FLD2002-09031
'I
.~
'I
~
.
..
....
.
,"
,~
>,
CITY OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4865
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mr. Uday Lele
White Sands, LLC
802 North Belcher Road
Clearwater, FL 33765
November 22, 2002
FILE
RE: Development Order regarding case FLD2Q02 09031 at 14 Somerset Street
Dear Mr. Lele:
This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206 D.6 of the Community
Development Code. On November 19, 2002, the Community Development Board (CDB)
reviewed your application to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet
to six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.A1., reduce the front (south) setback along
Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56
feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-404.F. The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-
unit condominium building of 62,692 square feet and five stories above parking. The
Community Development Board APPROVED the application with the following bases and
conditions:
Bases for avproval:
1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project
per Section 2-404.F.
2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913.
3. The application is consistent with the "Old Florida District" in Beach by Design.
4. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts.
BRIAN]. AUNGST, MAYOR-COMMISSIONER
WHITNEY GRAY, VICE MAYOR-COMMISSIONER HoYT HAMILTON, COMMISSIONER
FRANK HIBBARD, COMMISSIONER * BlI.L]ONSON, COMMISSIONER
11I:',r.,i'A. 'C'..THr'\,".Ir-""T'T'__4l1o.fr, AT"T'Tn.I&'T'n,r- Af"'.......T.-... T"'. .__ ______11
...
..'
"~ I
.
/
.
November 22, 2002
Lele - Page Two
Conditions of approval:
1. That the density of the site be limited to 15 dwellings units (30 dwelling units per acre);
2. That the height be limited to 56 feet as measured from base flood elevation;
3. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted
or as modified by the CDB;
4. That should addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different
from the one approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be
resubmitted to the Board for review;
5. That all Fire Code requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry system
and a knox key box on the building for emergency egress; and
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code.
Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of
Flexible Development approval (November 19, 2003) and all required certificates of occupancy
shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do
not change with successive owners. The Community Development Board may grant an
extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of
validity.
Please be aware that the issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity
to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate
the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter
with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval.
In addition, please be aware that under the provisions of Section 4-502.B. an appeal of a Level
Two approval (Flexible Development) may be initiated by the applicant or any person granted
party status with regards to the property (which is the subject of the approval) within 14 days of
the date of the CDB decision. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of
the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case will
expire on December 5,2002.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Mark Parry, Planner at 727.562.4558.
Zoning information is available through the City's website at www.clearwater-fl.com.
Very truly yours,
~.~.
Cynthia H. Tarapani, AICP
Planning Director
S:\Planning DepartmenflC D B\Flex\Jnactive or Finished Applications\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands - Approved\Somerset 14
DEVELOPMENT ORDER-doc
~
.
.
@
eJ
'0 ~r- \0"-
/
@
@
@
"~)
@
@
I~
@
@
@ @
@
@
"
~
@
z
<(
.--J
lL
UJ
t:
(f)
Sl
,L
/-\
! I
~
.
'.
.
'-
z
0
~
~
w
F
::>
0 F
-~ "' ""
0
z
.....
M
Lt)
CO
~
-<
.0-,0 ~
tf)
D
Z
<(
tf)
w
t:
:r:
;::
z
o
tf)
W
-l
<(
:r:
u
-,
II
1
~:
21
~l
~I
.91
~:
~I
'"
"'I
1;;1
:1)1
"'I
~l
I
I
1
1
t
I
I
I
,,', 1
~ i
I
I
I
1
1
1
I
I
,~
z
~i!!
<
<;:
11
~~
~~
~~
0L>l
,~~
[~
1
1
I
I
1)1
1>1
'I
~l
~I
01
~:
tl
I
I
I
I
I
I
~:
'I
~I
~'
~I
fill
~I
~I
~I
~I
81
1
I
I
I
~I
~I
'I
(31
~I
!iil
DI
~I
~I
&11
~1
81
1
<
"',
~ <
'-:' 3iS8 < ~
~ 1 ~~:g~ 0 ~~~
~ ~m~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~s~
ij) ~ ~,~ tL ~~~
fi:J t5 '::1
~~~~ ~tJ5
~~D2~~~
iw~::51-u.l~
~~~~~~~
~!~~~U
~~~ffi~~~~
&~&~~~~~
<
~
I
~
III
'"
......
M
Lt)
CO
IX
<
z
<C
-'
!:L
W
I-
ili
zt-
",F~
I
.
e
,i!'.'{Q,l. u.t ,b c;.'k
-
.......... '1:3"'..'
I"" '"
"..,
1.1
~
~
i
j
..
/
J
i_I - - - __("....1
'1::'- - - _.' I
L~j ;j' ;;;1;;1~-' I
,l'~~-'-I..II. ;;,,_ '
-\"- ~ --!
i '-1 fJ ,-: fl -~. -: f I -:: ~ ~:
.~...,._... -', _..
'-t-.;;;;;;
'.r.-._ . .~1
.~l- - - -:;:;
A~._ _ _ _=:,
....,t'~ - - _I'
-'~'- - - ---
l"-
t.! ~
;) ...-
., i;)
\
t) '"
~
.~ ~
e;,
~ -,
C;.'J u.
}UHN MAR~HALL sea
ARCHITECT
.
f' :_' ,. ," i':'~ t;':til
~~~;~i.~
~..,(
October 15, 2002
Development Review Committee
. i I 100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33752
Re: Draft Action Agenda - "Chalets on White Sands"
Case # FLD2002-09031
Dear Sir or Madam:
This letter is in response to the questions / issues required regarding this project.
1 a. Indicate whether existing units are overnight accommodations or residential in
nature.
The existing (9) units are overnight accomodations.
1 b. Indicate the color of the proposed awning - provide elevations showing
clearances between the awning and the right of way.
An elevation of the awning is shown on sheet A-2, with all required information.
1c. Indicate the minimum distance from any other building the proposed structure will
be.
Refer to Architectural sheet A-1. (reduced copy attached)
1 d. Provide the following required Residential Infill Project criteria:
Refer to attached letter from Roger Larson, Esq.
1e. Provide existing ISR.
The Impervious surface ratio of the existing site is 52%. Calculation is shown on survey.
11. A landscape plan indicating proposed stormwater facilities.
See sheet P-2
1 g. Provide a narrative indicating how the requirements of Beach by Design guidelines
are being met and, specifically, how the requirements of the Old Florida District are
being met.
Refer to attached letter from Roger Larson, Esq.
1 h. Provide a narrative outlining how the proposed development is compatible with the
area [...]
Refer to attached letter from Roger Larson, Esq.
1 i. Building mass is generally a rectangle with some relief; discuss/show how more
relief can be provided through articulation and fenestration.
Refer to attached renderings for clarity of building shape.
1130 PINEHURST ROAD SUITE - E * DUNEDIN, FL. 34698 * TELEPHONE (727) 735-0100 * FAX (727) 735-0200
I ; I_ ~o~ ~~S~~L ~C~
.
1 j. Provide a site plan more clearly showing the footprint of the building.
Footprint is shown with solid walls on sheet A-1
i ! II 1 k. Its not clear how the first 2 parking spaces on the nn side of the building can be
utilized by anyone entering the building.
These 2 spaces can be utilized by backing into the spaces. These would be additional spaces
that are above the required 23 spaces.
11. Its not clear how the first 2 parking spaces on the west side of the building can be
utilized by anyone entering the building.
These 2 spaces can be utilized with 3 pOint tums. These would be additional spaces that are
above the required 23 spaces.
2a. Minimum parking and drive aisle dimensions are not being met. Columns must not
encroach on any parking spaces or drive aisles.
The column layout has been revised and all spaces and drive aisles are in compliance. See shee,t
A-1.
2b. Sight triangle requirements must be met. Provide request for relief if there are ;
encroachments; detail how these will not impede safety.
Sight triangles are shown on sheet A-1. The areas in conflict will be made from a grillage material
that will allow clear sight to the roadway.
2c. Stacking or queuing space for a minimum of 2 vehicles off of the roadway at any
access-controlled entrance is not provided - if can't meet need to seek relief.
The west entrance gate has been revised to allow 29'-4" to the property line and approximately
37' _0" to the pavement edge. This should be sufficient for most vehicles. The eastern entrance
is unable to meet the 2 car space requirement. It should be noted that this street wilJ primarily only
be used for the residents who live on it and does not receive much traffic. Any additional stacking
will be on Somerset St. and not on any main road.
2d. Access door on west side of central lobby appears restricted by adjacent parking
spaces.
The door has been revised and is shown on sheet A-1
4a. Complex Maintenance staff shall move dumpsters to staging area.
Noted on sheet A-1
4b. Show grading from the staging to the street.
Grading is shown on sheet P-1.
4c. Label staging area throughout.
Staging area is labeled on sheets A-1, P-1, and P-2
1130 PINEHURST ROAD SUITE - E. DUNEDIN, FL. 34698. TELEPHONE (727) 735-0100. FAX (727) 735-0200
, I
· . ~O~~~~~L ~C~
II
.
9a. Fire Flow requirements for buildings must be in accordance with Appendix B of the
2000 International Fire Code. Show fire hydrant locations to provide the required
fire flow on site plan prior to review by COB.
II Hydrant location is shown on sheets A-1, P-1, and P-2.
9b. Knox Entry system is required on gates per Pinellas County Ordinance #98-4.
Show on construction documents.
Knox entry system is noted on sheet A-1 on the eastern wall of the front lobby entry (outside of
the building)
11 a. Sidewalk to be constructed along Somerset Street.
A new 4'-0" sidewalk is shown on sheet A-1 and is finished as specified in Beach by Design.
Sincerely,
~
1130 PINEHURST ROAD SUITE - E * DUNEDIN, FL. 34698 * TELEPHONE (727) 735-0100 * FAX (727) 735-0200
~, ~
.
.
.,,,~::,;:. "?l!'" ,,,,,t:;. r:-:1I
- :j
~ ._..~
FLD2002-000s 1
14 SOMERSET ST
Date Received: 9/19/2002
E\@~HALETS ON WHITE SANDS
---
ZONING DISTRICT: MHDR
LAND USE: RH
ATLAS PAGE: 258A
,,~;:e Fl U t'ie'
~uLl&:
\"1 .o~
\ O.
f'~A
" ,"
.'.:" .;"" '.. fJ l-{ ~
. ~ "'~ ~. " &.IiI
~TE~~-f?~2 ~
~~CovwShem
!
.
y
~~
.. C1earwater 100&oul'l....A...
o a.w.IiIr. F1aItde 33758
:: Telephone. 727-582....
-~. Fax: 727-582-04676
u~. .
.
.
C SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOT&Dlnn APPLICATION
C SUBMIT 12 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION including faIded ... plena
C SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE S
.
CASE ~
DATE RECEIVED:
RECEIVED BY (staff initials):
ATLAS PAGE tI:
ZONING DISTRICT:
LAND USE ClASSIFICATION:
ZONING" LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF
ADJACENT PROPERTIES:
NORTH:
SOUTH:
WEST:
EAST:
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
(ReYiIed 0BI3Ctt'01)
-PLEASE TYPE OR PRlNT-
A. APPUCANT. PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code
..s ?u
MAILING ADDRESS: 40 V A.~IJJ (... '6'
PHONENUMBER:' 'Z.. 7- *tl3-~*q FAXMJtI8!R; 72.. 7 -q67..-C)f.,., 7-z-
PROPERTY OWNER(S): C B G-pt"1Y) i N C
(Must include ALL ownera)
APPlICANT NAME: .
AGENT,,",,", _c!d~ tUe--
MAILING ADDRESS: ~o . fV ~ gel~f?A"
PHONE NUMBER: / 1.. ,- L{q 3 -~ @:AXNUMBER:
IS-:
x.;;-
B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code SectIon 4-202.A)
STREET ADDRESS: . 1+~Ae!T ~-
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:' . ~f!J 1-!1 flIIV..At"'J< ,
PARCEL NUMBER: 08 I ~tff/,/./6/~ t;. g~~!tJD/ /41:1.1.
PARCEL SIZE: ., &D ~ I ~8JV; ~ ,.~
(acres. square feet) , -..,.
PROPOSED USE(S) ANDSIZE(S): / ~ ~r6 .AAlIL'fI. PANtI/.. T /C~5 · ~I )
(number 01 dWIIIng unila. hot8I roome or ~ footage 01 norasidentlal use) ~ ,
.(I}/~~.,
, I ~. ~W""'YI
DESCRlPTIONOFREQUEST(S): 10 ~ ~~. ~P-.l~1IT
(Indude" NqII8SIlICI code ~.16; e.g. nkIucIan ~ number 01 perking ip8C8S, Ip8Cilic use, etc.)
~ ~ ~4(lNIf,J.NA/ LOt'
DOESW'tIftIJ.~~ RIGHTS (TDR). A PREvIouSLY APPROVED PlANNED UNIT
~~. OR A PREVIOUSLY ~ (CERTFIED) ~TE PLAN? YES _ NO ~ (II yes. attac:h. ClClPY 0I1he 8PPbble
P8g8 1 018 - FIulbIe 0lMII0pment AppIIc8Iion - CIty 01 CIurwater
~/
;
" ;
.
"
.
C. PROOF OF OWNERMIP: (Code SectIon 4-202AS)
a SU8MT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANQE POLICY, DEED OR AFfIIMVIT ATTESTING TO THE OWNERsHIP OF THE PROPERTY
D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code SectIon M13.A)
CI PnMde COIIlIII* respGI_1o the * (8) GENERAL. APPLICABILITY CAITERIA:
1. The pIOpOIed ~ ~ the IInd wII bein hInnany with the .... Idl. CllMrIIge, denIIIy end c:tweaelIr ~ .... praperties In wtIic:h It
IIIoc1tec1. y~ ,. ~/NIJ.AR. ~/!f~~T ~ '2ttL~
",.. ~~"H. ~ ~~I?/AI.4~tflt
.. ~~~ 11#~ JI~lJJ.
2. The pIOpOIed dcMJIapment wII not hinder or dIIccxnge the eppIOpiteIe deIreIcIprMnt 8nd 11M d edJ-=ent I8nd .... buIdIngs or lignlficently
ImpeIrIheVllluettwndlh / /f!!6I~ J,..~ WU-{,- It/41r
. ~~N4 ~~e '" ~-~r:r
3. The pIOpOIed dev8Iopmenl wII not-....ely IIfect Ihe heIlIh or ur.ty or ..... r.-IdIrlg or WOfIcing In the neIgt1tIomood of Ihe ptOpOSed
ute. ptJ: /!1!l71~ ",...,~ IN ~ r:=f:St~
~.
4. The pIOpOIed devllapment II dlllgneclto minimize InIlIIc oongeetIaI..
y,s :
MJ
ON~1 2-
ON-~
~~~~
~~.
wro
fWllDidJ,
(Ptt1J
5. The praposed d8ve1opmenl1l consIItent with Ihe community chlll'8Ct8r d the ImmecIate vIc:InIty d the perce/ proposed for d~
V~ : -nlI!eI! _1& 8UIWUC~ rJ~~ilT~ _
P#~~b rJI'17I1.J ~ vr~/~'" .
6. The design oflhe proposed detllapn..... minimizes eclvenIe effecIa,lncIudIng...., lICOU8IIc 8nd oIf8ctory end hours d operetion Impec:ls.
on edjec:ent propeI1Ies.
'f~ ~ r_ asl"" ~IAI~~.S MY tfOu~~ ~
1'0' ~~ ~If$.
o Address Ihe IIPIlIIc8b1e tIeldbIIty crbrta for the IP8cIfic lend UN .. IIsIiId in eech Zlri1g Di8IrIct to which the --.11 reqU8ll8d (use aeperate
Iheeta .. necesury):
- ax;,/J l~eD 51!:1"5~ - ~ . 2 ~ '"R) 10'
er:Jlle . I ~. "' ,,, I
- Au..tH,.,AuU D~ #j ~~/f.~ OlJd fJ~It'W4,'
- MIAlIMUI't ~T WJD[II -' l~' '"" ,,'
Pege 2 d 6 - FJeldbIe DeveIopmenI ~ - CIty d ae.rw.r.
~ ~..
~/
.
"
.
"
r
I ; e. IUPPLEIIENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code 8eaIon 4-Z02.A)
a IIGN:D NG SEALED SURVEY (IncIudIng"'~ d pnIpIIty) - One........ ....12 copIee;
.
D COF"f OfF RECClRDEO PLAT. . ~1tJIe;
D PREUMINARV PLAT. . requRd;
a LOCAnON MAP OF THE PROPERTY:
D TReE SURVEY ~ lIIIIIlq __ on lie _..... .. de. ~ _ by....... lID (D8H 4- or"""" _1oc8IIon.
including drip 1Ina)
a GRADING PLAN. .1P~ebIe;
F. SITE P.LAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code SectIon 4-202..A)
D SITE PlAN wIIh tile foIIcMIng lufol...uan (not eo ..... za- x 38"):
All dImelllial.:
Nor1h ..ow: .' .
E.....ollg bet ICIIe (mII*Iun ICIIe one Inch ~ 50 feet). _ d8te ~
I..ocIIian mep:
Inde}c.... .....1CIng 1ncIvIdu-'.....1ncIuded In pecIc8gI;
Footprint _ ... d II buIIcIlngI_ ~
AI ~ IlICtleGka;
All 8JdIlIng IlIi:I prapoud paInD d 8CCIIS:
AI required light ~
IdenlIficIICln of enWOlllMllIIIy unique ....1Ud'l. ~ wea.ncII. tnIe..-.. - epecImen
......Including deIatpIIon end IocIIlIan d WlCh.itlbY. grocnt ClMll' ~ end wlIcIIe IlIbII8la, lie;
LocalIon d.. public end prMIe ..Imenla;
I..ocIIian d II etnaet~.wey wII1In end ~ eo the_
l.oclIIIcln d 8IdlItIng pubic end prMeI.......1ncludIng tint ~. *'"" end -*-'Y.......... ~ ancllft 1CIIIIona. gee
end _INs:
AI periling epeces, drIv8I...aya.1oIdIng _ end veIlIcU8r we ~
DepIc:IIan by IMdIng or c.0IIt.IIIicI1Il1g of ... required peItdng Iallnterlor .~ -:
L..oclIIIan of .. refUIe caIecIIOn .... end II required 1(I,,1I1I1g (min. 10'x12' cIur ....):
Loc8IIon d II ~ lTIIIIIIII:
I..ocIIian d III onsIIe Ind 01'1IIII ~ menegement f8cIIlles;
I..ocIIian d II outdoor IighIng tbdur8I; end
Loc8IIon d II 8llistIng end pIOpCIMd ........
~
-
D SITE DATA TABLE for 8lliItIng. requked, _ prapoud de\ 1Iapment. In writtenltllbuI8r fonn:
Und...1n ecpn feet end ecns:
Number d dwelling lI'1b ~
Grou tIaar ... dewUd to ..c:h .-;
PerIdng epeces: IatlII runber. ..........In ... form wilt e. number d required ....-:
TCIt8I..,ed.....1ncIudIng II ~ perIdng..... _ drtunIIys, ....... in 8QI*lt felt _ pen:ell. of the peyed vehlculer erN;
SID _ epecIea d II "1dIcape ......
~ I8CXIfda book _ pege numbers d II 8IlIItIng ullllylUIIlTI8I1t
BdIdIng _ scrUcIur8 heISII*
III'Ip8I1Nl8bIe IUff8ce r.ao (1.s.R.): _
Floor ... r.ao (FAR.) far II nOllr_den.. uses.
D REDUCED SITE PlAN eo ICIIe (8 " X 11) _ color rendeIIng . poIIIbIe;
o FOR DEVElOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE. prvvIde the foIowing eddIioIl8llnformltion on lie pIen:
One-foot cxriDln or _ .....Ilol. on ..
0Irsfte ....uo.. If requked eo ev8lulde the prapoud ..,"" m8111g1m11lt for the pMlII;
All open.... ~
LacatIon d .. earth or...... Nt8lI*'a .... end ..... ber1na;
Lot 1IneI_ building IIneI (dimelllIiall8d);
StreeIa _ ~ (dimellliall8d):
BuIldIng anclllruc*nl..... (dlmellIiall8d);
StrucIInI CMfheIIgI;
TreelrMIIIDI;: ~ by. -cartIllad arborW'. oIl1traee r DBH or.,..... nIIIedIng" ~ (drip lines) Ind CICIndItIon of 1Ud'l-'
Page 3 d 8 - FItxIbIe ~~!JAo~-. - CIy d a..w.r
~/
,
/
I
.
"
.
STORMWATER PLAN SUBMmAL REQUIREMENTS: (CIty of Clearwater Design Criteria Manual and
4-202.A.21)
STORMWATER PLAN IncIudIngthe~ ~
EJdIlIng ~ ..-dlg 50 feet"'" eI praperty linea;
PIapoeed grdlg including fIniItlecI IGor ....,... fA ellINe*lNS;
All...,...... end ~ 1tDrm.....
PIopoIed ItDnm _ "'1lIal~ ..including lop fA e.nk. IDe fA IIape end ouII8t canIIOI A'Udure;
Stormwater CllClIIIlJorla for IitInUIIIIan end .... quIIIy;
SVtRn fA FIorlde NglRlllId PIA 11100111 EngIneer on III pIInI end ~
o COPY OF SOUTHWEST FlORl~ WATER MANAGeMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT SUBMITTAL (SWFWMD epprov8I Is required
prior to Iau8nce fA CIty BuIldIng PerInI)
o COPY OF STATE AND COUNTY STORMWATER SYSTEM TIE-IN PERt.IT APPLICATIONS. .. eppIIcabIe
.
H. LANDSCAPING PLAN Su_mAL REQUIREMENTS: (SectIon 4-1102.A)
o LANOSCAPE PLAN:
All uIatIng 8nd pRIpCIlI8d sIrucIInI;
N8meI cf 8butIIng atreetI;
DnIInIIge 8nd ret8nlIDn ....1nducIng ....... Iide IIopeI end boltDm _111101111;
DeIin..aon n cImellliona fA .. requRd pertneI8r ....... buIfer8:
SIght 'JlsIbIIty trIengIea: " .
Deh8lian 8nd dImellliona cf .. PlIfldng ....1ncIudIng I8nd1caplng 1lIIlIndlI8nd cutllng;
PrqJClHd lIf1d requftd plIlIdng ....
Eldatlng ...... arHll8 _ InwnedIII8Iy ~ to the .... by ....... size lIIld IacatIonI. Including drIpIne;
1.oc8lIon. 1Ize. ~, epedlIcallallS end qulIntiIilIlI cf a. .....ng _ propaeed I8Ild1c:8pe meterI8Ia. ~ bclI8nIc8IlUld
cammon n8l'l18S;
TypIcII pIlInIlng d4UIII for lrlIeS. palms. tIIlrube"lIf1d ground caver pI8rttlIlndudIng 1nIlIuctIona. IClII mIxea. badefllllng. mulching IUld
protectMt me8IUrlIS;
Inf8rior I8IIdscl1p1ng ..... hatChed endIOI ahlIdect lII'ld I8beIed end Ir*Iriar 181ldac8pe coverIIglI. 8JlIlI'88Iing in baIh aquere feet 8nd
peralllI8ge ClMII8d;
ConclIIIons of a pnMous development 8PPfOV8I (e.g. candltlona Impa8ed by .. Community DlMIlopment 8aeId):
In1gatIon notes.
o REDUCED LANDSCAPE PlAN to scale (8 % X 11) (calor rlIndering If paaIbIa);
o IRRIGATION PLAN (recp.nd for IewI two and three appnMll):
o COMPREHENSIVE lANDSCAPE PROGRAM appIlcalIon, as 8RlbbIe.
I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMmAL REQUIREMENTS: (SectIon 4-202.A.23)
RequIred In the event the appIIc8IlarIlnc:ludes a d8\alopm8ft ..... daIIgn ltandarda ant in iaIue (e.g. TaurlIt end DawnIDwn DiatIIct8) or as part
of a CampllIhenIIYe IntII RedewkJpmenl Project or II ReIIdentIaIInlII Pnljac:t.
.
a BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS - IIIIidas cf.. buIdIngs Including height d1menelonl. caIots and materlaIa;
a REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS - four eIdea cf building with cakn 8nd materials to IC8I8 (8 % X 11) (bIac:k lII'ld white and calor rendering, If
poaIbIe) .. required.
J. S1GNAGE: (DM.on 11. SIGNS I SectIon 3-1806)
o ComprehensIve Sign ProgrlIm ~, .. applicable (....... eppIcation 8nd fee requirlId).
a Reduced slgnage proposal (8 % X 11) (color). If lIUbmIIIIng CompnIhenIMl SIgn Program appIc:;atiar"..
K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-801.C)
o Include .. required If propaeed dev8lopment wi! degrlIde the aooepIlIbIe IewI cf eeMce for any roedway .. adapted In the CornprlItlenMe Plan.
Trip genelMIoI.1haII be baled on the most recent edIIIon fA the InaIIuee of TrwlSPQl1llllan EngIneer'a Trip GenerlII Manual. Refer to SedIon 4-801
C fA the CommunIty [)et.eIopment Code for ellCllIpIIallS to thia requIrwnert.
Page .. fA 8 - FIjpdbIe De1. alopment AppIk.IIIClI. - CIty fA a.....
,
l ,[,
! /.
I~
.
"
.
L SIGNATURE:
I, .. ........d. ~ I1et II ........... ....In IhiI
,",,--lI'I .. "- end ...... 10 .. belt or ..., IrnawIIcfae end
....... car ........... 10 .. end ___ the ~
-~-4~
......... rlllftlPIItY.... or ....IIIII~
ITATIIOF ~ CGWnYOf ,.-. ..
~----~.....
A.D. 2Of'L 10 me encIIor bJ
LrIJM~,l~fI::n ":
............
~~~
=..... ..... \"t1IgMr
f':J\.. __ CwM1I,,'a'l DD04I1.
''',J ____t2.2IIOI
P8ge 5 rI e - FIIdIIe ~ ApsII(;IIoo - cay rI a.....
,
/
. .'
.
'M. AFFIDAVIT TO
(NMliI fA .. pIapIrty owners
1. That (11InIw n) the owner{a) .... NCOl'd tIIe""a) fA the ~ dIecIIIed property (eddrea or ~ 1ocIllan):
I OM61C~
2. That this pIapIrty conatIU8a the property for which . req.-t far a: (daaatbe .....
F. ' .1J ~mEW'"
~~Mr'/olV
3. That the lRIenIgned ~) eppoklllld .... (doeaIdo) appoint
to.
. WHI7E S~l)3
,L ~ ~ ('W'tY U4
. .
. (hiaIIheIr) agent(s) to execute any1)8lillana or aIher doc::urIlIra neceaaary to aIrac:t IUCh ......:
4. That this lIIIidRIt has been uecuted to RUle the ClIy fA a.rw.ter, Florida to conaIder .... act on the __ deaaIJed praparty.
S. That site vIalIa to the property... neceaaary ~ CIty ,.....,.IwIl...1n ClI'der to pnaae thla ~ .... the owner aulhOItDa City
...........1Ivea to vIaIt end photogr8ph the property desc::rbId In this application;
.. That (1Iwe), Ihe underIIgned aulharlty, hereby certify that the foIego1ng ia We
eouN1Y OF P1NELLAS
.... the ~. an officer duly cammlalolled ~ the JlIwa;4ifA StIIeII fA ~ on....
, MJJA- personaIy ~ /fIJ I tL _L ~ 'LL-
and uys that h.,.". fUlly underataI_ the conI8nIa fA the .... hafIIle
My Comrniaalon EJpIrea:
-tJ,.,
J.q day of
. .who having bean ftrst duly sworn
e, ~~k .-
Notary PublIc
die
Pege 8 of 8 - FIeldbIe o.o.~ ~J*.am - ClIy fA a.. ..
,
~--"':,-";
: ...__~_;_:___.!_.._,i__-;-_..,_
; :- +--~"-\---.'":.-..-.i'.""J.-_'j
r + ;2,- ..'
;. --
~
(
.
~. r' rt rJ1:
:- r,;'1- ~ " ~': ~ -.
~ I ~', '-''''f!
.. k., t, ~ 1.,--,
".~~,'-~---
j!11!.~ "Z.-O~O~I
---...,;>
~
,~
u
~
z
::)
~
\
,J.,
/j
>
, -<
. ~
Z
::::l
#
I
<,
tCI
~
Z
::::l
<
)
~'\
~
.
:"'::-.
rl
/ .,. . '." -i
.~
\..
,
,
z
-<
--'
l.L
--'
ill
>-
ill
--'
--'
-<
U
l.L
~
-1-
:i':
~ ',',,-
"
~,.'
.~ lV'
~'+,~.'.".,'-~ , '
, ".
'" '" 1'\
"
'-P'
'. '.,',....
, '
,
, '
, .
..~.f, ~
~"". "", t"
"-, . .~~ ~~ ..
e,_. [I
t ,~ ,~ f
er~~t";' [l
1\:":'; ~ . ~ ~ /~
~.", ,
""" '. ,,", I-
\' -"-~
4- . .\. ~ .,
~.~(.;..-J
.' l "l:
'~':f--. ,l.,..
';"~'V.:_....I
,. r -',- : :
" , I,
:~_..-
, /'II -
t, )
',4t.____/
.
~" 4 ~ ~ ., .f,
,:. ~b:'.~ ~'. ~Q\;l. , .: ~it!' - -," ~ .-
, , (tl 1~, ~ _~_~~ i'~ ___ ~ ~l .' f<
~".l"--~=---J:"'r"'--"'- '1' . """ '~I': ',..;'
t;,j -" _ ill 1 :_~~/' J~
t1~~,~~~~~~H{~TI.j,i~~I::'Qr;'
'_._.!___L.,i._..:__
: ! Ii, ; , :
..+ :-----1 ;~.
u
~
Z
::)
./~:.
.,.liP!
~
,
,
,
,
/ I
'<~r__ ~!
",
~~'-
~,:e'
r L __ "
, ,
, .
,
-'
o
,/1
. ~:~
Ii
"
J~l ~-, <t1
~ '}k..,'."^','.', ;".~.:',;
"'J- , ~~~
"",,:,..','
-<
t:
z
::)
tCI
~
z
::)
~
UJ
10
-,
o
&:'
'" ,;' ,~ ,
, ~", 1/' ,," j",
t"';~'q(-:"
I .,H'"
. "" ,t4:., 1.
t :_. _':.... _,,~
""iO~..
r n n,J : .~'~,'~
/// I, ./' ~J/~ ~',t,', II.
, 'r.-.-.:'_.~.r,~...:t,
.. ,...: ..\~..~~
,:, "f(-::~.c
~"""'"
. "J;t,f . -" .
'It
n:"
~~-J~"".;
.., --t ',.;... ~J:___u
~ ();\ ,.
". . .~. .,-
It. ", _ ,....
j '" ~,. . ">,..
. ,
.~ ,
~'F":
6:":~~~~"
" _,.~,;. ,,'lIo
'.-- - " ,! -,'
,,~~:.,~
. ,-';.' '.
~. ~..
'~
'1r,. "'."{ ~..',
~ 1\ ,,'
.....,."\' ,
,- .. .."'
ifJ>.?aJ l. - ~} I
SHA!OW STUDY FOR JUN~ 1
1 0:00 am
1 2:00 noon
2:00 pm
4:00 pm
11 :00 am
1 :00 pm
3:00 pm
5:00 pm
SHADOvt'STUDY FOR DECEMB~ 21
10:00 am
12:00 noon
2:00 pm
4:00 pm
~~ 'f'>l
:1, _ ~ -~: ~
h~ i"i.' ~",.~.<. -,~u:h
~~t~il
11 :00 am
1 :00 pm
3:00 pm
5 :00 pm
, 0
)' z
~
<(
WJ
~
u.J
~
--
WJ
z
0
\.n
I-
u.J
...J
<(
:r:
\2)
-
r(\
o
~
.
~ NI\l
~;I, -c)~ ~ ~
'."J -Q
r..'.."i ~ ~~
,\~, ~
I
I
C:llt
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A. A:O~l"'''!)1
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
.
.
E. D. ARMSTRONG III
JOHN T. BLAKELY
BRUCE H. BOKOR
JOHN R. BONNER, SR.'
GUY M. BURNS
JONATHAN S. COLEMAN
MICHAEL T. CRONIN
ELIZABETH J. DANIELS
BECKY FERRELL-ANTON
COLLEEN M. FLYNN
MARION HALE
SCOTT C. ILGENFRITZ
FRANK R. JAKES
TIMOTHY A. JOHNSON, JR.
SHARON E. KRICK
ROGER A. LARSON
JOHN R. LAWSON, JR"
LEANNE LETIZE
MICHAEL G. LITTLE
MICHAEL C. MARKHAM
STEPHANIE T. MARQUARDT
ZACHARY D. MESSA
A.R. "CHARLIE" NEAL
F. WALLACE POPE, JR.
ROBERT V. POTTER. JR.
AUDREY B. RAUCHW A Y
DARRYL R. RICHARDS
PETER A. RIVELLINI
DENNIS G. RUPPEL"
CHARLES A. SAMARKOS
PHILIP M. SHASTEEN
JOAN M. VECCHIOLI
STEVEN H. WEINBERGER
JOSEPH J. WEISSMAN
'OF COUNSEL
PLEASE REPLY TO CLEARWATER
FILE NO. 1 06047
October 17, 2002
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33752
Re: The Chalets on White Sands ("White Sands") located at 14 Somerset
Street, Clearwater, Florida ("Property"); Case #FLD2002-09031
Dear Mr. Wells:
This correspondence is in lieu of my previous correspondence dated September
19, 2002, and October 3, 2002 and intends to combine the comments of each
correspondence and specifically address the request by staff to supply a narrative
indicating how the requirements of Beach by Design guidelines are being met and,
specifically, how the requirements of the Old Florida District are being met.
Property description and character.
The Property abuts the north right-of-way line and is at the west end and
terminus of Somerset Street and is known as 14 Somerset Street. The western
property line of the Property abuts the Gulf of Mexico. Somerset travels westerly from
Mandalay Boulevard and dead ends, without cul-de-sac, at the Gulf of Mexico.
The Property has 253 feet of frontage on Somerset Street and 87 feet of depth,
or approximately .5033 acres.
The city staff has taken the position that the property has two fronts, i.e., the
west property line fronting the Gulf of Mexico and the south property line fronting
Somerset Street.
The current zoning classification is Medium High Density Residential (MHDR).
The land use designation is Community Redevelopment District (CRD). The property
CLEARWATER OFFICE
911 CHESTNUT ST.
POST OFFICE BOX 1368
CLEARWATER. FLORIDA 33757-1368
TELEPHONE: (727) 461-1818
TELECOPIER (727) 462-0365
TAMPA OFFICE
lOON. TAMPAST.
SUITE 1800
POST OFFICE BOX 1100
TAMPA, FLORIDA 33601-11
TELEPHONE: (813) 225-2500
TELECOPIER (813) 223-7118
~
\,
.
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 17, 2002
Page 2
specifically is located in the "Old Florida District" of the Beach by Design Community
Redevelopment District.
Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) zoning abuts the northerly boundary of
the Property. The abutting use consists of two single-family residential dwellings. The
westerly-most dwelling is located directly on the Gulf of Mexico and is a two-story
residential dwelling with one living story above parking. The second single-family
dwelling lies to the east of the first dwelling and is approximately two stories and rests
on grade. This second dwelling sits well off the northerly boundary of the Property with
a storage building abutting the Applicant's northerly property line.
To the east of the Property are single-family, single story homes, which are of
an aged nature. Immediately to the south of the Property is a two-story aged patio
motel and as you move in an easterly direction along the southerly right-of-way line of
Somerset there are single story aged single-family dwellings resting on grade. The
homes and/or dwellings along Somerset are close together with little or no setback lines
and insufficient off-street parking. The parking along Somerset Street is
accommodated mostly by single spaces on a lot or on street parking which requires
backing into the right-of-way.
Cambria, the street immediately south of Somerset, has at its westerly end on
the south side of the right-of-way a two-story over parking aged building. As you move
in an easterly direction along the southerly right-of-way of Cambria there are single-
family, single story dwellings, resting on grade, in various stages of renovation and/or
aged condition. Cambria is a street that travels west from Mandalay Boulevard and
dead-ends, without cul-de-sac, at the Gulf of Mexico. The street contains a good deal
of on-street parking of vehicles and very little off-street parking availability. The
conditions are similar to the dwellings along Somerset.
Idlewild is the street immediately south of Cambria. At the westerly end of
Idlewild there is a condominium building, which is five stories over parking and abuts
the Gulf of Mexico. In an easterly direction along the south right-of-way line of Idlewild
there are mixed residential dwellings, apartments and motels, most of which are single
story, resting on grade, and in an aged condition. Some have been renovated recently
in terms of paver driveways and new siding. As is the case with Cambria and
Somerset, there is a lack of off-street parking available.
Glendale is the street immediately south of Idlewild. At its western end there is a
condoll)inium building, which is four stories over parking abutting the Gulf of Mexico.
Immediately to the east there is a two story over parking condominium.
.
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P .A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 17, 2002
Page 3
Immediately south of Glendale is Heliwood. The properties along this right-of-
way consist of primarily one and two story dwellings with atowrihome afthewesterly
end, which is two stories over parking.
Where there have been recent developments of dwelling units they have built the
dwelling units over parking and thus accommosated parking on site rather than using
the street as the parking area. In each case, each of these streets abuts the Gulf of
Mexico without a cul-de-sac.
The Request:
The Applicant requests the acceptance of Residential Infill Standards
contemplated by Level Two uses under the Clearwater Community Development Code
("Code"). The Applicant requests relief as follows: .
1.
~ ~~
3.
4.
5.
Reduce the front (south) setback along Somerset Street from 25 feet to
10 feet (to building);
Reduce stacking space for a controlled-access driveway from 40 feet (two
car lengths) to 10 feet on the east side, on the west entrance to 29.4 feet;
Increase the height from 30 feet to 56 feet (as measured from base flood
elevation );
Permission to have a reduced sight triangle at the entrance and exit of the
building; \ ~.
Allow an increase in height of a wall within the front setback from 3 feet to
6 feet.
Notwithstanding that residential infilllimits height to 30 feet, certain development
standards for residential infill projects are considered to be guidelines and may be
varied based upon the criteria specified in Section 2-404(F) of the Code.
.
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 17, 2002
Page 4
The following are responses to the criteria for residential infill projects set forth in
Section 2-404 F of the Code:
1. The development or redevelopment of the Parcel proposed for
development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and
development standards.
Response:
The development of this fifteen (15) unit condominium cannot occur without
"Residential Infill" approval allowing the adjustments to the front setback and height
requirements. Primary to this issue is the need to place all parking beneath the living
areas of the building. Because the lot depth is minimal (87 feet), increasing the height
of the building is critical to the maintenance of all of the code requirements. By using a
mid-rise structure of five (5) living levels and inserting parking under the building, the
Applicant is able to meet all other code development parameters such as impermeable
surface ratio, open space, provide landscaping in excess of code requirements, storm
water storage and retention and exceed the parking requirements by supplying twenty-
eight (28) spaces per fifteen (15) units. If the structure were constructed within the
Code established setback line, parking beneath the building could not be
accommodated for the twenty-eight (28) spaces. It is noted that although the city
standards require one and half (1/2) spaces per unit, this typically has been problematic
due to most unit owners having at least two automobiles. The height increase allows
~re open space. and accommodates the de~sity permitted on the property.
------~..__._.__..-- -----'"-- ---.-----"
The reduction in sight triangle and reduced stacking lanes for automobiles is a
direct result of a lacK of depth to the land. These two requests are mitigated due to the
following: (i) Somerset Street is a dead end street and therefore, not subject to through
traffic, (ii) the street only serves the properties located on the street, (iii) traffic is not at
a high rate of speed and is minimal, (iv) the sight triangle is partially blocked by the side
of the building, but there is an opening in the building wall that will allow some vision, (v)
there is ample distance between the building and the pavement to allow automobiles to
exit in a safe manner and have a vision of the roadway before entering the roadway, (vi)
the stacking will allow at least one and nearly two to stack inside the property line
before entering the roadway.
The increase in the height of the wall within the setback line is designed to
screen the trash staging area. The wall also contains the signage for the residence and
provides an attractive streetscape.
.
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 17, 2002
Page 5
2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a
Residential Infill Project will not materially reduce the fair market value of
abutting properties.
Response:
The surrounding properties are substantially aged and obsolete. The purpose of
Beach by Design is to encourage new development, which hopefully will provide a
catalyst for additional new development in the Beach by Design District. This Property
is estimated to have an overall retail value of approximately Fourteen Million Dollars
($14,000,000.00), which is a substantial increase in value, and which can only enhance
the surrounding area and encourage additional development of new construction or
renovation of existing structures. Rather than reduce fair market value, it will enhance
fair market value of the abutting properties. The existing use as a motel is not only
obsolete, but is inconsistent with the Old Florida District philosophy of retail being
neighborhood serving. The residential use proposed is encouraged in the Old Florida
District.
3. The uses within the Residential Infill Project are otherwise permitted
in the district.
Response:
It is apparent that multi-story and multi-family dwellings are in substantial use,
particularly along those properties in the District that immediately abut the Gulf of
Mexico. The Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) and the Community
Redevelopment District (CRD) all permit multi-family, multi-story construction within the
Residential Infill requirements. It should be noted that Residentiallnfill has as its intent
and is designed to accommodate the placing of new structures within subdivisions and
lot sizes, which were created many years ago and were established by codes that were
significantly less restrictive than the existing Code. The flexibility allowed by Residential
Infill, permits new construction to continue by permitting some flexible standard to
accommodate new structures within lot sizes, street configurations and abutting
property setback lines that were not designed with the current Code in mind. The use
of residential and the reduction of retail are consistent with the philosophy established
in the Beach By Design standards.
.
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 17, 2002
Page 6
4. The uses within the Residential Infill Project are compatible with
adjacent land uses.
Response:
The project is compatible with all properties lying to the south. The property is at
the northern edge of the Old Florida District and similar projects are permitted and
encouraged in the balance of the Old Florida District lying south of the Applicant's
project. With respect to the land north of the project, which is zoned as Low Medium
Density Residential (LMDR) and 7.5 units to the acre, the proposed use of the Property
is the least intense use of the Property yet allowing the permitted density. Comparing
the positioning of the proposed project as it relates to the residences on the north
boundary, shows that even if the height remained at thirty (30) feet, the presence of the
building and any shadows cast is no less than those shadows cast by an increase in
height to fifty-six (56) feet. The Applicant proposes to change the use from a retail use
as a motel to a residential use, which is more compatible with the adjacent land uses.
5. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a
Residential Infill Project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel
proposed for development.
Response:
The project will act as a catalyst to encourage other development in the Old
Florida District consistent with this mid rise multi-family dwelling, which should create
substantial renovation and rehabilitation of the Old Florida District over time, adding to
the City's tax base, removing on-street parking, improving general traffic flow,
accommodating a greater distance between buildings and adding substantial
landscaping consistent with the Code. Considering the aged conditions of the
surrounding uses, the approval of this Project will provide incentive to other property
owners in the area to upgrade their property.
\
."",
.
.
I
.1
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 17, 2002
Page 7
6. The design of the proposed Residential Infill Project creates a form
and function, which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity
of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
Response:
The proposed structure uses unique and imaginative designs and will bea model
of architecture incorporating the Old Florida designs and colors. The use of balconies,
landscaping and under the building parking will immediately enhance the character of
properties in the immediate vicinity of the parcel and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
Properties immediately adjoining the Applicant's Property do not meet flood elevation
standards, do not have under the building parking, do not meet retention and detention
Code requirements and, as a result, present and pose a greater burden on the City of
Clearwater than the Applicant's project. Approval of the Applicant's request will
enhance the character of the immediate vicinity and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-
street parking are justified by the benefits to the community character in the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of
Clearwater as a whole.
Response:
Due to the lot size, particularly the depth of the lot, it is essential to request the
flexibility of reduced front setback on Somerset and an increased height. This flexibility
(i) will allow the project to meet all other Code requirements, including, the creation of
two (2) parking spaces per unit of off-street parking beneath the building, retentionand
impermeable surface requirements and, (ii) will reduce the traffic congestion at a dead
end street. The granting of the flexibility standard requested shall not impose a harmful
effect on the surrounding properties, but will enhance their character as well as the City
of Clearwater as a whole. The requests represent the least flexibility necessary to
accomplish the Applicant's objective and benefit the character of the community.
~
.
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 17, 2002
Page 8
8. Provide a narrative indicating how the requirements of Beach by
Design guidelines are being met and, specifically, how the requirements of the
Old Florida District are being met.
Response:
Beach by Design in the Old Florida District contemplates:
1. Favoring residential uses.
2. The use of retail uses that are neighborhood serving.
3. Renovation and revitalization of existing improvements.
4. Limited new construction where renovation is not practical.
5. New single-family dwellings and townhouses are a preferred form of
development.
6. Densities in the area should be generally limited to the density of existing
improvements.
7. Building height should be low to mid-rise in accordance with the
Community Development Code.
8. Lack of parking may hinder revitalization.
The use proposed by the Applicant is consistent with the residential uses in the
Old Florida District. Renovation of the existing use of the Property is not likely and
would not be encouraged. The Applicant's project will replace a non-conforming retail
use. The Applicant's project located directly on the Gulf of Mexico will create a catalyst
for renovation, revitalization and new development extending eastward from the
Property.
The architecture of the Applicants project is Mediterranean Revival, which is
consistent with a tropical theme. The quality of the structure and ambiance of the units
is consistent with an upscale elegant beach community. Landscaping will be
conforming to the Clearwater Beach community and will be notably different from other
beach communities. The colors used are consistent with the palette suggested in
Beach by Design.
The project contemplates that all parking areas are removed from view from the
street and are housed inside of the building.
The Applicant's project is consistent with the density permitted by MHDR and
CRD. The density is thirty (30) units per acre and therefore, the fifteen (15) dwelling
"'-
;~
.
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY ,POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P .A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 17, 2002
Page 9
units proposed on this little more than one-half acre site are permitted on the Property.
The Applicant has specifically designed the project so as to remove parking from the
street area and avoid congestion at the end of a dead end street.
The frontage of the Property will be pedestrian friendly and will include
landscaping, sidewalks and an enhanced walking area.
The proposed building uses numerous relief design techniques, including the
extension of balconies to create a pleasing and aesthetically pleasant building, which is
consistent with the Beach by Design, Design Guidelines.
The issue as to height is whether or not the Applicant's project of a five living
story building above minimum floor elevation meets the definition as a "midrise
building". To resolve this issue one might determine a definition of a low rise building
and a definition of a high rise building and perhaps a midrise is in between.
If the standard for a low rise is thirty (30) feet, and a story is generally considered
to be ten feet, then a low rise would allow three stories above the minimum floor
elevation. Highrise is perhaps much like what is being constructed today on the beach,
which is seven (7) to ten (10) living stories above minimum floor elevation rising to one
hundred (100) feet as permitted by the Code, with the opportunity to rise to one
hundred fifty (150) feet under Beach by Design standards. Given those definitions,
midrise can easily be thought of as four (4) to six (6) living levels above minimum floor
elevation, or forty (40) to sixty (60) feet above FEMA elevation. I believe the Applicant
is within the height recommendations of a midrise building. There currently exists, at
the west end of Idlewild, a condominium building with five (5) living levels above
minimum floor elevation, so this application is not an anomaly.
The Applicant respectfully requests that the Request set forth above be
permitted and approved by staff and the City in accordance with the site plan submitted.
Yours very truly,
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE,
BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
~~ Q, ~~ ("iUS)
Roger A. Larson
~. ..
""' ,;';'
, . . >"/,,,
View looking southeast along Somerset Street
Neighboring property to the north
)..leighboring property to the north
14 Somerset Street
FLD2002-09031
Neighboring property to the east
Neighboring property to the north
Neighboring property to the north
".....,...""., ... -- ,.,-
--~
, ,'" ~J<
V iew looking northwest
View looking north
View looking north at west side of site
14 Somerset Street
FLD2002-09031
View looking northwest
View looking east
Neighboring property to the south
l
.
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE. BOKOR. RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
E. D. ARMSTRONG III
JOHN T. BLAKELY
BRUCE H. BOKOR
JOHN R. BONNER, SR.'
GUY M. BURNS
JONATHANS.COLEMAN
MICHAEL T. CRONIN
ELIZABETH J. DANIELS
BECKY FERRELL-ANTON
COLLEEN M. FLYNN
MARION HALE
SCOTT C. ILGENFRITZ
FRANK R. JAKES
TIMOTHY A. JOHNSON, JR.
SHARON E. KRICK
ROGER A. LARSON
JOHN R. LAWSON, JR'
LEANNE LETIZE
MICHAEL G. LITTLE
MICHAEL C. MARKHAM
STEPHANIE T. MARQUARDT
ZACHARY D. MESSA
A.R. "CHARLIE" NEAL
F. WALLACE POPE, JR.
ROBERT V. POTTER, JR.
AUDREY B. RAUCHW A Y
DARRYL R. RICHARDS
PETER A. RIVELLINI
DENNIS G.RUPPEL'
CHARLES A. SAMARKOS
PHILIP M. SHASTEEN
JOAN M. VECCHlOLI
STEVEN H. WEINBERGER
JOSEPH J. WEISSMAN
'OF COUNSEL
PLEASE REPLY TO CLEARWATER
FILE NO. 1 06047
October 16, 2002
Re:
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33752
Dear Mr. Wells: ~
)f;~;a~tm'" j (
This correspondence is in furtherance of my previous corresp a ce dated
September 19, 2002 and specifically responds to your further request for information. I
will respond to the following questions:
1. The development or redevelopment of the Parcel proposed for
development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and
development standards.
Response:
The development of this fifteen (15) unit condominium cannot occur without
"Residential Infill" approval allowing the adjustments to the front and rear setbacks and
height requirements. Primary to this issue is the need to place all parking beneath the
living areas of the building. Due to the pricing of the real estate located directly on the
Gulf of Mexico, density is critical to accommodate a yield. Because the lot depth is
minimal, increasing the height of the building is critical to the yield and maintenance of
all of the code requirements. By using a mid-rise structure of five (5) living levels and
inserting parking under the building, the Applicant is capable of meeting all other code
development parameters such as impermeable surface ratio, open space, landscaping,
storm water storage and retention and exceed the parking requirements by supplying
twenty-eight (28) spaces per fifteen (15) units. The development standards from which
CLEARWATER OFFICE
911 CHESTNUT ST.
POST OFFICE BOX 1368
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33757-1368
TELBPHONE: (727) 461-1818
TELECOPIER: (727) 462-0365
TAMPA OFFICE
lOON. TAMPA ST.
SUITE 1800
POST OFFICE BOX 1100
TAMPA, FLORIDA 33601-1100
TELEPHONE: (813) 225-2500
TELECOPIER: (813) 223-7118
JOHNSO'BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, Rupl & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 16,2002
Page 2
the Applicant is requesting flexible deviation are the front setback line, the rear setback
line and a request for additional height. If the structure were constructed within the
Code established set back lines, parking beneath the building could not be
accommodated for the twenty-eight (28) spaces. It is noted that although the city
standards require one and half (1/2) spaces per unit, this typically has been problematic
due to most unit owners having at least two automobiles. If the height is limited to thirty
feet, then the permitted density could not be realized and the yield for the price paid for
the land would be insufficient.
2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a
Residential Infill Project will not materially reduce the fair market value of
abutting properties.
Response:
As set forth in my correspondence of September 19, 2002 the surrounding
properties are substantially aged and obsolete. The purpose of Beach by Design is to
encourage new development, which hopefully will provide a catalyst for additional new
development in the Beach by Design District. This Property is estimated to have an
overall retail value of approximately Fourteen Million Dollars ($14,000,000.00), which is
a substantial increase in value, and which can only enhance the surrounding area and
encourage additional development of new construction or renovation of existing
structures. Rather than reduce fair market value, it will enhance fair market value of the
abutting properties. The existing use as a motel is not only obsolete, it is a retail use of
property, when a residential use is encouraged and will be more compatible.
3. The uses within the Residentiallnfill Project are otherwise permitted
in the district.
Response:
Referencing my correspondence to you of September 19, 2002, it is apparent
that multi story and multi-family dwellings are in substantial use, particularly along those
properties in the District that immediately abut the Gulf of Mexico. The Medium High
Density Residential (MHDR) and the Community Redevelopment District (CRD) all
permit multi-family, multi-story construction within the Residentiallnfill requirements. It
should be noted that Residential Infill is by its intent designed to accommodate the
placing of new structures within subdivisions and lot sizes, which were created many
years ago and were established by a code, which was significantly less restrictive than
the existing city codes. The flexibility allowed by Residential Infill, permits new
JOHNS' BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, Rupl & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 16, 2002
Page 3
construction to continue by permitting some flexible standard to accommodate new
structures within lot sizes, street configurations and abutting property set back lines that
were not designed with the new Clearwater City Code in mind. The use of residential
and the reduction of retail are consistent with the philosophy established in the Beach
By Design standards.
4. The uses within the Residential Infill Project are compatible with
adjacent land uses.
Response:
The project is compatible with all properties lying to the south. The property is at
the northern edge of the Old Florida District and similar projects are permitted and
encouraged in the balance of the Old Florida District lying south of the Applicant's
project. With respect to the land north of the project, which is zoned as Low Medium
Density Residential (LMDR) and 7.5 units to the acre, the proposed use of the
Applicant's Property is the least intense use of the Property yet allowing the permitted
density. Comparing the positioning of the proposed project as it relates to those
residences on the north boundary, it would show that even if the height remained at
thirty (30) feet and the rear set back line was within code, the presence of the building
and any shadows cast would not be any less than those shadows cast by an increase
in height. The use would be changed from a retail use as a motel to a residential use,
which is more compatible with the adjacent land uses.
5. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a
Residential Infill Project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel
proposed for development.
Response:
As suggested in my correspondence directed to you of September 19, 2002, the
project will act as a catalyst to encourage other development in the Old Florida District
consistent with this midrise multi-family dwelling, which should create substantial
renovation and rehabilitation of the Old Florida District over time, adding to the City's
tax base removing on-street parking, improving general traffic flow, accommodating a
greater distance between buildings and adding substantial landscaping consistent with
the Code. Considering the aged conditions of the surrounding uses, the approval of
this Project should provide that incentive to others owning properties in the area to
upgrade their property.
JOHNS' BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUP! & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 16, 2002
Page 4
6. The design of the proposed Residential Infill Project creates a form
and function, which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity
of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
Response:
This structure uses unique and imaginative designs and will be a model of
architecture incorporating the Old Florida designs and colors. The use of balconies,
landscaping and under the building parking will immediately enhance the character of
properties in the immediate vicinity of the parcel and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
Properties immediately adjoining the Applicant's Property do not meet flood elevation
standards, do not have under the building parking, do not meet retention and detention
code requirements and as a result present and pose a greater burden on the City of
Clearwater than the Applicant's project. An approval of the Applicant's request will
enhance the character of the immediate vicinity and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required set backs, height and off-
street parking are justified by the benefits to the community character in the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of
Clearwater as a whole.
Response:
As previously stated in this correspondence, due to the lot size, particularly the
depth of the lot, it is essential to request the flexibility of reduced rear and front set back
lines and an increased height. This allows for the project to meet all other codes,
particularly the creation of two (2) parking spaces per unit of off-street parking beneath
the building, retention requirements, impermeable surface requirements and will reduce
the traffic congestion at a dead end street. The granting of the flexibility standard
requested shall not impose a harmful effect on the surrounding properties, but will
enhance their character as well as the City of Clearwater as a whole. The requests
represent the least flexibility necessary to accomplish the Applicant's objective and
benefit character of the community.
JOHNS' BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUpt & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 16, 2002
Page 5
8. Provide a narrative indicating how the requirements of Beach by
Design guidelines are being met and, specifically, how the requirements of the
Old Florida District are being met.
Response:
Beach by Design contemplates the renovation and revitalization of existing
improvements with limited new construction where renovation is not practical. Density
in the area shall be generally limited to the density of the existing improvements and
building height should be low to midrise in accordance with the Community
Development Code. Lack of parking in the area may hinder revitalization of existing
improvements.
The architecture of the Applicants project is Mediterranean Revival, which is
consistent with a tropical theme. The quality of the structure and ambiance of the units
is consistent with an upscale elegant beach community. Landscaping will be
conforming to the Clearwater Beach community and will be notably different from other
beach communities.
The project contemplates that all parking areas are removed from view from the
street and are housed inside of the building.
The Applicant's project is consistent with the density permitted by MHDR and
CRD. The density is thirty (30) units per acre and therefore, the fifteen (15) dwelling
units proposed on this little more than one-half acre site are permitted on the
Applicant's Property. The Applicant has specifically designed his Property so as to
remove parking from the street area and avoid congestion at the end of a dead end
street.
The issue is what is a mid rise building? One might ask what is a low rise and
what is a high rise and perhaps a midrise is in between. Low rise, based upon other
existing buildings in the area, is at least one perhaps two (2) living levels over parking.
Highrise is perhaps much like what is being constructed today on the beach, which is
seven (7) to ten (10) living stories over parking rising to one hundred (100) feet, with the
opportunity to rise to one hundred fifty (150) feet under Beach by Design standards.
Given those definitions, midrise can easily be thought of as three (3) to six (6) living
levels over parking, or fifty (50) to sixty (60) feet above FEMA elevation. The issue
relates directly to height. I believe the Applicant is within the height recommendations.
It should be noted that there currently exists at the west end of Idlewild a condominium
building with five (5) livings levels over parking, so this application is not an anomaly.
JOHNS' BLAKEL Y, POPE, BOKOR, Rupl & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 16, 2002
Page 6
The use presented by the Applicant is consistent with the residential uses in the
Old Florida District. Beach by Design contemplates renovation and revitalization. This
new project located directly on the Gulf of Mexico will create a catalyst for renovation
and new development extending eastward from the Applicant's project. The colors,
architecture and uses of the Applicant's design are consistent with those set forth in the
Beach by Design presentation prepared by Siemon & Larsen.
The ReQuest:
The Applicant requests the acceptance of Residential Infill Standards
contemplated by Level Two uses under the Code. The Applicant requests adjustment
to the front setback line, rear setback line and height requirements.
The Residential Infill Standards allow a front setback to range between 10 and
25 feet. The Applicant is requesting a 10-foot setback.
The Residential Infill Standards allow a rear setback to range between 0 to 15
feet. The Applicant is requesting a 10-foot setback.
The Applicant is requesting approval of a height of 50 feet, 6 inches from the
flood elevation to the top of the roof deck, excluding parapets and elevator shafts.
Notwithstanding that residential infill limits height to 30 feet, certain development
standards for residential infill projects are considered to be guidelines and may be
varied based upon the criteria specified in Section 2-404(F).
The Applicant respectfully requests that the Request set forth above be
permitted and approved by staff and the City in accordance with the site plan permitted.
Yours very truly,
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE,
BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
Roger A. Larson
#276748 v1 - WhiteSandsLtrWells
~
.
.
"
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
E. D. ARMSTRONG III
JOHN T. BLAKELY
BRUCE H. BOKOR
JOHN R. BONNER, SR.*
GUY M. BURNS
JONATHAN S. COLEMAN
MICHAEL T. CRONIN
ELIZABETH J. DANIELS
BECKY FERRELL-ANTON
COLLEEN M. FLYNN
MARION HALE
SCOTI C. ILGENFRITZ
FRANK R. JAKES
TIMOTHY A. JOHNSON, JR.
SHARON E. KRICK
ROGER A. LARSON
JOHN R. LAWSON, JR*
LEANNE LETIZE
MICHAEL G. UTILE
MICHAEL C. MARKHAM
STEPHANIE T. MARQUARDT
ZACHARY D. MESSA
A.R. "CHARLIE" NEAL
F. WALLACE POPE, JR.
ROBERT V. POTTER, JR.
AUDREY B. RAUCHWAY
DARRYL R. RICHARDS
PETER A. RIVELLINI
DENNIS G. RUPPEL*
CHARLES A. SAMARKOS
PHILIP M. SHASTEEN
JOAN M. VECCHIOU
STEVEN H. WEINBERGER
JOSEPH J. WEISSMAN
*OF COUNSEL
PLEASE REPLY TO CLEARWATER
FILE NO. 1 06047
October 16, 2002
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33752
I r;::\ re rr.. ~: i I ~IE rn I
!' n !,-~~S.l...... .. n)
IU1 :,';j DC r 1 = 2002 I,.! i.l i I
LI r-~
lAA~c @!\I!~~1!iJit1~~~
ITV Of CLEARWATER
FilE
FLf) Za/Z -~C)JI
I represent White Sands, LLC, the Applicant, for site plan review and flexible
development approval of a Residentiallnfill Project.
Re:
The Chales on White Sands ("White San
Clearwater, Florida ("Property")
Dear Mr. Wells:
This correspondence shall serve as my client's position with respect to the
requests for approval pursuant to Section 2-404 F (Residential Infill) of the Clearwater
Community Development Code ("Code").
Property description and character.
The property is located on the north right-of-way of Somerset and is known as 14
Somerset. The western property line of the Property abuts the Gulf of Mexico.
The property's dimensions are 87 feet by 253 feet or approximately .5033 acres.
The front property line of the property is Somerset and has a linear footage of
253 feet on the right-of-way.
The current zoning classification is Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)
and the land use designation is Community Redevelopment District (CRD). The
property specifically is located in the "Old Florida" District of the Beach by Design
Community Redevelopment District.
Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) zoning abuts the north property line.
The abutting use consists of two single-family residential dwellings. The westerly most
CLEARWATER OFFICE
911 CHESTNUT ST.
POST OFFICE BOX 1368
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33757-1368
TELEPHONE: (727) 461-1818
TELECOPIER: (727) 462-0365
TAMPA OFFICE
lOON. TAMPA ST.
SUITE 1800
POST OFFICE BOX 1100
TAMPA, FLORIDA 33601-1100
TELEPHONE: (813) 225-2500
TELECOPIER: (813) 223-7118
JOHNSO'BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, Ruplf & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 16, 2002
Page 2
dwelling is located directly on the Gulf of Mexico and is a two-story residential dwelling
with one living story above parking. The second single-family dwelling lies to the east of
the first dwelling and is approximately two stories and rests on grade. This second
dwelling sits well off the property line with a garage and/or cabana abutting the
Applicant's northerly property line.
To the east of the Applicant's Property are single-family, single story homes,
which are of an aged nature. Immediately to the south of the Applicant's Property is a
two-story aged patio motel and as you move in an easterly direction along the southerly
right-of-way line of Somerset there are single story aged single-family dwellings resting
on grade. The homes and/or dwellings along Somerset are close together with little or
no setback lines and insufficient off-street parking. There is substantial parking in the
right-of-way or parking which backs into the right-of-way. Somerset travels westerly
from Mandalay Boulevard and dead ends, without cul-de-sac, at the Gulf of Mexico.
The dwelling units along Cambria, which is the street immediately south of
Somerset has at its westerly end on the south side of the right-of-way a two-story over
parking aged building. As you move in an easterly direction along the southerly right-of-
way there are single-family, single story dwellings, resting on grade, in various stages of
renovation and/or aged condition. Cambria is a street that travels west and dead-ends,
without cul-de-sac, at the Gulf of Mexico. The street contains a good deal of on-street
parking of vehicles and very little off-street parking availability. The conditions are
similar to the dwellings along Somerset.
Idlewild is the street immediately south of Cambria. At the westerly end of
Idlewild there is a condominium building, which is five stories over parking and abuts
the Gulf of Mexico. In an easterly direction along the south right-of-way line of Idlewild
there are mixed residential dwellings, apartments and motels, most of which are single
story, resting on grade, and in an aged condition. Some have been renovated recently
in terms of paver driveways and new siding. As was the case on the previous streets of
Cambria and Somerset there is a lack of off-street parking availability.
Glendale is the street immediately south of Idlewild. At its western end there is a
condominium building, which is four stories over parking abutting the Gulf of Mexico.
Immediately to the east there is a two story over parking condominium.
Immediately south of Glendale is Heliwood. The properties along this right-of-
way consist of primarily one and two story dwellings with a town home at the westerly
end, which is two stories over parking.
JOHNSO'BLAKELV, POPE, BOKOR, RUpJI & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 16, 2002
Page 3
Where there have been recent developments of dwelling units they have built the
dwelling units over parking and thus accommodated parking on site rather than using
the street as the parking area. In each case, each of these streets abuts the Gulf of
Mexico without a cul-de-sac.
The Reauest:
The Applicant requests the acceptance of Residential Infill Standards
contemplated by Level Two uses under the Code. The Applicant requests adjustment
to the front setback line, rear setback line and height requirements.
The Residential Infill Standards allow a front setback to range between 10 and
25 feet. The Applicant is requesting a 10 foot setback.
The Residential Infill Standards allow a rear setback to range between 0 to 15
feet. The Applicant is requesting a 10-foot setback.
The Applicant is requesting approval of a height of 50 feet, 6 inches from the
flood elevation to the top of the roof deck, excluding parapets and elevator shafts.
Notwithstanding that residential infill limits height to 30 feet, certain development
standards for residential infill projects are considered to be guidelines and may be
varied based upon the criteria specified in Section 2-404(F).
Comments in Support of the Reauest:
The Applicant believes that the project presented promotes the philosophies of
the Code for the following reasons:
1. The "Old Florida Districf lying between Acacia and Rockaway currently
suffers from both motels and residential dwellings that are aged and in poor condition.
Both Beach by Design and the MHDR zoning district contemplate the careful and
deliberate redevelopment and revitalization of neighborhoods in need of revitalization
with unique amenities, which create unique opportunities to increase property values
and the overall attractiveness of the City. Existing dwellings and uses located on
Somerset, particularly with the uniquely short depth of the existing lots of only 87 feet,
require unique and imaginative designs to use the real property in a manner to
accommodate oft-street parking and the delivery of upscale dwelling units of
appropriate size.
JOHNS' BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUpt & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 16, 2002
Page 4
2. The development of this 15-unit condominium cannot occur without
"Residential Infill" approval allowing the adjustments to the setback and height
requirements. Primary to this issue is the need to place all parking beneath the living
areas of the building. The Applicant will provide two spaces per unit beneath the
building, which is in excess of Code requirements and clearly accommodates the desire
to maintain off-street parking rather than placing parking on the street. Current parking
on the street side abutting the property has eight angle spaces. All of these spaces
would be removed thereby eliminating backing into the right-of-way. Because of the
narrow lot size and pricing of the real estate, density is critical to accommodate a yield.
Critical to yield and maintenance of all of other Code requirements is the need to
extend the height of the building. By using a mid rise structure of five living levels the
Applicant is capable of meeting all other Code development parameters, such as
impermeable surface ratio, open space, landscaping and water storage and retention.
3. This Property will have a combined market value of approximately
$14,000,000.00, which will substantially increase and upgrade the surrounding property
values and will add substantial tax base to the City over and above the existing tax
base.
4. Based on the density of 30 units per acre, 15 dwelling units are permitted
on the Applicant's Property. The condominium contemplated for this Property is
permitted in MHDR and in CRD.
5. This project is compatible with all properties lying to the south. This is due
to the fact that the property is at the northern edge of the Old Florida District and similar
projects are permitted and are encouraged in the balance of the Old Florida District
lying south of the Applicant's project. With respect to the land north of the project which
is zoned as Low Medium Density Residential {LMDR} at 7.5 units to the acre, the
proposed use of the Applicant's Property is the least intense use of the property yet
allowing the permitted density. The height proposed is a mid-rise height that is
consistent with multi-family residential dwellings abutting single-family neighborhoods.
It is particularly noteworthy that the tallest of mid-rise dwellings would most likely front
directly on the Gulf of Mexico due to the fact of the high cost of property immediately
abutting the Gulf of Mexico.
6. We believe the Applicant's project will act as a catalyst to encourage other
development in the Old Florida District consistent with this mid-rise dwelling, which will
create substantial renovation and rehabilitation of the Old Florida District over time,
adding to the City's tax base, removing on-street parking, improving general traffic flow
JOHNS' BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPt. & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 16, 2002
Page 5
and accommodating a greater distance between buildings, and adding substantial
landscaping consistent with Code.
7. The design of the project is a tropical vernacular reminiscent of the colors
and materials seen throughout the City of Clearwater. It is consistent with the newer
designed multi-family dwellings on Clearwater Beach and clearly will upgrade and
enhance the abutting the single-family neighborhood to the north.
8. The approval of this project will accomplish substantial off-street parking,
improvement of traffic flow, increased areas of vegetation and landscaping (all of which
will be irrigated), and with its increased tax base, it will enhance the payment to the City
of Clearwater for City services.
It is respectfully requested that staff and the Community Development Board
approve this project as requested.
Yours very truly,
Roger A. Larson
#276014 v1 - WhiteSandsLtr.Wells
-
rf~,
u
( ~
t1~~
.--'-. 1j
\
i
a
v
'\
~
,
(
,
In
I-
Z
::>
~
~
~
f
I
.
~-'-""'..Jj...............'.'"...'-.."."....
- - -! ----
,! -
cY.----'-
=~,--~--~/
-"'-'7
-~
I",
_I
e
l
t.
r
I -
r
Vi.......
f [
~,\..'''' r:- .
., r
, '.~
v
~e>
.-." /
..':..........'.........':....'....
'. -!---'
~
,!~
'(1....'1
.,.1
."1
,('1
';'J
,:.1 ~,1
"L,'._._"\... '''~'.....'..''...' (..,.,.,#..
,I "I ,. -,' '.... ::__:
--'I ,'-", - ;:.
r ',,",v,:.',
<::
I-
Z
::>
'.'
, '-, \ ,'/
.".\ <.:.; ;,
1~
\f~'!"'~
~,"'*
~', ,.('t/~,,,, 2
.,t~:.. ~
.' "~.~r ~ ~
. ...... .f '/'. j...I"
"'"" :>
~ 4.. ..,"." l.l
'~/\:;. c
'~j~r .,'. 2
i\~~~~,,)25'~ ~
,,: ~",'~,,\: 1)\),', ~~ <S
., . ...,';"r:;;~
,-;I'" ~
\
l
/' I
....[j
~,", ~1.,:~....-.....--.1J......... 1,_. '.'..
;"~'L=...-~~]
~,--- ,--..--:..=~~
, - -
"4 l \
(,.,f'
It.~,
i:J-n-
I' __
I'
[
(
/
if~,....,.
LV
,
~
rt!
L!=. i.=-..... j.... ....c~,-...~......., -.....,....-..........),...-
",' I I , '
-";,J .-~.
.
,~
<0 1
~ \
"'
/'----
~c-:--
,
_:_.. .."._.___;_____n__n_
.. ..... -I.
'\
~
,
~
I-
Z
:::::l
<:
\--
Z
:::::l
(
~
J
~
~
I.,
e+$1 ~
'--"
z
<:
-1
!.L
-1
; r~""c: i --~-; ~..'-~.\\il r~ ~f~-\ ~
!if'1 !~~' 1 "...:;;0-::-11"\ UJ
'I I !~_..__., .-". - .. -. \-1
l~' " : ~;\ :i
i::' I ;',' I ',I. U
lU\J'~ .~L ~
\ PLAtNiNG & REVtL~~~i~~ svCti
I CIT"{ Or CLEf t .
;;.-.
c,t"
,.....:.!.._. ,l"I_!5"
T. .: r~fi~j-~
,llnlll'
I ,F:=I-.lF,.
/CC'JCf~j
! ,',:' ____"n, ~_-:,:)-:;::-,,--<~,
i-.-; ,..:'." ,:'c::':-',':: '-,
,............/
l. . .',' ,"""
~"-'- ,; '.,'~
. '- ~,
~';',..
,1\
/:1
-=!++~II
----T-T7[~
_i__;
'il
- -- .----.-..-
"""i<"
.,,1";-
r~1-
r,-....... "~~
fr:...'",,,,
10'-
r.
k
"',i ',I
'Ii ,''',
r
r
L-n --
I
,
Coo;,.
r._____ __ ___._',
~........V:....i:.:.-..
'. r' ~n.
'. I
~ - ..
V
,.-....
tS)
UJ
Z
o
U
-1
<C
tn
D
UJ
D
Z
UJ
l-
X
UJ
~...f. ~..'
, ,
. ; ,-.
. " 1'-
. ,.', rr
../ l
,.., ~j
,. . , I
/", L
*'~B
"J.:-:':';'::';~'-'--':'-":"':"'_ _
<:
t:
z
:::::l
1--'-
",'
e
U
I-
Z
:::::l
tn
t:
z
:::::l
,
o
1
"I
..[11
".-,d
\,i
~,t)
i,I,J
: I ~'l
I,.' 't
)H\: of ..
.(!',..~. ,0.".
~'i'''...',.'.'... '., . ". '...,'....'.,..
'i!.J' .:';
i ;,\'\i:'
"'I",\i,
...........~..-....-I.-;;k
~-y ... -
z
<(
-l
!.L
-1
UJ
:>-
UJ
-1
D
Z
o
U
UJ
(,fl
, ' I ,
,
"- -' - --~~~~_~I:~=_;~: ,___~
..
.
.
-'
<! I
:'Cleanvater
;,.~'
Planning Department
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater. Floricja 33756
Telephone: 727-562-4567
Fax: 727-562-4576
CASE #: E'-I> '1-002,.. 0 '1) 3(
DATE RECEIVED: , l ' ~ I Ol.... ___
RECEIVED BY (staff initials): _~_~_
ATLAS PAGE #: ~
ZONING DISTRICT: ~~~=---=
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: _ ~ __
ZONING & LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF
ADJACENT PROPERTIES:
NORTH: t,..,'f; ~__
SOUTH: .J!!.t!Q1tS ~
WEST: ~blE- b.:./r##_
EAST: MUQIL --21:L
, SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
~
SUBMIT 12 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION including folded site plans
SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $_-' '2..<!S _
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
(Revised 08/30/0 I)
-PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT-
A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) . _ \
APPLICANT NAME: W A ,Ore ~ /I tI!LJ1..5 L,t,c I (Vi () 1+-.., Lef..~.i._____
MAILlNGADDRESS:cetO 2.- /II. ll-e.Ld1v rrJ" Wo...vuJ~ _El-_6 S ...
PHONE NUMBER:' 2- 7- LfL(3-~sq.q FAXNUMBER:7L 7 -Lf67-0t.-7-z-
,
/ NC
Gs-:
PROPERTY OWNER(S):
c... 13 erR IV)
(Must include ALL owners)
AGENT NAME, (jd~ uf"e..- .
MAILING ADDRESS: 4J 0 -,;;r: Edt- {,~ ,01. {( ewui-;E-e,.-- ?L- ~ --- ~ X'~
PHONENUMBER:/L. 7-4q3-cj~AXNUMBER:/2--7 -467-02- ~_2~.
B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
STREET ADDRESS:
/+ ~t)Mt:R~ -:S-(.
~~ 1-~~la::I< /
__-O~/Zt::f/'.sl/r,a~~ /(JOI/4t:1/~
PARCEL SIZE: ., ~----AC/(p / ~/8~ 4q Fr.
(acres. square feet) /
PROPOSED USE(S) AND SIZE(S): ---I.5...--UHLL1f2... MlJLT.'-~~_~(~~_'S___~lJ-
(number of dwelling units, hotel rooms or square footage of nonresidential use)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PARCEL NUMBER:
~----------
(include all requested code deviations: e.g. reduction in require number of parking spaces, specific use, etc.)
A{~N.A,JJCJ!i;i:t;! 5 t.sv/t!L~ ~~ rARX.INtf/ Milt! ,"crL_
DOEs~I!?((tJ.TI~"!t E M#M-l"OPMENT RIGHTS (TOR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES __ NO _ (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable
documents)
~: FR&71Vr
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST(S):
Page 1 of 6 - Flexible Development Application - City of Clearwater
.
.
., I I
~.r:JOOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5)
~SUBMIT A COpy OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED OR AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING TO THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY
D. ~RITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A)
~ \oS Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA:
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. yP~~1U~AAR ffel ~Jfl ~ ~ eJ,O~__
------t'12- Tile ~H ~ ~ ~lf7I^,q tf~
~8r ev4C~ tHAN 1'1Ie- ~~11N~
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly
impair the value thereofJl~: ~6/~~ A~A W~/,..{,- /t/t:>r
I~NL V~ c.p A~;.l-( ~fI!'~----
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed
use. 1p ~~ 1PEUi1~ PJ:!8dSDi r,v A ~e;,l oe:,.JtJAt-
-------~.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
y~s .
_____PIL
ottlk':1- 2-
ON - c;-r~
~"1!:5
P#~~~ .
WTO
9LJI/.PlAKI,
t.u111t
,
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
V~7 : -r~ J/el! -'fSJIl;tJu/&;5 CUuswrVl1 '*"
pp~Sf1b vc'fHW ffIe' -Yl G J I!tT'Y .
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects. including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts,
on adjacent properties.
~s ~ 1)/t ~~
TC/~
,c,/AI/M!-z,6S
~~.
M"t
tto()et:.~ ~~---
J Address the applicable flexibility criteria for the specific land use as listed in each Zoning District to which the waiver is requested (use separate
sheets as necessary):
~v ,f-e:o 5~JIe.l( ~r. 25'-ro 10 I
e~~ 15 ' 11:J /0 I
,I .... ~~c..€ o~ " ?f:tj~//!$ (}11d. fJ~t<'IA)4,
I - M 1,v1M tJl't lPT W 1f7.(1f ll;7::1' 7"f:J '17'
Page 2 of 6 - Flexible Development Application - City of Clearwater
.
.
I !
~ II
E. ~UPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A)
,~ SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) - One original and 12 copies;
[J~~PY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable;
.s IP.
[J tfELlMINARY PLAT, as required;
~ ~CATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY;
, TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and location,
including drip lines.)
~ ~RADING PLAN, as applicable;
F.....~TE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A)
J SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"):
All dimensions;
North arrow; .
Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared;
Location map;
Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package;
Footprint and size of all buildings and structures;
All required setbacks;
All existing and proposed points of access;
All required sight triangles;
Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen
trees, including description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc;
Location of all public and private easements;
Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site;
Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas
and water lines;
All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas;
Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas;
Location of all refuse collection facilities and all required screening (min. 10'x12' clear space);
Location of all landscape material;
Location of all on site and offsite storm-water management facilities;
Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; and
__ ~ Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks.
riJ ~ SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in written/tabular form:
Land area in square feet and acres;
Number of dwelling units proposed;
Gross floor area devoted to each use;
Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the number of required spaces;
Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces and driveways, expressed in square feet and percentage of the paved vehicular area;
Size and species of all landscape material;
Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easement;
Building and structure heights
Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and
Floor area ratio (FAR.) for all nonresidential uses.
l REDUCED SITE PLAN to scale (8 Y:z X 11) and color rendering if possible;
[J"\~R DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan:
One-foot contours or spot elevations on site;
Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel;
All open space areas;
Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms;
Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned);
Streets and drives (dimensioned);
Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned);
Structural overhangs;
Tree Inventory; prepared by a 'certified arborist", of all trees 8" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of such trees.
Page 3 of 6 - Flexible Development Application - City of Clearwater
T--
.
.
i ~ II
G. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Design Criteria Manual and
4-202.A.21)
~ STORMWATER PLAN including the following requirements:
Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines;
Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures;
All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems;
Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
Stormwater calculations for attenuation and water quality;
Signature of Florida registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations
D COPY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT SUBMITTAL (SWFWMD approval is required
prior to issuance of City Building Permit)
D COpy OF STATE AND COUNTY STORMWATER SYSTEM TIE-IN PERMIT APPLICATIONS, as applicable
H. J:,tNDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A)
J LANDSCAPE PLAN:
All existing and proposed structures;
Names of abutting streets;
Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations;
Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers;
Sight visibility triangles;
Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing;
Proposed and required parking spaces;
Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including dripline;
Location, size, description, specifications and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and
common names;
Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and
protective measures;
Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and
percentage covered;
Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board);
I rrigation notes.
D REDUCED LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8 Y:z X 11) (color rendering if possible);
D IRRIGATION PLAN (required for level two and three approval);
D COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable.
I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23)
Required in the event the application includes a development where design standards are in issue (e.g. Tourist and Downtown Districts) or as part
~ Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project or a Residentiallnfill Project.
')UILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS - all sides of all buildings including height dimensions, colors and materials;
~ REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS - four sides of building with colors and materials to scale (8 Y:z X 11) (black and white and color rendering, if
possible) as required.
J J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS I Section 3-1806)
D
~
Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required).
Reduced signage proposal (8 Y:z X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application.
K. T~FIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-801.C)
ill~clude as required if proposed development will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan.
Trip generation shall be based on the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's Trip General Manual. Refer to Section 4-801
C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement.
Page 4 of 6 - Flexible Development Application - City of Clearwater
.
! ~ i I
L. SIGNATURE:
I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this
application are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and
authorize City representatives to visit and photograph the property
described in this application.
Signature of property owner or representative
.
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS
swm5:~bSCribed before me this -4- day of
J ,A.D. 200'2.. to me and/or by
~ .s. ~[ lJ.o who ~ ...Jle~qnally known has
produ d fL L.- ()-~ 7-) J-O'i.9=Q_ as
identification.
~~
~ James Wagner
! . My CommIaaion 00049138
''tOft;.! Expires August 12, 2005
Page 5 of 6 - Flexible Development Application - City of Clearwater
,----.
.
.
M. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT:
CBA--A/'YJ lIVe
(Names of all property owners)
1. That (I amlwe are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location):
14 SomBR.SE-r Sy
2. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request)
FL€X/'I3GE l>GveLOP/YJ(ENy
, .
Fj-/J.A::..t e~ r /0 N
3. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint:
Wrl/7€ SANDS
LLC C l,{OIt'1 ~
as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition;
4. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property;
5. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City
representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application;
T",I (I/we), ~. ""d~;g'" ","'ri~, h"oby re"~ Ih" th. fore",I" I, 1m. 11r- ~
prop~wner
6.
Property Owner
STATE OF FLORIDA,
COUNTY OF PINELLAS
-t:J..,
) q day of
, who having been first duly sworn
6~.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
S.~Planning DepartmenMpplication Formsldevelopment revieWlflexible development application. doc
Page 6 of 6 - Flexible Development Application - City of Clearwater
.
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P .A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
t D., ARMSTRONG III
OHN T. BLAKELY
i RUCE H. BOKOR
, OHN R. BONNER, SR,'
UY M. BURNS
,ONA THAN S COLEMAN
MICHAEL T CRONIN
ELIZABETH J. DANIELS
BECKY FERRELL-ANTON
COLLEEN M. FLYNN
MARION HALE
SCOTT C. ILGENFRITZ
FRANK R. JAKES
TIMOTHY A. JOHNSON, JR.
SHARON E. KRICK
ROGER A. LARSON
JOHN R. LAWSON, JR.
LEANNE LETIZE
I
Jl,IICHAEL G. LITTLE
MICHAEL C. MARKHAM
STEPHANIE T. MARQUARDT
ZACHAR Y D MESSA
A.R "CHARLIE" NEAL
F WALLACE POPE, JR.
ROBERT V, POTTER, JR.
AUDREY B. RAUCHWA Y
DARRYL R RICHARDS
PETER A. RIVELLINI
DENNIS G. RUPPEL.
CHARLES A. SAMARKOS
PHILIP M. SHASTEEN
JOAN M. VECCHIOLI
STEVEN H. WEINBERGER
JOSEPH J, WEISSMAN
.OF COUNSEL
PLEASE REPLY TO CLEAR WATER
FILE NO, 106047
September 19, 2002
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
100 S, Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33752
Re: The Chales on White Sands ("White Sands") located at 14 Somerset,
Clearwater, Florida ("Property")
Dear Mr. Wells:
I represent White Sands, LLC, the Applicant, for site plan review and flexible
development approval of a Residentiallnfill Project
This correspondence shall serve as my client's position with respect to the
requests for approval pursuant to Section 2-404 F (Residential Infill) of the Clearwater
Community Development Code ("Code"),
prnpp-rty rlp-~r.riptinn ;:tnrl r.h;:tr;:tr.tp-r
The property is located on the north right-of-way of Somerset and is known as 14
Somerset The western property line of the Property abuts the Gulf of Mexico,
The property's dimensions are 87 feet by 253 feet or approximately .5033 acres.
The front property line of the property is Somerset and has a linear footage of
253 feet on the right-of-way.
The current zoning classification is Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)
and the land use designation is Community Redevelopment District (CRD). The
property specifically is located in the "Old Florida" District of the Beach by Design
Community Redevelopment District
CLEARW A TER OFFICE
91 \ CHESTNUT ST
POST OFFICE BOX 1368
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33757-1368
TELEPHONE: (727) 461-1818
TELECOPIER: (727) 462-0365
T AMrA OFFICE
100 N, TAMPA ST
SUITE 1800
POST OFFICE BOX 1100
TAMPA, FLORIDA 33601-\ 100
TELEPHONE: (813) 225-2500
TELECOPIER: (813) 223-7118
, J
I .
JOHNSON, B!KEL,v, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL AURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
September 19, 2002
Page 2
Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) zoning abuts the north property line.
The abutting use consists of two single-family residential dwellings. The westerly most
dwelling is located directly on the Gulf of Mexico and is a two-story residential dwelling
with one living story above parking. The second single-family dwelling lies to the east
of the first dwelling and is approximately two stories and rests on grade. This second
dwelling sits well off the property line with a garage and/or cabana abutting the
Applicant's northerly property line.
To the east of the Applicant's Property are single-family, single story homes,
which are of an aged nature. Immediately to the south of the Applicant's Property is a
two-story aged patio motel and as you move in an easterly direction along the southerly
right-of-way line of Somerset there are single story aged single-family dwellings resting
on grade. The homes and/or dwellings along Somerset are close together with little or
no setback lines and insufficient off-street parking. There is substantial parking in the
right-of-way or parking which backs into the right-of-way. Somerset travels westerly
from Mandalay Boulevard and dead ends, without cul-de-sac, at the Gulf of Mexico.
The dwelling units along Cambria, which is the street immediately south of
Somerset has at its westerly end on the south side of the right-of-way a two-story over
parking aged building. As you move in an easterly direction along the southerly right-
of-way there are single-family, single story dwellings, resting on grade, in various
stages of renovation and/or aged condition. Cambria is a street that travels west and
dead-ends, without cul-de-sac, at the Gulf of Mexico. The street contains a good deal
of on-street parking of vehicles and very little off-street parking availability. The
conditions are similar to the dwellings along Somerset.
Idlewild is the street immediately south of Cambria. At the westerly end of
Idlewild there is a condominium building, which is five stories over parking and abuts
the Gulf of Mexico. In an easterly direction along the south right-of-way line of Idlewild
there are mixed residential dwellings, apartments and motels, most of which are single
story, resting on grade, and in an aged condition. Some have been renovated recently
in terms of paver driveways and new siding. As was the case on the previous streets of
Cambria and Somerset there is a lack of off-street parking availability.
Glendale is the street immediately south of Idlewild. At its western end there is a
condominium building, which is four stories over parking abutting the Gulf of Mexico.
Immediately to the east there is a two story over parking condominium.
JOHNSON, B!KELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL &tURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS-AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
September 19,2002
Page 3
Immediately south of Glendale is Heliwood. The properties along this right-of-
way consist of primarily one and two story dwellings with a townhome at the westerly
end, which is two stories over park"ing.
Where there have been recent developments of dwelling units they have built the
dwelling units over parking and thus accommodated parking on site rather than using
the street as the parking area. In each case, each of these streets abuts the Gulf of
Mexico without a cul-de-sac.
The ReQuest:
The Applicant requests the acceptance of Residential Infill Standards
contemplated by Level Two uses under the Code. The Applicant requests adjustment
to the front setback line, rear setback line and height requirements.
The Residential Infill Standards allow a front setback to range between 10 and
25 feet. The Applicant is requesting a 10 foot setback.
The Residential InfHI Standards allow a rear setback to range between 0 to 15
feet. The Applicant is requesting a 1 a-foot setback.
The Applicant is requesting approval of a height of 50 feet, 6 inches from the
flood elevation to the top of the roof deck, excluding parapets and elevator shafts.
Notwithstanding that residential infill limits height to 30 feet, certain development
standards for residential infill projects are considered to be guidelines and may be
varied based upon the criteria specified in Section 2-404(F).
Comments in Support of the ReQuest:
The Applicant believes that the project presented promotes the philosophies of
the Code for the following reasons:
1. The "Old Florida District" lying between Acacia and Rockaway currently
suffers from both motels and residential dwellings that are aged and in poor condition.
Both Beach by Design and the MHDR zoning district contemplate the careful and
deliberate redevelopment and revitalization of neighborhoods in need of revitalization
with unique amenities, which create unique opportunities to increase property values
and the overall attractiveness of the City. Existing dwellings and uses located on
! .
. ..
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL ~URNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
September 19,2002
Page 4
Somerset, particularly with the uniquely short depth of the existing lots of only 87 feet,
require unique and imaginative designs to use the real property in a manner to
accommodate off-street parking and the delivery of upscale dwelling units of
appropriate size.
2. The development of this 15-unit condominium cannot occur without
"Residential Infill" approval allowing the adjustments to the setback and height
requirements. Primary to this issue is the need to place all parking beneath the living
areas of the building. The Applicant will provide two spaces per unit beneath the
building, which is in excess of Code requirements and clearly accommodates the desire
to maintain off-street parking rather than placing parking on the street. Current parking
on the street side abutting the property has eight angle spaces. All of these spaces
would be removed thereby eliminating backing into the right-of-way. Because of the
narrow lot size and pricing of the real estate, density is critical to accommodate a yield.
Critical to yield and maintenance of all of other Code requirements is the need to
extend the height of the building. By using a midrise structure of five living levels the
Applicant is capable of meeting all other Code development parameters, such as
impermeable surface ratio, open space, landscaping and water storage and retention.
3. This Property will have a combined market value of approximately
$14,000,000.00, which will substantially increase and upgrade the surrounding property
values and will add substantial tax base to the City over and above the existing tax
base.
4. Based on the density of 30 units per acre, 15 dwelling units are permitted
on the Applicant's Property. The condominium contemplated for this Property is
permitted in MHDR and in CRD.
5. This project is compatible with all properties lying to the south. This is due
to the fact that the property is at the northern edge of the Old Florida District and similar
projects are permitted and are encouraged in the balance of the Old Florida District
lying south of the Applicant's project. With respect to the land north of the project which
is zoned as Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) at 7.5 units to the acre, the
proposed use of the Applicant's Property is the least intense use of the property yet
allowing the permitted density. The height proposed is a mid-rise height that is
consistent with multi-family residential dwellings abutting single-family neighborhoods.
It is particularly noteworthy that the tallest of mid-rise dwellings would most likely front
I
"
. .
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
September 19, 2002
Page 5
directly on the Gulf of Mexico due to the fact of the high cost of property immediately
abutting the Gulf of Mexico.
6. We believe the Applicant's project will act as a catalyst to encourage other
development in the Old Florida District consistent with this mid-rise dwelling, which will
create substantial renovation and rehabilitation of the Old Florida District over time,
adding to the City's tax base, removing on-street parking, improving general traffic flow
and accommodating a greater distance between buildings, and adding substantial
landscaping consistent with Code.
7. The design of the project is a tropical vernacular reminiscent of the colors
and materials seen throughout the City of Clearwater. It is consistent with the newer
designed multi-family dwellings on Clearwater Beach and clearly will upgrade and
enhance the abutting the single-family neighborhood to the north.
8. The approval of this project will accomplish substantial off-street parking,
improvement of traffic flow, increased areas of vegetation and landscaping (all of which
will be irrigated), and with its increased tax base, it will enhance the payment to the City
of Clearwater for City services.
It is respectfully requested that staff and the Community Development Board
approve this project as requested.
#276014 v1 - WhiteSandsLtrWells
.
.
WHITE SANDS CONDOMINIUMS
DRAINAGE ANALYSIS
By:
CUMBEY & FAIR, INC. EB 2168
2463 Enterprise Road
Clearwater, FL 33763-1790
~ * "- ---
- ''"'" :"'-.
"
'- - '
. -, . ..~/
-" -
!, . ... .. ~
- . '- , .. ,-" ,,--
. ~- '1-t~~ --.
... ""--
Ti t Y E. E3QU(t;I?, P.E. #47149 ~.
::.' ~.;, - - '-
.....
~':> ,"
".
Job No. 661 B
September 19, 2002
J:IJN\661 BIWords\6618-drain-calcs. wpd
. CUMBEY & FAIR, IN.
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
ENGINEERING PLANNING LAND SURVEYING
2463 ENTERPRISE ROAD. CLEARWATER. FLORIDA 33763-1790 (727) 797-8982
job no. I, (" B "-
description 'uJ#r~ 5lvJ!JS Co"1)1)fI4,INI()~t"
sheet of
-
computed by H!:b
checked by
datll1-l t!-d-
date
" ..... ~ .
VI ,(f \h ~1 'I / "l- e 4-L L (jL A '1"/ I 0 V I"
T\.' /1
...., '"iJ.e n ~t ~';'''' /), A" .( . 7;:: ~ 'E I~~ iLl-
u #
"" IJ.h :Jl ,~ ~I ..... '- J:. !,,4.s Il...J Ii.- ~/D
-
- ~ - ..
I , .L:: ...... IJ ,1I'IJ A4 OJ if;.
~ 't'J 'Uf'
J; ~Jl 'UI, ~) {AI ~u; 'J! ~ MooJ ;n l1.J VLL ~
/
<'1"":l 7>J AN M1 .. ~Ji .IIi -,...~ .s:; II?
.,... ~< b ,~ -J.o
t
0. r J..J -
VV.
~ .. /J:, A-A ""' It. '?7 DS ~ 10 P;
h -
-~l. ;.t..T ~,JIJ 'l>F ~ )~ fh-t .
: tJrIl .~ .~
J / /
- E, JT 0,- l' 1~7~ 6~ .1" ~
\. OL ,,..~ - S 'J. ~ Q. :ir::
-
1(:. .
- ~ .~~ Jr (,../f 6€ n '~\r .., ~
k.. :.co> 'Tl ,-
16L ~ ,~ .,6- f,Jl I l- = 5 t-J /ry.., t.' 0;1-
- L 0
1'"'- -..- 1'""' " /1)
.,
i
. CUMBEY & FAIR, IN~
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
ENGINEERING PLANNING LAND SURVEYING
2463 ENTERPRISE ROAD. CLEARWATER. FLORIDA 33763.1790 (727) 797-8982
job no.
description
computed by
checked by
date
date
sheet
of
..., 4. ,: ..- ",",:::..., .. lit. l),S
' oJ - . << ~ ::.
~ .-
- ~ :..-- W"
....
-
.~ ..3, )
d S( ~) I~ ~ C/J (;
/' ( ^ r[ /'-( "\ ~. , ;1. 'T~
~ O~
~^ AI. r:rr:: Ail ~~ U/2 kU .A ..... . /'; ~ / /I I. -
r ,
A -:7 r- A - ;;::- I It'd '/1 3j J' - 7 17':; f rZ
-
, I ,04
;dlL ~A - - 2 I~ ' ')( ~c -' ~o ~f :,-'1
'/1.1' -
\A hi, AAC - I.. 5"f ,.. ~ Q. '")'" P ... - I].) )1 - 1- J~
I 1,,0 7~ r:; ...1; > I ~~ f 1'3
,
Q f,( 'J . t~ A i\~ (~ e", _ r:;.,.
, I Ill;..
!he:: ... - ,'U
'A ..... U~ ~ -I ~ 1-0 . I/IV flu ~-t'
+= !it ..... .~ 1 S~ ,Jf)" 7)' lc .-;:: ~l) '/ .r
/
.-
1l~ ~ ~ ,. .)f1 t.r'"' ~ '- - I~ - V 1<: k,-
- - -
Zc nil- ~
0 '1r: ~ ,-. ~ ~ ~ rc I~ 'r , "'- - 1~ 7"d -
I
.
.
C\J
()
........ c c
c() r r
..- i i
........
0)
I
Z
<(
--l
{L
nL
0
0
--l
u..
I-
Z
ill
nL
flL
~
U
,...
~
~
SHA!OW STUDY FOR JUNE4!,
1 0:00 am
12:00 noon
2:00 pm
4:00 pm
11 :00 am
1 :00 pm
3 :00 pm
U
SEP 1 9 2002
ARCSJ7
SHAD~ STUDY FOR DECEM A 21
1 0:00 am
1 2:00 noon
2:00 pm
4:00 pm
11 :00 am
1 :00 pm
3:00 pm
5:00 pm
JOHN lvt ~,r'OT'r
C'"'QI fil "Nj"
.) tJ .~) /1ill
ARS'.:T:'
il ~ ~ . .
"; 8 Q "; ~
Q
=-< ~ iii =-< 'S.
-= -= :g lI'l ~
Q Q
8 C'j. N 8 C'j. f'i
C'I " e - ....;' - ~ u
- iI"l- e iI"l-
-< -<
~ 1 3
Eo< Q
! Eo<
Oil .: ....
~ =
0 Q,I
'" El
0 cu ...
Z = ~ ~ ~
~ Q
1$ == .: =--
is -
OJ C"l
OJ \0
-< C"l
cu -
::I ~
1:1 C"l
cu I
t 0
-
l:E: 0
Q
Z
=> ~
W) 'a
~ Q
~ U
~
N ~
=
= -=
~ 8 In
0\ ~ -
,..-4 CoI .....
~ -< - 0
i = CLl
j ~
p...
~ = ~
..~
:tt: c; 1
.. .~
.~ "
~ ==
~
~ ~ 0
~ U
:= u
Q, :c
.C
~ ';(
u
!:l ti:
~
cu ~
'8
u :I:
~ ~
.. ~
Eo< ~
..
~
~ tI:l
-
C"l
0
~
I
C"l
~ 8 ~
C"l Q ~
r,; ~ ~ :i i ~
~ " .s:::
U = U
-
.... Q,I
:!! El
~ ~
=--
.
.
~
FLD2002-09031
14 SOMERSET ST
Date Received: 9/19/2002
CHALETS ON WHITE SANDS
ZONING DISTRICT: MHDR
LAND USE: RH
ATLAS PAGE: 258A
t"'J~' ~
'-, .
":'...' ',: ", ~>,' ., .' .
,."\iii,~~: .\,~. I:" l)" .....:
~ f~JJd< ~.
~.... '. ,.I"
C~N2tf~ )
DATE . I 02. ~
Cl WCoverSheet
OC.-- 7-02 MON 1. 16 0
II ~OfiN ~S~L ~c~~
nell'rin rUIlIlI ..1.11111
P _ 0 1
.
FAX TRANSMITTAL
I )A TE:
10/7/02
, ..
PAGES INCLUDING COVER: 10
"0:
M
fll~
( :OMPANY
C tf'1
F ROJECT: C-ffJfUT$. O..) vII t.r6 S/WPS
- /1{ ~t-4e!2S~, ~r.
Fi E:
-r.t$fb,J9~ ~ alJe5t1"~ /t"SSlJes
-
>('.1.
1130 PINEHURST ROAD SUITE - E: DUNEDIN, FL 34698
TEL. (727) 735-0100 FAX (727) 735-0200
~. LE@rn 0 ~7 rnJ[iI
, I ]111 i
I !I \ .' > >" llU!
~.J'l _
[}[.\.'r:i.;)i:~mT SERVICES DEPT
~(;.TY OF GLEAfIWA:lEF1
~ c. '. -- - 0JOHN MARSHALL.IT 6
I ARCHITECT
o
P.02
.
October 7, 2002
Mark Parry, Planner
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33752
Re: "Chalets on White Sands"
Dear Sirs:
;ZhiS I . er is in response to th.;} queotions I issues required regarding this project.
1 Provide the existing and anticipated value of the site.
The land is being acquired for a contractual price of $2.4 million subject to permissions. We have
spent approximately $25,00 to date on preliminary work. The site will be worth approxImately
$14,000,000 when all the condominiums are completed.
2. Provide existing number of units currently on the site and lndicate whether they are
o~rnlght accommodation~ nr residential in nature~
The western building on the site is a 2 story structure with 7 units plus an office. (6) 1 bedroom,
(1) efficiency.
The eastern building is a 1 story structure with a 2 story addition with 2 units. (1) 2 bedroom,
(1) 3 bedroom.
3. Indicate the minimum distance from any other building the proposed structure will
be.
Refer to Architectural sheet A-1. (reduced copy attached)
y4.
~
/;.
/'
Provide the gross flotlr area of the proposed building.
The gross floor area c,f the proposed building Is 62,692 sq. ft.
Indieate 'VW'hcther any slo.-age spaces vw:U be ...U'vlded 10.- Clvvner-s on ..Ite.
Storage space will be provided within eaoh of the 15 units.
Indicate If th9 J,;P-rQP98'i'c,I evvirnrning pvol is above ground or In ground.
In ground.
Provide thAi grnAA fln"r Aa-A~ f^r '-.Ar:h p;yiRting !l:::trl.n".r~
TtH::l w~~t~rly building's first floor area Is 2,263.2 sq. ft., The easterly building'S first floor area
Is 1,560 sq. ft.. as shown on the SlJrvAY. with ~n ::lcidition of 362.7 sq ft.
8./Provide the height of each existing structure.
V Tho westerly building',; height is 24.0 ;i; foet, The easterly building's height is 15.6 :I: feet, with
an attached addition cr 23.1 :t: r~et above grade.
l I 3' 0 ... t N ~ t-l U U. ~ 'I' 1,( V .A. U ~ U I I L - Ii. . PUN J;. DIN. FL. 3 4 C; If 8 ... T ~ L ~ P H 0 N E (7 2: 7) 7 3 5 - 0 , 0 0 .. F ^ X ( 7 2 7) 7 3 :; - 0 ~ 0 0
/
~ C' -.- JOHN MARSHAL. 7
ARCHITECT
........---... -
o
P.03
.
Ji. CI ify wnere fencing and/or walls will be located on the site. If so, details,
neluding height, materials, and colors will be required.
Ther" will bo Ctn aluminum f<>n~,," o.rouncllh", ....vvl vvtlluh will be "Z" In tleigll1 wlm piCKel::; at 4"
on center and painted white. It is noted on Architectural sheet A-1.
Along Somerset Gtree.t, Thal'a will UU ulllry garden walls that extend trom Iha building tacG to thQ
property line and t.:U/lliI1U~ for 11'-7" to tne east and west. These walls will taper from 6'-0" in
height to 4'-0" as shown on Arcllltectural sheet A-1. These walls will be made of masonry with
:sluccu rinl::;tl and palnlea to rnatcn tne oUllding color. These walls serve to mark the entry to the
building. as woll as provide visual cover for the trash staging area.
Above the walls, an awning will cover the entryway and extend past the property line to cover
the !"lidcwolk. This will provide protection for th", pvuutilrlul1~ U~ requected In OealJh by De;;;ign.
The support for the awning will be located within the property line.
10. Provide the following required Residential Infill Project criteria:
Refer to attached letter from Roger larson, Esq. #1 - #7.
l/ A sl~~~~~~~ ~?d~~~~~:;~,nb~w~~;~d:,~I~;~~l:=~~'~~~cl:~o~~,,~~~~!v~~~..~t:,,~ p'U[J~"Y "fie. "
will hI"! finishAn with rlhtrAssed cOllvr""l~ as specified In BQach by Design.
~ Pn:>vlde e....h.lill~ I::SR.
Tho rn-'po,vlOUG Gu,'rao;: r",Liu ur Ihe exl5ting olte 10 O~')b. QOllJulotlon i::. lSl'lOVVII VII :SUIVI:lY.
~icate the number ()f existing parking spaces.
TherA are 1 ~ existing spaces. 7 of which extend into the ~trAAt rioht-nf-w:;lY and imp-:-dc
pedestrian as well as vehicular traffic. The proposed parking OCCUr5 inside of the structure.
14. A landscape plan Indicating proposed stormwater facilities.
The landscape plan is found on Civil sheet P-2, the stormwater plan is found on Civil sheet P-1
15. Provide a narrative Indicating how the requirements of Beach by Design guidelines
are being met and, specifically, how the requirements of the Old Florida District are
being met.
Refer to attached letter from Roger larson, Esq. #8.
~
1110 PINEHURST ROAD SUITE. E' OUNEDIN, FL. 34698. TELEPHONE (727) 735-0100 * FAX (727) 735-0200
OCT- 7-02 MON 16:18 0
~, .
P.04
"
.
'.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
E D. APMSTRONG 1lI
J~ HN T. BLAKELY
B tUCE H. BOKOR
JI HN R BONNER, SR."
G N M. BURNS
J' 'NATHAN S. COLEMAN
l\I1CHAEL T. CRONIN
E .IZABETH J. DANIELS
B ,CKY fERRELL-ANTON
COLLEEN M. fL YNN
MARION HALE
SCOTT C. ILOENFRITZ
FRANK R.JAKES
TIMOTHY A. JOHNSON, JR.
SHARON C. KlUCK
ROGER A. LARSON
JOHN R. LAWSON.JR"
LEANNE LETlZE
MICHAEL G. LITTLE
MICHAEL C. MARKHAM
STEPHANIE T. MARQUARDT
ZACHARY D. MESSA
A.R. "CHARLIE" NEAL
r. W ^I.,I.,M.:b I'Ul'b, JK.
ROBERT V. POTTER, JR.
AUDREY B. RAUCHWAY
DARRYL R. RJCHARDS
PETER A. RJVELLINI
DEN'lIS G. RUPPEL"
CHARLES A. SAMARKOS
PHILIP M. SHASTEEN
JOAN M. VECCHIOU
5TBVEN H. WEI:NBfiROeR
JOS(I'I1J. WEISSMAN
"OF COUNSEL
PLEASE REPLY TO CLEARWATER
FILE NO.1 06047
October 3,2002
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33752
Re: The Chalets on White Sands ('White Sands") located at 14 Somerset
Street, Clearwater, Florida ("Property")
Dear Mr. Wells:
This correspondence is in furtherance of my previous correspondence dated
September 19, 2002 and specifically responds to your further request for informatiun. I
will respond to the following questions:
1. The development or redevelopment of the Parcel proposed for
development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and
development standards.
Response:
The development of this fifteen (15) unit condominium cannot occur without
"Residentiallnfill" approval allowing the adjustments to the front and rear setbacks and
IIt;;:i~lll reCjuilewnonto. Prir'"l8ry to tnis issue Is tnc ncod to placo all parking bGno:;lth thQ
living areas of the buildinB. Due to the pricing of the real estate located directly on the
Gulf of Mexico, density iB critical to accommodate a yield. Because the lot depth is
minimal, increasing the hHight of the building is critical to the yield and maintenance of
all of the code requirements. By using a mid-rise structure of five (5) living levels and
inserting parking under the building, the Applicant is capable of meeting all other code
development parameters such as Impermeable surface ratio, open space, landscaping,
storm waler slorage and retention and exceed the parking requirements by supplying
twenty-eight (28) spaces per fifteen (15) units. The development standards from which
'LEARWATEROFFICE
911 CiiESTNUT ST,
. OST OFFICE BOX 1368
CLISARV' I\TE,R. FLORIDA JJ7~7-JJ68
TE .EPHO'/E: (727) 461.1818
Jk ,.b(;VVIJSK: U';l"J) 1l~..4 QJU
TAMPA OFFICE
100 N. TAMPA ST.
SUITE 1800
POST OFFICIO BOll 1100
TAMPA. fLORJDA 33601-11
TI'.I.r.rIlONl:, (813) 125-2500
1ELECOPIER: (813)223-7118
o C.- - 7 - 0 2 M 0 N 1 6 : 1 '9 0
.
P.05
\ .
."
.
JOUl-T!:!OM, IILA-U.J:<LV, PODl::, YOVOD_, :R_uDIHn Rr RUOllJ~, P A
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Plar,ner
October 3, 2002
Page 2
the Applicant is requestin~~ flexible deviation are the front setback line, the rear setback
lil1~ cHlU Cl r~4u~sl rur additional height. If the structure were constructed within the
Code eotabliohed eet baok linea, parking beneath the building could not bQ
accommodated for the twenty-eight (28) spaces. It is noted that although the city
standards require one anel half (1/2) spaces per unit, this typically has been problematic
due to most unit owners having at least two automobiles. If the height is limited to thirty
feet, then the permitted dtmsity could not be realized and the yield for the price paid for
the land would be insufficient.
2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a
Residential Infill Project will not materially reduce the fair market value of
abutting properties.
Response:
As set forth in my correspondence of September 19, 2002 the surrounding
properties are substantially aged and obsolete. The purpose of Beach by Design is to
encourage new development, which hopefully will provide a catalyst for additional new
development in the Beach by Design District. This Property is estimated to have an
overall retail value of approximately Fourteen Million Dollars ($14,000,000.00), which is
a substantial increase in value, and which can only enhance the surrounding area and
encourage additional development of new construction or renovation of existing
structures. Rather than rE!duce fair market value, it will enhance fair market value of the
-- -- - -. - -.,;;.,;1 ,- - - ,- - - - - . . ~ - .
t.....~t"'It;;#' ly, v-o.."! ===: = : ........~!...=.!.=a.-,t:i~J I_~~..e-_i:.~ -rl:"ll..,::."=,,...,<r.'-"fto~<"'. _""r.""~__,^",jll. ..Jo:o-___~C"1.~_ C'-~.....,~~+lhl""",,
3. I ne uses wltnm the ~eSlaentlal IIlTIII r"roJe(;t are otnerwl:;e permittc::\.I
in the district.
Resoonse:
r-\~r~~ ~r '~:.":.;1 .. ...,. ~..,;. .-. ..;..~~_.......d_.......___ 4._ ;,-__ -c.-~ ~ _..."'__....____,,- .. U:o ~,-..._,.>. .. .- -,.....,......"...~-...
. ..
OC T--
7-02
MON
1i= 23
o
P _ 01
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
AT"ORNEVS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 3, 2002
Page 4
6. The design of the proposed Resldentiallnfill Project creates a form
and function, which enhances the community character of the Immediate vicinity
of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
Response:
This structure uses unique and imaginative designs and will be a model of
architecture incorporating the Old Florida designs and colors. The use of balconies,
landscaping and under the building parking will immediately enhance the character of
properties in the immediate vicinity of the parcel and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
Properties immediately adjoining the Applicant's Property do not meet flood elevation
standards. do not have under the building parking, do not meet retention and detention
code requirements and as a result present and pose a greater burden on the City of
Clearwater than the Applicant's project. An approval of the Applicanfs request will
enhance the character of the immediate vicinity and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
7. Flexibility In regard to lot width, required set backs, height and off.
street parking are Justified by the benefits to the community character in the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of
Clearwater as a whole.
Response:
As previously statE,d in this correspondence. due to the lot size, particularly the
depth of the lot, it is essential to request the flexibility of reduced rear and front set back
lines and an increased height. This allows for the project to meet all other codes,
particularly the creation of two (2) parking spaces per unit of off-street parking beneath
the building, retention requirements, impermeable surface requirements and will reduce
the traffic congestion at a dead end street. The granting of the flexibility standard
requested shall not impose a harmful effect on the surrounding properties. but will
enhance their character as well as the City of Clearwater as a whole. The requests
represent the least flexibility necessary to accomplish the Applicant's objective and
benefit character of the community.
. i
1 . ..., "
OCT~ 7-02 MON 16:27 0
.
P.02
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 3, 2002
Page 5
8. Provide a narrative indicating how the requirements of Beach by
Design guidelines are being met and, specifically, how the requirements of the
Old Florida District are being met.
Response:
Beach by Design contemplates the renovation and revitalization of existing
improvements with limited new construction where renovation is not practical. Density
in the area shall be genElrally limited to the density of the existing improvements and
building height should be low to mid rise in accordance with the Community
Development Code, Lack of parking in the area may hinder revitalization of existing
improvements.
The architecture of the Applicants project is Mediterranean Revival, which is
consistent with a tropical theme. The quality of the structure and ambiance of the units
is consistent with an upscale elegant beach community. Landscaping will be
conforming to the Clearwater Beach community and will be notably different from other
beach communities.
The project contemplates that all parking areas are removed from view from the
street and are housed inside of the building.
The Applicant's project is consistent with the density permitted by MHDR and
CRD. The density is thirty (30) units per acre and therefore, the fifteen (15) dwelling
units proposed on this little more than one-half acre site are permitted on the
Applicant's Property. The Applicant has specifically designed his Property so as to
remove parking from the street area and avoid congestion at the end of a dead end
street.
The issue is what is a mid rise building? One might ask what is a low rise and
what is a high rise and perhaps a mid rise is in between. Low rise, based upon other
existing buildings in the area, is at least one perhaps two (2) living levels over parking.
Highrise is perhaps much like what is being constructed today on the beach, which is
seven (7) to ten (10) livinn stories over parking rising to one hundred (100) feet, with the
opportunity to rise to onf~ hundred fifty (150) feet under Beach by Design standards.
Given those definitions, l11idrise can easily be thought of as three (3) to six (6) living
levels over parking, or fifty (50) to sixty (60) feet above FEMA elevation. The issue
relates directly to height. I believe the Applicant is within the height recommendations.
It should be noted that there currently exists at the west end of Idlewild a condominium
building with five (5) Iivin~s levels over parking, so this application is not an anomaly.
.1
OCT- 7-02 MON 16:31 0
.
P.03
.
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE, BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
Wayne Wells, Senior Planner
October 3, 2002
Page 6
I
The use presented by the Applicant is consistent with the residential uses in the
Old Florida District. Beach by Design contemplates renovation and revitalization. This
new project located directly on the Gulf of Mexico will create a catalyst for renovation
and new development extending eastward from the Applicant's project. The colors,
architecture and uses of the Applicant's design are consistent with those set forth in the
Beach by Design presentation prepared by Siemon & Larsen.
The Rea uest:
The Applicant requests the acceptance of Residential Infill Standards
contemplated by Level Two uses under the Code. The Applicant requests adjustment
to the front setback line, rear setback line and height requirements.
The Residential 1nfill Standards allow a front setback to range between 10 and
25 feet. The Applicant is requesting a 10-foot setback.
The Residential \nflll Standards allow a rear setback to range between 0 to 15
feet. The Applicant is requesting a 10-foot setback.
The Applicant is rElquesting approval of a height of 50 feet, 6 inches from the
flood elevation to the top of the roof deck, excluding parapets and elevator shafts.
Notwithstanding that res,dential infill limits height to 30 feet, certain development
standards for residentialinfill projects are considered to be guidelines and may be
varied based upon the criteria specified in Section 2-404(F).
The Applicant respectfully requests that the Request set forth above be
permitted and approved by staff and the City in accordance with the site plan permitted.
Yours very truly,
JOHNSON, BLAKELY, POPE,
BOKOR, RUPPEL & BURNS P.A.
#276748 v1 . WhiteSandsLtr.Wells
OCT- 7-02 MON 16:35 0
.
./
.
nIl
If
i~
"I
II
!
:~ :::~:~ ::::: :;~:~:~:~ ~::::: :~:~:~:~:~:~: ~:~:~ :~: ~:~:~:~: :~~: ~"~:;: ::: ::: ::.'. . .' .::
........1 ,.,.-.:nIJII'El
. " " "v ) "r.
......,.... ,. .-; (I
:;::~>::::: / i ii t~ ,; i
I &1 ", ... I
..'.'....... I I au: .._.~--_.... :
I I
I I
, I
....... t I
:::::::::;: '. I :
:::::::::\ ' ~ '<i> /I El ~
~:~:~:~:~:~: . leI
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
:::::::::::'\ ~l'"
:.:.>>>>: ~l
<-:<-:.;.:- I;
" " " I'
:::::::::~::: ,/'1
::::::;:::::: :
....., I
I
I
I
.........., I
1............tJ
ii ,.j
::;:::::::::1/'i
. . . . . . I
...... I
. . . . . . I
,..... I
-+--
I
I
I
I
. ;
" I
';.. 1Il
I...........
e
.
e
e
.
e
e
+
.
4>>
P.04
I
I
I
I
~l
!II
$,
~,
'I'
~l
'I
i'
II
1
~ I
~ I
~ I
II
.
~
i
;~
~~
8
S
~
I
I
I
I
~I
"I
~I
ffi'
.'
al
~:
1'1
I
I
I
./ .9&
I
I
I
~1
w,
~,
ffi'
.'
01
~I
~I
-I
@:
1
I
<
W
"
<
~
10
.
-
)-1
~I
~I
01
~l
"I
';>:
~,
~I
~I
DI
1;;1
'"I
::I,
"I
~I
1
1
1
1
t
~
"
10
3
u
1
I
,I
~I
~I
~:
~,
:;1
~I
~I
~I
@:
1
<
~
i ~~~'j) ~ ~
~Ji~~"@~ ~
i~U;~~~1 ~
z
<C
--1
tL
UJ
I-
(j)
z~
e
~'11<<
Q",~
~<Y~
~o~
~L
.
.0-,0 ~
~t!)
:l;()
~~
[j:'
r
~~ .to,9
~fu
~:s
@i2
~
.
.€",9 .0-.. . ., .0-0'
z
o
~
:>
~
w
~
::J
o
<J)
z
o
~
:>
~
w
~
'"
o
z
z
o
~
:>
~
w
f-
<J)
~
z
o
~
:>
~
w
f-
<J)
<
W
.0-,
I 1 II
.
.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4865
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
December 6, 2002
Mr. Uday Lele
White Sands, LLC
802 North Belcher Road
Clearwater, FL 33765
RE: Case FLD2002-09031 at 14 Somerset Street
Dear Mr. Lele:
On November 19, 2002, the Community Development Board (CDB) reviewed your application
to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet to six feet under the
provisions of Section 3-804.Al., reduce the front (south) setback along Somerset Street from 25
feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56 feet (as measured from
base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the provisions of Section 2-
404.F. The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-unit condominium building
of 62,692 square feet and five stories above parking.
Under the provisions of Section 4-502.B., an appeal of a Level Two approval (Flexible
Development) may be initiated by the applicant or any person granted party status with regards to
the property (which is the subject of the approval) within 14 days of the date of the CDB
decision. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of the decision pending
the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case expired on December 3,
2002. No appeals were filed.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 727.562.4561. Zoning information
is available through the City's website at www.clearwater-fl.com.
ct
S:\Planning Department\C D B\FleXlinactive or Finished Applications\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands - Approved\Somerset 14 letter of
no appeal.doc
BRIAN J. AUNGST, MAYOR-COMMISSIONER
WHITNEY GRAY, VICE MAYOR-COMMISSIONER HoYT ~ILTON, COMMISSIONER
FRANK HIBBARD, COMMISSIONER * BILL JONSON, COMMISSIONER
"EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER"
~. .;.':ittr. j I i
fJ.L.E ·
, i
I I
~. '<;:'P'
~ ..
.
t
i
I '
~
.4~
._~~rh?~
t'?t~ k~ ..
-~~~~7t)~~k-
:1 , ~.
I
]
. j
4i1t! '1"
III
I
I
!
, i
.
.
i i
j A/f-~
:':~.' ,
::i~~-,4~ ~ b~~ .
!.J~/h ",
, ~k/~~~4t,4?h~
;Plr~lJ/ ---/JO~~#hY~
j i'i ~~~~ .
I I ~~CJ1~~~
I ; I.
i i I
:~ /~ -~~
h/
;
I
I
jl ~ &J~.
I ~~~. /b}~;pk
"
f ~ h
.... ""
.
.
';
11
II
II
~_~:_m_m iii
,
~. _ot"
.
.
, Ph
I ,ij
I ,. i
~ ! ,~ I
..~-
.- ,
"l
~/?f'~h;;r;r~ ~ m~
~-~/ ~
~;? /ZhJll~>>W
- fJ~
.-6~
~
~
.
Wk\ t<::: ~cls LL-C
lLd . klc: I
~O;:;N. Belc.hev- ~.
C(e~~w~erJ FL 337~~
CAPRI MOTEL CONDO ASSN
55 SOMERSET ST APT 3
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1546
BOERNER. SUSANA B
112 S LAUBER WAY
TAMPA FL
33609 2615
PETRAS. MARGARET
31 ISLAND WAY . 1001
CLEARWATER FL
33767 2207
PALMA. GEORGE
32 FORGE DR
DOWNSVIEW ON M3N 2R3
J'~k.,
HUSGEN PROPERTIES INC
15 SOMERSET ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1542
DUVOISIN COTTAGES
21 SOMERSET ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1542
ROHEN. WILLIAM A
128 BREWSTER CT . A
BLOOMINGDALE IL
60108 8250
ROBERTS. GERALD 0
ROBERTS. PATRICIA K
219 S INDEPENDENCE. 1
TIPTON IN
46072 1932
VILLAS OF CLEARWATER BEACH
CONDO ASSN INC
C/O VALERIE JONES
15 GLENDALE ST APT A14
CLEARWATER FL 337'-7- /57'1-
TALON PROJECT
3437 OTTERDAY CIR
SHAKOPEE MN
55379
STARR. ARTHUR J
PO BOX 23295
TAMPA FL
33623 3295
LARSON. CURT R
LARSON. PAOLA E
PO BOX 1213
BIRMINGHAM MI
48012 1213
SANFILIPPO. JAMES A
MARTIN. JOHN E
47 BLACK HAWK CT
HOLMDEL NJ
07733 2523
.
FLD ~ooa - (11001 C()8 11-19 - O;:L..
I ~I l 0, R, l'if) f<I~wd- 'Z+
VERBAN. STEVE
VERBAN. HELEN K
55 SOMERSET ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1546
DE BELLIS. BARBARA
55 SOMERSET ST . 3
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1546
HESSELSCHWERDT. BERND J
HESSELSCHWERDT. BERNHARD
55 SOMERSET ST . 5
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1546
C B G A M INC
14 SOMERSET ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1541
/'
HANGHOFER. ADELHEID
19 SOMERSET ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1542
DU~OISIN JTAGES
21 E ST
CL FL
33 15
ROHEN. WILLIAM
1704 N 12TH AVE
MELROSE PARK IL
60160 2251
SHILOH INV INC
318 COLUMBIA AVE
TIPTON IN
46072 1221
'-
PRESTON. MICHAEL G TRE
419 EASTSHORE DR
CLEARWATER FL
33767 2028
ROPHIE. RALPH A
ROPHIE. VANESSA
450 PALM ISL SE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1938
CLIFF. DAVID R
CLIFF. JUDITH
895 GULFVIEW BLVD . 304
CLEARWATER FL
33767 3033
ADRIC. ALFRED C JR
ADRIC. ALMUTH H
IN DEN WEINGAERTEN 23A
6~~35 LIEDERBACH TS
.!;(BIlI :IL~""i, ~
F 1111 r.("'"'''',
Lt:
.
.
JAMES. MICHELE R
62-J.7 64TH ST
MIDDLE VILLAGE NY
J.J.379 J.024
OLSON. LOUISE
ETIENNE. JOY
14770 SHIPWATCH TRCE ~ J.930
LARGO FL
33774 5728
MC NALLY. DANIEL l'
PO BOX 654
SAFETY HARBOR FL
34695 0654
J & J'S BEACH PLACE
7J.05 PELICAN ISLAND DR
TAMPA FL
33634 7461
KEITH. VENICE
KEITH. CLYDE H
J.J.J.9 GOLFVIEW LN
GLENVIEW IL
60025 3J.76
HUSG~IEN PROP IES INC
J.5 R
CLE A L
3376 J.542
HADDON HOUSE INN INC
J.4 IDLEWILD ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1516
DELGADO. ANGEL
EDWARDS-DELGADO. LINDA J
13 CAMBRIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33'767 J.508
FRAZIER. STEVEN
FRAZIER. NITA L
J.5 CAMBRIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 J.508
ADAMS. SARAH C TRE
3950 PRESIDENTIAL DR
PALM HARBOR FL
34685 J.027
BAWELL.
BAWELL,
DLO
PSC J.J.7
:;,,~APS:'AE
WALTER A
BIRGIT H
BOX 25 go
:' 090
v';>'vov
MORREALE. JOSEPH C JR
3169 SAN MATEO ST
CLEARWATER FL
33759 3530
S1'RATEMAN. DALAL N
J.027 S DAKOTA AVE
TAMPA FL
33606 3005
PAGE, PATRICIA A
PAGE, MARGARET L
7J.0 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 J.420
SERENDIPITY HOLDINGS INC
2J.0 PALM ISLAND SW
CLEARWATER FL
33767 J.940
MC CULLOUGH. JAMES B
MC CULLOUGH. MARLENE K
21 IDLEWILD S1'
CLEARWATER FL
33767 J.5J.7
WALDOW. WARREN J JR
PO BOX 8J.60
WEBSTER NY
J.4580 8160
CHITRANEE-B INC
J.003BAY ESPLANADE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 J.0J.9
INC
LANADE
FL
OGILVIE, SCOTT
WILCOX, DAVID
28 SANIBEL DR
FAINPORT NY
J.4450 86J.9
OGILVIE. SCOTT
J.8 GLENDALE ST ~ J.
CLEARWATER FL
~5376 7 J.566
PELLEGRINELLI. GUY A JR
PELLEGRINELLI. MARY
459 FENN ST
PITTSFIELD MA
0J.20J. 5262
.
.
COLONY SURF CONDO ASSN INC
8 CAMBRIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1509
MINKOFF, DAVID L
MINKOFF, SUSAN
404 EDGE WOOD AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33755
VAN CLEAVE, ROBERT M TRE
BOND, THOMAS W
8 CAMBRIA ST ~ 202
CLEARWATER FL
33767
MORALES, RAUL
MORALES, BLANCA
930 EL DORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767
KANE, JOHN F
PAYER-KANE, PATRICIA
12345 ALAMEDA TRCE CIR ~ 512
AUSTIN TX
78727 5436
MOORE, PATRICIA
8 CAMBRIA 8T ~ 302
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1509
J J S WOLF REALTY
4335 ELMONTE ST
SAGINAW MI
48603
SHESTOKAS, ALBERT J II
8 CAMBRIA ST ~ PH 40.1
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1509
RODRIGUEZ, OTILIA
29 ACACIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767
WINTERS, RICHARD
WINTERS, MIRIAM
21 ACACIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1402
GUGLIOTTA, BEN J
704 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1420
CIAMPINI, JOHN P
CIAMPINI, JOAN 11
708 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1420
PAGE, PATRICIA A
7.10 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1420
MADIGAN, MARJORIE E TRE
CHAPMAN, ROBERT H TR
4101 WHITE PINE CT
COLUMBIA MO
65203 6645
MANUS, GEORGE E
9480 BRYNDALE WAY NE
ADA MI
49301 8854
BOLLEA, LINDA M
130 WILLADEL DR
CLEARWATER FL
33756
Me CLURE, JOHN MIll
MC CLURE, SANDRA S
724 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1420
THOMAS, JOHN C
730 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 .1420
SPICOLA, A G JR
SPICOLA, SHELIA G
192 BLANCA AVE
TAMPA FL
33606 3326
HARDGRAVE, NEWT L
HARDGRAVE, ELLEN 0
736 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1420
01 PASCA, ROBERT V
740 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1420
LAMPATHAKIS, JAMES 0
701 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1421
CHAPMAN, ROBERT H
4101 WHITE PINE CT
COLUMBIA MO
65203 6645
HAGGITT, CYNTHIA
717 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1421
.
.
EIFERT~ MARY A
721 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1421
HARTUNG~ J THOMAS
HARTUNG~ KATHERINE
2291 AMAERICUS BLVD W I 1
CLEARWATER FL
33763 2559
WOODWELL~ STANLEY B
HOISINGTON~ CHARLES TRE
SOUTH LEISURE WORLD SLDG
SILVER SPRING MD
20906 1704
PATSALIDES, HARRY
70 WILLOWOOD LN
OLDSMAR FL
34677
REESIDE~ ALAN E JR
REESIDE~ ARISTEA A
739 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1421
VANGJIN~ MONICA F
743 ELDORADO AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1421
BONACIO, CLARA E
732 MANDALAY AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1430
ROBERTS, DANNY K
ROBERTS, PAMELA E
818 GAINESBORO HWY
BAXTER TN
38544 3714
WITHERS, JOHN W
WITHERS. CAROL M
PO BOX 24895
LEXINGTON KY
40524 4895
TSOULFAS, KATINA
720 MANDALAY AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1430
SOULlS, DENNIS
SOULIS~ EVELINA
17 NEVADA AVE
WILLOWDALE ON M2M 3N9
;~w.I~~<.."
SOULIS, DENNIS
SOULIS, TINA
17 NEVADA AVE
WILLOWDALE ON M2M 3M9
,SMMA
PAPPAS, GEORGE ,J
PAPPAS, DEI1ETRA
8909 S ALBANY
EVERGREEN PARK IL
60805 1220
MACAIONE/MASON~ DOMENIC
MACAIONE/MASON~ DELORES
704 MANDA LAY AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1430
AIVALIOTIS~ GEORGE
28 ACACIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 .1401
TSAMBIS~ KONSTANTINOS C
TSAMBIS, ANNA D
6653 CATALPA DR
NEW PORT RICHEY FL
34655 3701
MEINHARDT, THOMAS
MEINHARDT, JAYN
1501 E MCMILLAN ST
CINCINNATI OH
45206 2107
LAUGHLIN, LANCE
709 MANDALAY AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1431
PAPPAS, NICK
PAPPAS, JOANNE
POBOX 8536
ROLLNG MEADOW IL
60008 8536
GILBERTSON, MICHAEL A
719 MANDALAY AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1431
RIGSBY~ GWENDOLYN G
RIGSBY, W CONRAD
70 GARDENIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1319
INC
NADE
KRITIKOS, EVA
DEGAN, ALDO
2115 MAYFLOWER BLVD
OAKVILLE ON L6H 4E6
;"'8ANAaA
HENIGAR, ROBERT L
HENIGAR, INGRID S
724 BRUCE AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767
.
.
JOHNSON, GREGG C
JOHNSON. LILLIAN I
720 BRUCE AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1415
HARROD, HOWARD
HARROD, BETTY J
716 BRUCE AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1415
ANDRESON, CONSTANCE
712 BRUCE AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1415
SCHAMBER, PATSY TRE
708 BRUCE AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1415
MILLHOUSE, DEAN A
GILL, SHARON R
704 BRUCE AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1415
GARRIS, BERLE SR
GARRIS, ANNE M
38 ACACIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1403
TSAMBIS, MARY
:34 ACAC I A ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1403
SONDERMANN, WILFRIED
SONDERMANN, HELGARD
52 ACACIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1405
COMB, JEAN J
287 PILGRIM
BIRMINGHAM MI
48009
LOCKE, WILLIAM R TRE
ALT, MARTIN I TRUST
705 BRUCE AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1416
NAPOLI, JOHN D
709 BRUCE AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1416
DANIEL, HAROLD M
DANIEL, JANICE V
713 BRUCE AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1416
CHRIST, DALE R
59 ACACIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1404
WEYANT, JAMES RIll
CARDONI-WEYANT, KRISTI A
51 ACACIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1404
SAGONIAS, STAMATINA
235 OLD OAK CIR
PALM HARBOR FL
34683 5862
ALT, MARTIN I
705 BRUCE AVE
CLEARWA TER FL.
33767 1416
LEARY, E B
LEARY, LILLIAN
1 LANDRY PL
NORTHPORT NY
11768 3262
BUNDY, THOMAS C
43 ACACIA ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1404
CRONIN, LEO J
CRONIN, TERRY
855 MANDALAY AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1204
ZANET, PIETFW J
ZANET, t1ICHELINA
5062 STOUFFVILLE RD RRW4
STOUFFVILLE ON L4A 7XS
'iiJlNIlM8AfO" .
WHITEHURST, DON R
778 ISLAND WAY
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1815
WAGNER, LARRY H TRE
240 WINDWARD PSE W 1202
CLEARWATER FL
33767 2249
LABRICCIOSA, ELENA
653 MANDALAY AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1523
BASIC, NIKOLA
BASIC, MAF~A
966 BAY ESPLANADE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1001
.
.
AMERPOL HOTELS & MOTELS INC
669 MANDALAY AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 .1523
RAUBESON. CHARLES F
PO BOX 367
LARGO FL
33779 0367
PENTHOUSE SHORES ASSN INC
661 POINSETTIA AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 .1561
FITZGERALD. RONALD
665 POINSETTIA AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 .1530
LEWINSKI. HANNA
LEWINSKI. WOJCIECH
66.1 POINSETTA AVE ~306
CLEARWATER FL
33767
LEWINSKI. WOJCIECH
LEWINSKI. HANNA
60 SOMERSET ~ 3
CLEARWATER FL
33767 .1543
HALGREN. RALPH W
HALGREN. VELORA
56 SOMERSET ST
CLEAR\^"A TER FL
33767 1543
FRIARS MINOR ORDER OF
ST FRANCIS
PROVINCIAL CURIA
.147 THOMPSON ST
NEW YORK NY I 00 j d - 3 1/ 0
BUNDY. RUSSELL H
NORGORDT. HANNAH K
42 SOMERSET ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1543
BOSCHEN. ELSIE R TRE
675 MANDALAY AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 .1526
AMERPOL HOTELS & MOTELS INC
669 MANDALAY AVE
CLEARWATER FL
33767 .1523
FORLINI. DOMENICO G
808 MANDALAY AVE
CLEARWATER FL
3376"7 .1324
CZIPRI. BRENDA K TRE
334 EAST LAKE RD STE 338
PALM HARBOR FL
34685 2427
CZIP~I. BREND K
334, L 0
PALM A OR L
3468 4'" ,
TRE
STE 338
CZIP~R.. BREN K TRE
334 L - D STE 338
PALM 0 L
3468.::;. 2427
01 DOMIZIO INVESTMENTS INC
475 FENMAR DR
NORTH YORK ON M9L 2R6
,-7~~H~'
01 DOMIZIO INVESTMENTS INC
475 FENMAR DR
NORTH YORK ON M9L 2R6
~(!l~PA'/
NINE CAMBRIA CONDO ASSN
C/O ANN NELLER
9 CAMBRIA ST APT 2
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1510
NELLER. ROTH 0
NELLER. ANN W
9 CAMBRIA ST tf 2
CLEARWATER FL
33767 .1510
NELLER. ROTH 0
NEL~. . N
9 C tf 2
CLE T
33767 1510
NIMA HOLDINGS INC
.1421 COURT ST STE B
CLEARWATER FL
33767
FENLON. KELLY A
9 CAMBRIA ST It 4
CLEARWATER FL
33767
CHRISTENSEN. DALE K
CHRISTENSEN. WENDILYN C
2431 ESTANCIA BLVD
CLEARWATER FL
33761 2608
MUNCH. MICHAEL A TRE
9 CAMBRIA ST tf 6
CLEARWATER FL
33767
.
.
SOMERSET CONDO ASSN INC
Clo LAMPATHAKIS REALTY
1299 MAIN ST
DUNEDIN FL
34698 5333
KOMITAS, ALVINOS
KOMITAS, HELLEN
141 CITATION DR
TORONTO ON M2K lT3
"'~'~I
LOWELL, TROY 0
LOWELL, MERYL B
538 SW 48TH ST RD
OCALA FL
34474 6730
SKANDALAKIS, JOHN
SKANDALAKIS, IRENE
5080 ELDEVIEW CT
MISSASSAUGA ON L5M 5A9
J"'~MA
COSTARELIS, NICK
HANGHOFER, DANICA
676 MANDALAY AVE ~ 114
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1528
ARIS INVESTMENTS INC
39 STRATHEDEN RD
TORONTO ON M4N lES
.CANADA
PANOS, CHRIST
PANOS, AMALIA
818 MARSHALL DR
DES PLAINES XL
60016 5946
KOZORONIS, HELEN
171 HOLLYWOOD AVE
NORTH YORK ON M2N 3K4
GANA&A
BRANDSTADTER. STEPHAN M
SEN, STEPHANIE E
3946 N WASHINGTON BLVD
INDIANAPOLIS IN
46205 2639
SURFS IDE OF PINELLAS CONDO
ASSN INC
11 IDLEWILD ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1563
WILSON, WILLIAM D JR
LAZZARA, PAUL
245 SANDRIDGE CT
ALPHARETTA GA
30022
GARBIS, WILLIAM
GARBIS, GLENNA S
8829 W 99TH PL
PALOS HILLS IL
60465 1147
BUMGARNER, DANA
BUMGARNER, MARTHA
5303 ANSONIA CT
ORLANDO FL
32839 5249
KINNARD, LOUIS R
KINNARD, LUCRETIA L
VIA S MARTA 24
FIRENZE 50139
~".,;,
EMERY, NEIL J
EMERY, JOANN S
Clo RAVENNA PATTERN & MFG
13101 APPLE AVE
RAYE::NNA MI t.f9L/-61 - 7755
WESTER, ROBERT M TRE
WESTER, PATRICIA A TRE
6 WOODGLEN
ST CHARLES MO
63304 7609
HUNTER, RICHARD F
HUNTER, PEGGY P
PO BOX 3646
CHATTANOOGA TN
37404 0646
ROWE, ROBERT B TRE
ROWE, WENDY A TRE
PO BOX 3711
CLEARWATER FL
33767 8711
WESTER, ROBERT M
WESTER, PATRICIA A
6 WOODGLEN ESTATES DR
ST CHARLES MO
63304
RASCONA, LISA
RASCONA, ANTHONY
45 ELAINE DR
STAMFORD CT
06902
II
ROWE, ROBERT B
FWWE, WENDY A
11 IDLEWILD ST
CLEARWATER FL
33767 1563
SOTTILE, BENJAMIN J
SOTTILE, ILEANA
24 S PARK DR
TENAFLY NJ
07670 3025
SHAY, BRIAN J TRE
SHAY, STEPHANIE A TRE
220 POINSETTIA AVE
CORON DEL MAR CA
92625
BANNON, PATRICK J TRE
BANNON, MARY K TRE
910 STRATFORD LN
DOWNERS GROVE IL
60516 1951
.
.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
NOTICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Community Development Board of the City of Clearwater, Florida, will hold public hearings on Tuesday,
November 19, 2002, beginning at 2:00 p.m., in the City Commission Chambers, in City Hall, 3rd floor, 112 South
Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, Florida, to consider the following requests:
NOTE: All persons wishine to address an item need to be present at the BEGINNING of the meetine. Those
cases that are not contested by the applicant. staff. neiehborine property owners. etc. will be placed on a
consent aeenda and approved by a sinele vote at the beeinnine of the meetine.
1. Briehtwater Townhomes. LLC. (Roland Rogers) are requesting a flexible development approval for the
construction of multi-use docks (10 new slips) in excess of 500 sq. ft., under the provisions of Section 3-601
(Proposed Use: the construction of a 1,355 sq. ft. ten-slip dock to be located 35 ft. from the extended side (east)
property line and a minimum of 105 ft. from the extended side (west) property line [includes removal of two existing
dock]) at 200 Briehtwater Dr., Bayside Sub No.2, Lots 31, 32 & 33. FLD 2002-09026
2. Vireinia B. Franks. Charles F. Raubeson. Emma F. Alison and Jean & Walter A. Koeeler (Radcliffe
Development Company, LLC.) are requesting a flexible development approval to reduce the required side (north)
setback from 10 ft to 5 ft (to pavement), reduce the front (west) setback along Poinsettia Ave. from 15 ft to zero ft
(to building), reduce the front (east) setback along Bay Esplanade from 15 ft to zero ft. (to building), reduce the front
(south) setback along Bay Esplanade from 15 ft to 3 ft (to pavement) and increase the height from 50 ft to 65 ft (as
measured from base flood elevation), under the provisions of Section 2-803 (Proposed Use: a 28-unit condominium
development within a single, seven-story, 65 ft in height [as measured from base flood elevation]) at 650 Bay
Esplanade, Mandalay Unit No.5, Blk 82, Lots 1,2, 11, 12 & 13. FLD 2002-09030
3. C B G A M. Inc. (Uday Lele, White Sands, LLC.) are requesting a flexible development approval to increase the
height of a wall within the front setback along Somerset Street from 3 ft to 6 ft under the provisions of Section 3-
804.A.l, reduce the front (south) setback along Somerset Street from 25 ft to 10 ft (to building), and increase the
height from 30 ft to 56 ft (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-404.F (Proposed Use: a 15-unit condominium development within a single, six-story,
building 56 ft in height [as measured from the base flood elevation]) at 14 Somerset St., Revised Map of Clearwater
Beach, Blk 1, Lots 1-5. FLD 2OO2~31
4. Belleview Biltmore Resort. Ltd. are requesting a flexible development approval to reduce the front (east) setback
along Gulf Blvd. from 25 ft to 5 ft to pavement (existing), reduce the side (north) setback from 10 ft to zero ft (to
existing building and pavement), and from 10 ft to 1.4 ft to existing pool deck, and reduce the required number of
parking spaces from 108 spaces to 46 spaces, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the
provisions of Section 2-704B (Proposed Use: the re-establishment of a restaurant within the current structure with
site improvements) at 1590 Gulf Blvd., Sec. 19-29-15, M&B 34.011. FLD 2002-09029
Interested parties may appear and be heard at the hearings or file written notice of approval or objection with the
Planning Director or City Clerk prior to the hearings. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by the
Board, with respect to any matter considered at such hearings, will need a record of the proceedings and, for such
purpose, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony
and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based per Florida Statute 286.0105.
All individuals speaking on public hearing items will be sworn in.
Five days prior to the meeting, staff reports and recommendations on the above requests will be available for review
by interested parties between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., weekdays, at the City of Clearwater, Planning
Department, 100 S. Myrtle Ave., Clearwater, FL 33756, or call (727) 562-4567.
FilE
Lisa Fierce
Planning Department
.
.
City of Clearwater
P.O. Box 4748, Clearwater, FL 33758-4748
NOTE: Applicant or representative must be present at the hearing.
Cynthia E. Goudeau, CMC
City Clerk
YOU ARE BEING SENT THIS NOTICE IF YOU ARE THE APPLICANT OR OWN PROPERTY WITHIN 500
FT. OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
A COpy OF THIS AD IN LARGE PRINT IS AVAILABLE IN THE CITY CLERK DEPT. ANY PERSON
WITH A DISABILITY REOUlRING REASONABLE ACCOMMODA TION IN ORDER TO
PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING SHOULD CALL THE CITY CLERK DEPT WITH THEIR REQUEST
AT (727) 562-4090.
Ad: 11/03/02
..,~..,~_~1. "._..,~.~'ifp ~ t.~
L.L.
.
<<'"
o
>-
I-
Updated as of 10/11/02
u
Note: Times are subject to change.
DRAFT ACTION AGENDA
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
~;:~ILE
Thursday, October 10,2002
1:10 p.rn.
Case: FLU:lUU:l-U~Ujl - 14 Somerset Street.
Applicant: Mr. Uday Lele; White Sands, LLC.
Location: 0.50-acres located on the north side of Somerset Street approximately 150 feet west of
Mandalay Avenue.
Atlas Page: 258A.
Zoning: MHDR, Medium High Density Residential District.
Request: Flexible Development approval to increase the height of a wall within the front setback
from three feet to six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.Al., reduce the front (south)
setback along Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building), reduction in stacking space for
a controlled-access driveway from 40 feet (two car lengths) to zero feet and increase the height
from 30 feet to 56 feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill
Project under the provisions of Section 2-404.F. within the "Old Florida District" of Beach by
Design.
Proposed Use: A 15-unit condominium development within a single, six-story, 62,692 square
foot building 56 feet in height (as measured from the base flood elevation).
Presenter: Mark T. Parry, Planner.
Attendees included:
City Staff: Mark Parry, Wayne Wells, Lisa Fierce, Glen Bahnick, Joe Colbert, Garry Brumback,
Reg Owens and Tom Glenn
ApplicantJRepresentative: Roger Larson, Tom Wannen, Tim Bourne, John Scott, Anjania
Bhyankar, Harish Patel and Jerry D'Souza
The DRC reviewed these applications with the following comments:
1. Plannine:
a) Indicate whether existing units are overnight accommodations or residential in nature
(confirm that there are nine units on the site);
b) Indicate the color of the proposed awning - provide elevations showing the clearance
between the awning and the right-of-way;
c) Indicate the minimum distance from any other building to the proposed structure;
d) Provide the following required Residential Infill Project criteria (the fax received on 10-
8-2002 was incomplete):
· The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is
otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development
standards;
· The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill
project will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties;
· The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in the district;
· The uses within the residential infill project are compatible with adjacent lands uses;
DRC action agenda - October 10, 2002 - Page 1
.
.
. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill
project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development;
. The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and function
which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel
proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole;
. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are
justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the
parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
e) Provide existing ISR (confrrm that it is 0.54);
f) A landscape plan indicating proposed stormwater facilities. The proposed storm water
facilities (top of bank and toe of slope, at least, should be shown on the landscape plan);
g) Provide a narrative indicating how the requirements of Beach by Design guidelines are
being met and, specifically, how the requirements of the Old Florida District are being
met (the fax received on 10-8-2002 was incomplete);
h) Provide a narrative outlining how the proposed development is compatible with the area,
considering the low density residential area to the north; The height of the building
should be compatible with the single-family residential properties immediately to the
north. Discuss potential impacts: shadow, mass, scale and privacy. The "Old Florida
District" provides for low- to mid-rise buildings;
i) Building mass is generally a rectangle with some limited relief; discuss/show how more
relief can be provided through articulation of the fenestration;
j) Provide a site plan more clearly showing the footprint of the building - almost everything
has the same line weight;
k) It's not clear how the frrst two parking spaces on the east side of the building can be
utilized by anyone entering the building; and
1) It's not clear how the first two parking spaces on the west side of the building can be
utilized by anyone entering the building.
m) All of the above (1 a-I) to be provided prior to CDB review;
a) All signage must meet the requirements of Code and be designed according to a common
theme including similar style, color, material and other characteristics to provide a sense
of uniformity.
2. Traffic eneineerine:
a) Minimum parking and drive aisle dimensions are not being met. Columns must not
encroach on any parking spaces or drive aisles. City standards must be met or exceeded,
especially, in enclosed parking structures.
b) Sight triangle requirements must be met; provide request for relief if there will be
encroachments; detail how these will not impede safety.
c) Stacking or queuing space for a minimum of two vehicles off of the roadway at any
access-controlled entrance is not provided - if cant meet need to seek relief.
d) Access to door on west side of central lobby appears restricted by adjacent parking space.
e) Transportation Impact Fee to be determined and paid prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy.
f) Issues a-d above to be resolved prior to prior to review by CDB.
3. Stormwater:
a) No comments
4. Solid waste:
a) Complex Maintenance staff shall move Dumpsters to staging area. Provide prior to
issuance of any permits;
b) Show Grade from the staging to the street;
c) Label staging area throughout;
d) Provide the above 4 (a - c) prior to review by CDB.
5. Parks and Recreation:
a) Open Space, Recreation Land and Recreation Facility impact fees will need to be
addressed for this residential expansion prior to issuance of building permits or final plat,
whichever occurs frrst. Clarification is needed on existing guest rooms or residential
units (4 hotel/motel rooms = 1 residential unit). Contact Deb Richter at 727-562-4817.
DRC action agenda - October 10, 2002 - Page 2
...d
'I
;
--
.
.
6. Landscapine:
a) No comments - the landscape plan is fine. There are some minor things to be looked at
but nothing major. I will work with Robin.
7. Land resource:
a) Tree permit required prior to building permit issuance.
S. Harbor Master:
a) No comments
9. Fire:
a) Fire Flow requirements for buildings must be in accordance with Appendix B of the 2000
International Fire Code. Show Fire Hydrant locations to provide the required fire flow on
Site Plan prior to prior to review by CDB.
b) Knox Entry System is required on gates per Pinellas County Ordinance # 98-4. Show on
construction documents;
10. Environmental:
a) No comments.
11. General eneineerine:
a) Sidewalk to be constructed along Somerset Street.
b) Clarify the above (11 a) prior to review by CDB.
c) Plat required prior to first Certificate of Occupancy.
NOTES:
~ Stormwater attenuation is not required, only water quality.
~ A turn-around would normally be required for fire and solid waste service however, because the proposed use is
less intense than the existing use and service is currently being provided no improvements will be required
within the right-of-way by the applicant;
~ 15 additional sets of the complete resubmittal of all required information, to include copies of the application,
survey, site plan (with any required changes as applicable), affidavit of authorization, etc. will be required by
October 18, 2002 in order to be placed on the November 19,2002 Community Development Board (CDB)
agenda.
~ Email commentstoJohnscottassoc@aol.com.Anjaniaatanianiabvankar@hotmail.com. Harish at
harish@esiI500.com, Tim at mailto:TBOURNE@CUMBEYFAIR.COM and Roger at roged@ibpfirm.com.
DRAFT CONDITIONS:
1. That a site plan to include a note providing that the complex staff will move the dumpsters to the
staging area be submitted to and approved by Staff prior to the issuance of any permits;
2. That a site plan which indicates the dumpster staging area be submitted to and approved by Staff prior
to the issuance of any permits;
3. That all required tree permits be applied for and received prior to the issuance of any permits;
4. That a Knox Entry System be shown on all gates per Pinellas County Ordinance # 98-4 prior to the
issuance of any permits;
5. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted or as
modified by the CDB;
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code and be designed according to a common theme
including similar style, color, material and other characteristics to provide a sense of uniformity; and
7. That a final plat be recorded with the County prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
S:\Planning DepartmenflC D B\FLEJN>ending casetlUp for the next DRClSomerset 14 Chalets on White Sands\Somerset 14 DRC Action agenda
lO-lO-02.doc
DRC action agenda - October 10, 2002 - Page 3
,[
'"
'"
.~
..
-.
.
CDB Meeting Date: November 19. 2002
Case Number: FLD2002-09031
Agenda Item: B3
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
OWNER:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
PLANS REVIEWED:
SITE INFORMATION:
PROPERTY SIZE:
CBGAM, Inc.
Mr. Uday Lele; White Sands, LLC.
14 Somerset Street
Flexible Development approval to increase the height of a wall
within the front setback along Somerset Street from three feet to six
feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.A.1, reduce the front
(south) setback along Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to
building), and increase the height of a building with attached
dwellings from 30 feet to 56 feet (as measured from base flood
elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the provisions
of Section 2-404.F.
Site and landscape plans submitted by Cumby and Fair, Inc.
Architectural plans submitted by John Marshall Scott.
0.50 acres; 21,884 square feet
DIMENSIONS OF SITE: Approximately 249 feet of width by 87 feet of depth
PROPERTY USE:
Current Use:
Proposed Use:
PLAN CATEGORY:
ZONING DISTRICT:
Overnight accommodations
Attached dwellings
RH, Residential High District Classification
MHDR, Medium High Density Residential District
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 1
I
.
.
.
ADJACENT LAND USES: North: Detached dwellings
West: Gulf of Mexico
East: Attached dwellings
South: Attached dwellings
CHARACTER OF THE
IMMEDIATE VICINITY: Multi- and single-family residential uses dominate the immediate
vicinity.
ANALYSIS:
The 0.50-acre site is located on the north side of Somerset Street approximately 150 feet west of
Mandalay Avenue. The site, initially developed in 1925, is located within transitional area on
Clearwater Beach marking the boundary between single-family dwellings to the north and multi-
family and overnight accommodation uses to the south. The site is located directly along the Gulf
of Mexico. An unimproved right-of-way, Beach Drive exists along the west site of the site. The
site contains two structures with a total of nine hotel units. A two-story building, approximately
24 feet in height with approximately 2,263 square feet of area, is located centrally on the property
and contains seven dwelling units. A second, one-story building, approximately 23 feet in height
with approximately 1,922 square feet of area, is located on the east portion of the site and contains
two dwelling units. There are parking spaces that are partially on the site and partially in the right-
of-way.
The site is located within the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design which designates the area
for residential reuse with multi-family townhomes and condominiums. The Plan recommends low
to midrise development. The character of the area is of modest attached dwellings and overnight
accommodations. There is significant redevelopment potential in the area.
The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-unit condominium building of
62,692 square feet and five stories above parking. The proposed building will be located
approximately 10 feet from the side (north and east) property lines, 25 feet from the front (east)
property line along Beach Drive (unimproved) and 10 feet from the front (south) property line
along Somerset Street.
The applicant seeks to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet to six
feet, reduce the front (south) setback along Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building)
and increase the height from 30 feet to 56 feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a
Residential Infill Project. Attached dwellings under the Flexible Standard Development
provisions are permitted to be up to 50 feet in height and may have front setbacks reduced to 15
feet. This site is located within a flood zone (zone VE), and the requested height is 56 feet (as
measured from the base flood elevation of 14 feet) with five floors above one floor of parking. By
Code, height is measure from base flood elevation. The front (south) setback request of 10 feet
and a height greater than 50 feet requires that the application be reviewed as part of a Residential
Infill Project request.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19, 2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 2
i
I
I i I
,"
.
.
One level of under-structure parking will be provided and will include 28 spaces that exceed Code
requirements of 23 spaces. Access to the site is proposed along Somerset Street at two gated
entrance/exits.
The Mediterranean architecture of the building will include neutral-color stucco, terracotta color
barrel tile roof, and a significant number of windows and balconies on all elevations. The flat roof
has been designed to minimize views of the mechanical equipment and incorporates the use of
cupola-type enclosures. The building compliments the vision of the "Old Florida District". It will
serve as an appropriate transition use from the more intensely developed area to the south,
consisting of a variety of overnight accommodation, retail, restaurant and other non-residential
uses, to the single-family neighborhood to the north.
A white, aluminum picket-style fence, 42-inches in height will be located around the perimeter of
the pool which is to be located along the Gulf side of the building. A masonry wall will taper from
six feet in height to four feet, extending from the south fa~ade of the building on either side of the
main entrance. It will continue to the east and west along Somerset Street for approximately 12
feet. The wall will have a stucco finish painted to match the primary color of the building. It is
designed to screen the trash staging area and provide space for building identification. An awning
will cover the main entryway.
The landscape plan exceeds the requirements of Code. This includes a mixture of various trees,
shrubs, palms and annuals. A sidewalk, four-feet in width will be provided along Somerset Street.
The sidewalk will include a distressed finish. The sidewalk will connect with an existing sidewalk
to the east. It will provide for continued public access across the frontage of the site to the Gulf.
Amenities include an in-ground swimming pool along the gulf (west side). Roof drains will be
routed through a proposed stormwater vault which will include a filtration system. A Code-
compliant method of treating paved, vehicular use areas must be provided to satisfy stormwater
management criteria, prior to the issuance of any permits, and the applicant is noticed that this
could adversely impact the site design. As provided in Section 4-406 of the Code, should
addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different from the one
approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be resubmitted to the Board
for review.
Fire Department requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry system and a
knox key box on the building for emergency egress, have been noted on the plan. Solid Waste
Department requirements have been met. Trash will be collected within the building and moved to
a staging area by the complex staff on pick up days.
CODE ENFORCEMENT ANALYSIS
There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19, 2002 - Case FLD2oo2-09031 - Page 3
.
.
A. COMPLIANCE WITH MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL STANDARD IN
THE MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (Section 2-401.1):
STANDARD REQillREDI EXISTING PROPOSED IN
PERMITTED COMPLIANCE?
DENSITY 15 dwelling units Nine dwelling 15 dwelling Yes
(dwelling units (30 dulac) units units (30
per acre) dwelling units
per acre)
IMPERVIOUS 0.85 0.54 0.71 Yes
SURFACE
RATIO
B. FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL INFILL
PROJECTS IN THE MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (Section
2-404):
STANDARD PERMITTEDI EXISTING PROPOSED IN
REQillRED COMPLIANCE?
LOT AREA N/A 21,884 square 21,884 square Yes
(minimum) feet feet
LOT WIDTH N/A 249 feet 249 feet Yes
(minimum)
FRONT 10 - 25 feet South: 10 feet South: 10 feet (to Yes
SETBACK (to building building
West: 36 feet (to West: 25 feet (to
building) building)
REAR 0- 15 feet N/A* N/A* Yes
SETBACK
SIDE o - 10 feet North: zero feet North: 10 feet (to Yes
SETBACK (to building) building)
East: three feet East: 10 feet (to
(to building) building) .
HEIGHT 30 feet** 24 feet** 56 feet** Yes**
maximum
PARKING 1.5 spaces per 12 spaces 28 spaces (1.86 Yes***
SPACES unit (23 spaces spaces per
minimum based on 15 unit)***
units)
***
Comer lots, under the provisions of Section 3-903.D., have side and front setbacks only.
The development standards for residential infill projects are guidelines and may be varied
based on the criteria specified in Section 2-404.F.
The minimum development standards for attached dwellings are 1.5 parking spaces per
unit (23 spaces). The applicant has provided 28 spaces, exceeding the minimum
requirements of Code.
*
**
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 4
, ; I
'-
.
.
C. FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA FOR RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECT IN THE
MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (Section 2-404.F):
1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is
otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development
standards;
The subject property was developed during the mid-1920's and redeveloped during the
mid-1950's. The area is intensely developed with predominantly multi-family and
overnight accommodation uses to the south and east. The area to the north has been
developed with single-family dwellings. A variety of non-residential uses including
restaurants, offices and retail sales and service exist to the south. The proposal includes the
demolition of the two existing, structures and constructing a single, residential building.
The reductions in setbacks will provide a building similar is size and scale to other
buildings along Somerset Street. The increase in height is necessary to provide a viable
product and allows for the placement of parking underneath the building. Additional
upscale residential dwellings are an important component of a healthy mix of uses in this
area and encouraged by the "Old Florida District" and Beach by Design. This use will also
stabilize and support other service uses nearby.
2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill project
will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties;
The ultimate redevelopment of this site will likely enhance abutting properties. The
buildings are approximately 50 years old. The current assessed valuation of the site is $2.4
million. The anticipated value of the site is expected to be in excess of $14,800,000.
3. The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in the district;
The site is zoned Medium High Density Residential District and the proposed use will be
in compliance with the zoning. Surrounding properties include residential and overnight
accommodations. The proposed development will result in a development in keeping with
the intended character of the "Old Florida District" within Beach by Design.
4. The uses within the residential infill project are compatible with adjacent lands uses;
Adjacent land uses are predominantly attached residential and overnight accommodation.
Many of the structures in the area are low- to mid-rise attached dwellings with under
building parking. The building complements the vision of the "Old Florida District" and
will serve as an appropriate transition use from the more intensely developed area to the
south and the single-family neighborhood to the north. The proposal includes a change of
use from nonresidential to residential which is more compatible with adjacent land uses.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 5
.
.
, ,
s. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill project
will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development;
The proposed building will be attractively designed with parking is excess of Code
requirements and abundant landscaping. The development and design of the project will
set a new standard for the area. It may be a catalytic project that influences other like
redevelopment efforts.
6. The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and function
which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel pro-
posed. for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole;
The proposal includes the complete redevelopment of a modest property with a I5-unit
condominium building. It is consistent with the provisions of Beach by Design and the
Medium High Density Residential District. The proposal incorporates well-articulated,
unified elevations and coordinated architectural elements. Landscaping will be provided
along all property lines. The proposed development will enhance the community character
of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development the City of Clearwater as
a whole. Additional residential development is a key component to the success of the "Old
Florida District".
7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are
justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the
parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
The proposed development will aesthetically improve the immediate area and Clearwater
as a whole. The proposed project reflects the City's vision of a residential character within
the "Old Florida District" within Beach by Design. The reductions in setbacks will provide
a building similar is size and scale to other buildings along Somerset Street. The proposal
will be pedestrian in scale and will provide for a continuous streetscape along Somerset
Street.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 6
....,
.
.
D. GENERAL APPLICABILITY (Section 2-903.C): Conditions which are imposed by the
Community Development Coordinator and the Community Development Board
pursuant to a Level One or a Level Two Approval shall ensure that:
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 proposed development will serve as a transition between the more intensely developed
area to the south and the residential neighborhood to the north. The goal of the "Old
Florida District" of Beach by Design includes a revitalized, multi-family residential area to
support beach businesses. Such development is encouraged to take the form of townhomes
and condominiums. This proposal includes upscale condominiums with amenities which
complies with Beach by Design. It will hopefully establish a positive redevelopment
precedent for the area. Additional upscale residential dwellings are an important
component of a healthy mix of uses in this area. This use will also stabilize and support
other service uses nearby.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate
development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value
thereof.
The site is zoned Medium High Density District and is part of the "Old Florida District"
within Beach by Design. The proposed development will be in compliance with that
zoning classification and the guidelines outlined in Beach by Design with anew,
attractively designed residential building and landscaping. The proposed development will
help generate a better mix of residential uses and encourage the like redevelopment of
other sites.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons
residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
The proposed residential use is permitted in the zoning district, and should not create any
adverse health or safety impacts in the neighborhood. The proposal includes under
building parking and landscaping in excess of Code requirements in addition to other on-
site amenities.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
The proposed development will have two ingress/egress points of access along Somerset
Street which is a dead-end street. The proposal includes razing the two existing buildings
with nine overnight accommodation units and replacing them with one building with 15
residential units. Vehicle trip generation should have no reduction in levels of service on
any roads in the area.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 7
Ii
-,
.
.
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
Adjacent land uses are primarily multi-family dwellings with overnight accommodations
farther to the east and south. Single-family dwellings exist to the north and a mix of
restaurants and retail sales and service and other non-residential uses exist farther to the
south. The site is within the "Old Florida District" of Beach By Design which encourages
multi-family dwellings. The proposal will meet the intent of Beach by Design with a new
attractively designed residential building. The proposed building will be located similarly
to surrounding buildings providing a continuous streetscape along Somerset Street. The
design of the building will create a positive visual impact along the street with abundant
balconies, windows and buffered, under-building parking.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual,
acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties.
The proposed development will have two ingress/egress points of access along Somerset
Street. Solid waste will be collected inside the building and moved to a staging area along
Somerset Street for pick up. The benefit of this project includes the redevelopment of a
modest site with an attractive residential building and well-designed landscaping.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on
October 10, 2002. The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible
Development approval to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet to
six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.AI., reduce the front (south) setback along Somerset
Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56 feet (as
measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the provisions of
Section 2-404.F. for the site at 14 Somerset Street, with the following bases and conditions:
Basis for Approval:
1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project
per Section 2-404.F.
2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913.
3. The application is consistent with the "Old Florida District" in Beach by Design.
4. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 8
II
.,
.
.
Conditions:
1. That the density of the site be limited to 15 dwellings units (30 dwelling units per acre);
2. That the height be limited to 56 feet as measured from base flood elevation;
3. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted or
as modified by the CDB;
4. That should addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different
from the one approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be
resubmitted to the Board for review;
5. That all Fire Department requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry
system and a knox key box on the building for emergency egress; and
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code.
Prepared by: Planning Department Staff
, ~/{ ~/oa-
Mark T. Parry, Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
Aerial Photograph of Site and Vicinity
Location Map
Future Land Use Map
Zoning Atlas Map
Application
S:\Planning Departmenf\C D B\FleXIPending casenUp for the next DRC\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands\Somerset 14 STAFF
REPORT. doc
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 9
t ---:.~
,- FORM 600A-2001
FLORIDA ENERGY EFFICIENCY CODE
FOR BUILDING CONSTRUCTION
Florida Department of Community Affairs
Residential Whole Building Performance Method A
Project Name:
Address:
City, State:
Owner:
Climate Zone:
Chalets on White Sands
14 Somerset Street
Clearwater Beach, FL 33767-
White Sands LLC
Central
Builder:
Permitting Office: Clearwater
Permit Number:
Jurisdiction Number.
I. New construction or existing
i2. Single family or multi-family
b. Number of units, if multi-family
4. Number of Bedrooms
5. Is this a worst case?
6. Conditioned floor area (ft')
7. Glass area & type
a. Clear - single pane
b. Clear - double pane
c. Tint/other SHOC - single pane
d. Tint/other SHOC - double pane
8. Floor types
a. Raised Wood, Stem Wall
b. N/A
c. NlA
9. Wall types
a. Frame, Wood, Exterior
b. Concrete, Int InsuI, Adjacent
c. N/A
d. NlA
e. NlA
10. Ceiling types
a. Concrete Deck Roof - Exposed
b.NlA
c. N/A
11. Ducts
a. Sup: Con. Ret: Con. AH: Interior
b. NlA
New
Multi-family
I
3
Yes
2464 ft2
0.0112
0.0 ft2
192.0 ft2
0.0 ft2
R=19.0, 2464.0ft2
R=5.0, 1080.0 ft2
R=Il.O, 324.0 ft2
R=I9.0, 2464.0 ft2
Sup. R=4.2, 45.0 ft
12. Cooling systems
a. Central Unit
b. N/A
c. NlA
13. Heating systems
a. Electric Heat Pump
b. NlA
c. N/A
14. Hot water systems
a. Electric Resistance
b. N/A
Glass/Floor Area: 0.08
Total as-built points: 26826
Total base points: 31037
I hereby certify that the pia and specifications covered
Il>y this calculation are in m Hance' e Florida
~nergy Code.
PREPARED BY:
DATE: 5' 2-
I hereby certify that this building, as designed, is in
compliance with the Florida Energy Code.
OWNER/AGENT:
IpA TE:
N (") Z CD ~ Cap: 59.0 kBtuIbr
~. ~ ~ (") ~ SEER: 12.50
::l r ,^
<P. m O"'tJ u#
~~~NO
0000'
:;ozOO=-
~ Wm
I I ';0 Cap: 52.0 kBtuIbr
~ ~ en HSPF: 6.80
(j) ~m
~ ~-I
g Wen
-t
~
Qi"
(/l
"*
N
CJ1
00
~
:ap: 50.0 gallons
EF: 0.92
PT, CF, _
r) .
~.:~ .J \j lr
c. Conserwtion credits
(HR-Heat recovery, Solar
DHP-Dedicated heat pum
IS. HVAC credits
(CF-Ceiling fim, CV -Cross ventilation,
~~=I~~~~-r~~"-
Mz.c-Multizone coolin8f i U ! ......U.:
MZ-H-Multizone heatin~1 .,,!;
,. i 'i '1 \
Ii:! ':
LJ '.._.1'
i
w~
..., '" .'.... ".. _._1
PA''''''''''T ".".("". '''-'-''r
'- '8S:;' :.>',,' ,.,' L:::'i"
, . ...., i':: (:! F: !., I'.'. :.
). _ '. '.." ,.. H
__L_~' _.__
Review of the plans and
specifications covered by this
calculation indicates compliance
with the Florida Energy Code.
Before construction is completed
this building will be inspected for
compliance with Section 553.908
Florida Statutes.
BUILDING OFFICIAL:
DATE:
EnergyGaugeclll (Version: FLRCSB v3.22)
II
r 600A-2001
SUMMER CALCULATIONS
Residential Whole Building Performance Method A - Details
II ADDRESS: 14 Somerset street, Clearwater Beach, FL, 33767-
PERMIT #:
,
BASE AS-BUlL T
GLASS TYPES
.18 X Conditioned X BSPM = Points Overhang
Floor Area TypelSC Omt Len Hgt Area X SPM X SOF = Points
.18 2464.0 25.78 11433.9 Single, Tmt SE 0.0 0.0 60.0 47.60 1.00 2856.1
Single, Tint SW 0.0 0.0 96.0 44.31 1.00 4253.6
Single, Tint SW 0.0 0.0 36.0 44.31 1.00 1595.1
As-Bullt Total: 192.0 8704.7
WALL TYPES Area X BSPM = Paints Type R-Value Area X SPM = Points
Adjacent 324.0 0.70 226.8 Frame, Wood, Exterior 5.0 1080.0 3.47 3749.1
aterIor 1080.0 1.90 2052.0 Concrete, lot Insul, Aqacent 11.0 324.0 0.30 97.2
Blase Total: 1404.0 2278.8 As-Bullt Total: 1404.0 3846.3
DOOR TYPES Area X BSPM = Points Type Area X SPM = Points
Adjacent 0.0 0.00 0.0 Exterior Wood 42.0 7.20 302.4
ElderIor 42.0 4.80 201.6
BJse Total: 42.0 201.6 As-Built Total: 42.0 302.4
CEILING TYPES Area X BSPM = Points Type R-Value Area X SPM X SCM = Points
U_ Attic 2464.0 2.13 5248.3 Concrete Deck Roof - Elcposed 19.0 2464.0 6.68 X 1.00 16470.1
..... Total: 2484.0 5248.3 As-Bu. Total: 2464.0 16470.1
F'-OOR TYPES Area X BSPM = Points Type R-Value Area X SPM = Points
S~ o.O(p) 0.0 0.0 Raised Wood, Stem WeM 19.0 2464.0 -1.80 -4435.2
RIised 2464.0 -3.43 -8451.5
__ Total: -8451.5 As-Bullt'TotaI: 2484.0 -4435.2
INFIL TRA TION, Area X BSPM = Points Area X SPM = Points
2464.0 14.31 35259.8 2464.0 14.31 35259.8
SUmmer Base Points: 45971.0 Summer As-Built Points: 60148.2
Total Summer X System = Cooling Total X Cap X Duct X System X Credit = Cooling
Points Multiplier Points Component Ratio Multiplier Multiplier Multiplier Points
(OM x DSM x AHU)
60148.2 1.000 (1.000 x 1.150x 0.90) 0.213 0.902 15326.9
i 45971.0 0.4266 19611.2 60148.2 1.00 1.035 0.273 0.902 15326.9
,
lE~auge1M DCA Form 600A-2oo1
II
r 600A-2001
WINTER CALCULATIONS
Residential Whole Building Performance Method A - Details
'II ADDRESS: 14 Somerset Street. Clearwater Beach, FL. 33767-
PERMIT #:
BASE AS-BUILT
cJLASS TYPES
.18 X Conditioned X BWPM = Points Overhang
Floor Area TypelSC Omt Len Hgt Area X WPM X WOF = Poin1
~18 2464.0 5.86 2599.0 Single, Tint SE 0.0 0.0 60.0 9.12 1.00 547.2
Single, nnt SW 0.0 0.0 96.0 9.88 1.00 948.9
Single, Tint SW 0.0 0.0 36.0 9.88 1.00 '355.8
As-Bult Total: 192.0 1852.0
WALL TYPES Area X BWPM = Points Type R-Value Area X WPM = Points
~acent 324.0 1.80 583.2 Frame, Wood, Elcterior 5.0 1080.0 3.73 4026.9
$lerior 1080.0 2.00 2160.0 Concrete, Int Insul, Ad"j8Cent 11.0 324.0 1.10 356.4
i
..... Total: 1404.0 2743.2 As-Built Total: 1404.0 4383.3
I)OOR TYPES Area X BWPM = Points Type Area X WPM = Points
Adjacent 0.0 0.00 0.0 Exterior Wood 42.0 7.60 319.2
Sxterior 42.0 5.10 214.2
... Total: 42.0 214.2 As-Bullt Total: 42.0 319.2
c;EILlNG TYPES Area X BWPM = Points Type R-Value Area X WPM X WCM = Points
Under Attic 2464.0 0.64 15n.0 Concrete Deck Roof - Exposed 19.0 2464.0 0.62 X 1.00 1534.7
Sa.. Total: 2464.0 1577.0 As-Bullt Total: 2464.0 1534.7
FLOOR TYPES Area X BWPM = Points Type R-Value Area X WPM = Points
Slab o.O(p) 0.0 0.0 Raised Wood, Stem WeM 19.0 2464.0 0.30 739.2
Raised 2464.0 -0.20 -492.8
... Total: -492.8 As-Bult Total: 2464.0 739.2
INFIL TRA TION Area X BWPM = Points Area X WPM = Points
2464.0 -0.28 -689.9 2464.0 -0.28 -689.9
'Ninter Base Points: 5950.7 Winter As-Built Points: 8138.4
Irotal Winter X System = Heating Total X Cap X Duct X System X Credit = Heating
I Points Multiplier Points Component Ratio Multiplier Multiplier Multiplier Points
I (OM x DSM x AHU)
: 8138.4 1.000 (1.000 x 1.160 x 0.92) 0.502 0.950 4141.3
5950.7 0.6274 3733.4 8138.4 1.00 1.067 0.502 0.950 4141.3
~nergyGauge 111 DCA Form 600A-2001
?M~O;:-;;~ HEATING & CODE COMPLIANCE 8T ATUS
Residential Whole Building Performance Method A - Details
:1 ADDRESS: 14 Somerset Street, Clearwater Beach. FL, 33767-
PERMIT #:
BASE AS-BUILT
WATER HEATING
i Number of X Multiplier = Total Tank ,EF Number of X Tank X Multiplier X Credit = Total
! Bedrooms Volume Bedrooms Ratio Multiplier
3 2564,00 7692.0 50.0 0.92 3 1.00 2452.52 1.00 7357.6
, As-8uiIt Total: 7357.6
,
CODE COMPLIANCE STATUS
! BASE AS-BUlL T
, Cooling + Heating + Hot Water = Total Cooling + Heating + Hot Water = Total
Points Points Points Points Points Points Points Points
119611 3733 7692 31037 15327 4141 7358 26826
I
PASS
I
~nergyGauge TU DCA Form 6QOA-2001
~.
.... . ...~ '" ~M 600A-2001
/.,,'
Code Compliance Checklist
R~sidential Whole Building Performance Method A - Details
ADDRESS: 14 Somerset Street, Clearwater Beach, FL, 33767-
PERMIT #:
6A-21INFIL TRA TION REDUCTION COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST
COMPONENTS SECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH PRACTICE
Exterior Windows & Doors 606.1.ABC.1.1 Maximum:.3 .ft. window . .5 cfmIs .ft. door area.
l Exterior & Adjacent Walls 606.1.ABC.1.2.1 Caulk, gasket, weatherstrip or seal between: windows/doors & frames, surrounding wall;
foundation & wall sole or siR plate; joints between exterior wall panels at corners; utility
penetrations; between wall panels & toplbottom plates; between walls and floor.
EXCEPTION: Frame walls where a continuous infiltration barrier is installed that extends
from and is sealed to the foundation to the t late.
606.1.ABC.1.2.2 Penetrations/openings >1/8" sealed unless backed by truss or joint members.
EXCEPTION: Frame floors where a continuous infiltration barrier is installed that is sealed
to the rimeter atioos and seams.
606.1.ABC.1.2.3 Between walls & ceilings; penetrations of ceiling plane of top floor; around shafts, chases,
soffits, chimneys, cabinets sealed to continuous air barrier; gaps in gyp board & top plate;
attic access. EXCEPTION: Frame ceilings where a continuous infiltration barrier is
installed that is sealed at the er at ations and seams.
Recessed Lighting Fixtures 606.1.ABC.1.2.4 Type IC rated with no penetrations, sealed; Of Type IC or non-IC rated, installed inside a
sealed box with 112" clearance & 3" from insulation; or Type IC rated with < 2.0 cfm from
conditioned tested.
606.1.ABC.1.2.5 Air barrier on er of ca' between floors.
606.1.ABC.1.3 Exhaust fans vented to outdoors, dampers; combustion space hearers comply with NFPA,
have combustion air.
CHE
v
Floors
v
Ceilings
t/
v
Multi-st Houses
Additional Infiltration reqts
J
6A-22 OTHER PRESCRIPTIVE MEASURES must be met or exceeded b all residences.
COMPONENTS SECTION REQUIREMENTS CHECK
jWater Heaters 612.1 Comply with effICiency requirements in Table 6-12. Switch or clear1y marked circuit L/
-----------.----.---.-----j-.---------. br~et:.(e1ectric) or cutoff ~ must ~ovided. Ext~al or.bu~t.:in hea.!~.reQuir~___+-------
iSwimming Pools & Spas 612.1 Spas & heated pools must have covers (except solar heated). Non-commercial pools .
must have a pump timer. Gas spa & pool heaters must have a minimum thermal
efficien of 78%.
w.ater fIcNv must be restricted to no more th&r! 2.5 ~Ions per minute at 80 PSIG.
All ducts, fittings, mechanical equipment and plenum chambers shall be mechanically
I attached, sealed, insulated, and installed in accordance with the criteria. of Section 610.
Ducts in unconditioned attics: R-6 min. insulation.
HVA~ Controll?___ 6O.LL.'--I..~ate readily accessible l1l8I1ual or ~!Jtornat.ic thermos!!it for each system~_____..___~_
Insulation 604.1,602.1 Ceilings-Min. R-19. Common walls-Frame R-11 or CBS R-3 both sides. f I
I Common ceiling & floors R-11. !
L.../"
hower headl?___ _612.1_____
\4.ir Distribution Systems 1610.1
I
a../"
----+-----
IV-
EfnergyGauge™ DCA Form 6OOA-2001
EnergyGaugelDIFIaRES'2001 FLRCSB v3.22
...:
,[
"
CITY OF CLEARWATER
DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS
for
CHALETS ON WHITE SANDS
At
14 SOMERSET STREET
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA
Prepared by:
CUMBEY & FAIR, INC.
2463 Enterprise Road
Clearwater, FL 33763
.:..
" -
f~~
Pankaj Shah, P:E.
Registered Engineer #21180 State of Florida
For Cumbey & Fair, Inc. E.B. #2168
J.N. 661 B
April 18, 2003
J:UN\661B\Words\draincalcs-js.wpd
MNf f 4200)
f-.._..-
_........'-~--
,''''~ I.....' ........
. I r ~. ; - .
I: 0 ! ,.~~'~L..
{'; ..r.;'\;
I : I:'
I LJ "-,"
I ,
: . ,"" ~'. '.--:- . -.--.. ., i I
L".. ..'" " . -----.".
I.- "-,'-,')1' ..i:T :~l ,'.:' ;i'\:'~'~~ 1"',--\
. . . \'... ' , '''' ',.,t' I: PT.. I
"-' .~.~~:i.~~.C.~~~I~.G
CI \ r I ,-. .....,
'I I ;
! Hi I' II';
.. I 'I :
,
<C
co
l.O
N
#
(/)
C\l
I- 1ii
cnC') ~
I-~ z
W t-- (f;
cntD w
~q ~
WM s
-==OOZ~
~OOO
ON~~~
,^ a.. 0 W ..
", ..J Ol
-60 U S <c ,~
...... WI B
~alZON
"
CUMBEY & FAIR, INC.
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
ENGINEERING PLANNING LAND SURVEYING
/ / 2463 ENTERPRISE ROAD. CLEARWATER. FLORIDA 33763-1780 (727) 797-8882
job no. u:u; 115
description C\1t>.-L-El'S ~~ tut.kre- 'DI'-'-l:ps computed by ~ date '"' \I8ID~
"'"D"'lC:~IIJ t>.<S6 CA.\..c.~ sheet ., otZ- checked by date
- -~ "':ii; \"\1 e \, qt::; 0 ~ ;).p-. (~ .5 ~ t f-)
\C I'f'M.
~ r;;.(.; eA( ~ ( ~ 3. ~'
t:Pe 1"11-\, ~ ~~ \8 ~ ~z. .;. p. ~ T. (f!. ,4 ~J ~)
W ~1. """- \ "T'j
\l: ,G; 2.. - ~ G. f'T. "'I II, Iz.. 'I 20" -:::.. , 7(.. C ~.1 'T.
""f'L ......., "0 {!) w ~ ,..." "2<::
""'0;; ~ -- .~
Vt ~LL \Nl~ ::. \ \ (o~ (. ~.' :.or. -e ~ -'Ii: ~!:;
~,.. \o\- to ~ :..
~ I\..L wJ>.r f\ ~ L. ..., ,~ - ( ~'." 1(, ') ::. S f7G ~ ~.} r;
~"'" e:: _, ~ .'i , ( 8')l S e;) = .., ~4 ~ ';),J r,
b ~-
'Z A' "'1:: ~'P N )( S ~ "iE :i>. J fT' ( Aw. :)
- \"2 ~ ( (;), I :::,-, If>i e'J IDE ~
['R: ~( !.Ot ~\ .01-
-ji )....~ IE ~L-j ,. J~ ~ ~~ It- ~ to.:
~ f'R:,E:P'< ;. 'Z-' ij 5G>. P-r, (~ ....... I'~ )
~ ~ 1 No/H' 4 ~LJ ~. p,. ,( \ 'l rr/'I- ~ \0\11 ~-z 4 e.~ OS
~ 1"3- ~ &lOO s.e:. ; O.
t.I 51j.; t:::. -$~ rE r1 F~ ~ ~ I! ~ ~ \ "I (,N 6' : <: ',.1 II CF ~
l't ~E -;'"( D~ ~~' ,. " "",'" "'.\.0. ~
,z~ po ~ IA. . =.eel lJ1Z.. - 00:: ~.I:': D '\
"1a\. '~
::>., I \ CtJ 1=1- '~
"
CUMBEY & FAIR, INC.
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
ENGINEERING PLANNING LAND SURVEYING
)' J. 2463 ENTERPRISE ROAD. CLEARWATER. FLORIDA 33763.1790 (727) 797-8982
job no. ~ I r;;;,
description c1-\ ta.-u:;,-,e..;;. 01-.) W ~ iT=- "'Sf--W"DS computed by ~"""S
-,;,--e.t>-.,r-.3 A:~6 c..AL,e"';,. sheet "2. of 2. checked by
date <-\ \loe: \0':.
date
_ ,\t;:: ..-.j ~. ~" =,( )1a.~ k ;:.1>.1. 0;;..<;"
'P.., rrv_ 'P\I "".,- lL /1 f14 ~ G. ~ T. ~ O. ., I: ,~ L.\q "S
fze : U ~
OF E.~ ~ .ce- ~,~ )( t:), ~ .-
"De :I. "~~ "J:l,. ~ ~ )C. \ . 0 ;:. ~ P
It 3,~ -2:2 .:;, Q. ~ -r, " o. ~'1 '~ 14 ,I<: ,
L\~ ",C ~w :;.. 0. B,p
Q ,....... C III wI e;r e.'. c.. ~ ~d !o
'0 9.f )( 7,4 ) (t. ~A ~) \ ~ ;, ~ I I..) (~ T2
F ~. c ~S eo :as J;., -=- o. 1~ ).,( .
Q = ( L ~~ Jz.. tu~ t!!vt:. ~ (;; ~ "2. SS CJ :.s
14 = ( QI ::)1- )"2- ~ C :. '2., 5" (~ .~D
~ r 2. 5~'\ It~ .$ '(oB 0) f'J~ '- ~ 8. 0 Pr.
t- ,'2 '5 F,. .
t. 3~ "5.'f I L-L w} " ;L.
+ o. "2.~D H
~ f. Si:; \) ht..: 10
~r Hi 03 12:29p
A M ENGINEERING
561-745-0981
p.2
!J:>~
A. M. ENGINEERING AND TESTING, INC.
860 nJPITERPARKDRIVE, UNIT #1
JUPITER, FLORIDA33458
LOCAL OFFICE: (561) 745-1060 FAX: (561) 745-0981
(888) 339-s0IL
.,
DOUBLE RING INFILTRATION TEST
ASTM D 3385
Client:
Whitt: Sands L.L.C.
802 N. Belcher Road
Clearwater, Florida 33765
Chalets on White Sands
Clearwater, Florida
Project No:
03-1187
Project:
Location:
Report Date:
Test Date:
Technician:
April 14, 2003
March 6, 2003
Mark Hall
SOIL PROFILE
Test
Location:
(see Boring
Location
Plan)
E-l
Test was performed
3 ft. below existing
grade.
De th to 'Vater Table from Ground Surface (feet) 5
TEST DATA
Cylinder Sizes:
Outer Ring Diameter - 24.0 in
Inner Ring Diameter - 12.0 in
Height of Water in Rings (Head) - 2 in
Actual Elaosed Time (min) Volume of Water Flow Infiltration Rate
Time Total Interval To Maintain Head (inJ) (in/h." )
.9:00 a.m. a 0 - - -+---=--.-
9:45 a.m. 4S 4S See remarks na na
10:05 a.m. 65 20 5 gallons 1155 30.6
10:22 a.m. 82 17 5 gallons 1155 36.0
10:40 a.In. 100 18 5 gallons 1155 34.0 '"
10:57 a.m. 117 17 S gallons 1155 36.0
11: 15 a.m. 135 18 5 gallons 1155 34.0
11 :33 a.m. 153 18 5 gallons 1155 34.0
.--
11:51 a.m. 171 18 5 gallons 1155 34.0
"
Remarks: During the first 45 minutes ofthe test, several heights of head were tried. The volume of water
used was not recorded.
Distribution:
Client (3)
RGA/jh
Reviewed by:
A. M. ENCINEERINC AND TESTING, INC.
{f!iJ:,{L, :2'1/0 3
Florida Registration No. 51863
F:IC.OD. Job.\'\CII/IIbey & Fair103.1187 - Chalets on White Sands. Cle""vater - Double Ring Infil/ration Test - constant head.doc
'.
PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA - SHEET NUMBER 10
I
. .;t<:i 0 1;....::.,~J" .1 bi'.' i.,\. \y
, .' ..... ......"\ ..'..... i'/ Z '. ..' ,\, ,':'F, b~:\
f.;;, >. <C co'. ..i," II lA.
!'./." .., Ma'.:..'.:'
,I, ""il ,<'" ...... -I , ,( '';-,
", !,."p".:2;, i en'" .... ',,[ f~ ;'. . Ma
.' I ":"~Et;JTi~:" ,!.., ,.
'.:,'." ,': >'!j~r/~N '.....5, ....
<' ';', ' : ' ::;i'~'c::.. ",. ,: .~.. Ma
'",- .:;' ,,'-\;;:: : ::f, 'f ~J;:/:~/,\:::i.':'-:;7':,5< ',":." " ,',', ':,'i
;::"'3;;,:' ":/'(C,., ""',. ! J: .,'- ~,.
"':"};:;':};.:;;;;;",",'t... .,.1 ():-
"')'li;),:;,i;;~;"n;;;~'" I .....,. <C 5~ ~ '
'ii,;,:}'~;}';':';;'!./::':~:'~"l ~ ~' , " ,. .,~ /
,,,":::: I ,'-' ' ,
,. ..! .' lJ::' _Ma
~:,/:,,::;::';'>~\'~~~l>>~:~"-~: ,[ , ~
;'2%i~( J}<' ~ ... ~."'"
,; w il!:;; ~ '. ,..... ~.'.~~ :.::' .:':'
;' ,!.:: ....... ... , ,,7r :MEi
'. ,'-i, .:, oCt . ,.
'c' "", Ll.J Pa ; ,
,", .. ................. -.J ' ~:
. . Ub' "
, () ," :)
.....'.',. ~.
,.1 - Cc '."lLr
l!!>:IBeCJch
''':'.!'
',: :-:" 'I, ...... .
, i,i".".:
<t, :
..il.?:.,.'...'"
:;,".
,
"...,.,:i.
"",
".
:..' "
,,"""\
<'i,'
: ii:'; \
",:':" . ,\-... ",
:fl": "..,,-
'.".': ....,.....
,l..,~PI': :"'..'. '" -,'.",.'
~,'\('::;.i.{'>o >, '.' ..
........... ......./,:('.:"?,'.
, ........::.;.i..:'.q:t:,...,'....
:'i'i ClearwateT';~': p.
i:;,(;;,..,:-~. 'b'ass..
........... . <Iii"" '~"J";"~ "'. .
,i.... Z '..'
, Co"
::';? .. ~..,~:L.~.t, 4)';':.' .
,..;.:~~. "." "" :-., .
.l<~;" ~ '.
.r ,1' . .",i:...~...~r~t ;'t':~"}i': '.. '.. ""ii.'. ..............,.......
i ell . ..~~~M~.(~..>.
,';0, ,:',;1'."" ....... ,
........ .,~~~, ~!tr. .i: . ',x'. .( . CJ
'/ .'.;l~)"'" ,':.' /;/,....,...',..:'.:, ""',
I
...
::~
(;~
(<
"I
.... "."
::. .......
...'
,.""
"; ..' .......... ..."
~,~_ i~i;;:;\ 7~l~' ~~f~
'J6~' ;'\~~1" .~fii
Ma11 . 'I Malt "
~f' ~i ...... t~
" Ma',';
I
't~1\ '.
S
~"
J ~
\ ~ ,"
.. \ \'::.',
~. .~.~~~;.~C.
.,:-.. ~Ma
;' ~- .....
~, .
SD
b
tj, :-.tJb
f~7 '
, ti~-' E:,..
,'r'-:,
S{!:,-;..
:;:"~~ .:' - ~r, r~' . ~l .:.' ,..
I ,/1 !
~"'t~,
.'
:
1 "
,
~ if"
;..
Ma-
>> ....~
"',~ ~ j.!
; ,.
,~.<.
~ I
", Ma- ~
g;.;"",.:) I ~I
~~:.!:';.'.,!.."'"
. ", ".:-.~: ...:.-".- :.:...;.~.o:::.,_~~."
I 240000 FEET
, . <.':: .'
, '.'., .....
,,','
..:i,' .ii. '. (.<
: ..... ....,: .,,..,.,"
'........... " .'"."
,<'"i<r.....i. ......... .
'/ ......... ........ ....... ,.,
....). e......,...............,.........'...
T' .... ..A.......,'........'..............,'....,..
. ..,......,....... .'......... . '," ..... .......~
:;';".? '"i"o:.' ..' ......,,;,;. . -"
""-"'1' .. ',',. ........, .......
". '",,~:', ';"::"'0".."'"
s~~t~~:i~~~~~;~:~,'~~,:.'2:' '''i~,;
"', ":..'
. "'.": ""'.
. ....,...
'.....,...............,..
'c.
",,,:
!:',..,,:..../
i~. :'.
,,,'/'.',:
":'.':' .......
......"..
".
.....
; .,
VI!.
""i ....
,'.,:'.....
....,
;~.
.
...........'."....,....
'" .
.,. '
'.:.,......
::. : <;.' ), .
:,,~
@
~ , M
..
, ,
~:
~}:~.
'. '''.. l):~~',:"
* .:\9
>,;;~;; :~:
Jf :-~.:.~~ ~
"~~"
......
cl
"'1>:"
..:> . ..
". ,;:.';;
,
&.
'.'
.ii"Jt I'..
./f,'i!'tf.\iy'j';:;
.....". "t7 .~' ~ '''"
-. .] . :'"e~~,r ~. ~
~'f~'~'E'"
in 'Ub;,
t59O' ,: ~ ..". ,;.
~'" I~.',,"
: I ,,''': .".
'J 'wC.~ll"...:.E.:fA....Ri:W. r.~T.1
'(lp/ ~tM', '~':~;:"m~~)
~ "............."..." >; ./ ............,,:..:.......#~l::..:' --'C"':c .
, .... ...... ,...,:..... :Ui ' "'. ",.''','' ,.... '"., ;'
~t,,' ",.' .................... ',. ..i~?16, '. ;')"
, '.:, .,' '.1'~'.~~~,"~ ~:~",... ,~', ',-, !:~" :;;
i:,'i,:",,' .' "..~" -k, :;,'"';:: ., '; ,
. .... .....,'.~~' '.0,," :."" ,
':.............;;'..,;~I~:.''''..
~ ......... ." ........ . ,/~::~~?-:.:fft. ~:"
"{t'C",u, '.' .}",.... ..~.:"
. i,:;~t.;~(:2:~~V.':;~~:~/:,,::
, "'M":1" ''I;: ',. :r:'1^ #'fF
~~;~~~;:i:..~?~~:;: ~:.~...:~~:.?'~ .:
""I',"':",,}':" J"."....~: '':'''J aID
M"'-:y.,~f%:,;::-tr '''':i', C:I
a'--:II~~:if-";:'L:t }~..~.~~..~~...t;tl e
"':':\'fr'
1?~
,"
51)
~
....
I!r..q
"
_ t. -
'I
.( V7Y'(JNVN
........
I-~ ~~w
tu~~~1-~5~~
~~~~tti~~U)~
~~:~~:n5~~
~9~ocn~",~~
a:-0o5<:I:w<
~~~~;t~~~1j
t5Q5~~~~::~
"';NM.uiq:i"a;ai
"I,
An Equal
Opportunity
Employer
Ronnie E. Duncan
Chair, Pine lias
Thomas G. Dabney, II
Vice Chair, Sarasota
Heidi B. McCree
Secretary, Hillsborough
Watson L Haynes, II
Treasurer, Pinellas
Edward W. Chance
Manatee
Monroe "AI" Coogler
Citrus
Maggie N. Dominguez
Hillsborough
Pamela L Fentress
Highlands
Ronald C. Johnson
Polk
Janet D. Kovach
Hillsborough
John K. Renke, III
Pasco
E. D. "Sonny" Vergara
Executive Director
Gene A. Heath
. Assistant Executive Director
William S. Bilenky
General Counsel
Protecting '(our
Water Resources
/'
~(pI.pI17
SOtlth west Florida
Water Management District
~;"~~~-::;,,.,~..
",.'~~~~'~1i~~'I"~"'I-.", . .' -,~: ",' .;t:;.....j~.....
"~~~_~~l'\ -, r, ",~;<,.
2379 Broad ::Hreet, Brooksville, Florida 34604-6899
(352) 796-7211 or 1-800-423-1476 (FL only)
SUNCOM 628-4150 TOO only 1-800-231-6103 (FL only)
On the Internet at: WaterMatters.org
Tampa Service Office
7601 Highway 301 North
Tampa, Florida 33637-6759
(813) 985-7481 or
1-80Q..836-0797 (FL only)
SUNCOM 578-2070
Bartow Service Office
170 Century Boulevard
Bartow, Aorida 33830-7700
(863) 534-1448 or
1-800-492-7862 (FL only)
SUNCOM 572-8200
Sarasota Service Office
6750 Fruitville Road
Sarasota, Aorida 34240-9711
(941) 377-3722 or
1-800-320-3503 (FL only)
SUNCOM 531-6900
Lecanto Service Office
3600 West Sovereign Path
Suite 226
Lecanto, Aorida 34461.8070
(352) 527-8131
SUNCOM 667-3271
February 4, 2003
\
RECE\VED
FEB 0 ~ '2003
_CUMBEY & FAIR INC.
Uday Lele
White Sands L.L.C.
802 North Belcher Road
Clearwater, FL 33765
Subject:
Project Evaluation - No Permit Required
Project Name: Chalets on White Sands
Inquiry Number: 110416
County: Pinellas
SecfTwp/Rge: 5/29S/15E
LatitudelLongitude: 27059'21.15"/82049'38.73"
Reference:
Rule 400-4.041, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.)
Dear Mr. Lele:
The District has reviewed the information you submitted for the project referenced above and has
determined that an Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) will not be required for the site re-
development resulting in a 1,039 square foot reduction in vehicular use area.
The information received by the District will be kept in the Tampa Service Office to support the
District's determination regarding your project. The District's determination that your project does not
require an ERP is only applicable pursuant to the statutes and rules in effect at the time the information
was submitted and may not be valid in the event subsequent changes occur in the applicable rules
and statutes. Additionally, this notification does not mean that the District has determined that your
project is permanently exempt from permitting requirements. Any subsequent change you make in
the project's operation may necessitate further evaluation or permitting by the District. Therefore, you
are advised to contact the District before beginning the project and before beginning any activity which
is not specifically described in your submittal. Your timely pursuit of this activity is encouraged to avoid
any potential rule changes that could affect your request.
This letter constitutes notice of final agency action of the project referenced above. You or any person
whose substantial interests are affected by the District's action regarding a permit may request an
administrative hearing in accordance with Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.S., and Chapter 28-106,
F.A.C., of the Uniform Rules of Procedure. A request for hearing must: (1) explain how the substantial
interests of each person requesting the hearing will be affected by the District's action, or proposed
action, (2) state all material facts disputed by the person requesting the he~ring or state that there are
no disputed facts, and (3) otherwise comply with Chapter 28-106, F.A.C. Copies of Sections
28-106.201 and 28-106.301, F.A.C. are enclosed for your reference. A request for hearing must be
filed with (received by) the Agency Clerk of the District at the District's Brooksville address within 21
days of receipt of this notice. Receipt is deemed to be the fifth day afterthe date on which this notice
is deposited in the United States mail. Failure to file a request for hearing within this time period shall
constitute a waiver of any right you or such person may have to request a hearing under Sections
I
l~
Uday Lele, White Sands L.L.C.
Page 2
February4,2003
120.569 and 120.57, F.S. Mediation pursuant to Section 120.573, F.S., to settle an administrative dispute regarding
the District's action in this matter is not available.
Enclosed is a "Noticing Packet" that provides information regarding District Rule, Section 40D-1.1 01 0, FAC., which
addresses the notification of persons whose substantial interests may be affected by the District's action in this
matter. The packet contains guidelines on how to provide notice of the District's action, and a notice that you may
use.
If you have questions regarding this determination, please contact Richard M. Alt, P.E., at the Tampa Service Office,
extension 2045. Please reference the Project Name and Number in future communications concerning this project.
Sincer/) A J? /"::/:' r .
~
Alba E. Mas, P.E., Director
Tampa Regulation Department
AEM:dsw
Enclosures:
Noticing Packet (42.00-046)
Sections 28-106.201 and 28-106.301, F.A.C.
Inquiry No. 110416
USACOE
John Steward, P .E., Cumbey and Fair, Inc.
cc:
.
.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4865
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
November 22, 2002
Mr. Uday Lele
White Sands, LLC
802 North Belcher Road
Clearwater, FL 33765
RE: Development Order regarding case FLD2002-09031 at 14 Somerset Street
Dear Mr. Lele:
This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206 D.6 of the Community
Development Code. On November 19, 2002, the Community Development Board (CDB)
reviewed your application to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet
to six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.A1., reduce the front (south) setback along
Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56
feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-404.F. The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-
unit condominium building of 62,692 square feet and five stories above parking. The
Community Development Board APPROVED the application with the following bases and
conditions:
Bases for approval:
1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project
per Section 2-404.F.
2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913.
3. The application is consistent with the "Old Florida District" in Beach by Design.
4. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts.
BRIAN). AUNGST, MAYOR-COMMISSIONER
WHITNEY GRAY, VICE MAYOR-COMMISSIONER HoYT HAMILTON, COMMISSIONER
FRANK HIBBARD, COMMISSIONER * BlI.L)ONSON, COMMISSIONER
, I
"1:'''11''-1 t;"'n'r'I."'I.~I!.I'T' AP\.'....... ACI:'Tnr..'(A'T'nTI:' Ar'T'lr"l.?I C....r\T"'n~n"
.
.
November 22, 2002
Lele - Page Two
Conditions of approval:
1. That the density of the site be limited to 15 dwellings units (30 dwelling units per acre);
2. That the height be limited to 56 feet as measured from base flood elevation;
3. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted
or as modified by the CDB;
4. That should addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different
from the one approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be
resubmitted to the Board for review;
5. That all Fire Code requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry system
and a knox key box on the building for emergency egress; and
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code.
Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of
Flexible Development approval (November 19, 2003) and all required certificates of occupancy
shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do
not change with successive owners. The Community Development Board may grant an
extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of
validity.
Please be aware that the issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity
to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate
the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter
with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval.
In addition, please be aware that under the provisions of Section 4-502.B. an appeal of a Level
Two approval (Flexible Development) may be initiated by the applicant or any person granted
party status with regards to the property (which is the subject of the approval) within 14 days of
the date of the CDB decision. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of
the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case will
expire on December 5,2002.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Mark Parry, Planner at 727.562.4558.
Zoning information is available through the City's web site at www.clearwater-fl.com.
Very truly yours,
~.~
Cynthia H. Tarapani, AICP
Planning Director
S:\Planning DepartmenflC D HlFle:Nnactive or Finished Applications\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands - Approved\Somerset 14
DEVELOPMENT ORDER. doc
.
.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTIE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4865
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
November 22, 2002
Mr. Uday Lele
White Sands, LLC
802 North Belcher Road
Clearwater, FL 33765
RE: Development Order regarding case FlD2002-09031 at 14 Somerset Street
Dear Mr. Lele:
This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206 D.6 of the Community
Development Code. On November 19, 2002, the Community Development Board (CDB)
reviewed your application to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet
to six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.Al., reduce the front (south) setback along
Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56
feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-404.F. The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-
unit condominium building of 62,692 square feet and five stories above parking. The
Community Development Board APPROVED the application with the following bases and
conditions:
Bases for approval:
1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project
per Section 2-404.F.
2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913.
3. The application is consistent with the "Old Florida District" in Beach by Design.
4. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts.
BRIAN]. AUNGST, MAYOR-COMMISSIONER
WHITNEY GRAY,VICE MAYOR-COMMISSIONER HoYT HAMILTON, COMMISSIONER
FRANK HIBBARD, COMMISSIONER * BILL]ONSON, COMMISSIONER
, I
1'J:'r.YIAT t"..AOTr\....'7t.I.I:'l\I'T' Al\Tr'\ Ar.Cl0"'A'T'J\It:' Ar"T'fr't.l\! 'C7t..lnlr\Vt:'D'1
.
.
November 22, 2002
Lele - Page Two
Conditions of approval:
1. That the density of the site be limited to 15 dwellings units (30 dwelling units per acre);
2. That the height be limited to 56 feet as measured from base flood elevation;
3. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted
or as modified by the CDB;
4. That should addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different
from the one approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be
resubmitted to the Board for review;
5. That all Fire Code requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry system
and a knox key box on the building for emergency egress; and
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code.
Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of
Flexible Development approval (November 19, 2003) and all required certificates of occupancy
shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do
not change with successive owners. The Community Development Board may grant an
extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of
validity.
Please be aware that the issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity
to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate
the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter
with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval.
In addition, please be aware that under the provisions of Section 4-502.B. an appeal of a Level
Two approval (Flexible Development) may be initiated by the applicant or any person granted
party status with regards to the property (which is the subject of the approval) within 14 days of
the date of the CDB decision. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of
the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case will
expire on December 5,2002.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Mark Parry, Planner at 727.562.4558.
Zoning information is available through the City's website at www.clearwater-fl.com.
Very truly yours,
~.~.
Cynthia H. Tarapani, AICP
Planning Director
S:\Planning DepartmenflC D B\FlexVnactive or Finished Applications\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands - Approved\Somerset 14
DEVELOPMENT ORDER. doc
.
.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLFARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUIWING, 100 SOUTH MYRUE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4865
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
November 22, 2002
Mr. Uday Lele
White Sands, LLC
802 North Belcher Road
Clearwater, FL 33765
RE: Development Order regarding case FLD2002-09031 at 14 Somerset Street
Dear Mr. Lele:
This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206 D.6 of the Community
Development Code. On November 19, 2002, the Community Development Board (CDB)
reviewed your application to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet
to six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.Al., reduce the front (south) setback along
Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56
feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-404.F. The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-
unit condominium building of 62,692 square feet and five stories above parking. The
Community Development Board APPROVED the application with the following bases and
conditions:
Bases for approval:
1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project
per Section 2-404.F.
2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913.
3. The application is consistent with the "Old Florida District" in Beach by Design.
4. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts.
BRIAN]. AUNGST, MAYOR-COMMISSIONER
WHITNEY GRAY, VICE MAYOR-COMMISSIONER HoYT HAMILTON, COMMISSIONER
FRANK HIBBARD, COMMISSIONER * BILL]ONSON, COMMISSIONER
~--.LL
"H"IillAl--.RU.D.l.nVMh'.!'I.tT _AMD. ~~CTIJ::}J\l-.F--.AA...OILnl1.~l
.
.
November 22, 2002
Lele - Page Two
Conditions of approval:
1. That the density of the site be liinited to 15 dwellings units (30 dwelling units per acre);
2. That the height be limited to 56 feet as measured from base flood elevation;
3. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted
or as modified by the CDB;
4. That should addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different
from the one approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be
resubmitted to the Board for review;
5. That all Fire Code requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry system
and a knox key box on the building for emergency egress; and
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code.
Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of
Flexible Development approval (November 19, 2003) and all required certificates of occupancy
shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do
not change with successive owners. The Community Development Board may grant an
extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of
validity.
Please be aware that the issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity
to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate
the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter
with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval.
In addition, please be aware that under the provisions of Section 4-502.B. an appeal of a Level
Two approval (Flexible Development) may be initiated by the applicant or any person granted
party status with regards to the property (which is the subject of the approval) within 14 days of
the date of the CDB decision. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of
the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case will
expire on December 5,2002.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Mark Parry, Planner at 727.562.4558.
Zoning information is available through the City's website at www.clearwater-fl.com.
Very truly yours,
~.~.
Cynthia H. Tarapani, AICP
Planning Director
S:\Planning Departmenf\C D B\FlexVnactive or Finished Applications\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands - ApproveillSomerset 14
DEVELOPMENT ORDER. doc
.
.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUIlDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTIE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (]27) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4865
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
November 22, 2002
Mr. Uday Lele
White Sands, LLC
802 North Belcher Road
Clearwater, FL 33765
RE: Development Order regarding case FLD2002-09031 at 14 Somerset Street
Dear Mr. Lele:
This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206 D.6 of the Community
Development Code. On November 19, 2002, the Community Development Board (CDB)
reviewed your application to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet
to six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.Al., reduce the front (south) setback along
Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56
feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-404.F. The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-
unit condominium building of 62,692 square feet and five stories above parking. The
Community Development Board APPROVED the application with the following bases and
conditions:
Bases for approval:
1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project
per Section 2-404.F.
2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913.
3. The application is consistent with the "Old Florida District" in Beach by Design.
4. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts.
BRIAN). AUNGST, MAYOR-COMMISSIONER
WHITNEY GRAY, VICE MAYOR-COMMISSIONER HoYT HAMILTON, COMMISSIONER
FRANK HIBBARD, COMMISSIONER * BILL)ONSON, COMMISSIONER
!lPnl I^ I kA.ADT tl.VlI..fCI\IT A ",!n A I:'I:'tDU AT'nlC 4rTTr\I\T kA,(DI r\VI:'O"
.
.
November 22, 2002
Lele - Page Two
Conditions of approval:
1. That the density of the site be limited to 15 dwellings units (30 dwelling units per acre);
2. That the height be limited to 56 feet as measured from base flood elevation;
3. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted
or as modified by the CDB;
4. That should addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different
from the one approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be
resubmitted to the Board for review;
5. That all Fire Code requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry system
and a knox key box on the building for emergency egress; and
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code.
Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of
Flexible Development approval (November 19, 2003) and all required certificates of occupancy
shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do
not change with successive owners. The Community Development Board may grant an
extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of
validity.
Please be aware that the issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity
to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate
the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter
with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval.
In addition, please be aware that under the provisions of Section 4-502.B. an appeal of a Level
Two approval (Flexible Development) may be initiated by the applicant or any person granted
party status with regards to the property (which is the subject of the approval) within 14 days of
the date of the CDB decision. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of
the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case will
expire on December 5,2002.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Mark Parry, Planner at 727.562.4558.
Zoning information is available through the City's web site at www.clearwater-fl.com.
Very truly yours,
~.~.
Cynthia H. Tarapani, AICP
Planning Director
S:\Planning Departmenf\C D B\FleX\Inactive or Finished Applications\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands - Approved\Somerset 14
DEVELOPMENT ORDER. doc
.
.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SmITH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4865
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
November 22, 2002
Mr. Uday Lele
White Sands, LLC
802 North Belcher Road
Clearwater, FL 33765
RE: Development Order regarding case FLD2002-09031 at 14 Somerset Street
Dear Mr. Lele:
This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206 D.6 of the Community
Development Code. On November 19, 2002, the Community Development Board (CDB)
reviewed your application to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet
to six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.Al., reduce the front (south) setback along
Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56
feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-404.F. The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-
unit condominium building of 62,692 square feet and five stories above parking. The
Community Development Board APPROVED the application with the following bases and
conditions:
Bases for approval:
1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project
per Section 2-404.F.
2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913.
3. The application is consistent with the "Old Florida District" in Beach by Design.
4. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts.
BRIAN J. AUNGST, MAYOR-COMMISSIONER
WHITNEY GRAY, VICE MAYOR-COMMISSIONER HoYT HAMILTON, COMMISSIONER
FRANK HIBBARD, COMMISSIONER (i) BlI.LjONSON, COMMISSIONER
1'kr'\J1Al h"1\.JlDTf'l..'\Jl.JlI:'''''''T' Ar..T~ A.....c..c..t.n.ruA-Tn.LI:.'_--.Ar:.Trr.::),J'\__t RII.A.nLcn.LI:::'D~_
.
.
November 22, 2002
Lele - Page Two
Conditions of approval:
1. That the density of the site be limited to 15 dwellings units (30 dwelling units per acre);
2. That the height be limited to 56 feet as measured from base flood elevation;
3. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted
or as modified by the CDB;
4. That should addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different
from the one approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be
resubmitted to the Board for review;
5. That all Fire Code requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry system
and a knox key box on the building for emergency egress; and
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code.
Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of
Flexible Development approval (November 19, 2003) and all required certificates of occupancy
shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do
not change with successive owners. The Community Development Board may grant an
extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of
validity.
Please be aware that the issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity
to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate
the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter
with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval.
In addition, please be aware that under the provisions of Section 4-502.B. an appeal of a Level
Two approval (Flexible Development) may be initiated by the applicant or any person granted
party status with regards to the property (which is the subject of the approval) within 14 days of
the date of the CDB decision. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of
the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case will
expire on December 5,2002.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Mark Parry, Planner at 727.562.4558.
Zoning information is available through the City's website at www.clearwater-fl.com.
Very truly yours,
~.~.
Cynthia H. Tarapani, AICP
Planning Director
S:\Planning Departmenf\C D B\FleJNnactive or Finished Applications\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands - Approved\Somerset 14
DEVELOPMENT ORDER. doc
.
.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTI.E AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4865
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
November 22, 2002
Mr. Uday Lele
White Sands, LLC
802 North Belcher Road
Clearwater, FL 33765
RE: Development Order regarding case FlD2002-09031 at 14 Somerset Street
Dear Mr. Lele:
This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206 D.6 of the Community
Development Code. On November 19, 2002, the Community Development Board (CDB)
reviewed your application to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet
to six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.Al., reduce the front (south) setback along
Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56
feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-404.F. The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-
unit condominium building of 62,692 square feet and five stories above parking. The
Community Development Board APPROVED the application with the following bases and
conditions:
Bases for approval:
1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project
per Section 2-404.F.
2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913.
3. The application is consistent with the "Old Florida District" in Beach by Design.
4. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts.
I
I
j i I
BRIAN). AUNGST, MAYOR-COMMISSIONER
WHITNEY GRAY, VICE MAYOR-COMMISSIONER HoYT HAMILTON, COMMISSIONER
FRANK HIBBARD, COMMISSIONER * BILL JONSON, COMMISSIONER
"1:'r-.TIAT t:;'lI..fnlr>,"""r.'''''''''' ."',..... A T:'T:'ln. " A 'T'n rr ArT'''''''''''! 1:'1l."Yn.......'TT~n"
.
.
November 22, 2002
Lele - Page Two
Conditions of approval:
1. That the density of the site be limited to 15 dwellings units (30 dwelling units per acre);
2. That the height be limited to 56 feet as measured from base flood elevation;
3. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted
or as modified by the CDB;
4. That should addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different
from the one approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be
resubmitted to the Board for review;
5. That all Fire Code requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry system
and a knox key box on the building for emergency egress; and
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code.
Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for_ a bug~ing permit shall be made within one year of
Flexible Development approval (November 19, 2003) and all required certificates of occupancy
shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do
not change with successive owners. The Community Development Board may grant an
extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of
validity.
Please be aware that the issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity
to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate
the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter
with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval.
In addition, please be aware that under the provisions of Section 4-502.B. an appeal of a Level
Two approval (Flexible Development) may be initiated by the applicant or any person granted
party status with regards to the property (which is the subject of the approval) within 14 days of
the date of the CDB decision. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of
the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case will
expire on December 5,2002.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Mark Parry, Planner at 727.562.4558.
Zoning information is available through the City's website at www.clearwater-fl.com.
Very truly yours,
~.~
Cynthia H. Tarapani, AICP
Planning Director
S:\Planning Departmenf\C D B\Flex\Inactive or Finished Applications\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands - Approved\Somerset 14
DEVELOPMENT ORDER. doc
II
.
.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLFARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (127) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4865
PlANNING DEPARTMENT
November 22, 2002
Mr. Uday Lele
White Sands, LLC
802 North Belcher Road
Clearwater, FL 33765
FILE
RE: Development Order regarding case FT 0?00'7-09031 at 14 Somerset Street
Dear Mr. Lele:
This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206 D.6 of the Community
Development Code. On November 19, 2002, the Community Development Board (CDB)
reviewed your application to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet
to six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.Al., reduce the front (south) setback along
Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56
feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-404.F. The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-
unit condominium building of 62,692 square feet and five stories above parking. The
Community Development Board APPROVED the application with the following bases and
conditions:
Bases for approval:
1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project
per Section 2-404.F.
2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913.
3. The application is consistent with the "Old Florida District" in Beach by Design.
4. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts.
BRIAN]. AUNGST, MAYOR-COMMISSIONER
WHITNEY GRAY, VICE MAYOR-COMMISSIONER HoYT HAMILTON, COMMISSIONER
FRANK HIBBARD, COMMISSIONER * BlI.LjONSON, COMMISSIONER
'I"C..........,.. t:".ru........'n..ro....'T' .......... A..........n...........n..... Ar-r-ro...,......, '[:"..n..,....'T'I~n'l
.
.
November 22, 2002
Lele - Page Two
Conditions of approval:
1. That the density of the site be limited to 15 dwellings units (30 dwelling units per acre);
2. That the height be limited to 56 feet as measured from base flood elevation;
3. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted
or as modified by the CDB;
4. That should addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different
from the one approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be
resubmitted to the Board for review;
5. That all Fire Code requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry system
and a knox key box on the building for emergency egress; and
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code.
" .
Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a buqding permit shall be made within one year of
Flexible Development approval (November 19, 2003) and all required certificates of occupancy
shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do
not change with successive owners. The Community Development Board may grant an
extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of
validity.
Please be aware that the issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity
to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate
the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter
with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval.
In addition, please be aware that under the provisions of Section 4-502.B. an appeal of a Level
Two approval (Flexible Development) may be initiated by the applicant or any person granted
party status with regards to the property (which is the subject of the approval) within 14 days of
the date of the CDB decision. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of
the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case will
expire on December 5, 2002.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Mark Parry, Planner at 727.562.4558.
Zoning information is available through the City's website at www.clearwater-fl.com.
Very truly yours,
~.~.
Cynthia H. Tarapani, AICP
Planning Director
S:\Planning Departmenf\C D B\FleXllnactive or Finished Applications\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands - Approved\Somerset 14
DEVELOPMENT ORDER. doc
II
.
.
,1"""".
t.I~\:.j:\LOF 71/;-<>:....".
\._\<l)f,/f'UJIII~~"
..'L-.....,.f . II_."/~_
.. ~", I !I}fM-''-'''
....p;:,.~ ,\ 1/ .r ." .':, '"" '"<.
.., -.';"/--' .. , . 100
'-'C"':I~'~'5=C"i
~r:~ ~~_ ~~~e
~~~.;..~~.~:=- "~~~
.... 7;;-'--""'"',.. ','
~ ~rJ.'4"~#-#.Ja(--' ~v \11
.,p-"':......J/TE~,.lf..
"~.iTI.'~
CITY OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, 'CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (727) 562-4800 FAX (727) 562-4825
PARKS AND RECREATION
DEPARTMENT
October 7, 2002
Mr. Uday Lele
White Sands LLC
802 N. Belcher Rd.
Clearwater, FL 33765 F D l IE
Re: Chalets on White Sands Condominiums, 14 Somerset St., FLULUU2-090j 1
Dear Mr. Lele:
According to the current Recreation and Open Space Land Dedication Ordinance, the above referenced project
will be required to satisfy the Open Space, Recreation Land and Recreation Facilities dedication requirement
prior to issuance of any building permits or final plat, whichever occurs first.
In order to determine the amount owed, the developer or representative should complete the top portion of the
attached form and return it to the City of Clearwater Parks and Recreation Department with verification of the
just value for the land only according to the current year's property tax assessment. Also, clarification will be
needed on the existing guest rooms or residential units (4 hoteVmotel guest rooms = 1 residential unit) to be
able to provide credit for the existing structure.
Please note, this dedication requirement could be a substantial amount and an impact to your project.
Therefore, we encourage you to contact Debbie Richter at 562-4817 as soon as possible to estimate the
assessment and to answer any questions.
Sincerely,
~(4'c~ ~
Art Kader
Assistant Director/Planning, Projects & Programs Group
FILE
Attachment: Open Space/Recreation Impact Worksheet
Code of Ordinances, Chapter 54, Recreation and Open Space Land Dedication
cc: Debbie Richter, Management Analyst, Parks & Recreation
Lisa Fierce, Assistant Planning Director
Robert Hays, Development Services Coordinator
BRIAN J. AUNGST, MAYOR-COMMISSIONER
WHITNEY GRAY, VICE MAYOR-COMMISSIONER HoYT HAMILTON, COMMISSIONER
FRANK HIBBARD, COMMISSIONER (t) Bn.LJONSON, COMMISSIONER
"EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER"
.11
,
." .
CITY OF CLEARWATER
ftlflfJr.fY~;.
:Q~'t.~LOF r/f?~~"",
~~~"?L(fTOr",..,....~~.,..~
~~" I ~~~,..
4lt Q 'tt..,- \ J /' \ r' ~ ~ ~
'" ~'_ _',,"; 'I. ~
..~, -- 5C~
..~';. =- ~.~
_TO ~ ~~'_.~ ~"
':.~.~.~.:-.~:::." ~'~....'
~1AfE~~~~\\
~-~L.JCL'{I.
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTIE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4865
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
September 24, 2002
Mr. Uday Lele
White Sands, LLC
802 North Belcher Road
Clearwater, FL 33765
RE: Application for Flexible Development approval to increase the height of a wall
within the front setback from three feet to six feet under the provisions of Section
3-804.AI., reduce the front (south) setback along Somerset Street from 25 feet to
10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56 feet (as measured
from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-404.F. within the "Old Florida District" of Beach by
Design.
Dear Mr. Lele:
The Planning staff has reviewed your application for Flexible Development approval to
increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet to six feet under the
provisions of Section 3-804.Al., reduce the front (south) setback along Somerset Street
from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56 feet (as
measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the
provisions of Section 2-404.F. within the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design. The
proposal includes a I5-unit condominium development within a single, six story, .
square foot building 56 feet in height (as measured from the base flood elevation.
After a preliminary review of the submittedl!<WTnM!!staff has determined that the
application is generally complete. The applica~entered into the Department's
filing system and assigned the case number: FLR7Q02-0903I.
BRIAN J" AUNGST, MAYOR~COMMISSIONER
WHITNEY GRAY, VICE MAYOR-COMMISSIONER HoYT HAMILTON, COMMISSIONER
FRANK HIBBARD, COMMISSIONER * Bn.I.JONSON, COMMISSIONER
"EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER"
i
~v.....
.
.
,
September 24, 2002
Lele - Page Two
The following items/data need to be submitted and/or clarified prior to the DRC meeting:
1. Provide the existing and anticipated value of the site;
2. Provide the existing number of units currently on the site and indicate whether
they are overnight accommodations or residential in nature (provide a break down
of the number of units within each structure)
3. Indicate the minimum distance from any other building the proposed structure will
be;
4. Provide the gross floor area of the proposed building;
5. Indicate whether any storage spaces will be provided for residents onsite;
6. Indicate if the proposed swimming pool is above ground or in ground;
7. Provide the gross floor area for each existing structure;
8. Provide the height of each existing structure;
9. Clarify where fencing and/or walls will be located on the site. If so, details,
including height, materials and colors, will be required;
10. Provide the following required Residential Infill Project criteria:
a) The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is
otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development
standards;
b) The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill
project will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties;
c) The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in the
district;
d) The uses within the residential infill project are compatible with adjacent
lands uses;
e) The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill
project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development;
t) The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and
function which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of
the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole;
g) Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street
parking are justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate
vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as
a whole.
11. A sidewalk, four feet in ~~dth'wiU~b~ required along Somerset Street;
12. Provide existing ISR; ~;:;. ". :::.,.-~~
13. Indicate the number of e~~Rgptlfllciflg spaces;
14. A landscape plan indicating proposed stormwater facilities; and
15. Provide a narrative indicating how the requirements of Beach by Design
guidelines are being met and, specifically, how the requirements of the Old
Florida District are being met.
~
.,
.1
,
.
.
September 24, 2002
Lele - Page Three
The Development Review Committee (DRC) will review the application for sufficiency
on October 10, 2002 in the Planning Department conference room - Room 216 - on the
second floor of the Municipal Services Building. The building is located at 100 South
Myrtle Avenue in downtown Clearwater. Please call Sherrie Nicodemus, Administrative
Analyst at 727.562.4582 no earlier than one week prior to the meeting date for the
approximate time that your case will be reviewed. You or your representative must be
present to answer any questions that the committee may have regarding your application.
Additional comments will be generated by the DRC at the time of the meeting.
Please be aware that 15 additional sets of the complete resubmittal of all required
information, to include copies of the application, survey, site plan (with any required
changes as applicable), affidavit of authorization, etc. will be required by October 18,
2002 in order to be placed on the November 19, 2002 Community Development Board
(CDB) agenda.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 727-562-4558.
Sincerely yours,
______--J
y .~/
Mark Parry
Planner
S:\Planning Department\C D B\Aex\Pending cases\Up for the next DRC\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands\Somerset 14
complete.doc
.
.
CDB Meeting Date: November 19. 2002
Case Number: FLD2002-09031
Agenda Item: B3
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
OWNER:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
REQUEST:
PLANS REVIEWED:
SITE INFORMATION:
PROPERTY SIZE:
CBGAM, Inc.
Mr. Uday Lele; White Sands, LLC.
14 Somerset Street
Flexible Development approval to increase the height of a wall
within the front setback along Somerset Street from three feet to six
feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.A.l, reduce the front
(south) setback along Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to
building), and increase the height of a building with attached
dwellings from 30 feet to 56 feet (as measured from base flood
elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the provisions
of Section 2-404.F.
Site and landscape plans submitted by Cumby and Fair, Inc.
Architectural plans submitted by John Marshall Scott.
0.50 acres; 21,884 square feet
DIMENSIONS OF SITE: Approximately 249 feet of width by 87 feet of depth
PROPERTY USE:
Current Use:
Proposed Use:
PLAN CATEGORY:
ZONING DISTRICT:
Overnight accommodations
Attached dwellings
RH, Residential High District Classification
MHDR, Medium High Density Residential District
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 1
j i i
.
.
"........
ADJACENT LAND USES: North: Detached dwellings
West: Gulf of Mexico
East: Attached dwellings
South: Attached dwellings
CHARACTER OF THE
IMMEDIA TE VICINITY: Multi- and single-family residential uses dominate the immediate
vicinity.
ANALYSIS:
The 0.50-acre site is located on the north side of Somerset Street approximately 150 feet west of
Mandalay Avenue. The site, initially developed in 1925, is located within transitional area on
Clearwater Beach marking the boundary between single-family dwellings to the north and multi-
family and overnight accommodation uses to the south. The site is located directly along the Gulf
of Mexico. An unimproved right-of-way, Beach Drive exists along the west site of the site. The
site contains two structures with a total of nine hotel units. A two-story building, approximately
24 feet in height with approximately 2,263 square feet of area, is located centrally on the property
and contains seven dwelling units. A second, one-story building, approximately 23 feet in height
with approximately 1,922 square feet of area, is located on the east portion of the site and contains
two dwelling units. There are parking spaces that are partially on the site and partially in the right-
of-way.
The site is located within the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design which designates the area
for residential reuse with multi-family townhomes and condominiums. The Plan recommends low
to midrise development. The character of the area is of modest attached dwellings and overnight
accommodations. There is significant redevelopment potential in the area.
The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-unit condominium building of
62,692 square feet and five stories above parking. The proposed building will be located
approximately 10 feet from the side (north and east) property lines, 25 feet from the front (east)
property line along Beach Drive (unimproved) and 10 feet from the front (south) property line
along Somerset Street.
The applicant seeks to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet to six
feet, reduce the front (south) setback along Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building)
and increase the height from 30 feet to 56 feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a
Residential Infill Project. Attached dwellings under the Flexible Standard Development
provisions are permitted to be up to 50 feet in height and may have front setbacks reduced to 15
feet. This site is located within a flood zone (zone VE), and the requested height is 56 feet (as
measured from the base flood elevation of 14 feet) with five floors above one floor of parking. By
Code, height is measure from base flood elevation. The front (south) setback request of 10 feet
and a height greater than 50 feet requires that the application be reviewed as part of a Residential
Infill Project request.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 2
.
.
One level of under-structure parking will be provided and will include 28 spaces that exceed Code
requirements of 23 spaces. Access to the site is proposed along Somerset Street at two gated
entrance/exits.
The Mediterranean architecture of the building will include neutral-color stucco, terracotta color
barrel tile roof, and a significant number of windows and balconies on all elevations. The flat roof
has been designed to minimize views of the mechanical equipment and incorporates the use of
cupola-type enclosures. The building compliments the vision of the "Old Florida District". It will
serve as an appropriate transition use from the more intensely developed area to the south,
consisting of a variety of overnight accommodation, retail, restaurant and other non-residential
uses, to the single-family neighborhood to the north.
A white, aluminum picket-style fence, 42-inches in height will be located around the perimeter of
the pool which is to be located along the Gulf side of the building. A masonry wall will taper from
six feet in height to four feet, extending from the south fa~ade of the building on either side of the
main entrance. It will continue to the east and west along Somerset Street for approximately 12
feet. The wall will have a stucco finish painted to match the primary color of the building. It is
designed to screen the trash staging area and provide space for building identification. An awning
will cover the main entryway.
The landscape plan exceeds the requirements of Code. This includes a mixture of various trees,
shrubs, palms and annuals. A sidewalk, four-feet in width will be provided along Somerset Street.
The sidewalk will include a distressed finish. The sidewalk will connect with an existing sidewalk
to the east. It will provide for continued public access across the frontage of the site to the Gulf.
Amenities include an in-ground swimming pool along the gulf (west side). Roof drains will be
routed through a proposed storm water vault which will include a filtration system. A Code-
compliant method of treating paved, vehicular use areas must be provided to satisfy stormwater
management criteria, prior to the issuance of any permits, and the applicant is noticed that this
could adversely impact the site design. As provided in Section 4-406 of the Code, should
addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different from the one
approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be resubmitted to the Board
for review.
Fire Department requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry system and a
knox key box on the building for emergency egress, have been noted on the plan. Solid Waste
Department requirements have been met. Trash will be collected within the building and moved to
a staging area by the complex staff on pick up days.
CODE ENFORCEMENT ANALYSIS
There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 3
.
.
A. COMPLIANCE WITH MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL STANDARD IN
THE MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (Section 2-401.1):
STANDARD REQillREDI EXISTING PROPOSED IN
PERMITTED COMPLIANCE?
DENSITY 15 dwelling units Nine dwelling 15 dwelling Yes
(dwelling units (30 dulac) uni ts units (30
per acre) dwelling units
per acre)
IMPERVIOUS 0.85 0.54 0.71 Yes
SURFACE
RA TIO
B. FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL INFILL
PROJECTS IN THE MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (Section
2-404):
STANDARD PERMITTEDI EXISTING PROPOSED IN
REQillRED COMPLIANCE?
LOT AREA N/A 21,884 square 21,884 square Yes
(minimum) feet feet
LOT WIDTH N/A 249 feet 249 feet Yes
(minimum)
FRONT 10 - 25 feet South: 10 feet South: 10 feet (to Yes
SETBACK (to building building
West: 36 feet (to West: 25 feet (to
building) building)
REAR o - 15 feet N/A* N/A* Yes
SETBACK
SIDE o - 10 feet North: zero feet North: 10 feet (to Yes
SETBACK (to building) building)
East: three feet East: 10 feet (to
(to building) building)
HEIGHT 30 feet** 24 feet** 56 feet** Yes**
maximum
PARKING 1.5 spaces per 12 spaces 28 spaces (1.86 Yes * * *
SPACES unit (23 spaces spaces per
minimum based on 15 unit)***
units)
***
Comer lots, under the provisions of Section 3-903.D., have side and front setbacks only.
The development standards for residential infill pro~cts are guidelines and may be varied
based on the criteria specified in Section 2-404.F. (~~")
The minimum development standards for attached dwellings are 1.5 parking spaces per
unit (23 spaces). The applicant has provided 28 spaces, exceeding the minimum
requirements of Code.
*
**
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-0903l - Page 4
.
.
C. FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA FOR RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECT IN THE
MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (Section 2-404.F):
1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is
otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development
standards;
The subject property was developed during the mid-1920's and redeveloped during the
mid-1950's. The area is intensely developed with predominantly multi-family and
overnight accommodation uses to the south and east. The area to the north has been
developed with single-family dwellings. A variety of non-residential uses including
restaurants, offices and retail sales and service exist to the south. The proposal includes the
demolition of the two existing, structures and constructing a single, residential building.
The reductions in setbacks will provide a building similar is size and scale to other
buildings along Somerset Street. The increase in height is necessary to provide a viable
product and allows for the placement of parking underneath the building. Additional
upscale residential dwellings are an important component of a healthy mix of uses in this
area and encouraged by the "Old Florida District" and Beach by Design. This use will also
stabilize and support other service uses nearby.
2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill project
will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties;
The ultimate redevelopment of this site will likely enhance abutting properties. The
buildings are approximately 50 years old. The current assessed valuation of the site is $2.4
million. The anticipated value of the site is expected to be in excess of $14,800,000.
3. The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in the district;
The site is zoned Medium High Density Residential District and the proposed use will be
in compliance with the zoning. Surrounding properties include residential and overnight
accommodations. The proposed development will result in a development in keeping with
the intended character of the "Old Florida District" within Beach by Design.
4. The uses within the residential infill project are compatible with adjacent lands uses;
~ .,
Adjacent land uses are predominantly attached residential and overnight accommodation.
Many of the structures in the area are low- to mid-rise attached dwellings with under
building parking. The building complements the vision of the "Old Florida District" and
will serve as an appropriate transition use from the more intensely developed area to the
south and the single-family neighborhood to the north. The proposal includes a change of
use from nonresidential to residential which is more compatible with adjacent land uses.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19. 2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 5
I
.
.
5. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill project
will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development;
The proposed building will be attractively designed with parking is excess of Code
requirements and abundant landscaping. The development and design of the project will
set a new standard for the area. It may be a catalytic project that influences other like
redevelopment efforts.
6. The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and function
which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel pro-
posed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole;
The proposal includes the complete redevelopment of a modest property with a I5-unit
condominium building. It is consistent with the provisions of Beach by Design and the
Medium High Density Residential District. The proposal incorporates well-articulated,
unified elevations and coordinated architectural elements. Landscaping will be provided
along all property lines. The proposed development will enhance the community character
of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development the City of Clearwater as
a whole. Additional residential development is a key component to the success of the "Old
Florida District".
7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off. street parking are
justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the
parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole.
The proposed development will aesthetically improve the immediate area and Clearwater
as a whole. The proposed project reflects the City's vision of a residential character within
the "Old Florida District" within Beach by Design. The reductions in setbacks will provide
a building similar is size and scale to other buildings along Somerset Street. The proposal
will be pedestrian in scale and will provide for a continuous streetscape along Somerset
Street.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 6
.
.
D. GENERAL APPLICABILITY (Section 2-903.C): Conditions which are imposed by the
Community Development Coordinator and the Community Development Board
pursuant to a Level One or a Level Two Approval shall ensure that:
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 proposed development will serve as a transition between the more intensely developed
area to the south and the residential neighborhood to the north. The goal of the "Old
Florida District" of Beach by Design includes a revitalized, multi-family residential area to
support beach businesses. Such development is encouraged to take the form of townhomes
and condominiums. This proposal includes upscale condominiums with amenities which
complies with Beach by Design. It will hopefully establish a positive redevelopment
precedent for the area. Additional upscale residential dwellings are an important
component of a healthy mix of uses in this area. This use will also stabilize and support
other service uses nearby.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate
development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value
thereof.
The site is zoned Medium High Density District and is part of the "Old Florida District"
within Beach by Design. The proposed development will be in compliance with that
zoning classification and the guidelines outlined in Beach by Design with anew,
attractively designed residential building and landscaping. The proposed development will
help generate a better mix of residential uses and encourage the like redevelopment of
other sites.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons
residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
The proposed residential use is permitted in the zoning district, and should not create any
adverse health or safety impacts in the neighborhood. The proposal includes under
building parking and landscaping in excess of Code requirements in addition to other on-
site amenities.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
The proposed development will have two ingress/egress points of access along Somerset
Street which is a dead-end street. The proposal includes razing the two existing buildings
with nine overnight accommodation units and replacing them with one building with 15
residential units. Vehicle trip generation should have no reduction in levels of service on
any roads in the area.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19. 2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 7
.
.
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
Adjacent land uses are primarily multi-family dwellings with overnight accommodations
farther to the east and south. Single-family dwellings exist to the north and a mix of
restaurants and retail sales and service and other non-residential uses exist farther to the
south. The site is within the "Old Florida District" of Beach By Design which encourages
multi-family dwellings. The proposal will meet the intent of Beach by Design with a new
attractively designed residential building. The proposed building will be located similarly
to surrounding buildings providing a continuous streetscape along Somerset Street. The
design of the building will create a positive visual impact along the street with abundant
balconies, windows and buffered, under-building parking.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual,
acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties.
The proposed development will have two ingress/egress points of access along Somerset
Street. Solid waste will be collected inside the building and moved to a staging area along
Somerset Street for pick up. The benefit of this project includes the redevelopment of a
modest site with an attractive residential building and well-designed landscaping.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on
October 10, 2002. The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible
Development approval to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet to
six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.A1., reduce the front (south) setback along Somerset
Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56 feet (as
measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the provisions of
Section 2-404.F. for the site at 14 Somerset Street, with the following bases and conditions:
Basis for Approval:
1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project
per Section 2-404.F.
2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913.
3. The application is consistent with the "Old Florida District" in Beach by Design.
4. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19, 2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 8
.
.
Conditions:
1. That the density of the site be limited to 15 dwellings units (30 dwelling units per acre);
2. That the height be limited to 56 feet as measured from base flood elevation;
3. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted or
as modified by the CDB;
4. That should addressing storm water issues result in a site plan which is significantly different
from the one approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be
resubmitted to the Board for review;
5. That all Fire Department requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry
system and a knox key box on the building for emergency egress; and
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code.
Prepared by: Planning Department Staff
?
/
Mark T. Parry, Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
Aerial Photograph of Site and Vicinity
Location Map
Future Land Use Map
Zoning Atlas Map
Application
S:\Planning Departmenf\C D B\Fle:ilPending cases\Upfor the next DRC\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands\Somerset 14 STAFF
REPORT. doc
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 9
~
NORTH
1=
Aerial Map
CBGAA~ Ine.
J 4 Somerset .)treet
FLD 2002-09031
'Ii
./
~~
I~-"'S~ CITY OF CLEARWATER. FLORIDA
~tn~O~i) PUBIJC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
- ",.
_";~,,.,l ENGINEERING
~
NORTH
1"=1320'
.~
~
~
~
~
~
Location Map
CBGAM, Inc.
14 Somerset Street
FLD 2002-09031
PROJEC
SITE
,",,,,,,,,
,I~ !lEA~"'",__
lQ~~\
, ,d,/ , ...
~ n..... ~
"r.~~ 6~
\. ~l
--...... teA of( JIll
...........",,',11
CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA
PUBue WORKS ADMINISTRATION
ENGINEERING
0
<D
750
5
4r.;{4 0
\:::Y 0
3 740 <(
a:::
0
2 736 9
W
1 734
0 ASTER
<D STREET
730
8
7 724
717 12
4 19 712 4 712
721
3S'rifflgte . jhmily resi"j nnft~ i'dl7
717 t: ~ 708 709' r.':;-. 708'~-
" ~J W 707 '-1/ 6
2 ....1' ~1706:::> 2 14704 709
719 ~'---' L 704 Z 705 W
~ I---- U 707
f--- <( MA~ DA~Y ~ 705 5~
7011,.-\.> 23 701 1 16.,. 15700 CD 703 ~
~ 22 / '" ~ 60 701 4 ~
caO\'"\~'
___ 742
11 12
745 10
13 738
743 9
14
732
739 8 (j[g) 15 726
735 7 16 724
731 6 17 720
725 5
18
60
720 0
o
<(
5 716 a:::
o
4 9
(;:;\ 712 W
'CJ ,\
3 710 U
2196-;:;0-
2 708 " ~
'-~
-SUB. :g-:;:
1 704 5: ~
80 KP~~~ ~ ~~iy~ 4 ?'~l ~~~~ I
~ 3 CD 4 5 S8~~~ - far,ni ~ res id~ r~~ ~~ 31 ~~
.,. 2 41-29 675 ~ "I 0 .,. 000 "'.,. 692\
~ SOMERSET ST 0 .,. '" 'l) 'l)<rJ <rJ<rJ
..,. ~
)ve!J-' -i 1i.1~t ci( 80 L. ati~. . OMERSET
I:! -4'" 5 6 7 8 9 669 __~ '" 60 CAPRI MOTEL~I ~
1} f't\ >- 10~ 11" 7
C CONDOS. 48-07
COSLUORNFY 14 L 1~~lf lllc-~1O:5 \, ~
68-49 ~M b /I.. ';!?,tJ 1. C~ ::tf .... 12 672 ~ 665 5
co ~ ~"I 'o;;o:r ., Z ~_ 5:-
;' CAMBRIA ST ~ ~ ~ g,? 13662 <(
~tdf "''''o>",,,,t-. ~~
: fttm'ily TpslCW~'htial65~~ 1~8
:r:Z to:) (.~ ~h~ .~ ~
~ .,to:) 15 1~t2: -, 1 11 lQ..j ~~~ 15654 t;J 655 2
W 1 . n, ~tI!!"" ~
CD ;:: ~ 2 r:I iB g 655 ~ 16 650 <5
;' IDLEWILD ST ~ f-- 4 -&- ~ 17 c...
SURFSIDE ~ ~ <;;17 Sf;J 644 oR N
~ :3 ~
,
ACACIA
~
'"
3(D2
741 3 (11\.) S
'-;/ 740
q.
741
j 60 r
20 738
'"
<rJ
718
737 2 9
~ 736
~33 10 734
<2 1 ~ 70
tI~~ ~11 730
~l. S
I 729 Q ~ l);>~~r
725 S 7 ~ W
724 U
:::>
:z:r 6 <i ~10 720 \ &i
719 5 11 716 \ 60
737
60
STREET ~ I
~ \:;S I c; I 7 / 5~ ~
729 1 ~ \ I 17~ 1 734 745 4
727 2~ \ \ ~ 2 F ~ -
^;:::; . [i~
c 3l:Q _ \ ~-= tJ 3 732/ >-- 731 TllSlSNOTA I
r;:'\ ~..... ~ ~ -j SURVEY
~ ~ \ \;~.\:::Y Q) I
723 4 j :j 4 730 733 2
:;:;- ;;;
721 5 ~ "I \ co ~ 5 7261 /731 1
'0 i '" I 1
o
<D
IRIS
o
<D
ASTER
STREET
o
<D
'"
'0
7 24 J 60 !
10
11 720 723
718
"-
'"
7 I
6 I
/717 5 /
!:::d. 7
/,," 'e:/ 1
709 3
(707
705 2
701 1
8
9
STREET
12 718
3 2
71~1
'" <rJ ~ 1 710
'" '"
0
<0
0>
"I
699~ 2
'C/
693 1
ST
o
<D
4
661~ ~
'eI
3
\ ! \ 689 13
668 687
S 664 685 12
^
PENTHOUSE THE
SHORES \ 1"1 FIVE
CONDO. VI PALMS
13-50 il MOTEL
~ CONDO
11 654 )> 73-69
13 0 673
1"1
12 650
1 0) ~
L 00
"'-----
669 8
/
~7 J
EXISTING SURROUNDING USES MAP
QWNER: CBGAM, Inc. CASE: FLD 2002-09031
~ITE: 14 Somerset Street I PROPERTY SIZE (ACRES): 0.50
PIN: 05- 29-15-16362- 001- 0010
ATLAS
PAGE: 258A
787 2 9
...---- 786 0
~88 10 734 '"
c 1 ~70
~ I((j..t~,. ,.11 M I
2 736 ~ '" : <i~:57:: ~, ~
1 784 735 7 16 724 725 7 724 ~
::::>
~~~ 6 G 10 720 ~
750
5
4r;{4
\:::/
3 74C
o ASTER
'" STREET
730
8
7 724
720 0 717
D
5 716 ~ 719
o
4 9
t:::\ 712 W
"\:9
3 710 \.
21!HH~
2 708 ~ ~
,...
-SUB. ~ ~
1 704 ~ ~
~ 3 CD 4
....
~ SOMERSET
-
"..
11
12
745 10
13 788
743
731 6
17 720
725 5
18
718
721 4
19
719 5
712
717 4
1;l l:g I &i I
'29 1 ~ \ I ,~1 734
(27 2 ~ \ I ~ 2
~ 3~ I~ ~ ~ 3 732
f7\ ~ c- ~ -- 1rI f;::;\
72~~ \ \'34~0
60 721 5 ~ ~ \\:ll ~ 5 726 J
11 716
12
712
737 I \
IRIS
o
'"
ASTER
60 711 3 1 3 W 713 7
.,09 r. ~ 708 ~
~ 707 2 \: ~ 1 4 709 6
Z 705 704 W
~ ~ '- U 707
<( MA~ D A l.A Y ~ 705 5 t:::d. 3
7011... 23 701 1 16.... 15"00 m 703 'C:7
~22./L'i r o1r, ~/I" 701 4:il ~
ACACIA 1 ~ J ~ STREET
.. CI> ..
C\j Ol CI> 0] 0] ~ ::,.."; CI> .... .....
4 3 (p2 1'" 80 1 0 ~ 8.... ~ tj""s.... 154 -
695 4
60
3 20 710
/.'t:::-. 708
2 ,p 21706
-L- 704
5 S8~~~ET
2 41-29676
ST 0
l::!
~ COLON~
SUR
68-49 Q:l
C
3 ~t: ~ t\i
"4P 5 6 7 8 9
~;'\
1~:/12 11~1Q
~ ~~ ~~ ~
ST
o
v
~~{ 4
5 r\~
<( 1 ' "
W
, m
0 10
v
SURF
~ ~
~!:J 658
8 9
9
675
8
7
CIl
....
o SOMERSET
'"
669 l'
~O C\
~
9 I
.8 ~
~
577
6
'" ~~
5~~4 3'" "'2
C .... Q:lC CIl....
..... ..........'" "''''
\ ! \ 689 1 3
668 687
664 685 12
THE
FIVE
PALMS
MOTEL
CONDO
73-69
673
J 60
STREET
0]
.....
STREET
7241 60 I
10 I
..,
'"
UU I
I
6
7
o
v
>-
~
<(
D
Z
<(
~
III 60
11 ....
W
::::>
12672 ~
13662 <(
14 658
L':-..
9
15654
16650
..,
~17
'"
v
o
In
V
APRI YOmig'
CONDOS. .uJ-07
665
4
66~
~
3
<(
i= 655
~ 2
z
5 1 '" ~
t;
l'-
.....
8
9
11 72(
718
12 718
o
to
745 ~
L- h'>,\ t
~ c.!3~ -J
Q) I THISISNOTA I
7.l SURVEY
I
/731 1
o
'"
/
7 I
13 11 11
~ ~ ~
LD ST
~~17 8!:J
9>
10 fo'i\'b:i
C 6~;n
..,
0
v
644 -4~
~
~
2
712
'" ~ 1 710/
.....
a
'"
CI> q; I
III
33 2
3
892
\
ST
.....
7'"
5
8
723
6
PENTHOUSE
SHORES
CONDO.
13-50
I
13
11 654
12 650
5
71'1
715 4
71.?~
711 -.:::::::;t
709 3
07
705 2
701 1
699r-;:::.. 2
.\13
\693 1
g
r11
(/l
."
r
~
~
r11
669 8
\~
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT REQUEST
PWNER: CBGAM, Inc. CASE: FLD 2002- 09031
SITE: 14 Somerset Street I PROPERTY SIZE (ACRES): 0.50
PIN: 06- 29-16-18382- 001- 0010
ATLAS
PAGE: 258A
I
..
.
.
REQUEST:
Flexible Development approval to increase the height of a wall
within the front setback along Somerset Street from three feet to six
feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.A.l, reduce the front
(south) setback along Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to
building), and increase the height of a building with attached
dwellings from 30 feet to 56 feet (as measured from base flood
elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the provisions
of Section 2-404.F.
ANALYSIS:
The 0.50-acre site is located on the north side of Somerset Street approximately 150 feet west of
Mandalay Avenue. The site, initially developed in 1925, is located within transitional area on
Clearwater Beach marking the boundary between single-family dwellings to the north and multi-
family and overnight accommodation uses to the south. The site is located directly along the Gulf
of Mexico. An unimproved right-of-way, Beach Drive exists along the west site of the site. The
site contains two structures with a total of nine hotel units. A two-story building, approximately
24 feet in height with approximately 2,263 square feet of area, is located centrally on the property
and contains seven dwelling units. A second, one-story building, approximately 23 feet in height
with approximately 1,922 square feet of area, is located on the east portion of the site and contains
two dwelling units. There are parking spaces that are partially on the site and partially in the right-
of-way.
The site is located within the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design which designates the area
for residential reuse with multi-family townhomes and condominiums. The Plan recommends low
to midrise development. The character of the area is of modest attached dwellings and overnight
accommodations. There is significant redevelopment potential in the area.
The proposal includes the redevelopment of the site with a 15-unit condominium building of
62,692 square feet and five stories above parking. The proposed building will be located
approximately 10 feet from the side (north and east) property lines, 25 feet from the front (east)
property line along Beach Drive (unimproved) and 10 feet from the front (south) property line
along Somerset Street.
The applicant seeks to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet to six
feet, reduce the front (south) setback along Somerset Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building)
and increase the height from 30 feet to 56 feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as part of a
Residential Infill Project. Attached dwellings under the Flexible Standard Development
provisions are permitted to be up to 50 feet in height and may have front setbacks reduced to 15
feet. This site is located within a flood zone (zone VB), and the requested height is 56 feet (as
measured from the base flood elevation of 14 feet) with five floors above one floor of parking. By
Code, height is measure from base flood elevation. The front (south) setback request of 10 feet
and a height greater than 50 feet requires that the application be reviewed as part of a Residential
Infill Project request.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 1
...
.
.
One level of under-structure parking will be provided and will include 28 spaces that exceed Code
requirements of 23 spaces. Access to the site is proposed along Somerset Street at two gated
entrance/exits.
The Mediterranean architecture of the building will include neutral-color stucco, terracotta color
barrel tile roof, and a significant number of windows and balconies on all elevations. The flat roof
has been designed to minimize views of the mechanical equipment and incorporates the use of
cupola-type enclosures. The building compliments the vision of the "Old Florida District". It will
serve as an appropriate transition use from the more intensely developed area to the south,
consisting of a variety of overnight accommodation, retail, restaurant and other non-residential
uses, to the single-family neighborhood to the north.
A white, aluminum picket-style fence, 42-inches in height will be located around the perimeter of
the pool which is to be located along the Gulf side of the building. A masonry wall will taper from
six feet in height to four feet, extending from the south fa\=ade of the building on either side of the
main entrance. It will continue to the east and west along Somerset Street for approximately 12
. feet. The wall will have a stucco finish painted to match the primary color of the building. It is
designed to screen the trash staging area and provide space for building identification. An awning
will cover the main entryway.
The landscape plan exceeds the requirements of Code. This includes a mixture of various trees,
shrubs, palms and annuals. A sidewalk, four-feet in width will be provided along Somerset Street.
The sidewalk will include a distressed finish. The sidewalk will connect with an existing sidewalk
to the east. It will provide for continued public access across the frontage of the site to the Gulf.
Amenities include an in-ground swimming pool along the gulf (west side). Roof drains will be
routed through a proposed stormwater vault which will include a filtration system. A Code-
compliant method of treating paved, vehicular use areas must be provided to satisfy stormwater
management criteria, prior to the issuance of any permits, and the applicant is noticed that this
could adversely impact the site design. As provided in Section 4-406 of the Code, should
addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different from the one
approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be resubmitted to the Board
for review.
Fire Department requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry system and a
knox key box on the building for emergency egress, have been noted on the plan. Solid Waste
Department requirements have been met. Trash will be collected within the building and moved to
a staging area by the complex staff on pick up days.
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19,2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 2
"
.
.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on
October 10, 2002. The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible
Development approval to increase the height of a wall within the front setback from three feet to
six feet under the provisions of Section 3-804.A1., reduce the front (south) setback along Somerset
Street from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and increase the height from 30 feet to 56 feet (as
measured from base flood elevation), as part of a Residential Infill Project under the provisions of
Section 2-404.F. for the site at 14 Somerset Street, with the following bases and conditions:
Basis for Approval:
1. The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residential Infill Project
per Section 2-404.F.
2. The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913.
3. The application is consistent with the "Old Florida District" in Beach by Design.
4. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts.
Conditions:
1. That the density of the site be limited to 15 dwellings units (30 dwelling units per acre);
2. That the height be limited to 56 feet as measured from base flood elevation;
3. That the final design of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted or
as modified by the CDB;
4. That should addressing stormwater issues result in a site plan which is significantly different
from the one approved by the Community Development Board, the site plan must be
resubmitted to the Board for review;
5. That all Fire Department requirements, including gates with an approved emergency entry
system and a knox key box on the building for emergency egress; and
6. That all signage meet the requirements of Code.
S:\Planning DepartmenflC D B\FleXlInactive or Finished Applications\Somerset 14 Chalets on White Sands - Approved\Somerset 14
CDB Notes.doc
Staff Report - Community Development Board - November 19. 2002 - Case FLD2002-09031 - Page 3
j ,
Oct 16 03 08:41a
John Marshall Scott Arch. 813 968-6234
p. 1
II!O~~~L~~~
i..llrler .iAIIIII . ...11111.
FAX TRANSMITTAL
DATE:
le;)/t; It??
II
ft~/c pAf<~1
PAGES INCLUDING COVER: ,-
TO:
COMPANY
PROJECT:
11,,,/ '!?CrA't ~SG7'.
RE:
tcl::
7tov~
I~ Ft?je rlkr1 ~/IJ
3802 EHRLICH ROAD . SUITE 306 TAMPA, FLORIDA 33624 PHONE- (813) 968-6222 FAX - (813) 968-6234
, i I
, ~' ~"'" "',' "
Oct 16 03 08:41a
John Marshall Scott Arch. 813 968-6234
p.2
.~,
....
'j
j
)
Infill Discussion 1anuary 9, 2003
1. IntndUetiOD
a. When we were talking CDB. I mentioned some concerns with infill.
b. Tonight WBJ1t to introduce the subject
c. Give you a cbaDce to consider the issue
d. Talk about it at our next meeting.
2. InfiD
a. I noted split decision on one of the CDB cases on 11/19 and wondered if
... there were policy issues in need of clarification.
b. Noted general neighborhood opposition to the requested S6 feet height of
the proposed building that was on the edge of a MHDR and LMDR
boundary .OD north beaeh. They were requesting 56 feet plus the flood
elevation and the roof mechanical a1low~. So it could be as much as
86 feet high vs. most surrounding properties in the' 30-40 high range.
c. I reviewed the staff recommendation. Compared it against the code and
concluded that the staff recormnen~ation seemed to be inconsistent with
my reading oftb.e code.
d. Talked to the City Manager and was advised that other members of this
Commission were aiviDa him POLICY GUIDANCE to be as liberal as
possible to allow iu:fi11.
e. My position is tbat infill is the third level of variance and should be very
restrictively used. Standard, Flex Standard, and Flexible Standard come
into play first. Then on top oftbis we allow iDtill variance with DO limits.
f. I am especially concerned with height and building mass.
3. Suggested Action
a. I have some infonnation I will pass out After you have. had a chance to
. review it I would hope that I could receive your thoughts and understand
what POLICY guidance you.have been giving to the City Manager.
Commission lnfill Discussion 030 109 .doc
Page I of 4 Printed 1/912003 5;02 PM
Oct 16 03 08:41a
John Marshall Scott Arch. 813 968-6234
4. Policy Issues:
Be Shouldn't an iDfill decision should consider the current status of the
adjoining properties. If they are newly renovated, then the variance on the
infill site should be consistent with them. If they are greatly deteriorated,
then the iDfill should be consistent with what might be redeveloped on the
adjoining properties. .
:b. Shouldn't an in1iU variance be a give aDd take with the adjoining
properties. In no instance should the in1ill degrade an adjoiDing property.
The i.nfill variance should be a plus for the immediate neighborhood. We
should consider how to involve the neighborhood.
'c. Shouldn't an infilI decision on the edge of a zoning district give some
consideration to the adjoining dist#ct? This kind of language is in the
code [2"-404 A,3] but iriexplicitably it only applies if an adjoining district
is the low-deasity zoning category. "
a. There is a reference to vertical compOnent (2404 A. 2. b) of the view, but
this too only applies from a low-density zoned property. I don't
understand why 'this restriction would not also apply to Low Medium
Density Residential. Perhaps with a distance requirement.
.d. What kind of documentation is needed to demonstrate "Impracticable"
without deviations?
:e. Should fina.ncial viability be ajustification? It is NOT now part of the
code.
,f. What does Beach by Design's Old Florida "transitional" concept mean?
'g. What does "reducing the vertical componeot of the view from a parcel of
land which is designated as low density residential in the Zoning Atlas"
mean?
h. What iDvolvement of the neighborhood should be required (like
Miami)?
5. Background Information
a Infill Definition from code 8-102:
1. ResideDtiaI in1iD project means a development approved pursuant
to flexibility criteria that allow the development of properties,
which due to unique COnditioDS or historical patterns of
development of ownenhip could not otherwise be developed.
. [CURRENT POLICY].
b. 2-404 Flexible development standards for - ResideDtiallnfil1 Projects:
i. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for
development is otherwise impractical with deviations from the
intensity and development standards.
c. LMDR Levels of standards
i. Minimum Standard Development: 30 feet
ii. Flexible Standard Development: 30 feet
ill. Flexible Development: 30 feet
iv. Residential In:fill: No limits
d. MHDR Levels of standards
Commission Infill Discussion 030109.doc
Page 2 of 4 Print~rll/QI?OO'l Ci.n'? PH
p.3
~
Oct 16 03 08:42a
\,
John Marshall Scott Arch. 813 968-6234
p.4
i. Minimum Standard Development: 30 feet
ii. Flexible Standard Development: 30-40 feet
iii. Flexible Development: 30-50 feet
iv. Residential Infill: No limits
] . Flexibility in regard 10 . . . height. . . are justified by the
benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity
of the parcel proposed for development ClJRRENT
POLICY
e. Height rules
i. Start above flood levels - 14 feet
ii. Roof
1. Pitched roof-halfway up
2. Flat roof-Elevator and equipment get an extra 16 feet
f. O~ jurisdictions
i. Oregon Growth MaJ1agement Program - between two existing
buildings then no higher than five feet above the two adjacent
buildings.
ii. San Antonio Texas: shall be compatible in massing to buildings on
adjoining lots.
iii. Miami: Promote good design with a clear objective of
empowering the residents, bllliDesa OWDen, and an other
stakeholdel'S'iD detel1lliDlDg die character and iatensity of
development in and aroaud tJaeir neigltborhood.
Commission Infill Discussion 03~ 1 09.doc
I ! ,!
Page 3 of 4 Printed 1/912003 5:02 PM
Oct 16 03 08:42a
John Marshall Scott Arch. 813 968-6234
! i I
.-.
CDD peeisfoD 11/19
14 Somerset Reside.utlallnftUSummary
1. The property is located on the north edge of a MHDR zone district, immediately
south ofLMDR .zoning on the Gulf of Mexico.
2. The property was previously RM-20 which bad a height limit of 30 feet. RM-20
and RM-24 were combined into MHDR in the 1999 code ch8nge. RM-24
allowed a height of 50 feet uDder the old code.
3. The base height in MHDR is 30 f~ ~ut current District Flexible Development
allowS 50 feet under certain conditions where "'the increased height will not
reduce the vertical component of the view from a parcel of land which is
designated as low density residential in the Zoning Atlas."
4. The property is liT,mediately adjacent to LMDR where the height limit is 30 feet
even with the District Flexible Development provision.
S. The definition of in:fill is "a development approved pursuant to tlexibility criteria
that allow the development of properties which due to unique eondidons or
historical patterns of development and ownership could not otherwise be
developed."
6. Residential Infill within MHDR [Sec. 2-404 (F)] is allowed where "The uses
within the residential in1ill project are compatible with adjacent land uses". It
further allows ""flexibility in regard to ... . height . . . justified by the beneiits to the
community character I.Ild tile ~ediate vidnlty of the parcel propos~ for
development and the City of Clearwater as a whole."
7. The applicant's application provided the following answer to the question "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":
"Yes similar height bldg 2 blocks 10 the south. We are providing greater set backs
than the existing."
8. The property two blocks to the south is in the middle of the Old Florida district of
Beach by Design not on the edge of it.
9. The "Old Florida" district of Beach by Design calls for a transition between the
residential and resort uses to the south. It further specifies, "'building height
should be low to mid-rise in accordance with the Community Development
Code." MHDR code allows only 50' under the District Flexible Development
standard.
10. The drawings submitted with the application show substantial architectural
parapet walls above tile roof level to hide the mechanical equipment
11. The staff report states in part that the "increase in height is necessary to provide a
viable product and allows for the placement of parking underneath the building."
Parking would be allowed below the tlood base level even without any height
variance. "Viable product" is not defined.
]2. In the paragraph which would address impact on the immediate vicinity, the staff
report states that the "reductions in setbacks will provide a building similar is (sic)
size and scale to other buildings along Somerset Street to No comparison was
detailed to the residential buildings to the north.
; I
Commission Infi11 Discussion 030109.doc
Page 4 of 4 Printed 1/9/2003 5:02 PM
10.5
.~"'
;~
-\
JOHN MARSHALL SCOTT A.1.A.
&"/'1Mt-- ;.
SCc:rrrA-fiSOC @AD'-,'"
Phone (727) 7 3 5 - 0 1 0 0
Fax (727) 7 3 5 - 0 2 0 0
E~S~I
ElectroCare Solutions,/nc.
Harish Patel
Managlng Directbr
8910 N. Dale Mabry
Suite 30
Tampa, FL 33614
f'il: ~I~ 712.. '5'2.(.'1-
Off: 813-915-1866
L _ _" Fax: 813-915"0785
Y\(o\"'I'"~1'\ ~1@esi1500.com
._ r.' .
CUMBEY & FAIR, INC.
2463 ENTERPRISE ROAD
CLEARWATER, FL 33763-1790
(727) 797-8982 Clearwater
(813) 223-4333 Tampa
FAX (727) 791-8752
TBOURNE@CUMBEYFAIR.COM
CIVIL ENGINEERING
LANO SURVEYING
PLANNING
ffj
TIMOTHY E. BOURNE, P.E.
Project Manager
Vice-President
A Minority Business Enterprise
~-
... ~ r'
WESTCHESTER
LEARNING CENTER
"where children come first'
JERRY D'SOUZA
SHAMA D'SOUZA
ANNE ANDERTON .
5690 Roosevelt Blvd. -
Clearwater, FL 34620
(813) 536-1622
#C 950793
PHYLLIS HULVEY
438 62nd Ave N
St. Petersburg, FL 33702
(813) 527-5690
#C 960040
.... .,,!l_..l.."