The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2013-08029� � ea.�c�at�� :;.��,.r.``-��-�v�: �- MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: CASE: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT November 19, 2013 E.6. FLD2013-08029 REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a 3,220 square foot Mixed Use with 2,240 square feet of office space and 980 square feet dedicated to a single dwelling unit in the Tourist (T) District with a lot area of 0.23 acres, a lot width of 100 feet, a front (east) setback of 19 feet (to existing building), 3.4 feet (to edge of existing deck) and 4.75 feet (to existing pavement), a side (north) setback of 52 feet (to existing building) and 5.5 feet (to existing pavement), a side (south) setback of three feet (to existing building) and zero feet (to existing concrete pad) and 3.5 feet (to edge of existing deck), a rear (west) setback of 2.75 feet (to existing building), 4.75 feet (to existing pavement), a building height of 22.5 feet above grade (nine feet above Based Flood Elevation) and 12 parking spaces, under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-803.0 and to reduce the amount of interior landscaping as based on the amount of vehicular use space from 10 percent (434 square feet) to eight percent (339 square feet) as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3- 1202.G. GENERAL DATA: Agent ........................... Sarah Ferfoglia; John A Bodziak Architect Applicant / Owner . ............ 348 Coronado, LLC. Location .......................... 348 Coronado Drive; west side of Coronado Drive approximately 70 feet north of 5`h Street and 75 feet south of Brightwater Drive PI'opelty Size .................... 0.23 acres Future Land Use Plan...... Resort Facilities High (RFH) Zoning .......................... Tourist (T) District Special Area Plan .............. Beach by Design (Beach Walk District) Adjacent Zoning.... North: Tourist (T) District South: Tourist (T) District East: Tourist (T) District West: Tourist (T) District Existing Land Use ............. Vacant (most recent use was Restaurant) Proposed Land Use......... Mixed Use including 2,240 square feet of office space (first floor) and 980 square feet � W4 dedicated to a single dwelling unit (second floor) f! . M � { -. .�. ♦ � � � ., �M � �t. �� :. 'S l �J ��' J -� ' ,�� =Jll�f'."'L'. �Y.... .` Y�� rt f r ��/�,�1� ; �� .. .. �A _ �� :r ' C..'�' �:� � ` �'.; . 'p� " ^ • � , `'�), }�� , � , � �. :�� - � w� � �.�;71`� : ' � :� `�` � � "�4`' `q *�'�" .r • :� j � i � ,'� � •..'s '`�` � 1 ► � � r , �T �� ±� �{ ,/ , - � + � 1;±� � ,� �_ �. + .�� ~��, !"�•- !� � � '� �I =ti �� : �� ,�"'� �� r `� 1 �� , � � . .. .;.-. , j � : I � ll , . �, \ � � ' ii4 � ' , ! j +� ',�` `� ' � ! --__ � o� � � �*', S • � *� � * � � �� fl � �. ; _� " �� ..,.il� !� -. + � � �' 4 � C�eLl� ►1'till.� Level II Flexible Development Application Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT _.. -. ��-:�;. '��.. , .,._. ` '•�� . . .. . . . . . DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DN[SION .., r� .�.-�-m-..;. � ANALYSIS: Location and Existing Conditions: The 0.23-acre subject property is located on the west side of Coronado Drive approximately 70 feet north of St" Street and 75 feet south of Brightwater Drive. The property is located within the Tourist (T) District and the Resort Facilities High (RFH) Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) classification. The subject property is also located within the Beach Walk District of Beach by Design. The property is occupied by two buildings connected by a short breezeway which essentially bifurcates the north fenestration. For the sake of argument, the structure will be referred to as a single building with the one story component referred to as the east wing and the two story component as the west wing. The east wing is one story 1,260 square feet in area and the west wing is two stories encompassing approximately 1,960 square feet. A wood deck a few feet above grade is located at the southeast corner of the site attached to the east fa�ade of the east wing. The deck includes a handicap ramp extending to the north. The primary access to this building is via the ramp and deck. The building was built in 1947 (according to Pinellas County Property Appraiser records) and is currently vacant. The most recent permitted primary use of the site was a restaurant which City records indicate as being closed since January 2006. The site has been used intermittently as temporary parking since the restaurant closed. The site is accessed via a two-way driveway along Coronado Drive. Off-street parking is accommodated via twelve off-street parking spaces (including one handicap space) located on the north two-thirds of the site. A freestanding sign is located along Coronado Drive. While a formal sign package has not been submitted the sign appears to be non- compliant with regard to height and area. � k � 0 � a c� i . � � y o � � : )' l, "'_'Qi - _' . _. , ' _'_'O � .. -'- � . , DEVON DR- � ;3�- - ._- — — _'; � , � : � � ;; PROJECT � , i , ; i � �..: �� s„� , , ; -- � �---� _, - �__-- __ .� '�� (' ,�gr'�::_ _--- _. \ \ ,'W,--._ __ -� enVSmEOa ' � �� / � �-'- — -- ,,, ,�, _ __ ; :_ S....,\ �, (`'G�.� ... ��. _'%�. - �. �� ,� , �'�'AYe��o�'�_ _ — - __� _ -- �'r - - iQi. , '--n:--- �9 � '_��`-._._,�-- ��9>. dT`'- _.. � _ � LOCATION MAP _ - is Z '`�J �4 4 _ ;__ _ ,,, _ ° ,�� pr $ " a _ _ 3 _ � I ' ' e o _ _ _ �.� ' _ '� L �- c? � "�P - ' vy- a- - A - _ �. w _'-- - - ��q�- �,� , �- l�l oa ��rJ` 249 5 L} O � � _ 6'/F' Li� BR/Cy ' J, � _ _' HrSe nrQ .ar - �R � � ---_ �, � „ _-a-�.=` x � � � _ _ fiG � B � W ' - � ` 9 a4 �.Lf 1 _ '� ° �, �o A __'� _�'� __ ` � S� T�p p iJ � 6 '^ Jq , , � � T Q �I __ /p s o $ � � r xs�n -'--- �W� ' � w , z, - a �-_ � a �a - -0 _ .a. � - '�` a �a r ------- .,,� ,�a � �- m � � � 3 10 �r. ' EXISTING SURROUNDING USES MAP Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page i .' ��.N1 1'T �l��.l Level II Flexible Development Application Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT � , ��. . � .. . . . DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION The immediate area is characterized by a variety of uses including overnight accommodation, retail, outdoor recreation/entertainment, restaurant and attached dwelling uses. The adjacent properties include a hotel (north and south) and restaurants (west). The property to the east across Coronado Drive is vacant. The area in which the subject property is located can best be described as an area in flux with a wide range of building forms, styles and sizes. The City's Beach Walk project to the west has been constructed transforming South Gulfview Boulevard to the north of this site into a winding beachside promenade with lush landscaping, artistic touches and clear views to Clearwater's award-winning beach and the water beyond. Development Proposal: The proposal is to repurpose the existing building and site as a Mixed Use with 2,240 square feet of office space and 980 square feet dedicated to a single dwelling unit. The existing parking lot and all other structures on site will be retained with the proposal with the exception of the removal of one parking space at the southeast corner of the parking lot. This parking space will be incorporated into the landscaping along Coronado Drive. While Mixed Uses are permissible as a Level One Flexible Standard Development (FLS), this application has been made as a Level Two Flexible Development (FLD) request because a change of use is one of the triggers which requires that a site be brought up to compliance with the Community Development Code (CDC). The existing building encroaches into the rear (west) setback beyond that as otherwise permitted as a Level One FLS. Notwithstanding the rear setback, the development proposal would otherwise have been reviewed as a Level One FLS. Changes to the site and buildings are limited to interior modifications and rehab, upgrading of doors and windows, new paint and the addition of new landscaping around the site. It should be noted that many of these changes have already occurred. No changes are proposed to site access, floor area, height or building footprint. The existing freestanding sign is non-compliant with regard to height and area and will have to be removed or otherwise be brought into compliance with the CDC prior to the issuance of any permits. Any new signage (attached or freestanding), although not included with this submission, will be required to comply with the applicable provisions of the CDC. Special Area Plan: Beach bv Design: Beach Walk District The City has demonstrated through the creation of Beach by Design and subsequent amendments to this plan that it recognizes the need for pedestrian-friendly development in order to create a vibrant active resort and waterfront destination serving tourists and locals alike. It is understood that a broad range of uses including retail sales and service, hotels and motels and restaurants contribute to the creation of the unique character and atmosphere that is Clearwater Beach. The vision of the Beach Walk District of Beach by Design recognizes that this district is a distinctive area of mixed use, high-rise condominiums, low- to mid-rise hotels, outdoor recreation and tourist- and neighborhood-serving retail uses. The document acknowledges that development within the District may be inhibited by though the lack of availability of off-street parking. This development would further the trend of quality redevelopment andlor improvements of properties along South Gulfview Boulevard within the District. Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 2 � p��1 + t� PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT ' C�.Na 1'1'alel Level II Fiexible Development Applicatlon Review DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION � �� ;� , Beach bv Design: Section VII. Design Guidelines: Beach by Design provides that the implementation of the document involves more than community redevelopment initiatives, it also involves private development and redevelopment that conforms to design objectives and principles established in Beach by Design. These objectives and principles will help the City promote safety, encourage cleanliness, and provide a comfortable environment. It should be noted that any issue not addressed in the Design Guidelines shall be governed by the requirements of the CDC. Furthermore, the Design Guidelines are intended to be administered in a flexible manner to achieve the highest quality built environment for Clearwater Beach. Section A specifically addresses the issue of density. The proposal includes a Mixed Use with 2,240 square feet of office space (first floor) and 980 square feet dedicated to a single dwelling unit (second floor). 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 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.0, 3,220 square feet of non-residential GFA requires 3,220 square feet of land. This area is subtracted from the overall size of the site (9,934 square feet) resulting in 6,969.6 square feet of land area or 0.16 acres. This is then multiplied by 30 (the number of dwelling units permitted per acre) which yields four units where one dwelling is proposed. The proposal is consistent with Beach by Design and the CDC with regard to density and FAR. Section B specifically addresses height. The development proposal provides for a building 22.5 feet in height as measured from grade (nine feet above Base Flood Elevation) where a height of up to 50 feet would be permissible as part of a Level One I FLS application. This section also provides that the floorplate of any portion of a building that exceeds 45 feet in height is limited as follows: a) Between 45 feet and 100 feet the floorplate will be no greater than 25,000 square feet except for parking structures open to the public; and b) Between 100 feet and 150 feet, the floorplate will be no greater than 10,000 square feet; and c) Deviations to the above floorplate requirements may be approved provided the mass and scale of the design creates a tiered effect and complies with the maximum building envelop allowance above 45 feet as described in Section C. 1.4 of the Design Guidelines. The proposal does not include a building greater than 45 feet in height. Therefore, this section is not applicable to the proposal. Section C addresses issues relating to design, scale and building mass. These topics are quantified in six parts as follows: Section C.1 requires buildings with a footprint of greater than 5,000 square feet or a single dimension greater than 100 feet to be constructed so that no more than two of the three building dimensions in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length. The proposed Community Development Board November l 9, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 3 ' 1��.t�tl ►'tal�l.,t Level II Flexible Develo ment Bcation Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT p �p DEVELOPMENT REVffiW DMSION � . � �'��. � �� . . . . building footprint is approximately 2,200 square feet and no plane of the building extends for more than 45 feet. Therefore, this section is not applicable to the proposal. Section C.2 requires no plane or elevation to continue uninterrupted for greater than 100 feet without an offset of more than five feet. No portion of the building fa�ade continues for more than 45 feet in length. Therefore, this section is not applicable to the proposal. Section C.3 requires at least 60 percent of any elevation (with elevation being defined as that portion of a building that is visible from a particular point outside the parcel proposed for development) to be covered with windows or architectural decoration. The primary facades visible from offsite are the east and north facades of the east wing. Extensive landscaping, fencing and other buildings limit the visibility of the south fa�ade of the east wing and the north, south and west facades of the west wing. The applicant indicates that the building is currently not in compliance with this requirement although the deviations are relatively minor in nature especially considering the diminutive overall size of the building. The applicant asserts that the building, in place since 1947 includes the amount of windows, doors and architectural details consistent with the Key West-style of architecture. That coupled with the fact that no major changes are proposed justifies the applicant's request that the building be permitted to remain in its current form without the addition of additional windows or doors. In short, the applicant has shown that the improvements to the building are consistent with the Key West-style of architecture and that the improvements are in keeping with the spirit of the Design Guidelines which, as noted are intended to be administered in a flexible manner which is warranted in this specific case. Therefore, this provision is supported by the proposal. Section C.4 provides that no more than 60 percent of the theoretical maximum building envelope located above 45 feet will be occupied by a building. No portion of the building extends beyond nine feet above Base Flood Elevation (BFE). Therefore, this section is not applicable to the proposal. Section C.S requires that the height and mass of buildings will be correlated to: (1) the dimensional aspects of the parcel proposed for development and (2) adjacent public spaces such as streets and parks. The adjacent Coronado Drive right-of-way is 60 feet in width. The closest point of the building to the east (front) property line is just less than 20 feet. Given the height of the building there should be no negative effect on adjacent public spaces. It bears noting that the building has been in place since 1947 without evidence if negative effect on adjacent public spaces. Therefore, this provision is supported by the proposal. Section C.6 permits buildings to be designed for a vertical or horizontal mix of permissible uses. The development proposal is for a Mixed Use including a single dwelling unit and an office use. Therefore, the application is supported by this Guideline. Section D addresses the issues of sidewalk widths, setbacks and stepbacks. The distance between the edge of the right-of-way along arterials and a building should be a minimum of 15 feet where the proposal provides a distance of approximately 20 feet along Coronado Drive between the building and edge of right-of-way. Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 4 ' C��.tl.i ►'T�Lel Level II Flexible Development App�ication Review pL�NG&DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPI�NT REVIEW DIVISION v , �::FF;,�:c.�.... . . The section identifies a 10 foot pedestrian path as key in establishing a pedestrian-friendly environment. The sidewalk adjacent to the site along Coronado Drive as well as extending to the north and south is seven feet in width and has already been improved by the City with palm trees and decorative brick edging. No changes to the sidewalk are proposed. It should be noted that this section also provides that, except for setbacks along rights-of-way, no side or rear setback lines are recommended, except as may be required to comply with the City's Fire Code. This section also provides guidance with regard to building stepbacks for buildings along Coronado Drive which balances height, stepbacks and setbacks. Generally speaking, the less the setback the lower the height at which a building stepback is required to take place. Given the height of the building (nine feet above BFE) and the setback (20 feet) as well as the fact that the sidewalk has already been improved by the City this section is generally not applicable to the proposal. Section E addresses issues of street-level facades and the incorporation of human-scale features into the facades of buildings. The proposed maintains the building which is residential is scale and scope. In addition, the site plan includes an extensive use of landscaping along Coronado Drive. Therefore, this Guideline is met by this proposal. Section F addresses issues related to the treatment of parking areas. To create a well-defined and aesthetically appealing street boundary, all parking areas will be separated from public rights-of- way by a landscaped decorative wall, fence or other opaque landscape treatment of not less than three feet and not more than 3.5 in height. Parking is provided via twelve off-street parking spaces generally on the northern two-thirds of the site. Landscaping will be provided with buffers between three and 15 feet in width which meets the requirements of this section and will sufficiently buffer the parking spaces from the Coronado Drive right-of-way. Therefore, this Guideline is met by this proposal. Section G addresses issues related to signage. CDC Article 8 defines a discontinued sign as any sign and/or sign structure (a) displaying advertising for a product or service which is no longer available or displaying advertising for a business which is no longer licensed, (b) which is blank, or (c) which advertises a business that is no longer doing business or maintaining a presence on the premises where the sign is displayed; provided that such circumstances have continued for a period of 180 days. CDC Section 3-1804 includes discontinued signs among prohibited signs. Finally, CDC Section 6-104 provides that in the event a building permit is required for the redevelopment of a principal use/structure, or a principal use/structure is vacant for a period of 180 days, signs on the parcel proposed for development shall be brought into compliance. While a sign package has not been included with the submittal. Any proposed signage will be required to meet the requirements of this section of Beach by Design and any applicable portions of the Community Development Code. As mentioned, there is one freestanding sign which is non- compliant with regard to area and height which will need to be removed or otherwise brought into compliance with the CDC prior to the issuance any permits, Business Tax Receipts (BTR) or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever comes first. Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 5 aVlV(�l ►'!'GiL�� Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT p pp DEVELOPMENT REV�W DMSION � �� , 4. Section H addresses issues related to sidewalks (also addressed in part by Section D, above) and provides that all sidewalks along arterials and retail streets should be at least 10 feet in width. The proposal proposes no changes to the existing sidewalk approximately seven feet in width. The sidewalk, recently improved by the City with palm trees and decorative brick edging, remains in good condition and is consistent with the sidewalk width to the north and south of the site between 2"d Street and Hamden Drive and provides adequate space for pedestrians to walk. Therefore, this Guideline is met by this proposal. Section I addresses issues related to street furniture and bicycle racks. Street furniture, bicycle racks and the like are not proposed with this development. However, in the event that the applicant desired to include any street furniture or bicycle racks they will coordinate with City Staff with regard to the placement and installation methodology of such items. Therefore, this Guideline is not applicable to this proposal. Section J addresses issues related to street lighting. Street lighting installed by the City already exists along Coronado Drive. Additional street lighting is not proposed with this development. Therefore, this section is not applicable to the proposal. Section K addresses issues related to fountains. A fountain is not proposed with this development. Therefore, this section is not applicable to the proposal. Section L addresses issues related to materials and colors. Finish materials and building colors are required to reflect Florida or coastal vernacular themes. The existing building, built in 1947, is indicative of the Key West-style of architecture. The building is painted light yellow with white trim. The existing color scheme and material schedule meets the requirements of this section. Community Development Code ➢ 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 1-103.B.1. Allowing property owners to enhance the value of their property through innovative and creative redevelopment. The property owner will reuse an underutilized property incorporating a variety of improvements and upgrades to an existing building built in 1947 including new paint, windows, doors, landscaping and signage. Many of these changes have already, been implemented. The office use will be in support of nearby hotel operations. Therefore, the proposal supports this CDC 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 are generally developed with a myriad of uses indicative of a tourist destination including overnight accommodations, retail sales and services, bars, nightclubs, outdoor recreation and entertainment, restaurants and attached dwellings. The proposed Mixed Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 6 � C�e�alei Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT - p pp DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION � Use will constitute an appropriate use for the neighborhood. Surrounding properties will be enhanced through the active use of a vacant building, aesthetic upgrades to that building as well as new landscaping. Therefore, the proposal supports this CDC Section. Section 1-103.8.3. Strengthening the city's economy and increasing its tax base as a whole. The proposal includes the reuse of a vacant site in one of the more valuable areas of the City vis- a-vis tourism and will positively contributing to the City's economy and its t� base. The site will remain unchanged with the exception of new landscaping and the rehabilitation of an existing Key West-style structure as a Mixed Use with a dwelling unit and office space. Therefore, the proposal supports this CDC Section. Section 1-103.D. It is the further purpose of this Development Code to make the beautification of the ciry a matter of the highest priority and to require that existing and future uses and st�-uctures in the city are attractive and well-maintained to the mczcimum extent permitted by law. The development proposal includes a variety of improvements and upgrades to the existing building and site including new windows, doors, paint and landscaping. Many of these changes have already been implemented. Therefore, the proposal supports this CDC Section. Section 1-103. E. S. Preserve the natural resources and aesthetic character of the community for both the resident and tourist population consistent with the city's economic underpinnings. The development proposal will support both the resident and tourist populations with a Mixed Use with one dwelling unit and office space. The office space will operate in support of the operations of several nearby hotels. The proposal will be consistent with regard to the desired form and function of the Beach Walk District of Beach by Design and meets the Design Guidelines of that document. Therefore, the proposal supports this CDC Section. Section 2-401.1 Intent of the T District and RFHFLUP classi ication. The CDC provides that it is the intent of the T District that development be consistent with the Countywide Future Land Use Plan as required by state law. The uses and development potential of a parcel of land within the T District shall be determined by the standards found in this Development Code as well as the Countywide Future Land Use Designation of the property, including any acreage or floor area restrictions set forth in the Rules Concerning the Administration of the Countywide Future Land Use Plan, as amended from time to time. For those parcels within the T District that have an area within the boundaries of and governed by a special area plan approved by the city council and the countywide planning authority, maximum development potential shall be as set forth for each classification of use and location in the approved plan. Section 2.3.3.4.6 of the Countywide Plan Rules provides that the purpose of the RFH FLUP classification is to depict those areas of the County that are now developed, or appropriate to be developed, with high density residential and resort, tourist facility uses, and to recognize such areas as well-suited for the combination of residential and temporary lodging use consistent with their location, surrounding uses, transportation facilities and natural resource characteristics of such areas. Primary and Secondary uses include residential and office uses. Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD20 1 3-08029 — Page 7 ' Ciear 1', alel Level II Flexible Development Application Review PL��'G & DEVELOPMENT - DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION ° . . . .. ...'�;;.. » . , o. . .. . . . The site is proposed to be reused as a Mixed Use with one dwelling unit and office space which are uses permitted by the RFH FLUP classification. ➢ Development Parameters Intensit�o Use: Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-801.1, the m�imum density for properties with a designation of RFH is 30 dwelling units per acre and a FAR of 1.0. The proposal includes a Mixed Use with 2,240 square feet of office space (first floor of both buildings) and 980 square feet dedicated to a single dwelling unit (second floor of the west wing). 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 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.0, 3,220 square feet of non-residential GFA requires 3,220 square feet of land. This area is subtracted from the overall size of the site (9,934 square feet) resulting in 6,969.6 square feet of land area or 0.16 acres. This is then multiplied by 30 (the number of dwelling units permitted per acre) which yields four units where one dwelling is proposed. The proposal is consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC. Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR� Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-801.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.95. The proposed ISR is 0.82, which is consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC. Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Tables 2-802 and 803, the minimum lot area for Mixed Uses is between 5,000 and 10,000 square feet. The subject property is 9,934 square feet in area. Pursuant to the same Tables, the minimum lot width for Mixed Uses can range between 50 and 100 feet. The lot width of this site along Coronado Drive is 106 feet. The proposal is consistent with these Code provisions. Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Tables 2-802 and 803, the minimum front setback for Mixed Uses can range between zero and 15 feet, and minimum side setbacks between zero and 10 feet. The difference between the two is that Table 2-802 provides for a minimum rear setback between 10 and 20 feet where Table 2-803 allows for flexibility down to zero feet. In addition, Section 3-903, CDC, provides that parking lots shall be set back from front property lines a distance of 15 feet, and shall be set back from all other property lines a distance that is consistent with the required perimeter landscape buffer width. For properties within the T District, the setback for parking lots shall be based a dimension consistent with the existing/proposed building setback, or at a dimension consistent with setbacks required or otherwise established by Beach by Design, whichever is less. Section F of the Design Guidelines within Beach by Design provides that all parking areas are to be separated from public rights-of-way by a landscaped decorative wall, fence or other opaque landscape treatment of not less than three feet and not more than 3.5 feet in height. Surface parking areas that are visible from public streets or other public places must be landscaped such that the parking areas are defined more by their landscaping materials than their paved areas when viewed from adjacent properties. Furthermore, Section D of the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design provides that, except for setbacks along rights-of-way no side or Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 8 ' v�e�ii �t Lall.l Level II Flexible Development Application Review PLnxxn•rG & nsvELOPMErrr u „�,� � ':. . . . . DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION rear setback lines are recommended, except as may be required to comply with the City's Fire Code. The required setback to parking along Coronado Drive is therefore, three feet with no setbacks required along the sides and rear. The site has been developed with a front (east) setback of 19 feet (to existing building), 3.4 feet (to edge of existing deck) and 4.75 feet (to existing pavement}, a side (north) setback of 52 feet (to existing building) and 5.5 feet (to existing pavement), a side (south) setback of three feet (to existing building), zero feet (to existing concrete pad) and 3.5 feet (to edge of existing deck), a rear (west) setback of 2.75 feet (to existing building), 4.75 feet (to existing pavement). The proposal meets the setback requirements of both CDC Tables 2-802 and 2-803 with regaxd to front and side setbacks and with Table 2-803 for the rear setback for Mixed Uses. Therefore the proposal is consistent with this Code provision and Beach by Design. Maximum Building Hei�ht: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the maximum allowable height for Mixed Uses can range between 35 and 100 feet. Pursuant to CDC Table 2-802, the maximum allowable height for Mixed Uses can range between 35 and 50 feet. The existing building height of nine feet above BFE is less than the otherwise permitted range of height of either a FLS (Table 2-802) or a FLD (Table 2-803). Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with this Code provision. Minimum Off �-street Parking_ Pursuant to CDC Tables 2-802 and 2-803, the minimum off-street parking requirement for Mixed Uses is determined by the individual uses. Pursuant to CDC Table 2-802 residential uses require two parking spaces per unit and ofiices require three parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA. The proposed Mixed Use will include 2,240 square feet of office space (seven parking spaces) and a single dwelling unit (two parking spaces) thereby requiring nine parking spaces where twelve parking spaces are proposed. The proposal is therefore consistent with this Code provision. Mechanical Ec�uipment: Pursuant to CDC Sections 3-201.D.1 and 3-903.I, all outside mechanical equipment must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. Mechanical equipment is located along the south side of the site and is fully screened by the existing building and a wood fence six feet in height. The proposal is therefore consistent with this Code provision. Sight Visibili Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the intersection of streets and/or 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. This proposal does not propose any structures within the required sight visibility triangles and landscaping within them will be limited to groundcovers and low shrubs, complying with this provision. This proposal has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineering Department and been found to be acceptable. Landscaping located within the sight visibility triangles will need to be maintained to meet the Code requirements. Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 9 � C�V(��►'1'aLel Levei II Flexib�e Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT p pp DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � ��; . �, .;� � �;: : . , 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 no existing overhead utility lines, serving this development, within the rights-of-way along the west side of South Gulfview Boulevard. All proposed utilities that will serve the site will be placed underground. Landsca�in� As examined in detail in the Development Parameter pertaining to setbacks, above, the required landscape buffer adjacent to parking areas is three feet in width where perimeter buffers adjacent to the parking lot are between three and 15 feet in width. Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.E vehicular use areas in excess of 4,000 square feet require at least 10 percent of that area to be dedicated to interior green space. The proposal includes 4,340 square feet of vehicular use area which requires at least 434 square feet of interior green space where 339 square feet is provided. Because the site does not meet the requisite amount of interior green space the applicant has opted to utilize the Comprehensive Landscape Program pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.G. The criteria for a Comprehensive Landscape Program are provided below: 1. Architectural theme. a. The landsca�ing in a comprehensive landscape program shall be designed as a ap rt of the architectural theme o the rp incipal buildin�,proposed or developed on the parcel pro osed for development; or b. The desiQn, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape �Rram shall be demonstrably more attractive than landscapin� otherwise permitted on the parcel pro op sed for development under the minimum landscape standards. Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, there are no perimeter buffers required in the Tourist District for this site. This proposal meets the required minimum five-foot wide foundation planting along the east side of the building. The proposal also includes perimeter landscape buffers between approximately three and 15 feet in width along the north, south and west sides of the site. The landscape design incorporates plant material that is native and/or naturalized and salt tolerant, while providing visual interest. The pedestrian scale along South Gulfview Boulevard will be enhanced with accent shrubs and groundcover beds. These buffer widths are consistent with the requirements of Beach by Design as examined previously in this report. The site meets all landscape provisions of the CDC and Beach by Design except for the provision of interior green space in the amount of 10 percent of the vehicular use area; the site provides eight percent. While the site is deficient with regard to interior landscaping it exceeds the CDC with the provision of perimeter landscaping along all sides of the site. It should be noted that one parking space at the southeast corner of the parking lot is proposed to be removed and incorporated into the existing landscaping area. A planting plan has not been created yet however, the applicant has committed to providing a completed landscape plan which includes this small area to Staff prior to the issuance of any permits, Business Tax Receipts (BTRs) or Certificate of Occupancy. Staff is confident that the submitted landscape Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 10 � C�bui 1'taLe.t Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION ° . :,.�*r�?rs�.: `�:?'� . plan can easily be modified to meet this criteria and a condition to this effect is included as part of Staff's recommendation. Therefore, this criterion is met. 2. Lightin�. Anv li�htinQ proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is automaticallv cont�-olled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed Lighting is not proposed with the submittal therefore, this criterion is not applicable. 3. Communitv character. The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landsca�e pro�am will enhance the community character of the Citv of Clearwater The additional landscaping proposed for the site in combination with the existing landscaping will make the property more attractive thereby enhancing the community character. 4. Propertv values. The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape pro�ram will have a beneficial impact on the value o�pr�tv in the immediate vicinit�of the ap rcel proposed for development• Additional landscaping provided along all sides and within the site will improve the aesthetics of the site and should have a beneficial impact on surrounding properties. 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 Citv of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel proposed or development is located. Perimeters buffers, as previously mentioned, are not required by the CDC in the T District except as otherwise required by Beach by Design. Parking areas are required by Section F of the Design Guidelines within Beach by Design to be buffered from public rights-of-way by a landscape buffer at least three feet in width and 3.5 feet in height. The site includes a perimeter buffer along Coronado Drive between four and 15 feet in width which exceeds the requirements of Beach by Design. Solid Waste: The proposal will utilize two black barrels to accommodate all solid waste needs. The black barrels will be stored within the first floor of the west wing. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste Department. Si�ge: The proposal does not include a sign package at this time. However, the existing freestanding sign is non-compliant with the CDC with regard to height and area and must be removed or otherwise brought into conformance with the CDC prior to the issuance of any permits. The applicant has committed to bringing all signage into compliance with the CDC and understands that any future freestanding sign must be designed as a monument-style sign six feet in height, maintain a setback of five feet and match the exterior materials and color of the building. Attached signage is not proposed at this time but, at such time as it is proposed, must also meet Code requirements. All signage will be required to meet the applicable portions of the CDC and the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design. Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page I 1 '. C��.�ai �7�tLe�Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review FLANNING&DEVELOPMENT y . DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION ➢ General A�plicability Criteria Reauirements The proposal supports 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, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The proposal includes a 3,220 square foot Mixed Use with 2,240 square feet of office space and 980 square feet dedicated to a single dwelling unit to be located within and existing building built in 1947. The dwelling unit will be located on the second floor of the west wing and the office use will be located within the east wing and the first floor of the west wing. The wings are connected by a short, enclosed breezeway. The subject site is surrounded by a myriad of uses indicative of a tourist destination including overnight accommodations, retail sales and services, bars, nightclubs, outdoor recreation and entertainment, restaurants and attached dwellings ranging between one and 15 stories. The proposed Mixed Use will constitute an appropriate use for the neighborhood. The proposal includes landscaping which exceeds the intent of the CDC and will complement and enhance surrounding properties. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code 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 proposal is, as discussed in relation to CDC Section 3-914.A.1, above, consistent with the character of adjacent properties and with the intent and vision of Beach by Design, the Beach Walk District and the Design Guidelines. The area in which the subject is located can best be described as an area in flux with a wide range of building forms, styles and sizes. The applicant has shown through substantial competent evidence that the proposal is similar in nature vis-a-vis form and function to adjacent and nearby properties. The proposal will not impair the value of 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 safery of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. The proposal will likely have no effect, negative or otherwise, on the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A.4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. The proposal includes mostly aesthetic improvements limited to landscaping and upgrades to the existing structures such as new windows, doors and paint. The proposed use, a Mixed Use with office space and one dwelling unit, will generate less vehicle trips per day that the prior use, a restaurant, and should result in no net increase in the amount of traffic in the area. 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. As previously discussed, the community character consists primarily of a variety of uses including attached dwellings, outdoor recreation and entertainment, retail sales and service, hotels and motels and restaurants within multi-story attached dwellings between two and 15 Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 12 � C�ea��aLei Level II Flexib�e Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT p PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � .s�;�r�, ... stories. The proposal is for a Mixed Use consisting of one dwelling unit and office space to be located in a vacant building. No changes are proposed except for upgrades to landscaping and the building such as new windows, doors and paint most of which have already been implemented. 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 design of the proposed development minimizes adverse visual and acoustic impacts on adjacent properties. There should be no olfactory impacts of any kind. Landscaping is proposed along all sides of the site and the parking area will be adequately buffered along Coronado Drive. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. ➢ Mixed Use criteria requirements The proposal supports the specific applicable Mixed Use criteria pursuant to CDC Section 2- 803.0.1 through 3 as follows: Lot area and width: The reduction in lot area and/or width will not result in a building which is out of scale with existing buildings in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. The lot is nearly 10,000 square feet in area and over 100 feet in width and within the ranges permitted as part of both a Level I and Level II review. No changes are proposed to the size or dimensions of the site. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. 2. Front setback: The reduction in front setback results in an improved site plan or improved design and appearance. The existing front (east) setback of 19 feet (to existing building), 3.4 feet (to edge of existing deck) and 4.75 feet (to existing pavement) will be maintained with the proposal. The primary changes will be the addition of landscaping along all sides of the site and improvements to the building including new windows and doors and paint all of which will result in an improved appearance. It should be noted that the existing deck functions as part of the handicap-accessible entrance. In addition, the deck also conceals an existing stormwater retention facility. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. 3. Side and rear setback: a. The reduction in side and/or rear setback does not prevent access to the rear of any building by emergency vehicles; b. The reduction in side andlor rear setback results in an improved site plan, more efficient parking, or improved design appearance and landscaped areas are in excess of the minimum required. The proposal has been thoroughly examined by City Staff and a determination has been made that access by emergency personnel to the sides and rear of the building will not be prevented. In addition, given that the proposal is for the adaptive reuse of an existing building with upgrades to the building and site and that landscape buffers are provided along all sides of the site where buffering is only required (by Beach by Design) along the east side of the site City Staff has determined that the proposed improvements will result Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 13 � C��.Ni �aLe� Level II Flexible Development Application Review PLn�vn�� & nav�,orn�rrr u �r�t�.' . .. � . DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION in an improved design appearance and landscaped areas in excess of the minimum required. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 4-206.D.4: Burden of proof. The burden of proof is upon the applicant to show by substantial competent evidence that he is entitled to the approval requested. The applicant has adequately demonstrated through the submittal of substantial competent evidence that the request is entitled to the approval requested as required by CDC Section 4- 206.D.4. Comprehensive Plan: The proposal is supported by applicable various Goals, Objectives and/or Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan as follows: Future Land Use Plan Element Objective A.1.2 — Population densities in the coastal storm areas are restricted to the maximum density allowed by the Countywide Future Land Use Designation of the property, except for specific areas identified in Beach by Design: A Preliminary Design for Clearwater Beach and Design Guidelines, in which case densities identified in Beach by Design shall govern. All densities in the coastal storm area and shall be consistent with the Pinellas County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study. The maximum number of permitted dwelling units, not withstanding any non-residential component, for the site is limited to six dwelling units where one dwelling is proposed. Given the amount of floor area dedicated to non-residential uses four dwelling units are permitted. Therefore, the proposal supports this Objective. Objective A.3.1 — All signage within the City of Clearwater shall be consistent with the Clearwater sign code, as found within the Community Development Code, and all proposed signs shall be evaluated to determine their effectiveness in reducing visual clutter and in enhancing the safety and attractiveness of the streetscape. The proposal does not include a sign package at this time. However, the existing freestanding sign is non-compliant with the Code with regard to height and area and must be removed or otherwise brought into conformance with the Code prior to the issuance of any permits. The applicant has committed to bringing all signage into compliance with the CDC and understands that any future freestanding sign must be designed as a monument-style sign six feet in height, maintain a setback of five feet and match the exterior materials and color of the building. Attached signage is not proposed at this time but, at such as it is proposed, must also meet Code requirements. Therefore, the proposal supports this Objective. Policy A.3.2.1 - All new development or redevelopment of property within the Ciry of Clearwater shall meet all landscape requirements of the Communiry Development Code. The proposal, as discussed, meets the requirements of the CDC providing perimeter landscaping along the north, south, east and west sides of the site. Perimeter landscaping in excess of that as otherwise required by the CDC and the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design mitigate the fact that eight percent of the vehicular use area is provided by landscaped area rather than the CDC- compliant 10 percent. The applicant has included a Comprehensive Landscape Program in support of this reduction. Therefore, the proposal supports this Policy. Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 14 � C��.Nl 1'Talei Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION L ... �� . .. Objective A. S. S- Promote high quality design standards that support Clearwater's image and contribute to its identity. The proposal includes the reuse of lot currently developed with a modest building built in 1947. The prior use of the site was a restaurant. The proposal includes improvements to the building and site and the establishment of a Mixed Use including one dwelling unit and office space. The proposed Mixed Use meets the requirements of the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design, is supported by the vision of the Beach Walk District and supports this Objective. Policy A. S. S.1 Development should be designed to maintain and support the existing or envisioned character of the neighborhood. As mentioned above and discussed elsewhere in this report, the proposal is consistent with the vision of Beach by Design, the Beach Walk District and the Design Guidelines and supports this Policy. Objective A.6.1 - The redevelopment of blighted, substandard, inefficient andlor obsolete areas shall be a high priority and promoted through the implementation of redevelopment and special area plans, the construction of catalytic private projects, city investment, and continued emphasis on property maintenance standards. In adopting Beach by Design the City recognized that large portions of the Beach could be classified as blighted, substandard and suffered from "obsolescence and age". One of the goals of Beach by Design is to reverse this trend of disinvestment. This goal is well on the way to being met (perhaps even exceeded) in many areas of the Beach. The Beach Walk District is one area that has seen a great deal of redevelopment activity. The proposed Mixed Use will bring a use to a site which has been largely vacant since 2006 and should be seen as one more step in the revitalization of the Beach and supports this Objective. Objective A.6.2 — The City of Clearwater shall continue to support innovative planned development and mixed land use development techniques in order to promote infill development that is consistent and compatible with the surrounding environment. The proposal is the adaptive reuse of two modest vacant buildings as a Mixed Use with one dwelling unit and office space. Improvements to the building and site include new doors and windows, paint and landscaping. It should be noted that many of these improvements have already been implemented. Therefore, the proposal supports this Objective. 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 Cleanvater Community Development Code. Policy A.6.4.1 - The development or redevelopment of small parcels [less than one (1) acreJ which are currently receiving an adequate level of service shall be specifically encouraged by administration of land development and concurrency management �egulatory systems as a method ofpromoting urban infill. The proposal includes the adaptive reuse of a small site less than a quarter-acre in area which also receives an adequate level of service. The approval of the request to maintain the building and site with the noted improvements would fulfill this Objective and Policy. Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 15 � Clecu �1a1e1 Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P pP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � ��x� , _ , � Policy A.6.8.3 - Where appropriate, development shall provide a sense of pedestrian scale on streets through minimal front setbacks, similar building heights, street trees and proportionality of building heights to street widths. The proposal includes the reuse of a modest building. As explored in detail previously in this document, the proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design including those provisions addressing pedestrian scale, setbacks, stepbacks and proportionality vis-a-vis building height and street widths and supports this Policy. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards for Mixed Uses as per CDC Tables 2-801.1 and 2-803: Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent Density 30 units/acre 1 dwelling unit Xl (4 units based on 0.16 acres of land area remaining after the non- residential component is considered) Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.0 3,220 square feet X� (8,568 sq.ft after the proposed dwelling unit is considered Impervious Surface Ratio 0.95 0.82 X Minimum Lot Area 5,000 —10,000 sq.ft. 9,934 sq.ft. X Minimum Lot Width 50 —100 feet 100 feet X Minimum Setbacks Front: 0-15 feet East: 19 feet (to existing building) Xl 3.4 feet (to existing deck) 4.75 feet (to existing pavement) Side: 0-10 feet North: 52 feet (to existing building) X� 5.5 feet (to existing pavement) South: 3 feet (to existing building) X� Zero feet (to existing concrete) 3.5 feet (to existing deck) Rear: 0— 20 feet West: 2.75 feet (to existing building) X' 4.75 feet (to existing pavement) Maximum Height 35 — 100 feet 22 feet (nine feet above BFE) X� Minimum 1 space/unit (2 spaces) 12 spaces X Off-Street Parking 3 spaces/1,000 sq.ft. GFA (7 spaces) 9 s aces total 1 See analysis in Sta„{jReport Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 16 � L�Q� 1'1' �14� Level II Flexible Development Application Review � . „ sw.;�i` _F?k„#`;.', r.:, ... PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-803.0 (Mixed Uses): 1. Lot area and width: The reduction in lot area and/or width will not result in a building which is out of scale with existing buildings in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 2. Front setback: The reduction in front setback results in an improved site plan or improved design and appearance. 3. Side and rear setback: a. The reduction in side and/or rear setback does not prevent access to the rear of any building by emergency vehicles; b. The reduction in side and/or rear setback results in an improved site plan, more effcient parking, or improved design appearance and _ landscaped areas are in excess ofthe minimum required. See analysis rn Stafj'Report. Consistent Inconsistent X1 X1 X1 .►'3' COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL APPLICABILITY STANDARDS: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level One Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A: 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. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation imnacts on adiacent nronerties. � See analysis in staffreport. Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 17 Consistent Inconsistent X� X� X' X' Xi X� 0 _' v��.(�1 1��L�,l Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review ° ..... �. �.c'�.:�;xF',,�<,�.. �: . . PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION COMPLIANCE WITH COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM STANDARDS• The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Comprehensive Landscape Program as per CDC Section 3-1202.G: 1. Architectural theme. a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program shall be designed as a part of the architectural theme of the principal buildings proposed or developed on the pazcel proposed for development; or b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment 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 standazds 2. Lighting. Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed. 3. Communiry character. The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. 4. Property values. The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape program will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 5. Special area or scenic corridor plan. The landscape treatment proposed in the 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. � See analysis in Sta,�'Report COMPLIANCE WITH BEACHBYDESIGNDESIGN GUIDELINES 1. Section A: Density. 2. Section B: Height. 3. Section C: Design, Scale and Mass of Buildings. 4. Section D: Setbacks. 5. Section: Street-Level Fa�ades. 6. Section F: Parking Areas. 7. Section G: Signage. 8. Section H: Sidewalks. 9. Section I: Street Furniture and Bicycle Racks. 10. Section J: Street Lighting. 11. Section K: Fountains. 12. Section L: Materials and Colors. � See analysis in Staff Report. Consistent � Inconsistent XI X' X� Xj X1 Consistent ( Inconsistent Xt N/A� X1 N/A1 X' X� X' X' N/A1 N/A' N/A1 X' SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of October 3, 2013, and deemed the development proposal to be legally suffcient to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD20 ] 3-08029 — Page 18 � C�bcar►lalel Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT p PP DEVEI.OPMENT REVIEW DIVISION u � Findings of Fact The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact: 1. That the 0.23-acre subject property is located on the west side of Coronado Drive approximately 70 feet north of 5�' Street and 75 feet south of Brightwater Drive; 2. That the subject property has been largely unoccupied since 2006 and that the previous primary use of the property was a restaurant; 3. That the subject property is located within the Tourist (T) District and the corresponding Resort Facilities High (RFH) Future Land Use Plan category; 4. That the subject property is located in the Beach Walk District of Beach by Design; 5. That the subject property is comprised of one parcel with approximately 100 feet of fronta.ge along Coronado Drive; 6. That the development proposal is to repurpose the existing building and site as a Mixed Use with 2,240 square feet of office space and 980 square feet dedicated to a single dwelling unit; 7. That the development proposal includes twelve off-street parking spaces where nine off- street parking spaces are required by the CDC; 8. That the existing building height is 22 feet from grade (nine feet above BFE); 9. That the development proposal includes a front (east) setback of 19 feet (to existing building), 3.4 feet (to edge of existing deck) and 4.75 feet (to existing pavement), a side (north) setback of 52 feet (to existing building) and 5.5 feet (to existing pavement), a side (south) setback of three feet (to existing building) and zero feet (to existing concrete pad) and 3.5 feet (to edge of existing deck), a rear (west) setback of 2.75 feet (to existing building), 4.75 feet (to existing pavement); and 10. That there are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property. Conclusions of Law The Planning and Development Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law: 1. That the development proposal is consistent with the pattern of development of the surrounding neighborhood; 2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Beach Walk District of Beach by Design; 3. That the development proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design. 4. That the development proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan including Policies A.3.2.1, A.5.5.1, A.6.4.1 and A.6.8.3 and Objectives A.1.2, A.3.1, A.5.5, A.6.1, A.6.2 and A.6.4; 5. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Purposes of the Community Development Code including Sections 1-103.B, D and E.S; 6. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Tables 2-801.1 and 2- 803, Community Development Code; 7. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2- 803.0., Community Development Code; 8. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level One and Two Approvals as per Section 3-914.A., Community Development Code; 9. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria for a Comprehensive Landscape Program as per Section 3-1202.G., Community Development Code; and Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 19 ; C��.N,1 17�Le1 Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT p PP DEVELOPMENT REV�.W DIVISION � � �^�,+� .� � ��,x. �;, 10. 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 for a 3,220 square foot Mixed Use with 2,240 square feet of office space and 980 square feet dedicated to a single dwelling unit in the Tourist (T) District with a lot area of 0.23 acres, a lot width of 100 feet, a front (east) setback of 19 feet (to existing building), 3.4 feet (to edge of existing deck) and 4.75 feet (to existing pavement), a side (north) setback of 52 feet (to existing building) and 5.5 feet (to existing pavement), a side (south) setback of three feet (to existing building) and zero feet (to existing concrete pad) and 3.5 feet (to edge of existing deck), a rear (west) setback of 2.75 feet (to existing building), 4.75 feet (to existing pavement), a building height of 22.5 feet above grade (nine feet above Base Flood Elevation) and 12 parking spaces, under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-803.0 and to reduce the amount of interior landscaping as based on the amount of vehicular use space from 10 percent (434 square feet) to eight percent (339 square feet) as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3-1202.G subject to the following conditions: Conditions of A�proval: General/Miscellaneous Conditions 1. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the elevations approved by the CDB; 2. That any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign and that all signs be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building; 3. That any freestanding signs be limited to the minimum as permitted by the CDC with regard to area, height and number; 4. That issuance of a development permit by the City of Clearwater 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; 5. That all irrigation systems be connected to the City reclaimed water system where available per Clearwater Code of Ordinances, Article IX., Reclaimed Water System, Section 32.376. Reclaimed water lines are available in the Coronado Drive rights-of-way; 6. That all other applicable local, state and/or federal permits be obtained before commencement of the development; Timing Conditions 7. That application for a building permit be submitted no later than November 19, 2014, unless time extensions are granted pursuant to CDC Section 4-407; 8. That prior to the issuance of any permits, Business Tax Receipts or Certiiicate of Occupancy, whichever comes first, the existing freestanding sign be removed or otherwise brought into conformance with the CDC; 9. That prior to the issuance of any permits, Business Tax Receipts or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever comes first, a revised landscape plan which fully incorporates the area claimed via the removal of the parking space at the southeast corner of the site be submitted to and approved by Staff; Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 20 � Cl�.cti r�alQ�Levei II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT p pp DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION � n>a�� _ 10. That prior to the issuance of any permits, Business T� Receipts or Certifcate of Occupancy, whichever comes first, the location and visibility of electric equipment (electric panels, boxes and meters) be reviewed and, if located exterior to the building where visible from any street frontage, be shown to be painted the same color as the portion of the building to which such features are attached; 11. That prior to the issuance of any permits, Business Tax Receipts or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever comes first, any applicable Parks and Recreation impact fees be paid; 12. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, Business Tax Receipts or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever comes first, 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 percent of its rated capacity; 13. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, Business Tax Receipts or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever comes first, all requirements of the General Engineering, Stormwater Engineering, Traffic Engineering and Fire Departments be addressed; 14. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, Business Tax Receipts or Certificate of Occupancy, whichever comes first, the existing deck be modified in such a matter to expose at least 50 percent of the underlying stormwater swale to sunlight; 15. That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the sidewalk and any associated sidewalk amenities be installed to the satisfaction of City Staff along Coronado Drive; 16. That prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy that all required Transportation Impact Fees be paid; and 17. That prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, all se ' e lines onto the property shall be installed underground. Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff Mark T. Parry, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Photographs Community Development Board November 19, 2013 FLD2013-08029 — Page 21 MARK T. PARRY 1655 Linwood Drive Tel: (727) 742.2461 Clearwater, FL 33755 E-mail: mparry tampabay.rr.com SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS A dedicated, AICP certified professional Planner focused on contributing to the field of Urban Planning experienced in public and private sector planning. An excellent communicator, able to effectively interact with clients, local government officials and business professionals at all levels. Experienced in various aspects of urban design and planning, zoning regulations and permitting. OBJECTIVE To secure a Planning position which will allow me to continue improving the built environment and my community through sound and innovative planning and design principals. EDUCATION COOK COLLEGE, RUTGERS UNIVERSITY, New Brunswick, NJ B.S. Landscape Architecture Major, Urban Planning Certification B.S. Environmental Planning and Design Certificate Urban Planning Golden Key National Honor Society; Sigma Lambda Alpha American Planning Association (Florida Chapter); member A/CP #020597 40-hour OSHA (Hazwoper) Training PLANNER III PLANNING DEPARTMENT, CITY OF CLEARWATER 04/12 - Present 08/98 — 04/05 • Responsible for nonresidential and single/multi-family site plan review and permitting. • Assist in the implementation and subsequent review of the Community Development Code. • Responsible for assessing and writing Community Development Code amendments. . Land Development Code development, interpretation and application. • Provide, inspect and direct landscape review/design. • Acting Development Review Manager 9/99 —11/99 and 01/05 — 03/05. • Manage and direct Associate Planners. • Review, process and present variance/conditional use, land use/zoning atlas amendment and annexation applications at in-house and public review meetings. • Principle Planner in creating and implementing Clearwater's Downtown Design Guidelines. Assisted in the implementation and application of the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan. SENIOR PLANNER DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, CARDNO TBE 04/05 — 04/12 • Planner of record for Cities of Indian Rocks Beach, Seminole and Clearwater and Town of Belleair. • Responsible for nonresidential and single/multi-family site plan review and permitting. . Perform site design and inspections. . Provide technical planning support for engineering department. • Provide support for Zoning Code, Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Land Use Plan amendments. • Research and write Evaluation and Appraisal Reports. • Create and update Special Area Plans/Form-based Codes. • Provide CADD support. • Assist with creating redevelopment marketing material. • Perform technical environmental services including soil and groundwater sampling. Designer/Owner GREENSCAPES-GLD, MARLBORO, NJ g/92 - g/gg • Founded and established a local garden and landscape business. • Plan and oversee installation of commercial and residential landscaping projects utilizing a variety of CADD and photo-manipulation programs. • Develop and implement adve�tising programs, brochures and graphics. • Estimate, bid and negotiate jobs. • Source and negotiate purchase of materials and equipment. • Manage, train and schedule installation crews. Program Supervisor LONGSTREET FARM, MONMOUTH COUNTY PARK SYSTEM, HOLMDEL, NJ 6/87 - 8/93 • Assisted in formulating and running children's summer program ("Hayseed"). • Created and coordinated daily programs and schedules for 6-9 year old groups. • Supervised several other programs throughout the year. • Created a demand which was finrice the program's capacity after the first year. COMPUTER SKILLS Access, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Works, ClarisWorks, MS Word, Land Designer Pro, Permit Plan, Excel, Cornerstone, AutoCADD, PowerPoint, Publisher \ `' � ` '� "�°��.. , � . ( " ��'- >. �f � h��j(��_.. �i i � . ' � •N'�. � p f �— . . � _� .u� s� �� F }� �r!'� \ � � � � ��YP, Y� �`` { .. , � 1 � :�� a, _ . . , . . . � Lookine SW at the �'F' ��rn�-� nf the site. Looking E along the nunh ,iuc ,.� �, ,__ �: }� r , , �� ..+�� .�" ,,. 'r°" . _. .. a � �� f`�4� � �■■ , �� ■■ � �! _. � .___ _. _ .. . ---.__ f � �) s�� I�+ e o ..�� .�, .�; Luok�i�g � along the east side of the site. - - ".c'.,�.•%.�.aemiul4'. Looking SW across Cor�mado Dr jj �. ,� 3 No1Et1 . ,� „": Y � v e. 6RE�T R�TES {� `,y� `., . ` �' '�,',,� _ � ;� z:=. � � ::�i '�` ;� �(�/ �M� � > ] �� ; x aj. �,�� ,. _ Lookine NW at thc Sr, �uiii�� :��:. ,�.. Vie�� of existing nonconforming s�gn. 348 CORONADO DRIVE FLD2013-08029 �, �''� Pfanning & Devetapment Department .� � �t��t�� Flexible Devela ment Application p �,. Att,�Ghed Dwellings, Miaced-Uses ar Non-Residentia� Uses R 151NCUM8ENi UPaNi THE APPtIG4NT �'O SU8MIT COMPIETE AND CORRfCT INFORMATiCyN{. ANY MISLEAOING. DECEPTIVE, INCaNIPIET£ OR INCORRECT IN��tMATlON MAY lNVALtDA7f YOt1R APPLICA�TIOIV. ALL AFPUCATtONS ARE TO Bf FlU.ED OUT COMPtEfEIY AND CORRECTLY, AND SUSMITTEQ !N PERSON {NO FAX OR DELIVERIES) TO THf PtANldIN6 & DEVEIOPMENT D€PARTMENT BY NOON ON THE SCHEDUIEU I�AQUNE DATE. A TOTRL Of 11 Ct#MPLETE SETS QF PtANS ANQ AP'PUCATION MATfR1ALS (1 ORlG1NAL AND i0 COPIES} AS REQUIR€D WITNiN ARE T� BE SUBMITTED FflR REIflEW BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. SUBSEQUENT SU6M1'RAI. FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVEL�MENT BdARD Wttl REQUIRE 15 COMPLETE SETS � PIANS AND APPUCATlON M1AiERiAIS �1 tNt1GiNAL AMD 24 COPlE5j. PLAPi5 AND APPlICATItNVS AttE REQUtRED TO BE COCLATED, STAPLED �1ND Ft)LQED INTO SETS. THE APPliCANT, BY FItNVG THIS APPI{CATION, AGREES TQ CaIAPtY WITH Al! A�'PItCABLE REQUiREMENTS OF THE CONfMUNITY DEi/ELOPMENT CQDE. F1RE DEPT PREIIMARY StTE PtAN REVtEW �EE: $20Q APPLICATION FEE: $1,205 PROPERTY OWi�ER �PER DEEQJ. MAtLtN6 ADdRESS: 3�'i FHC3NE NUMBER: �7i�' � �j� " O�I' S '.?r. _ _ . . __ . _ _ __ EMAIt: . �Q.p�►7. G�.�� ,L. _. ��'rCirIA,.1 �.�. %U � .. AGENT OR REPRfSENTQ11�fE: �Q�� _ I�„t�l � ��,��a��aa�RESS: _..��_�.�.___�i__f�v�P,�1i�i�.__�v_�-_�'._._Y4�r�C�1Wr��__1Cv ��t_o__. _____.._. .___ ___ PHaNE NUMBER: �(Z7 -�...20 - 8 � S�i EMAIL: ��,�.?,� 7.�1 YIO•l.QYV! ADQRESS OF SUBIECT PR�P'ERTY: '�f q'g aronado S/11(e �_ LW�I.�Gt,T�(��,�� 1?7 PARCEL NUMBER(S�: Q'� -?,�,- (� '�j2?!g� �' DOO' � O _ _ . f _ .._ .. _ .. . _ _.._... �___ LEGAL DESCRIPTlON: %�2.(�=.��11 {��G '_.��G�r��V .�.�.K�._��..._..le!.u...�`� �+- t __._____ .J ��__._._ �__.._ PROPOSED fJSE(S) DESCRIP7ION OF REQUEST: Sperificaffy rdeniify the request (inctude odi requested code }Iexibility; e.g., reduci�can in requireri number of parking spaces, tt�ight, setbacks� loi size, rot wrdt�, spec�frt use, �tr.): __�1L t�d u�_��, f�+h ov��t d we�� .a- av� o�FFt�ce PlaaNny d� [3evebpment bepartrnertt,100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Ckarwater, FL 33T66, Tat 727-b62�d567; Fax: 721�b62-4865 Page 1 oi 8 Revisad 0l1t2 � ��rwater � Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application Data Sheet PLEASE ENSIlRf THAT THE FCri.LOWING tNFORMAiiON iS FtLIfD OUT, iN iTS ENTIRETY. FQILURE TO CAMPLETE THI� FORM WILL RESULT iN YOtJR APPUCATIt1N BEING FOI�ND IMCOMPt,ETE AND POSSlBIY D�fERRED UNTIL THf FQLtOWlNG APPLICATION CYCLE. • • :�r�u� "�" 'TOVYi S� ��rr�� .��r� �s� �� s��a�r��v: .__ �.�(�i .."_�.esot%� ��,�tU�t,�_�._�h`�h"_._�_.._______. _._ ______ _.___ _ EXt5TiN6 USE (currentiy existing orz site): R,eS�A,� {�a,jl1 '�'j PROPOSED USE jneN� use, if any; plus exisNng, if to rema'sn): {�I� �C�d �SQ VV� � D YIG C�ING I� t YIDI i' GlI/� bTT I G(. StTE AREA: � � � �J� �� sq. €t. . 2�J �res GROSS Fla�t AREA {totai square faatage of a!I buiidings}: Existing: Proposed: Maximum Altowabie: �.'�J!'ls'L� _ _ __ sq. ft. �'✓� �i� sq. ft. q �q'lJ`{'.'tJ sq. ft. GROSS fLOOR AREA (tota# sq�zare footage dewot� to each use, if tnere �vii15� multipie uses): F«St us�: Id 2t� o.___ _. 5�. �. b F'� �E Second use: -__ ... eI$D Sq. �- �F�i�� M�� N t�N�N�E � _..__...,..._.. _._.._. _ _.._.._._.... Third use: `��9 _ sq, ft �Ni��,(�l N(J FLQ()R AREA RAT10 (tata4 sqe�are faotage of ai! bui4dings divicled by the totaf ss�uare footage of entife site): Existing: , �?J2� Proposed: _.____ yJ� Maximum Allo4vable: � . d -V� _� BUILDlNG COVERAGE/�OaTPfttNT {;�` fiaor square footage of aE! buildis�gs;: Exi�ting: �� 2� � sq. ft. { �'2 �j 94r of sitej __ � . . ... _.. . Proposed: 2��iq' O sq. ft. f 2r�r S-- % of sitej _.._. . _ . _._ __. � . .. _._.... Maximum Fermitted. -�"'� � sq. ft. (_;,/''� �fi of srte) GREEM SPACE W!T#�N VEF�CULAR USE ARE/�4 (green space .vit�i;� the parking !ot and interior of site; not �erimeter buffer}. Exist�ng: �J%2._w. ......� �, ft. � . ....$•1�,_ ...�..__� °� of sifej Propased: __�_L..Q_7i_ry� _�_____.. �. �t. � _..__�i%�' J.______ % of sitej VEHfCUlAR USE AREA (parking spaces, dciue aisles, loading areaj: Existing: �_ �J OO • � . . sq. �t. � �} Jr, �J % of site� _.. �. - - _- . _ . ._ ProE�osed: �}��_�� ____.. sc1.. ft. � ... �'?l..�� ..,. _., %of sitej Plan�ng 8 Dev�etopment Departrnerrt,100 S. Myrde Avenue, Clearvvater, �L 33758, Tek 727-662-d66T; Faar 72i-Ci82�4$65 Page 2 of 8 Re�ntsed 0lt12 a {MP"ERVIOUS SURFAGE RATIO (iota9 square fcwtage of impenrious areas divided by the totai sq�rare footage of entire s+te�: Existing: _ S.L�?._I �1. �_'_ �_ g31 Proposed: _.g_!_� �Z�-s_'--' -8'21 Maximum P�rro'rtted: . �lj DEPiSRIf (units, rooms or beds per acre}: �xiscing: /' Pro}aosed: � �. _ . _ ... Maxic»trm Permitted: � � �j(� _, OfF-STREET PAFtKlN6: Exisfing: Propased: t1l�inimum Required: �� .� .__._.__ �..� ......_._.__ �._ _ _.._.,_r..____ . _. . � BUILQIN6 F1fiGHT: Ex�St;�: 2�' �'�Z' .c,�ov.� 9�d� �I Froposed: vL' _ �'!z". �br�re � radG Maximum Permitted: '�15'- 50' U�o�rilL I3�E WhtAT 15 THE ESTfMATfD TOTAI VALUE OF THE PROlECT ttPON C�MPlE710�i? 5?!�!?!� �� 20NING DISTRlR5 FOR ALL ADJACENi PROPERTY: rv�-th: '�'(_"'('bt)h$i'__ _.. _ _ . __ .__ - __ _. so�ct,: "'(" �DUYt S�' ��L: .� „ r�-- west: '''r'' '(I�C�{/i C+ STATE OF FLORIDA, C�UNTY OF PtNEtE.AS ��,;,� i, the undersigned, acknowledge that ait Swarn to nd si.sbscribed befare me th�s ;��} � ctay of representations made in this appticat':on are tre�e and ��(�� accurate ta the best of my koiowledge and authorize �--,, (�_ —• v` � 1� �jQ me and/or by City representatives ta visit and phatograph the ��'�C �" C-�''� �� t`� ,��o ' rsonafl known has ro ert describeci in this a ficatian. � ��'� �� Y p�' produced as icfentific�tion. � �uuE �cuw,u�Y or repre�`entative Notary pub(ic, � �= Expil�s JUt1e 27, 2(?'!4 My cornmission expires: � ,�„4� sa,aoan�„r�yF�;,�so�ssao�s _._.__. __..... _ �__... �+� Plannirg d� Devebpmerrt Depa�lment, tfl0 S. �t+jr►tte Avenue, Gkarvvater, FL 33756, Tek 727-662•466T; Fa�c T2T-662-4866 Pa+�e 3 of 8 Revised 01112 `� rwat�r �_ � �� Planning & Deveiopment Qepartment Flexible Development Applir.ation __.�-----_.____________.�____------_�_....._______�__ General Applicabitity Criteria PRt�tQE CCIMPLEI'E RESRt�+l5ES T� EACN Of ?Hf StX (6j GENfAAI APPt{CA�ILt�1i CRIi�WA EXFtaNiN6 kt3W, !N dETptE, THE CRRfR10M IS BftN6 COMPUED WITN PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. 1. The propased deuelopment of the land witl be in harrnony with the scale, buf�C, coverage, density and character o# adjacent properties in �.vhich it is (ocated. .�j�gS.��h��t��1.�, Yvcc��-i t/� . -___.._ ____.__._____ 2. The proposed development witf not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use af adj�ent land and buildir�s or signi6icantly impair ihe value thereof. . _.�K��...�.��_.�T.x.4�__��.�.�._._��_�'�. �. _ � .._._..�_� _... , ...... _. _. ... _. ___. ._...._ . _..... � ..... 3. The proposed clevelapment will not adverse�y affect the health or safety or persons residing or worfcis� in the ne�ghtaorhood of the praposed use. ��?l��sed��-�-�.n�.�a�.��;�kl�� :�h�.trl.��a�-}�c-oU�.�.��.�.A��.��ta!l.r��.�-- � . .�. r , .- .. � r �� 11�_c�r�..►.�. rta l_ona�.�_v_ A. �rcu.s�_�� v_v_�r�#- �v�ne�t .� d�wVt Si2td -Iv Z bt�ick� b�u.rrcl �.sh Ca�ts, �piG� The praposed devefapment is designed to minimize traffic congestion. wtcicly 5. The proposecl development is consistent with the community character ot the �mmecitate v�rnity ot the parcer proposer� ror development. v I m n � f co asfa � + . e . . ... . _ . . . _ �. _ . . . � . _ � i_t �•,-- uv�i�n.z� .cx�.i��,nce d b�j -f�� tvSh v.c��-Fu,�-ivh * lav►dscap,'�g. 5. The design af the p�roposed de�velopment rninimizes a verse effects, including visua4, acoustic and affactory ar�d hours of aperation impacts, on adjacent properties. �p�O 5��,��—L�,� �Y�f�,� �iYi�.Gt r�s��.vvr,ev� t mini vn��,� ad verse a�FPCtS "�'v�dav�. v ��va�ic�, �-r �enhar�tcs -t�vte��pert� � n�c�gv►baov�v� �o�a. P#a�tdng � t�evsbprnent DeparVnent,104 S. My�tte Avenue, Ctearwater, Ft 33756, Tet T2T�&62-4667; Fs�c 727�b62-4$65 Psge 6 ot 8 ftevised Q1h2 , 0 �i �rwater �� Planning & Develupment Department Flex�ble De�elopment Appif cation Flexibilitv Criteria PRQVIDE CON�RIETE RESP�{SfS 7ti TNE APi"l.tCAB1E FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA FOR THE SPEGfIC llSE(Sj BEtNG R€QUESTED AS SET fOR'fH IN "fHE IONiNG OISiRtCT(S� iN WHtCH THE SUB1fR PROPER7Y IS IOCATED. IXPLAiN FNQW, tN DfTAIt, EACH CRftER10N iS SEfNCs C�MPt1ED WlTH PER THIS UEYEL�PMEIVT FROPOSAL �USE SfPARATE SHEETS AS NfCESSARYj. �. � �� . �. �. � $. e�.YL rGG1.11LS�1r1/� (� V4M G V1(� P, �er -�h,c r�ar c�,kbr�.�.l� fo_ _ 2'-_l i'�2�� ►n ��. (��I�S ( u�� work w� I( !� �ualm��ed ur�e+�S�l��at� ix�m�t J: ylldu�� -�n' ��i ct��v� �s-�ar;�u�� -� r�rnc�iv� in i+�S Lu��e�►f loc�,fion ��nUiv�fr�ins �h.e �'�►�__�j��;m.��c�%.___ . . ---�n __. k�nd.._ .�Y�._.�.r�__��f��!��-fo __��.��!�___ _ __._a_ �_. .�_.�,��.t ►_'�_�-��.f��_�_._ _.__----_.___.. _�C��uf�c�_�_�, .�t►��.r-e�__u�.h�.1�e._�b�:��. �h��s��-.e �.n� ,�a�m��c.._.� �i� �rnur,h r�c �i.rAcihl�_ 1'h� �,nn�tx�nr,t n�r��inU �� a-F�f�►i"s hu� Iclit1ol �S Pianrdrg & Ckvebpment DsparVnent,104 S. R�IyMle Avenua, Cteerwater, F!. 33766, iak T2T�662d5S7; Fax: T27�62�4666 Ps�s 7 af B Ravised 01M2 JOHN A. BODZIAK, ARCHITECT, A.I.A., P.A. City of Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 October 10, 2013 RE: General Applicability Criteria Case # FLD2013-08029 348 Coronado Drive Clearwater, FL 33767 To Whom It May Concern, Below, please find the narrative responses to the Flexible Development Application, "General Applicability Criteria'; Items #1 and #2. 1. The property is located between 2 existing hotels to the north and south in the "Beach Walk" designation, adjacent to the "Small Motel". The hotel to the north is the "Beachview Inn" and is 5 stories. The hotel to the south is the "Ritz Motel" that is comprised of 3 and 4 stories. To the west of the subject property are three, 1— 2 story restaurants (Crabby's, McDonald's and Frenchy's). There are no proposed modifications to the existing small scale, charming Key West style building and street level facade. The structure is one of the smaller scale buildings located in this immediate area with the height being only 22'-41/2" from grade (building sets back 19'-8 3/4" from the front property line to a height of 12'-0") and the FAR being less than one third permitted on the site. 55301ST AVENUE N• ST. PETERSBURG, FL • 33710 PHONE: (72� 327-1966 • FAX:1 (72� 865-5119 FLA REG. #AR0005Q65 2. With this development now being properly maintained, the site being brought to current code compliance (under separate permit) per the City of Clearwater's requests, this existing development, along with the painting, and lush landscaping emphasizes the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings. Please see sheet A-4 for pictures which illustrate what the property looked like before it was purchased. We hope this development encourages the neighboring properties to bring their sites into both code and aesthetic compliance as well. Thank you, Sarah Ferfoglia ASID, Associate AIA 727-420-8759 JOHN A. BODZIAK, ARCHITECT, A.I.A., P.A. City of Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 October 10, 2013 RE: Mixed Use Criteria Case # FLD2013-08029 348 Coronado Drive Clearwate�, FL 33767 To Whom It May Concern, Below, please find the narrative responses to the Flexible Development Application, "Mixed Use Criteria". 1. The lot is nearly 10,000 square feet in area and within the range permitted as part of a Level I and Level II review. No changes are proposed to the size or dimension of the site. 2. The property is located between 2 existing hotels to the north and south in the "Beach Walk" designation, adjacent to the "Small Motel". The hotel to the north is the "Beachview Inn" and is 5 stories. The hotel to the south is the "Ritz Motel" that is comprised of 3 and 4 stories. To the west of the subject property are three, 1— 2 story restaurants (Crabby's, McDonald's and Frenchy's). There are no praposed modifications to the existing small scale, charming Key West style building and street level facade. The existing building is located 19'-8 %" from the front (east) property line and has a height of 12'-0" at that location and conforms to the front setback requirement. The existing unenclosed wood deck is 20" 55301ST AVENUE N• ST. PETERSBURG, FL • 33710 PHONE: (72� 327-1966 • FAX:1 (72� 865-5119 FLA REG. #AR0005065 above grade (with a 42" guardrail), located 3'-5 3/" from the front property line and covers an existing retention pond. The deck has been in place for many years and is the main means of ingress, egress and HDCP path of travel for the building. With no construction or alteration proposed, the reduction in the front setback for the wood deck results in an improved site plan by maintaining the access to the front entry of the building, parking lot layout, landscaping as well as concealment of the retention pond. Please refer to the North Exterior Elevation #1 on sheet A-4 depicting the profile of the deck and building. 3a. The existing building was built in 1947 and there are no proposed modifications under this scope of work. The existing side setbacks are 3'- 0" (south) and 52'-0 %' (north), conforms to the side setback requirements and does not prevent access to the site by emergency vehicles. The existing rear setback (west) is 2'-11 %" which will only allow access by emergency personnel. However, the rear setback is adjacent to two (2) parcels which allow access by emergency vehicles. 3b. The existing building was built in 1947. Allowing the existing structure to remain in its current location, maintains the existing pedestrian and vehicular flow with a very efficient parking layout, maintains both the existing vegetation and all parking perimeter buffers as required. To demolish this 66 year old structure and attempt to rebuild elsewhere on the site, along with required parking and landscaping would create an extreme financial burden and could not be replaced in kind. We are attempting to preserve the old existing native Clearwater Beach structure. The rear (west) setback is adjacent to 2 restaurants, McDonald's and Frenchy's maintenance/ dumpster areas, screened with various trees and shrubs. Additionally, per the City of Clearwater's request, one parking space will be removed and replaced with 161 square feet more of interior landscaping (under a separate permit), bringing the total to 1,023 square feet. Thank you, Sarah Ferfoglia ASID, Associate AIA 727-420-8759 JOHN A. BODZIAK, ARCHITECT, A.I.A., P.A. City af Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Ciearwater, FL 33756 October 10, 2013 RE: Beach by Design — Design Guidelines Case # FLD2013-08029 348 Coronado Drive Clearwater, FL 33767 To Whom It May Concern, Belaw, please find the narrative responses to Beach by Design's "Design Guidelines". A. Density 1. The proposed density of 1 dwelling unit for this .23 acre property is well below the 30 dwelling units per acre allowed. B. Height 1. The existing overall building height of 22'-41/2" is under the maximum height allowed for this area. C. Design, Scale and Mass of Buildings 1. The existing building is 3,220 square feet and has no single dimension greater than 100'-0". 2. There are no planes of the existing building that are uninterrupted for greater than 100'-0" linear feet. 3. The existing street level fa�ade front elevation (east) is approximately 249.8 square feet and is comprised of 123.4 square feet of doors, windows and architectural decoration (49.4%}. The building is set back at 19'-8 %" from the property line which allows for the existing abundant landscaping which provides additional texture and adds to the aesthetic appeal. The elevations to the north, south and west, although slightly under the window and architectural decoration requirement, are screened by adjacent properties parking lots, buildings, fences, trees and foliage which help to both screen and soften the facades. 4. The existing overall building height of 22'-41/2" is under the requirement. 55301ST AVENUE N• ST. PETERSBURG, FL • 33710 PHONE: (72� 327-1966 • FAX:1 (72� 865-5119 FLA REG. #AR0005065 5. The building is justified to the south of the property with the parking lot on the north. The height of the building (2 story portion) increases towards the rear of the lot, creating a tiered effect. 6. The building has a mix of two permitted uses, 1 dwelling unit located vertically on the second floor and an office which comprises the entire first floor. D. Setbacksand Stepbacks 1. The distance from the edge of the ROW to the building is 19'-8 3/4". 2. The existing side setbacks are 3'-0" (south) and 52'-0 %Z" (north), conforms to the side setback requirements and does not prevent access to the site by emergency vehicles. The existing rear setback (west) is 2'-11 %" which will only allow access by emergency personnel. However, the rear setback is adjacent to two (2) parcels which allow access by emergency vehicles. 3. The existing building is located 19'-8 %" from the front (east) property line and has a height of 12'-0" at that location and conforms to the front setback requirement. E. Street-Level Facades 1. The existing street level fa4ade front elevation (east) is approximately 249.$ square feet and is comprised of 123.4 square feet of doors, windows and architectural decoration (49.4%). The building is set back at 19'-8 %" from the property line which allows for the existing abundant landscaping which provides additional texture and adds to the aesthetic appeal. 2. There are no window coverings or other opaque materials. 3. The front door entrance is located at the top of the HDCP access ramp (only entrance to the front of the building) and the front door is of a different style and color from the other doors. 4. There are no awnings, however the existing roof overhang is 2'-0" deep (typical). F. Parking Areas 1. The existing parking lot is surrounded by a+/-36" high landscape buffer hedge with various shade trees and palms. G. Signage 1. There is an existing non-code compliant sign located in the front setback of the property. This sign will be removed and replaced per code under a separate permit. H. Sidewalks 1. There is no modification of the existing sidewalks proposed. Striping will be added under a separate permit to indicate the HDCP path of travel from the ROW to the building entrance. I. Street Furniture and Bicycle Racks 1. Not applicable. There is no street furniture or bicycle racks proposed. J. Street Lighting 1. Not applicable. The existing street lighting is to remain. There is no new street lighting proposed. K. Fountains 1. Not applicable. There are no fountains proposed. L. Materials and Colors 1. The existing building is in keeping with the coastal vernacular theme and Key West style with horizontal wood lap siding (painted yellow), vertical wood corner trim and soffits (painted white) and divided lites on the windows and doors. 2. There are no interior sidewalks other than the access at the rear property line. 3. Not applicable. There is no street furniture proposed. 4. The color of the existing building cannot be specifically matched to the color samples in Beach by Design. It is however, a bright, crisp yellow color which has been duplicated on a few buildings around the area. Thank you, Sarah Ferfoglia ASID, Associate AIA 727-420-8759 w ° �rwa�t�r Pianning & Development Department Flexible Development Application � Affidavit to Authorize Agent/Representative 1. Provide names of ail property owners on deed — PRINT full names: ��kB �Aro o L1�!'1- P�r(acv�c, � et� — 2. That (i am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holdsr(s) of the fo8owing described property: � 1 .i � ,,: 1 . . � . . � � 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for (describe request): 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appai�ted and (does/do) appoint: as {his/their) age�t(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; S. 1`hat 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 by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner autharizes City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application; 7. 1',��we), the undersigned ority, he�eby certify that the foregoing is true and co�rect. C�-`l_% �. ` ..j - Prope wner Property Owner Property Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PIAtELLAS Property Uwner BEFORE ME THE UNDERSIGNED, AN OFFICER DULY COMMISSIONED BY THE LAWS OF TliE STATE OF F�ORIDA, ON THIS / C� � � DAY OF � �- � �� '�'-- � �� , PERSONALLY APPEARED WHO HAVING BEEN FtRBT DULY SWORN DEPOSED AND SAYS THAT HErSHE FULLY UNDERSTANOS TWE CONTENTS �F THE AFFIDAVIT THAT HEJSHE SIGNED. ....�.�..�. � � KIMBERI.Y L STOVER ; � Notary publ�, Smte of Florilda �`_� Comm�elon # FF 28355 � c M�r qnnun� s� June t t,1ro�a Notary Publk S nature Nota SeatlStam My Commisaion Expires: �-E�-�- f� �,� /`1 tY P Planniny d Dsvefopma�rt Dspartinerrt,100 S. Myrtls Avenw, Clesrwab�, FI. 33786, Tei: 727-582•4587; Fax: T27-662-4856 Paps 8 M 8 Revlsad d1J12 � � e�rwat�r Planning & Devetopment Department Camprehensive Landscaping Appiication i? t5 iNCUMBENT UPON iHE APPUCANT �'O SUBMiT Ct�V{PLETE AMD CORRECT tNFORMATtON. QNY MiSlEADlNG, DECEPTIVE, lNCQMPLETE OR iMCC)RRECT IN�ORMATION MAY INVALFDA7f Y(�UR APPUCATION. ALL APPUCATIONS ARE TO BE FILLED �JT COMPLETELY AND C�tRfCTLY, AND SUBMITTEQ IN PERSt�t (NQ FAX OR DEtNERlESj TO THE PLANt�iNf &�VEtORMENT DEPARTMENT BY NQQIU ON THE SCHEDULED O�EAUUNE DATE. A TOTAL O� 11 COMPLEiE SETS � PIANS AN� APPUCA7101V MATERiALS (1 ORIGiNAI AND li} COPif5j AS itEQUiRED W17NIN ARE TO Sf SLIBMITTED FC?R REVIEW BY TFfE DEVELOPMEi�lT REVIEW COAAMiTiEE. SUBSEQUE�tT SUBMtTTAi FOR TF(E COlVIMUNtTY DEVELOFMENT Bt7�AaD, IF NECESSARY, WILL RfQU1RE 15 COMPE.ETE SETS OF PlANS AND APPUCATIfNV MATERtAtS (1 fNilGINAL AND 14 COPIfSj. PLANS AND APPUCAT101VS ARE REQUIRED TO BE COLLATED, STAPLEO� AND FOLQED INTO SETS. THE APPIiCANT, BY FICING THIS APPttCAT10N, AGREES TO COMPLY WITH �4LL APPLfCABLE RE+QUtREMENTS OF THE COMMUNlTY QEVECOPMENT CODE. PROPERTY Q1N1�tER {PER DfED): MAtLfNG AQDRE5S: PH{lNE NUMBER: EMAIL• AGENT OR REPRFSENiATiVE: MAILiNG ADDRESS: PHOt�E NUMBER: 1 G{��'.i.0 o t �'L EMAIL: y�(AY'(,��► �!L�%'� �ivna �or_b____ _ ADQRE55 O� SU6IECT PR()PERTY: ___. ��__.IAIX QI�(�.L��.�lJ[.i,Y...��..,.--5��...�i�� ._.C�.sl__._3��iQ�._...P...,_..__.__..__._.__._..._.__ Df5CR1PTiON OF RE4UEST: Specifically rdentify rhe request {include all requ�sted code flexibility,; e.t�,, re+a'uction in required number of �aarkir�g spaces, height seibnrics, !at size, tot widrh, specrfic use, erc.}: STATE OF �LOIttDA, COUNTY OF PIt�tEtLAS `t i, the undersigned, acknnw{ec�e that a!! Sworn to and subscribed before me this �'�_____� day of representatians made in th�s applicatian are true anci �;� ��,�,i, " ,:',,�'; �''3 ��y�nd/or by accurate to the best of my knawledge annd authorize �,,, — ° � City repres�entatives to visit and phoYograph the �cO' �''�''� ��' Y��`{ , wh is personall�t�arown has property describec4 in this applicatian. produc�d as identification. �� r.` * *r.'�i�+z� JULIE KURMAY Commission # EE 004109 Notary pubtic, "`�',i,>'%�:� �T�Troyfain�muance81X�38&7018 My commission expires: Plant�irg 8� Develupment Departrnent,100 S. Myrtfe Avenue, Clesrwater, FL 33768, Tet 727-b62�d667; Fax T27�662-4865 Faqe t of 2 Revised d4i12 �; Planning & Development Depa�-tment �, ��arwater Com rehensive Landsca in A licatian �,, P P g pF Flexibility Griteria PROM1t{[3f COMPLETE RESPCNI5ES TO �A►CH OF THE FtVE jSj �LEXIBlLIIY CRtTERiA EJtPIAt�i1NG HOW, iN OETAiI, 7HE CRlTfRiOt+! iS BEIN6 COMPItED W17H PER THES COMPFtE!#NStV€ LANDSCAPiNG PROPOSAL 1. Architectural Tfieme: a. The landscaping in a Comprehensive ta»dscaping program shall be des�ned as a part of the architectura! theme of the principat twild'rngs praposed or de�reioped on zhe parcel propased #or the development. �R b. The design, character, locatitu� anctJor materiafs of the iandscape treatment praposed in the CQanprehensive Landscaping prc�ram shal! be demanstrab�y mare attractive than landscaping ather�r�ise perrnitted on the parcel propased for develop►nent underthe minimum landscape standards. v • . .i .. - m{�. r -�1�s� � �cis � ��ns _��q�t�on f, nCW, AImS, . es, $1n�rU � � shcl� + mu_!_c�h c�lor�9 2. Llgl�tr eA{�fy (�ti�ig�p apo�se�� ari�o� a�ornp e��r��a�clscaping pro�ram is automaticatPy controtled so that t#�e tighting is turned off when the business is closed. �Ch�tre �S �.o �i�hfihA �w�.os�d_• 3. Community Choracter. The lancfscape treatme►�t proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Pragram wilt enhance the community character of the Gity of Clearwater. Gomrrn�ni�bp�� — — — -_. __ 4. Property Valc�es. The iandscape treatment praposed in the Comprehensiue Landscaping program �rfiti have a beneficiai impact on the value of the property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for devebpment. i �_p��m.� w�� u(va�je.d_�-�r��_,_h�ui ��.��s1._h,edgcs_t_shrU1��_,��h��l t_m.�,lr�..��s_. _�. �d.ed. -_�_c� d.i�h n�n.u.i_I�.a_�h�C_I D�'---!5__�Y�t�G�J_or!_(� I � 1/�_. _►Yt�t_iYI �A iYtE'ci___�!!i _(�_ 4!��L� �__I2G1.�I�. _.__._. 5. Special Area or Scenit Corridor Ptan. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensiue Landscape Program is consistent with any s�ciai area ar scenic corridor plan which the City of Cleanvater has prepared and adopted for tFee area in whicn the parcel proposed for development is loc�ated. V ��iT . � � � . 1�A�t'1��'�. 1�1 � �. � �. , . ' ► ,_ �. �7 ' � ' � :�i�� Pianrdrg � Development Department,1Q4 S. Myrtie Avenue, Ckarwater, FL 33766,1'et 727-662�66T; Fa�c T27-662•d6S6 Page 2 of 2 Revi�red Ot112