12/16/2003
.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING
CITY OF CLEARWATER
December 16, 2003
Present:
Ed Hooper
David Gildersleeve
Shirley Moran
Edward Mazur, Jr.
Alex Plisko
Kathy Milam
Daniel Dennehy
Chair
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Acting Board Member
Absent:
John Doran
Vice Chair
Also Present: Leslie Dougall-Sides
Lisa Fierce
Frank Gerlock
Gina Clayton
Patricia O. Sullivan
Assistant City Attorney
Assistant Planning Director
Development Review Manager
Long Range Planning Manager
Board Reporter
The Chair called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Invocation
and Pledge of Allegiance.
.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: November 18, 2003
Member Moran moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of November 18,
2003, as submitted in written summation to each board member. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
D. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE (to January 20, 2004 Meeting - Item 1):
1. Case: FLD2003-09042 - 1575 South Highland Avenue Level Two Application
Owners/Applicant: Griffin International, Inc. (186 Bayside Drive, Clearwater, FL 33767;
phone: 727-444-4495; fax: 727-444-4496; e-mail: D4444495@aol.com).
Location: 8.5 acres located at the northeast corner of Highland Avenue & Belleair Road.
Atlas Page: 315A.
Zoning: C, Commercial District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages on a parcel of land
contiguous to a parcel of land which is designated as residentially zoned property in the Zoning
Atlas, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section
2-704.C.
Proposed Use: Alcoholic beverage sales within a 2,100 square-foot tenant space located in an
existing shopping center.
Neighborhood Association(s): None.
Presenter: Bryan Berry, Planner
.
Community Development 2003-12-16
1
.
.
.
Member Gildersleeve moved to continue Item D1, Case FLD2003-09042 for 1575 South
Highland Avenue to January 20, 2004. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
E. CONSENT AGENDA: The following cases are not contested by the applicant, staff,
neighboring property owner, etc. and will be approved by single vote at the beginning of the
meeting. (Items 1-16)
1. Case: FLD2003-08037 - 3080 Allen Avenue Level Two Application
Owners/Applicants: Robert Hupp and Allen McMullen (3090 Charles Avenue,
Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727.422.0422; fax: 727.726.8190).
Representative: Bryan L. Zarlenga (380 Park Place Blvd., Suite 300, Clearwater, FL
33759; phone: 727.531.3505; cell: 727.639.5569; e-mail: bzarlenQa@tbeQrouD.com).
Location: 1.95 acres located at the northwest corner of Allen Avenue and McMullen-
Booth Road.
Atlas Page: 212A.
Zoning: 0, Office District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit a reduction in the front (north) setback from 35 feet to
15 feet (to pavement) and from 35 feet to 16 feet (to generator pad) along Charles Avenue, a
reduction in the required number of parking spaces from 98 spaces (5/1,000 square feet) to 97
spaces (4.9/1,000 square feet) and an increase in building height from 30 feet to 38.5 feet,
under the provisions of Section 2-1004.C.
Proposed Use: A 9,560 square-foot medical clinic.
Neighborhood Association: None.
Presenter: Bryan Berry, Planner.
The applicant requested this item be continued.
Member Gildersleeve moved to continue Item E1, Case: FLD2003-08037 for 3080 Allen
Avenue to January 20,2004. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Community Development 2003-12-16
2
.
.
.
2. Case: FLD2003-09046/PL T2003-00011 - 181 Brightwater Drive Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Rogers Beach Development (P.O. Box 676, Crystal Beach, FL 34681;
phone: 727-733-3769; cell: 727-733-3769; cell: 727-560-0969; email: oarch@qate.net).
Location: 0.32 acre located on the south side of Brightwater Drive, approximately 1,000
feet east of Harnden Drive.
Atlas Page: 276A.
Zoning: T, Tourist District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit six attached dwellings (town homes) with a reduction in
the side (east) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to building), the side (west) setback from 10 feet
to five feet (to building), the rear (south) setback from 20 feet to one foot (to pool and decking)
and to permit parking that is designed to back out into the public right-of-way, as part of a
Comprehensive lnfill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C, and
Preliminary Plat approval for six lots.
Proposed Use: Six attached dwellings (townhomes).
Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Beach Association (Pres. David MacNamee, 827
Mandalay Ave., Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-446-5801; e-mail: dmacnav@att.net).
Presenter: Bryan Berry, Planner.
The 0.32-acre site is located on the south side of Brightwater Drive, approximately 1,200
feet east of Harnden Drive. It is located within an area currently transitioning from overnight
accommodations to residentially developed townhomes and condominiums on Clearwater
beach. The parcel has frontage along Clearwater Bay and is located within the Small Motel
District of Beach By Design, which contemplates the redevelopment of Brightwater Drive with
townhomes and timeshares, between two and four stories above parking.
The proposal includes constructing a six-unit, three-story town home building. The
building will contain two floors of living area above base flood elevation, with the two-car garage
on the ground level. Units one and six will be 3,865 total square-feet each. A singlewide
driveway, 12 feet in width, will serve each unit. The design requires cars to back out into the
right-of-way to exit the site. The Community Development Code prohibits "back out" parking for
any uses other than detached dwellings. The driveway length will permit a vehicle to completely
"back out" of the garage, thus eliminating the garage walls as a potential view obstruction of the
sidewalk and street. The development will operate as, and have the characteristics of, single-
family detached homes, including individual garages. The site is located on Brightwater Drive,
which is a cul-de-sac street approximately 1,700 feet in length and generally used only by
persons with a destination on the street. From a traffic standpoint, this concept of "back out"
parking for town homes may be acceptable on a low-volume cul-de-sac street such as this. It
should not be considered, however, as a precedent for deviation from the Code provision of
restricting "back out" movement into the right-of-way for single-family residential uses only, and
will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
The request is to permit six single-family town homes with reductions in the side (east)
setback from 10 feet to five feet (to building) and three feet (to pool decking), the side (west)
setback from 10 feet to five feet (to building) and seven feet (to pavement), the rear (south)
setback 20 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), and to permit parking that is designed to back out
into the public right-of-way, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the
provisions of Section 2-803.C, and Preliminary Plat approval for six lots. The reductions in side
setback are a function of the average unit width at 18 feet, which is generally a standard unit
Community Development 2003-12-16
3
.
.
.
width. The reduction in the rear setback to zero feet is for the pool decking and provides
pedestrian access to the water and existing docks. The increase in building height is still in
compliance with Beach by Design, which allows town homes two-to four-stories in height.
The materials of the building shall consist of cream color stucco with pink/peach stucco
on concrete block, a mix of magenta monier barrel tile roofing and flat roofing with concrete
molding parapet walls. All railing will be black or mill finished aluminum. The units will have
either an elevator or interior spiral staircase allowing for roof top access.
The landscape plan meets Code requirements utilizing a variety of a colorful
groundcover (including aztec grass and giant Iiriope), shrubs (including oleander and jasmine)
and trees (including washingtonia palms, queen palm, and ligustrum).
Solid waste will be removed via black barrel service for each unit. All required Parks and
Recreation fees are to be paid prior to the issuance of any building permits. The applicant will
record a Final Plat prior to the issuance of building permits. With this proposal, the existing
dock and two catwalks will be retained. Use of the dock and slips should be for residents and
their guests only and not sub-leased. Proposed and existing aboveground utility facilities in the
public rights-of-way will be required to be placed underground, or provisions made for placing
the utilities underground (including interim construction details to be completed prior to the
issuance of the first certificate of occupancy) within timeframes acceptable to the City.
The application and supporting materials were reviewed by the Development Review
Committee on October 30, 2003. The Planning Department recommends approval of the
Flexible Development approval to permit six single family town homes with reductions in the
(east) side setback from 10 feet to five feet (to building) and 10 feet to three feet (to pool
decking), the (west) side setback from 10 feet to five feet (to building) and 10 feet to seven feet
(to pavement), the (south) rear setback 20 feet to zero feet (to pool deck), and to permit parking
that is designed to back out into the public right-of-way, as part of a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Section 2-803.C, and Preliminary Plat approval
for six lots, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal
complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project per Section 2-804.C; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code
including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The development is
compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts AND
Conditions of Approval: 1) That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the
conceptual elevations submitted or as modified by the CDB; 2) That all Traffic Impact Fees be
paid before Certificate of Occupancy; 3) That all required Parks and Recreation fees be required
to be paid prior to the issuance of any building permits; 4) That boats moored at the docks be
for the exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the town homes and not be permitted to
be sub-leased separately from the town homes; 5) That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-
way to the proposed buildings) be placed underground and installation of conduit(s) along the
entire length of the site's street frontage be completed prior to the issuance of the first certificate
of occupancy; 6) That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met
related to seawall setbacks; and 7) That a town home plat be recorded prior to the issuance of
the first Building Permit.
AND
Community Development 2003-12-16
4
.
.
.
3. Case: FLD2003-09044 - 692 Bayway Boulevard Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Island Key Development, LLC.
Representative: Gene Jerichow, Dolphin Marine Equipment, Inc. (13056 Faxton Street,
Clearwater, FL 33760; phone: 727-539-8113; fax: 727-536-9448).
Location: 0.51 acre located on the north side of Bayway Boulevard, approximately 500
feet west of Gulf Boulevard.
Atlas Page: 285A.
Zoning: T, Tourist District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval for a multi-use dock for the construction/reconstruction of 11
slips, dock and four catwalks with boardwalk along the seawall for a residential condominium
complex, with a reduction of the side (north and south) setbacks from 18 feet to 16 feet (to
catwalks) and from 18 feet to zero feet (to boardwalk) and an increase of the width of the dock
from 75 percent of the lot width (135 feet) to 100 percent of the lot width (180 feet), under the
provisions of Section 3-601.
Proposed Use: Multi-use dock of 11 slips for Island Key Condominiums.
Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Beach Association (Pres. David MacNamee, 827
Mandalay Ave., Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-446-5801; e-mail: dmacnav(Q>.att.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Senior Planner.
The 0.26-acre site is located on the north side of Bayway Boulevard, approximately 500
feet west of Gulf Boulevard. It is located along a highly developed area within Clearwater beach
and has frontage along Clearwater Bay. The site is located within the South Beach/Clearwater
Pass District of Beach By Design, which is a distinctive area of mixed uses including high-rise
condominiums, resort hotels, and commercial uses. Beach by Design contemplates this district
will be an area of strategic revitalization and renovation in response to improving conditions on
the balance of Clearwater beach. On January 21, 2003, the Community Development Board
approved Case No. FLD2002-11 043 with 11 conditions to develop the upland portion of this site
with 15 attached dwellings (condominiums). There are 11 existing boat slips and a dock, which
under the prior approval were to be retained, unchanged.
Section 3-601.C.3 requires docks over 500 square-feet in area (in association with a
multi-family development or condominium) to be treated as a commercial dock and be approved
as part of a Level Two, Flexible Development review. The proposal includes the construction/
reconstruction of the existing slips and dock to provide the same 11 slips for use by the owners/
tenants of the condominiums. The slips and dock have existed for more than 20 years and are
in need of replacement. The proposal is to construct the catwalks on the east and west sides of
the property at a 16-foot side setback, where an 18-foot side setback is required by Code. The
existing catwalks are closer to the side property lines than the proposed catwalks. Eight of the
proposed slips will be 16 feet wide, while two slips are proposed to be 18 feet wide and one slip
at the end of the dock at 12 feet wide. The proposed side setback reduction from 18 feet to 16
feet to the catwalks is reasonable to widen narrow slips to enhance boat navigation and
mooring. There are no issues regarding sea grasses or navigation with the proposal and the
other criteria for docks, except as discussed below, have been met.
Code dock provisions limit the width of docks to a maximum of 75% of the lot width, or
135 feet in this case. The proposal includes constructing a 1 O-foot wide boardwalk for the entire
site width (180 feet), which is 100% of the lot width and at a zero side (east and west) setback.
This boardwalk straddles the seawall with three feet on the upland and seven feet over the
Community Development 2003-12-16
5
.
water. Existing rip-rap in the water is adjacent to the seawall. When the upland portion of the
site was reviewed and approved, the approved site plan showed a four-foot wide concrete
sidewalk/boardwalk adjacent to the seawall to provide access to the existing dock and catwalks.
This concrete sidewalk/boardwalk ended 10 feet short of the side lot lines, meeting side setback
requirements of the Tourist District.
Insufficient justification has been submitted to extend the proposed wood boardwalk to a
zero setback to the side property lines. Section 3-601.C.3.a.iii requires compatibility with dock
patterns in the general vicinity. The applicant has submitted three examples of docks/
boardwalks from Island Estates, which is not considered "in the general vicinity." Staff notes
that the existing dock for the property directly to the north at 674 Bayway Boulevard, approved
for six townhome attached dwellings on the upland, included a similar existing boardwalk at a
zero (east) setback to the common property line (FLD2002-11 038, approved by the CDB on
January 21, 2003), but that boardwalk has since been removed during construction of the
seawall repair. The existing dock for the property directly to the south for the Police Substation
has a similar boardwalk at an approximate setback from the common property line of 10 feet.
This boardwalk at the Police Substation also is approximately 10 feet from its south property
line. A boardwalk on the property south of the Police Substation is also at a minimum side
setback of 10 feet. Staff can support reducing the width of the proposed wood boardwalk to
coincide with the upland sidewalk adjacent to the seawall at a 10-foot side setback, which would
be consistent with boardwalks on the two adjacent properties to the south. While this is not the
maximum of 75% of the lot width (135 feet), it is recommended at 89% (160 feet).
.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including but not limited to General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and dock criteria (Section 3-601.C.3) have been met,
except as discussed above.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting
materials on October 30, 2003. The Planning Department recommends approval of the
Flexible Development application for a multi-use dock for the construction/reconstruction of 11
slips, dock and four catwalks with boardwalk along the seawall for a residential condominium
complex, with a reduction of the side (north and south) setbacks from 18 feet to 16 feet
(to catwalks) and from 18 feet to ten feet (to boardwalk) and an increase of the width of
the dock from 75 percent of the lot width (135 feet) to 89 percent of the lot width (160
feet), under the provisions of Section 3-601, for the site at 692 Bayway Boulevard, with the
following bases and conditions (note: items bolded above are changes from that
requested and advertised): Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible
Development criteria under the provisions of Section 3-601; 2) The proposal is in compliance
with other standards in the Code including the general applicability criteria per Section 3-913;
and 3) The dock development is compatible with the surrounding area AND Conditions of
Approval: 1) That boats moored at the docks be for the exclusive use by the residents and/or
guests of the condominiums and not be permitted to be sub-leased separately from the
condominiums; 2) That dock-supported signage be permanently installed containing wording
warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity; and 3)
That the wood boardwalk meet a 10-foot side (east and west) setback.
The motion for approval of Items E2 and E3 is on page 26.
.
Community Development 2003-12-16
6
.
.
.
4. Case: FLD2003-09047 - 1750 North Belcher Road Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: BelCal Properties, LLC.
Representative: Gerald Figurski, Esquire (2435 US Highway 19, Suite 350, Holiday, FL
34691; phone: 727-942-0733; fax: 727-944-3711).
Location: 3.288 acres located at the southwest corner of North Belcher Road and
Calumet Street.
Atlas Page: 262B.
Zoning: IRT, Industrial, Research and Technology District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit retail sales (financial services) with deviations to allow
direct access to a major arterial street (Belcher Road), to allow the use as a permitted use and
in a separate, primary building and to allow the use to serve patrons beyond the industrial area,
as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-1304.C.
Proposed Use: Retail sales and services (GTE Federal Credit Union), in addition to a proposed
distribution center and offices.
Neighborhood Association: None.
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Senior Planner.
Member Mazur declared a conflict of interest.
The 3.288-acre site is located at the southwest corner of North Belcher Road and
Calumet Street. North Belcher Road is a heavily-traveled, four-lane divided roadway. The east
side of North Belcher Road is residentially developed with single-family detached dwellings.
The west side of North Belcher Road is developed industrially. The site formerly was developed
with an office building, which recently was demolished under BCP2003-03525. Under
BCP2003-03528, the site was approved to be developed with a St. Petersburg Times
distribution building on the west side facing Calumet Street and two office buildings facing North
Belcher Road. The site was approved with one driveway on Calumet Street close to the
western property line and one driveway on North Belcher Road, approximately 80 feet north of
the south property line. The St. Petersburg Times distribution building, as well as all other
parking, drainage and landscaping improvements, currently are under construction.
The proposal includes constructing a GTE Federal Credit Union facing Calumet Street,
in place of the northern office building approved on the site plan under BCP2003-03528. Under
Code, financial institutions (banks and credit unions) are included in the definition of "retail sales
and services." In the Industrial, Research and Technology (IRT) District, retail sales and
services is permitted as a Flexible Standard Development use, but with criteria prohibiting the
use from locating contiguous to residentially zoned property and taking direct access to major
arterial streets, and with criteria restricting the use to occupying no more than ten percent of a
building used by a Minimum Standard Development use and that the use primarily serve the
employees or patrons of the industrial-type uses. Under the adopted Countywide Plan Rules,
financial services are included under the definition of "offices," which are permitted secondary
uses in the Industrial Limited (IL) land use classification. Due to its inclusion under the definition
of "retail sales and services" and its prohibitions and restrictions in the IRT District, the applicant
must request approval of the proposed credit union under the Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project process. Staff notes that these same prohibitions and restrictions apply
to restaurants desiring to locate within the IRT District. The site is not contiguous to residentially
zoned property, as North Belcher Road separates the non-residentially-developed area on the
Community Development 2003-12-16
7
.
west side from the residentially-developed area on the east side. The proposed redevelopment
of the site meets all of the development standards of the IRT District.
The applicant is requesting a deviation from the criteria prohibiting direct access to a
major arterial street. As North Belcher Road is a divided roadway, the driveway near the
southern property line will permit only right in/right out turning movements. This driveway
location originally was approved for permitted uses (under BCP2003-03528). Only one drive-
way is approved on Calumet Street. The change of use from an office building to a credit union
should allow continued access to North Belcher Road to provide necessary on-site traffic flow.
.
The applicant is requesting a deviation to allow the use as a permitted use and in a
separate, primary building. This Code restriction intends to limit the size and location of "retail
sales and services" in the IRT District, relegating the use to a more "accessory" use. The site
plan presently approved under BCP2003-03528 provides for three separate buildings. The
proposed revision to allow the credit union in place of the northern office building does not
materially change the site design otherwise already approved. If the site were to be developed
at the maximum Floor Area Ratio permitted of 0.65, the site could be developed with a
maximum of 93,086 square-feet. The site is being redeveloped with a total of 26,346 square
feet. The Code does not mandate or restrict the development of property to one building.
Under the proposal, the 3,528 square-foot credit union building is 13.4 percent of the total
building square footage shown on the site plan, slightly higher than the allowable ten percent
maximum. Since the site is not being developed to its maximum Floor Area Ratio and the site
plan provides more than the required parking spaces, the percentage increase requested is
minimal. While the credit union could be developed in a larger building of several tenants, the
applicant has chosen to separate the tenant spaces into different buildings based on their
usage. This separation providing a primary building for the proposed credit union should not
degrade the intent of the IRT District. Other properties in this large industrially zoned area west
of North Belcher Road will continue to be developed for industrial-type uses.
Finally, the applicant is requesting a deviation to allow the use to serve patrons beyond
the industrial area. The credit union is proposed within a large industrial area, albeit on the
eastern fringe of the industrial area. There is only one other financial institution in this general
area. This proposed credit union will enhance financial services to employees of this industrial
area, potentially reducing patron drive distances when services are necessary. It is recognized,
however, that patrons of the GTE Federal Credit Union may live or work on the east side of
North Belcher Road and would benefit by its location at this intersection. Staff reiterates that the
Countywide Plan Rules place financial services under "offices," which originally were proposed
at this location. A credit union at this location will be compatible with the surrounding area, will
be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, intensity and character of the adjacent properties
and will enhance and upgrade the character of this immediate vicinity.
The introduction of the proposed credit union does increase the anticipated traffic impact
of the development of this parcel. A Traffic Impact Analysis submitted by the applicant, and
reviewed by the City's Traffic Operations Division, indicates that intersection improvements are
necessary. The applicant will need to construct a left turn lane with adequate storage length on
Calumet Street at North Belcher Road. Additionally, the installation of a traffic signal light may
be required, if warranted by a Traffic Signal Warrant Study. The applicant will need to establish
an escrow account with the City for this potential future traffic signal light, where funds will be a
.
Community Development 2003-12-16
8
.
.
.
shared portion of the full cost of a traffic signal light (funds will be refunded if the traffic signal
light is not warranted).
Foundation plantings for the proposed credit union will need to meet Code provisions on
revised plans prior to permitting. No freestanding signage has been shown on the proposed site
plan. Any freestanding signage should be limited to monument-style of no more than six feet in
height, integrated with the design and color of the proposed buildings and into the proposed
landscaping to avoid shielding. More than one freestanding sign on either street frontage will
require the submission of a Comprehensive Sign Program. Placement of outdoor lighting
fixtures should also be integrated into the landscape design to also avoid shielding of the
lighting by tree canopy.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including but not limited to General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria
(Section 2-1304.C) have been met.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on October 30, 2003. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit retail sales (financial services) with deviations to allow direct
access to a major arterial street (North Belcher Road), to allow the use as a permitted use and
in a separate, primary building and to allow the use to serve patrons beyond the industrial area,
as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-1304.C for
the site at 1750 North Belcher Road, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for
Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive
Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-1304.C; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other
standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The
development is compatible with and will not be detrimental to developmenVredevelopment
efforts of the surrounding area. AND Conditions of Approval: 1) That the final design and color
of the buildings be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the
CDB; 2) That use of the building on the subject property be limited to a credit union with hours
of operation ending at 5:00 p.m. daily. The applicant shall record a covenant in the public
records restricting the use of this building on the subject property, as contained in this condition,
prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the credit union. Any future change of
use of this building to a bank shall require the following: a) Construction plans be submitted and
approved showing the installation of a left turn lane of adequate storage length, according to
City and Florida Department of Transportation design standards, on Calumet Street at North
Belcher Road. Construction of this improvement must be completed prior to the issuance of an
Occupational License for the bank and b) Establishment of an escrow account with the City,
prior to the issuance of an Occupational License for the bank, for the future construction of a
traffic signal light at the intersection of North Belcher Road and Calumet Street, if warranted by
a Traffic Signal Warrant Study. The funds in the escrow account will be a shared portion of the
full cost of a traffic signal light. The City's shared portion shall not exceed 50% of the full cost.
If, in the event that a traffic signal light is not warranted based on the Study, funds will be
refunded to the applicant; 3) That revised landscape plans be submitted and approved prior to
the issuance of building permits for the proposed credit union reflecting Code foundation
plantings; 4) That outdoor lighting fixtures be integrated into the landscape site design to avoid
shielding of the lighting by tree canopy; and 5) 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. Freestanding signage shall be limited to
Community Development 2003-12-16
9
.
.
.
monument-style, not to exceed six feet in height. Submission of a Comprehensive Sign
Program is required for more than one freestanding sign on either street frontage.
Assistant Planning Director Lisa Fierce reported a change to condition #2.
Representative Gerald Figurski accepted the change.
Acting Member Dennehy moved to approve Consent Agenda Item E4, Case FLD2003-
09047 for 1750 North Belcher Road with Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval as
listed. The motion was duly seconded. Members Gildersleeve, Moran, Plisko, Milam and
Acting Member Dennehy and Chair Hooper voted "Aye"; Member Mazur abstained. Motion
carried.
5. Case: FLD2003-09048 - 1211 - 1215 North Betty Lane Level Two Application
Owners: Everybody's Tabernacle, Inc., and Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
Applicant: Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
Representative: Barbara Green (1120 North Betty Lane, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone:
727-442-9041; fax: 727-443-4875).
Location: 0.62 acre located on the east side of North Betty Lane, across from Engman
Street.
Atlas Page: 269B.
Zoning: C, Commercial District.
Req uest:
Flexible Development approval to permit a residential shelter of eight units/beds in the
Commercial District at 1211 North Betty Lane with a reduction of the front (west) setback along
North Betty Lane from 25 feet to 17 feet (to stairway ramping) and from 25 feet to 23 feet (to
pavement), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section
2-704.B, as an amendment to a previously approved Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project (Case Nos. FLD 02-04-09 and FLD 02-04-09A) [which permitted a residential shelter of
eight units/beds at 1215 N. Betty Lane with reductions in the front (west) setback along North
Betty Lane from 25 feet to 15 feet (to stairwell) and from 25 feet to 23 feet (to building), a
reduction of the side (north) setback from 10 feet to four feet (to building) and a reduction in the
rear (east) setback from 20 feet to eight feet (to stairway ramping), under the provisions of
Section 2-704. B].
Proposed Use: Residential shelter of eight units/beds.
Neighborhood Association: None.
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Senior Planner.
Member Gildersleeve declared a conflict of interest.
The 0.62-acre overall site is located on the east side of North Betty Lane, across from
Engman Street. The original application (FLD 02-04-09, approved by the CDB on June 18,
2002, with five conditions) included three sites (Sites A, B and C) processed under an
"umbrella" use of Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, as a means to review a "master
plan" for development. The original site at 1215 North Betty Lane (Site B) was 0.35 acre, had
110 feet of frontage along North Betty Lane, and was approved by the CDB for a residential
shelter for eight units/beds and included front (west) setback reductions to pavement, building
and the western stairway, and a rear (east) setback reduction to stairway ramping. On
December 17, 2002, the CDB approved a Flexible Development application (FLD 02-04-09A)
with six conditions (the five original plus one new condition), as a revision to the previously
Community Development 2003-12-16
10
.
.
.
approved Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project for Site B for the residential shelter, in
order to relocate the building to the north by reducing the north side setback from 10 feet to four
feet (to building) and by further reducing the rear (east) setback from 20 feet to eight feet (to
stairway ramping). The purpose of that revision was to provide adequate area for development
should the property to the immediate south of this lot (1211 North Betty Lane) be acquired to
provide a similar residential shelter in the future. Both lots are zoned Commercial District.
Residential shelters are not a permitted use in the Commercial District, thereby requiring
Flexible Development approval as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project to permit the
use. The northern lot previously was developed with a retail sales building, while the southern
lot was developed with a commercial building used by a sail maker.
The proposal includes construction of a similar two-story, eight unit/bed residential
shelter of permanent supportive housing for homeless persons with disabilities on property at
1211 North Betty Lane as was previously approved, and currently under construction, on the
original property at 1215 North Betty Lane. The residential shelter buildings will situate on the
north and south sides of a common parking area of 16 spaces. The proposed buildings will be
of similar design and color, which will have an exterior stucco finish (beige with white columns,
railing and trim) and shingle roof (gray with greenish accent). The proposed buildings are
located on low-lying lots that must be elevated to meet FEMA requirements. To meet Building
Code requirements, the second floor is required to have stairways on the east and west sides of
each building. The first floor of each building will be handicap accessible. The handicap
ramping for the northern building at 1215 North Betty Lane (under construction) is on the east
side of the building. In order to avoid conflicts with the proposed retention pond, the proposal
includes handicap ramping (unenclosed) for the southern building to be placed on the west side
of the building at a front setback of 17 feet, where 25 feet is required by Code. The stairway on
the west side of the southern building meets the required front setback and the southern
building exceeds the front setback requirement (proposed at 33 feet front setback).
The proposal also includes a front setback reduction to proposed pavement from 25 feet
to 23 feet to allow a similar design for both parking areas north and south of the common drive
(a setback reduction to pavement for the parking on the north side of the drive previously was
granted by the CDB). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the site plan will need to be
revised to relocate the southern handicap parking space to the west end of the parking row to
meet accessibility requirements. A dumpster is proposed on the east end of the parking lot to
provide for trash collection for both residential shelter buildings. No freestanding signage is
proposed. All proposed on-site utilities, including electric, phone and cable television, will need
to be located underground. The development of these residential buildings, parking area and
landscape improvements will enhance the appearance of this overall site and the surrounding
area. To ensure compliance with Code landscape provisions for tree types and to resolve
conflicts of landscaping with the proposed southern building and/or parking area, the landscape
plan will need to be revised prior to the issuance of a building permit for the southern building.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including but not limited to General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria
(Section 2-704.C) have been met.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on October 30, 2003. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit a residential shelter of eight units/beds in the Commercial
Community Development 2003-12-16
11
.
.
.
District at 1211 North Betty Lane with a reduction of the front (west) setback along North Betty
Lane from 25 feet to 17 feet (to stairway ramping) and from 25 feet to 23 feet (to pavement), as
a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C, as an
amendment to a previously approved Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project (Case Nos.
FLD 02-04-09 and FLD 02-04-09A) [which permitted a residential shelter of eight units/beds at
1215 North Betty Lane with reductions in the front (west) setback along North Betty Lane from
25 feet to 15 feet (to stairwell) and from 25 feet to 23 feet (to building), a reduction of the side
(north) setback from 10 feet to four feet (to building) and a reduction in the rear (east) setback
from 20 feet to eight feet (to stairway ramping), under the provisions of Section 2-704.B] for the
site at 1211 - 1215 North Betty Lane, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for
Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive
Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-704.C; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other
standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The
development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment
efforts AND Conditions of Approval: 1) * That any change in ownership on Site A (retail thrift
store) be evaluated for complementary operational characteristics and parking demand, and
may require approval by the CDB; 2) * That the landscape plan for Site C be amended to
include a hedge along the north and east sides of the parking lot in the northeast corner of the
property, to the satisfaction of Staff, prior to the issuance of any permits for Site C
improvements; 3) * That any existing or future dumpsters on either Sites A, B or C be located,
designed, properly enclosed and constructed in accordance with City standards; 4) * That the
color of proposed buildings be consistent with existing buildings and be approved by City staff
prior to the issuance of building permits for those buildings; 5) * That all signage meet Code,
including the removal/redesign of any existing nonconforming signs, through building permits
prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the applicable site; 6) That a Unity of Title
be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit for the southern building; 7) That each
residential shelter building be for a maximum of eight units/beds; 8) That, prior to the issuance
of a Certificate of Occupancy for the southern building, the site plan be revised to relocate the
southern handicap parking space to the west end of the parking row to meet accessibility
requirements; 9) That the landscape plan be revised prior to the issuance of a building permit
for the southern building to ensure compliance with the landscape provisions of the Code for
tree types and to resolve conflicts of landscaping with the proposed southern building and/or
parking area; and 10) That all proposed on-site utilities, including electric, phone and cable
television, be located underground. (* Previously imposed under Case No. FLD 02-04-09 and
FLD 02-04-09A)
AND
Community Development 2003-12-16
12
.
.
.
6. Case: FLD2003-09049 - 1003 Carlton Street Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
Representative: Barbara Green (1120 North Betty Lane, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone:
727 -442-9041; fax: 727-443-4875).
Location: 0.172 acre on the south side of Carlton Street, approximately 100 feet west of
the intersection with Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue.
Atlas Page: 269A.
Zoning: C, Commercial District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit a residential shelter of four beds with a reduction of the
front (north) setback from 25 feet to five feet (to pavement), a reduction of the side (east)
setback from 10 feet to 4.46 feet (to pavement), and to permit parking that is designed to back
out into the public right-of-way, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under
the provisions of Section 2-803.C, and a reduction of the side (west) landscape buffer from 12
feet to 10 feet, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section
3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Residential shelter.
Neighborhood Association: North Greenwood Association (Jonathon Wade, 908 Pennsylvania
Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone: 727-461-5291).
Presenter: Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Senior Planner.
Member Gildersleeve declared a conflict of interest.
The 0.172-acre overall site is located on the south side of Carlton Street, approximately
100 feet west of the intersection with Martin Luther Ling, Jr. Avenue. The proposed site is a
vacant lot, located within a predominantly single-family residential neighborhood. The proposal
is to construct a one-story, four bed residential shelter of permanent supportive housing for
homeless persons.
The proposed 2,406 square-foot building will have an exterior stucco finish (light yellow)
a front porch with columns, railing and trim and green-pitched roof. The building will have an
exterior appearance of a single-family residential home. Proposed parking includes a one-car
garage and two exterior parking spaces. The proposed design of the house is aesthetically
attractive and fits the scale of the neighborhood.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on October 30, 2003. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit a residential shelter of four beds with a reduction of the front
(north) setback from 25 feet to five feet (to pavement), a reduction of the side (east) setback
from 10 feet to 4.46 feet (to pavement), and to permit parking that is designed to back out into
the public right-of-way, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the
provisions of Section 2-803.C, and a reduction of the side (west) landscape buffer from 12 feet
to 10 feet, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-
1202.G, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies
with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per
Section 2-704.C; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including
the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The development is compatible with
the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts AND Conditions of Approval:
1) A SWFWMD (Southwest Florida Water Management District) permit needs to be provided
Community Development 2003-12-16
13
.
.
.
prior to issuance of any building permits; 2) That all signage meet Code; 3) That there be a
maximum of four beds; and 4) That all proposed on-site utilities, including electric, phone and
cable television, be located underground.
Member Mazur moved to approve Consent Agenda Items E5, Case: FLD2003-09048 for
1211 - 1215 North Betty Lane with Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed and
E6, Case: FLD2003-09049 for 1003 Carlton Street with Bases of Approval and Conditions of
Approval as listed. The motion was duly seconded. Members Mazur, Moran, Plisko, Milam
and Acting Member Dennehy and Chair Hooper voted "Aye"; Member Gildersleeve abstained.
Motion carried.
7. Case: FLD2003-09045 - 700 S. Gulfview Boulevard Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Elias Anastasopoulas.
Representative: Alex Plisko, Plisko Architecture, PA (800 Drew Street, Clearwater, FL
33755; phone: 727-442-7200; fax: 727-447-6914; email: archp@verizon.net).
Location: 0.51 acre located on the north side of Gulfview Boulevard at the intersection
with Parkway Drive.
Atlas Page: 285A.
Zoning: T, Tourist District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit retail sales and services with a reduction of the front
(south) setback from 15 feet to four feet (to pavement), reductions of the front (west) setback
from 15 feet to two feet (to building) and from 15 feet to zero feet (to sidewalk), reductions of the
side (north) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to ramp), from 10 feet to one foot (to building) and
from 10 feet to five feet (to rubber matting), reductions of the side (east) setback from 10 feet to
zero feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to three feet (to rubber matting), a reduction of
required parking from five spaces per 1,000 square feet (38 spaces) to 3.19 spaces per 1,000
square feet (23 spaces) and a reduction in the width of the required foundation landscaping
adjacent to the building from five feet to two feet, as part of a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C.
Proposed Use: A 7,610 square-foot retail sales and services building.
Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Beach Association (Pres. David MacNamee, 827
Mandalay Ave., Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-446-5801; e-mail: dmacnav@att.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Senior Planner.
Member Plisko declared a conflict of interest.
The 0.51-acre site is located on the north side of Gulfview Boulevard at the intersection
with Parkway Drive and is zoned Tourist District. It is located within a highly developed, tourist-
dominated area of South Clearwater beach. This site was developed with a bank including four
drive-thru lanes, which has been demolished. The balance of this block is developed with the
Bay Bazaar Shopping Center. The site is located within the South Beach/Clearwater Pass
District of Beach By Design, which is a distinctive area of mixed uses, including high-rise
condominiums, resort hotels, and commercial uses. Beach by Design contemplates this district
will be an area of strategic revitalization and renovation in response to improving conditions on
the balance of Clearwater Beach. There are four active redevelopment projects for residential
uses (townhouses and condominium) at 620,656,674 and 692 Bayway Boulevard. The Bay
Bazaar Shopping Center was approved, but has yet to be constructed, under FL 00-11-49 to
add a restaurant on the eastern end of the shopping center adjacent to Gulf Boulevard.
Community Development 2003-12-16
14
.
.
.
The proposal includes constructing a one-story, 7,200 square-foot retail sales building
with 23 parking spaces in place of the former bank building. The style and exterior color (walls:
peach; accent trim: red orange; peaked roof accent: Spanish clay tile) of the proposed building
will be similar to the existing Surf Style building at 422 Mandalay Avenue, approved by the COB
under Case FLD2002-07018. The building will be oriented toward South Gulfview Boulevard,
with its main pedestrian entrance adjacent to Parkway Drive and a secondary pedestrian
entrance facing South Gulfview Boulevard. In order to meet Building Code requirements for
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), the building is designed with a wall inside
the outside windows providing a separate display area that is flood proofed (only employees can
access this perimeter display area thru flood proofed access doors). Building pedestrian access
areas are otherwise protected through acceptable flood proofing methods. A small mezzanine
area is planned above the restrooms and dressing rooms in the northwest corner of the building.
The applicant is proposing an interactive water feature (actual design not yet selected by the
applicant) on the east side of the building with drainable rubber matting. The proposed parking
lot design, oriented east to west, will act as an extension of the adjacent Bay Bazaar Shopping
Center parking lot. The northern driveway on South Gulfview Boulevard for the Bay Bazaar
Shopping Center will be rebuilt as part of this proposal to be a joint driveway straddling the
property line (therefore, the reason for the requested zero side setback request). The proposed
parking lot also will have a right inlright out driveway on Parkway Drive, due to Parkway Drive
having a landscaped median. A small retention area is planned at the southwest corner of the
property.
The applicant is requesting setback reductions to the proposed building, to the proposed
rubber matting for the interactive water feature and to the proposed pavement. The property
owner also imposed certain site design constraints to accommodate the design, location and
tenants of the adjacent Bay Bazaar Shopping Center. The proposed building has been
positioned to not visually block the adjacent building to the south. Additionally, a 30-foot wide
view corridor was required to allow views of the entrance to the pub to the east (as part of the
Bay Bazaar Shopping Center). To comply with these design parameters, the applicant
designed the site parallel with South Gulfview Boulevard. The parcel is not a rectangular site,
thereby producing some of the requested reductions. The proposed site design also complies
with Beach by Design criteria, requiring the building to be positioned close to the right-of-way of
Parkway Drive to allow for a pedestrian friendly building. The applicant is requesting a
reduction of the front setback along South Gulfview Boulevard from 15 feet to four feet (to
pavement) to be consistent with landscape areas on the adjacent Bay Bazaar Shopping Center.
By complying with Beach by Design, the site design produces requests to reduce the front
(west) setback from 15 feet to two feet for the building and from 15 feet to zero feet for the
handicap sidewalk ramp (due to the change in site elevation). The applicant also has designed
a ramp on the north side of the building at a zero-foot setback to allow for deliveries. Due to the
irregularities of the northern property line and the lining-up of the site improvements parallel with
South Gulfview Boulevard, the building position at its closest point to the property line produces
a one-foot setback. The rubber matting for the interactive water feature has been positioned at
a five-foot setback from the north property line and a three-foot setback from the east property
line. As previously mentioned, the requested zero-foot setback to pavement from the east
property line is a function of the redesign to provide a joint-use driveway straddling the property
line with the adjacent Bay Bazaar Shopping Center.
Community Development 2003-12-16
15
.
Additionally, the applicant is requesting a reduction of the required five-foot width of the
building foundation planting area to as little as a two-foot width. The width varies between two
feet on the eastern portion of the building and three-feet, seven-inch on the western building
portion. This width, again, is a product of applicant and site design constraints. The requested
setback reductions are consistent with setbacks on the adjacent property and with other
commercial properties in the vicinity, as well as desired under Beach by Design. The proposal
will be compatible with the surrounding development and may influence redevelopment efforts
for commercially developed property in the vicinity.
.
The applicant is requesting a reduction of the amount of parking spaces required for this
retail sales establishment from five spaces per 1,000 square-feet (36 spaces) to 3.19 spaces
per 1,000 square-feet (23 spaces). Considering building square footage devoted to actual retail
sales area accessible to customers, the window display areas (discussed above) and storage
mezzanine reduces the square footage from 7,200 to 6,182 square-feet, effectively producing a
parking ratio of 3.72 spaces per 1,000 square feet (based on the 23 spaces provided). As a
point of reference, the Flexible Standard Development parking standards for retail sales and
services in the Tourist District provides a range between four and five spaces per 1,000 square
feet. The applicant has provided documentation showing 83 existing parallel parking spaces
available to the general public within the rights-of-way of South Gulfview Boulevard and Bayway
Boulevard within 1,000 feet of the subject property. A parking analysis submitted for the
expansion of the adjacent Bay Bazaar Shopping Center (approved under FL 00-11-49, not
constructed) indicated that existing parking at the shopping center was underutilized and would
be sufficient for the proposed expansion. The developer also operates the Surf Style retail store
at 422 Mandalay Avenue, which has no on-site parking, utilizing on-street and parking lot
parking spaces within the vicinity and has indicated no issues related to inadequate provided
parking. The developer is relying on the tourist trade from the surrounding area walking to the
proposed retail store, much as it exists at the existing store on Mandalay Avenue.
The applicant proposes to utilize the existing adjacent dumpster on the property to the
north. An agreement with the abutting property owner will be necessary, acceptable to the Solid
Waste Department, prior to the issuance of any permits for this project. While there is a small
retention pond provided, the applicant will need to make payment in lieu of stormwater
attenuation to the City prior the issuance of any building permits. There are overhead utilities
within the abutting rights-of-way. All proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed
building) will be required to be placed underground and installation of conduit(s) along the entire
length of the site's street frontage be completed prior to the issuance of the certificate of
occupancy to provide for the future undergrounding of these existing overhead utilities. While
the former bank building has been removed from the site, there still exists parking areas and a
freestanding sign. This existing freestanding sign will be removed and only attached signage
provided on the proposed building. Since two attached signs are proposed, signage will need to
be processed through the Comprehensive Sign Program. The applicant has specified Natal
plum shrubs along the sidewalk on South Gulfview Boulevard. This shrub has thorns, is
poisonous, and should not be used along pedestrian paths. Prior to the issuance of any
building permits, the landscape plan should change this shrubbery to another suitable plant.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including but not limited to General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria
(Section 2-803.C) have been met.
.
Community Development 2003-12-16
16
.
.
.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on October 30, 2003. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit retail sales and services with a reduction of the front (south)
setback from 15 feet to four feet (to pavement), reductions of the front (west) setback from 15
feet to two feet (to building) and from 15 feet to zero feet (to sidewalk), reductions of the side
(north) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to ramp), from 10 feet to one foot (to building) and from
10 feet to five feet (to rubber matting), reductions of the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero
feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to three feet (to rubber matting), a reduction of required
parking from five spaces per 1,000 square-feet (36 spaces) to 3.19 spaces per 1,000 square-
feet (23 spaces) and a reduction in the width of the required foundation landscaping adjacent to
the building from five feet to two feet, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project,
under the provisions of Section 2-803.C for the site at 700 South Gulfview Boulevard, with the
following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible
Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C; 2)
The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General
Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The development is compatible with the
surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts AND Conditions of Approval: 1)
That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations
submitted to, or as modified by, the COB; 2) That a Unity of Title be recorded in the public
records prior to the issuance of any building permit; 3) That an agreement with the abutting
property owner for joint use of the dumpster on the adjacent property is required, acceptable to
the Solid Waste Department, prior to the issuance of any building permits; 4) That, in lieu of
stormwater attenuation, payment be made to the City, in an amount determined by the City,
prior the issuance of any building permits; 5) That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to
the proposed building) be placed underground and installation of conduit(s) along the entire
length of the site's street frontages be completed prior to the issuance of the certificate of
occupancy; 6) That signage meet the requirements of Code and a Comprehensive Sign
Program be processed for more than one attached sign. Any freestanding signage shall be
limited to monument-style, not to exceed six-feet in height designed to match the color and
material of the building; and 7) That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, the landscape
plan be revised to change the Natal palm shrubs to a suitable plant, acceptable to the Planning
Department.
Member Gildersleeve moved to approve Consent Agenda Item E7, Case: FLD2003-
09045 for 700 S. Gulfview Boulevard with Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval as
listed. The motion was duly seconded. Members Gildersleeve, Mazur, Moran, Milam and
Acting Member Dennehy and Chair Hooper voted "Aye"; Member Plisko abstained. Motion
carried.
Community Development 2003-12-16
17
.
.
.
8. Case: FLD2003-09053 - 2575 Enterprise Road Level Two Application
Owner: ABR Plymouth Plaza, LTD.
Applicant: Tampa Bay Water, Jerry L. Maxwell, General Manager.
Representative: Steve Luce, URS Corporation (7650 W. Courtney Campbell Causeway,
Tampa, FL 33607; phone: 813-636-2418).
Location: 3.8 acres on the north side of Enterprise Road, approximately 750 feet north of
Countryside Boulevard.
Atlas Page: 221A.
Zoning: 0, Office District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit an office building with an increase of building height
from 30 feet to 55 feet and a reduction of the side (east) setback from 20 feet to 10 feet (to
pavement), under the provisions of Section 2-1004.F.
Proposed Use: 37,000 square foot three-story office building.
Neighborhood Association: None.
Presenter: Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Senior Planner.
This 3.8-acre site is located on the north side of Enterprise Road, approximately 750 feet
north of Countryside Boulevard. The predominant character of the immediate vicinity is office
and retail. The proposal is to construct a 37,000 square-foot three-story office building to serve
as the headquarters for Tampa Bay Water. The proposed building will have a light in color brick
finish and a pitched roof. A covered walkway is proposed to connect the building to an existing
parking garage located immediately east of the site. The site plan proposes 220 parking
spaces, with 52 spaces located onsite and the remainder within the adjacent parking garage.
The applicant is seeking flexible approval for two deviations from the Community
Development Code: 1) an increase of building height from 30 feet to 55 feet and 2) a reduction
of the side (east) setback from 20 feet to 10 feet (to pavement), under the provisions of Section
2-1004.F. The maximum building height reduction is sought to accommodate the building
design, which includes a pitched roof. The height of the building allows for greater vegetative
space on the site. The proposal exceeds the typical green space submittal by including an
Irrigation Training/Education Area to consist of irrigation/landscape test plots, passive
observations by practitioners, and an anticipated two to three field classes per year.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on October 30, 2003. The Planning Department recommends approval of the application for
Flexible Development approval to permit an office building with an increase of building height
from 30 feet to 55 feet and a reduction of the side (east) setback from 20 feet to 10 feet (to
pavement), under the provisions of Section 2-1004.F., with the following bases and conditions:
Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria per Section
2-1004.F; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the
General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The development is compatible with the
surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts AND Conditions of Approval: 1)
That a SWFWMD (Southwest Florida Water Management District) permit needs to be provided
prior to issuance of any building permits; 2) That all signage meet Code, consist of channel
letters for any wall signs, and be architecturally integrated to the design of the building and site;
3) That prior to building permit, provide a revised tree survey, accurately indicating the size of
the pine trees; 4) That the irrigation plan be revised to avoid tree impacts, prior to building
Community Development 2003-12-16
18
.
permit; and 5) That the Tree Preservation Plan be revised to reflect modifications, prior to
building permit.
AND
.
9. Case: FLD2003-08038/PL T2003-00012 - 2525 Druid Road Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: South Gate Park, Inc.
Representative: Keith Lawes (300 6th Street North, Suite 7, Safety Harbor, FL 34695).
Location: 3.35 acres located on the south side of Druid Road, on the south side of Druid
Road, approximately 600 feet west of US Highway 19.
Atlas Page: 299B.
Zoning: MDR, Medium Density Residential District and P, Preservation District (pending
ANX2003-08021 and LUZ2003-08006).
Req uest:
Flexible Development approval to permit attached dwellings with a reduction of the side (west)
setback from five feet to zero feet (to existing pavement), an increase of building height to allow
perimeter parapets an additional six feet (from roof deck) and a deviation from the requirement
to screen off-street parking from adjacent parcels of land and any adjacent street, as a
Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-304.G, and Preliminary Plat approval
for 10 lots.
Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (10 units, five per building).
Neighborhood Associations: Tropic Hills Neighborhood Association (Michael Sobota, 2472
Burnice Drive, Clearwater, FL 33764; phone: 813-494-3059, e-mail: tropichills@hotmail.com);
and South Gate Homeowners Inc. (South Gate Park Board of Directors, 20000 US 19 North,
Clearwater, FL 33764; phone: 727-726-7888).
Presenter: Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Senior Planner.
This 3.35-acre site is located on the south side of Druid Road, on the south side of Druid
Road, approximately 600 feet west of US Highway 19. It is located to the immediate north of an
existing mobile home park. Mobile homes, commercial, and vacant land dominate the
immediate vicinity. The site is proposed to be re-zoned as Medium Density Residential District
and the land use is in compliance with the proposed zoning.
The proposal is to construct attached dwellings, 10 units total within two buildings, with
five units per building. All applicable Code requirements and criteria including but not limited to
General Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Residentiallnfill Project criteria (Section 2-
304.G) have been met. The applicant is seeking flexible approval to permit attached dwellings
with a reduction of the side (west) setback from five feet to zero feet (to existing pavement), an
increase of building height to allow perimeter parapets an additional six feet (from roof deck)
and a deviation from the requirement to screen off-street parking from adjacent parcels of land
and any adjacent street, as a Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-304.G,
and Preliminary Plat approval for 10 lots. The west side setback to pavement reduction is
sought because the access roadway to the mobile home park already exists. The additional
building height requested will allow for unique building design. The deviation from the
requirement to screen off-street parking is to address the residential driveways.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on October 30, 2003. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit attached dwellings with a reduction of the side (west) setback
.
Community Development 2003-12-16
19
.
.
'.
from five feet to zero feet (to existing pavement), an increase of building height to allow
perimeter parapets an additional six feet (from roof deck) and a deviation from the requirement
to screen off-street parking from adjacent parcels of land and any adjacent street, as a
Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-304.G, and Preliminary Plat approval
for 10 lots, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal
complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residentiallnfill Project per Section 2-
304.G; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General
Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The development is compatible with the
surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts AND Conditions of Approval: 1)
Open Space, Recreation Land and Recreation Facility impact fees must be satisfied prior to the
issuance of building permits or final plat, whichever occurs first; 2) Provide copy of SWFWMD
(Southwest Florida Water Management District) permit prior to building permit; 3) Traffic Impact
Fees to be determined and paid prior to Certificate of Occupancy issuance; 4) Provide a letter
from the South Gate Mobile Home Park granting a turn-around access for solid waste pickup,
prior to Certificate of Occupancy; 5) Address all Fire Department requirements prior to building
permit issuance; 6) For wetland buffer encroachment, all exotic plant species must be removed
from the remaining portion of the owner's property (prior to Certificate of Occupancy) and the
property must be maintained to prevent future growth of exotics; 7) Present a letter of approval
from Progress Energy for the installation and future maintenance of the landscaping shown on
their parcel prior to issuance of a building permit; 8) That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-
way to the proposed buildings) be placed underground and installation of conduit(s) along the
entire length of the site's street frontage be completed prior to the issuance of the first certificate
of occupancy; and 9) That no building permits be issued until recording of the final plat.
AND
10. Case: FLD2003-09043 - 1601 Sand Key Estates Court Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Mr. and Mrs. Dean Carley (1601 Sand Key Estates Court/Tel. 727-
595-1634).
Location: 0.196 acre located on the southeast side of Sand Key Estates Court and south
of Sand Key Estates Drive, at the intersection of both streets.
Atlas Page: 319B.
Zoning: HDR, High Density Residential District..,.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to reduce the rear (east) setback from 15 feet to zero feet as
part of a Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C.
Proposed Use: Residential deck.
Neighborhood Association: Sand Key Civic Association (President, Bob Henion, 1480 Gulf
Blvd., #102, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-596-4348; email: DBo1438013@aol.com).
Presenter: Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Senior Planner.
The 0.196-acre site is located on the east side of Sand Key Estates Court and south of
Sand Key Estates Drive, at the intersection of both streets. It is located within a single-family
developed area. The site contains an existing single-family dwelling. The site has one existing
driveway along the northwest property line (Sand Key Estates Court). The site is zoned High
Density Residential District and the land use is in compliance with the zoning.
The proposal is to construct a wooden deck at the rear of the property, at the existing
sea wall. The deck is intended to frame the existing swimming pool to the south and to the east.
Community Development 2003-12-16
20
.
.
.
The provision of the deck would reduce the rear setback to zero feet, where 15 feet is required.
The deck is proposed to extend into a drainage and seawall maintenance easement.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including but not limited to General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Residentiallnfill Project criteria (Section 2-1 03.B) have
been met.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on October 30, 2003. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to reduce the rear (east) setback from 15 feet to zero feet as part of a
Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C., with the following bases and
condition: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria
as a Residentiallnfill Project per Section 2-504.F; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other
standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The
development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment
efforts AND Condition of Approval: That a condition of the building permit state that the City of
Clearwater, for any reason, can remove the section of the deck, which extends into a drainage
and seawall maintenance easement, and that should such removal occur, that the City is not
obliged to replace the deck.
AND
11. Case: ANX2003-09023 - 1813 Brentwood Drive Level Three Application
Owner/Applicant: Serafino Caraco.
Representative: Riccardo S. Caraco (phone: 978-667-0940).
Location: 0.23-acre located on the south side of Brentwood Drive, approximately 180
feet east of Keene Road and 110 feet north of Lakeview Road.
Atlas Page: 308A.
Request:
a) Annexation of 0.23 acre to the City of Clearwater;
b) Land Use Plan amendment from the RL, Residential Low Category (County) to the RL,
Residential Low Category (City of Clearwater); and
c) Rezoning from the R3, Single Family Residential District (County) to the LMDR, Low Medium
Density Residential District (City of Clearwater).
Proposed Use: Existing single-family dwelling.
Neighborhood Association(s): None.
Presenter: Marc A. Mariano, Planner.
The subject property is located at 1813 Brentwood Drive, on the south side of the street
approximately 180 feet east of South Keene Road and 110 feet north of Lakeview Road. The
applicant is requesting this annexation in order to receive City sewer service. The property is
contiguous with the existing City boundaries to the north and west; therefore, the proposed
annexation is consistent with Florida Statutes with regard to voluntary annexation. The subject
site is approximately 0.23-acre in area and is occupied by an existing single-family detached
dwelling. It is proposed that the property have a Future Land Use Plan designation of
Residential Low (RL) and a zoning category of LMDR, Low Medium Density Residential
The proposed annexation can be served by City of Clearwater services, including
sanitary sewer, solid waste, police, fire and emergency medical services without any adverse
Community Development 2003-12-16
21
.
.
.
effect on the service level. The applicant has paid the assessment fee and the impact fee
required for sewer connection, and is aware of any additional costs to extend City sewer service
to the property.
The proposed annexation and existing use are consistent with the City's Comprehensive
Plan and the Pinellas Planning Council's Countywide Plan Rules with regard to both the Future
Land Use Map, as well as the goals and policies. The existing and proposed use of this site as
a single-family dwelling is consistent with the LMDR zoning district. Finally, the proposed
annexation is consistent with Florida law regarding municipal annexation through its adjacency
with existing City boundaries and is compact in concentration.
Based on its analysis, the Planning Department recommends approval of the: 1)
annexation of the property located at 1813 Brentwood Drive; 2) Residential Low (RL) category
pursuant to the City's Comprehensive Plan, and 3) LMDR, Low Medium Density Residential
zoning district pursuant to the City's Community Development Code.
AND
12. Level Three Application
Case: ANX2003-09024 - 309 & 323 Meadow Lark Lane; and 3040 Carolina Avenue
Owner/Applicant: Crum Properties, LLC.
Representative: Elise B. Lynn, Esquire; Piper Rudnick, LLP (101 East Kennedy
Boulevard, Suite 2000; Tampa, Florida 33602; phone: 813-229-2111).
Location: 1.3-acre located on the east side of Meadow Lark Lane, approximately 350
feet north of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and 560 feet west of McMullen-Booth Road.
Atlas Page: 292A.
Request:
a) Annexation of 1.3-acres of property and 0.71-acre of the abutting Tennessee Avenue, Bay
Street and Carolina Avenue rights-of-way to the City of Clearwater;
b) Land Use Plan amendment from the RU, Residential Urban Category (County) to the RU,
Residential Urban Category (City of Clearwater); and
c) Rezoning from the R3, Single Family Residential District (County) to the LMDR, Low Medium
Density Residential District (City of Clearwater).
Proposed Use: Parking facility.
Neighborhood Association(s): None.
Presenter: Marc A. Mariano, Planner.
The subject site is located on the east side of Meadow Lark Lane at 309 and 323
Meadow Lark Lane and 3040 Carolina Avenue, approximately 350 feet north of Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard and 560 feet west of McMullen-Booth Road. The site consists of four parcels totaling
1.2-acres and containing an unoccupied single-family detached dwelling and an existing office.
The applicant is requesting this annexation in order to develop the property as an accessory
parking facility for its adjacent, existing office use to the south. The proposed use of this site as
a parking facility would only be permitted in the LMDR zoning district as a Residentiallnfill
project, and would require approval by the Community Development Board. At this time, no
application for the proposed development project has been filed. The property is contiguous
with the existing City boundaries to the north, south and west; therefore, the proposed
annexation is consistent with Florida Statutes with regard to voluntary annexation. It is
proposed that the abutting Tennessee Avenue, Carolina Avenue and Bay Street rights-of-way
Community Development 2003-12-16
22
.
.
.
not currently within the City limits also be annexed. The applicant is requesting that the property
have a Future Land Use Plan designation of Residential Urban (RU) and a zoning category of
LMDR, Low Medium Density Residential.
The proposed annexation can be served by City of Clearwater services, including
sanitary sewer, solid waste, police, fire and emergency medical services without any adverse
effect on the service level. The applicant is aware of the required sanitary sewer impact fee and
assessment fee, as well as the additional cost to connect the property to the City sewer systems
in the event the existing uses remain or new development occurs, which requires these
services.
The proposed annexation and the single-family dwelling are consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan and the Countywide Plan with regard to the Future Land Use Map and its
goals and policies. Finally, the proposed annexation is consistent with Florida law regarding
municipal annexation through its adjacency with existing City boundaries and is compact in
concentration.
Based on its analysis, the Planning Department recommends approval of 1) the
annexation of the properties located at 309 and 323 Meadow Lark Lane and 3040 Carolina
Avenue and the abutting Tennessee Avenue, Bay Street and Carolina Avenue rights-of-way; 2)
the Residential Urban (RU) category pursuant to the City's Comprehensive Plan; and 3) the
LMDR, Low Medium Density Residential zoning district pursuant to the City's Community
Development Code.
AND
13. Level Three Application
Case: LUZ2003-09008 - 1219 South Fort Harrison Avenue, 509 Jeffords Street and 508
& 512 Grand Central Street
Owner/Applicant: O'Keefe's Incorporated.
Representative: Anne K. Dornhofer, O'Keefe's Incorporated (1219 South Fort Harrison
Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756; work: 727-442-9034; home: 727-584-1305).
Location: 1.46-acres located at the southeast corner of South Fort Harrison Avenue and
Jeffords Street.
Atlas Page: 305B.
Request:
a) Land Use Plan amendment from the IL, Industrial Limited Classification to the CG,
Commercial General Classification; and
b) Rezoning from the IRT, Industrial Research Technology District to the C, Commercial District.
Proposed Use: Existing restaurant.
Neighborhood Association(s): None.
Land Use Plan Amendment Category: Small Scale
Presenter: Marc A. Mariano, Planner.
The Future Land Use Plan amendment and rezoning application involves four parcels of
land, approximately 1.46-acres in area and occupied by a restaurant use, with an accessory
office and storage use. When the restaurant use was established in 1961, the site was zoned
CG, Commercial General on the front portion of the site and IL, Industrial Limited on the rear
portion and restaurants were permitted in these districts. In 1985, the City adopted revisions to
Community Development 2003-12-16
23
.
.
.
its Land Development Code and the entire site was reclassified to the IL, Industrial Limited
zoning district and the restaurant was permitted in this District as well. In 1999, the City
adopted a new Community Development Code and the site's zoning designation was
reclassified to the IRT, Industrial Research Technology District. Restaurants are not permitted
in this zoning district; therefore the existing main use of the property was rendered
nonconforming. The applicant is proposing to amend the Future Land Use Plan designation of
this property from the Industrial Limited (IL) category to the Commercial General (CG) category
and to rezone it from the IRT, Industrial Research Technology District to the C, Commercial
District to render this site conforming and ultimately submit a development application for the
construction of an outdoor seating area.
In accordance with the Countywide Plan Rules, the land use plan amendment is subject
to approval by the Pinellas Planning Council and Board of County Commissioners acting as the
Countywide Planning Authority. Based on the acreage involved in this plan amendment, review
and approval by the Florida Department of Community Affairs is not required. An amendment to
the Future Land Use Plan from Industrial Limited (IL) to Commercial General (CG) and a
rezoning from the IRT, Industrial Research Technology District to the C, Commercial General
District for the subject property is necessary to bring this existing non-conforming use into
compliance with the Community Development Code. The neighborhood is surrounded by
warehouses to the east and south, offices to the north, and a vacant site to the west
The proposed Commercial General Future Land Use Plan classification and Commercial
zoning district are consistent with both the City and the Countywide Comprehensive Plans, is
compatible with the surrounding area, does not require nor affect the provision of public
services, is compatible with the natural environment and is consistent with the development
regulations of the City.
The Planning Department recommends approval of amending the Future Land Use Plan
designation of 1219 South Fort Harrison Avenue, 509 Jeffords Street and 508 & 512 Grand
Central Street from Industrial Limited (IL) to Commercial General (CG), and amending the
zoning district designation of 1219 South Fort Harrison Avenue, 509 Jeffords Street and 508 &
512 Grand Central Street from the IRT, Industrial Research Technology District to the C,
Commercial District.
AND
Community Development 2003-12-16
24
.
.
.
14. Case: LUZ2003-09009 - 2261 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Level Three Application
Owner: Ralph Englert, Trust; Jean Englert, Trust; George and Margaret Brunning TIE;
Eva Brunning and Georgia V. Lenard, Trustee.
Applicant: Robert Szasz, Vice President; R & S Investment of Pinellas (162 Brent Circle;
Oldsmar; Florida 34677; phone: 813-925-1260).
Location: 1.31-acres located at the south side of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, approximately
600 feet east of Belcher Road.
Atlas Page: 299A.
Request:
a) Land Use Plan amendment from the RLM, Residential Low Medium Classification to the CG,
Commercial General Classification; and
b) Rezoning from the MHP, Mobile Home Park District to the C, Commercial District.
Proposed Use: Restaurant.
Neighborhood Association(s): None.
Land Use Plan Amendment Category: Small Scale.
Presenter: Marc A. Mariano, Planner.
The Future Land Use Plan amendment and rezoning application involves one vacant
parcel of land, approximately 1.31-acres in area. The site has a Future Land Use Plan
designation of Residential Low Medium (RLM) and a zoning classification of MHP, Mobile Home
Park. The applicant is requesting to amend the Future Land Use Plan designation to the
Commercial General (CG) category and to rezone it to the C, Commercial District to develop a
retail center on the site.
In accordance with the Countywide Plan Rules, the land use plan amendment is subject
to approval by the Pinellas Planning Council and Board of County Commissioners acting as the
Countywide Planning Authority. Based on the acreage and density involved in this plan
amendment, review and approval by the Florida Department of Community Affairs is not
required.
An amendment to the Future Land Use Plan from Residential Low Medium (RLM) to
Commercial General (CG) and a rezoning from the MHP, Mobile Home Park District to the C,
Commercial District for the subject property is requested in order to develop a retail center on
the site. The neighborhood is surrounded by overnight accommodations to the east, retail and a
restaurant to the west, overnight accommodations, retail, offices and a mobile home park to the
north, and a mobile home park to the south.
The proposed Commercial General (CG) Future Land Use Plan classification and C,
Commercial District zoning district are consistent with both the City and the Countywide
Comprehensive Plans, is compatible with the surrounding area, does not require nor affect the
provision of public services, is compatible with the natural environment and is consistent with
the development regulations of the City.
The Planning Department recommends approval of amending the Future Land Use Plan
designation of 2261 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard from the Residential Low Medium (RLM) category to
the Commercial General (CG) category, and amending the zoning district designation of 2261
Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard from the MHP, Mobile Home Park District to the C, Commercial.
Community Development 2003-12-16
25
.
.
.
Member Gildersleeve moved to approve Consent Agenda Items E2, Case: FLD2003-
09046/PL T2003-00011 for 181 Brightwater Drive, with Bases of Approval and Conditions of
Approval as listed, E3, Case: FLD2003-09044 for 692 Bayway Boulevard with Bases of
Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, E8, Case: FLD2003-09053 for 2575 Enterprise
Road with Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, E9, Case: FLD2003-
08038/PL T2003-00012 for 2525 Druid Road with Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval
as listed, and E10, Case: FLD2003-09043 for 1601 Sand Key Estates Court with Bases of
Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, and recommend approval of E11, Case:
ANX2003-09023 for 1813 Brentwood Drive, E12, Case: ANX2003-09024 for 309 & 323 Meadow
Lark Lane and 3040 Carolina Avenue, E13, Case: LUZ2003-09008 for 1219 South Fort Harrison
Avenue, 509 Jeffords Street and 508 & 512 Grand Central Street, and E14, Case: LUZ2003-
09009 for 2261 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
15. Case: LUZ2003-09010 - 2301 Chautauqua Avenue Level Three Application
Applicant: Rottlund Homes of Florida, Incorporated.
Owner: Lawrence H. Dimmitt and Larry H. Dimmitt, Jr.
Representative: Robert Pergolizzi, Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. (13630 58th Street North,
Suite 110; Clearwater, Florida 33756; phone: 727-524-1818).
Location: 23.01-acres located at the east side of Chautauqua Avenue, approximately
600 feet east of U.S. Highway 19 North.
Atlas Page: 244A.
Request:
a) Provide an initial Future Land Use Plan designation to the RS, Residential Suburban (City),
P, Preservation (City) and Water (City) Categories for property annexed into the City of
Clearwater on July 18, 2002, pursuant to ANX 02-02-04; and
b) Provide an initial zoning designation to the LDR, Low Density Residential (City) and the P,
Preservation (City) Districts for property annexed into the City of Clearwater on July 18,
2002, pursuant to ANX 02-02-04.
Proposed Use: Single family dwellings.
Neighborhood Association(s): None.
Land Use Plan Amendment Category: Small Scale.
Presenter: Marc A. Mariano, Planner.
Member Mazur declared a conflict of interest.
The Future Land Use Plan and rezoning application involves four parcels of land,
approximately 23.01-acres in area, containing two single-family residential dwellings with
accessory structures. The site currently has County Future Land Use Plan designations of
Residential Suburban (RS), Preservation (P) and Water/Drainage Feature. No changes to the
Future Land Use Plan designations are being proposed to the site as part of this application.
On July 18, 2002, the City Commission approved ANX 02-02-04 which annexed this site
into the City limits. The annexation application also involved a companion Future Land Use
Plan amendment and rezoning application (LUZ 02-02-02) that requested an increase in density
from 2.5 dwelling units per acre to 7.5 dwelling units per acre. The City Commission approved a
Future Land Use Plan amendment to 5.0 dwelling units per acre, however, that application was
denied by the Board of County Commissioners. As a result of the denied application, the site
was annexed into City jurisdiction without an initial City future land use plan or zoning
Community Development 2003-12-16
26
.
.
.
designation. The applicant is requesting the City provide initial Future Land Use Plan
designations of Residential Suburban (RS), Preservation (P) and Water/Drainage Overlay and
consistent zoning designations of LOR, Low Density Residential and P, Preservation in order to
develop the 23-acre site with 46 single-family detached dwellings, as part of FLS2003-10054.
As this request is only to provide initial zoning and future land use plan categories
consistent with the existing County designations, the application is not subject to approval by
the Pinellas Planning Council and Board of County Commissioners.
The purpose of this application is to provide initial City Future Land Use Plan and Zoning
Atlas designations for this site, which was annexed into the City on July 18, 2002. The Future
Land Use Plan categories are proposed to remain the same as designated in the County and
are as follows: Residential Suburban (RS), Preservation (P) and Water/Drainage Overlay. The
proposed initial City zoning designations of LOR, Low Density Residential and P, Preservation
Districts are consistent with these land use categories. The designation of these properties will
allow the development of 46 detached dwellings. The neighborhood is surrounded by single-
family residential dwellings to the north and south, Lake Chautauqua to the east, and vehicle
sales/display to the west.
The proposed Residential Suburban (RS), Preservation (P) and Water/Drainage Overlay
Future Land Use Plan classifications and LOR, Low Density Residential and P, Preservation
zoning districts are consistent with both the City and the Countywide Comprehensive Plans, are
compatible with the surrounding area, do not require nor affect the provision of public services,
are compatible with the natural environment and are consistent with the development
regulations of the City.
The Planning Department recommends approval to provide initial Future Land Use Plan
designations to the Residential Suburban (RS) (City), Preservation (P) (City) and
Water/Drainage Overlay (City) Categories for property at 2301 Chautauqua Avenue and provide
initial zoning designations to the LOR, Low Density Residential (City) and the P, Preservation
(City) Districts for property at 2301 Chautauqua Avenue.
Member Gildersleeve moved to recommend approval of Consent Agenda Item E15,
Case: LUZ2003-09010 for 2301 Chautauqua Avenue. The motion was duly seconded.
Members Gildersleeve, Moran, Plisko, Milam, and Acting Member Dennehy and Chair Hooper
voted "Aye"; Member Mazur abstained. Motion carried.
Community Development 2003-12-16
27
.
.
.
16. Removed from Consent Agenda
Case: APP2003-00003 - 2959 Eagle Estates Circle West*
Owners: Jeffrey and Ambryn Finstad (2959 Eagle Estates Circle West, Clearwater, FL
33761; phone: 727-723-8724; fax: 727-724-8714).
Applicants/Appellants: Michael and Stefanie Markham (2960 Talon Drive, Clearwater, FL
33761; phone: 727-796-5076; fax: 727-443-6548; email: mmarkham@tampabav.rr.com).
Location: 0.423 acre located at the northeast corner of Eagle Estates Circle West and
Eagle Estates Circle South.
Atlas Page: 200B.
Zoning: LDR, Low Density Residential District.
Proposed Use:
A 1,528 square-foot, two-story addition, including a third car garage (with a driveway extension) in
association with an existing single-family dwelling.
Request: Appeal of the decision of a Level One (Flexible Standard Development) that approved
an application reducing the side (east) setback from 15 feet to 10 feet for a two-story addition to
an existing single family dwelling, as a Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section
2-103.B (FLS2003-08038).
Neighborhood Association(s): None.
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Senior Planner.
(* Per Section 4-504.B, the CDB shall place an appeal from a Level One approval on the
consent agenda. The appeal may be removed from the consent agenda only by a vote of at
least four members of the Board. If not removed, the decision of the Community Development
Coordinator is confirmed as part of the consent agenda. If removed, the CDB shall conduct a
quasi-judicial public hearing on the application.)
This 0.298-acre site is located on the northeast corner of Eagle Estates Circle West and
Eagle Estates Circle South. This corner lot presently contains a 2,815 square-foot, single-story
detached dwelling building, including an attached two-car garage, and is zoned LDR, Low
Density Residential District.
This case is an appeal of a Level One (Flexible Standard Development) that approved an
application reducing the side (east) setback from 15 feet to 10 feet for a two-story addition to an
existing single family dwelling, as a Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-
103.B, under Case No. FLS2003-08038. The application was considered by the Development
Review Committee at its meeting on September 18, 2003. A Development Order was issued
approving the request on October 29,2003. The Staff Report addressed appellant objections.
The appellants filed this appeal on November 4, 2003. Section 4-501.A.3 of the
Community Development Code states that the CDB has the authority to hear appeals from
Level One approval decisions. Section 4-502.A provides that an appeal of a Level One
approval (Flexible Standard Development) may be initiated by an applicant or property owner
within the required notice area and who presented competent substantial evidence in the Level
One review within seven days of the date the Development Order is issued. The filing of an
application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of the decision pending the final determination
of the case. Section 4-504.B states that upon receipt of the application/notice of appeal, the
CDB shall place the appeal on the Consent Agenda of the next scheduled meeting of the CDB.
Notice of the date of such meeting shall be provided the applicant and the appellants by mail
and by telephone. The appeal may be removed from the Consent Agenda only by a vote of at
Community Development 2003-12-16
28
.
least four members of the CDB. If the appeal is not removed from the Consent Agenda, the
decision of the Community Development Coordinator is confirmed as part of the Consent
Agenda by a vote of the majority of the members of the CDB. If the appeal is removed from the
Consent Agenda, the CDB shall review the application, the recommendation of the Community
Development Coordinator, conduct a quasi-judicial public hearing on the application in accord
with Section 4-206 (notice and public hearings) and render a decision in accordance with the
provisions of Section 4-206.D.5 granting the appeal, granting the appeal subject to specified
conditions or denying the appeal.
Pursuant to Section 4-504.C of the Community Development Code, in order to grant an
appeal, overturning or modifying the decision appealed from, the CDB shall find that based on
substantial competent evidence presented by the applicant or other party: 1) The decision
appealed from misconstrued or incorrectly interpreted the provisions of the Community
Development Code; 2) That the decision will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose
of the Community Development Code; and 3) Will not be detrimental to the public health, safety
and general welfare.
In consideration of the recent court decision related to Soboleski versus the City and
Christopher Mariani, Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides recommended the CDB
(Community Development Board) remove this item from the Consent Agenda to hear what the
appellants want to say.
.
Member Mazur moved to remove Item E16, Case: APP2003-00003 for 2959 Eagle
Estates Circle West from the Consent Agenda and conduct a quasi-judicial public hearing on the
application. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Ms. Dougall-Sides reported board rules do not cover this type of presentation.
Appellant Michael Markham said his house is most affected by the flexible development
approved for his rear neighbors, Jeffrey and Ambryn Finstad, and disagreed with staff's approval
of that request to expand the garage to within 10 feet of the rear property line and construct a two-
story addition. He reviewed the Code, citing criteria and standards. He said the request is
inconsistent with deed restrictions and will result in a 2-story wall with windows overlooking his
backyard, only 10 feet from his rear property line. He said his back yard property line should be
considered a rear setback, not a side setback. He said the proposed addition will lower his
property value and result in the largest house on a neighborhood internal lot, establishing a
precedent. He said a third garage bay is not essential, the design in not in harmony with the
character of adjacent properties, no hardship exists, and rejection of the request will not impair the
subject home's value or adversely affect health and safety. He expressed concern his family will
be impacted from noise from equipment located next to the expanded garage and construction
will cause flooding in his back yard.
Discussion ensued regarding the neighborhood's deed restrictions. Mr. Markham said the
property owner had not yet submitted project plans to the homeowners association. He said the
homeowners association had not granted variances previously and doubted it would approve this
project. In response to a question, Mr. Markham estimated his two-story house is 11 to 12 feet
from the side property line. Ms. Dougall-Sides said the City does not enforce deed restrictions
unless a NCOD (Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District) has been established.
.
Community Development 2003-12-16
29
.
.
.
In response to a question, Mr. Markham said it would be more detrimental to him if the
garage expansion is permitted than it would be to his neighbors if the construction was prohibited.
Ms. Dougall-Sides said the Code no longer has a hardship standard.
Property owner Jeffrey Finstad said increasing the size of his house is an investment. He
planned to apply to the homeowners association for approval of the planned construction. In
response to a question, he said he needs a reduced setback to expand his garage but could
reduce the size of the second-floor by only building above the current footprint. In response to a
question, Development Review Manager Frank Gerlock said Code indicates corner lots have
two front setbacks and two side setbacks. Mr. Wells said the City does not require homeowner
associations to sign off on development requests.
Discussion ensued regarding problems related to the size of corner lots developed in the
Eagle Estates neighborhood due to privately constructed roads and comments that the Finstads
first should obtain approval from the homeowners association before applying to the City, that
the proposed mass at the rear of the proposed project is too great for the neighborhood, that the
homeowner is not giving anything back in return for the flexible development request, and the
design in not compatible with the neighborhood. Ms. Fierce said three-car garages are usual
and customary for houses and lots of this size in this neighborhood. It was felt the applicant
was aware of expansion restrictions when he purchased the property and is not being denied
use of his property. It was felt the five-foot flexible development variance is not justified.
It was felt construction of a second story within 10 feet of a property line would
negatively affect the value of the adjacent property. Concern was expressed the board's
decision will be appealed, regardless of the outcome, and impact staff resources. It was
recommended the item be continued until resolution by the homeowners association. It was
suggested further board debate could occur if the homeowners association approves the
project.
In response to a question, Mr. Wells said a number of interior lots in the neighborhood
have 10-foot side setbacks. The neighborhood has a mixture of one- and two-story houses,
with the majority featuring two-stories. In response to a question, Mr. Wells said to address Mr.
Markham's concerns, a condition of approval requires the back hedge to be maintained. Staff
did not recommend a condition requested by Mr. Markham to require frosting on second floor
rear windows as staff felt it may be important for a resident to view clearly something outside. It
was felt the garage expansion would not encroach on Mr. Markham's property but a second
floor above that expansion would. It was stated construction cannot begin until the homeowners
association makes a decision.
Member Mazur moved to continue Item E16, Case: APP2003-00003 for 2959 Eagle
Estates Circle West to no later than March 16,2004. The motion was duly seconded. Members
Gildersleeve, Mazur, Moran, Plisko, and Milam voted "Aye"; Acting Member Dennehy and Chair
Hooper voted "Nay." Motion carried.
F. LEVEL ONE APPEALS (items removed from Consent Agenda)
Community Development 2003-12-16
30
.
.
.
1. Case: FLD2003-09051 -1615 Union Street Level Two Application
Owner: Mooring Capital Fund, L.L.C.
Applicant: Family Resources, Inc.
Representative: Nina Bandoni, Turnstone Properties (49 Turnstone Drive, Safety
Harbor, FL 34695; phone: 727-712-1196; fax: 727-723-9221; email:
nina@turnstoneproperties.com).
Location: 1.05 acres located on the south side of Union Street, approximately 650 east
of Highland Avenue.
Atlas Page: 252B.
Zoning: I, Institutional District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit a residential shelter (16 beds for youth in crisis) and a
social/public service agency in the Institutional District with a reduction of the side (east) setback
from 10 feet to 8.5 feet (to pavement), a reduction of the side (west) setback from 10 feet to 9.5
feet (to pavement), a deviation to allow the residential shelter 900 feet (instead of 600 feet) from
a transit line and a deviation to allow a social/public service agency adjacent to residentially
zoned property, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions
of Section 2-1204.A, and a reduction of the landscape buffer along the side (west) property line
from 12 feet to 9.5 feet, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions
of Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Residential shelter (16 beds) and a social/public service agency.
Neighborhood Association: Windsor Park Homeowners Association (President, Jim Goins, 1728
Great Brickhill Road, Clearwater, FL 33755).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Senior Planner.
Senior Planner Wayne Wells reviewed the request. The 1.04-acre site is located on the
south side of Union Street approximately 1300 feet east of Highland Avenue. It is located within
a primarily single-family residentially developed area, although there are existing apartments
approximately 700 feet to the west on the south side of Union Street. The property to the east is
developed with a place of worship.
The site contains an existing 6,920 square-foot, two-story building developed as a
school. The school operated at this location for many years, however the occupational license
for the school indicates it was closed in August 2001. The site has been vacant since that time.
The site has a circular driveway with very few parking spaces. A tennis court exists east of the
school building south of the circular drive. An existing swimming pool is located on the south
side of the site. The site gradually slopes to the south, where there is an existing retention
pond. The site is zoned Institutional District, which permits as Minimum Standard Development
uses assisted living facilities, congregate care, governmental uses, nursing homes and places
of worship, provided all development standards are met with the redevelopment of the site. As
Flexible Standard Development permitted uses, halfway houses, medical clinics, places of
worship, assisted living facilities, nursing homes and congregate care are allowed, provided all
development standards and criteria are met.
The proposal includes demolishing all existing improvements, including the tennis court
and swimming pool. The applicant proposes to construct an 8,450 square-foot, single-story
residential shelter of 16 beds for youth in crisis and offices and a counseling center for a
social/public service agency (Family Resources). The office area will be on the north side and
the residential shelter will be on the south side of the building.
Community Development 2003-12-16
31
.
.
.
I
This residential shelter is not for youth who have committed crimes, as these youth are
referred to other programs in Pinellas County. Youth served at this facility are usually between
the ages of 10 and 17, include males and females (separate sleeping rooms in the shelter) who
often are abused or neglected in their home environment, whereas some have run away from
home, while others are referred to the program by school counselors or other professionals.
Occasionally, police escort youth to the shelter, in cases of abuse or other family crisis where
the children must be removed from the home. While at the shelter, youth must follow program
rules (including standard meal times, completion of homework, and attending school each day),
must be indoors at 9:30 pm and are escorted to bus stops and other off-site activities. The
counseling for youth and families is performed in the late afternoon or early evening hours,
where life skills and instruction on how to live together are taught, and will provide a convenient
location adjacent to the shelter. The offices house school liaisons that work to reconnect youth
to school. This new facility is planned to replace a 12-bed facility at 1622 Turner Street, where
the shelter has operated for 18 years. This existing facility is aging and the property is not able
to handle program enhancements. The existing facility is in a residential area south of Gulf-to-
Bay Boulevard, but in proximity to commercial properties, and has had few neighborhood
problems. A past problem at the existing facility related to youth escaping through facility
windows, but the installation of a security system on these windows corrected the problem.
The site plan submitted positions the proposed building on the east and south portions of
the site. Parking areas are on the west and north portions of the site. The proposed building
has been designed with two pedestrian access points, one for the office area and one for the
residential shelter. While currently licensed for 12 beds at the Turner Street site, the proposal
provides for 16 beds in this residential shelter to provide limited expansion capability.
Recreation areas for the youth, including a 1/3 court basketball and open gazebo, have been
placed on the east side of the building away from the abutting detached dwellings to the west to
minimize noise impacts. The recreation area will be enclosed with a six-foot high solid wood
fence. Outdoor air conditioning condensers are proposed to be located within the enclosed
recreation area. The applicant is proposing to buffer the abutting detached dwellings with a six-
foot high solid wood fence along the west and south property lines, enhanced with a continuous
hedge and trees on the inside of the fence. The building has been designed to be one-story in
height to blend in with the predominately single-family residential character of the surrounding
area. The existing drainage retention pond on the south side of the property will be
reconfigured as part of this proposal to meet Code provisions.
The proposal includes reductions of the required setbacks and landscape buffers. A
reduction of the side (west) setback is requested from 10 feet to 9.5 feet to the proposed
pavement. The parking area pavement begins at a 13-foot setback from the west property line
on the north side, reducing to 9.5 feet on the south side. The building is proposed at 13.8 feet
from the west property line at its closest point (southwest corner). Landscape buffering on the
west side of the property is required to be 12 feet wide. These reductions are due to
irregularities in the lot width, being wider on the north property line than the south property line.
The applicant also is requesting a reduction of the side (east) setback from 10 feet to 8.5 feet to
the proposed pavement. Parking spaces, the building, and basketball court meet the required
setback, but the requested reduction is for only the parking backup flair, which provides for ease
of vehicular movement. These reductions are minor and will be in harmony with the character
of the surrounding area and will not substantially impact the abutting properties.
Community Development 2003-12-16
32
.
.
.
The applicant also is requesting deviations to allow the residential shelter to locate 900
feet from a transit line, where Code criteria requires a maximum separation of 600 feet, and a
deviation to allow a social/public service agency adjacent to residentially zoned property. Mass
transit normally is not used with this type of residential shelter, due to the nature of the children
in the facility. Youth are transported to and from school and to other off-site functions. In the
infrequent circumstance that youth would need to use mass transit, staff will escort youth to the
bus stop. The site is located adjacent to residentially zoned property to the north, west and
south. The office portion of this request, defined by Code as a social/public service agency,
functions to provide counseling for the families and children in the center, but also provides
office and counseling rooms for school liaisons (for families and children not in the center). The
functions proposed for the social/public service agency are less intense from use, traffic impact
and building design standpoints and are more compatible with the surrounding area than the
prior use.
To ensure Code landscaping requirements and proper landscaping practices are met,
prior to the issuance of any permits for this project a revised landscape plan must be submitted
ensuring proposed trees are properly located in relation to drainage pipes and existing tree
canopy, interior landscape areas are properly delineated and calculated and plant sizes meet
Code provisions. A tree preservation plan also is required to be provided prior to issuance of
any permits to address the impacts of the proposed development on existing trees. The
applicant is proposing a monument-style freestanding sign of a maximum of six feet in height
adjacent to Union Street. The dumpster enclosure and freestanding sign must be consistent in
materials and color as the principal building.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including but not limited to General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria
(Section 2-1204.A) have been met.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on October 30, 2003. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit a residential shelter (16 beds for youth in crisis) and a
social/public service agency in the Institutional District with a reduction of the side (east) setback
from 10 feet to 8.5 feet (to pavement), a reduction of the side (west) setback from 10 feet to 9.5
feet (to pavement), a deviation to allow the residential shelter 900 feet (instead of 600 feet) from
a transit line and a deviation to allow a social/public service agency adjacent to residentially
zoned property, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions
of Section 2-1204.A, and a reduction of the landscape buffer along the side (west) property line
from 12 feet to 9.5 feet, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions
of Section 3-1202.G for the site at 1615 Union Street, with the following bases and conditions:
Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-1204.A; 2) The proposal is in
compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per
Section 3-913 and the Comprehensive Landscape Program per Section 3-1202.G; and 3) The
development is compatible with the surrounding area AND Conditions of Approval: 1) That the
residential shelter be limited to a maximum of 16 beds for youth in crisis, not for youth who have
committed crimes; 2) That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the
conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the COB; 3) That, prior to the issuance of
any permits for this project, a revised landscape plan be submitted ensuring proposed trees are
properly located in relation to drainage pipes and existing tree canopy, interior landscape areas
Community Development 2003-12-16
33
.
.
.
are properly delineated and calculated and plant sizes meet Code provisions; 4) That a tree
preservation plan be submitted prior to issuance of any permits to address the impacts of the
proposed development on existing trees; and 5) That the dumpster enclosure and freestanding,
monument-style sign be consistent in materials and color as the principal building.
Ms. Fierce said the Code does not permit locating shelters next to offices and other uses
but does not preclude locating them next to residential properties. In response to a question,
Mr. Wells said while a public hearing is required, the project can be approved as long as it
meets all flexible standards.
Mr. Wells was unaware of another similar facility in the City. Family Resources Director
Jane Harper reviewed the history and mission of her social services organization. The agency
manages three facilities, including one on Turner Street, one is St. Petersburg, and one in
Bradenton. She said the facilities are good neighbors. The Turner Street site was not designed
as a shelter. The agency wants to relocate the Turner Street facility to improve the coordination
of services. Family Resources representative Pat Gerard said the facility's youth crisis program
provides short term stays and counseling for teens and their families to resolve differences. The
average length of stay is 8 days. Afterward, the majority of residents return to their homes. The
facility offers supervised classes and training. The counseling center is closed on weekends.
The shelter is licensed by the State. She said the proposed site is an abandoned school that
attracts vagrants. A fire has caused damage and the windows are boarded. In response to a
question, she said the agency has many volunteers for its Safe Place program but has difficulty
attracting volunteers to work at the shelter. The agency does a follow-up of all clients 6 months
after services are provided.
Architect Ric Ortega said the neighborhood-oriented building is in proper scale and will
improve nearby property values. The facility's playground, secured by a fence, is located by the
abutting church property rather than near residences. Office windows will overlook the
playground. The previous school at this site had approximately 200 students. The new facility
will have only 16 beds. In response to a question, Mr. Gerrard said police officers do bring
some children to the center and are called if child abuse needs to be reported. The facility is
required to contact the police if a youth leaves the site without permission. The police also are
called if fighting occurs, which rarely happens. She was unaware of any vandalism related to
the facility during the past 11 years. Facility clients come from northern Pinellas County, with
approximately 20% from Clearwater. The facility accepts Pasco County residents only as a
courtesy. The average age of clients is 14 to 15, with a higher percentage being female.
Eight people spoke in favor of the facility and three people spoke in opposition.
Ms. Gerard said the facility's clients are children, not criminals.
Member Milam moved to approve Item F1, Case: FLD2003-09051 for 1615 Union Street
with Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
Community Development 2003-12-16
34
.
H. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS:
Assistant City Attorney - Update on litigation
Ms. Dougall Sides reviewed the case Deborah Groen Soboleski vs. City of Clearwater
and Christopher C. Mariani. The Circuit Court overturned the findings of the Hearing Officer and
City, expressed concern regarding due process, and mentioned several items, including the staff
report, including standards discussed. She said the counsel for Mr. Mariani may be able to
discuss the merits of the case. The Court expressed concern regarding conflicts of interest and
indicated neighbors should be renoticed if an application is amended. The City may appeal these
findings.
Concerns were expressed the Court's decision regarding conflicts of interest seems to
disallow board members from providing services. Ms. Dougall-Sides said State law addresses
conflicts of interest by board members.
Ms. Dougall Sides reviewed the case, The Cepcot Corporation and Clearwater Train
Station, Inc. vs. City of Clearwater Planning Department. The Hearing Officer upheld the board's
denial of the application and supported staff's determination that the proposed convenience store
and gas station project is more suburban than urban in design.
Next meeting date - January 20, 2004
Board Comments
. Board Request
Concern was expressed that the Code permits flexible standards, especially on the
beach. It was felt this issue needs to be addressed as part of a general discussion. It was
recommended discussion of this issue be agendaed at a meeting or work session, perhaps with
the City Commission. Concern was expressed too much impervious space is being given up.
Mr. Gildersleeve was complimented for his son Ryan's success at becoming a Golf
Professional.
All were wished Happy Holidays with best wishes for health and happiness.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:42 p.m.
.
Chair
Community Developmen Board
Community De elopment 2003-12-16
35
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
NAM~F BOARD, COUNCil, COMMISSION, AYTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE
::r. . t..4'" d
C' I THE BOARD, COUNCil, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON
I ,.c,.,1 ~ WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF:
CO \y 0 COUNTY 0 OTHER lOCAL AGENCY
I NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISIpN:
n Cl=~ ...,./'",,7-'-1"
MY POSITION IS:
o ELECTIVE
APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 88
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council,
commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting
conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a contlict of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
. ,
completing the reverse side and filing the form. .
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
. ures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea-
re which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the
parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or
to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or
163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that
capacity.
For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation
are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
*
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the contlict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you
are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min-
utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
*
*
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you
must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made
~you or at your direction.
~OU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
. You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side)
CE FORM 88 - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 1
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
· A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
· The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
.
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETINQ:
· You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.
· You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of th
meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
.L, / DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S '~TEREST
I, ~ M~ tJr ,herebydisclosethaton /2-/1"/17;3
(a) A measure c~me ~I come before my agency which (check one) "
inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate,
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative,
~ inured to the special gain or loss of ,!loti /1/ fld 4 ~
whom I am retained; or
,20_
, by
inured to the special gain or loss of
is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
,which
.
L/)-2 zOoj- ~q OlD
AO ~-f:; (rf,r;cL ~h ~t )
~ifJ H~ -t ~II/~J~)
dIL6L~&7--7L ~. ~
!2,h k ~
Date Filed I I .......-
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES 9112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACH.T,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000.
CE FORM 88 - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 2
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
~ NAM OF BOARD, COUNCil, COMMISSIO,>> AU HORITY, OR COMMITTEE
~,- . . ~.
THE BOARD, COUNCil, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON
WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF:
a COUNTY a OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISIO .
ele .., v
MY POSITION IS:
a ELECTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 88
This form is for use by any pers~n serving a~ the county, city, or other local.le,vel of governm~nt on an .appointed or elected boa.rd, councill
commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advIsory and non-adVISOry bodies who are presented with a voting
conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. I
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly dependingi
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing the reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
. ures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea-
re which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the
parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or
to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or
163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that
capacity.
For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation
are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you
are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min-
utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
*
*
*
*
*
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you
must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made
~ you or at your direction. .
~OU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
. You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side)
CE FORM 88 - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 1
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
· A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
· The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
.
· You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. I
· You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for rec. ording the minutes of thj
meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. I
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
I, .&I ~ 1/./ , hereby disclose Ihal on L2-(r " / 0 ~
(a) A measure ca~ will come before my agency which (check one)
inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate,
_ inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, j) ..
~ Inured 10 the special gatn or loss Of~ r t t'J f fC+t..t.o
whom' am retained; or
inured to the special gain or loss of
is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
,20_
, by
,which
.
F L)) 7-t7tJ ~ - 01 Clf-l7 _
f~~.~J ~ J.^_'
JJiL ~'sI-^f 4 JL~. l'~J
IZ,/r~ /& J
. .
Date Filed
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES 9112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACH.T,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000.
CE FORM 8S - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 2
LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME
{ ;:"0 U;;"" K
~ILlNG ADDRESS . f
10~ o~1< Av
CITY
I"J,--/CP-O?
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER lOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS'
NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEE
(/otA1MUIV17'7 l?Gr./6, ,lAfi7V'r ~A~
THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORI OR COMMITTEE ON
WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF:
ITY 0 COUNTY
NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION:
(//7'1 0 uE)./l.. W~
MY POSITION IS:
'/ AI G"U"I1 '7
o OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
COUNTY
DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED
o ELECTIVE
APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 88
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council,
commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a votin9
conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure inwhich you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before I
completing the reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
. ures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea-
re which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the
parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or
to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or
163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that
capacity.
For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation
are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you
are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min-
utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
*
*
*
*
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you
must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made
...li.you or at your direction.
~OU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
. You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side)
CE FORM 88 - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 1
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
· A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
· The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
.
· You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.
· You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of th
meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
I,
Af..,e-x
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
(?lI4/ICO
, hereby disclose that on
/2 - {to
,20~
(a) A ,?easure came or will come before my agency which (check one)
-.-J! inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate,
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative,
inured to the special gain or loss of
whom I am retained; or
inured to the special gain or loss of
is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
I
;1
, by
,which
.
CA$€ pt. (;) ZOO ~ -(:;)<{045'-
AR-qA-ttcur- fO~ fp..O";~1
/ZrIIt,jo7
Date Filed ' {
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES 9112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACH.T,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000.
CE FORM 88 - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 2
FORM 88 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER lOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
&e7'1AJ NAc~~~;r.l MISSI_ORITY,Ott;~E
THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON
WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF:
Q-CIfY- 0 COUNTY
NA E OF POL~L S~DIVISION: '?Are1t-
MY POSITION IS:
o OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED
o ELECTIVE
~POINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 88
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council
commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a votin~
conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly dependin~
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing the reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
. ures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea-
re which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the
parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or
to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or
163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that
capacity.
For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation
are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you
are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min-
utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
*
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you
must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made
~ you or at your direction.
~OU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
. You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side)
CE FORM 8B - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 1
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
· A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
· The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. .
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
.
· You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.
· You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of th
meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
I, _[),v IT;> r; ll.. DEilDLGeve
, hereby disclose that on
])et:BHU; Etl..
J(., ,20~
(a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one)
inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate,
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative,
~. inured to the special gain or loss of tf9';?f-6f.,t;;2h eHJ,~l:I'~ f l6J.. ];Pi-
, by
whom I am retained; or
inured to the special gain or loss of
is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
,which
.
GA-5E .:tI Pu>;}.~' ~ - ()q 0'-11
/ Of) 3 {#t, ~~ 57
C {.,(;#IMJIr'f({t
( -;,../ f b'IO ';J
Date FileJ t
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES 9112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACH.T
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000.
CE FORM 8B - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 2
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
lA T NtE-FIRST NAME-MI~lE NAME, 8AJCr~ CLEA;;:;;;~NCll, COMMISSI N, AUTHORITY, OR C ~
J\ILlNG ADDRESS S THE BOARD, COUNCil, COMMISSION, AU HORITY 0 COMMITTEE ON
50 1)(l:i:> T WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF:
~ 0 COUNTY 0 OTHER lOCAL AGENCY
CIT):..
<.: l /iAfllt)PtrElC NAME OtftP,'TICAl SUBDlall~ 7f'Il-
MY POSITION IS: _ /.
o ELECTIVE &or APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 88
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council
commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a votin~
conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure inwhich you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly dependin~
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing the reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
. ures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local o.fficer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea-
lire which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the
parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which hear she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or
to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or
163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that
capacity.
For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation
are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
*
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you
are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min-
utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
*
*
*
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you
must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made
~ you or at your direction.
~OU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
· You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side)
CE FORM 88 - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 1
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
· A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
· The form must be read publicly at the riext meeting after the form is filed.
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
.
· You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.
· You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of th~
meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the I
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
I, VInJl.O r;IU:)E:ilSLEe~
, hereby disclose that on
DEeEuA6et'L
l(p
,20~
(a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one)
inured to my special private gain or loss;
inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate,
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative,
inured to the special gain or loss of ftttut (tS'7 ~~ PMv€~T 1 ""P'Pt:..
whom I am retained; or
inured to the special gain or loss of
is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
, by
,which
.
C~e =# Fl1.kkJ()3 - ~f OrB' -IJlt -/2/~ }v. ~L~
Date ~:i It, ! 0 ?
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES 9112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACH. 'T,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, A
CIVIL PENALTY NOTTO EXCEED $10,000.
CE FORM 8B - EFF. 1/2000
PAGE 2
..
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16" 2003
I have conducted a personal investigation and site visit to the following properties:
3080 Allen Avenue
FLD2003-08037
Robert Hupp and Allen McMullen
.,/'yes
no
1575 S Highland Avenue
FLD2003-09042
Griffin International, Inc.
/' yes
no
181 Brightwater Drive
FLD2003-09046 /
PL T2003-000 11
Rogers Beach Development
---.Lyes
no
692 Bayway Boulevard
FLD2003-09044
Island Key Development, LLC.
yes
/ no
1750 North Belcher Road
FLD2003-09047
BelCal Properties, LLC.
/
/yes
no
Page 1 of 4
.
,
.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
1211-1215 North Betty Lane
FLD2003-09048
Everybody's Tabernacle, Inc. and
Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
J' yes
no
1003 Carlton Street
FLD2003-09049
Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
Jyes
no
1615 Union Street
FLD2003-09051
Mooring Capital Fund, LLC
~s
no
700 S. Gulfview Boulevard
FLD2003-09045
Elias Anastasopoulas
yes
J no
2575 Enterprise Road
FLD2003-09053
ABR Plymouth Plaza, LTD.
/yes
no
Page 2 of4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
2525 Druid Road
FLD2003-08038 /
PLT2003-00012
South Gate Park, Inc.
/yes
no
1601 Sand Key Estates Court
FLD2003-09043
Mr. & Mrs. Dean Carley
yes
/00
1813 Brentwood Drive
ANX2003-09023
Serafino Caraco
yes
~o
309 & 323 Meadow Lark Lane and
3040 Carolina Avenue ANX2003-09024
Crum Properties, LLC.
/
yes
no
Page 3 of4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
1219 South Fort Harrison Avenue
509 Jeffords Street
508 & 512 Grand Central Street LUZ2003-09008
yes
~no
2261 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
LUZ2003-09009
Lyes
no
2301 Chautauqua Avenue
I
LUZ2003-090 1 0
~es
no
2959 Eagle Estates Circle West
APP2003-00003
~es
no
Signature:
S:\Planning DepartmentlC D BlCDB,
Page 4 of 4
"
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
O'Keefe's Incorporated
Ralph Englert, Trust;
Jean Englert, Trust
George & Margaret Brunning, TTE;
Eva Brunning & George V. Lenard, Trustee
Rottlund Homes of Florida, Inc.
Jeffrey and Ambryn Finstad
Date 12-/1~1 OtJ
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16.. 2003
I have conducted a personal investigation and site visit to the following properties:
3080 Allen Avenue
FLD2003-08037
Robert Hupp and Allen McMullen
I
,
yes
no
1575 S Highland Avenue
FLD2003-09042
Griffin International, Inc.
~es
no
181 Brightwater Drive
FLD2003-09046 /
PLT2003-00011
Rogers Beach Development
-tres
no
692 Bayway Boulevard
FLD2003-09044
Island Key Development, LLC.
yes
\ I
'/ no
/,
.)
1750 North Belcher Road
FLD2003-09047
BelCal Properties, LLC.
~es
no
Page 1 of 4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
1211-1215 North Betty Lane
*yes
1003 Carlton Street
*es
1615 Union Street
*es
700 S. Gulfview Boulevard
~es
2575 Enterprise Road
~es
FLD2003-09048
no
FLD2003-09049
no
FLD2003-09051
no
FLD2003-09045
no
FLD2003-09053
no
Page 2 of4
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
Everybody's Tabernacle, Inc. and
Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
Mooring Capital Fund, LLC
Elias Anastasopoulas
ABR Plymouth Plaza, LTD.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
2525 Druid Road
~es
1601 Sand Key Estates Court
FLD2003-08038 /
PLT2003-00012
no
FLD2003-09043
y~ -f-no
1813 Brentwood Drive
yes
ANX2003-09023
+no
309 & 323 Meadow Lark Lane and
3040 Carolina Avenue ANX2003-09024
yes
+" no
"
Page 3 of4
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
South Gate Park, Inc.
Mr. & Mrs. Dean Carley
Serafino Caraco
Crum Properties, LLC.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
1219 South Fort Harrison Avenue
509 Jeffords Street
508 & 512 Grand Central Street LUZ2003-09008
~yes
-/\
no
2261 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
LUZ2003-09009
~es
no
2301 Chautauqua Avenue
LUZ2003-090 1 0
*es
no
2959 Eagle Estates Circle West
APP2003-00003
yes
fno
Signature:
S:\Planning DepartmentlC D SICDS, property investigation check list. doc
Page 4 of 4
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
O'Keefe's Incorporated
Ralph Englert, Trust;
Jean Englert, Trust
George & Margaret Brunning, TTE;
Eva Brunning & George V. Lenard, Trustee
Rottlund Homes of Florida, Inc.
Jeffrey and Ambryn Finstad
Date
J
'"
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
I have conducted a personal investigation and site visit to the following properties:
3080 Allen Avenue
FLD2003-08037
/
Robert Hupp and Allen McMullen
yes
no
1575 S Highland Avenue
FLD2003-09042
/
Griffin International, Inc.
yes
no
yes
FLD2003-09046 /
73-00011
no
Rogers Beach Development
181 Brightwater Drive
yes
F79044
no
Island Key Development, LLC.
692 Bayway Boulevard
yes
/
7047
no
BelCal Properties, LLC.
1750 North Belcher Road
Page 1 of 4
.
.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
yes
7003-09048
no
Everybody's Tabernacle, Inc. and
Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
1211-1215 North Betty Lane
yes
FLD2003-09049
J
no
Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
1003 Carlton Street
yes
F7003-09051
no
Mooring Capital Fund, LLC
1615 Union Street
yes
Fj003-09045
no
Elias Anastasopoulas
700 S. Gulfview Boulevard
yes
F12003-09053
no
ABR Plymouth Plaza, LTD.
2575 Enterprise Road
Page 2 of4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
2525 Druid Road
FLD2003-08038 /
703-00012
South Gate Park, Inc.
yes
no
1601 Sand Key Estates Court
FLD2003-09043
Mr. & Mrs. Dean Carley
/
yes no
1813 Brentwood Drive
ANX2003-09023
Serafino Caraco
/
yes no
309 & 323 Meadow Lark Lane and
3040 Carolina Avenue ANX2003-09024
Crum Properties, LLC.
/
yes
no
Page 3 of4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
1219 South Fort Harrison Avenue
509 Jeffords Street
508 & 512 Grand Central Street
yes
703-09008
no
O'Keefe's Incorporated
2261 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
LUZ2003-09009
Ralph Englert, Trust;
Jean Englert, Trust
George & Margaret Brunning, TTE;
Eva Brunning & George V. Lenard, Trustee
yes
~
yes
L7-09010
no
Rottlund Homes ofF10rida, Inc.
2301 Chautauqua Avenue
yes
70003
no
Jeffrey and Ambryn Finstad
2959 Eagle Estates Circle West
/ ;L/;b / L13
'//
Date
Page 4 of 4
~
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16" 2003
I have conducted a personal investigation and site visit to the following properties:
3080 Allen Avenue
FLD2003-08037
Robert Hupp and Allen McMullen
---- yes
no
1575 S Highland Avenue
FLD2003-09042
Griffin International, Inc.
yes
~o
181 Brightwater Drive
FLD2003-09046 /
PLT2003-00011
Rogers Beach Development
~yes
no
692 Bayway Boulevard
FLD2003-09044
Island Key Development, LLC.
~yes
no
1750 North Belcher Road
FLD2003-09047
BelCal Properties, LLC.
~es
no
Page 1 of 4
> -
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
1211-1215 North Betty Lane
FLD2003-09048
Everybody's Tabernacle, Inc. and
Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
~yes
no
1003 Carlton Street
FLD2003-09049
Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
~yes
no
1615 Union Street
FLD2003-09051
Mooring Capital Fund, LLC
~yes
no
700 S. Gulfview Boulevard
FLD2003-09045
Elias Anastasopoulas
~es
no
2575 Enterprise Road
FLD2003-09053
ABR Plymouth Plaza, L TD.
~~es
no
Page 2 of 4
.,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
2525 Druid Road
FLD2003-08038/
PLT2003-00012
South Gate Park, Inc.
~yes
no
1601 Sand Key Estates Court
FLD2003-09043
Mr. & Mrs. Dean Carley
yes
~~
1813 Brentwood Drive
ANX2003-09023
Serafino Caraco
yes ~. no
309 & 323 Meadow Lark Lane and
3040 Carolina Avenue ANX2003-09024
Crum Properties, LLC.
yes ........------- no
Page 3 of 4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
1219 South Fort Harrison Avenue
509 Jeffords Street
508 & 512 Grand Central Street LUZ2003-09008
~yes
no
2261 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
LUZ2003-09009
----yes
no
2301 Chautauqua Avenue
LUZ2003-090 1 0
~yes
no
2959 Eagle Estates Circle West
APP2003-00003
________yes
no
Page 4 of 4
..
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
O'Keefe's Incorporated
Ralph Englert, Trust;
Jean Englert, Trust
George & Margaret Brunning, TTE;
Eva Brunning & George V. Lenard, Trustee
Rottlund Homes of Florida, Inc.
Jeffrey and Ambryn Finstad
Date \~\~\~~
.
I.
,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16~ 2003
I have conducted a personal investigation and site visit to the following properties:
3080 Allen Avenue
FLD2003-08037
Robert Hupp and Allen McMullen
yes 4no
1575 S Highland Avenue
FLD2003-09042
Griffin International, Inc.
yes
-l-no
181 Brightwater Drive
FLD2003-09046 /
PLT2003-00011
Rogers Beach Development
yes
4no
692 Bayway Boulevard
FLD2003-09044
Island Key Development, LLC.
yes +no
1750 North Belcher Road
FLD2003-09047
BelCal Properties, LLC.
yes
x
no
Page 1 of 4
~
\
t
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
1211-1215 North Betty Lane
FLD2003-09048
Everybody's Tabernacle, Inc. and
Homeless Emergency Proj ect, Inc.
yes +-no
1003 Carlton Street
FLD2003-09049
Homeless Emergency Project, Inc.
yes
~no
1615 Union Street
FLD2003-09051
Mooring Capital Fund, LLC
yes +no
700 S. Gulfview Boulevard
FLD2003-09045
Elias Anastasopoulas
yes -\- no
2575 Enterprise Road
FLD2003-09053
ABR Plymouth Plaza, LTD.
yes
~no
Page 2 of4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
2525 Druid Road
FLD2003-08038 /
PLT2003-00012
South Gate Park, Inc.
yes
4no
1601 Sand Key Estates Court
FLD2003-09043
Mr. & Mrs. Dean Carley
yes
-tno
1813 Brentwood Drive
ANX2003-09023
Serafino Caraco
yes
~no
309 & 323 Meadow Lark Lane and
3040 Carolina Avenue ANX2003-09024
Crum Properties, LLC.
yes ~no
Page 3 of4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: December 16, 2003
1219 South Fort Harrison Avenue
509 Jeffords Street
508 & 512 Grand Central Street LUZ2003-09008
O'Keefe's Incorporated
yes
-Too
2261 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
LUZ2003-09009
Ralph Englert, Trust;
Jean Englert, Trust
George & Margaret Brunning, TTE;
Eva Brunning & George V. Lenard, Trustee
yes ~oo
2301 Chautauqua Avenue
LUZ2003-090 1 0
Rottlund Homes of Florida, Inc.
-*-00
yes
2959 Eagle Estates Circle West
APP2003-00003
Jeffrey and Ambryn Finstad
yes
~o
Date
/Z)ft / r.J.3
/ {
Page 4 of 4