLEArI'1ATEk 9ENCHI,IARK 306A, t.o.o. � tro oi emk a`A' � c�y �r�a ELEVATiJ'I <V,Q9' NAbL inoa, LO.±. a Tea of 9q�o iCLL = tdccom Sa.i<a w� a Ylotv uetv -E- . O.arneoa H,.ea ,q��r �5 SVBtCt tC n mli ::i:nC�• :l'�: E;'t•+E�.i., �:n;-,�-�iAr Rn0 O1NER 11A11Eji;! C� ACCG�9. BAS5 C� 9:AR�IIGS �= �SSU�AEC C/i .�enca tk •ay e wa�v �r�w p•:7 NE�EFDiC.D 10 iNE V�E+� ^!7C-v -NAY G' ��YSERE n�T_uvE, BEna;uC u OU�O'CC' E. ��. U��CEPLnCUhD lOCA1ED UNlES; 51'7au MEREOf�. :i�m'�1'..�^- '��''p,,. � GUYf{ALEL�tNOSUR�EY/NG ' V�f9� � .. ,� CfR11fIC.17JON.� _ . /•.�V, .�� : tmo�.it;rrao-�n:.+:r�?;��ny�Lti:41.�}�.•r..wat /f�� nt �^r �n:-s��:nrs ��;:r;: t) tw A'� 1�r_�epl'.�Gµ j�.!. $. •�.: /.lA� �� ?7Kx �:; .M-sI�!�%{%'��(J :�rii� ��C,•'r![;L��U.i L�Cw\jb:�f�' �� }Y Ail '; � � �'� Wli:ll �4 qCv,�,�+�•J .:�4: • �•�•'��rf��;�`'�'� 111.=0AESTLAKfS80ULE"SiARD arawrresir::e � 9LDSAWR.fLAQlOAi;6i7 J08 MUldBER:2012045 � `�• . �8/2012 �.�', -2,}dp�,/�,FdY/M717.73.977R m � �N �� r b< � O z� �� pz � 1 � rn � �� . � � - t m x N � Z � N d Z � '.1 ;� J � u : � �! W .�, / T_,y_ �o„ .r_e., - i ii i ,q,_3,. �� brn < D � O z � �� c m x � z � �_5� RENOVATIONS FOR JAY F. MYERS O MIGH�hL.E 8 R05EM/4RIE MYERS & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE AIA PA AR (�959 � 9170 OAKHURST ROAD SUITE 3B SEMINOLE, FLORIDA CARRIE MATTEOLI ��a_5 GER�OLO / O'DONNELL N ioio MYRTLE AVE 5. GLEARYVATER, FLORIDA �?� - 595 - 7100 FAX 727 - 595 - 7138 myersarch@ix.netcom.com AR 93907 � # AA -0003461 tt� .� s i �� .. . , • SITE DATA 1010 SOUTI-1 MYRTLE AVEN V E C(TY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA FLEXI = LE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT PLAN PARCEL ID #: 1 �r29-t 554450-036-0061 ZONING: C - COMMERCIAL LAND USE: CG - COMMERCIAI GENERAL EXISTING USE: RES�DENTIAL PROPOSED USE: MIXED USE - OFFICE, RESIDENTIAL , FLS LEVEL 1 PROJECT SITE AFtEA: 8,800 SF 0202 AC 3.300 SF ADDED FROM VACATION OF DAVIDSON AVENUE ADJACENT LAND USES: NORTH - COMMERCIAL SOUTH-COMMERCIALlVACANTROW EAST - 5. MYRTLE AVE - ROW WEST - COMMERCIAL BUILDING SETBACKS: BUILDING SETBACKS: REQUIRED PROVIDED FRONT (EAST) - 15'125' 15'143.3' SIDE (SOUTH) - 0-10' 1.5'143.5' SIDE (NORTH) - 0.10' 2.3' REAR (WEST) - 10.20' 29' ALLOWABLE BUILDING HT. - 25'-50' MAX EXISTING BUILDING HT. - 18.5' 2 STORY LAND COVER: EXISTING PROPOSED BUILDINGS 895 SF 895 SF ASPHALT/SW/BRICKPAVERS 1,783SF' 2,6085F POND 0 SF 0 SF OPENSPACE 6.123 SF 5,298 SF '2213 SF OF PAVT REMOVED FROM DAVIDSON AVE 361 SF OF PAVT REMOVED FROM SITE 2574 SF TOTAL OF PAVT REMOVED FROM S�TE FLOOD ZONE: SITE IS LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONE'X" . PANEL NO.'12103C 0108H, MAP 5l77l05 REFERENCED TO NAVD OF 1988 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE: 895 SF @ $3,292.OW7000 SF = $2,946.34 PROPERTY OWNER: � ROSEMARIE REM CERAOLO-O'DONNELL 1340 SOUTH KEENE ROAD CLEARWATER, FL 33756-3861 PH (727) 4d2-286'I ' ARCHITECT: I � _ JAY MYERS 9'I70 OAK HURST � � SEMINOLE, FLORIDA 33759 . . � � Ph (727) 595-7100 Fax (727) 595-7'138 � . ENGINEER: ,_. ., BRET KRASMAN, P.E. � _ KRASMAN B�ASSOCIATES, INC. � - . �� __ P.O. BOX 422 DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34697 � � � � � � � (727)738-0359 SECTION 15, TOWN�HIP 29S, RANGE 15E PARCEL I.D. # 15/29/15/54450/036/0061 LOCATION MAP Y � � � �� SI?�E,�. � � � . .. _., . .. ,..,.�� . ..... �� : .,':� : 1 r ,. °,..�� - ...:�: ,...�_:,,..,,�„ ;.,.�,,,..'. : g '. .� .__ ,.�... x.� z .. ` 7� � ,». � � �� s a �...:.,� . . . ..,«,.�....�.,,,:. .�m . ;: - : �. . x . � . .. �---"'-'-. _ .�_S � R VICINITY MAP PREPARED FOR.• �tOSEMARIE REM CtER.AOLO-0'DONNELL 1350 SOUTH KEENE ROAD CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 PH (727) 442-2881 PREPARED B Y.• = KRASMAN AND ASSOC/A TES,- /NC, - - - P. O. BOX 422 - ,- DUNED/N, FL 34697 - - - - ` _ _ PH (727�738-0359 - FAX (727� 738-0380 --` . . . _ . - _ _ __ _ E. B. #25963 __ _ PERMITS ,rre w� �qv� m++ee CITY OF CLEARWATER M.pQDb06pN SWFWMD ' ADDITIONAL PERMITTING MAY BE REQUIRED - CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION WARNING CONTR4CTOR TO CALL'SUNSHINE STATE ONE CALL' 'I-800.432�4770 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY CLEARING OR CONSTRUCTION FOR EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS . AlL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MUST CONFORM 70 THE NOTICE TO CONTRACTORlOWNER MINIMUM STANDARDS SET FORTH IN THE CITY OF CONSTRUCTION IS NOT AUTHORIZED UNTIL PLANS HAVE . ... . .. _ . .. CLEARWATER IAND DEVELOPMENT, ZONING, OR RELqTED BEEN ISSUED BY KRASMAN & ASSOCIATES, �NC. STAMPED . . . . . . � �� . � ORDINANCES 'iSSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION" � � - LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE SOUTH 50 FEET OF LOTS 6 AND 7, BLOCK 36, MAGNOLIA PARK SUBDIVISION, TOGETHER WITH THE VACATED RIGHT-0E-WAY OF DAVIDSON AVENUE APPERTAINING THERETO, ACCORDING TO THE MAP OR PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 70, OF THE PUBLIC RECARDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA SURVEYOR'S NOTE: THE WARRANTY DEED DOES NOT INCLUDE THE VACATED RIGHT-OF-WAY OF DAVIDSON AVENUE, BUT SMOWS ON THE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER SITE AS INCLUDING IT. DRAWING INDEX SHEET TITLE 1 COVER SHEET 2 EX�STING CONDITIONS 3 SITE PLAN - 4 DETAILS - I. _ i REVIEW ONLY .��! Z � Z�i�3 #' LOT 8 BLOCK 36 Q a 0 J ryg� z LOT 7 BLOCK 36 ati 'L°j� EDGE OF ASPHALT 1 �.r.ra. � ,y0 FOP 1/2" ,� NO CAP tie ry9� ry9h �i90 � 2S�A�, g � � — — ---f— — — — — — — — , ry9b ASPHALT PARKyJG I 6 ry�� CENTERLINE SWALE �N`+ ,L1e 110.01'(M) 110'(P) � 4' VINYL FENCE 'L� h rti�:'� I :' • � 20" r .�? �� 10":ORSHID �� LOT � ...�`�°�BLOC 12" PALM :::.. : ..: . �oti . ��..... ......._ . w U Z LL z a x U n �� O � FOP 1" �� NO CAP � LOT 6 BLOCK 36 O�` 0�' Pp �ry il I �� ti9°° I �� O � .,N.,�. wy. �0' �ry. FIR 1/2" NQ•CAi��...... �°'? ;'• ,��a � �ti�o . � � ��' '� MAIL BOX �y`ti' � :' f� . 0 ..a �, _`....� : i `ti� : � �� . / . ��. �X CAR Af�RT ��^ ��ry / ` - -----�- � EX TWC� STORY WOQD FRAME s � Kuc; � uK� #3010 ' LOWESTFLOOR ELEV. = 31:09' •••••••�cor,c: sraRs 25" MANGO � :- 9^_:.-�'`ry ,�'� . ' : ..;.. � �.�0 6" 8" 10" I Oo,� ^60 -�� $Y'#ICK : � m 9 : x I �^6 : � b� • �^ : �o "'• . � YZ' 25" MANGO � �O ' 6^ 7 ' �,L 0 � . 37" OAK .. �� ,�'Lb �� LOT � � �ti� � �h LOCK 6 � ��"" a I ❑- � 34"ELM p � ,�p p o� �. w � �,�6 a0 o � _ � ��g p ' WM U W Y J 3 O •... I 1� �I –�—_ oy �.� o'� '�� .� �'� 109.65'(M) (110'(P) ry ��. FREE POURED CONCRETE ��^ 6 VACATED S 1/2 x �ti� \ DAVIDSON AVENUE��9 ^,bbti 30' DRAINAGE/UTILITY EASEMENT � tt��+*,n.r� 9q �90 5 "�O• �,5 �� p 3Q' �9 ,�b �y'3 ��. ��. �a. SN/D 06 �� o° I '}"� DENOTES ELEVATION AND IS BASED ON CITY OF CLEARWATER BENCHMARK 306A, ELEVATION 41.99' NAVD 1988. SURVEY IS SUBJECT TO A TITLE SEARCH FOR EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAV AND OTHER MATTERS OF RECORD. BASIS OF BEARINGS ARE ASSUMED AND REFERENCED TO THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MYRTLE AVENUE, BEARING N 00°00'00" E. NO UNDERGROUND LOCATED UNLESS SHOWN HEREON. I 9 �^� � W Q COMUNICATIONS � VAULT � J �1 � �ry. LJ_ � � � � � 0r^ m �i/ K � �U LL Ow � �(V �� . �p0� � GRAPHIC SCALE 0' 20' 40 60' 1"=20' LEGEND EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING PAVEMENT � EXISTING BRICK � EXISTING CONCRETE REMOVED (2,630 SF) �► EXISTING DRAINAGE FLOW � PROPOSED BRICK PARKING (828 SF) I � LOTUS PATH 1. ALL PLANT MATERIAL IN SIGHT TRIANGLES MUST BE MAINTAINED AT 30" OR LESS. 2. THERE SHALL BE NO OBJECTS IN SIGHT TRIANGLES OVER THE ACCEPTIBLE HEIGHT CRITERIA AT A LEVEL BETWEEN 30" AND 8 FEET ABOVE GRADE. 3. IRRIGATION SYSTEMS CONNECTED TO THE PUBLIC POTABLE WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM SHALL INCLUDE A BACKFLOW PREVENTER AT THE SERVICE CONNECTION. 4. CONTRACTOR TO MAKE ALL EFFORTS TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO TREES. 5. EXISTING CONCRETE DRIVE TO BE RESURFACED. 'CITY HAS THE RIGHT TO REMOVE, WITHOUT COST OR OBLIGATION TO REPLACE OR RESTORE ANY FENCE OR WALL AND LANDSCAPING AS MAY BE NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN THE UTILITIES LOCATED IN THE EASEMENT. AT THIS TIME NO UTILITIES EXIST IN THE EASEMENT. REMOVAL OF WALLS, FENCES OR LANDSCAPING MAY CAUSE DETRIMENTAL FLOODING OF THE BUILDING. SURVEY PREPARED BY: GUY HALE LAND SURVEYING 111 FOREST LAKES BOULEVARD OLDSMAR, FLORIDA 34677 (727) 734-4266 FAX (727) 734-3228 — — — — — — �— — — — — — — — ti°j�. 'L�p^ i LOT 7 LOT 6 IBLOCK 36 qSPHAITPARKw7w7 ''� BLOCK 36 � I N � r ^ �ry� �� ati 'r� �O � 'L°� EDGEOFASPHALT 1.°� �' '�� PR 20' 0' SIGHT TRIANGLE I,L�1 'M' CENTERLINE SWALE w'► ,1,10 wy�g� w�► 0� � ti �ti' FOP 1/2" ,� NO CAP 110.01'(M) 110'(P) N NIR �6 � .... o,� 6 h 1 I ,5 � ^O� y '�^. , ry 'L°j� `L°j� 4' VINYL FENCE `L�' + �� . ,y� ' .�`L�� 25'04 • � L � � ' , « .................... ...... ti A L O �'�' e ^� " � 18.6' � I n ! .� 21.C' � '"�I ,��i. � � � � � ry. ( �; EX CkR P � 7 I � � � � �� ° � � W h . �y°' 9.4' � � , . . � ,� � ��6 � �"� •` � : ; S ";3Z.3' � ; T � ; . ....., . , �. , ,F , .. -��--`--i �".3.3' 20° EcnN i �X TW� STORY z � • ± : • __ 0 uJ o .�•°' � WOOQ FRAME ��o°� ,��`°0 37, A` '�,Lp � EX�' \ W ��.:1 ��__ � � J�i KU4 f Uf'CC �:� U �� K � , LOT �n � a 10 �ORSHID " � � #30�� `.'.. � � ,. � LOT 8 3 : P�oPOS��1 XI y�� ti° 1 ,�5 � 1 � LOT 7 DECK I �-OWEST FLOOR w 1 ,�� ;' 'b� COMUNICATIONS ti0 ' ••.c� ... og• ELEV 3i.09 ' LOCK 6 � j� vnu�r BLOCK 36 �o _� BL�OCK 6;� ,; s�.��,. � � a�:�`�, a ❑ �� J �'•. � � � "�� ` '� ��' �° �- 3 6 � •., � 12" PALM .� . . . � .:. _ '�`l' � � ry�1 ,� �::.., ;: ' o� ,.�.�......C6NC��STAIRS 4i : 34 ELM 0 �,yp. .:- ` ry ' �''� TREE BARRICAD � � y x � ' � / � :'� '0....:D�.......•' • 25" MANGO � � � :. W ^� � � ~ �� ' . � ^y ry LANTER ��p' o . '� . o,� � 6"OffSHI�— � . ��'S —.-__T� ^� . .. —• Y � � � O � .• o ^ � � < '� 9 9 ,.. ..� ,��.� U 2' MANGO V �'y0 � ��y 6' 6" �10' w Zo ' � m �i/ AVACADO � � � U U � � N �-� � Y LL O O' �. � ( o � VACATED 1/2 N,`�" �� o � �� N� N <V I � ��•.pAVIDSON VENU �� . . .... � "'••••....... � ....:= ti�° m �.,,,. ` ^� .............. ....... . . . . ......... •- � y. � I CONS CT NEW 12' WIDE � CLEANOUT � � ' ' ' """ """' """� � 7 � TN � DRIVE PER FDOT INDEX 515 — \�� —�__ _ Q 30' DRAINAGE TILITY S M � CHAIN FENCE LIN y ' a�' °^ �a j �" '�°`' � O R� O �ry � � o� �� ^p � Pry� � � �. � � �� FOP 1" �' ti°� � `� SN/D � A NO CAP �' 109.65'(M) (110'(P) �''� �° � FREE POURED CONCRETE �� x �'� ,,ti�b VACATED S 1 /2 �'� x DAVIDSON AVENUE��y9 �"� ,�� ,�� 30' DRAINAGE/UTILITY EASEMENT I, 0 � n� n �r o° I '�'� DENOTES ELEVATION AND IS BASED ON CITY OF CLEARWATER BENCHMARK 306A, ELEVATION 41.99' NAVD 1988. SURVEY IS SUBJECT TO A TITLE SEARCH FOR EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND OTHER MATTERS OF RECORD. BASIS OF BEARINGS ARE ASSUMED AND REFERENCED TO THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MYRTLE AVENUE, BEARING N 00°00'00' E. NO UNDERGROUND LOCATED UNLESS SHOWN HEREON. GRAPHIC SCALE 0' 20' 40' 60' 1"=20' LEGEND EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING PAVEMENT � EXISTING BRICK � EXISTING CONCRETE REMOVED (2,630 SF) �- EXISTING DRAINAGE FLOW � PROPOSED BRICK PARKING (828 SF) ( I _ LOTUS PATH 1. ALL PLANT MATERIAL IN SIGHT TRIANGLES MUST BE MAINTAINED AT 30" OR LESS. 2. THERE SHALL BE NO OBJECTS IN SIGHT TRIANGLES OVER THE ACCEPTIBLE HEIGHT CRITERIA AT A LEVEL BETWEEN 30" AND 8 FEET ABOVE GRADE. 3. IRRIGATION SYSTEMS CONNECTED TO THE PUBLIC POTABLE WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM SHALL INCLUDE A BACKFLOW PREVENTER AT THE SERVICE CONNECTION. 4. CONTRACTOR TO MAKE ALL EFFORTS TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO TREES. 5. EXISTING CONCRETE DRIVE TO BE RESURFACED. 6. DRIVEWAY APRON FLARES EXCEEDED 10' . DETAILED INFORMATION NOT PICKED UP BY SURVEYOR. 'CITY HAS THE RIGHT TO REMOVE, WITHOUT COST OR OBLIGATION TO REPLACE OR RESTORE ANY FENCE OR WALL AND LANDSCAPING AS MAY BE NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN THE UTILITIES LOCATED IN THE EASEMENT. AT THIS TIME NO UTILITIES EXIST IN THE EASEMENT. REMOVAL OF WALLS, FENCES OR LANDSCAPING MAY CAUSE DETRIMENTAL FLOODING OF THE BUILDING. SURVEY PREPARED BY: GUY HALE LAND SURVEYING 111 FOREST LAKES BOULEVARD OLDSMAR, FLORIDA 34677 (727) 734-4266 FAX (727) 734-3228 :i IR fRCCESSIBLE PARKING 57ACE S1GN SEE INDJC NO. 11? TRAFFIC BWE (TVPIGW 6' WIDE TRAFFIC WHRE STR17E (TYPICI�1 TRAFFIC WHITE + e� s,no� § (nr�Cny / 1 s.p NOTE: All pavement markings to be paiM. r crnicw TYPICAL SINGLE ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL CITY INDEX NO. 118; 1 OF 2 N.T.S. Interbcking Concrete Paver r Sand FWed JaMs / Concete Sand ,�? :a : a . e �. Bedding Course � � °' � ,a�-,• ��. . .. - --... . _ � - .. ..... .. .. _ . course Granular Base INSTALLATION PATTERN com��aa —�/��//��//��//��//��//��//��//��// ( Pattern will vary wi[h selected pave� suegrade TYPICAL CROSS SECTION NOTES: 7. Interlodcing paving units shall generally pe instaNetl in accordance wlth manufaclures requiremenls. 2. Paver Tl�ickness: 2 3!8' - Residential, LigM Duty Tralbc; 3 1B' - Commerdal. Hesvy Dury Trsific 3. Concrete Pevers fo confortn to ASTM C936-82. 4. Course Granular Base shatl be'v� axordence wHh menufadures requirements ( 4' min. fw 2 3/8' pavers antl 8" min. for 3 1l8' pavers) . Granular base shall be crushed concrete roed bese i157 and fines or olher malerial aPprovad by Ctty Enqincer. Arees under trees shaP utll¢e washed if57 stone and be coordineted wRh CXy Arporist 5. Cobring or dye shetl be unNortn throughoul each wncrefe paver unft. Dipped or eatemeAy wbred paver units ere unacceptable. 6. Pavers shall be instaUed wNh edge restraint and coMned with eemeMed pave� units, curbs, pouretl conaete or other suiteble method. 7. Finai fetisheE sur(ace shal be M unifam elevation or sbpe. . 8. SubgraAe sheil be iree ol day, orparu�s, or other materials which will albw Tuture settlemeM and compaGed to 96% AASHTO T-� 8o-57. � 9. Pdymeric sand or other joint filling material, as approved by the Ciry Engincer, shall be inslalled between pavers in all areas that contain Oreinage struGUres, have sbpes in ezoess of 276 or are subjed to water rurqR. 10. The cross slope on�any�requiretl pedestrian path crossing e tlriveway antllor drnre aqon eannot exceed 2%. 1 �. HandcaD bading area may utNae bss base than parking to prolecl Vees. For addRional detail see Index No. � 13; Sh. 2 of 2: — INTERIOCKINGCONCRETE PAVER DETAIL FOR COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC AND ROW INSTAL-LATION --- - - - -- -- -- - - - -- -- -- -- — - - - - - INTERLOCKING CONCRETE PAVER DETAIL � - � - - - - - -- - --FOR RESIDENTIAL AND PEDESTRIAN �TRAFFIC - - - - ----- --- ---- --- - --- - - � CITY INDEX NO. ��3; 1 OF 2 N.7.5. ��-� STANDARD PRE-PAINTED DISABLED PARKING SIGN ON 1/6" THICK SHEET ALUMWUM � PARKING BY DI SABLED PERMIT ONLY =255 FINE F.S. 318.18 � Z I V -1 O N � a. � : �� Q. I I b. : ��;a � - �� a. - r. . ��`. .^'i�: �� I I' �� '. ;•+� . . � � �- d' � �' zl. -� � � I-I I I ,•I fi ! I I I- —� + . �I I = N I I— .I I. � a��i i a� .�'� .� .r . m .A a . � TYPICAL ACCESSIBLE SIGN DETAIL CITY INDEX NO. 119;'I OF'I N.T.S. Post ( Options: 2" x 4" Or 2�� Min. Dia. Wood; Steel 1.33 Lbs/FL Min.) � i 6' Max. � � � � � O + � � � � � WHITE BORDER �-- 8 SYMBOL BLUE BACKGROUND BLACKBORDER -f-- & LETTERS WHITE BACKGROUND BIACKBORDER �-- 8 LETTERS WHRE BACKGROUND '12' GALVANIZED U-CHANNEL POST ( 2.5 LBS. PER FDOT SPEC.) 8" X 2'-6' CONCRETE MASS. FINISH TpP OF MASS LEVEL WfTH A SLIGHT RNSED WASH APPROXIMATELY 12" ABOVE LEVEL OF TURFISOD. � ELEVATION Note: Silt Fence to be paid for under the contract unit price for Staked Sitt Fence ( LF� . TYPE III SILT FENCE ( TOP OF THE SIGM ( MIDDLE OF THE SIGPq ( BOTTOM OF THE SIGM NOTE: ALL LEnERS - 1" SERIES'C Principle Post Position ( Canted 20° Toward Flo.` Optional Post Positions Filter Fabric ( In � � Confortnance With Sec. 985 FDOT Spec.) j � Filter Fabric Sitt Flow SECTION a N��' ��— < ¢ LOT 8 ° BLOCK 36 �o� FOP 1 �NO ( 2� � � � 5 � � . r �� `} : � t� � w �� 20� . :._ R x 2�� I LOT 7 BLOCK 36 I ^ p,2 09' Fnts c� e�aNni T ,L�^ CENTERLINE SWALE 4' VINYL �� V• i� �r `'S• ', N o,�, �;� �o, 2� ; � � .. 20" PE�AN : � � S � � ,�' c�c. N �,. ; N �- 10'� ORSHID % � LOT 7' ° "" BLOCK �6 12' PALM J S . 2�� "CO ,�� . -� I Z Q _ V �a� — x — — ��O FOP 1 " NO CAP � . pc� ��` �o Boundary S�rrvey — — � — � I x 2�p I ASPHALT PAFjKING ( 3� ( 2�� LOT 6 I BLOCK 36 � I ti I 2�� o�� 3 � 0 p O 2� Zg• �h 2 1 10.01'(M) I 1 10'(P) 2�3� FIR 1/2" � . � , N� �A'¢ � 2�'1 `y�!j ✓, n,1R . Zq.. � \ 21.0' / � . � CAR PORT o � �°2 � � � o• _ '3 37.3' TWO STORY WOOD FRAME STRUCTURE #1010 LOWEST FLOOR ELEV. = 31.09' 37.3' J �' � ,n�1• SECTION 15 TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE 15 EAST, PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA O�` �'Ap �Z• ��',. �� 3�'1p ' ,y2' �ti1�� V �� I � g o �Zb .a � . ��o°� ,yo�� ,�ti`•°� ��,.:�A 37" OAK i 0 � �� BR�� , �q�LOT 6� �, � o �q 3 �Zo " I U �~�' LOCK 36 � � —�-�~• �` � --�y � —'�'x'-�` --��r—� _ �' � �rr 'i1� 'jZ'� 22' 25' s- s• ,o• AVACADO � �°� � �, x VACATED N 1/2 x�2' �"'--DAVIDSON AVENUE CLEANOUTO'�� `".�_,--_„_.�-_--..! x CHAIN FENCE LINE — � _ , _ � — , — , _ , x �~•11 �EGEND P.O.C. = Point of Commencement FlR = found Iron Rod (No Cap) P.O.B. a Point of Beginning �/D = Set Naii dc Disc PLS 4626 �P = Gata per Deacription FOP = Found Open Pipe (No Cap) M� � Meaaured Data fN0 "X' = Found X" in Concrete (F = Feld Data F.C.M. = Found Concrete Monument p�.(s) = Page (a) S.I.R. � Set Iron & Cap 1/2" LS. �4626 o.a = O�cial Record Book LB � Ceryorate Certificate Number P.B. = Plat Book P.LS. � Profesatonal Land Surveyor R= Radlua C/S = Covered Concrete 6= Deito Mgle CONC. = Concrete E.F. = Edge of Pcvement �'� �- 2.7' Wing Wali R/W = Right-of-way = Centerline S 0/W = D i i p�0 �2. oh _—� � � � ''2� 109.fi5'(M) (110'(P) 332 — FREE POURED CONCRETE � 32� X y� x ��. VACATED S 1 /2 DAVIDSON AVENUE �• � ' U- , � I ,�tie 34"E'a" p ^ (ua � " 3.y: �� ti• O � '��• o ■ 5 r 33� � �rt?'� Z r WM 0 �� 3 0� �Z o 3� � � N Q r _ 1� 2 ��R x a �tiq I � Z > COMUNICAT10N5 � VAULT �� ^�,L. � � � I � m � � � v � � N � i 3�~ y �'�� o• � ,,�, �� , � y� ��, �a. � O�/'� V I 'S 33� ��;1 3R2 x SN/p I i � � ._ . ... . . % �� I I . �� I � �� A I � ��0 I 2 H � 0 z _� � w � � � � Q GRAPHIC SCALE 0' 20' 1"= 20' 40' 60' LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THE SOUTH 50 FEET OF LOTS 6 AND 7, BLOCK 36, MAGNOLIA PARK SUBDIVISION, TOGETHER WITH THE VACATED RIGHT—OF—WAY OF DAVIDSON AVENUE APPERTAINING THERETO, ACCORDING TO THE MAP OR PLAT THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 70, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA. 0 FLOOD STATEMENT: � THIS PR�PERTY IS LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONE "X", ACCORDING TO F.E.M.A. FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP # 12103C0108H, DATED MAY 17, 2005. . � SMH = Sanitary ewer Manhole rveway ��.E.S. = t�litcred End section cN = cab�e Tv DENOTES ELEVATION AND IS BASED ON CITY OF CLEARWATER BENCHMARK 306A, 7.0.6. = 7op ot oank Gw = Guy wire ELEVATION 41.99' NAVD 1988. T.O.S. = Tce of Siope 7ELE = Telecom Service :4M = Water Meter -E- = Overheod �res � �/T = renea P,e HN = Water Valve URVEY IS SUBJECT TO A i1TLE SEARCH FOR EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF-�JAY AND OTHER Mq77ER5 OF RECORD. BASIS OF BEARINGS ARE ASSUMED ',`dC ?E�E°ENCE� '0 THF ;"lEST °!�riT- �� -'N.AY �F ?S1Ri,w .q'�NU�. EEARItd� N OQ v0'00" �. \0 U"��_RGROUND LOCA7ED UNLE�S �Hv'saN �EREON CERTiFIED T0: MICHAEL CERAOLO-0'DONNELL SURVEYOR'S NOTE: THE WARRANTY DEED DOES NOT INCLUDE THE VACATED RIGHT—OF—WAY OF DAVIDSON AVENUE, BUT SHOWS OIV THE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER SITE AS INCLUDING IT. x GUYH.4LELANO SURI/EY/NG CERT7F/CA 110N.• /, CJY D. lfifL.$ 7F.i S(lRIFY�4 M' R�h�SY�E � ARG� H'.R�.�Y CERIlf7' 7Y.�lT ! � ThE SUR�£Y RE94£SEN7ID HE7PEQV /!MD 7HA7 SUO ABOI�£ pPU'/ND S(HPl£Y ANO 9Yf7L7Y .�//41� ALY]fA4A7E 7D fiE '�,�iST Q� NY KNOMLmG� AAl7 BE2/fF. SURb£Y N07:;VA4�0 UAKESS' �i,la.Qv M7111 AN EA/B� S�AL .:/ � ,!"� o",: '` ' �%?�' 111 FOREST LAKES BOULEi/ARD cuY a' H.u�' �.s' y`"'czs' �'" OLDSMAR, FLOR/DA 34677 JOB NUfvIS�R:2012094 CATE:iO/26/2012 ��27�r3�266FslX(727)7.?¢3228 .. , � MYERS & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE, AIA, P.A. AA-0003461 ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIOR ARCHITECTURE • LANDSCAPE DESIGN • ARBORICULTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9170 Oakhurst Rd., Suite 3B Seminole, Fiorida 33776 July 8, 2013 Ellen Crandall City of Clearwater PO Box 4748 Clearwater, FL 33758 RE: 1010 South Myrtle�Ave. Clearwater Ellen, � I believe that I explained in my previous correspondence how to treat the brick pavers and not to compact within 5' of this Mango tree, in my professional opinion as a Cerfified ISA Arborist FL 5542A this method should not impact the tree or create a hazards condition. Should you have questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me a# 727-595-7100. 1 Si cerely, Jay F. yers, A A Cerfifie ISA Arb ri t FL 5542A 0 ,� � -�-� � , Ii i�ll ��I � � � i Ijl I�i�� i,,� � ii�,�i;:i Phone: 727-595-7100 Fax: 727-595-7138 E-mail; myersarch@ix.netcom.com �'�� 1� �t� ��;