03/22/2005
.
.
.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD SPECIAL MEETING
CITY OF CLEARWATER
March 22, 2005
Present: David Gildersleeve
J. B. Johnson
Dana K. Tallman
Nicholas C. Fr:tsch
Thomas COF.ltes
Daniel Dennehy
Chair
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Acting Board Member
Absent: Alex Plisko
Kathy Milam
Vice Chair
Board Member
A!so Present: Gina Grimes
Leslie Dougall-Sides
Cyndi Tarapani
Neil Thompson
Patricia O. Sullivan
Attorney for the Board
Assistant City Attorney - arrived at 2:23 p.m.
Planning Director
Planning Manager
Board Reporter
The Chair called the meeting to order at 1 :00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Invocation
and Pledge of Allegiance.
To provide continuity jor research, items are in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
C.
DIRECTOR'S ITEM: (Items 1 - 2)
1.- Expert Witness. List Addllj.Q-'l~
Planning Director C~inai Tarapani presented resumes for Michael Delk and Neil
Thompson.
Member Coates moved to include Michael L. Delk on the City's Expert Witness List as
an expert in redevelopment planning, comprehensive planning, annexation implementation, and
economic development. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Member Dennehy moved to include Neil Thompson on the City's Expert Witness List as
an expert in Development Code, transportation system planning, system development changes,
and comprehensive plans. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
2 - Discussion of Community Development Board process reqardinq Quasi-Judicial Cases
Attorney for the Board Gina Grimes said, based on new Code iequirements, the COB
(Community Development Board) must base future motions of apprc\!a! and denial on findings
of facts and conclusions of law, and staff reports. This requirement is based on a judge's
suggestion and is normal procedure for quasi-judicial hearings. Staff reports. will include factual
and summary findings for members to reference when making motions.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
.
.
.
D. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE: (to April 19, 2005) (Item 1)
1. Case: FLD2004-11 080 - 1611 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Level Two Application
Owner: Liberty Reality Group.
Applicant/Representative: Bryan Zarlenga, TBE Group Inc., 380 Park Place Blvd, Suite
300, Clearwater, FL 33759; phone: 727-531-3505; fax: 727-539-1294; email:
bzarlenqa@tbeqroup.com).
Location: 0.96 acre located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard and Yeivington Avenue.
Atlas Page: 297B.
Zoning District: Commercial (C) and Medium Density Residential (MDR).
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit retail sales and service (bank) and offices in
the Commercial District with a reduction to the front (north) setback from 25 to 23.5 feet (to
pavement), a reduction to the front (east) setback from 25 feet to 20 feet (to building), an
increase to building height from 25 feet to 28 feet (to roof deck), with an additional 3.33 feet for
parapet (from roof deck), and an additional 8.83 feet for architectural embellishments (from roof
deck), and a deviation to allow direct access to a major arterial street (Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard) as
a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C; (2) to
permit non-residential parking in the Medium Density Residential District with a reduction to
front (east) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to pavement) and a deviation to place landscaping
on the inside of the buffer fence along the west and south sides of the property, as a Residential
Infill Project, under the provisions of 2-304.G.
Proposed Use: Bank and office space.
Neighborhood Associations: Skycrest Neighbors (Elizabeth France, President, 1629 Cleveland
Street, Clearwater, FL 33765; phone: 727-442-5856); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition
(Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345;
email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Due to incomplete advertising of this request, this application must be continued to April
19, 2005.
Member Coats moved to continue Case: FLD2004-11080 for 1611 Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard to April 19, 2005. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Community Development $pecial 2005-03-22
2
.
.
.
E. APPLICATION WITHDRAWN: Case withdrawn by applicant (Item 1)
1. Case: FLD2004-11 079 - 501 S. Missouri Avenue Level Two Application
Owner: Valentine L. Ayers
ApplicanURepresentative: Mark A. Jonnatti, AlA, Jonnatti Architecture Inc., 21021 US
19N, Clearwater, FL 33765; phone: 727-725-2724; fax: 727-725-2603; email:
. mionnatti@iarch.ccm). .
Location: 0.276 acre located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Missouri
Avenue and Court Street.
Atlas Page: 296B.
Zoning District: Commercial (C).
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit a 351 square-foot addition to an existing
building with reductions to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 2.9 feet (to existing
pavement) and from 25 feet to 16.9 feet (to existing building), reductions to the front (north)
setback from 25 feet to 3.9 feet (to existing pavement) and from 25 feet to 20.7 feet (to existing
building), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to pavement), and a
reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to three feet (to pavement) under the
provisions of Section 2-704.C., as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, and a
reduction to the landscape buffer along South Missouri Avenue from 15 feet to 2.9 feet, a
reduction to the landscape buffer along Court Street from 15 feet to 3.9 feet and a reduction to
the landscape buffer along the south side from five feet to three feet, as a Comprehensive
Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Dental office.
Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Mark T. Parry, Planner III.
On February 15, 200~, the COB (Community Development Board) continued this
request to March 2005, to address the applicant's concerns regarding conditions requiring that
all signage be brought into compliance with the Code. The applicant did not submit additional
information and did not meet with Staff to discuss Code-compliant alternatives with regard to
signage.
In his March 18, 2005 letter to Mark Parry, Mark Jonnatti, representative, withdrew this
application. . ,. . .. .
No action was required.
F. CONSENT AGENDA: The following cases are not contested by the applicant, staff,
neighboring property owners, etc. and will be approved by a single vote at the beginning of the
meeting (Items 1 - 4)
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
3
.
.
.
1. Case: FLD2004-09065 - 105 Brightwater Drive Level Two Application
Owner: La Fiesta Brightwater, LLC.
Applicant/Representative: Robert Szasz, R & S Investments of Pinellas, LLC, 1860 N.
Ft. Harrison Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone: 727-467-0730; fax: 727-467-0732;
email: RBSzasz@aol.com.
Location: 0.16 acre located on the south side of Brightwater Drive, approximately 100
feet east of Harnden Drive.
Atlas Page: 276A.
Zoning District: Tourist (T).
Request: Flexible Deve!opment approval to permit attached dwellings with a reduction to lot
area from 10,000 to 7,21~ square-feet, a reduction to lot width from 100 feet to 60 feet, and an
increase to building height of an additional three feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck -
roof deck at 35-foot height) and to permit a building within the visibility triangles, under the
provisions of Section 2-803.B.
Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (three condominiums).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association; (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive,
Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-443-2168); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug
Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email:
Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
On February 15, 2005, the COB continued this request to March 22, 2005, to address
concerns over the provision of handicap parking, fire escape/egress and elevator orientation.
Regarding any requirement for the provision of a handicap parking space, such requirement is
only applicable for four or more multi-family dwellings under the Fair Housing Accessibility
Guidelines. Since this proposal is for three attached dwellings, there is no required handicap
parking space. The Development Services Department has reviewed the fire escape/egress
stairs and finds they generally are in compliancewith Building Code requirements. Finally, as to
the orientation of the elevator, the applicant has submitted a revised floor plan showing a
corrected elevator orientation, with the door opening on the east side on all floors.
The rectangular~shaped site is 0.16 acre: located on the south side of Brightwater Drive,
approximately 100 feet east of Harnden Drive. It is located along a highly developed area within
Clearwater beach and has frontage along Clearwater Bay. The site is located within the Small
Motel District of Beach By Design, Which provides for the redevelopment of Brightwater Drive
with townhomes and timeshares between two and four stories above parking.
The site currently is developed with a one-story overnight ,acGomQ.1odation building of
nine units/rooms and approximately 10 feet in height. The site has the appearance of one,
undefined, existing driveway along most of the front property line (Brightwater Drive), where
parking spaces straddle the property line (partially on-site and partially within the right-of-way)
and "back out" into the right-of-way. The site also contains an existing dock and two boat slips,
to be retained for resident and guest usage only and will not be sub-leased. All existing
improvements (buildings, pavement, walkways and decks) will be removed as part of the site's
redevelopment.
. . .-
The properties to the east, west and north have not yet been redeveloped. The property
to the west currently is developed with a two-story overnight accommodation use, and there
have been no redevelopment proposals for this site. The property to the north across
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
4
.
.
.
Brightwater Drive currently is developed with overnight accommodation uses and there have
been no redevelopment proposals for these sites. Property to the east currently is developed
with a one- and two-story overnight accommodation use and there have been no redevelopment
proposals for this site. Brightwater Drive, however, can be characterized as undergoing
significant redevelopment into attached dwellings (townhomes and condominiums).
The proposal includes constructing a three-story (over ground level parking) residential
condominium building. A total of four dwelling units are permitted for the subject property,
based on the maximum of 30 units per acre. The proposal is for three units (one unit per floor).
The units will be 2,627 square-feet each (conditioned floor area). The proposal includes five
parking spaces under the building (five parking spaces are required at 1.5 spaces per unit).
Parking under the building will be open and accessible with no gates. The proposal meets all
required setbacks (front (If 15 feet, side of 10 feet and rear of 20 feet). The proposal includes a
portion of the building within the sight visibility triangle, but this is limited to one column on the
west side of the driveway, which is acceptable from a traffic safety standpoint. The proposed
building meets the 35-foot height standard (to roof deck). The request includes an increase to
building height of an additional three feet for perimeter parapets (from the roof deck). This
increased height for the perimeter parapets is to screen rooftop air conditioning and mechanical
equipment.
The proposal includes :3 reduction to lot area from 10,000 to 7 ;214 square-feet and a
reduction to lot width from 100 feet to 60 feet. This proposal includes only one platted lot,
whereas all other redevelopment proposals on Brightwater Drive have included multiple lots.
Staff is aware of only two circumstances on Brightwater Drive where there are single lots that
have been passed over through the redevelopment of adjacent properties. This proposal is
different, in that this lot is in between other lots to the east and west that also have not yet been
proposed for redevelopment. The Small Motel District of Beach by Design recognizes that
"although the existing improvements may not represent the theoretical 'highest and best' use of
this area, the relatively good condition of most buildings and the economic value of the existing
improvements make it difficult, if not impossible, to anticipate significant land assembly,
demolition and new redevelopment." Beach by Design also recognizes Brightwater Drive as
being "riper for redevelopment." The applicant has attempted to 'acquire the adjacent
properties, but has been unsuccessful. Adjacent existing development on the properties to the
east and west are also larger motels. While Staff would prefer a larger parcel, where reductions
to lot area and lot width would not be necessary, Staff also recognizes the circumstances of
redevelopment proposals. In this case, while the lot is small, the appiicant is not maximizing the
number of units allowable and has designed a project, meeting setback requirements.
The Mediterranean-style of architecture of the building will include soft yellow stucco for
the main building color... The parapet walls will contain terra cotta barrel tile roofing. Banding,
windows, doorframes, railings and other architectural features will be painted white. The
landscape plan utilizes groundcover (giant green liriope), shrubs (pittospqrum tobira and ilex .
shilling) and trees (queen palm) at the front of the property. The applicant proposes variegated
ligustrum shrubs and queen palms along the east and west property lines adjacent to the
existing developments.
The applicant is not proposing any signs with this development. Any future freestanding
sign should be a monument-style sign of a maximum four feet in height and designed to match
the exterior materials and color of the building. The proposal will utilize black barrels for trash
. .'
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
5
.
.
.
(one per unit). These will be stored in a trash room on the northwest corner of the building and
will be placed within a staging area adjacent to the public sidewalk on pick-up days. All required
Parks and Recreation fees will be required to be paid prior to the issuance of any building
permits. On-site utility faGilities (electric and communication lines) will be required to be placed
underground as part of the site redevelopment. Provisions for the placement of conduits for the
future undergrounding of existing aboveground utility facilities in the public right-of-way should
be completed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy in a manner acceptable to
the utility companies and the City.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on November 12, and December 30, 2004. The Planning Department recommends approval of
the Flexible Development application to permit attached dwellings with a reduction to lot area
from 10,000 to 7,214 square-feet, a reduction to lot width from 100 to 60 feet and an increase to
building height of an additional three feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck - roof deck at
35-foot height) and to permit a building within the visibility triangles, under the provisions of
Section 2-803.B, for the site at 105 Brightwater Drive, with the following bases and conditions:
Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria for
attached dwellings per Section 2-803.8; 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 compatibie 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 CDB; 2) That
boats moored at the docks, lift and/or slips 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; 3) That a~y future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign a maximum fo.ur
feet in height and designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building; 4) That a
condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 5) That
all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall
setbacks; 6) That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed
underground. Conduits for the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting
right-of-way shall be installed along the entire site's street frontages prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number
of conduits with all affected utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location,
size and number of conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's
Engineering Department prior to the commencement of work; 7) That all Fire Department
requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits; and 8) That all Parks and Recreation
fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits.
See page 11 for motion of approval.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
6
.
.
.
2. Case: FLD2004-12083 - 3190 McMullen-Booth Road Level Two Application
Owner: North Bay Community Church, Inc.
Applicant: CWMC, LLC.
Representative: Tom Radcliffe, L1overas, Baur & Stevens, 29228 US 19N, Clearwater,
FL 33761; phone: 727-784-3965; fax: 727-784-8153; email: tradcliffe@lbsonline.com.
Location: 2.554 acres located on the west side of McMullen-Booth Road, directly west of
Briar Creek Boulevard, and approximately 700 feet south of Mease Drive.
Atlas Page: 190A.
Zoning District: Institutional (I).
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit a medical clinic with a reduction to front
(east) setback from 25 to 15 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10
to six feet (to pavement), and a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 to zero feet (to
pavement), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section
2-1204.A, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the south property line from five feet to
zero feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program: under the provisions of
Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Medical clinic with a gross floor area of 20,481 square-feet.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
This area, on the west side of McMullen-Booth Road, is developed generally with
churches, whereas the east side is developed with Mease Hospital and medical offices.
Attached dwellings and cidacht:d dwellings are west of these churches that front McMullen-
Booth Road.
The 2.554 acres is on the west side of McMullen-Booth Road, directly west of Briar
Creek Boulevard and approximately 700 feet south of Mease Drive. The site has approximately
308 existing linear feet of frontage on McMullen-Booth Road. The site currently includes 72
parking spaces for the church to the south. There is a small, two-story building on the property
(formerly a garage apartment), as well as a basketball court. A detached dwelling was
demolished in 1995.
Research of records in the Development Services Department indicates that the parking
lot on this parcel was constructed under Permit #95070377, issued July 18, 1995. Parking
calculations on the 1995 site plan for this parking lot indicated that the 396 seat worship center,
with a parking ratio of one space for each three seats, required 132 parking spaces and 124
parking spaces existed on the church parcel to the south of this subject parcel.
A retention pond for McMullen-Booth Road drainage abuts to the north. Churches exist
to the north and to the south. A detached dwelling subdivision is adjacent to the west. Mease
Hospital is located to the northeast. Medical offices are located to the east across McMullen-
Booth Road. .
The proposa! includes construction of a two-story, 20,481 Bqll~r~-foot medical clinic.
The new building is proposed on the northern half of the site. Some proposed parking will be
under the second floor of the building. The proposal includes a reduction to the front (east)
setback from 25 to 15 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 to six
feet (to pavement), and a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 to zero feet (to existing
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
7
.
pavement). The building is proposed 45 feet from the front property line. Existing pavement is
set back approximately 15 feet from the front property line. The proposal meets the 15-foot
wide landscape buffer requirement along McMullen-Booth Road. The proposed reduction will
provide sufficient area to provide significant landscaping to buffer the front of the property.
There are corollary reduction requests to the 10-foot setback and five-foot wide
landscape buffer requirements ~!ong the north and south property lines. With regard to the
setback reduction along the north property line, there is an existing retention pond for McMullen-
Booth Road drainage immediately to the north. Only the eastern portion of the parking along
the north property line requires the requested reduction, as the western portion of the parking
meets the required 10-foot setback. Directly north of this eastern portion of the northern parking
row, on the adjacent retention pond parcel, is dense existing underbrush, contributing to
buffering along the north property line of parking spaces. Regarding the reduction to the
setback and landscape buffer along the south property line, the existing parking lot pavement un
this parcel is at the same setback as requested. Staff has advertised a zero side setback to the
south property line due to the cross access that is proposed to be maintained between the two
properties. Maintaining this cross access will allow the church to park on the medical clinic
property when it is not open for business, and will allow the medical' clinic access to the church's
driveway farther south on McMullen-Booth Road. Maintaining the closeness of the parking for
the church also wili allow preservation of existing trees adjacent to this south property line. The
applicant plans to install a podocarpus hedge with crape myrtle trees along this edge.
.
Access to the site will be maintained at the same location as it exists today, however, it
will be modified to reduce its width. The driveway lines up with Briar Creek Boulevard across
McMullen-Booth Road. A driveway that provided access to the former garage apartment and
detached dwelling will be removed with this redevelopment proposal. Due to the trip generation
associated with the medical clinic and the Level of Service at this location on McMullen-Booth
Road, a rightturn deceleration, lane will be installed.
The site plan indicates the provision of 101 parking spaces for the medical clinic,
whereas Code provisions require 103 parking spaces. In accordance with Section 3-1404.E,
this reduction by two parking spaces was necessary to preserve existing trees on-site. With the
sale of this property and redevelopment with a medical clinic, parking for the North Bay
Community Church will not meet the parking requirements of 132 parking spaces cited in 1995
(only 124 spaces exist on the Ghurch site to the south of the subject parcel). However, it has
been the intent with the sale of this property, hence the request for a zero side setback to
continue cross access between the properties, that the church have access to the medical clinic
parking when the clinic is not open for business. Pursuant to Section 3-1405, together the
church and medical clinic meet the provisions for shared parking, therefore, required parking is
being provided. This shared parking must be formalized and recorded in the public record into
shared parking agreement prior to the issuance of any permits.
The proposed building is planned with 8,162 square-feet on the first floor and 12,319
square-feet on the second floor. The building's main access will be at the southeast corner of
the building and will have a porte cochere. The building meets the Code height provisions of 30
feet to the roof deck. The building will have a stucco exterior appearance of a colonial revival
(dark sand) color with wh!te trim and green glazed glass.
.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
8
.
.
.
The proposal includes a monument sign oriented to McMullen-Booth Road. This
monument sign should be a maximum of six feet high and finished to match the building in
material and color. There is an existing sign for the church within the McMullen-Booth Road
right-of-way abutting this parcel that must be removed prior to the issuance of the Certificate of
Occupancy.
The site will be well landscaped with this proposal. The rear area of the site includes a
creek that has been determined to be a jurisdictional wetland. Code buffering is being provided
to this wetland. A number of trees within this wetland area are being preserved.
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 January 27, 2005. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit a medical clinic with a reduction to front (east) setback from
25 feet to 15 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to six feet
(to pavement) and a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to
pavement), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section
2-1204.A, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the south property line from five feet to
zero feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of
Section 3-1202. G, for the property located at 3190 McMullen-Booth 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 2-1204.A; 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, prior to the issuance of any permits, a shared parking agreement and cross-access
agreement be recorded in the public records; 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, the dumpster enclosure be designed with materials and
color consistent with the principal building; 4) That the freestanding sign be limited to six feet in
height above the finished grade of the front property line, be consistent with the design and
color of the principal building and be coordinated into the landscape design of the site. The
existing sign within the right-of-way shall be removed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy; 5) That, prior to the issuance of any permits, a Pinellas County right-of-way permit
be obtained for the driveway modification and the proposed right turn deceleration lane; 6) That,
prior to the issuan<::e of alJ~eermits, a Tree Preservation Plan preR~rE~d by a certified arboris!,
consulting arborist, landscape architect or other specialist in the field of arboriculture be
submitted. This plan must show how the proposed building, parking, stormwater and utilities
impact the critical root zones (drip lines) of tree to be preserved and how these impacts are
addressed (Le. crown elevating, root pruning and/or root aeration systems). Other data required
on this plan must show the trees canopy line, actual tree barricade limits (2/3 of the drip line
and/or in the root prune lines if required), the tree barricade detail and any other pertinent
information relating to tree preservation; 7) That all Fire Department requirements be met prior
to the issuance of any permits; 8) That prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy,
traffic impact fees be assessed and paid; and 9) That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid
prior to the issuance of any permits.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
9
.
See page 11 for motion of approval.
.
3. Case: FLD2004-04032A - 1410 North Betty Lane Leve/ Two Application
Owner/Applicant: David Jaye, 2850 Weathersfield Court, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone:
727 -791-7878.
Representative: Housh Ghovaee, Northside Engineering Services, Inc., 601 Cleveland
Street #930, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone: 727-443-2869; fax 727-446-8036; e-mail:
dwilliams@northsdsideengineeering.com.
Location: 0.220 acre located on the southwest corner of Stephenson Drive and Betty
Lane.
Atlas Page: 269B.
Zoning District: Commercial (C).
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit car wash with a reduction to the front (north)
setback along Stephenson Drive from 25 to 23 feet (to building), as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-?04.C, 25 an amendment to a
previously approved Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project (Case No. FLD2004-04032
[which permitted a car wash with reductions to the front (north) setback along Stephenson Drive
from 25 feet to eight feet (to dumpster enclosure), from 25 to 24 feet to building, a reduction
from the front (east) setback along Betty Lane from 25 to 20 feet to building, a reduction from
the side (west) setback from 10 to five feet to the freestanding vacuum area and from 10 to nine
feet to pavement, and a reduction to the required number of parking spaces from seven to three
spaces, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3.-
1202.G]).
Proposed Use: A three-bay, self-service car wash with a reduced front (north) setback along
Stephenson Drive from previously approved 24 to 23 feet.
Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
This 0.220-acre site is on the southwest corner of Stephenson Drive and North Betty
Lane. On September 21, 2004, the COB approved the development of this site with a self-
service car wash, with various reductions. Building Permit # BCP2004-10035 was issued
November 4, 2004, to construct the site and building improvements. The site was developed
with the self-service car wash. It came to the attention of the City after the building was
constructed that the building was located approximately 11 inches closer to Stephenson Drive
than originally approved (23-foot setback rather than a 24-foot setback). The applicant has
submitted this application in an effort to correct the location oversight. A.Temporary Certificate
of Occupancy was issued February 18, 2005, pending the outcome of this application.
The proposal is to legitimize the location of the three-bay, self-service Car wash building
as it has been constructed at a front setback of 23 feet to Stephenson Drive. In order to
increase the turning radius of vehicles entering or exiting the southernmost bay, the building
location was amended to.be three feet farther west than originally approved (to be located at a
23-foot front setback rather than the originally approved 20-foot front setback from North Betty
Lane). When laying out the building location, there was a miscommunication with the surveyor
regarding the change to a front setback of 23 feet. The building was laid out to meet a 23-foot
setback from both North Betty Lane and Stephenson Drive, whereas the setback to Stephenson
.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
10
Drive should have remained at a 24-foot setback. The change in location from Stephenson
. Drive is not perceptible generally to the surrounding area.
The site has been otherwise constructed as previously approved by the CDB, with the
exception that Staff approved the amendment of the wall originally shown along the west
property line to a six-foot high vinyl fence, with a six-foot high masonry wall constructed on three
sides of the vacuum station to reduce noise impacts on the abutting detached dwelling.
.
.
The building and site improvements originally were found to be compatible with the
surrounding area. 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 originally reviewed the application and supporting
materials on August 18, 2004. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit a car wash with a reduction to the front (north) setback along
Stephenson Drive from 25 to 23 feet (to building), 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 FLD2004-04032 [which permitted a car
wash with reductions to the front (north) setback along Stephenson Drive from 25 to eight feet
(to dumpster enclosure), floln 25 to 24 feet to building, a reduction from the front (east) setback
along Betty Lane from 25 to 20 feet to building, a reduction from the side (west) setback from 10
feet to five feet to the freestanding vacuum area and from 10 to nine feet to pavement, and a
reduction to the required number of parking spaces from seven to three spaces, as part of a
Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G]) for the site at
1410 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 Projecfper 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
proposal is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance redevelopment efforts.
Conditions of Approval: (* Previously imposed under Case FLD2004-04032) 1 *) That the
vacuum operation be limited to 7:00 a.m. 10:00 p.m.; 2*) That all Fire Department concerns be
addressed prior to building permit issuance; 3*) That an approved health permit be obtained
from Pinellas County Health for sanitary connection prior to issuance of a building permit; 4*)
That an approved SWFWMD (Southwest Florida Water Management District) permit be
provided prior to building permit issuance; 5*) That a Traffic Impact fee to be assessed and paid
prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, by the applicant; 6*) That all proposed on-site
utilities, including electric, phone and cable television, be located underground; and 7*) That all
signage meet Code, consist of channel letters for any attached signs, and low monument-style
for a freestanding sign and be architecturally-integrated into the design of the building and site.
Member Coa~es moved to approve Item F1 j Case: FLD2004-0~OR5 for 105 Brightwater
Drive, including the Bases for Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, Item F2, Case:
FLD2004-12083 - 3190 McMullen-Booth Road, including the Bases for Approval and
Conditions of Approval as listed, and Item F3, Case: FLD2004-04032A for 1410 North Betty
Lane including the Bases for Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, based on findings
of fact, conclusions of law, and staff reports. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
11
.
.
.
4. Level Two Application
Case: FLD2004-1 'lO82 - 2723 SR 580 (Related to ANX2004-11019 and LUZ2004-
11 007)
Owner/Applicant: Richard T. Heiden, 1640 US 19N, Suite 4, Palm Harbor, FL 33684;
phone 727-771-7888; fax: 727-771-7899; email: richardheiden@rthlaw.com.
Location: 0.16 acre located on the south side of SR 580 approximately 1,300 feet east of
McMullen-Booth Road.
Atlas Page: 212A.
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit an office with a reduction in the. minimum lot
area from 10,000 square-feet to 7,152 square-feet, reduction in the minimum lot width from 100
feet to 60 feet, reduction in the required number of parking spaces from seven spaces (three
spaces per 1,000 square-feet of GFA) to six spaces (2.5 spaces per 1,000 square-feet of GFA),
reduction in the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to pavement), reduction in the rear
(south) setback from 20 to 10 feet to building, reduction in the side (east) setback from 20 to five
feet to building and to 1.5 feet to walkway, reduction in the side (west) setback from 20 to 10
feet to building and parking, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the
provisions of Section 2-1003. B.
Proposed Use: A two-story office building, 2,428 square-feet in area.
Neighborhood Association(s): Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Mark Parry, Planner III.
The site is 0.16 acre, on the south side of SR 580, approximately 1,300 feet west of
McMullen-Booth Road, is vacant and is accessed via a single curb cut along SR 580. The
majority of the site.is presently within unincorporated Pinellas County and is being annexed
(ANX2004-08013). Land Use Plan and Zoning Atlas amendments also are being requested
(LUZ2004-08006). The requests propose to amend the Future Land Use classification from the
Residential Suburban (RS) Classification (County) to Residential Low (RL) Classification (City)
and change the zoning from the R-3, Single Family Residential District (County) to the Office
(0) District (City of Clearwater).
The proposal includ~s a two-story office building, 2,428 sq!J~re-f~et in area. The first
floor of the building will be used for three parking spaces, a lobby with stairwell, and elevator
access. The building will be approximately 45 feet from the front (north) property line along SR
580, five feet from the side (east) property line, 10 feet from the side (west) property line, and 10
feet from the rear (south) property line. A total of six parking spaces will be provided where
eight are required. The existing driveway along SR 580 will serve the site. The proposal
includes installation of landscaping around the perimeter of the site consistent with the intent of
the Code including India hawthorn, variegated jasmine, viburnum and magnolia, live oak and
bald cypress.
The main entrance to the building will be along SR 580. The building will incorporate the
use of exposed beams, standing seam metal roof, railings, and an extensive use of windows
and faux windows. The proposed materials will be hardi-plank siding painted a light yellow and
a standing seam metal roof system. The proposed, two-story building design and architectural
style is residential in character with regard to size and scale. The proposed number of parking
spaces will serve the sits adequately. The proposed tenant is ail attornoy's office employing
three full-time employees, including the owner and one part-time employee who is present after
normal business hours and after full-time staff have left for the day. The nature of the
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
12
.
.
.
applicant's business is such that clients are on site one at a time. The only other visitors to the
site include deliveries, such as UPS or FedEx delivery vans. The decrease in the width and
area of the site is required due to the factthat the site is an existing piece of property. The
properties on each side (to the east and west have been developed with offices) and there are
no opportunities to increase the width or area of the site and adjacent property owners have not
expressed interest in acquiring the site. The decrease in setbacks is sensitive to the
surrounding area and is mitigated through landscaping and the residential scale of the building.
Offices to the east and west characterize the area. Single-family dwellings exist to the south.
The reduction in setbacKs w~!1 provide a more economically, viable projed without a significant
reduction in the quality of the site, building, or landscape design. Without these reductions, it
would be difficult to develop the site.
Solid waste service will be provided via trash containers staged within the building.
Office staff will move them out on collection days for pick up by the Solid Waste Department. All
stormwater requirements have been met with this proposal with the site. A sign package has
not been submitted with this <:lpplication, however all signage will be required to meet the
requirements of Code and be architecturally-integrated with the design of the building with
regard to proportion, color, material and finish as part of a final sign package submitted to and
approved by Staff prior to the issuance of any permits.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on December 30, 2004. The applicant has worked with Staff to provide an attractive, well-
designed development that will enhance the local area and City as a whole. The development
will further the City's goals of improving the character of the area. The proposal is in
compliance with the standards and criteria for Flexible Development approval for
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project use and with all applicable standards of the
Community Development Code.
The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible Development
application to permit an o"ffi~~ with a reduction in the minimum lot area from 1 0,000 square-feet
to 7,152 square-feet, reduction in the minimum lot width from 100 to 60 feet, reduction in the
required number of spaces from seven spaces (three spaces per 1,000 square-feet of GFA) to
six spaces (2.5 spaces per 1,000 square-feet of GFA), reduction in the front (north) setback
from 25 to 15 feet (to pavement) reduction in the rear (south) setback from 20 to 10 feet to
building, reduction in the side (east) setback from 20 to five feet to building and to 1.5 feet to
walkway, reduction in the side (west) setback from 20 to 10 feet to building and parking, as a
Comprehensive lnfill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-1004.B. 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 2-1004.B; 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, and be approved by Staff; 2) That a Transportation
Impact Fee be paid, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; 3) That all proposed
utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for
the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting rights-of-way shall be installed
along the entire site's street frontages prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The
applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
13
.
.
.
utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of
conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior
to the commencement of work; 4) That all Fire Department requirements be met, prior to the
issuance of any permits; 5) That all Traffic Department requirements be met, prior to the
issuance of any permits; 6) That all signage meet the requirements of Code and be
architecturally-integrated with the design of the building with regard to proportion, color, material
and finish as part of a final sign package submitted to and approved by Staff prior to the
issuance of any permits which includes: a) All signs fully dimensioned and coordinated in terms
of including the same color and font style and size and b) All signs be constructed of the highest
quality materials which are coordinated with the colors, materials and architectural style of the.
building; 7) That all City Storm Drainage criteria be met prior to the issuance of any building
permits; and 8) That an approved FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) right-of-way
permit be secured and presented to Staff prior to any work performed in the public right-of-wQY
and/or the issuance of any build!!1g permits.
One person spoke in opposition to the application and one person spoke in support.
Planner Mark Parry said the project meets all City stormwater requirements, which are
more stringent than SWFWMD. The setback in the front is requested for pavement only. The
building will not be closer to the road than the one next door.
Richard Heiden, applicant, reviewed his request. The building will be 42 feet from the
front of the property.
Member Fritsch moved to approve Item F4, Case FLD2004-11082 for 2723 SR 580
including the Bases for Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, based on findings of fact,
conclusions of law, and staff reports related to engineering and diainage calculations. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
14
.
.
.
G. CONTINUED ITEM (Item 1):
1. Case: FLD2004':1 0076fTDR2004-1 0014 -12ldlewild Street Level Two Application
Owner: Haddon House Inn, Inc. . .. .__
Applicant/Representative: Housh Ghovaee, Northside Engineering Services, Inc., 601
Cleveland Street, Suite 930, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone: 727-443-2869; fax: 727-446-
8036; email: nestech@mindsprinq.com.
Location: 0.462 acre on the north side of Idlewild Street, approximately 125 feet west of
Mandalay Avenue.
Atlas Page: 258A.
Zoning District: Medium High Density Residential (MHDR).
Request:
1) Flexible Development approval to permit 14 attached dwellings with- reductions to the front
(south) setback from 25 to 15 feet (to building) and from 25 to 4.2 feet (to trash staging area), a
reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 to eight feet from the Coastal Construction Control
Line (to pool deck), reductions to the side (north) setback from 10 to 5.9 feet (to building), from
10 to five feet (to pool deck) and from 10 to two feet (to sidewalk), a reduction to the side (west)
setback from 10 to 3.2 feet (to sidewalk), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 to 6 feet
(to sidewalk), and an increase to he!ght from 30 to 64 feet (to roof deck} '.^lith an additional 4.16
feet for perimeter parapet (from roof deck) and an additional 15.83 feet for a rooftop pavilion
(from roof deck), as a Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.F;
2) reduction to the landscape buffer along Idlewild Street from 10 to 4.2 feet (to trash staging
area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 to 5.9 feet (to
building), from 10 to five feet (to pool deck) and from 10 to two feet (to sidewalk), a reduction to
the landscape buffer along the west property line from 10 to 3.2 feet (to sidewalk) and a
reduction to the landscape buffer along the eastern property line from 10 to 6 feet (to sidewalk),
as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G; and
3) Transfer of Development Rights for one dwelling unit from 321 Coronado Drive, under the
provisions of Section 4-1403 (TDR2004-1 0014).
Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (fourteen condominiums).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive,
Ciearwater, FL 33767: phone: 727-443-2168); Island Estates Civic Association (PO Box 3154,
Clearwater, FL 33767); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544
Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Wayne Wells, Planner III, AICP.
On February 15, 2005, the COB continued this application at the applicant's request to
March 22, 2005. There have been no changes to the site plan or other application materials
since February 15, 2005.
Planner Wayne Wells reviewed the request. The 0.47-acre site is on the north side of
Idlewild Street, approximately 125 feet west of Mandalay Avenue. The site has 195 feet of
frontage on Idlewild Street and extends an additional 70 feet west of the end of Idlewild Street.
The property is an odd shaped lot composed of two equal sided polygons. The larger portion of
the site is a 175 by 87 foot east/west rectangle along Idlewild Street, and the smaller portion is a
60 by 90 foot rectangle the west end of which extends west of the CCCL (Coastal Construction
Control Line).
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
15
.
The parcel is zoned Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District and currently is
developed with a nonconforming overnight accommodation USE'. The H8ddon House, built in
1925, is one of the two oldest rental units on the beach and is the oldest house on the beach.
The existing building is unique and attractive to the "Old Florida District." The site includes
back-out parking on Idlewild Street, and limited landscaping.
The site is within the special area redevelopment plan Beach by Design as part of the
"Old Florida District." The immediate vicinity is almost entirely composed of attached dwellings,
with a condo building on the south side of Idlewild Street and a restaurant on the north side of
Idlewild near Mandalay. Buildings in the district are of varying heights from single story to an
approved 6-story building. Two blocks north of Idlewild Street and to the west of Mandalay
Avenue are two approved condominium developments: 1) Chateau of White Sands - 15
Somerset Street, 61.66 feet in height and 2) Chalets on White Sands - 14 Somerset Street, 56
feet in height.
The proposed building will have six living floors (64 from BFE [Base Flood Elevation] to
roof deck), with varying numbers of units per floor. Levels 2 and 3 are proposed with three units
each, Unit C is 1,979 square-feet of living area with 270 square-feet of balcony, Unit B is 2,002
square-feet of living area with 262 square-feet of balcony, and Unit A is 2,282 square-feet of
living space with 387 square-feet of balcony. Level 4 includes Units A and B plus a clubhouse
with 1,390 square-feet of floOi area and 599 square-feet of balcony space. Levels 5 and 6
include two floor plans with Unit A comprising 2,282 square-feet of living space and 387 square-
feet of balcony. Unit B includes 2,003 square-feet of living area and 555 square-feet of balcony.
Elevators in the center of the 'building will provide access to the units. Two stairwells are
located on the northern side of the building.
.
Sidewalks will be constructed within the rights-of-way of Idlewild for pedestrian safety,
where no sidewalks presently exist. The proposal also provides a turn around that meets fire
requirements. Amenities for the proposal include a Jacuzzi and pavilions on the roof and a
swimming pool, spa and cab,;lnas to the west of the building. Pa(king and a solid waste staging
area will be located on the ground floor, The applicant is not proposing any signage at this time.
Beach by Design regulates development within certain areas of the beach. Beach by
Design calls for renovation and revitalization of existing improvements with limited new
construction where renovation is not practical. The site is located within the "Old Florida
D!strict" of Beach by Design where the preferred form of development includes low- to mid-rise
new single-family dwellings and townhomes. The Planning Department interprets mid-rise as
maximum of 50 feet, based on the height standards in the Medium Density Residential (MDR),
Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) and High Densify Residential (HDR) districts. The
immediate vicinity is composed of attached dwellings and small motels and condominiums,
Building styles generally resemble architecture from the 1950s and appear to have been
progressively expanded. The proposed height (64 feet to roof deck; 80 feet overall from BFE) of
the building and the form of development (condominium) are inconsistent with the preferred
development type and permitted height of the "Old Florida District." The height also is
inconsistent with the major ity of existing buildings in the an:::Cl.
Staff has found instances within the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design where
developments approved by the COB, with Staff support, have and are dramatically changing the
character of the area. These changes generally have not been consistent with the vision and
.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
16
.
.
.
requirements of the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design. Due to these conditions, Staff has
taken a more conservative approach to development within the Beach by Design plan area,
especially related to building height and type of use, and therefore, cannot support the height
and the condominium use requested for this project. This proposal is inconsistent with the "Old
Florida District" of Beach by Design with regard to height (64 feet to roof deck and 80 feet
overall from BFE) where low:- to mid-rise buildings are required and type of use (condominium
where single-family or town is required). .
As such, the proposal does not meet the following residential infill project criteria: 1) The
development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is otherwise
economically impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards. Staff
agrees the requested reductions in setbacks are warranted given the size and shape of the lot
and historical development patterns in the area. However, the applicant has not shown how the
increase in height from 30 feet to 64 feet (to roof; 80 feet overall from BFE) is necessary for
development of the site; 2) The uses within the residential infill project are compatible with
adjacent lands uses. The proposed overall building height of 80 feet from BFE is taller than
most surrounding buildings and is inconsistent with the requirements of the "Old Florida District"
of Beach by Design. The proposal is not compatible with adjacent land uses; 3) The
development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill project will upgrade
the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. The proposal continues the
current trend of oversized buildings on small lots further eroding the vision of the "Old Florida
District" of Beach by Design and will result in a building out of scale with surrounding buildings;
and 4) The design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and function which
enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. The design of the building is out of scale
with surrounding buildings most of which are well below the proposed overall height of 80 feet;
5) Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified
by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. Building height may only exceed 80 feet,
however, if the parcel proposed for development fronts on Clearwater Harbor or is only
separated from Clearwater Harbor by a public open space. While reductions in the setbacks
are warranted given the odd shape of the site and the existing development pattern within the
neighborhood, the proposed height is not consistent with Beach by Design. The applicant has
not clearly shown that an overall height of 80 feet from BFE provides a benefit to the community
character and the immediate vicinity of the property. - - .
Additionally, the proposal does not meet the following General Applicability criteria: 1)
Development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and
character of adjacent properties. The proposal includes a building with an overall height of 80
feet (64 feet to roof deck from BFE). The proposed height is inconsistent with most of the
buildings in the neighborhood and is inconsistent with the "Old Florida" District" of Beach by
Design and 2) Development is consistent with the community character of the immediate
vicinity. The development is inconsistent with the community character of the immediate
vicinity, which consists primarily of buildings less than 50 feet in height.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on March 4, April 1, and May 6, 2004. The Planning Department recommends denial of the
Flexible Development application to permit attached dwellings with reductions to the front
(south) setback from 25 to 15 feet (to building) and from 25 to 4.2 feet (to trash staging area), a
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
17
.
.
.
reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 to eight feet from the Coastal Construction Control
Line (to pool deck), reductions to the side (north) setback from 10 to 5.9 feet (to building) and
from 10 to five feet (to pool deck) and from 10 to 2 feet (to sidewalk), a reduction to the side
(west) setback from 10 to 3.2 feet (to sidewalk), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 to
6 feet (to sidewalk), and an increase to height from 30 to 64 feet (to roof deck), with an
additional 4.16 feet for perimeter parapet (from roof deck) and an additional 15.83 feet for a
rooftop pavilion (from roof deck), and change of use from Overnight Accommodations to
Attached Dwellings as a Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.F. with
the following Bases for Denial: 1) The proposal is not in compliance with the "Old Florida
District" of Beach by Design where the preferred form of development is low- to mid-rise new
single-family dwellings and townhouses; 2) The proposal does not comply with the Flexible
Development criteria as a Residentiallnfill Project per Section 2-404.F.1, 4,5, 6 and 7; 3) The
proposal is not in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General
Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913.1 and 6; and 4) The development is not compatible with
the surrounding area and will not enhance other redevelopment effolis.
Mr. Wells said the request for Transfer of Development Rights for one dwelling unit had
been withdrawn as it is not required.
Troy Perdue, representative for the applicant, said the application's type of use and
requested height are: common in the district and requested setbacks are reasonable. He said
the project is consistent with five nearby projects previously approved by the board, which had
determined their appropriateness in the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design. He said the
only anomaly of the design is the overruns, open pavilions that break up the roofline without
obstructing the visual flow. He said neighbors have not objected to the project.
Planning Director Cyndi Tarapani said, based on discussion with the City Council and
their change of opinion regarding appropriate levels of development in the "Old Florida District,"
staff has taken a new look at applications and is concerned about the impact of previously
approved projects on th~ area.
Discussion ensued with concerns expressed that the CDB should act consistently and
the City Council had not enacted a moratorium. In response to a question regarding staff's
summary findings of fact and conclusions of law, Ms. Tarapani said each project should be
considered on its own merit. She said this project is well above mid-rise height, the multi-level
additions will make the building appear even taller, and the mass is out of scale with the area.
The Beach by Design plan supercedes zoning district allowances. Staff does not think the
project, an oversized building on a small lot outside the tourist zone, will upgrade the immediate
vicinity. It was felt that mid-rise buildings shouid not be taiier than 50 jeet. In response to a
question, Ms. Tarapani said the project is at the maximum density allowed by Code. It was
suggested the project is consistent with what the community character of the immediate vicinity
is becoming.
Mr. Perdue said the applicant had determined that two parking spaces per unit would not
be required. Mr. Wells said a common area planned for the roof could generate trash. Ms.
Tarapani said overruns are permitted by code for mechanical equipment, such as stairs and
elevators. Mr. Perdue said the developer is willing to reduce the overruns as much as possible
and remove one pavilion to reduce mass.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
18
.
.
.
Acting Mem.ber D~nnehy moved to approve Item G1, Case: FLD2004-10076fTDR2004-
10014 for 12 Idlewild Street subject to conditions of approval consistent with those imposed on
similar projects, based on findings of fact, conclusions of law, and staff reports, with exceptions
that the project complies with standards and criteria as they apply to height, the redevelopment
of the parcel proposed for development is otherwise economically impractical without deviations
from the intensity and development standards, uses within the residential infill project are
compatible with adjacent lands uses, development of the parcel proposed for development as a
residential infill project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development, the design of the proposed residential infill project creates a form and function
which enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development and the City of Clearwater as a whole, flexibility in regard to lot width, required
setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified by the benefits to community character and
the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a
whole, development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and
character of adjacent properties, development is consistent with the community character of the
immediate vicinity, and the design of the proposed project creates ~ form and function which
enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. The motion was duly seconded.
Members Johnson, Tallman, and Acting Member Dennehy voted "Aye"; Member Fritsch and
Chair Gildersleeve voted "Nay." Motion carried.
Consensus was for staff to present Conditions of Approval for CDS approval on April 19,
2005.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
19
.
.
.
H. LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (Items 1 - 3):
1. Case: FLD2004-12084 -1603,1605,1607,1609,1612,1613,1616,1620,1621,
1624, 1625, 1628, 1629, 1632, 1633, 1636, 1637, 1639, 1640, 1641, 1643, 1644, 1645
and 1647 Sand Key Estates Court; and 130,134,142,146,147,150,154,155,158,
159, 162, 166, 167, 170, 174, 178, 182, 186, 190, 194, 198,202,206,210,218,219,
222,223, 230 and 231 Sand Key Estates Drive
Owners: Robert G. & Ana C. Zakel, James H. & Ann R. Slavin, Robert 0 Francis &
Lorraine Y. Hori, Rosalia Menna, John J. & Margaret D. Rubino, William D. & Patricia A.
Gross, Robert R. & Sharron A. Rankine, Marcus I. & Roswita A. Schmiedt, Avery & Ann
Coryell, Henry A. & Juliane Hale, Carol D. Larson, Christopher P. Gleason, Thomas &
Claudia Dunne, Richard A. & Rose-Marie Hamilton, Gregori L. & Cheri V. Boudreau,
Tamara Ustianowski, William J. McNally, Dames Limited Partnership, Karl D. & Joanne
M. Jones, Isabela B. Christian, Pamela K. Roberts, Debra L. Early & Christopher C.
Lavin, Stephen N. & Barbara D. Vallari, Brian P. & Kristie K. Hickok, Thomas J. &
Patricia A. O'Connor, Patrick C. & Dawne Smith, Sirun & Ayda Sarafian, Phillis L. Eagle,
Caryn A. Kast, Gregory & Sandra Kay Winteregg, Robert W. & Barbara H. Thacker,
Thomas J. & Patricia' A. O'Connor, Ronald T. & Patricia A. Franciose, Michael B.
&Frances B. Sosslau, Edward & Susan Grant, Eugene Edward Fitzpatrick, Patrick &
Barbara K. Nacol, Nikolas T. Spiridellis, Leonard & Geraldine Mennen, Deborah Hinson,
William & Patricia Adams, Paul & Nancy Bergstrom, Jay & Gail Jorgensen, Klaus &
Kaye Harig, Siegfried & Ursala Adam, Joseph & Michele Sgroi, David Barnett, Leon &
Linda Welch, Adrian Allen, Luigi Del Basso & Louise Ward, Chui & Soon Lee, Sung Tae
& Assami Byun, Lenore J. Smith & Wondel Smith, Jr. and John J. Anthony for KAJA
Enterprises, LLC.
Applicant: Avery Coryell, 1621 Sand Key Estates Court, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone:
727- 595-8989; fax: 727-595-6027; email: capt2AA@aol.cglD... .' .
Location: 54 lots in The Moorings of Sand Key Subdivision, approximately 600 feet east
of Gulf Boulevard on Sand Key Estates Court and Sand Key Estates Drive
Atlas Page: 319B
Zoning District: High Density Residential (HDR).
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit rear deck/patio additions to existing detached
dwellings with a reduction to the rear setback from 15 feet to zero feet (to deck/patio) and a
reduction to the side setback from 10 to zero feet (to deck/patio), as a Residentiallnfill Project,
under the provisions of Section 2-504.F.
Proposed Use: Rear deck/patio additions to existing detached dwellings.
Neighborhood Associations: Sand Key Civic Association (Jim Warner; phone: 727-410-5383);
Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater,
FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Mr. Wells reviewed the iequest. These 54 lots are in The MCCiiiigs of Sand Key
Subdivision, approximately 600 feet east of Gulf Boulevard on Sand Key Estates Court and
Sand Key Estates Drive. The subdivision was platted in 1991 and approved through a Certified
Site Plan 1993. The subdivision is developed with a detached dwelling (zero-lot-line) on each
lot. The applicant has filed this request involving 54 of the 66 lots in this subdivision, rather than
each lot filing its own request. There already have been two similar requests approved in this
subdivision at 1601 Sand Key Estates Court (FLD2003-09043, approved by the COB on
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
20
December 16, 2003) and at 1648 Sand Key Estates Court (FL 02-01-01, approved by the COB
. on March 19, 2002).
The proposal inGh.lde.s C1l1owing the location of wooden or composite material board
decks from the rear of the house (or rear pool apron) to the seawall, minor extension of the pool
aprons (if desired for additional seating space adjacent to the pool) and new walkway pavers six
feet or less in width to the seawall. The provision of the deck would reduce the rear setback to
zero feet, where 15 feet is required, would reduce one side setback to zero feet (same side as
zero-lot-line dwelling or to stay in line with the edge of the dwelling) and would reduce the other
side setback to five feet, where 10 feet is required (coinciding with a five-foot wide maintenance
easement adjacent to thez0ro-lot-line dwelling). The deck is proposed to extend into a 12-foct.
wide private drainage and seawall maintenance easement adjacent to the seawall. The
maximum six-foot wide, paver sidewalk will provide safe access to the existing dock. The deck
will provide better use of the backyard and will still allow rainwater to pass through to the
ground, minimizing increases to stormwater runoff. The backyard generally slopes downward
toward the seawall. In the event access to maintain the seawall is required in the future, the
pavers, deck or deck segments can be temporarily removed to allow work to be performed.
Building Code requires an 18-foot separation between seawalls and any structures. Because
these decks are within this setback, relief from the Building Code will be required.
.
.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including but not limited to General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Resideritiallnfill Project criteria (Section 2-103.B) have
been met.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on January 27,2005. The 'Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit rear deck/patio additions to existing detached dwellings with
a reduction to the rear setback from 15 feet to zero feet (to deck/patio) and a reduction to the
side setback from 10 to zero feet (to deck/patio), as a Residentiallnfill Project, under the
provisions of Section 2-504.F, at 1603,1605,1607,1609,1612,1613,1616,1620,1621,1624,
1625, 1628, 1629, 1632, 1633, 1636, 1637, 1639, 1640, 1641, 1643, 1644, 1645 and 1647
Sand Key Estates Court;~a.nd 130,134,142,146,147,150,154,15.5,15.8,159,162, 166, 167,
170,174,178,182,186,190,194,198,202,206,210,218, 219, 222, 223, 230 and 231 Sand
Key Estates Drive 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-
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, will provide standards for the subdivision and will enhance other
redevelopment efforts, and Conditions of Approval: 1) That building permits be required for the
construction of any sidewalks, minor pool apron extensions and decks; 2) That decks be
constructed at the same setback as the dwelling on one side (zero-lot-line side) and not
encroach into the five-foot wide maintenance easement on the other side; 3) That decks be
constructed of wood or composite material board; 4) That paver sidewalks to the seawall not
exceed six feet in width; 5) That sidewalks and decks within the drainage and seawall
maintenance easement be constructed in a manner to be removable in the event seawall
maintenance is necessary; 6) That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building
Code be met related to seawall setbacks; and 7) That roof Oi cover structures or screen
enclosures be prohibited over the open decks beyond the pool decks, as indicated on the
Certified Site Plan.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
21
.
.
.
Mr. Wells said a condition of approval prohibits construction above grade.
Avery Coryell, applicant, reviewed the request. He said nothing will be constructed in
the separation between the houses, which provides backyard access. The decks will be
constructed of wood or composite to allow drainage. He said a swale, three feet from the
seawall, helps catch water. He said proposed pavers will not block the swale. He said sufficient
drainage will exist on both sides of the decks. He said the homeowners association will
maintain all grass in the raar of the houses.
Acting Member Dennehy moved to approve Party Status for Robert Hagemeyer. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Mr. Hagemeyer indicated the last condition addresses his concerns.
Member Fritsch moved to approve Item H1, Case: FLD2004-12084 for 1603, 1605, 1607,
1609,1612,1613,1616,1620,1621,1624,1625,1628, 1629, 1632, 1633, 1636, 1637, 1639,
1640,1641,1643,1644,1645 and 1647 Sand Key Estates Court and 130, 134, 142, 146, 147,
150,154,155,158,159,162,166,167,170,174,178,182, 186, 190, 194,198,202,206,210,
218, 219, 222, 223, 230 and 231 Sand Key Estates Drive including the Bases for Approval and
Conditions of Approval as listed, based on findings of fact, conclusions of law, and the staff
report. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The CDB recessed from 2:59 to 3:07 p.m.
2. Case: FLD2004-12088 - 645 - 655 South Gulfview Boulevard
Owner/Applicant: Clearwater Grande Development, LLC.
Representative: Housh Ghovaee, Northside Engineering Services, Inc., 601 Cleveland
Street, Suite 930, C!earvvater, FL 33755; phone: 727-443-2869; fax: 727-446-8036;
email: nestech@mindsorinq.com. ..
Location: 1.437 acres on the south side of South Gulfview Boulevard approximately
1,200 feet west of Gulf Boulevard.
Atlas Page: 285A.
Zoning District: Tourist (T).
Request:
1) Termination of Status of a Nonconformity for density (retain existing 91 overnight
accommodation rooms/units); and
2) Flexible Development approval to permit a 91-room/unit overnight accommodation use with
an accessory restaurant with a reduction to the front (north) setback from 15 feet to one-foot (to
dumpster staging area), a reduction to the rear (south) setback from 20 feet to zero feet (to pool
deck) and to increase the building height from 35 feet to 100 feet (to roof deck), as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C.
Proposed Use: Overnight accommodation use of 91 rooms/units.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive,
Clearwater, FL 33767: phone: 727-443-2168); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug
Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email:
Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
22
.
.
.
Mr. Wells reviewed the request. The 1.437 acres is on the south side of South Gulfview
Boulevard, approximately 1,200 feet west of Gulf Boulevard. The site has 248 feet of frontage
on South Gulfview Boulevard. The site is currently developed with the five-story, 91-room
Quality Inn overnight accommodation use. The existing building is located on the east side of
the site and oriented north/south. Parking is presently located over the western two-thirds of the
property.
Properties to the west are developed with overnight accommodation uses. The parcel to
the east is developed with an attached dwelling building of 12 stories. Properties to the north,
between South Gulfview Boulevard and Bayway Boulevard, are commercial uses oriented
toward tourists. Properties north of Bayway Boulevard are, or have been approved for, attached
dwellings.
The proposa: incli.idE;S the demolition of all site impiOvemsiits fOi the existing five-story,
91-room Quality Inn and construction of a new 11-story, 91-room overnight accommodation use,
with an accessory restaurant of 3,433 square-feet on the second floor. The new building
proposes an easUwest orientation with limited parking outside of the building. The majority of
the proposed parking is within the first two floors of the building. The existing deck and dock
south of the seawall are proposed to be removed.
The proposal includes a request to Terminate the Status of the Nonconformity for the
nonconforming density for the existing 91-room overnight accommodation use on the property.
Based on current Land Use Category density limitations of 40 units/rooms per acre for overnight
accommodation uses, the overall subject site may be developed with a maximum of 57
overnight accommodation units/rooms. The applicant is requesting to terminate the
nonconforming density in order to demolish existing site improvements and build a new
overnight accommodation use. Under the Termination of Status of Nonconformity provisions,
there are four required improvements: 1) Installation of perimeter buffers. Perimeter buffers are
not required in the Tourist District (southern portion of the property); 2) Improvement of off-street
parking lots. The applicant is removing all existing improvements and is providing parking that
exceeds Code provisions in the two levels of the parking garage and outside the building; 3)
Removal of nonconforming signs, outdoor lighting or other accessory structures. The applicant
is removing all existing improvements. Any future signage will need to meet current Code
provisions; and 4) Use of Comprehensive Sign Program and Comprehensive Landscape
Programs to satisfy requirements. At this time there is no need for a Comprehensive Sign
Program, as there are no signs proposed, nor a Comprehensive Landscape Program. Code
provisions of Sections 6-1 09.B and C require Level Two approval of the Termination of Status of
Nonconformity and reconstruction complying with all other Code requirements.
The applicant has proposed the redevelopment of the property, as described in the
narrative, as a "condo-hotel," where all units will be owned as individual condominium rooms.
On-site management wi!! operate the facility as a hotel/motel, on a day-ta-day basis, 24-hours a
day, seven days a week. A lobby is provided on the second floor with registration and
management offices necessary to facilitate daily operations. The management will coordinate
all marketing and rentals on a daily basis. The on-site management staff will provide maid
service and daily maintenance of the property's amenities.
This type of use is fairly new to the Tampa Bay area. Staff is considering the use an
overnight accommodation use. The Countywide Plan Rules define a "transient accommodation
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
23
.
.
.
unit" as "an individual room, rooms or site within a Transient Accommodation Use designed to
be occupied as a single unit for temporary lodging or living quarters." The Countywide Plan
Rules also define a "transient accommodation use" as "a facility containing one or more
transient accommodation-units, the occupancy of which occurs, or is offered or advertised as
being available, for a term of less than one month, more than three times in any consecutive
twelve month period. In determining whether a property is used as a transient accommodation
use, such determination shall be made without regard to the form of ownership of the property
or unit, or whether the occupant has a direct or an indirect ownership interest in the property or
unit; and without regard to whether the right of occupancy arises from a rental agreement, other
agreement, or the payment of consideration." The Community Development Code defines
"overnight accommodations" as "any use that provides transient lodging accommodations to the
public, including interval ownership..." Length of stay, either by the unit owner or a guest, at this
facility must be consistent with that of an overnight accommodation use. Should this proposal
be approved, a condition should be included for the obtaining and maintaining of a license from
the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Hotels and
Restaurants. The units also should not qualify for homestead exemption, nor should home or
business occupational licenses be issued for individual rooms/units (since they are not dwellings
or a residential use).
The proposal includes the provision of a minimum of 15 feet of landscaped area along
South Gulfview Boulevard, meeting the setback requirements (with the exception of the
dumpster staging area). The building will have a refuse collection room on the ground floor
within the parking garage. Dumpsters will be rolled out to the staging area on collection days.
The location of the trash staging area within the front setback is necessary to eliminate the
necessity of the trash truck yoming on-site. The required side setba_ck qf. 1 0 feet will be met,
both to the proposed building and to pavement. The existing building is situated 10 feet from
the east property line, whereas existing pavement is located at a zero-foot setback to the west
property line. On the south side, the proposed building will be located 25 feet from the seawall
to the southwest corner of the building. The existing pool is at a zero setback, as well as wood
decks. The proposal includes a new pool in the same location as the existing one, still at a zero
setback to the seawall. All provisions of the Chapter 39 of the Building Code will be required to
be met regarding seawall setbacks. The site will be fully landscaped. Modifications to the
landscape plan to more fully comply with Code provisions will be necessary prior to the
issuance of any building permits.
The proposal is to construct a new building of 11-stories, at a height increase to 100 feet
to the roof deck. This height complies with the Tourist District of Beach by Design. The
Continental Towers Condominiums to the east is a 12-floor building also oriented east/west.
The Econo Lodge overnight accommodation use to the west is five floors. The proposal
includes a parapet meetiiig Code requiiements. The tops of the staii towers are proposed
14.17 feet above the roof deck.
The proposed building is designed with a Classic Italian architecture. Parking is
provided on the first and second floors. The hotel/motel lobby, hotel/motel offices and the
restaurant are planned on the second floor. Guest rooms will be on Floors 3 - 11. Floors 3 - 8
will have 11 rooms each, Floors 9 and 10 will have nine rooms each, and Floor 11 will have
seven rooms. Rooms wiII rahge from 1,112 to 1,118 square-feet, typicaily with two bedrooms,
with the two larger penthouse units on the 11th floor being 2,382 square-feet in size with four
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
24
bedrooms. Rooms will be accessed from outdoor walkways on the north side of the building.
. Rooms will have balconi~:s on lh~ south side of the building.
The site today has fewer on-site parking spaces than the number of rooms and a
number of these spaces are narrower than Code width. While the proposal is for a 91-room
overnight accommodation use with a parking requirement of 91 parking spaces, the proposal
will provide 120 parking"spaces, most within a two-level parking garage. An existing 2,700
square-foot, accessory restaurant (I HOP) on the property will be removed. The applicant
proposes a new accessory restaurant of 3,433 square-feet. An accessory restaurant does not
have any additional parking requirement above that of the overnight accommodation use.
However, 29 excess parking spaces are being provided on-site for guests of the motel and
restaurant.
.
.
A new sidewalk, 10 feet in width, will be constructed within the right-of-way along South
Gulfview Boulevard. This sidewalk should be constructed to be consistent with standards
developed for the BeachWalk improvements in terms of design and landscaping.
The applicant is proposing a monument-style sign at the front of the property. Unless
approved through a Comprehensive Sign Program at a six-foot height, the sign cannot exceed
four feet in height under Code provisions. The design of the sign should be in character with the
building design.
. All applicable. Code requ!rements 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.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on January 27,2005. The Planning Department recommends approval for the (1) Termination
of Status of a Nonconformity for density (retain existing 91 overnight accommodation
rooms/units); and (2) Flexible Development application to permit a 91-room/unit overnight
accommodation use with an accessory restaurant with a reduction to the front (north) setback
from 15 feet to one-foot (to dumpster staging area), a reduction to the rear (south) setback from
20 feet to zero feet (to pool deck) and to increase the building height from 35 feet to 100 feet (to
roof deck), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-
803.C, for the site at 645-655 South Gulfview Boulevard, with the following bases and
conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria
as a Comprehensivelnfill 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; 3) The proposal complies with Beach by Design; and 4) The development is
compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts, and
Conditions of Approval: 1) That the use of this property be for overnight accommodations,
meeting the definition of the Community Development Code, with owner and guest stays not to
exceed 30 days, where occupancy of rooms/units arise from a rental agreement, other
agreement or the payment of consideration. At the request of the City Manager or designee,
the records of the business shall be made available for examination to determine whether the
length of stay complies with these provisions. Failure to provide such records upon request
shall be grounds for imposition of appropriate fines, revocation of the occupational license
and/or any other enforcement afforded by law or by City regulations. A license must be
obtained and maintained from the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation,
Community Development.Special 2005-03-22
25
.
.
.
Division of Hotels and Restaurants. A registration lobby, operated 24 hours a day, seven days
a week, shall be maintained. This development shall not be deemed attached dwellings with
individual dwelling units, nor shall rooms/units qualify for homestead exemption or home or
business occupational licenses; 2) That the final design and color of the building be consistent
with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB: 3) That all proposed
utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for
the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting right-of-way shall be installed
along the entire site's street frontages prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The
applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected
utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of
conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior
to the commencement of work; 4) That any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign
and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building. The maximum height
shall be four feet, unless approved at six feet high through a Comprehensive Sign Program; 5)
That sea-turtle friendly light fixtures be employed wit~ the site design, with compliance
demonstrated on plans acceptable to the Environmental Division, prior to the issuance of
building permits; 6) That prior to the issuance of any permits, the landscape plan be amended to
meet the requirements of the Planning Department; 7) That, prior to the issuance of any
permits, a Unity of Title be recorded in the public records; 8) That all applicable requirements of
Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks; 9) That all Fire Department
requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits; 10) That prior to the issuance of the
Certificate of Occupancy, traffic impact fees be assessed and paid; and 11) That all Parks and
Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits.
Ed Armstrong, representative, presented Robert Pergolizzi as an expert witness.
Acting Member Dennehy moved to accept Robert Pergolizzi as an expert witness. The
motion was duly seconded ~Ilti carried unanimously.
Mr. Pergolizzi said the project will not increase the number of on site hotel units and will
provide more parking than required by Code. He said all proposed setbacks meet Code except
for setbacks required for a dumpster and the swimming pool. He said the project will be less
than the 100-foot height limit, reduce the impervious surface, increase landscaping, and
increase the market value of adjacent properties. He said the project's form and function will
enhance the community and a'rea redevelopment efforts. He said the'reduction of asphalt wiil
provide a better connection to the area's pedestrian atmosphere. A 10-foot sidewalk will comply
with the nearby BeachWalk project. He said courts have ruled that no one has a legal right to
view corridors across neighboring property. He presented illustrations to indicate the project's
impact will minimally affect views from condominiums at the abutting Continental Towers.
Developer Steve Page said he was unsuccessful in his attempt to dialog with
Continental Towers residents regarding this project. He said the project was positioned to not
block views.
Mr. Armstrong said two expert witnesses, including Mr. Wells, had testified that the
project meets Code. He said the project will meet expressed concerns that too many hotel
rooms on Clearwater beach are being replaced with condominiums. He said the project has
been moved away from the wC1terfront and includes increased open space and interior
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
26
landscaping. He submitted an affidavit from the City Clerk indicating notices of this meeting had
. been mailed on March 4, 2005, to all Continental Tower residents.
Six people spoke in support of the project.
Acting Member Dennehy moved to approve Party Status for Nathan Hightower. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Mr. Hightower opposed the project.
Member Johnsonmoveu to approve Pariy Status forJanei NCiBSir. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Ms. Nassif and five other people spoke in opposition to the project.
In response to questions from Mr. Armstrong, Mr. Wells reviewed the project, testifying it
is consistent with the Code, Comprehensive Plan, nearby projects, and Beach by Design. He
said the current structure is outdated. He said separations between tall buildings are not
required for this section of Clearwater beach.
.
In response to questions from Mr. Hightower, Mr. Wells said staff had not reviewed
approvals for the site's original development. He said staff did not think this project is too
massive. In response to questions from Ms. Nassif, Mr. Wells reviewed parking requirements.
Ms. Tarapani said while Planners are not Real Estate appraisers, staff reports are considered
expert opinion.
Mr. Armstrong said the current structure was legal when built and became
nonconforming with time as changes occurred. He said Code allows redevelopment to preserve
the original density. In response to a complaint that staff's summary findings of fact and
conclusions of law had not been disseminated to the public prior to the meeting, Ms. Grimes
said that action is not necessary. .
Member Johnson moved to approve Item H2, Case: FLD2004-12088 for 645 - 655
South Gulfview Boulevard including the Bases for Approval and Conditions of Approval as
listed, based 'on findings of fact, conclusions of law, and staff reports. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
.
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
27
.
.
.
3. Case: FLD2002-12045 - 657 Court Street
Owners: The CEPCOT Corporation and Clearwater Train Station, Inc.
Applicant: The CEPCOT Corporation.
Representative: E. D. Armstrong, III, Esq. (work: 727-461-1818, fax: 727-462-0365,
email: ed@jpfirm.com).
Location: 0.95-acre located on the west side of East Avenue between Court Street and
Chestnut Street.
Atlas Page: 286B.
Zoning: 0, Downtown District.
Remand: Remand by Circuit Court for action consistent with Court's order including imposition
of conditions of approval. (Flexible Development approval to permit an automobile service
station in the Downtown District as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the
provisions of Section 2-903.C).
Proposed Use: The redevelopment of the site with a 3,200 square-foot convenience store with
gas pumps.
Neighborhood Association: Pierce 100 Condominium Association (Terry Turner, 100 Pierce
Street, #710, Clearwater, FL, 33756).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, Senior Planner.
Subsequent to COB action of June 17, 2003, to deny the request, an appeal was filed to
the City's hearing officer who upheld the action of the COB. Subsequent to the action of the
City's Hearing Officer, the matter was appealed by the applicant to the Circuit Court for the Sixth
Judicial Circuit. On January 19, 2005, the Sixth Judicial Circuit granted writ of certiorari, thereby
reversing the decision of the COB and the City's Hearing Officer.
It should be noted, that immediately upon COB approval and consideration, the project
will become a non-conforming use and subject to all nonconforming regulations of the
Community Development Code. The decision of the Circuit Court constitutes a remand of a
Level Two Application
Pursuant to the order of the court, issued January 19, 2005, this matter is hereby
remanded back to the COB for action and approval subject to Conditions of Approval: 1) That
this approval is for site plans and related materials as provided to the COB for their review and
consideration on June 17, 2003; 2) Future development of the parcel shall occur in a manner
materially and substantially in conformance with the site plan and related materials as provided
to the COB for their r~v!e~^! end consideration on June 17. 2.003 Non-m;:jteri~1 or minor changes
shall be consistent with the provisions of Section 4-406 of the Code; 3) That the final design and
color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to (or as modified
by) the COB, and be approved by staff; 4) That a complete permit application including site
plans be submitted within one year of COB approval; 5) That the Certificate of Occupancy be
issued within one year of the issuance of building permit; 6) That all Fire Department
requirements be met, including pavement reinforcement necessary to retain structural integrity
of underground vault, prior to the issuance of any permits; 7) That all Traffic Department
requirements be met, including pavement reinforcement necessary to retain structural integrity
of underground vault, prior to the issuance of any permits; 8) That all utility equipment including
but not limited to wireless communication facilities, electrical and water meters, etc. be screened
from view and/or painted to match the building to which they are attached, as applicable prior to
the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; 9) That all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to
the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for future under grounding of existing
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
28
.
.
.
utilities within the abutting rights-of-way shall be installed along the entire site's street frontages
prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant's representative shall
coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected utility providers (electric, phone,
cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of conduits to be approved by the
applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior to the commencement of work;
and 10) That all signage meet the requirements of Code and be architecturally-integrated with
the design of the building with regard to proportion, color, materi~1 and finish as part of a final
sign package submitted to and approved by Staff prior to the issuance of any sign permits which
includes: a) All signs fully dimensioned and coordinated in terms of including the same color,
font style and size; b) All signs be constructed of the highest quality materials which are
coordinated with the colors, materials and architectural style of the building; c) All attached signs
consist of channel letters; and d) Any freestanding sign be designed as a monument-style at a
maximum height of four feet.
Ms. Tarapani reviewed the conditions of approval, including Fire Department
requirements related to the underground vault. In response to a question, she said the use is
prohibited in the Downtown district and the project will be considered non-conforming. Major
modifications to the site may trigger project review against the new Downtown plan.
Mr. Armstrong, representative for the applicant, requested that Fire Department
requirements be listed in the Conditions of Approval. He said the court had found no competent
substantial evidence to support the original CDB denial of approval.
Member Johnson moved to approve Item H3, Case: FLD2002-12045 for 657 Court
Street including the Bases for Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, based on remand
by Circuit Court for action consistent with Court's order. The motion was duly seconded an<=!
carried unanimously. .. . . ... ". . .~-
Comments
Concern was expressed a single entity could gain control of large blocks of condo-hotel
units, affecting marketability and demographics. Ms. Tarapani said condo-hotels must feature all
characteristics of hotels, including its operations, services, and providing a meaningful, lobby
check-in area. The units cannot be homesteaded. Staff needs to review County data to see if
average stays change due to larger units. It was recommended that staff review parking
requirements for hotels and condominiums.
I. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:06 p.m.
Chair
Community Devel
Attest:
Community Development Special 2005-03-22
29