04/19/2005
.
.
.
. .. .
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
April 19, 2005
Present: David Gildersleeve
Alex Plisko
J. B. Johnson
Dana K. Tallman
Nicholas C. Fritsch
Thomas Coates
Daniel Dennehy
Chair
Vice Chair
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Acting Board Member
Also Present: Gina Grimes
Leslie Dougall-Sides
Michael L. Delk
Gina Clayton
Patricia O. Sullivan
Attorney for the Board
Assistant City Attorney
Planning Director
Assistant Planning Director
Board Reporter
The Chair called thE:: ITleeting to order at 1 :00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Invocation
and Pledge of Allegiance.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
Election of ChairNice Chair
Acting Member Dennehy moved to reappoint David Gildersleeve as Chair and Alex Plisko
as Vice Chair. The motion was duly seconded.
It was noted that acting board members cannot serve as Vice Chair.
Member Fritsch moved to close the nominations. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
Upon the vote being taken on the reappointments, the motion carried unanimously.
C - APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS: March 15 and 22, 2005
By unanimous consent, the minutes of the regular meeting of March 15, 2005, and
special meeting of March 22, 2005, were approved with the following corrections: Member
Thomas Coates present at both meetings; Member Coates' name added to motion of approval
in paragraph 10, page 10, minutes for March 15, 2005, meeting, and spelling of Troy Perdue, in
paragraph two, page 18, minutes for March 22, 2005, special meeting. .
Community Development 2005-04-19
1
.
D - 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 - 11 :
.
1. Level Two Application
Cases: FLD2004-02011A1PL T2004-00007 A - 2520 Sunset Point Road .
Owner/Applicant: Global Financial Investments, LLC; and Equity Investments, LLC
Representative: Richard Tommell, P.E., Avid Engineering, Inc. (2300 Curlew Road,
Suite 100, Palm Harbor, Florida 34683; phone: 727-789-9500; fax: 727-784-6662; e-
mail: rtomell@avidenq.com).
Location: 26.384 acres located on the northwest side of Sunset Point Road and US
Highway 19 N and approximately 400 feet east of East Skyline Drive.
Atlas Page: 254B
Zoning District: Medium Density Residential (MDR)
Request: Flexible Development approval with reduction of the front (east) setback along Lawson
Road from 25 feet to 18 feet (to building), from 25 feet to 14 feet (to pavement), reductions to
front (west) setback along Lawson Road from 25 feet to seven feet (to patios), from 25 feet to
11 feet to (building) and from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement), a reduction of the front (south)
setback along Blackburn Street from 25 feet to ten feet (to pavement), and a reduction to a
landscape buffer from 10 feet to seven feet (to patios) along the east side of Lawson Road, as a
Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-304.G. and Preliminary Plat approval
for 248 lots, and as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-
1202.G.
Proposed Use: A residential development of 248 attached dwellings.
Neighborhood Association: Sunset Lake Estates (Gene Britten, 2520 Sunset Point Road, #86,
Clearwater, FL 33763; phone 727-799-1917); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug
Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email:
Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Planner III.
The 26.384-acre site is located on the northwest side of Sunset Point Road and US
Highway 19 N and is approximately 400 feet east of East Skyline Drive. There are 192 existing
abandoned mobile home structures located on this site. Onsite, the existing mobile homes are
in deteriorated condition with overgrown and not maintained landscaping. There are wetlands
and ponds located at both the north and south sides of this site.
The heavily traveled US Highway 19 N frames the site area to the south and the east.
Power lines frame the western border of the site. Lawson Road runs north and south through
the site, interconnecting property to Sunset Point Road. The intersection of Lawson Road and
Sunset Point Road is potentially dangerous, as Lawson, a narrow road, feeds traffic eastbound
and westbound onto Sunset Point Road and to a large shopping center with a Publix grocery
store and a Barnes & Noble bookstore. Blackburn Street runs from US Highway 19 N, east to
west, into the site. Lawson Road has a poor roadway surface, consisting of numerous asphalt
patches, from the intersection of Haas Road northbound to where the site ends at the north.
Access is from Blackburn Street and Lawson Road. In addition to the mobile homes,
some of the land uses within the northwest corner of US Highway 19 N and Sunset Point Road
include a jewelry store, funeral home, restaurant, barber shop, beautician, lounge, card shop,
gas station, electronicsstors, copy center, and an amusement facility (Celebration Station). Two
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
2
commercial sites access onto Lawson Road from the east. A land use mix of mobile homes,
. multi-family residential, single-family residential, and commercial uses surround this site.
What is proposed is an amended site plan and preliminary plat to what was approved by
the COB (Community Development Board) on August 17, 2004, as FLD2004-02011/PL T2004-
00007, with 281 residential units. The applicant now is proposing preliminary plat and site plan
approval for 248 multi-family residential units, where the allowed density would permit up to 305
residential units. The proposed site will be comprised of a community of two-story residential
buildings, ranging in size from four attached units to six attached units. The buildings are
designed to have varying window styles (some with widow boxes), pitched rooflines, and
recessed ground level entryways. Some of the units are proposed to have garages with
driveways. The buildings will be painted a beige or cream color, with dark brown, white, and
blue highlights. The site plan shows a swimming pool and cabana building in a central location
within the site. A play area frames the pool area at the pool's east side. The site plan shows a
proposed sidewalk system both internal to the site and connecting to Sunset Point Road just
north of the Sunset Point and Lawson Road intersection. The site design is sensitive to the
wetlands on site, with a proposed south pond retention area of 1.98 acres and a proposed north
pond retention area of 1.14 acres. There is a wetland mitigation plan and a monitoring and
maintenance plan as part of the overall site plan set.
This very large-scale residential project brings an opportunity to improve the appearance
and function of the northeast side of the City of Clearwater. It is an opportunity to bring good
building design, provide additional housing, protect environmentally sensitive land, and
introduce good landscaping. This project can help toward making a safe city by improving the
condition of Lawson Road and the Lawson Road intersection at Sunset Point Road.
.
The application is seeking six front setback reductions, as stated in the request above; in
order to fit the proposed 248 unit attached residential development. The setbacks are
necessary in order for the plan to fit parking, some residential units, and some patio space. The
amended plan s~ows a reduction .in density, one less landscape buffer reduction, and an
increase in green space. The proposed ISR is now 0.38. The August 2004 COB approved plan
has an ISR of 0.50. The parking ratio of spaces to residential units has increased since August
2004, from 1.79 spaces per unit to 1.96 parking spaces per unit.
DRC (Development Review Committee) members reviewed the flexible development
application amendment, individually. The Planning Department recommends approval of the
Flexible Development" application with a reduction of the front (east) setback along Lawson
Road from 25 feet to 18 feet (to building), from 25 feet to 14 feet (to pavement), reductions to
front (west) setback along Lawson Road from 25 feet to seven feet (to patios), from 25 feet to
11 feet to (building) and from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement), a reduction of the front (south)
setback along Blackburn Street from 25 feet to ten feet (to pavement), and reductions to a
landscape buffer from 10 feet to seven feet (to patios) along the east side of Lawson Road, as a
Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-304.G. and Preliminary Plat approval
for 248 lots, and as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-
1202.G., with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies
with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residentiallnfill Project per Section 2-304.G; 2) The
proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability
Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The development is compatible with the surrounding area and
will enhance other redevelopment efforts AND Conditions of Approval: 1) That no building
.
Community Developme.nt 2005-04-19
3
.
.
.
permits be issued until recording of the final plat with Pinellas County; 2) That the landscape
plan be revised to the satisfaction of Planning staff and submitted prior to building permit
issuance; 3) That Open Space, Recreation Land and Recreation Facility impact fees be
satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits or final plat, whichever occurs first; 4) That a
copy of the SWFWMD (Southwest Florida Water Management District) permit or letter of
exemption and a NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) Notice of Intent be
provided prior to building permit issuance; 5) That all Fire Department requirements be
addressed prior to building permit issuance; 6) That no building permits be issued until vacation
of the north portion of Lawson Road where two buildings are proposed; 7) That prior to building
permit issuance, the applicant is to mitigate traffic impacts to provide a level of service
acceptable to the City of Clearwater Traffic Operations Manager on Lawson Road and at the
intersection of Lawson and Sunset Point Road (At a minimum, these improvem-ents are to
include providing a third lane approximately 420 feet in length at the south end of Lawson Road
and providing or making a payment in lieu of equipment to upgrade signalization of the .
intersection of Lawson Road and Sunset Point Road in accordance with FDOT (Florida
Department of Transportation) standards); 8) That Lawson Road and Blackburn Street be
improved to City Standards prior to Certificate of Occupancy; 9) That Lawson Road be improved
prior to construction if it is to facilitate construction equipment access; 10) That a Traffic Impact
Fee be determined by staff and be paid prior to Certificate of Occupancy issuance; 11) That all
proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed buildings) be placed underground and
installation of conduit(s) along the entire length of the site's street frontage be completed prior to
the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy; 12) That the final design and color of the
building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the CDB;
and 13) That all signage meet Code and be architecturally integrated into the design of the site
and/or buildings.
See page 23 for motion of approval.
2. Case: FLD2005-01 01 0 - 600 Bayway Boulevard Level Two Application
Owner: Baywatch Suites Inc.
Applicant: Bay Harbor, LLC.
Representative: Bill WoodslTerri Scapik, Woods Consulting, Inc. (322 Ridge Road, Palm
Harbor, FL 34683: phone: 727-786-5747; fax: 727-786-7479; email:
billwoods@woodsconsultinq.orq).
Location: 0.558 acre located on the north side of Bayway Boulevard, immediately north
of the intersection of South Gulfview Boulevard and Bayway Boulevard.
Atlas Page: 276A.
Zoning District: Tourist (T) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval to construct a 1,376 square-foot multi-use dock facility
to provide eight slips as an amenity to 19 condominium units. The request includes an increase
of the width of the dock from 75 percent of the lot width (135 feet) to 77 percent of the lot width
(139 feet), and a reduction of the side (west) setbacks from 17.98 feet to 10.3 feet to the dock,
per Section 3-601.C.3.
Proposed Use: Construct a multi-use dock of 1,376 square-feet for eight slips.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association (David MacNamee, 827 Mandalay
Ave., Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-446-5801; email: dmacnav@att.net); Clearwater
Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761;
phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: John Schodtler, Planner I.
Community Development 2005-04-19
4
.
This 0.562-acre site is located on the north side of Bayway Boulevard immediately north
of the intersection of South Gulfview Boulevard and Bayway Boulevard. It is located along a
highly developed area within Clearwater beach and has frontage along Clearwater Harbor. The
site is located within the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach By Design, which is a
distinctive area of mixed uses including high rise condominiums, resort hotels, and commercial
uses. Beach By Design contemplates this District will be an area of strategic revitalization and
renovation in response to improving conditions on the balance of Clearwater beach.
The site presently is occupied with a two-story overnight accommodations building of
eight units (Baywatch Suites), two-story retail building and two apartments (vacant), and a one-
story restaurant. All existing improvements (buildings, pavement, and walkways) will be
demolished and removed as part of the site's redevelopment.
The property to the west has been redeveloped into 55 attached dwelling units with
seven floors of living area over one floor of ground level parking. The CDB approved the
"Harborview Grande" (FLD2003-08041/TDR2003-08004) on October 21,2003. Town home
development is located to the east of the project site. To the south is a convenience store, gas
station, and miniature golf course. Significant development has occurred, from small motels
and retail to attached dwelling units.
.
The approved upland development includes a 19-unit, four-story (over ground level
parking) residential condominium building. The CDB approved the "Bay Harbor" Condominiums
(FLD2004-07050/TDR2004-09012); a total of 16 dwelling units are permitted for the subject
property, based on the maximum of 30 units per acre. The applicant is proposing the utilization
of three dwelling units through the Transfer of Development Rights from 620,645, and 674
Bayway Boulevard (one unit each per address). The first level will contain four units, while
levels two, three, and four will have five units per floor. All units are the same size, at 1,890
square-feet.
Section 3-601.C.3 requires docks over 500 square-feet in area (in association with a
multi-family development or condominium) be treated as a commercial dock and be approved
as part of a Level Two, Flexible Development review. The proposal includes the removal of the
existing docks and the construction of a dock totaling 1,376 square-feet for eight slips for use by
the owners/tenants of the condominiums.
The proposal is to construct an eight-slip dock system, approximately 18.4 feet from the
seawall due to the existence of seagrasses. The slips are accessed by walkouts to avoid any
impact to the seagrass beds. The walkout is designed with handrails on both sides to preclude
boats mooring against the walkout. The dock is designed with a T-head, which will have
handrails on their landward side to avoid boats mooring against the T -heads, outside of
designated boat slips. "No mooring" and "caution manatee" signage also are proposed to assist
with restricting boat traffic within the areas of seagrasses and to increase manatee awareness.
Catwalks for the slips are proposed to be 31.0 feet in length. Individual slips are proposed 14
feet in width each. The overall length of the dock from the seawall is 54.4 feet. The western
edge of the dock is proposed 10.3 feet from the western extended property line and 21.2 feet
from the western riparian property line, while the eastern edge of the dock is proposed 19.0 feet
from the eastern extended property line and 14.1 feet from the eastern riparian property line. A
minimum side setback of 17.9 feet is required for the docks based on 10% of the width of the
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
5
.
.
.
property at the waterfront, which is 179.8 feet. Code dock provisions limit the width of docks to
a maximum of 75% of the lot width, or 134.85 feet in this case. The proposed dock width is
77.3% of the lot width (139.0 feet). Code provisions restrict dock length to a maximum of 75%
of the lot width (134.85 feet). The dock length is proposed to be a maximum of 30.2% (54.4
feet) of the waterfront width. While not consistent with existing, older, and shorter docks, the
proposed docks are consistent with newer docks required to meet current environmental
restrictions, wherein the length takes into account the water depth at mean low water and
preserves existing sea grass beds.
SWFWMD requires a minimum three feet water depth at mean low water for boats in the
slips. All slips have at least 4.5 feet of water depth (most have greater depth). The width of the
waterway at this location is approximately 526 feet. Based on the proposed design of the dock,
there are no issues regarding seagrasses. There are no issues regarding navigation and the
proposal meets all of the City's Harbormaster's requirements. All other criteria for docks have
been met. All applicable Code requirements and criteria including but not limited to General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and dock criteria (Section 3-601.C.3) have been met.
FindinQs of Fact: 1) Subject property is 0.562 acre and is Tourist (T) District/Resort
Facility High (RFH) Category; 2) The approved upland development includes a 19-unit, four-
story (over ground level parking) residential condominium building. The CDB approved the "Bay
Harbor" Condominiums (FLD2004-07050fTDR2004-09012) on October 19,2004; 3) Adjacent
uses zoned T are developed with attached dwellings with marine dock facilities; 4) The site is
located within the special area redevelopment plan, Beach by Design, as part of the "South
Beach/Clearwater Pass District"; 5) The proposed dock structure totals 1,376 square-feet for
eight slips for use by the owners/tenants of the condominiums; 6) While the proposed dock is
not consistent with existing, older and shorter docks, they are consistent with newer docks
required to meet current environmental restrictions, wherein the length takes into account the
water depth at mean low water and preserves existing sea grass beds; 7) Staff finds the
proposal does not meet the following Commercial Dock criteria: a) The proposed dock shall be
in harmony with the scale and character of adjacent properties and the neighborhood in general.
While the proposed dock is not consistent with existing, older and shorter docks, they are
consistent with newer docks required to meet current environmental restrictions, wherein the
length takes into account the water depth at mean low water and preserves existing sea grass
beds and b) The proposed dock shall be compatible with dock patterns in the general vicinity.
While the proposed dock is not consistent with existing, older and shorter docks, they are
consistent with newer docks required to meet current environmental restrictions, wherein the
length takes into account the water depth at mean low water and preserves existing sea grass
beds.
Additionally, the proposal does not meet the following General Applicability criteria: 1)
Development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity. While the
proposed dock is not consistent with existing, older and shorter docks, they are consistent with
newer docks required to meet current environmental restrictions, wherein the length takes into
account the water depth at mean low water and preserves existing sea grass beds.
Conclusions of Law: 1) The proposal is not in compliance with the Commercial Docks
per Section 3-601.C.3.a.ii and iii and 2) The proposal is not in compliance with other standards
in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913.5.
Community Development 2005-04-19
6
.'
.
.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on. March 3, 2005. ThePlanning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development approval to construct a 1,376 square-foot multi-use dock facility to provide eight
slips as an amenity to 19 condominium units. The request includes an increase of the width of
the dock from 75% of the lot width (135 feet) to 77% of the lot width (139 feet), and a reduction
of the side (west) setbacks from 17.98 feet to 10.3 feet to the dock, per Section 3-601.C.3. for
the site at 600 Bayway Boulevard, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval:
1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria under the provisions of Section
3-601; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the general
applicability criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The dock development is compatible with the
surrounding area AND Conditions of Approval: 1) That boats moored at the docks be for the
exclusive use by the residents and/or guests of the condominiums and not be permitted to be
sub-leased separately from the condominiums; 2) That dock-supported signage be permanently
installed containing wording warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and
manatees in the vicinity; and 3) That a copy of the SWFWMD (Southwest Florida Water
Management District) and/or FDEP (Florida Department of Environmental Protection) Permit,
USACOE (United States Army Corps of Engineers) Permit and proof of permission to use State
submerged land, if applicable, be submitted to the Planning Department prior to commencement
of construction.
See page 23 for motion of approval.
3. Case: FLD2004-11080 -1611 -1617 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Uive/ Two Application
Owner: LibertyReality Group. '
ApplicanURepresentative: 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 Yelvington Avenue.
Atlas Page: 297B.
Zoning District: Commercial (C) and Medium Density Residential (MDR).
Request: Flexible Development approval (1) 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 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), a
reduction to required parking from 38 to 35 spaces 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 Residentiallnfill 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.
Community Development 2005-04-19
7
.
.
.
This property is a total of 0.96 acre and is located on the southwest corner of the
intersection of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and Yelvington Avenue. The lot has approximately 142
feet of frontage along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and approximately 294 feet of frontage on
Yelvington Avenue. The restaurant and attached dwellings recently were demolished and a
temporary modular bank is operating on the site. Few trees or landscaping are present on the
site. The northern 129 feet of the .Iot is zoned Commercial District and the southern 165 feet is
zoned Medium Density Residential District. The site is surrounded by both residential and
commercial uses due to the alignment of zoning boundaries. An existing white vinyl fence
buffers a portion of the western border.
The proposal includes the construction of a two-story, 8,600 square-foot commercial
building. The building will include a bank (retail sales and services) of 3,700 square-feet on the
ground floor, with drive-thru facilities on the south side, and offices of 4,900 square-feet on the
second floor. While the second floor office space is anticipated to be dedicated to the bank
function, it could function as office tenant spaces. The building, including the drive-thru
facilities, is situated entirely in the Commercial District. Only off-street parking and a dumpster
will be located within the Medium Density Residential zoned portion of the site. Prior use of this
overall site was with a restaurant and retail sales abutting Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and attached
dwellings and off-street parking for the commercial uses within both the Commercial and
Medium Density Residential Districts.
The site has been designed to have vehicular traffic enter from the south side of the site
on Yelvington Avenue. Traffic flow will circulate clockwise with vehicles exiting to Yelvington
Avenue from the drive-thru facility in the middle of the site or vehicles exiting to Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard from parking spaces west of the building. Stacking for the drive-thru begins at the
rear of the site and does not conflict with traffic flow or parking. The proposal includes a
deviation to allow direct access to a major arterial street (Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard). This deviation
is justified by this access solely being an exit, which will continue to restrict turning movements
on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard for this site to Yelvington Avenue. Removal of the existing parking
that was located within and backed into the Yelvington Avenue right-of-way, restriction of site
access to two driveways on Yelvington Avenue, and the provision of a pedestrian sidewalk for
the site frontage will improve safety conditions for persons residing or working along Yelvington
Avenue.
The applicant proposes a reduction in parking from 38 spaces to 35 spaces. A parking
study has been submitted that justifies the requested reduction. Under the Countywide Plan
Rules, financial institutions are defined as offices. While the City has financial institutions
defined as retail sales and services, which requires a higher parking ratio, if viewed totally as an
office use there would be only 34 spaces required (less than the 35 spaces provided).
Adequate off-street parking will be available to avoid on-street parking.
The proposal includes reductions to front setback requirements on Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard and Yelvington Avenue. The site is a corner lot where front setback requirements
are applied to both street frontages, which restricts site development by reducing the buildable
area. The reduction to the front setback to 23.3 feet from Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is for a small,
triangular encroachment of pavement for one parking space. In order to meet side setback
requirements along the west side of the site, the proposal includes a reduction to the front
setback along Yelvington Avenue from 25 feet to 20 feet (to the proposed building) in the
Commercial District and to 15 feet (to proposed pavement) in the Medium Density Residential.
Community Development 2005-04-19
8
.
.
.
District The applicant requests front setback reductions because of dual frontage along
Yelvington Avenue and Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and to further separate the bank from adjacent
residential development. The prior development of this site included zero setbacks to both the
building and to pavement, in both the Commercial and Medium Density Residential Districts,
with an impervious surface ratio of 90%. Existing development within the Commercial District
within the surrounding area is at or close to a zero front setback to both buildings and
pavement. The overall proposed impervious surface ratio is 62.41 %. The proposed reductions
significantly improve these existing conditions and will upgrade and enhance the community
character and visual appearance of the immediate vicinity. Due to the proposed site design
and extensive landscaping, this redevelopment proposal is compatible with the adjacent land.
uses.
The proposal accommodates the transition in zoning by limiting major functions to the
Commercial District and by buffering surrounding properties. The proposal includes the
provision of the required side buffer of 10 feet in the Commercial District and the required side
buffer of 12 feet in the Medium Density Residential District. A six-foot high PVC fence with
landscaping will further buffer the abutting residential uses along the west and south property
lines. The proposal includes a deviation to place the required landscaping on the interior side of
the fence, rather than the outside of the fence. Locating the landscaping on the inside of the
fence will enhance the bank's ability to maintain this landscaping (without going onto neighbor's
property) and will enhance this site. Generally, abutting property owners would prefer the fence
along the common property line in order to allow for complete fencing in of their own properties.
The proposal includes increases to building height from 25 feet to 28 feet (to roof deck)
and an additional three feet four inches for the parapet and an additional eight feet 10 inches for
an architectural embellishment of the roofed area on the front of the building. Heights along
Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard in the Commercial District are typically one or two stories and the
proposal will be consistent with that character. The hip roof architectural embellishment will
provide additional aesthetic interest and supports the overall design of the building.
The proposed building is attractive, including the use of brick on the first floor and stucco
on the second floor, braces at the hip roof, and awnings over the windows and doors. The brick
will be a dark, mottled brown, while the stucco will be a biscuit (beige) color. Both the hip roof
shingles, the braces, and the awnings will be a dark green.
The site will be extensively landscaped, including live oak and magnolia trees for shade,
augmented by date and sable palms for accent. Shrubs along the fence and edges of
pavement will be viburnum, while Indian hawthorn will be utilized around the building. Planting
beds will be enhanced by Iiriope, gold lantana, fountain grass, dracaena and shore juniper.
Code requires on-site utilities (electric, cable, telephone, etc.) to be located
underground. The site appears to be previously served by overhead lines within the right-of-
way along the southern portion of the site that terminated approximately midpoint along
Yelvington Avenue. Since these overhead lines solely served this site, these overhead lines
must be buried with .this redevelopm~nt proposal.
Flexibility in regard to 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. This proposal will continue the improved
Community Development 2005-04-19
9
.
appearance of the Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard corridor through improved building design, extensive
landscaping and improved signage.
.
FindinQs of Fact: 1) The subject 0.96-acre site is zoned Commercial District (0.42 acre)
and Medium Density Residential District (0.53 acre); 2) The current use of the site is for 7,116
square-feet of commercial building area for a restaurant and retail sales in the Commercial
District and 3,895 square-feet of residential building area for 12 attached dwellings and
nonresidential off-street parking in the Medium Density Residential District; 3) The applicant is
proposing the redevelopment of the entire site for retail sales and services (bank) and offices
within a two-story, 8,600 square-foot commercial building within the Commercial District and
nonresidential off-street parking for the bank and offices within the Medium Density Residential
District; 4) Commercial uses, including retail sales and service uses, dominate the commercially
zoned properties along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard; 5) The southern portion of the site zoned
Medium Density Residential is surrounded by residentially developed properties with detached
and attached dwellings; 6) The proposal increases the pervious area of the site from 10% to
38%; 7) While reductions to setbacks to building and pavement are requested, these reductions
are less than the setbacks to building and pavement for the existing development; 8) The
proposed reduction to required parking is minimal and is consistent with office-type parking
demands; 9) The proposal reduces the number and width of driveways to three driveways (one
exit only on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and two driveways on Yelvington Avenue), rather than the
continuous driveway and parking within the right-of-way along Yelvington Avenue; 10) The
proposal is compatible with the surrounding development, and will upgrade and enhance the
community character and visual appearance of the immediate vicinity; 11) Flexibility in regard to
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; and 12) There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel.
. Conclusions of Law: .1) Staff concludes that the proposal complies with the Flexible
Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-704.C; 2)
Staff concludes that the proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a
Residentiallnfill Project per Section 2-304.G; 3) Staff further concludes that the proposal is in
compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913 and the other standards of
the Code; and 4) Based on the above findings and proposed conditions, Staff recommends
approval of this application.. .
The DRe reviewed the application and supporting materials on January 27,2005. The
. Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible Development application (1) 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 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), a reduction to required parking from 38 to
35 spaces 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 Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of 2-304.G, with the following bases and
conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with Flexible Development criteria as .
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
10
.
.
.
a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project and Residentiallnfill Project, per Section 2-
704.0 and Section 2-304.G respectively; 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 AND Conditions
of Approval: 1) That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual
elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the COB; 2) That a Unity of Title be recorded in the
public records prior to the issuance of any permits; 3) That all proposed on-site utilities (from the
right-of-way to the proposed building) and for the site frontage along and within the Yelvington
Avenue right-of-way be placed underground prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy;
4) That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits; and 5)
That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits.
See page 23 for motion of approval.
4. Case: FLD2004-09072fTDR2005-01 015 - 483 Mandalay Avenue Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: BJE, Inc.
Representative: Keith Zayac, P.E. (701 Enterprise Road East, Suite 404, Safety Harbor,
FL 34695; phone: 727-793-9888, fax: 727-793-9855; e-mail: keith@keithzavak.com).
Location: 1.68 acres located between Mandalay Avenue and Poinsettia Avenue
approximately 180 feet south of Baymont Street.
Atlas Page: 267 A.
Zoning District: Tourist (T).
Request: (1) Flexible Development approval to permit a mixed use (proposed parking garage
and attached dwellings in conjunction with existing retail sales) with a reduction to the front
(east) setback from 25 feet to 4.77 feet (to building), a reduction to the side (north) setback from
10 feet to 2.91 feet (to building), reductions to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to zero feet
(to dumpster enclosure), from 10 feet to 1.74 feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to 2.6 feet (to
building), a reduction to the rear (west) setback from 20 feet to 0.5 feet (to building), to increase
the building height from 35 feet to 70 feet (to roof deck) with an additional four feet for perimeter
parapets (from roof deck) and an additional 16 feet for rooftop pavilion (from roof deck) and to
permit a building within the visibility triangles, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project,
under the provisions of Section 2-803.C., and a reduction to the width of foundation landscaping
along Poinsettia Avenue from five feet to 4.77 feet, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program
under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G; and (2) Transfer of Development Rights of four units
from 656 Bayway Boulevard, under the provisions of Section 4-1402 (TDR2005-01015).
Proposed Use: Mixed use (four level parking garage with 355 parking spaces and 28 attached
dwelling units [condominium] in conjunction with 37,940 square-feet of existing retail sales).
Neighborhood Associations: Coral Resort Condominium (483 East Shore Drive, Clearwater, FL
33767; phone: 727-446-3711; email: coraI483@aol.com); Clearwater Beach Association (Jay
Keyes, 100 Devon Drive, Clearwater, FL 33767: phone: 727-443-2168; email:
papamurphv@aol.com); Clearwater Neighborh9ods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544
Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: diwe@qte.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
This Flexible Development case originally was advertised for the January 18, 2005, COB
agenda. It was requested by staff to be continued to a date uncertain (and was so continued by
the COB) due to an incomplete TOR (Transfer of Development Rights) application (which was
not originally advertised) and due to unsafe vehicular movements at the southern driveway and
Community Development 2005-04-19
11
.
.
.
the bottom of the ramp needing to be resolved. These concerns have been resolved and the
requests have been properly advertised.
The 1.68-acre site is located between Mandalay Avenue apd Poinsettia Avenue,
approximately 180 feet south of Baymont Street. The site has approximately 300 linear feet of
frontage on Mandalay Avenue (west) and 350 linear feet on Poinsettia Avenue (east). This
parcel is currently developed with a 38,000 square-foot shopping center. The building is on the
west side of the site and the current surface parking lot of approximately 101 parking spaces is
on the east side of the site. Attached dwellings are being constructed within close proximity of
this site, including the Belle Harbor project north of Baymont Street (under construction),
Mandalay Beach Club to the southwest across Mandalay Avenue (completed), and the
proposed Sand pearl project across Mandalay Avenue
The proposal includes redeveloping the site into a mixed use of the existing 38,000
square-foot shopping center, combined with a four-level parking garage east of the shopping
center building of 355 parking spaces that is topped by three-levels of a total of 28 attached
dwellings. The site is located within the Retail and Restaurant District of Beach by Design. The
proposed parking garage, with parking available to the public, will provide convenient parking to
this Retail and Restaurant District.
East of the existing shopping center building, the applicant proposes to construct the
seven-story addition where the existing surface parking lot is currently located. Access to the
existing surface parking is from two driveways, one on the north side and one on the south side
of the parking lot. Access essentially will remain the same, with the primary entrance and exit
driveway on the north side and a residenUemergency exit-only driveway on the south side. The
southern residenUemergency exit driveway should, however, be used for both ingress and
egress at appropriate times during peak events. Parking in the garage will be by a fee (except
for the residential parking area on the fourth level). A loading zone for delivery trucks for the
retail businesses is being provided within the right-of-way for those trucks that cannot enter the
parking garage. The ground level of the parking garage will allow for larger vehicles due to the
second level of the parking garage needing to be at the same elevation as the second floor of
the shopping center. The parking garage will provide 73 parking spaces on Level One (ground
level), 90 parking spaces on Level Two, 104 parking spaces on Level Three, and 88 parking
spaces on Level Four. Gates will restrict the public from the resident parking on Level Four.
Code provisions require 232 parking spaces for the existing shopping center and proposed
attached dwellings, ...,hereas 355 parking spaces are being provided. A portion of the parking
garage will be open to the public, providing relief from the need for additional parking on the
beach.
Above the four-level parking garage, the applicant proposes a total of 28 attached
dwellings on three floors. Due to the existing shopping center floor area, a mixed-use
calculation of unused intensity provides for 24 dwelling units. The applicant is requesting an
additional four dwelling units through the use of a Transfer of Development Rights from 656
Bayway Boulevard. The proposal is in compliance with the criteria of Section 4-1403 for the
Transfer of Development Rights. Levels Five and Six are proposed with 10 attached dwellings
per floor, whereas Level Seven is proposed with eight attached dwellings. The applicant
proposes on Level Seven tenant storage units for the residents. Use of these tenant storage
units must be restricted to storage only. A pool and 35-foot by 40-foot, open rooftop pavilion are
proposed on the roof of the building as part of a common area for the condominium residents.
Community Development 2005-04-19
12
.
.
.
Due to Code provisions regarding height and the advertisement of the requested height, the
pavilion on the roof must be open-air and not be enclosed in any manner. The overall building
height is proposed to be 70 feet (to roof deck), with an additional four feet for perimeter parapets
(from roof deck) and an additional 16 feet for the rooftop pavilion (from roof deck to the peak of
the pavilion roof).
The new building has been designed to incorporate many of the design elements
outlined in Beach by Design, including undulation of the front fac;:ade, architectural banding,
stepping of balconies, arches and tower elements. The building has been designed with
distinctive aluminum grillwork and arches on the first four levels to achieve the goal of the
building not looking like a parking garage. The building at Level 5 is stepped back vertically and
horizontally from the parking levels, providing balconies for the dwellings on both the east and
west elevations. Balconies for the dwelling units on the south side are cantilevered from the
building, which are mirrored for units on the north side of the building, to add interest and break
up the overall mass. The west elevation of the new building is set back approximately 110 feet
. from Mandalay Avenue due to the existing shopping center building. Design elements of the
existing shopping center building are being incorporated into the new building, including
decorative medallions, barrel tile roofing, banding details and arches. The color palette for tlie
new building will be consistent with that of the existing building. The proposal is compatible with
the surrounding development, and will upgrade and enhance the community character and
visual appearance of the immediate vicinity.
The proposal includes a reduction to the front (east) setback from 25 feet to 4.77 feet (to
building), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to 2.91 feet (to building),
reductions to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to dumpster enclosure), from 10
feet to 1.74 feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to 2.6 feet (to building) and a reduction to the
rear (west) setback from 20 feet to 0.5 feet (to building). The reduction to the front setback from
Poinsettia Avenue for the parking garage is at the approximate same location as the existing
surface parking lot. The proposed front setback is a function of the location of the existing
shopping center building, compliance with the standards for parking lot design and the stairwell
design. The stairwells protrude slightly from the main building edge, which assists in the
provision of visual interest and undulation of the building fac;:ade. This similar protrusion has
been echoed with the elevator and trash chute towers. The side setback reductions to the south
property line partially are a product of property lines not being perpendicular to the front property
lines. The side setback reduction to the north property line is a function of complying with the
standards for parking lot design and attempting to maximize the number of parking spaces
being provided. The existing shopping center building is a zero side setback (north and south).
The rear setback reduction in the southwest corner of the site for the new building is also part of .
complying with the standards for parking lot design and lot dimensions. . The proposed .
redevelopment of this parcel in order to maximize the number of parking spaces in the parking
garage is otherwise impractical without deviation from the setback requirements of the Tourist
District. Flexibility in regard to these required setbacks are also justified by the benefits to the
provision of parking spaces exceeding the required number of parking spaces that will be
available to the public on this portion of the beach.
The site and building plans presently show a dumpster enclosure on the south side of
the property, a trash chute and dumpster storage room for residential trash approximately in the
middle of the building (north of the electrical room), and a dumpster room toward the north side
of the building. These dumpsters all have access to Poinsettia Avenue for rollout pickup service
Community Development 2005-04-19
13
.
.
.
or direct truck pickup service. However, the dumpsters indicated are inadequate for the uses on
this property (existing or proposed). To resolve this inadequacy, the applicant has indicated in
writing that the best way is to place (2) 17 -yard compactors in the proposed dumpster storage
area at the northern end of the building. This would reduce the number of parking spaces
provided by one space due to the width of the compactor (7.93 feet + 2 feeUside for service =
11.93 feet). This development also will be required to have two additional 4 cubic-yard rollout
dumpsters and a recycling area. These changes, acceptable to the Solid Waste Department,
should be reflected on the site and building plans prior to the issuance of any permits.
In furtherance of Section 6-104.A of the Code, any nonconforming signage for the
shopping center will be required to be brought into conformance with Code provisions prior to
the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the dwellings. The pelican medallions
proposed for this new building are considered signs under the provisions of the Code, and will
require the submission of a Comprehensive Sign Program. The Comprehensive Sign Program
may be utilized to provide freestanding and attached signage (and potentially to retain existing
nonconforming signage) in accordance with Code provisions. All applicable Code requirements
and criteria including, but not limited to, General Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria (Section 2-803.C) have been met.
Findinqs of Facts: 1) The subject 1.68-acre site is zoned Tourist District and is located
within the Retail and Restaurant District of Beach by Design; 2) The current use of the site is for
a 38,000 square-foot shopping center for retail sales and restaurants with 101 parking spaces.
east of the building; 3) The applicant is proposing redevelopment of the site for mixed use,
incorporating the existing 38,000 square-foot shopping center with the construction of a new
building for 355 parking spaces and 28 attached dwellings; 4) Commercial uses, including retail
sales, restaurants and overnight accommodation uses, dominate this tourist area along and
east of Mandalay Avenue; 5) Attached dwellings are being constructed within close proximity of
his site, including the Belle Harbor project north of Baymont Street (under construction),
Mandalay Beach Club to the southwest across Mandalay Avenue (completed) and the proposed
Sandpearl project across Mandalay Avenue; 6) The proposal provides excess parking available
to the general public, which will be convenient to patrons of the Retail and Restaurant District of
Beach by Design; 7) While reductions to setbacks to building and pavement are requested,
these reductions are consistent with existing setbacks to building and pavement for the existing
shipping center and of the surrounding area; 8) The proposal is compatible with the surrounding
development, and will upgrade and enhance the community character and visual appearance of
the immediate vicinity; 9) Flexibility in regard to required setbacks are justified as a function of
the location of the existing shopping center building, compliance with the standards for parking
lot design, stairwell design and the benefits to the provision of parking spaces exceeding the
required number of parking spaces (excess spaces available to the public on this portion of the
beach); and 10) There are no active code enforcement cases for the p.arcel.
Conclusions of Law: 1) Staff concludes that the proposal complies with the Flexible
Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C; 2)
Staff further concludes that the proposal is in compliance with the General Applicability criteria
per Section 3-913 and the other standards of the Code; 3) Staff concludes that the proposal
complies with the Transfer of Development Rights per Section 3-1403; 4) Staff concludes that
the proposal complies with Beach by Design; and 5) Based on the above findings and proposed
conditions, Staff recommends approval of this application.
Community Development 2005-04-19
14
.
.
.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on November 12, 2004, and
December 2, 2004. The Planning Department recommends approval of the (1) Flexible
Development application to permit a mixed use (proposed parking garage and attached
dwellings in conjunction with existing retail sales) with a reduction to the front (east) setback
from 25 feet to 4.77 feet (to building), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to 2.91
feet (to building), reductions to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to dumpster
enclosure), from 10 feet to 1.74 feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to 2.6 feet (to building), a
reduction to the rear (west) setback from 20 feet to 0.5 feet (to building), to increase the building
height from 35 feet to 70 feet (to roof deck) with an additional four feet for perimeter parapets
(from roof deck) and an additional 16 feet for rooftop pavilion (from roof deck) and to permit a
building within the visibility triangles, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under
the provisions of Section 2-803.C., and a reduction to the width of foundation landscaping along
Poinsettia Avenue from five feet to 4.77 feet, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under
the provisions of Section 3-1202. G; and (2) Transfer of Development Rights of four units from
656 Bayway Boulevard, under the provisions of Section 4-1402 (TDR2005-01 015) for the site at
483 Mandalay Avenue, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The
proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other
standards in the Code including the General Applicability C~iteria per Section 3-913; 3) The
proposal complies with the Transfer of Development Rights per Section 3-1403; 4) The proposal
complies with Beach by Design; and 5) 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 CDB; 2) That tenant storage units on Level Seven be for storage only; 3) That
the pavilion on the roof be open-air and not be enclosed in any manner; 4) That the southern
resident/emergency exit driveway be used for both ingress and egress at appropriate times .
during peak events; 5) That replacement tree calculations be revised, acceptable to the
Planning Department, prior to the issuance of any permits; 6) That a special warranty deed,
specifying the number of dwelling units being conveyed or sold from 656 Bayway Boulevard and
being transferred to this site, be recorded prior to the issuance of any permits for this project.
The special warranty deed also shall contain a covenant restricting in perpetuity the use of all
platted lots at 656 Bayway Boulevard due to the transfer of development rights. Any mortgage
holder of the sending site (656 Bayway Boulevard) shall consent to the transfer of development
rights prior to the issuance of any permits; 7) 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;
8) That all existing nonconforming freestanding and attached signage be brought into
conformance with Code provisions prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for
the attached dwellings. The Comprehensive Sign Program may be utilized to provide
freestanding and attached signage in accordance with Code provisions; 9) That changes to the
number and location of trash containers, trash rooms and enclosures, acceptable to the Solid
Waste Department and other DRC members, be reflected on revised site and building plans
prior to the issuance of any permits; 10) That dumpster enclosures meet Solid Waste
Department size requirements and be consistent in exterior material and color as the hotel
building; 11) That a condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of
Community Development 2005-04-19
15
.
.
.
Occupancy; 12) That, prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, traffic impact
fees be assessed and paid; 13) That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance
of any permits; and 14) That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of
any permits.
See page 23 for motion of approval.
5. Pulled from Consent Agenda .
Case: FLD2004-10076rrDR2004-10014.-12Idlewild Street Level Two Application
Owner: Haddon House Inn, Inc.
ApplicanURepresentative: 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 feet to 15 feet (to building) and from 25 feet to 4.2 feet (to
trash staging area), a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to eight feet from the
CCCL (Coastal Construction Control Line) (to pool deck), reductions to the side (north) setback
from 10 feet to 5.9 feet (to building), from 10 feet to five feet (to pool deck) and from 10 feet to
two feet (to sidewalk), a reduction to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to 3.2 feet (to
sidewalk), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to 6 feet (to sidewalk), and an
increase to height from 30 feet 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), as a
Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-404.F and (2) a reduction to the
landscape buffer along Idlewild Street from 10 feet to 4.2 feet (to trash staging area), a
reduction to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 10 feet to 5.9 feet (to
building), from 10 feet to five feet (to pool deck) and from 10 feet to two feet (to sidewalk), a
reduction to the landscape buffer along the west property line from 10 feet to 3.2 feet (to
sidewalk) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the eastern property line from 10 feet to
6 feet (to sidewalk), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section
3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (fourteen condominiums).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive,
Clearwater, 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.
At their meeting on March 22, 2005, the Community Development Board approved this
application, but continued it to April 19, 2005, to attach conditions of approval.
The 0.47-acre site is located 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 foot by 87 foot
easUwest rectangle along Idlewild Street and the smaller portion is a 60 foot by 90 foot
Community Development 2005-04-19
16
.
rectangle on the west end of which extends west of the CCCL (Coastal Construction Control
Line).
The parcel is zoned Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District and is currently
developed with a nonconforming overnight accommodation use. The Haddon 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 there is limited landscaping.
The site is located 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, Chateau of White Sands,
located at 15 Somerset Street, is 61.66 feet in height and Chalets on White Sands, located at 14
Somerset Street, is 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 floor 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 cabanas to the west of the building. Parking 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
District" 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 Density 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 majority of existing buildings in the area.
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
17
.
.
.
Staff has found instances within the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design where
developments approved by the CDB, with staff support, have and are dramatically changing the
character of the area. These changes have generally not been consistent with the vision and
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 residential infill
project criteria.
Staff has suggested 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 a Unity of Title be recorded in the public records prior to the issuance of any permits; 3)
That any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height and
designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building;' 4) That the cabanas on the.
ground floor be used for storage only, in compliance with all FEMA (Federal Emergency .
Management Authority) rules and guidelines. Evidence of this restriction of use, embodied in
condominium documents, homeowner's documents, deed restrictions or like forms, shall be
submitted to the Building Official prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 5)
That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits; 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(s)-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 Parks and Recreation fees be paid
prior to the issuance of any permits; 8) That a condominium plat be recorded prior to the
issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; and CDB recommended Condition of Approval 9)
That the pavilions on the roof be open-air and not be enclosed in any manner.
James McCullough requested party status.
Acting Member Dennehy moved to grant party status to James McCullough. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Planner Wayne Wells reviewed staffs recommended conditions of approval. '
James McCullough spoke in opposition to the project.
It was recommended that a condition of approval be added to require roof pavilions to be
open-air and not enclosed.
Community Development 2005-04-19
18
.
Acting Member Dennehy moved to approve Case: FLD2004-10076rrDR2004-10014 for
12 Idlewild Street with Bases for Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, including
condition 9, requiring pavilions on the roof to be open-air and not enclosed in any manner,
based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
6. Case: ANX2005-01 002- 1724 Thomas Drive Level Three Application
Owner/Applicant: West Bay Development Corporation (1136 Candler Road, Clearwater,
FL 33765; phone: 727-791-3833).
Location: 0.193-acre consisting of one parcel approximately 440 feet north of the
northwest corner of S.R. 590 and Thomas Drive.
Atlas Page: 264A.
Request:
a) Annexation of 0.193-acre to the City of Clearwater;
b) Future Land Use Plan amendment from Residential Low (RL) Category (County) to
Residential Low (RL) Category (City of Clearwater); and
c) Rezoning from R-3, Single-Family Residential District (County) to Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) District (City of Clearwater).
Proposed Use: A single-family dwelling.
Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw(a)qte.net).
Presenter: Karl Wielecki, AICP, Planner II.
.
This annexation involves a 0.193-acre property, consisting of one parcel, located
approximately 440 feet north of the northwest corner of S R 590 and Thomas Drive. The
property is located within an enclave; it is not contiguous with any existing City boundaries. The
proposed annexation is consistent with Pinellas County Ordinance #00-63 with regard to
voluntary annexation. The applicant is requesting this annexation to receive sewer and solid
waste service. It is proposed that the property have a Future Land Use Plan designation of
Residential Low (RL) and a zoning category of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR).
The proposed annexation can be served by City of Clearwater services, including solid
waste, police, fire and emergency medical services without any adverse effect on the service
level. The property will receive water service from Pinellas County and sanitary sewer service
from the City of Clearwater. The proposed annexation is consistent with both the City's
Comprehensive Plan and with Pinellas County Ordinance #00-63 regarding municipal
annexation.
Based on its analysis, the Planning Department recommends approval of the annexation
of 0.193-acre to the City of Clearwater, of the Residential Low (RL) Future Land Plan
classification, and of the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) zoning classification
pursuant to the City's Community Development Code.
See page 23 for motion to recommend approval.
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
19
.
.
.
7. Case: ANX2004-08014A - 2060 Evergreen Avenue Level Three Application
Owner/Applicant: Bernard K. Reichel (1957 Freedom Drive, Clearwater, FL 33755;
phone: 727-638-9062; fax: 727-443-2021).
Location: 0.46-acre consisting of three parcels, bound by Evergreen and Lantana
Avenue to the east and west, respectively, Arbelia Street to the north and Idlewild Drive
to the south, approximately 250 feet west of King's Highway.
Atlas Page: 251 B.
Request:
a) Annexation of 0.46-acre of property to the City of Clearwater;
b) Future Land Use Plan amendment from Residential Urban (RU) Category (County) to
Residential Urban (RU) Category (City of Clearwater); and
c) Rezoning from R-4, One, Two and Three Family Residential District (County) to Medium
Density Residential (MDR) District (City of Clearwater).
Proposed Use: Up to three single- and/or multi-family dwellings.
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, Consulting Planner
On February 3, 2005, 1.34-acre, consisting of Lots 1 through 6 and Lots 9 through 13
was annexed into the City of Clearwater as part of ANX2004-08014. The subject of this
application is two parcels, 0.46-acre in area, consisting of Lots 7, 8, 15 and 16 and was
supposed to be included with the original application (ANX2004-08014) but was inadvertently
omitted. Approval of this application (ANX2004-08014A) will correct that omission and bring.
these four lots into the City of Clearwater.
This annexation involves 0.46 acre of a 1.8-acre property, consisting of two parcels,
bounded by Evergreen and Lantana Avenues to the east and west, respectively and Idlewild
Drive to the south, approximately 250 feefwest of King's Highway and 0.28 acre of the abutting
Arbelia Street right-of-way. The site is contiguous with existing City boundaries on all sides and
is consistent with Florida Statutes with regard to voluntary annexation. The applicant is
requesting this annexation to receive sanitary sewer, water, and solid waste service. It is
proposed that the property have a Future Land Use Plan designation of Residential Urban (RU)
and a zoning category of Medium Density Residential (MDR).
The proposed annexation can be served by City of Clearwater services, including water,
sewer, solid waste, police, fire and emergency medical services without any adverse effect on
the service level. The proposed annexation is consistent with both the City's Comprehensive
Plan and is consistent with Florida law regarding municipal annexation and eliminates an
enclave.
Based on its analysis, the Planning Department recommends approval of the annexation
of 0.46-acre to the City of Clearwater, a Land Use Plan amendment from Residential Urban
(RU) Category (County) to Residential Urban (RU) Category (City of Clearwater), and rezoning
from R-4, One, Two and Three Family Residential District (County) to Medium Density
Residential (MDR) District (City of Clearwater).
See page 23 for motion to recommend approval.
Community Development 2005-04-19
20
.
.
.
8. Case: LUZ2005-01001 - 2485 Druid Road Leve/ Three Application
Owner: William L. Jacobsen.
Applicant: Sun Group Construction Consultants, Inc. (5514 Park Boulevard, Pinellas
Park, FL 33781; phone: 727-544-1403; fax: 727-541-6187).
Location: 2.60 acres consisting of two parcels on the south side of Druid Road
approximately 1,300 feet west of U.S. Highway 19 North.
Atlas Page: 299B.
Request:
a) Future Land Use Plan amendment from Residential/Office General (R/OG) Category (City of
Clearwater) to Residential Medium (RM) Category (City of Clearwater); and
b) Rezoning from Office (0) (City of Clearwater) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) District
(City of Clearwater).
Proposed Use: Up to 39 multi-family dwellings.
Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Gina L. Clayton, Long Range Planning Manager.
This Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) amendment and rezoning application involves two
parcels of land, approximately 2.601 acres in area, located on the south side of Druid Road
approximately 1,300 feet west of U.S. Highway 19 North. The site currently is vacant and has a
FLUP classification of Residential/Office General (R/OG) and a zoning designation of Office (0).
The applicant is requesting to amend the FLUP designation of the site to the Residential
Medium (RM) classification and to rezone it to the Medium Density Residential (MDR) District in
order to construct up to 39 attached dwelling units on the site. The current R/OG classification
allows residential development at the same density as the proposed RM classification (15 units
per acre); however, the 0 zoning district does not permit stand-alone residential uses.
In accordance with the Countywide Plan Rules, the FLUP amendment is subject to
approval by the Pinellas Planning Council and Board of County Commissioners acting as the
Countywide Planning Authority. Based on the density of the classification requested, review
and approval by the Florida Department of Community Affairs is required.
An amendment of the FLUP from the Residential/Office General (R/OG) category to the
Residential Medium (RM) category and a rezoning from the Office (0) District to the Medium
Density Residential (MDR) District for the subject site is requested. This 2.601-acre site
exceeds the minimum requirements for the proposed use of the property as attached dwellings.
The neighborhood is characterized by single-family residential dwellings to the north and mobile
home parks to the southeast and west. The proposed future land use plan amendment and
rezoning is compatible with the existing neighborhood.
The proposed Residential Medium (RM) Future Land Use Plan classification and
Medium Density Residential (MDR) zoning district is consistent with both the City and the
Countywide Comprehensive Plans, is compatible with the surrounding area, does not require
nor affect the provision of public services, is compatible with the natural environment and is
consistent with the development regulations of the City.
Based on its analysis, the Planning Department recommends approval of the Future.
Land Use Plan amendment from the Residential/Office General (R/OG) Classification to the
Community Development 2005-04-19
21
Residential Medium (RM) Classification and of the rezoning from the Office (0) District to the
. Medium Density Residential (MDR) District.
See page 23 for motion to recommend approval.
9. Case: ANX2005-01001- 2201 Arlington Place Level Three Application
Owner/Applicant: Elizabeth McDonough (2201 Arlington Place, Cleal"\\later, FL 33765;
phone: 727-726-0263).
Location: 0.17 acre consisting of one parcel at the southeast corner of North Belcher
Road and Arlington Place.
Atlas Page: 281A.
Request:
a) Annexation of 0.17 acre to the City of Clearwater;
b) Future Land Use Plan amendment from Residential Urban (RU) Category (County) to
Residential Urban (RU) Category (City of Clearwater); and
c) Rezoning from R-3, Single-Family Residential District (County) to Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) District (City of Clearwater).
Proposed Use: An existing single-family dwelling.
Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Gina L. Clayton, Long Range Planning Manager.
.
This annexation involves a 0.17 -acre property consisting of one parcel, located at the
southeast corner of North Belcher Road and Arlington Place. The property is located within an
enclave and is contiguous with existing City boundaries to the north and west; therefore, the
proposed annexation is consistent with Pine lias County requirements with regard to voluntary
annexation. The applicant is requesting this annexation to receive sewer and solid waste
service. It is proposed that the property have a Future LandUse Plan designation of
Residential Urban (RU) and a zoning category of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR).
The proposed annexation can be served by City of Clearwater services, including
sanitary sewer, solid waste, police, fire and emergency medical services without any adverse
effect on the service level. The property already receives City water service. The proposed
annexation is consistent with both the City's Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with Pinellas
County Ordinance #00-63 regarding municipal annexation.
Based on its analysis, the Planning Department recommends approval of of the
annexation of 0.17 acre to the City of Clearwater, of the Residential Urban (RU) Future Land
Use Plan classification, and of the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) zoning district
pursuant to the City's Community Development Code.
See page 23 for motion to recommend approval.
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
22
.
.
.
10. Case: ANX2004-12022 -1600 Pine Place Level Three Application
Owner/Applicant: Mr. & Mrs. Jon Morris (1600 Pine Place Clearwater, FL 33655; phone
727 -446-5105).
Location: 0.368 acre located at the western terminus of Pine Place.
Atlas Page: 252B.
Request:
a) Annexation of 0.368 acre of property to the City of Clearwater;
b) Future Land Use Plan amendment from Residential Urban (RU) Category (County) to
Residential Urban (RU) Category (City of Clearwater); and
c) Rezoning from R-R, Rural Residential District (County) to Low Medium Density Residential
(LMDR) District (City of Clearwater). .
Proposed Use: A single-family dwelling.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net); Windsor
Park Homeowners Association (Jim Goins, President, 1723 Great Brickhill Road, Clearwater, FL
33755; phone: 727-442-6689).
Presenter: Gina L. Clayton, Long Range Planning Manager.
This annexation involves a 0.368-acre property occupied by a single-family dwelling
located at the western terminus of Pine Place. The property is located within an enclave and is
contiguous with existing City boundaries to the south, east and west; therefore, the proposed
annexation is consistent with Pine lias County requirements with regard to voluntary annexation.
The applicant is requesting this annexation in order to receive sanitary sewer and solid waste
service. It is proposed that the property have a Future Land Use Plan designation of
Residential Urban (RU) and a zoning category of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR).
The proposed annexation can be served by City of Clearwater services, including sewer,
solid waste, police, fire and emergency medical services without any adverse effect on the
service level. The proposed annexation is consistent with both the City's Comprehensive Plan
and is consistent with Pinellas County Ordinance #00-63 regarding municipal annexation.
Based on its analysis, the Planning Department recommends approval of the annexation'
of 0.368-acre of property to the City of Clearwater, of the Residential Urban (RU) Future Land
Use Plan Classification, and of the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) zoning district
pursuant to the City's Community Development Code.
Member Coates moved to approve Item D1, Cases: FLD2004-02011A1PL T2004-
00007 A, for 2520 Sunset Point Road with Bases for Approval and Conditions of Approval as
listed, Item D2, Case: FLD2005-01010 for 600 Bayway Boulevard with Bases for Approval and
Conditions of Approval as listed, based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Item D3,
Case: FLD2004-11 080 for 1611 - 1617 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard with Bases for Approval and
Conditions of Approval as listed, based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and Item
D4, Case: FLD2004-09072/TDR2005-01 015 for 483 Mandalay Avenue with Bases for Approval
and Conditions of Approval as listed, based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and
recommend approval of Item D6, Case: ANX2005-01002 for 1724 Thomas Drive, Item D7,
Case: ANX2004-08014A for 2060 Evergreen Avenue, Item D8, Case: LUZ2005-01001 for 2485
Druid Road, Item D9, Case: ANX2005-01001 for 2201 Arlington Place, and Item D10, Case:
ANX2004-12022 for 1600 Pine Place. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
Community Development 2005-04-19
23
.
.
.
11. Pulled from Consent Agenda
Level Three Application
Cases: FLD2005-01016fTDR2005-01017/PLT2005-00002 -715 South Gulfview
Boulevard
Owner/Applicant: Sunspree Green, LLC
Representative: E. D. Armstrong III, Esq., Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP
(P.O. Box 1368, Clearwater, FL 33757; phone: 727-461-1818; fax: 727-441-8617; e-
mail: ed@jpfirm.com).
Location:, 5.313 total acres (4.383 acres zoned Tourist District; 0.93 acre zoned Open
Space/Recreation District) located at the southwest corner of South Gulfview Boulevard
and Gulf Boulevard.
Atlas Page: 285A.
Zoning District: Tourist (T) District and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) District.
Request: (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density for the existing 105-room hotel
tower, located on 2.383 acres (density to be converted to 78 dwelling units); (2) Flexible
Development approval to permit attached dwellings with reductions to the front (north along S.
Gulfview Blvd.) setback from 15 feet to 11.88 feet (to security guard house) and from 15 feet to
6.42 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the front (east along Gulf Blvd.) setback from 15 feet to
zero feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to 4.29 feet (to
pavement), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to boardwalk), an
increase to building height from 35 feet to 150 feet (to roof deck) with an additiona/11 - 21 feet
for decorative mansard architectural embellishments, an increase to fence height within the front
setback from six feet to seven feet and a deviation to allow a building within visibility triangles,
as a Comprehensive lnfill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C; (3)
Transfer of Development Rights of 10 units from 41 Devon Drive and three units from the
Sand pearl project located generally at 500 Mandalay Avenue, under the provisions of Section 4-
1402 (TDR2005-01017); and (4) Preliminary Plat for one lot (PL T2005-00002).
Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (149 dwelling units).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive,
Clearwater, FL 33767: phone: 727-443-2168; email: papamurphv@aol.com); 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 request. The 5.313 total acres (4.383 acres zoned Tourist
District; 0.93 acre zoned Open Space/Recreation District) are located at the southwest corner of
South Gulfview Boulevard and Gulf Boulevard. The site has approximately 600 feet of frontage
on South Gulfview Boulevard (north) and 400 feet of frontage on Gulf Boulevard (east). This
parcel currently is developed with a 21 O-room/unit overnight accommodation use (Holiday Inn
Sunspree Resort). The site is adjacent to the Clearwater Pass Bridge to Sand Key. Hotel
rooms currently are located in low-rise, two-story buildings and a 1 O-story tower on the east side
of the site. This area is a tourist-dominated area of mixed uses (condominiums, overnight
accommodation uses, and commercial uses). The Sea Wake Inn is adjacent to the west, with
the Continental Tower (condominiums) west of that site. Retail sales establishments are
located across South Gulfview Boulevard to the north. A restaurant and condominiums are
located to the east and northeast. A nine-story residential tower is located northeast of this site
east of Gulf Boulevard between South Gulfview and Bayway boulevards.
Community Development 2005-04-19
24
.
.
.
The proposal is to demolish all existing improvements related to the hotel and
reconstruct the site for 149 dwelling units in two, 150-foot tall residential towers. The proposal
includes a request for Termination of the Status of Nonconformity for the nonconforming density
of 105 rooms/units in the hotel tower on 2.383 acres. The intent of this portion of the request is
to convert these 105 rooms from a density standpoint to 78 dwelling units. Based on the
maximum allowable density of 40 rooms/units per acre for the RFH land use category and the
2.383 acres zoned Tourist apportioned for this hotel tower, this portion of the site could be
developed today with only 95 overnight accommodation rooms/units. Under the Terminatio.n of
the Status of Nonconformity provisions, there are four required improvements: 1) Installation of
perimeter buffers. Perimeter buffers are not required in the Tourist District; 2) Improvement of
off-street parking lots. The applicant proposes to demolish all existing improvements, including
parking areas, and reconstruct parking that meets Code requirements. Most parking spaces will
be within a two-level parking garage. Only 16 parking spaces are provided outside of the
garage and are intended for guests; 3) Removal of nonconforming signs, outdoor lighting or
other accessory structures. The applicant is proposes to demolish all existing signs, outdoor
lighting and other accessory structures and construct improvements in compliance with Code
provisions; and 4) Use of Comprehensive Sign Program and Comprehensive Landscape
Programs to satisfy requirements. The proposal complies with the landscape provisions of the
Code and no Comprehensive Landscape Program is necessary. Proposed signage will need to
meet Code provisions, as the Code does not provide for a Comprehensive Sign Program for
residential projects.
To complete the. calculation for the proposed density for this project, in addition to the 78
dwelling units proposed through the Termination of Status of Nonconformity described above,
with the remaining two acres of upland zoned Tourist, a total of 60 dwelling units are proposed
(at the maximum allowable density of 30 dwelling units per acre). The applicant is also
proposing a Transfer of Development Rights of a total of 13 dwelling units from two parcels.
This totals 151 dwelling units, although only 149 dwelling units are proposed to be constructed
on this site (these two dwelling units will be lost for future development and cannot be
transferred off-site, due to the provisions of Section 6-109.B). The overall density for this site is
proposed at 33.995 dwelling units per acre.
Regarding the Transfer of Development Rights, the site at 41 Devon Drive presently is
developed with an overnight accommodation use of 20 rooms/units. Based on the land area of
0.355 acres for 41 Devon Drive and a maximum residential density of 30 dwelling units per acre,
this site could be developed with a maximum of 10 dwelling units. The applicant proposes to
transfer all of these 10 dwelling units to the subject site at 715 South Gulfview Boulevard.
Discussions between the applicant and City Staff have included the demolition of this motel and
all appurtenances, conveying the property to the City, and the applicant constructing a surface
parking lot at their cost. The City will design the proposed parking lot and obtain all necessary
design approvals and permits. The approval of this request should include a condition
regarding this portion of the proposal.
The Flexible Development proposal includes reductions to the front (north along S.
Gulfview Blvd.) setback from 15 feet to 11.88 feet (to security guard house) and from 15 feet to
6.42 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the front (east along Gulf Blvd.) setback from 15 feet to
zero feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to 4.29 feet (to
pavement) and a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to boardwalk).
The front setback reduction along South Gulfview Boulevard for the security guard house also
Community Development 2005-04-19
25
.
.
.
places this structure within the visibility triangles for this driveway, requiring a deviation to allow
this building within the visibility triangles. This western driveway is situated across from the .
intersection of South Gulfview Boulevard and Parkway Drive, in the same location as an existing
hotel driveway. The setback reduction for this security guard house will still provide adequate
visibility for motorists to view pedestrians before crossing over the sidewalk. The distance from
the face of the gate arm to the back edge of the sidewalk within the South Gulfview Boulevard
right-of-way at the western driveway for incoming traffic will need to be a minimum of 40 feet for
traffic safety purposes. The existing setback to pavement for the hotel is at approximately one-
foot, with the majority of the existing hedging and trees located within the City's right-of-way.
While the Code does not require any perimeter buffer along this major roadway, the proposed
6.42 feet will provide adequate planting area for the landscaping shown on the submitted plans.
The setback to pavement for the Surf Style establishment across South Gulfview Boulevard was
approved at four feet, which was noted in the Staff Report that the setback was consistent with
that provided for the on the adjacent Bay Bazaar Shopping Center (which is also across South
Gulfview Boulevard from this project). There is a second, exit-only driveway closer to the
intersection that also will be gated. The design of these driveways will minimize traffic
congestion.
The front setback reduction to zero feet along Gulf Boulevard to the east is for the
emergency vehicle turnaround required by the Fire Department. It is noted that there is an
existing License for vehicle parking on City property within this area, which also is at a zero
setback to pavement. The parking area will be removed for this emergency vehicle turnaround.
The proposed 4.29-foot setback to pavement from the west property line represents an increase
over the existing three-foot setback to pavement for the same area. This reduced setback is
only for a portion of the pavement, whereas other portions exceed the required setback at 13.52
feet. The parking garage portion of the building is located 33.58 feet from the west property
line, with the western residential tower approximately 38 feet from the west property line. The
proposal includes a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to zero feet for the eight-
foot wide boardwalk along the seawall. The building is proposed a minimum of 20 feet from the
seawall, which complies with Building Code setbacks (18 feet) from the seawall. The existing
10-story hotel tower is located three feet from the seawall, with other existing structures
extending south of the seawall. All of these existing improvements, including those south of the
seawall, will be removed with this redevelopment proposal. With the entire setback reductions
requested, most represent improvements over existing setbacks and this flexibility is justified by
the improvement to the character of the immediate vicinity.
The proposal includes an increase to building height from 35 feet to 150 feet (to roof
deck) with an additional 11 - 21 feet for decorative mansard architectural embellishments. The
requested height is consistent with the guidelines set forth in Beach by Design. Section 4-
1403.C of the Code provides for the authorization of increased building height up to 1.5 times
the maximum height otherwise permitted (or a maximum of 150 feet) when utilizing the Transfer
of Development Rights. While there are 13 dwelling units being transferred from 41 Devon
Drive and the Sandpearl project (generally 500 Mandalay Avenue), the Planning Department
has determined a reasonable relationship between the number of units being transferred and
the proposed building height. This site is located within the Clearwater Pass District of Beach
by Design, which is indicated as a distinctive area of mixed use, including high-rise
condominiums. The two proposed residential towers are not located within 500 feet of any other
buildings exceeding 100 feet in height. The additional height for the decorative mansard
architectural embellishments will hide various rooftop mechanical equipment and will provide
Community Development 2005-04-19
26
.
proportion to the buildings with the "tiered" appearance with separated rooftops. Portions of the
increased height will provide proper clearance for elevator equipment. The design of this
project creates a form and function that will be consistent with and enhance the character of this
area.
A fence is proposed within the front setback along South Gulfview and Gulf Boulevards. .
The applicant requests an increase to fence height within the front setback from six feet to
seven feet. The drawings indicate an aluminum picket-style fence partially at a six-foot height
with concrete columns seven feet high. Section 3-804.A.2 permits such fences and walls within
the required front setback at a height of six feet. The applicant has not provided any justification
for the fence height increase and Staff cannot support this request. A similar style fence can be
designed to meet the maximum six feet height and accomplish the design parameters desired
for this site.
Beach by Design calls for the construction of 10-foot wide sidewalks along major roads
for pedestrian safety and convenience, enhanced with palm trees spaced a maximum 35 feet
apart. The site plans do not indicate compliance with this requirement. However, with the
construction of BeachWalk improvements, and to ensure consistency of sidewalk design (along
with any landscape or street lighting improvements), the applicant will need to work with the City
toward meeting the City design specifications. Approval of this request should be conditioned
on compliance with these specifications and to allow for an alternate construction schedule or
the provision of payment in lieu of construction of the sidewalk within the right-of-way.
.
The site plan indicates a proposed sign adjacent to the east side of the western
driveway. It is noted that the Code does not provide the ability to request Comprehensive Sign
Programs for residential properties. Future signage will need to meet the requirements of the
Code and any future freestanding sign must be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in
height, -designed to match the exterior materials. and c.olor of the building.
To ensure that the cabanas on the ground floor are used for storage only, in compliance
with all FEMA rules and guidelines, any approval will need to include a condition for such.
Evidence of this restriction of use, embodied in condominium documents, homeowner's
documents, deed restrictions or like forms, shall be submitted to the Building Official prior to the
issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy.
The applicant has requested that the approval of the development order include a
provision that application for building permits be made within two years of the date of approval
of this request, rather than the normal one-year provision of Section 4-407. Additionally, the
applicant is requesting a two-year construction period between issuance of a building permit
and a Certificate of Occupancy, rather than the normal one-year provision in the same Code
section. The purpose of their requests is due to other projects currently under construction or
soon to be under construction, such as the Belle Harbor and Sand pearl projects. These
timeframes are reasonable.
The property today is two lots. The proposal includes a Preliminary Plat to combine this
overall property into one lot, prior to the recording of a Condominium Plat. The request
complies with the Code requirements for a Preliminary Plat.
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
27
.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913), Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria
(Section 2-803.C) and Transfer of Development Rights (Section 4-1402) have been met.
.
Findinqs of Fact: 1) The subject 5.313 total acres (4.383 acres zoned Tourist District;
0.93 acre zoned Open Space/Recreation District) are located within the Clearwater Pass District
of Beach by Design; 2) The current use of the site is for a 21 O-room hotel (which is
nonconforming to current density maximums of 175 rooms); 3) The site is located in a tourist-
dominated area of mixed uses (condominiums, overnight accommodation uses and commercial
uses); 4) The applicant proposes to redevelop the entire site for 149 attached dwellings in two
residential towers 150 feet tall each; 5) The applicant is deriving the proposed density through
the Termination of Status of Nonconformity for the 105-room hotel tower on 2.383 acres,
converted to 78 dwelling units, together with 60 dwelling units on the remaining two acres of
upland (based on 30 dwelling units per acre) and the Transfer of Development Rights of 13
dwelling units (10 units from 41 Devon Drive and three units from the Sandpearl project); 6)
While reductions to setbacks to building and pavement are requested, these reductions are less
than the setbacks to building and pavement for the existing development; 7) The proposed
building height of 150 feet for both of the residential towers bears a reasonable relationship
between the number of units being transferred through the Transfer of Development Rights and
the proposed height; 8) The proposed fence height requested is not justified and the maximum
six-foot height by Code should be complied with; 9) The requested timeframes of two years from
the date the CDB approves this request to apply for building permits and two years after
issuance of the building permits to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy is a reasonable request,
given the other projects under construction or soon to be under construction by the same
developer; 10) The proposal is compatible with the surrounding development, and will enhance
the character of the immediate vicinity; and 11) There are no active code enforcement cases for
the parcel.
Conclusions of Law: 1) Staff concludes that the Termination of Status of Nonconformity
for density and building height complies with the criteria of Section 6-109; 2) Staff concludes
that the proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C: 3) Staff further concludes that the proposal is in
compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913 and the other standards of
the Code; 4) Staff concludes that the proposal complies with Beach by Design; 5) Staff
concludes that the proposal complies with the Transfer of Development Rights per Section 3-
1403; 6) Staff concludes that the proposal complies with the Preliminary Plat provisions of the
Code; 7) Staff concludes that the requested fence height is not justified and cannot be
supported by Staff; and 8) Based on the above findings and proposed conditions, Staff
recommends approval of this application, with the exception of the requested fence height.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on March 3, 2005. The Planning Department recommends approval of: 1) Termination of Status
of Nonconformity for density for the existing 105-room hotel tower, located on 2.383 acres
(density to be converted to 78 dwelling units); 2) Flexible Development application to permit
attached dwellings with reductions to the front (north along S. Gulfview Blvd.) setback from 15
feet to 11.88 feet (to security guard house) and from 15 feet to 6.42 feet (to pavement), a
reduction to the front (east along Gulf Blvd.) setback from 15 feet to zero feet (to pavement), a
reduction to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to 4.29 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the
side (south) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to boardwalk), an. increase to building height from
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
28
.
.
.
35 feet to 150 feet (to roof deck) with an additional 11 - 21 feet for decorative mansard
architectural embellishments and a deviation to allow a building within visibility triangles, as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C; 3)
Transfer of Development Rights of 10 units from 41 Devon Drive and three units from the
Sandpearl project located generally at 500 Mandalay Avenue, under the provisions of Section 4-
1402 (TDR2005-01 017); and 4) Preliminary Plat for one lot (PL T2005-00002) for the site at 715
South Gulfview Boulevard, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The
proposal complies with the Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density per Section 6-
109; 2) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C; 3) The proposal is in compliance with other
standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; 4) The
proposal complies with Beach by Design; 5) The proposal complies with the Transfer of
Development Rights per Section 3-1403; 6) The proposal complies with the Preliminary Plat
provisions of the Code; and 7) The proposal is compatible with the surrounding development
and will assist in the redevelopment of properties within the immediate vicinity AND Conditions
of Approval: 1) That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual.
elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the COB; 2) That, while the proposal is for a total of
151 dwelling units, only a maximum of 149 dwelling units be constructed on this site. The two
remaining dwelling units cannot be constructed on-site and cannot be transferred off-site in the
future; 3) That application for a building permit shall be made within two years of Flexible
. Development approval (April 19, 2007) and all required certificates of occupancy shall be
obtained within two years of the date of issuance of the building permit; 4) That the applicant
convey, at no cost to the City, to the City of Clearwater the property located at 41 Devon Drive
upon the earlier of (a) 45 days after the applicant's receipt of notice from the City or (b) the date
a building permit is issued for the construction of the improvements for this site. The applicant
shall demolish, at no cost to the City, all site improvements within 30 days notice from the City.
The applicant shall construct, at no cost to the City, a parking lot on the property, after the City
obtains all necessary design approvals and permits (any meters shall be the responsibility of the
City); 5) That a 1 O-foot wide sidewalk within the South Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way be
designed and constructed for the site frontage in accordance with Beach Walk design
specifications. The developer and City may agree on an alternate construction schedule or the
provision of payment in lieu of construction; 6) That future signage meet the requirements of the
Code and any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height,
designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building; 7) That the maximum height
of the fence along South Gulfview Boulevard and Gulf Boulevard be six feet, including columns;
8) That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the distance from the face of the gate arm
to the back edge of the sidewalk within the South Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way at the
western driveway be a minimum of 40 feet; 9) That a special warranty deed, specifying the
number of dwelling units being conveyed or sold from 41 Devon Drive and from the Sandpearl
project (generally located at 500 Mandalay Avenue) and being transferred to this site, be
recorded prior to the issuance of any permits for this project. The special warranty deed shall
also contain a covenant restricting in perpetuity the use of all platted lots at 41 Devon Drive and
at the Sandpearl project due to the transfer of development rights. Any mortgage holder of the
sending site (41 Devon Drive and the Sandpearl project) shall consent to the transfer of
development rights prior to the issuance of any permits; 10) That the cabanas on the ground
floor be used for storage only, in compliance with all FEMA (Federal Emergency Management
Authority) rules and guidelines. Evidence of this restriction of use, embodied in condominium
documents, homeowner's documents, deed restrictions or like forms, shall be submitted to the
Building Official prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 11) That sea-turtle
Community Development 2005-04-19
29
.
.
.
friendly light fixtures be employed with the site design, with compliance demonstrated on plans
acceptable to the Environmental Division, prior to the issuance of building permits; 12) 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; 13) That all applicable requirements of
Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks; 14) That a Final
Subdivision Plat be recorded prior to the issuance of any permits and a condominium plat be
recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 15) That all Parks and
Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits; and 16) That all Fire Department
requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits.
One resident spoke in opposition to the project.
Ed Armstrong, representative for the applicant, said the project will reduce traffic and
meets criteria for approval. He said the front fence will be six-feet, as requested by staff. The size
of the Devon Drive parking lot will be determined.
Acting Member Dennehy moved to approve Item D11, Cases: FLD2005-
01 016fTDR2005-01017/PL T2005-00002 for 715 South Gulfview Boulevard with Bases for
Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
E - CONTINUED ITEMS: (1 - 2):
1. Case: LUZ2004-08005 - 2506 Countryside Boulevard Level Three Application
Owner/Applicant: Executive Corporation of Clearwater, Inc. (5260 South Landings Drive,
Ariel #704, Fort Myers, FL 33919; phone 239-433-1382).
Representative: Timothy A. Johnson (Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP, 911
Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756; phone 727-461-1818; fax 727-462-0365).
Location: 44.2 acres, located at the northwest corner of the Countryside Boulevard and
Enterprise Road intersection.
Atlas Page: 221A.
Request:
a) Future Land Use Plan amendment from the Recreation/Open Space (RlOS) Classification to
the Residential Urban (RU) Classification; and
b) Rezoning from the Open/Space Recreation (O/SR) District to the Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) District.
Proposed Use: Attached Dwellings. .
Neighborhood Associations: Woodgate I & II (Jennifer Ritter, President, 2345 Ashmore Drive,
Clearwater, FL 33763; Telephone: 727-791-0848; E-mail: idelotto@tampabav.rr.com);
Woodgate III (Steve Pashioian, VP, 2360 Hazlewood Lane, Clearwater, FL 33763; Telephone:
727-797-7070; E-mail: stevie@tampabav.rr.com); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug
Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email:
Diw@qte.net).
Mark T. Parry, Consulting Planner
Community Development 2005-04-19
30
.
.
.
Member Tallman declared a conflict of interest.
Mary Buenavenura, attorney for Tampa Bay Water, requested party status.
Member Fritsch moved to grant party status to Mary Buenavenura. The motion was
duly seconded. Members Johnson, Milam, Fritsch, Thomas Coates,'Acting Member Dennehy,
and Chair Gildersleeve voted "Aye." Member Tallman abstained. Motion carried.
Assistant Planning Director Gina Clayton reviewed the request. This Future Land Use
Plan amendment and rezoning application involves one parcel of land, approximately 44.2 acres
in area, located at the northwest corner of the Countryside Boulevard and Enterprise Road
intersection. The site currently functions as the Clearwater Executive Golf Course and includes
the course's clubhouse (Dogwater Cafe). The site has an existing FLUP designation of
Recreation/Open Space (RlOS) and a zoning designation of Open Space/Recreation (OS/R).
The applicant is requesting to amend the FLUP designation of the site to the Residential Urban
(RU) classification and to rezone it to the Medium Density Residential (MDR) District in order to
permit the development of attached dwellings. A proposed development agreement between
the applicant and the City is also associated with this site that limits the number of developable
residential units on the site to 280 dwelling units (331 units allowed pursuant to the RU Plan
designation); limits the building heights to 35 feet; and requires increased buffering and
landscaping between the existing residential units to the west and the proposed units within the
site.
In accordance with the Countywide Plan Rules, the land use plan amendment is subject,
to approval by the Pine lias Planning Council and Board of County Commissioners acting as the
Countywide Planning Authority. Based on the acreage involved in this plan amendment, review
and approval by the Florida Department of Community Affairs also is required.
An amendment of the FLUP from the Recreation/Open Space (RlOS) category to the
Residential Urban (RU) category and a rezoning from the Open Space/Recreation (OS/R)
District to the Medium Density Residential (MDR) District for the subject site is requested. This
44.2-acre site exceeds the minimum requirements for the proposed use of the property as
attached dwellings. The neighborhood is surrounded by single-family and multi-family
residential dwellings to the south and east and a variety of non-residential uses to the west and
north. The proposed future land use plan amendment and rezoning is compatible with the
existing neighborhood. The use and density this property is proposed to be limited through a
companion development agreement application (Case: DVA2004-00004).
The proposed Residential Urban (RU) Future Land Use Plan classification and Medium
Density Residential (MDR) zoning district is consistent with both the City and the Countywide
Comprehensive Plans, is compatible with the surrounding area, does not require nor affect the
provision of public services, is compatible with the natural environment and is consistent with
the development regulations of the City.
Community Development 2005-04-19
31
.
.
.
Based on its analysis, the Planning Department recommends approval of the land use
plan amendment from the Recreation/Open Space (RlOS) Classification to the Residential
Urban (RU) Classification and of the rezoning from the Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) District
to the Medium Density Residential (MDR) District.
Tim Johnson, representative, reviewed the request, stating it is not economically feasible
to continue the current use as there is significant competition among local golf courses. He said
while the traffic analysis predicted no degradation in nearby levels of service, the applicant has
agreed to the City's mandate to construct changes at Enterprise's intersection with SR 580.
Based on input during four meetings with nearby residents, the developer has accepted an
additional requirement to the development agreement that the project shall not have vehicular
access to Laurelwood Drive. He said the landscape buffer to the west will be 20 feet wide. He
said the developer also has agreed to install the type of buffer that is requested by groups of
neighboring homeowners. He said the recreation facility was relocated away from current
homes. He said the project will address drainage issues. It was recommended that left turns
from Countryside Boulevard into the development be prohibited. Mr. Johnson submitted the
resume of Roy E Chapman to qualify as an expert witness. Mr. Chapman said the driveway
currently exists.
Mary Buenavenura spoke in opposition to the project.
Following the distribution of resumes, Acting Member Dennehy moved to grant expert
witness status to Paula Dye. The motion was duly seconded. Members Johnson, Milam,
Fritsch, Coates, Acting Member Dennehy, and Chair Gildersleeve voted "Aye." Member
Tallman abstained. Motion carried.
Member Fritsch moved to grant expert witness status to Sharon M. Phillips and Patricia
S. Campbell. The motion was duly seconded. Members Johnson, Milam, Fritsch, Coates,
Acting Member Dennehy, and Chair Gildersleeve voted "Aye." Member Tallman abstained.
Motion carried.
Sharon M. Phillips and Patricia S. Campbell spoke in opposition to the project.
Dan Stoliker requested party status.
Member Johnson moved to grant party status to Dan Stoliker. The motion was duly
seconded. Members Johnson, Milam, Fritsch, Coates, Acting Member Dennehy, and Chair
Gildersleeve voted "Aye." Member Tallman abstained. Motion carried.
Mr. Stoliker spoke in opposition to the project.
Seven people spoke in opposition to the project and three people discussed their buffer
preferences.
Mr. Johnson said the project will address all buffering issues with nearby residences,
offices, and industrial uses. He said changes to the Enterprise Road/SR 580 intersection are
being done at City direction. He said the traffic study proves the dp.velopment meets City
standards and that limiting egress/ingress to the development is not necessary.
Community Development 2005-04-19
32
.
.
.
Member Johnson moved to recommend approval of Item E1, Case: LUZ2004-08005 for
2506 Countryside Boulevard. The motion was duly seconded. Members Johnson, Milam,
Fritsch, Coates, Acting Member Dennehy, and Chair Gildersleeve voted "Aye." Member
Tallman abstained. Motion carried.
2. Case: DVA2004-00004 - 2506 Countryside Boulevard Level Three Application
Owner/Applicant: Executive Corporation of Clearwater, Inc. (5260 South Landings Drive,
Ariel #704, Fort Myers, FL 33919; phone 239-433-1382).
Representative: Timothy A. Johnson (Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP, 911
Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756; phone 727-461-1818; fax 727-462-0365).
Location: 44.2 acres, located at the northwest corner of the Countryside Boulevard and
Enterprise Road intersection. .
Atlas Page: 221A.
Request: Review of and recommendation to the City Council of a Development Agreement
between Executive Corporation of Clearwater, Inc. and the City of Clearwater.
Proposed.Use: Attached Dwellings.
Neighborhood Associations: Woodgate I & II (Jennifer Ritter, President, 2345 Ashmore Drive,
Clearwater, FL 33763; Telephone: 727-791-0848; E-mail: idelotto@tampabav.rr.com);
Woodgate III (Steve Pashioian, VP, 2360 Hazlewood Lane, Clearwater, FL 33763; Telephone:
727-797-7070; E-mail: stevie@tampabav.rr.com); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug
Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email:
Diw@qte.net).
Mark T. Parry, Consulting Planner
Member Tallman declared a conflict of interest.
Ms. Clayton reviewed the request. The subject site consists of one parcel of land, 44.2
acres in area, known as the Countryside Executive Golf Course. It is located at the northwest
corner of the Countryside Boulevard and Enterprise Road intersection, approximately 1,000 feet
west of U.S. Highway 19 North. The surrounding area is predominantly developed with low-
medium to medium density residential and office uses. Single-family dwellings exist to the
south, and single-family and multi-family dwellings are found to the west. Office and light
industrial uses are located to the east, while to the north exists a place of worship, assisted
living facility and vehicle sales/display use.
On December 29, 1977, the original developer of the golf course and surrounding
residential areas, U.S. Home Corporation, recorded a warranty deed that required the subject
site to operate as a golf course for a period of 20 years. The deed did not restrict the use of the
property beyond that timeframe, which expired in 1997. The applicant is proposing to redevelop
this site with a total of 280 townhomes. This proposed development agreement is being
submitted in conjunction with applications to amend the future land use plan designation of the
site from Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) to Residential Urban (RU) and to rezone it from Open
Space/Recreation (OS/R) to Medium Density Residential (MDR), which would permit a
maximum of 331 residential units.
The Development Agreement associated with the 44.2-acre site sets forth public and
private obligations to ensure that the proposed development will limit the impact on surrounding
areas and is in harmony with the existing surrounding uses and public facilities. The
development agreement will be in effect for a period of 10 years and requires redevelopment of
Community Development 2005-04-19
33
.
.
.
the site to be consistent with the following requirements: 1) Density of the site shall not exceed
280 residential units; 2) The property shall be developed substantially in conformance with the
Concept Plan submitted as Exhibit liB" to the Development Agreement; 3) Building heights shall
be limited to 35 feet; 4) The architectural style of the buildings shall be consistent with the
rendered drawings submitted as Exhibit "C" to the Development Agreement; 5) A 20-foot
landscape buffer shall be provided along the western boundary of the site, adjacent to existing
residential uses, consistent with Exhibit liD" of the Development Agreement, which includes
canopy and accent trees placed at various locations along the buffer and a continuous low-lying
hedge along the entire buffer; 6) The applicant must post the required security for traffic
improvements to the intersection of Enterprise Road and Main Street (SR 580) and Countryside
Boulevard directly adjacent to the site to mitigate the impacts associated with the proposal.
These improvements must be constructed prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the
site; 7) The applicant shall grant a utility easement for water service five feet on either side of
the water lines on the site; 8) Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the site, the applicant
shall record a deed restriction, approved by the City Attorney, encumbering the property and
describing the development limitations of the Development Agreement; and 9) provision to be
added to Section 6.1.3 of the Development Agreement: 6.1.3.7 The project to be developed on
the property shall not have vehicular access to Laurelwood Drive.
Additionally, the Development Agreement obligates the City to comply with the following:
1) Concurrently process the Future Land Use Plan amendment and rezoning requests (see
case LUZ2004-08005) submitted by the applicant for the subject site; 2) Approve site and
construction plans consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the submitted Concept
Plan; 3) Where possible, utilize transportation impact fees paid by the applicant in connection
with the proposed development for the design, permitting and construction of the transportation
improvements required at the intersection of Enterprise Road and Main Street; and 5) Vacate an
easement that relates to two abandoned water well sites found in O.R. Book 4223, Page 1502,
of the Public Records of Pinellas County Florida.
The application and supporting materials were reviewed by the Development Review
Committee on October 7, 2004, December 2, 2004 and January 27, 2005. The Planning
Department recommends approval of the Development Agreement for the site at 2506
Countryside Boulevard, with the following Bases for Approval: 1) The Development Agreement
is consistent with and furthers the goals, policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan; 2)
The Development Agreement complies with the standards and criteria of Section 4-606; and 3)
The Development Agreement implements and formalizes the requirements of the Future Land
Use Plan Amendment and Rezoning request found in LUZ2004-08005.
Discussion related to this item is reported under Item E1, Case: LUZ2004-08005 - 2506
Countryside Boulevard, beginning on page 31.
In response to a question, Ms. Clayton said as proposed, the project will have three
entrances off Belcher Road and two off Countryside Boulevard. It was recommended that
Condition #5 of the Development Agreement indicate the buffer will be of varied design. Mr.
Johnson said landscaped buffers will be 20 feet wide while the distance to wall buffers will be 10
feet. He said staff has a sense of what the developer is trying to do.
Community Development 2005-04-19
34
.
.
.
Member Coates moved to recommend approval of Item E2, Case: DVA2004-00004 for
2506 Countryside Boulevard. The motion was duly seconded. Members Johnson, Milam,
Fritsch, Coates, Acting Member Dennehy, and Chair Gildersleeve voted "Aye." Member
Tallman abstained. Motion carried.
The Community Development Board recessed from 3:19 to 3:28 p.m.
F - LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (1 - 5):
1. Cases: FLD2005-01 005/SGN2005-01 016 - 430 South Gulfview Boulevard
Owner/Applicant: MSPA Acquisition II, L.P.
Representative: Timothy A. Johnson, Jr., Esq., Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns,
LLP (P.O. Box 1368, Clearwater, FL 33757; phone: 727-461-1818; fax: 727-441-8617;
e-mail: timj@jpfirm.com).
Location: 2.44 total acres (1.859 acres zoned Tourist District: 0.585 acre zoned Open
Space/Recreation District) located on the west side of South Gulfview Boulevard
approximately 500 feet northwest of Hamden Drive.
Atlas Page: 276A.
Zoning Districts: Tourist (T) and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R).
Request: (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density to allow the continuation of an
existing 217-room/unit hotel (where 74 rooms/units are permitted today) and for height to allow
the existing 155-foot high building (where a maximum height of 150 feet is permitted today); (2) .
Flexible Development approval to permit a 217-room/unit overnight accommodation use with a
reduction to the rear (west) setback from 20 feet to zero feet (to patio/pool decking and tiki bars)
and to allow patio/pool decking seaward (westward) of the Coastal Construction Control Line,
an increase to building height from 35 feet to 155 feet (to existing roof deck) and a reduction to
required parking from 217 to 201 spaces (existing), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C; (3) Reduction to the required interior
landscape area, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-
1202.G; and (4) Comprehensive Sign Program approval, under the provisions of Section 3-1807
(SGN2005-01016).
Proposed Use: Retain existing 217-room overnight accommodation use.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive,
Clearwater, FL 33767: phone: 727-443-2168; email: papamurphy@aol.com); Continental
Towers (675 South Gulfview Boulevard, #1002, 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 M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Mr. Wells reviewed the request. The 2.44 total acres (1.859 acres zoned Tourist District:
0.585 acres zoned Open Space/Recreation District) site is located on the west side of South
Gulfview Boulevard, approximately 500 feet northwest of Hamden Drive and directly south of
Clearwater beach. The site has approximately 235 feet of frontage on South Gulfview
Boulevard (east) and 296 feet of frontage on the Gulf of Mexico (west). This parcel is currently
developed with a 217-room/unit overnight accommodation use (Adam's Mark Clearwater Beach
Resort) in a building 155 feet in height. The hotel currently is closed due to damage sustained
during Hurricane Jeanne in September 2004. Attached dwellings (condominiums) exist
adjacently to the southeast. This area is a tourist-dominated area due to the site's proximity to
the public beach.
Community Development 2005-04-19
35
.
.
.
The proposal is to renovate the existing hotel and re-open under the Radisson flag.
While the damage is not sufficient to warrant demolition of the hotel, due to the value of the
necessary improvements Code threshold provisions require the parking and landscaping be
brought into compliance with current regulations. In order to comply with Code requirements,
. . . . .
the applicant has submitted this application. The proposal includes a request for Termination of
the Status of Nonconformity for the nonconforming density of 217 rooms/units and for height to
allow the existing 155-foot high building (where a maximum height of 150 feet is permitted
today). Based on the maximum allowable density of 40 rooms/units per acre for the RFH land
use category and the 1.859 acres zoned Tourist, the site could be developed today with only 74
overnight accommodation rooms/units. The applicant plans to renovate the existing building by
repairing and restoration of the hotel tower and ground floor spaces, renovation of the existing
main restaurant and office spaces, general repair and renovation of the exterior areas (including
the entry/drop-off area, porte cochere, landscaping, signage, pool decks and pool bars). Under
the Termination of the Status of Nonconformity provisions, there are four required
improvements: 1) Installation of perimeter buffers. Perimeter buffers are not required in the
Tourist District; 2) Improvement of off-street parking lots. Most parking spaces are within the
parking garage. The only parking spaces outside of the parking garage are on the north side at
the porte cochere; 3) Removal of nonconforming signs, outdoor lighting or other accessory
structures. The applicant is completely renovating all existing improvements, which will require
bringing signage into compliance with Code provisions. Pool bars on the west side are
requested at reduced setbacks; and 4) Use of Comprehensive Sign Program and
Comprehensive Landscape Programs to satisfy requirements. The applicant has submitted a
Comprehensive Sign Program to replace existing signage. A Comprehensive Landscape
Program was submitted and advertised, however, recalculation of the interior landscape areas
indicate compliance with Code provisions, therefore the Comprehensive Landscape Program is
unnecessary.
Retaining existing hotel rooms in this tourist-dominated area adjacent to Clearwater
beach is important to the vitality of Clearwater beach. This hotel was constructed in 1974 when
density and height regulations were different. The condominiums to the southeast, built in 1975,
also exceed current Code height (157 feet) regulations. Submission of this Level Two request
complies with the requirements of Section 6-109.A regarding the nonconforming structure
height. However, any approval of this request is based upon the existing structure, which
should contain a condition that any voluntary demolition of this existing building shall not vest
the existing height, but requires compliance of any future reconstruction to meet current Code
height requirements. Section 6-109.B permits the reconstruction of the nonconforming density
on this parcel, provided the reconstruction complies with all other requirements of the
Community Development Code. The existing building does not comply with the Beach by
Design requirement for building spacing of 100 feet for buildings that exceed 100 feet in height;
however, these buildings have existed in their present location for 30 years, prior to the adoption
of Beach by Design. The redevelopment of the parcel to allow reopening of this hotel is
otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards of the
Code. The existing and proposed development is consistent with the community character of
the tourist-based immediate vicinity.
The proposal includes a parking reduction from the required 217 parking spaces to 201
parking spaces. The applicant has submitted a parking study that analyzes the parking
demands for this hotel. The parking study indicates this 16-space deficit is justified by the use
Community Development 2005-04-19
36
.
.
.
of airport shuttles, limo, and taxi services for their guests, as well as public transportation (Jolly
Trolley) that stops in front of the hotel. The accessory restaurants are primarily patronized by
hotel guests and guests of nearby hotels and condominium owners that are within walking
distance or accessible by public transportation. There do also exist on-street parking spaces
available (most will be removed by the BeachWalk project). Termination of Status of
Nonconformity provisions require bringing the existing parking into Code compliance. Handicap
parking within the parking garage and at the porte cochere will be upgraded to current Code
provisions. A sidewalk connection on the north side for handicap access to a sidewalk on City
property is proposed. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion for this hotel, all City
approvals and easements necessary for the sidewalk connection for handicap accessibility must
be obtained. The southern two parking spaces on the west side of the porte cochere do not
meet Code provisions for required drive aisle width (backup area). The plans still indicate these
two spaces, however, their removal has been advertised as part of the parking reduction
request. Prior to the issuance of any permits, site and building plans must be revised to show
the removal of, and the striping out of, these two southern parking spaces as a "no parking"
area.
Beach by Design calls for the construction of 1 O-foot wide sidewalks along major roads
for pedestrian safety and convenience. The site plans indicate compliance with this
requirement. However, with the construction of BeachWalk improvements, and to ensure
consistency of sidewalk design (along with any landscape or street lighting improvements), the
applicant will need to work with the City toward meeting the City design specifications. Approval
of this request should be conditioned on compliance with these specifications and to allow for an
alternate construction schedule or the provision of payment in lieu of construction of the
sidewalk within the right-of-way.
The proposal includes the renovation of the pool deck on the west side of the building
and reconstruction of the Tiki bars. The CCCL cuts through a portion of the pool deck area.
Code provisions require the measurement of setbacks from this CCCL. The proposal includes a
reduction to the rear (west) setback from 20 feet to zero feet (to patio/pool decking and Tiki
bars) and to continue to allow patio/pool decking seaward (westward) of the CCCL. As these
structures have existed in this location for 30 years without any adverse effects, the setback.
reduction appears appropriate.
The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Sign Program (SGN2005-01 016) as part
of the request. Existing signage will be removed. A 36 square-foot, monument-style
freestanding sign, advertising the "Radisson" hotel, at a height of six feet is proposed between
the existing building and the sidewalk. Three attached signs are proposed. Two signs advertise
"Radisson," one 68.32 square-foot sign on the north side of the building and one 153.48 square-
foot sign on the top of the east side of the building. A third attached sign of five square-feet,
more of a directional sign, indicates the "parking garage." Proposed signage meets the
Comprehensive Sign Program requirements.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria
(Section 2-803.C) have been met.
Findinos of Fact: 1) The subject 2.44 total acres (1.859 acres zoned Tourist District:
0.585 acre zoned Open Space/Recreation District) is located within the Clearwater Pass District
Community Development 2005-04-19
37
.
.
.
of Beach by Design; 2) The current use of the site is for a 217 -room hotel (which is
nonconforming to current density maximums of 74 rooms), at a building height of 155 feet
(which is nonconforming to current maximum building heights of 150 feet) and with 201 parking
spaces (198 spaces within a parking garage and three spaces at the porte cochere on the north
side of the building, where 217 spaces are required under current Code regulations); 3) The site
is located adjacently south of Clearwater beach and the BeachWalk District of Beach by Design;
4) The hotel currently is closed due to damage sustained during Hurricane Jeanne in
September 2004; 5) The applicant is proposing to reopen the closed hotel under a new flag for
the same 217 rooms and 201 parking spaces; 6) The site is located in a tourist-dominated area
due to the site's proximity to Clearwater beach; 7) The hotel has operated at this location with
the same density and number of parking spaces for 30 years without major conflict and retaining
existing hotel rooms in this tourist-dominated area adjacent to Clearwater beach is important to
the vitality of Clearwater beach; 8) The proposed parking reduction is justified by the applicant,
as described in their Parking Study 9) While reductions to the rear (west) setback to patio/pool
decking and Tiki bars, which the patio/pool decking will also be seaward (westward) of the
Coastal Construction Control Line are requested, these reductions are consistent with existing
setbacks for the same structures that have existed on the west side of the hotel for 30 years;
10) The proposal is compatible with the surrounding development, and will assist in retaining the
community character of the immediate vicinity; and 11) There are no active code enforcement
cases for the parcel.
Conclusions of Law: 1) Staff concludes that the Termination of Status of Nonconformity
for density and building height complies with the criteria of Section 6-109; 2) Staff concludes
that the proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C; 3) Staff further concludes that the proposal is in
compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913 and the other standards of
the Code; 4) Staff concludes that the proposal complies with Beach by Design; 5) Staff
concludes that the proposed signage complies with the Comprehensive Sign Program
standards, under the provisions of Section 3-1807; and 6) Based on the above findings and
proposed conditions, Staff recommends approval of this application.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on March 3, 2005. The Planning Department recommends approval of: 1) Termination of Status
of Nonconformity for density to allow the continuation of an existing 217-room/unit hotel (where
74 rooms/units are permitted today) and for height to allow the existing 155-foot high building
(where a maximum height of 150 feet is permitted today); 2) Flexible Development application to
permit.a 217-room/unit overnight accommodation use with a reduction to the rear (west) setback
from 20 feet to zero feet (to patio/pool decking and Tiki bars) and to allow patio/pool decking
seaward (westward) of the Coastal Construction Control Line, an increase to building height
from 35 feet to 155 feet (to existing roof deck) and a reduction to required parking from 217 to
201 spaces (existing), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions
of Section 2-803.C; and 3) Comprehensive Sign Program application, under the provisions of
Section 3-1807 (SGN2005-01 016) for the site at 430 South Gulfview Boulevard, with the
following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the
Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density and building height per Section 6-109; 2) The
proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C; 3) The proposal is in compliance with other
standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; 4) The
proposal complies with Beach by Design; 5) Staff proposed signage complies with the
Community Development 2005-04-19
38
.
.
.
Comprehensive Sign Program standards, under the provisions of Section 3-1807; and 6) The
proposal is compatible with the surrounding development, and will assist in retaining the
community character of the immediate vicinity AND Conditions of Approval: 1) That any
voluntary demolition of this existing building shall not vest the existing height of 155 feet. Any
future reconstruction requires compliance with current Code height requirements; 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 the sidewalk within the South Gulfview Boulevard right-of-
way be designed and constructed for the site frontage in accordance with Beach Walk design
specifications. The developer and City may agree on an alternate construction schedule or the
provision of payment in lieu of construction; 4) That all City approvals and easements necessary
for the sidewalk connection for handicap accessibility to the sidewalk on City property to the
north be obtained prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion; 5) That prior to the
issuance of any permits, site and building plans be revised to show the removal of, and the
striping out of, the two southern parking spaces on the west side of the porte cochere as a "no
parking" area, acceptable to the Engineering Department; 6) That fencing within the visibility
triangles and waterfront visibility triangles be brought into compliance with Code provisions prior
to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion. Fence height increases above that otherwise
permitted and alternate fence materials shall only be allowed (1) in the waterfront visibility
triangle if a letter of "no objection" is submitted from the adjacent condominium association
board and (2) in the visibility triangle if acceptable to the Engineering Department; 7) That the
City, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion, approve the sidewalk cafe on the west
side; 8) That the monument-style freestanding sign not exceed six feet in height, meet a five-
foot setback from property lines and include the site address; 9) That all construction comply
with FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Authority) requirements; and 10) That all Fire
Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits.
Tim Johnson, representative, said without approval of this application, the hotel cannot
reopen.
Member Fritsch moved to approve Item F1, Cases: FLD2005-01 005/SGN2005-01 016
for 430 South Gulfview Boulevard with Bases for Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed,
based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
Community Development 2005-04-19
39
.
.
.
F2. Case: FLD2005-01 009 - 665 Bay Esplanade
. Owner: Robert M. Pennock II and Melodie A. Ferguson Revocable Living Trust
Agreement DTD.
Applicant: Robert M. Pennock.
Representative: Keith Zayac, P.E. (701 Enterprise Road East, Suite 404, Safety Harbor,
FL 34695; phone: 727-793-9888, fax: 727-793-9855; e-mail: keith@keithzavak.com).
Location: 0.259-acre located at the south side of Bay Esplande, approximately 600 feet
east of Poinsettia Avenue.
Atlas Page: 258A.
Zoning Districts: Tourist (T) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit five attached dwelling units with a reduction
to the minimum lot width from 100 feet to 51 feet; an increase in height from 35 feet to 59 feet to
top of roof deck, an additional 3.5 feet to the top of mansard roof (from roof deck) and an
additional 11.75 feet for stair/elevator tower (from roof deck) and architectural embellishment; a
reduction in the rear (south) setback from 20 feet to zero feet to pool deck, 3.5 feet to pool and
18 feet to building as a Comprehensivelnfill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of
Section 2-803.C.
Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (5 dwelling units).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (2544 Frisco Drive,
Clearwater, FL 33761; phone 727-725-3345; email diw@Qte.net); Clearwater Beach Association
(Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-443-2168; email:
papamurphv@aol.com); Clearwater Point 1 Beach House 16 (845 Bayway Blvd, Clearwater, FL
33767; phone: 727-535-2424); Clearwater Point 3 Marina House 17 (868 Bayway Blvd #212,
Clearwater, FL 33767); Clearwater Point 4 Island House 1 (895 S Gulfview Blvd, Clearwater, FL
33767; phone: 727-530-4517); Clearwater Point 7 Inc, Yacht House (851 Bayway Blvd,
Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-441-8212; e-mail: cpoint7@knoloQv.net); Clearwater Point 8
Shipmaster, Sail (800 S. Gulfview Blvd, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-442-0664; e-mail:
clwpt8@tampabav.rr.com); Clearwater Point 5 Admiral House 19 (825 S Gulfview Blvd #104,
Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-447-0290).
Mark T. Parry, Consulting Planner
Planning Manager Neil Thompson reviewed the request. The 0.273-acre site is located
on the south side of Bay Esplanade, approximately 320 feet east of Mandalay Avenue. The site
has 51 feet of frontage on Bay Esplanade. The property is located along a turn on Bay
Esplanade and is therefore a pie shaped lot, with a rear lot line of 140 feet along an existing
seawall.
The parcel is zoned Tourist (T) District and is currently developed with four (4) attached
dwelling units. The site is located 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 (duplexes and triplexes) and a compound of a single family dwelling and two
duplexes to the east. Structures in the area vary in height between one and three stories.
Within this section of Mandalay Avenue are two approved condominium developments, La Risa
I, located at 650 Bay Esplanade, is 69.5 feet in height and La Risa II, located at 669 Bay
Esplanade, is 52 feet in height.
The proposed building will have five living floors (59 feet from BFE [base flood elevation]
to roof deck), with one unit per floor. All five living floors will include 3,700 square-feet of livable
space and include two bedrooms and a master suite, three-and-a-half bathrooms, a living room,
Community Development 2005-04-19
40
.
.
.
a kitchen with a pantry and breakfast bar, a dining area, a media room, an office, and a lobby
area for access to and from an elevator. The second floor unit will have a balcony that is slightly
large than the typical balcony to cover the cabanas and pool equipment room. Elevators in the
northwest corner of the building will provide access to the units. Two stairwells are located on
the northwest and east side of the building.
. Sidewalks will be constructed within the rights-.of-way of Bay Esplanade for pedestrian . .
safety, where no sidewalks presently exist. Amenities for the proposal include a swimming pool
and cabanas to the south of the building. Parking 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
District" 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),
Tourist (T) and High Density Residential (HDR) districts. The immediate vicinity is composed of
attached dwellings, small motels and condominiums. Building styles generally resemble
architecture from the 1950s and appear to have been progressively expanded. The proposed
height (58 feet 10 inches) 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 is also inconsistent the majority of existing buildings in the area.
Staff has found instances within the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design where
developments approved by the Community Development Board, with Staff support, have and
are dramatically changing the character of the area. These changes have generally not been
consistent with the vision and 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,
58 feet 10 inches, where low- to mid-rise buildings are preferred and type of use (condominium
where single-family or townhomes are required).
As such, the proposal does not meet the following comprehensive infill redevelopment
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 that the requested reduction in rear setback and minimum lot width is
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 35 feet to 58 feet 10
inches is necessary for the development of the site; 2) The uses within the comprehensive infill
redevelopment project are compatible with adjacent lands uses. The proposed overall building
height of 58 feet 10 inches is taller than most surrounding buildings and is inconsistent with the
requirements of the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design. The proposed condominium use
is not compatible with adjacent land uses; 3) The development of the parcel proposed for
development as a comprehensive infill redevelopment 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
Community Development 2005-04-19
41
.
.
.
by Design and will result in a building out of scale with surrounding buildings. The design of the
proposed comprehensive infill redevelopment 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. While other tall projects have been
approved in the area, staff feels the design of the building is out of scale with surrounding
buildings most of which are one to three stories in height, well below the proposed overall height
of 58 feet 10 inches; and 4) 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. While the
reductions in setback and lot width are warranted given the pie 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 58 feet 10
inches provides a benefit to the community character and the immediate vicinity of the property.
Additionally, the proposal does not meet the following General Applicability (3-913.1 & 5)
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
58 feet 10 inches. The proposed height is inconsistent with the majority 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 and the preferred type of development
in this area is single family dwellings and town home units
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on March 3, 2005. The Planning Department recommends denial of the Flexible Development
application to permit five attached dwelling units with a reduction to the minimum lot width from
100 feet to 51 feet; an increase in height from 35 feet to 59 feet to top of roof deck, an additional
3.5 feet to the top of mansard roof (from roof deck) and an additional 11.75 feet for stair/elevator
tower (from roof deck) and architectural embellishment; a reduction in the rear (south) setback
from 20 feet to zero feet to pool deck, 3.5 feet to pool and 18 feet to building as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, wider the provisions of Section 2-803.C. based
upon the following recommended findings of fact and recommended conclusions of law:
Recommended FindinQs of Fact: 1) Subject property 0.259 acres property is Tourist (T)
District/Resort Facilities High (RFH) Future Land Use Plan classification; 2) Currently the site
developed with four attached dwelling units; 3) Adjacent uses zoned Tourist District developed
with single- and multi-family dwellings generally between one and three stories in height,
surrounding area a mixture of attached dwellings and overnight accommodations; 4) The site is
located within the special area redevelopment plan, Beach by Design, as part of the "Old Florida
District"; 5) Beach by Design specifies a preferred form of development as low- to mid-rise new
single-family dwellings and townhomes, with mid-rise interpreted as maximum of 50 feet based
on the height standards in the Tourist (T) District; 6) The proposed structure height is 58 feet 10
inches to roof deck; 71 feet overall from Base Flood, Elevation (BFE) including height gained by
the elevator shafts and architectural embellishments; 7) There are no pending Code
Enforcement issues with these sites; 8) Staff finds the proposal does not meet the following
General Applicability criteria: a) 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 58 feet 10 inches. The proposed height is inconsistent with the majority of
Community Development 2005-04-19 .
42
.
.
.
the buildings in the neighborhood and is inconsistent with the "Old Florida" District" of Beach by
Design and b) 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 and the preferred type of
development in this area is single family dwellings and townhome units; and 9) Staff finds the
proposal does not meet the following Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment criteria: a) The
development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is otherwise
economically impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards. Staff
agrees that the requested reduction in rear setback and minimum lot width is 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 58 feet 10 inches is
necessary for the development of the site; b) The uses within the comprehensive infill
redevelopment project are compatible with adjacent lands uses. The proposed overall building
height of 58 feet 10 inches is taller than most surrounding buildings and is inconsistent with the
standards of the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design. The proposed condominium use is
not compatible with the surrounding area; c) The development of the parcel proposed for
development as a comprehensive infill redevelopment 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; d) The design of
the proposed comprehensive infill redevelopment 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 one to three stories in height, well below the
proposed overall height of 58 feet 10 inches; and e) 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. While the reductions in setback and lot width are warranted given the pie 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
58 feet 10 inches provides a benefit to the community character and the immediate vicinity of
the property.
Recommended Conclusions of Law: 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 Comprehensive Infill Project per Section 2-803.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 5; and 4) The development is not compatible with
the surrounding area and will not enhance other redevelopment efforts.
Ed Armstrong, representative, presented the resume of Ethel Hammer and requested
she be granted expert witness status.
Member Johnson moved to grant expert witness status to Ethel Hammer. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Ethel Hammer spoke in support of the project.
Community Development 2005-04-19
43
.
.
.
Seven people spoke in support of the project.
Mr. Armstrong said the City had approved taller projects nearby and charged that staff
has been inconsistent with their interpretation of Code. He said the project complies with
criteria and compatible surrounding properties. Should the CDB approve the application, he
presented a proposed list of Conditions of Approval: 1) That this approval is for site plans and
related materials that will be provided to the CDB for their review and consideration on April 19,
2005; 2) Future development of the parcel shall occur in a manner materially and substantially
in conformance with the site plan and related materials that will be provided to the CDB for their
review and consideration on April 19, 2005. Non material 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 CDB,
and be approved by Staff; 4) That the Certificate of Occupancy be issued within one year of the
issuance of building permit; 5) That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the
issuance of any permits; 6) That all Traffic Department requirements be met prior to the
issuance of any permits; 7) That all utility equipment, including but not limited to wireless
community 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; 8) That all proposed utilities be placed underground; 9) That all applicable
requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks; and 10)
That all Parks & Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits.
In response to a question, Mr. Thompson said he was comfortable with the proposed
conditions, which are consistent with what staff would have proposed. Discussion ensued with
support expressed for the proposed height as necessary for units to feature 9- to 11-foot
ceilings, for the 10-foot setbacks which will provide an effective view corridor, for the proposed
landscaping, and for parking exceeding Code.
Member Fritsch moved to approve Item F3, Case: FLD2005-01 009 for 665 Bay
Esplanade with Conditions of Approval as provided by the applicant, based on Findings of Fact
and Conclusions of Law, except for staffs interpretation of Sections 2-801 and 2-804.F,
Compliance with Standards and Criteria where it is found that the lot width, front and rear
setbacks and height are consistent, of Section 2-803.C, compliance with the Comprehensive
Infill Project Flexibility Criteria where it is found that following items are true: 1) The
development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is otherwise impractical
without deviations from the use, intensity and development standards; 2) The uses or mix of
uses within the comprehensive infill redevelopment project are compatible with adjacent land
uses; 3) The development of the parcel proposed for development as a comprehensive infill
redevelopment project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development; 4) The design of the proposed comprehensive infill redevelopment 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 ClearNater as a whole; and 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, AND of Section 3-913, Compliance with General Applicability
Standards, where it is found that following items are true: 1) Development of the land will be in
harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties and 2)
Development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Community Development 2005-04-19
44
.
.
.
3. Case: FLD2005-01 008 - 830 Bayway Boulevard
Owner/Applicant: Clearwater Yacht Club, Incorporated.
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: 1.157 acres located on the north side of Bayway Boulevard, approximately 50
feet east of Gulf Boulevard.
Atlas Page: 285B.
Zoning Districts: Tourist (T) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit a three story, 18,500 square foot Yacht Club
with offices, exercise room, restaurant and parking garage structure, with reductions to the front
(south) setback from 15 feet to zero feet to pavement and four feet to building structure; to
permit a building within the sight visibility triangles along Bayway Boulevard, a reduction of rear
(north) setback from 20 feet to zero feet to paver deck and 18 feet to building and an increase in
building height from 25 feet to 46.5 feet to mean roof height, as a Comprehensive Infill Project,
under the provisions of Section 2-803.C.
Proposed Use: Marina.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net);
Clearwater Point 1 Beach House 16 (845 Bayway Blvd, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-535-
2424); Clearwater Point 3 Marina House 17 (868 Bayway Blvd #212, Clearwater, FL 33767);
Clearwater Point 8 Shipmaster, Sail (800 S. Gulfview Blvd, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-
. 442-0664; e-mail: c1wpt8@tampabav.rr.com); Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100
Devon Drive, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-443-2168; email: papamurph..Y@aol.com); _
Clearwater Point 4 Island House 1 (895 S. Gulfview Blvd, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-
530-4517); Clearwater Point 5 Admiral House 19 (825 SGulfview Blvd #104, Clearwater, FL
33767; phone: 727-447-0290); Clearwater Point 7 Inc, Yacht House (851 Bayway Blvd,
Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-441-8212; e-mail: cpoint7@knoloqv.net).
Mark 1. Parry, Consulting Planner
Member Milam declared a conflict of interest.
Mr. Thompson reviewed the request. The 1.16-acre site is located on the north side of
Bayway Boulevard, approximately 50 feet east of Gulf Boulevard. The site currently is occupied
by the Clearwater Yacht Club and contains a two-story, 8,500 square-foot building. The
Clearwater Yacht Club has occupied this site since 1976. The site is accessed via two curb
cuts along Bayway Boulevard, with one two-way driveway located at the east end of the site and
one at the west end. The site contains three docks with approximately 30 slips which will
remain unchanged with this proposal. It is located along a highly developed area within
Clearwater beach and has frontage along Clearwater Harbor. The site is located within the
Clearwater Pass District of Beach By Design.
The proposal includes demolishing the existing two-story yacht club facility and replacing
it with a 18,556 square-foot, three-story building, 46 feet in height. The first floor of the building
will be used for 48 parking spaces, lobby, exercise room, men's and women's showers, storage,
dock master office and a tiki bar accessible from the outdoor swimming pool on the west side of
the site. The second floor will contain 51 parking spaces and primarily meeting and office
space. The third floor will contain the banquet and dining rooms, including a bar and kitchen.
Community Development 2005-04-19
45
.
The building will be located approximately four feet from the front (south) property line along
Bayway Boulevard, 10 feet from the side (east) property line, 69 feet from the side (west)
property line and 18 feet from the rear (north) property line.
A total of 99 parking spaces will be provided where 93 are required. The existing
driveways along Bayway Boulevard will continue to serve the site.
The proposal includes the installation of landscaping around the perimeter of the site
consistent with the intent of the Code including a variety of palm trees, ixora, jasmine, ilex and
lilies.
The main entrance to the building will be along Bayway Boulevard. The building will
incorporate a modern style of architecture utilizing split-faced masonry block, cementitious
siding board, stucco, and a standing seam metal roof. The primary colors used for the building
will be white (trim) light to medium grey (body) and blue (roof). The proposed number of parking
spaces will adequately serve the site. The design of the parking garage portion of the building
does not meet Section 7 of Beach by Design, which requires that when a parking garage abuts
a public road or other public place, it will be designed such that the function of the building is not
readily apparent except at points of ingress and egress. The design of the portion of the
building housing the parking garage on the east side of the site does not adequately conceal
that use and clearly appears to be a parking garage. Staff cannot recommend approval of this
application as submitted. Staff recommends that revisions be made to the design of the portion
of the building accommodating the parking garage. These changes could include providing a
solid wall along the front (south) fa<;ade of the parking garage which would mimic the remainder
of the building including architectural details such as faux windows or louvers.
. The reductions to the front (south) and rear (north) setbacks are consistent with other
developments in the area and provide for the reasonable use of the property. The reduction to
zero feet along the rear (south) property line will be to a paver deck only.
. . . .
The elimination of the sight visibility triangles on the south side of the site will provide
adequate space for a functional parking garage. An adequate distance will be provided
between the edge of the building and the sidewalk and Bayway Boulevard for visibility. The
Traffic Engineer will work with the projects engineer to ensure that the walls within the sight
visibility triangle are designed such that they minimize visibility obstruction.
An increase in building height from 25 feet to 46.5 feet to mean roof height will provide
for an aesthetically pleasing building.
Solid waste service will be provided via trash containers staged within the building. Staff
will move them out on collection days for pick up by the Solid Waste Department. All
stormwater requireme'nts have been met with this proposal with the site.
A sign package has not been submitted with this application, 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.
.
Community Development 2005-04-1,9
46
.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on December 30, 2004.
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 however the proposal is not in compliance with the design
guidelines set forth within Beach by Design.
.
The Planning Department recommends denial of the Flexible Development application to
permit a three story, 18,500 square-foot Yacht Club with offices, exercise room, restaurant and
parking garage structure, with reductions to the front (south) setback from 15 feet to zero feet to
pavement and four feet to building structure; to permit a building within the sight visibility
triangles along Bayway Boulevard, a reduction of rear (north) setback from 20 feet to zero feet
to paver deck arid 18 feet to building and an increase in building height from 25 feet to 46.5 feet
to mean roof height, as a Comprehensive Infill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C.
with the following Recommended Findings of Fact and Recommended Conclusions of Law:
Recommended FindinQs of Fact: 1) Subject property is 50,417 square-feet (1.16 acres), 284
feet wide, Tourist (T) District; 2) Applicant seeks relief from front and rear setbacks as a
Comprehensive Infill Development Project under Code provisions of Section 2-803.C; and 3)
The parking garage portion of the proposed, three-story building design and architectural style is
not consistent with the Beach by Design Design Guideline requirement that when a parking
garage abuts a public road or other public place, it will be designed such that the function of the
building is not readily apparent except at points of ingress and egress AND Recommended
Conclusions of Law: 1) Staff finds the proposal compliant with the Flexible Development criteria
as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C. 1 through 8; 2) Staff
finds the proposal to be not in compliant with the Flexible Development criterion as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C.9; 3) Staff further finds the
proposal compliant with the standards of the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913. 1
through 6; therefore staff recommends Board denial of FLD2005-01 008 based on the above
Recommended Findings of Fact.
In response to a question, Mr. Thompson said staff approached the architect several
times regarding problems with the design of the parking garage. The applicant has shown no
interest in making changes.
Jeff Mendenhall, project architect, said the shape of the site dictates the location of the
parking garage, which must be next to the main building, rather than being part of the main
building. He said the need to construct the project in phases also necessitates the parking
garage's location and design. He said the design is minimalist and includes a panel to screen
cars. He said other designs were found to be awkward and poorly proportioned. He said the
proposed design is in the spirit of what Beach by Design seeks to accomplish.
Three people spoke in support of the project.
Dorian Williams, representative for the applicant, said no neighbors oppose the project.
It was suggested the artist's rendition features automobiles and does not reflect the actual
height of SUVs. Concerns were expressed that the project does not conceal vehicles in the
parking garage or create pedestrian interest, as required by Beach by Design, and requires
additional work.
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
47
.
Member Coates moved to continue Item F3, Case: FLD2005-01008 for 830 Bayway
Boulevard to May 17, 2005. The motion was duly seconded. Members Johnson, Fritsch,
Coates, Tallman, Acting Member Dennehy, and Chair Gildersleeve voted "Aye." Member Milam
abstained. Motion carried.
.
4. Case: FLD2005-01 012 - 200 and 201 Skiff Point
Owner/Applicant: Skiff Point of Clearwater, LLC.
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: 2 parcels of land totaling 0.500-acre located at the western terminus of of Skiff
Point, approximately 300 west of Labrador Way.
Atlas Page: 267B.
Zoning Districts: Island Estates Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (IENCOD)
& Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit 15 attached dwelling units with reductions to
the front (east) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet to building and from 25 feet to .three feet to
pavement; a reduction to the side (north and south) setbacks from 10 feet to 6.5 feet to building
and five feet to parking; a reduction to the rear (south) setback from 15 feet to zero feet to pool
deck, five feet to pool and 7.5 feet to parking; and an increase in height from 30 feet to 49 feet
to roof deck and additional four feet for parapet (from roof deck to top of parapet) and an
additional 16 feet for elevator overrun (from roof deck), as a Residentiallnfill Project, in the
Island Estates Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (IENCOD)/Medium High Density
Residential (MHDR) District under the provisions of Sections 2-404.F and 2-1602. C and H.
Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (15 dwelling units).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@Qte.net); Dolphin
Cove Condo Association (255 Dolphin Point, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-442-7880; e-
mail: dlphincove1@netzero.com).
Mark T. Parry, Consulting Planner
The pie-shaped site is 0.50 acre, located at the western terminus of Skiff Point,
approximately 300 west of Labrador Way. It is located within a highly developed area of Island
Estates and has frontage along Clearwater Harbor.
The site is currently developed with two residential buildings; a two-story building located
on the north side of the site and a one-story building located on the south side of the site. The
buildings contain a total of 15 dwellings. Vehicle access to the site is from one, undefined,
existing driveway along most of the front property line (Skiff point), where parking spaces "back
out" into the right-of-way. The site also contains two existing docks approximately 35 feet in
length 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.
Properties along Skiff Point have been developed with attached dwellings
(condominiums both owner occupied and rented).
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
48
.
The proposal includes constructing a 15-unit, five-story (four stories over ground level
parking) residential condominium building. A total of 15 dwelling units are permitted for the
subject property, based on the maximum of 30 units per acre. The first level will be utilized for
parking. The next three levels will contain four units on each floor, while the top floor (fifth level)
will have three units. The proposal includes 24 parking spaces under the building where 23
parking spaces are required (1.5 spaces per unit).
The request is being processed as a Residentiallnfill Project to permit attached
dwellings within the Medium High Density Residential District due to setback reductions on each
side of the site due to the irregular shape of the property. The proposed setbacks are
comparable to other developments in the area. The building will be located 6.5 feet from the
side property lines, 15 feet from the front property line and 18 feet from the rear property line.
.
The proposal includes increases to building height from 30 feet to 49 feet (to roof deck)
with an additional four feet (from roof deck for perimeter parapets) and an additional 16 feet
(from roof deck) for an elevator shaft. The proposed building of four stories over ground level
parking is consistent with other developments in the area. Code provisions allow parapet walls
to extend a maximum of 30 inches above the roof deck. The applicant is requesting to increase
the parapet to a total of four feet from the roof deck. This four-foot high parapet is located on all
facades of the building, will screen from view rooftop air condensing units, and will be in
proportion with the building fac;ade. The proposal also. includes architectural embellishments to
provide visual interest and screening for the stairwells (on the northeast and southeast corners
of the building) and elevator shaft (centrally located along the east fac;ade). The waterside side
of the roof will be enclosed for safety and Building Code purposes with a railing, which will not
block water views from residents and guests while on the roof deck. Code provisions allow, and
the proposal includes, elevator towers, stair towers and mechanical equipment rooms to be a
maximum of 16 feet above the roof deck. The proposed rooftop pavilion will, therefore, be lower
than the elevator and stairwell towers proposed on the front side of the building.
The Mediterranean-style of architecture of the building will include soft yellow stucco for
the main building color, accented by the elevator and trash towers in darker shades. The
parapet walls will contain barrel tile roofing. Banding, decorative tile and other architectural
features will provide additional aesthetic interest. The windows, door frames and railings will be
white in color.
The landscape plan utilizes colorful groundcovers (dwarf jasmine and muhley grass),
shrubs (hibiscus, variegated arboricola, Indian hawthorne and sea grape) and trees (Mexican
Fan Palm, cabbage palm and magnolia).
The applicant is not proposing any signs with this development. Any future attached
signs should be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building. Dumpsters
will be placed within a staging area adjacent to the building and driveway on pickup days. All
required Parks and Recreation fees will be required to be paid prior to the issuance of any
building permits. On-site utility facilities (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.
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
49
.
.
.
Recommended FindinQs of Fact: 1) Subject property is 21,820 square-feet (0.50 acre),
approximately 160 feet wide, Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District; 2) Parcel is
further subject to the requirements of Section 2-1602. C and H (Island Estates Neighborhood
Conservation Overlay District (IENCOD); 3) Applicant seeks relief from minimum front, rear and
side setbacks as a Residentiallnfill Project under Code provisions of Section 2-404.F; 4) The
proposed, five-story building design and architectural style is residential in character with regard
to size and scale; and 5) Proposed landscaping mitigates setback reductions, buffering adjacent
uses, adhering to neighborhood character.
Recommended Conclusions of Law: 1) Staff finds the proposal compliant with the
Flexible Development criteria as a Residentiallnfill Project per Section 2-44.F. 1 through 7; 2)
Staff further finds the proposal compliant with the standards of the General Applicability Criteria
per Section 3-913. 1 through 6; therefore 3) Staff recommends Board approval of-FLD2005-
01012 based on the above-recommended findings of fact and conditions proposed.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on March 3, 2005. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development request to permit 15 attached dwelling units with reductions to the front (east)
setback from 25 feet to 15 feet to building and from 25 feet to three feet to pavement; a
reduction to the side (north and south) setbacks from 10 feet to 6.5 feet to building and five feet
to parking; a reduction to the rear (south) setback from 15 feet to zero feet to pool deck, five feet
to pool and 7.5 feet to parking; and an increase in height from 30 feet to 49 feet to roof deck and
additional four feet for parapet (from roof deck to top of parapet) and an additional 16 feet for
elevator overrun (from roof deck), as a Residentiallnfill Project, in the Island Estates
Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (IENCOD)/Medium High Density Residential
(MHDR) District under the provisions of Sections 2-404.F and 2-1602. C and H, for the site at
200 and 201 Skiff Point, based on the following recommended findings of fact, recommended
conclusions of law and with Conditions of Approval: 1) That the final design and color of the .
building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to, or as modified by, the COB;
2) That 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 any future attached sign meet all the requirements of Code and be
designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building; 4) That all applicable
requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall setbacks; 5) That a
condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 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 a right-of-way permit be obtained from
the City prior to open cutting the roadway within the Skiff Point right-of-way for a water
connection prior to the issuance of a building permit. Contact Don Melone (727.562.4798) for
permit information; 8) That all street restoration shall be in accordance with Engineering
Standard Detail #104. Revise Sheet C6.1 using City details prior to the issuance of any permits;
9) That revised plans be submitted to and approved by Staff prior to the issuance of any permits
which indicates that ductile iron pipe be installed between any tap and water meter and tap and
backflow preventor device and at least one joint of ductile iron pipe be installed on the service side
Community Development 2005-04-19
50
.
.
.
of any backflow preventor device; 10) That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the
issuance of any permits; and 11) That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the
issuance of any permits.
Gary Schaaf requested party status on behalf of the Starboard Tower and Clipper Cove
condominium associations at 400 Island Way.
Member Coates moved to grant party status to Gary Schaaf. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
Tim Frary requested party status on behalf of the condominium association at 400 Island
Way.
Member Coates moved to grant party status to Tim Frary. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
Don McCreary requested party status on behalf of the Island Estates Civic Association.
Member Johnson moved to grant party status to Don McCreary. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
Nick Spillane requested party status.
Member Coates moved to grant party status to Nick Spillane. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
Mr. Thompson reviewed the request and recommended conditions.
Doreen Williams, representative for the applicant, said the applicant had just learned that
the item was pulled from the Consent Agenda.
Robert Resch III, representative for the applicant, reviewed the current conditions and .
the request. He expressed concern regarding condition 6 related to overhead power lines. The
owner is interested in complying with Code and plans to place the utilities underground.
Gary Schaaf, Tim Frary, Don McCreary, and Nick Spillane spoke in opposition to the
project.
Troy Perdue, representative for the applicant, noted Clipper Cove and other
condominium towers are taller than the proposal. It was noted those towers are not waterfront.
Three people spoke in opposition to the project.
Ms. Clayton said the project is consistent with City density limits of 30 units per acre.
She reported only the single-family residence district had adopted various restrictions under the
Island Estates NCOD (Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District). The only restrictions
adopted in the multi-family district address parking, landscaping, and fence requirements. The
Fire Department has reviewed and approved the application.
Community Development 2005-04-19
51
.
.
.
In response to concerns, Mr. Perdue said the subject neighborhood needs
redevelopment. He said the project is consistent with NCOD restrictions and City Code. Ms.
Williams estimated the two parcels currently feature not less than 8 duplex and triplex units.
Discussion ensued with concerns expressed that the project does not reflect the spirit of
the NCOD as the development is too large for a too small/ot and that the project would
overwhelm the end of the street and a comment that the project is consistent with Code and
should be approved.
Mr. Perdue requested a continuance as the item originally was listed on the Consent
Agenda, so that he could discuss the project with neighbors.
Acting Member Dennehy moved to continue Item F4, Case: FLD2005-01 012 for 200 and
201 Skiff Point to May 17, 2005. The motion was duly seconded. Members Milam, Fritsch,
Coates, and Chair Gildersleeve voted "Aye." Members Johnson and Tallman and Acting
Member Dennehy, voted "Nay." Motion carried.
The Community Development Board recessed from 5:49 to 5:58 p.m.
Community Development 2005-04-19
52
.
.
.
5. Case: FLD2005-01 007 - 15 - 27 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street
Owner/Applicant: Panorama on Clearwater Beach, LLC.
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: 0.498 acre located between Avalon Street and Kendall Street, approximately
100 feet west of Mandalay Avenue.
Atlas Page: 258A.
Zoning Districts: Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District and Tourist (T)
District.
Request: (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (15 overnight accommodation
units, to be converted to 11 dwelling units, plus eight existing dwelling units), under the
provisions of Section 6-109; (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a total of 15 attached
dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District and Tourist (T) District with a
reduction in the T District from 10,000 square-feet to 4,350 square-feet, a reduction to lot width
in the T District from 100 feet to 50 feet, reductions to the front (north along Avalon Street -
MHDR District) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to
trash staging area), a reduction to the front (south along Kendall Street - T District) from 15 feet
to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the side (west - MHDR District) from 10 feet to seven feet
(to building), a reduction to the side (west - T District) from 10 feet to three feet (to building and
pavement), a reduction to the rear (south - MHDR District) from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building),
an increase to building height in the MHDR District from 30 feet and in the T District from 35 feet
to 52.67 feet (to roof deck) with perimeter parapets of 3.67 feet (from roof deck), as a
Residentiallnfill Project in the MHDR District and as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project in the T District, under the provisions of Sections 2-404.F and 2-803.C; and (3)
Reduction to the side (west) landscape buffer in the MHDR District from 10 feet to seven feet (to
building), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (15 dwelling units).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive,
Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-443-2168; email: papamurphv@aol.com); Coral Resort
Condominium (483 East Shore Drive, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-446-3711; email:
coraI483@aol.com); 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 request. The 0.498 acre is located between Avalon Street and
Kendall Street, approximately 100 feet west of Mandalay Avenue. The site has 200 feet of
frontage on Avalon Street (north) and 50 feet of frontage on Kendall Street (south). The
proposed site is composed of seven parcels.
On November 16, 2004, the COB denied a similar request for 13 attached dwellings on
0.299 acre, composed of the three western parcels (Cases FLD2004-08059fTDR2004-08008
for property at 15 - 17 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street). This prior request included
reductions to lot area and lot width in the MHDR and T Districts, similar reductions to setback
requirements (with the west side setback requested at zero feet to building) and a building
height of 69.5 feet (to roof deck). The applicant has since purchased four small lots, with an
additional 1 00 feet of frontage on Avalon Street, in order to respond to design issues outlined in
this prior application. .
Community Development 2005-04-19
53
.
.
.
The parcel at 15 Avalon Street is zoned Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)
District and currently is developed with a nonconforming, five-unit overnight accommodation
use. The parcel at 17 Avalon Street is zoned MHDR District and is currently developed with one
detached dwelling. The parcels at 21 - 27 Avalon Street are zoned MHDR District and are
currently developed with seven attached dwellings, which are nonconforming to density. The
parcel at 16 Kendall Street is zoned Tourist (T) District and is currently developed with a
nonconforming, 1 O-unit overnight accommodation use. All existing improvements are planned
to be demolished. While there is some existing on-site parking, there is existing parking that
straddles the front property line along Avalon Street (partially on-site and partially within the
right-of-way). There are City metered parking lots to the west and north (across Avalon Street)
of the subject property, as well as existing overnight accommodation uses.
The Palm Pavilion restaurant and overnight accommodation use is to the south across
Kendall Street. Existing development to the east of the subject property includes retail and a
restaurant along Mandalay Avenue, overnight accommodation uses and a detached dwelling.
The proposal includes a request for Termination of Status of Nonconformity for the
nonconforming density on the overall site. Based on current Land Use Category density
limitations of 30 dwelling units per acre for residential uses, the overall subject site may be
redeveloped with a maximum of 14 dwelling units. The two overnight accommodation uses at
15 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street currently total 15 overnight units/rooms. The applicant
is requesting to terminate the nonconforming density for these two parcels in order to convert
the 15 overnight units/rooms to 11 dwelling units, based on the 40:30 conversion factor. In
addition, the seven dwellings on 21 - 27 Avalon Street calculate to an existing density of 35.175
dwelling units per acre. The applicant also requests to terminate the nonconforming density for
these four parcels. Under the Termination of Status of Nonconformity calculations, when all .
conversions are factored in and all dwelling units are totaled, including the one dwelling unit at
17 Avalon Street, 19 units could be placed on this site. The request is for only 15 dwelling units.
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). On the northern portion of the property, zoned
MHDR District, the applicant is providing the required 1 O-foot wide landscape buffers along
Avalon Street (with the exception of the dumpster staging area) and along the east and south
sides of the property. The applicant is requesting to reduce the landscape buffer along the west
side of the property from 10 feet to seven feet, which is adjacent to a City parking lot; 2)
Improvement of off-street parking lots. The applicant is removing all existing improvements and
is providing parking that meets Code provisions in the parking garage; 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. The Comprehensive Sign Program is not available under the Code to residential
properties. The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Landscape Program to satisfy the
requested reduction to the 10-foot landscape buffer requirement along the west side of the
property.
The proposal is to construct 15 dwelling units on the subject property, where under the .
Termination of Status of Nonconformity a total of 19 dwelling units could be requested. Based
on current Land Use Category density limitations of 30 dwelling units per acre for residential
uses, the overall subject site may be developed with a maximum of 14 dwelling units. In light of
Community Development 2005-04-19
54
.
.
.
the fact that the applicant is seeking to construct only one dwelling unit above that which is
permitted under the Land Use Category density limitations and the 19 dwelling units potential
under the Termination calculations, Staff supports the proposed 15 dwelling units. Additionally,
this support is based on the provisions of Section 6-1 09.B that require the terminated density to
be reconstructed on the same site. This provision does not allow for the future transfer of the
remaining four dwelling units off-site to another site on the beach through the TDR provisions.
Any approval of this request should include a condition regarding this restriction. It is noted that
Staff's support of this means of calculating appropriate density for this project was based on a
preference over the use of a TDR of one dwelling unit to this site (as requested in the prior
request), where the TDR provisions allow for increased building height under certain
circumstances.
Reductions to lot area and lot width for attached dwellings are part of this proposal in the
T District from 10,000 square-feet to 4,350 square-feet (lot area) and from 100 feet to 50 feet
(lot width). While these reductions have been advertised, and the reduction to lot area amounts
to a 56.5% reduction in the T District, when viewed in light of the overall property the
development concern is diminished. However, these reductions should be reviewed in light of
setback reductions requested.
The request is being processed as a Residentiallnfill Project in the MHDR District and
as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project in the T District due to the height increase
and setback reductions being requested to the building and dumpster staging area. The
proposal includes reductions to the front (north along Avalon Street - MHDR District) setback
from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to dumpster staging pad), a
reduction to the side (west - MHDR District) froni 10 feet to seven feet (to building), a reduction
to the rear (south - MHDR District) from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the front
(south along Kendall Street - T District) from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building) and a reduction to
the side (west - T District) from 10 feet to three feet (to building). In regard to the front setback
reduction related to the trash staging area, the building will have refuse collection rooms 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 coming on-site.
Staff acknowledges that the reductions to the front setbacks from Avalon and Kendall
Streets are similar to those reductions approved for the projects at 14 Somerset Street
(FLD2002-09031, approved by the CDB on November 19, 2002) and 15 - 17 Somerset Street
and 16 Cambria Street (FLD2004-01 002fTDR2004-01 006, approved by the CDB on June 15,
2004). The lot depth of 87 feet restricts site design, especially compliance with front and rear
setback requirements. The prior request for the western portion of the subject property
(FLD2004-08059fTDR2004-08008, denied by the CDB on November 16, 2004) requested a
zero side setback on the west side of the property. With this request, the applicant has
requested a seven-foot setback (to building) within the MHDR District and a three-foot setback
(to building) in the T District, which is greater than the zero setback previously requested, but
still less than the required 10-foot setback. While the abutting property to the west is a City
parking lot, it should not be discounted as not being affected. The narrowness of this area on
the west side of the proposed building affects the type and amount of landscaping that can be
placed within this area.
Community Development 2005-04-19
55
.
The lot width reduction in the T District can be viewed as a contributing factor to the
requested setback reductions. It is noted that the proposal complies with the required 10-foot
side setback on the east side of the southern portion of the property zoned T District. It is
further noted that the project at 12 Idlewild Street was "conceptually" approved last month by the
CDB (this case is on this same April 19, 2005, CDB agenda for inclusion of conditions of
approval) with a side (north) setback of 5.9 feet (to building). Building Code provisions also
restrict the amount of openings in the exterior wall based on how close the building is to the lot
line. At between a three- to 10-foot setback, only 10% openings are allowed and 20% above a
10-foot setback. The applicant has indicated on the building elevations how the proposal meets
these Building Code restrictions.
.
Concurrent with the front setback reductions, this proposal includes reductions to the
front landscape buffer along Avalon Street in the MHDR District from 10 feet to zero feet (to
dumpster staging pad) and to the side (west) landscape buffer in the MHDR District from 10 feet
to seven feet (to building). As with the front setback reduction requested, the location of the
trash staging area within the front landscape buffer area is necessary to eliminate the necessity
of the trash truck coming on-site. Site drainage has been designed to be located within a vault
under the building, allowing the proposed setback areas to be fully usable for landscaping. The
reductions on the west side, especially the three-foot area, restrict the amount and type of
landscaping to buffer this side of the building. The landscaping proposed is an improvement
over the plan denied by the CDB in November 2004. Primarily within the th'ree-foot planting
area, the applicant proposes a hedge of silver buttonwood. Due to window and balcony
locations on this west side, placement of appropriate landscape material and the size of the
material are extremely important (so that views are not impaired). Any approval of this request
should include a condition that the applicant work with City Staff to improve the landscaping,
especially on the west side, to strategically place appropriately sized landscape material. The
minimum size of palms (except pigmy date palms) must be 10 feet of clear trunk.
The site today has some existing on-site parking spaces, but there is existing parking
that straddles the front property line along Avalon Street (partially on-site and partially within the
right-of-way). The applicant has advised that some guests of the existing overnight
accommodation uses at 15 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street utilize parking spaces on the
adjacent City parking lots to the west and/or to the north. The proposal is to eliminate all
parking within the right-of-way and provide 24 parking spaces on-site.(Code requirement is 1:5
spaces per unit or 23 spaces; proposal is at 1.6 spaces per unit). Parking will be provided
within the ground level parking garage and will be fully screened from view by solid walls. The
driveways on Avalon Street will not be gated, but will have sensors alerting residents that
vehicles are entering the parking garage. The driveway on Kendall Street will be gated and will
be an exit-only driveway.
The proposal includes constructing 15 attached dwellings (condominiums) in a building
with five living floors over ground level parking. The proposal includes an increase to the
building height from 30 feet (MHDR District) and 35 feet (T District) to 52.67 feet from the Base
Flood Elevation (BFE) to the highest roof deck. The eastern portion of the building, which is for
a pool, building and pool equipment rooms and clubhouse, is at a building height of 25.5 feet to
the midpoint of the pitched roof (from BFE). The site is located within the "Old Florida District"
of Beach by Design where the preferred form of development includes low- to mid-rise new
single-family dwellings and townhomes. The Planning Department has interpreted mid-rise as
maximum of 50 feet based on the height standards in the Medium Density Residential (MDR),
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
56
.
Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) and High Density Residential (HDR) districts. Beach
by Design calls for renovation and revitalization of existing improvements with limited new
construction where renovation is not practical within the "Old Florida District." 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.
Two blocks to the north on the north side of Glendale Street and adjacent to
undeveloped Beach Drive is a residential condominium building of five living floors over ground
level parking. The Colony Surf Condominium building on the north side of Cambria Street is
three living floors over ground level parking (approximately 35 feet in height [from BFE to roof
deck]). Under construction on the north side of Somerset Street is a project by the same
developers as this proposal (Chalets on White Sands residential condominiums) with five living
floors over ground level parking at a height of 56 feet to the roof deck (FLD2002-09031,
approved by the CDB on November 19, 2002). Between Somerset and Cambria Street is a
project (Chateau on White Sands residential condominiums) approved by the CDB, but not yet
under construction, in a building of five living floors over two floors of parking at an approved
height of 61.66 feet to the roof deck (FLD2004-01 002ffDR2004-01 006, approved by the CDB -
on June 15, 2004). At their meeting on March 22, 2005, the CDB "conceptually" approved the
project at 12 Idlewild Street (three streets to the north) at a building height of 64 feet (from BFE
to the highest roof deck). It also is noted that the "LaRisa" project at 650 Bay Esplanade (Case
No. FLD2002-09030, approved by the CDB on November 19, 2002) was approved with its
highest roof deck at 69.5 feet above the BFE line (although only accounting for 57% of the total
roof - other roof decks were at 58.5 feet above BFE [17.5%], 48 feet above BFE [18.1 %] and
37.5 feet above BFE [7.4%]).
.
While the proposal is not one of the preferred development types in this "Old Florida
District," the proposed height of this building at 52.57 feet to the roof deck may be viewed as
being consistent with building heights approved by the CDB in the "Old Florida District," and
close to that interpreted by Staff as being "mid-rise" in height.
The proposal includes a request to increase the height of perimeter parapets around the
edge of the roof deck an additional 3.67 feet (from roof deck), where the Code permitted
maximum is 30 inches. This increase may be viewed as making the parapets proportional in
respect to the height of the building and to aid in the screening of the rooftop air conditioning
units.
As indicated previously, the proposed building will have five living floors. Levels 2 - 6
are proposed with three units each, with units ranging between 2,730 and 3,800 square-feetof
living area. Level 2, separated from the residential portion of the building, provides areas on the
east side of the building for pool and building equipment. Level 3, above the pool and building
equipment rooms, is proposed with a pool and clubhouse. The southern units are oriented
north/south with a westerly view, while the northern and middle units are oriented east/west with
views in all directions.
Sidewalks will be co-nstructed within the rights-of-way of both Avalon and Kendall streets
for pedestrian safety, where no sidewalks presently exist. Site drainage is proposed within a
vault under the east side of the building. Engineering review of the drainage plans for this site
indicates there may be insufficient capacity within the vault proposed. The vault may be
.
Community Development 2005-04-19
57
.
.
.
required to be relocated to the west side of the building, due to sheer walls on the east side of
the building, in order to enlarge it for additional capacity. Prior to the issuance of any permits,
revised drainage plans and details, meeting the requirements of the Engineering Department,
will need to be approved.
The applicant is not proposing any signage at this time. It is noted that the Code does
not provide the ability to request a Comprehensive Sign Program for a residential property.
Future signage will need to meet the requirements of the Code and any future freestanding sign
must be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height, designed to match the exterior
materials and color of the building.
Staff's support for this proposal is based on reasons enumerated above. The proposal
is compatible with the surrounding properties. The redevelopment of this site will improve the
appearance of this site and the surrounding area. All applicable Code requirements and criteria
including, but not limited to, General Applicability criteria (Section 3-913), Residentiallnfill
Project criteria (Section 2-404.F) and Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria
(Section 2-803.C) have been met.
FindinQs of Fact: 1) The subject 0.498 acre is zoned Tourist District and is located within
the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design; 2) The current use of the site is for overnight
accommodation uses totaling 15 rooms and a total of eight dwelling units, which is
nonconforming to current density maximums; 3) Based on current Land Use Category density
limitations of 30 dwelling units per acre, the overall subject site may be redeveloped with a
maximum of 14 dwelling units; 4) The applicant is deriving the proposed density through the
Termination of Status of Nonconformity for the 15 hotel rooms at 15 Avalon Street and 16
Kendall Street, converted to 11 dwelling units, together with eight dwelling units on the
remaining parcels, for a total of 19 dwelling units; 5) The applicant proposes to redevelop the
entire site for 15 attached dwellings in a residential building 52.67 feet tall; 6) The future transfer
of the remaining four dwelling units off-site to another site on the Beach through the Transfer of
Development Rights provisions is prohibited under Section 6-109.B; 7) The lot depth of 87 feet
restricts site design, especially compliance with front and rear setback requirements; 8)
Reductions to setbacks to building and pavement proposed are similar to those approved for
other projects within the "Old Florida District" west of Mandalay Avenue and represent
improvements over that existing; 9) The proposed height of 52.67 feet is considered a mid-rise
development; 10) The proposal is compatible with the surrounding development, will enhance
the character of the immediate vicinity and will improve the appearance of this site and the
surrounding area.; and 11) There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel.
Conclusions of Law: 1) Staff concludes that the Termination of Status of Nonconformity
for density complies with the criteria of Section 6-109; 2) 2. Staff concludes that the proposal
complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residentiallnfill Project per Section 2-2-
404.F; 3) Staff concludes that the proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C; 4) Staff further concludes
that the proposal is in compliance with the General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913 and
the other standards of the Code; 5) Staff concludes that the proposal complies with Beach by
Design; and 6) Based on the above findings and proposed conditions, Staff recommends
approval of this application.
Community Development 2005-04-19
58
.
.
.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials
on March 3, 2005. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development request for: 1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (15 overnight
accommodation units, to be converted to 11 dwelling units, plus eight existing dwelling units),
under the provisions of Section 6-109; 2) Flexible Development application to permit a total of
15 attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District and Tourist (T)
District with a reduction in the T District from 10,000 square-feet to 4,350 square-feet, a
reduction to lot width in the T District from 100 feet to 50 feet, reductions to the front (north
along Avalon Street - MHDR District) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and from 25
feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), a reduction to the front (south along Kendall Street - T
District) from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the side (west - MHDR District) from
10 feet to seven feet (to building), a reduction to the side (west - T District) from 10 feet to three
feet (to building and pavement), a reduction to the rear (south - MHDR District) from 15 feet to
10 feet (to building), an increase to building height in the MHDR District from 30 feet and in the
T District from 35 feet to 52.67 feet (to roof deck) with perimeter parapets of 3.67 feet (from roof
deck), as a Residentiallnfill Project in the MHDR District and as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project in the T District, under the provisions of Sections 2-404.F and 2-803.C;
and 3) Reduction to the side (west) landscape buffer in the MHDR District from 10 feet to seven
feet (to building), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-
1202.G for the site at 15-27 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street, with the following bases and
conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria
as a Residentiallnfill Project per Section 2-404.F; 2) The proposal complies with the Flexible
Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C; 3)
The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General
Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; 4) The development is compatible with the surrounding
area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts; and 5) The proposal is in compliance with
the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design 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, while the proposal totals 19 dwelling units through the
Termination of Status of Nonconformity and only 15 dwelling units are proposed, the four
remaining dwelling units cannot be constructed on-site and cannot be transferred off-site in the
future; 3) That a Unity of Title be recorded in the public records prior to the issuance of any
permits; 4) That, prior to the issuance of any permits, the stormwater treatment vault be
enlarged and be designed to satisfy all City design and construction requirements; 5) That,
prior to the issuance of any permits, additional planting materials be incorporated to the
landscape design of this site, especially the west side, of an appropriate material and size,
including the relationship to windows and balconies, acceptable to the Planning Department.
The minimum size of palms (except pigmy date palms) must be 10 feet of clear trunk; 6) That
future signage meet the requirements of the Code and any future freestanding sign be a
monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height, designed to match the exterior materials
and color of the building; 7) That any future storage units on the ground floor be used for
storage only, in compliance with all Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA)
rules and guidelines. Should such storage units be proposed and approved by Staff as a Minor
Revision to this approval, evidence of this restriction of use, embodied in condominium
documents, homeowner's documents, deed restrictions or like forms, shall be submitted to the
Building Official prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 8) 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
Community Development 2005-04-19
59
.
.
.
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; 9) That a condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of
the first Certificate of Occupancy; 10) That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the
issuance of any permits; and 11) That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the
issuance of any permits.
Ann E. Rooney-Quinn requested party status.
. Member Johnson moved to grant party status to Ann E. Rooney-Quinn. The motion was .
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Joseph Quinn requested party status.
Member Johnson moved to grant party status to Joseph Quinn. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
Gerald Figurski, representative for the applicant, reviewed the project. He said while the
project is entitled to 19 units, it is requesting 15. He said the project will improve setbacks and
parking. Dumpsters will be stored in the garage, except for collection days. He reported Ken
Hamilton, of the Palm Pavilion, does not object to the project. He said the project is compatible
with the area and meets Beach by Design guidelines. Taller projects have been approved
nearby. Mr. Figurski requested that Fred Lowndes be granted expert witness status.
Acting Member Dennehy moved to grant expert witness status to Fred Lowndes. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Fred Lowndes, representative for the applicant, said the project meets City Code and will
add landscaping that is not currently present.
Ann E. Rooney-Quinn and Joseph Quinn spoke in opposition to the project.
Five people spoke in support of the project.
Mr. Figurski said the project will meet all Code requirements. He reviewed the applicant's
failed efforts to purchase an abutting property to enlarge the project. He said the project is
compatible with surrounding properties.
Member Johnson moved to approve Item F5, Case: Case: FLD2005-01007 for 15 - 27
Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street with Bases for Approval and Conditions of Approval as
listed, based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
Community Development 2005-04-19
60
.
.
.
G - ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m.
Community Development 2005-04-19
61
..
.
\
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: April 19, 2005
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the
following properties.
1. Case: FLD2004-09072/TDR2005-01015 - 483 Mandalay Avenue
~yes
no
2. Case: FLD2004-11 080 - 1611 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
~s no
3. Case: LUZ2004-08Q{)5 -: DV A2004-00004 - 2506 Countryside Boulevard
~y~ 00 .
4. Case: FLD2004-1 0076/TDR2004-1 0014 - 12 Idlewild Street
hs no
5. Cases: FLD2004-020 11 AlPL T2004-00007 A - 2520 Sunset Point Road
V;es
no
6. Case: FLD2005-01010 - 600 Bayway Boulevard
v: no
7. Cases: FLD200~/SGN2005-01016 - 430 South Gultview Boulevard
yes no
8. Cases: FLD2005-01016/TDR2005-01017/PLT2005-00002 -715 South Gulfview Boulevard
/yes
no
9. Case: FLD2005-0 1007 - 15 - 27 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street
Les
no
,.
..
10. Case: FLD2005-01009 - 665 Bay Esplanade
~s no
11. Case: FLD2005-0 1008 - 830 Bayway Boulevard
~s no
12. Case: FLD2005-01012 - 200 and 201 Skiff Point
~yes
no
13. Case: ANX2004-08014A- 2060 Evergreen Avenue
~es no
14. Case: LUZ2005-01001 - 2485 Druid Road
~es no
15. Case: ANX2005-01001- 2201 Arlington Place
~es
no
16. Case: ANX2004- ~2 - 1600 Pine Place
/ yes no
17. Case: ANX2005-0 02- 1724 Thomas Drive
yes
no
Signature:
S:\Planning Depa
B\CDB, property investigation check list.doc
Date: If-/$-ttr
2
.
.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: Aptil19, 2005
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the
following properties.
\) 1. Case: FLD2004-09072/TDR2005-01015 - 483 Mandalay Avenue
/ yes
-
no
2. Case: FLD2004-11080 - 1611 Gulfto Bay Boulevard
----
yes
/ no
3. Case: LUZ20075 - : DV A2~~004 - 2506 Countryside Boulevard
~ yes no
!3 4. Case: FLD2004-10076/TDR2004-10014 - 12 Idlewild Street
/yes no
5. Cases: FLD2004-02011A/PLT2004-00007A - 2520 Sunset Point Road
-Luo
yes
{3
6. Case: FLD2005-0 1 010 - 600 Bayway Boulevard
/
yes no
(j 7. Cases: FLD2005-01005/SGN2005-01016 - 430 South Gulfview Boulevard
/ yes
no
2> 8. Cases: FLD2005716/TDR2005-0 1017/PL T2005-00002 - 715 South Gulfview Boulevard
yes no
] 9. Case: FLD2005-01007 - 15 - 27 Avalon S,!reet and 1~ Kendall Street
..~,..""".-
/ yes
no
...
#
g
10. Case: FLD2005-01009 - 665 Bay Esplanade
/ yes no
15
11. Case: FLD2005-01008 - 830 Bayway Boulevard
~ yes no
~
12. Case: FLD2005-01012 - 200 and 201 SkiffPoint"'tJ
/' yes no
:::.. 1.<),1/ I II
l
Jt;J~
\ ,""T t.c; ~ '.... .r-
13. Case: ANX2004-08014A- 2060 Evergreen Avenue E (l.-'it <>;.I'k.i. ..5 e
/ no
yes
14. Case: LUZ2005-01001 - 2485 Druid Road
yes - /" no
15. Case: ANX2005-01001-2201 Arlington Place N COt(...L{4d~"'I'" r..:.'
~o
:.2.i\..d.t\;;~'-' ',' .,' ~.
~.
yes
16. Case: ANX2004-12022 -1600 Pine Place
~no
,; i
'1r5 ~.....,...e;~l t...:
W. <>'../n/ ~.^,,-.L.. !:;. &. N el/\ I~J,.( .,' .-';
v i}"" . . ..
yes
17. Case: ANX2005-01002- 1724 Thomas Drive .\
/ no
('I" "
~.,j,", ...,it". ..:;
: .4
i } I .
;, J I ,\,
\.. ~ ' ,
yes
Signature: ,,-(!~ (~:\~'f
S:\Planning Dep ment\C D B\CDB, property investigation check list.doc
Date: 1- ) !ct/lK'
~(l{)h
2
".
~
~
~
,
.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: April 19, 2005
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the
following properties.
072/TDR2005-01015 - 483 Mandalay Avenue
yes
no
-11080 - 1611 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
yes
no
08005 - : DV A2004-00004 - 2506 Countryside Boulevard
\ es no
4. Case:
L 076/TDR2004-10014 - 12 ldlewild Street
yes
no
-02011A1PL T2004-00007 A - 2520 Sunset Point Road
yes
no
01010 - 600 Bayway Boulevard
yes no
Vases: FLM-O 1005/SGN2005-0 10 16 - 430 South Gulfview Boulevard
~yes no
0ases: F~. 2 ,-010 16/TDR2005-0 1017 /PL TI005-00002 - 715 South Gulfview Boulevard
yes no
0ase: FLD20 - 1007 - 15 - 27 Avalon Street aod 16 Kendall Street
yes
no
..
.
10. Case: FL~D-01009 - 665 Bay Esplanade
es no
'-=
'-
II. Case: FLor-01008 - 830 Bayway Boulevard
. yes no
~ase: FLD~-01O:2-200 and 201 Skiff Point
es no
G Case: ANc;r-08014A- 2060 Evergreen Avenue
yes no
r'
- \!9ase: LUMl01001-2485 Druid Road
lA yes no
@Se: ~5-01 001- 2201 Arlington Place
~ yes no
r:~L
\.o/ase: A~4-12022 - 1600 Pine Place
~ / yes no
5-01002- 1724 Thomas Drive
yes
no
2
Date:
(q ~ ~S.
,
I
l1
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: April 19, 2005
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the
following properties.
I. Case: FLD2004-09072/TDR2005-01015 - 483 Mandalay Avenue
/ yes no
2. Case: FLD2004-11080 - 1611 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
~yes no
3. Case: LUZ2004,-/05 -: DV A2004-00004 - 2506 Countryside Boulevard
yes no
4. Case: FLD2004-10076/TDR2004-10014 - 12 Idlewild Street
/yes
no
5. Cases: FLD2004-0201IA/PLT2004-00007A - 2520 Sunset Point Road
/ yes no
6. Case: FLD2005-01010 - 600 Bayway Boulevard
/' yes no
7. Cases: FLD2005-01005/SGN2005-01016 - 430 South Gulfview Boulevard
/' yes no
8. Cases: FLD2005-01016/TDR2005-01017/PLT2005-00002 -715 South Gulfview Boulevard
/' yes no
9. Case: FLD2005-01007 - 15 - 27 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street
/
1/
v yes no
..
.
10. Case: FLD2005-01009 - 665 Bay Esplanade
/ yes no
11. Case: FLD2007-01 08 - 830 Bayway Boulevard
yes no
12. Case: FLD2005-01012 - 200 and 201 Skiff Point
J yes no
13. Case: ANX2004-08014A- 2060 Evergreen Avenue
/
I
yes v' no
14. Case: LUZ2005-01001 - 2485 Druid Road
//
\/ yes no
15. Case: ANX2005-01001- 2201 Arlin~ Place
yes ~ no
16. Case: ANX2004-12022 -1600Yin lace
yes no
17. Case: ANX2005-01002- 1724 Thomp Drive
yes / no
Signature:
S:\Planning Department\
\CDB, property investigation check list.doc
~ld 6-tltiv~~
2
Date: 1//~J()S
1Ijr/~
"
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: April 19, 2005
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the
following properties.
1. Case: FLD2004-0jD72/TDR200S-0101S - 483 Mandalay Avenue
J yes no
2. Case: FLD2004-11 080 - 1611 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
j yes no
3. Case: LUZ2004-d800S - : DV A2004-00004 - 2S06 Countryside Boulevard
~. yes no
~. Case: FLD2004-J076/TDR2004-10014 - 12 Idlewild Street
yes no
S. Cases: FLD200470 11A1PLT2004-00007A - 2S20 Sunset Point Road
yes no
6. Case: FLD200S-0~10 - 600 Bayway Boulevard
J yes no
7. Cases: FLD2001- 00S/SGN200S-01016 - 430 South Gulfview Boulevard
yes no
8. Cases: FLD200S-0;b16/TDR200S-01017/PLT200S-00002 -715 South Gulfview Boulevard
j yes no
9. Case: FLD2005-0l007 - 15 - 27 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street
j yes
no
..
10. Case: FLD200S-0} 009 - 66S Bay Esplanade
vi yes no
11. Case: FLD200Sf 1008 - 830 Bayway Boulevard
J yes no
12. Case: FLD2005-01012 - 200 and J Skiff Point
yes no
13. Case: ANX2004-08014A- 2060 Evergreen Avenue
j no
yes
14. Case: LUZ2005-01001 - 2485 DJd Road
yes no
IS. Case: ANX200S-01001- 2201 Arjin ton Place
yes no
16. Case: ANX2004-12022 - 1600 Pine Place
yes I' no
17. Case: ANX200S-0 1002- 1724 ThjaS Drive
yes no
Signature~ ~ ~
-.....---- -~
S:\Planning Department\C D B\CDB, property investigation check list.doc
Date: 4 t 1'1 .....
VJ2.,() ~ h-,
2
..
.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: April 19, 2005
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the
following properties.
1. Case: FLD2004-09072/TDR200S-0l01S - 483 Mandalay Avenue
yes ~ no
2. Case: FLD2004-ll 080 - 1611 Gulfto Bay Boulevard
~es
no
3. Case: LUZ2004-08~-: DV A2004-00004 - 2S06 Countryside Boulevard
~ yes no
4. Case: FLD2004_l0076/TDR2004-l00l4 - 12 ldlewild Street
yes X' no
S. Cases: FLD2004-020 11 AlPL T2004-00007 A - 2S20 Sunset Point Road
yes
~ no
6. Case: FLD200S-0l0l0 - 600 Bayway Boulevard
yes X no
7. Cases: FLD200S_0l00S/SGN200S-0l0l6 - 430 South Gulfview Boulevard
yes
X no
8. Cases: FLD200S_0l0l6/TDR200S-0l0l7/PLT200S-00002 -71S South Gulfview Boulevard
~no
yes
9. Case: FLD200S-0l007 - IS - 27 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street
yes ~no
-..
..
10. Case: FLD2005-01009 - 665 BXSPlanade
yes no
II. Case: FLD2005-01008 - 830 Bayway Boulevard
yes ~no
12. Case: FLD2005-01012 - 200 and 201 Skiff Point
Xno
yes
13. Case: ANX2004-08014A- 2060 Evergreen Avenue
yes
no
14. Case: LUZ2005-01001 - 2485 Druid Road
~s no
15. Case: ANX2005-01001- 2201 Arlington Place
~yes no
16. Case: ANX2004-12022 - 1600 Pine Place
/yes
no
17. Case: ANX2005-01002- 1724 Thomas Drive
no
Signature:
S:\Planni
~o-- l(}..\\~
Date:
tion check list.doc
2
<{ /17!V:J-
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: April 19, 2005
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the
following properties.
1. Case: FLD2004-09072/TDR2005-01015 - 483 Mandalay Avenue I;')
t. ~,
yes
no
2. Case: FLD2004-11080 - 1611 Gulfto Bay Boulevard \1
yes
no
3. Case: LUZ2004-08005 - : DV A2004-00004 - 2506 Countryside Boulevard
yes no
4. Case: FLD2004-10076/TDR2004-10014 - 12 Idlewild Street
yes
no
5. Cases: FLD2004-02011A1PLT2004-00007A - 2520 Sunset Point Road ~
yes no
-1_. Cj l. ,f
t--.... ',--' "
~~ 6. Case: FLD2005-0101O - 60biBayway Boulevard 'is i'..be.
~/ yes no
7. Cases: FLD2005-01005/SGN2005-01016 - 430 South Gulfview Boulevard '(
yes
no
8. Cases: FLD2005-01016/TDR2005-01017/PLT2005-00002 -715 South Gulfview BoulevardX
yes
no
9. Case: FLD2005-01007 - 15 - 27 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street 'I
yes
no
10. Case: FLD2005-01009 - 665 Bay Esplanade \
yes
no
11. Case: FLD2005-01008 - 830 Bayway Boulevard
yes
no
12. Case: FLD2005-01012 - 200 and 201 Skiff Point ~
yes
no
;
13. Case: ANX2004-08014A- 2060 Evergreen Avenue!
yes
no
14. Case: LUZ2005-01001 - 2485 Druid Road
yes
no
15. Case: ANX2005-01001- 2201 Arlington Place
__yes
no
16. Case: ANX2004-12022 - 1600 Pine Place
yes
no
17. Case: ANX2005-01002- 1724 Thomas Drive
yes
no
Signature: Date:
S:\Planning Department\C D B\CDB, property investigation check list.doc
~lJW
~ f{o..;lfJ-- iI/[qA)j
~JV[
~