10/18/2005
.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
October 18, 2005
Present: Alex Plisko
Kathy Milam
J. B. Johnson -
Dana K. T aiiman
Nicholas-C. Fiitsch -
Daniel Dennehy
Absent: David Gildersleeve
Thomas Coat~s _
Also Present: Gina Grimes
Leslie Dougall-Sides
Michael L. Dell<.
Gina Clayton
Neil Thompson
Patricia O. Sullivan
Vice-Chair
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Alternate Board Member
Chair
Board Member
Attorney for the Board
Assistant City Attorney
Planning Director
Assistant Planning Director
Planning Manager
Board Reporter
The Vice-Chair called the meeting to order at 1 :03 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the
invocation and Pledge of Allegiance.
.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTE~ OF PREVIOUS MEETING: September 20, 2005
Alternate Member Dennehy moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of
September 20, 2005, as recorded and submitted in written summation to each board member.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
D. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE (to December 20, 2005) (Items 1- 2):
1. Level Two Application
Case: FLD2003-08039 ":"1460, 1470 and 1480 South Missouri Avenue
Owners/Applicants: Peter and Kelly L. Nascarella and KP23 Enterprises, Inc.
Representative: Gerald A. Figurski, Esquire (2550 Permit Place, New Port Richey, FL
34655; Phone: 727-942-0733; fax: 727-944-3711; email: fiq@fhlaw.net).
Location: 2.31 acres located on the west side of South Missouri Avenue, south of
Bellevue Boulevard and 200 feet north of Woodlawn Street.
Atlas Page: 314A.
Zoning District: Commercial (C) District and Low Medium Density Residential District.
Request: Flexible Development approval (1) to permit vehicle sales/display and an automobile
service station in the Commercial District with reductions to the front (east) setba"ck from 25 feet
to five feet (to pavement), from 25 feet to 13.7 feet (to existing building) and from five feet to
zero feet to retain existing signage (to the leading edge of the sign), reductions to the side
(south) setback fro"m 10 feet.to 5.8 feet (to carport) and from 10 feet to 3.9 feet (to pavement), -
.
.
.
.
reductions to the rear (west) setback from 20 feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement and existing
building), a reduction to required parking from 55 spaces to 30 spaces, an increase to sign
height from 14 feet to 15 feet (for existing signage), a deviation to allow vehicle sales/display
contiguous to residentially-zoned property, a deviation to allow the display of vehicles for sale
outdoors and a deviation to allow direct access to a major arterial street, as a Comprehensive
Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C, and reductions to the
landscape buffer width along South Missouri Avenue from 15 feet to five feet (to pavement) and
from 15 feet to 13.7 feet (to existing building), a reduction to the landscape buffer width along
the south property line from five feet to 3.9 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the landscape
buffer width along the west property line adjacent to single family dwellings from 12 feet to 5.8
feet (to pavement), a reduction to the landscape buffer width along the west property line
adjacent to a nonresidential use from five feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement and existing building), a
reduction to the foundation landscaping adjacent to buildings from five feet to zero feet and a
reduction to reduce the interior landscape area from 10% to 7.45% of the vehicular use area, as
a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G; and (2) to
permit non-residential off-street parking in the Low Medium Density Residential District, with a
deviation to allow landscaping on the inside of a perimeter fence, as a Residentiallnfill Project,
under the provisions of Section 2-204.E.
Proposed Use: Vehicles display and sales.
Neighborhood Associations: South Clearwater Citizens for Progress (Duke Tieman, 1120
Kingsley Street, Clearwater, FL 33756; email: duketieman@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.
Planner Wayne Wells reported the City had received a request to continue this item to
December. The applicant did not have representation present to request a continuance based
on the number of board members in attendance.
Two residents spoke of neighborhood wishes to comment on the item and expressed
concern that the item already had been continued many times previously.
Discussion ensued regarding board rules on continuations.
Member Fritsch moved to continue Item D1, Case: FLD2003-08039 for 1460, 1470, and
1480 South Missouri Avenue to December 20,2005, with Condition of Approval: 1) this
continuation will be last one granted by CDB (Community Development Board) for reasons
within board purview. The motion was duly seconded. Members Milam, Johnson, Tallman,
Fritsch and Acting Chair Plisko voted "Aye"; Alternate Board Member Dennehy voted "Nay."
Motion carried.
Community Development 2005-10-18
2
.
.
.
2 Case: FLD2005-06053 - 1101 South Fort Harrison Avenue Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Lenny Cristino.
Representative: Mark A. Jonnatti (21021 US Highway 19 N, Clearwater, FL 33765;
phone: 727-725-2724; fax: 727-725-2603; e-mail: mionnatti@jarch.com).
Location: 0.297 acre located on the east side of South Fort Harrison Avenue,
approximately 200 feet north of the intersection of South Fort Harrison Avenue and
Jeffords Street.
Atlas Page: 295B.
Zoning District: Commercial (C) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit the expansion of a restaurant with a
reduction to lot width from 100 feet to 96 feet, reductions to the front (west) setback from 25 feet
to 15 feet (to existing outdoor seating deck), from 25 feet to 22 feet (to canopy), and from 25
feet to nine feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to 5.8 feet
(to existing building), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to existing
pavement), reductions of the rear (east) setback from 20 feet to 14.3 feet (to building), from 20
feet to four feet (to existing pavement) and from 20 feet to zero feet (to dumpster enclosure) and
a reduction of parking spaces from 43 spaces to 9 spaces, under the provisions of Section 2-
704.M, and a reduction to the front (west) landscape buffer from 15 feet to nine feet (along
South Fort Harrison Avenue), and a reduction to the rear (east) landscape buffer from five feet
to zero feet (to dumpster enclosure), as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the
provisions of Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Restaurant.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net); and
Harbor Oaks Association (301 Druid Street, Clearwater, FL 33756, phone 727-447-8081).
Presenter: Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Planner III.
Alternate Member Dennehy moved to continue Item 02, Case: FLD2005-06053 for 1101
South Fort Harrison Avenue to December 20, 2005. The motion was duly seconded and
carried unanimously.
E. CONSENT AGENDA (Items 1 - 6):
Community Development 2005-10-18
3
.
.
.
1 Case: FLD2005-07076 - 810 South Missouri Avenue Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Clearwater Retail Group, Ltd.
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: eda@jpfirm.com).
Location: 1.368 acres located at the southwest corner of South Missouri Avenue and
Druid Road.
Atlas Page: 296A.
Zoning District: Commercial (C) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit attached dwellings as part of a mixed use in
the Commercial (C) District with a reduction to the front (east along South Missouri Avenue)
setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement), reductions to the front (north along Druid Road)
setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement and dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the side
(south) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to pavement), reductions to the side (west) setback
from 10 feet to five feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to 9.7 feet (to dumpster enclosure) and
an increase to building height from 25 feet to 52.25 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof) with an
additional 15.5 feet for a decorative clock tower, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along
South Missouri Avenue from 15 feet to 10 feet (to pavement), reductions to the landscape buffer
along Druid Road from 15 feet to 10 feet (to pavement and dumpster enclosure), a reduction to
the landscape buffer along the south property line from 10 feet to five feet (to pavement) and a
reduction to the landscape buffer along the west property line from 10 feet to five feet (to
pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-
1202.G.
Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (32 condominiums).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
The 1.368 acres is located at the southwest corner of South Missouri Avenue and Druid
Road. The site has 225 feet of frontage on South Missouri Avenue and 270 feet of frontage on
Druid Road. The site is currently vacant, but formerly was developed commercially. This site
originally was part of a Certified Site Plan approved by the DRC (Development Review
Committee) on March 12, 1998. The CDB, at its July 17, 2001 meeting, approved a Flexible
Development application (FLD 01-01-05) for this site as a further amendment to the Certified
Site Plan. Renaissance Square Apartments, Ltd., subsequently appealed the case to the
Division of Administrative Hearings, which stayed the approval pending the outcome of that
action. The appeal was withdrawn and the case was closed on February 27,2002.
The CDB approved a Flexible Development request (FL 02-02-06) on April 16, 2002,
amending the Certified Site Plan to decrease the number of residential units on Parcel 4,
increase the gross floor area of non-residential use on Parcels One and Five, replace a
clubhouse with a parking lot on Parcel 3, replace a residential building with six commercial
buildings on Parcel 5, combine Parcels 2,5, and 5A into a unified Parcel 5 (consisting of Lots 7,
8, 9, and 10), and combine Parcels 4 and 4A into unified Parcel 4. These parcels are part of a
larger development known as Renaissance Square (formally the Sunshine Mall). This site is Lot
10 and originally was approved for a CVS Pharmacy.
Community Development 2005-10-18
4
.
.
.
The proposal is to develop this site with attached dwellings to serve as part of the mixed-
use project of Renaissance Square (formerly the Sunshine Mall). The project has been
designed to be compatible with existing residential structures contained within the overall
master plan. The proposed residential building contains 32 dwelling units on three floors over
ground level parking. The applicant must request approval of the proposed attached dwellings
as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, since such use is not permitted in the
Commercial District. The Commercial General (CG) land use category permits attached
dwellings at a permitted density of 24 dwelling units per acre. Staff's support for this proposal is
based on how this proposal fits into the previously approved mixed-use Certified Site Plan,
where all of the residential development on the former Sunshine Mall property also is located in
the Commercial District. Even though there is commercial development of a restaurant and
retail sales to the south of this project, the development of this site residentially is compatible
with adjacent uses.
From an access and site circulation standpoint, the proposal maintains the existing
driveway location on South Missouri Avenue, as well as the existing driveway location to the
service road to the west (which provides access to Druid Road for this site, the two commercial
properties to the south, and the residential projects farther south). The proposal also maintains
the cross-access points with the adjacent Wendy's parking lot (which also ties in with the retail
sales farther south). A total of 64 parking spaces are proposed, at a ratio of two spaces per
unit. Twenty-one of the provided parking spaces are located outside of the building, whereas 43
spaces are located under the residential building. A drive from the front to the rear parking area
is located on the north side of the building. A double dumpster enclosure is proposed at the
western terminus of this northern drive aisle, providing adequate trash truck access.
The proposal includes a reduction to the front (east along South Missouri Avenue)
setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement), reductions to the front (north along Druid Road)
setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement and dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the side
(south) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to pavement) and reductions to the side (west) setback
from 10 feet to five feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to 9.7 feet (to dumpster enclosure).
Similarly, the proposal includes a reduction to the landscape buffer along South Missouri
Avenue from 15 feet to 10 feet (to pavement), reductions to the landscape buffer along Druid
Road from 15 feet to 10 feet (to pavement and dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the
landscape buffer along the south property line from 10 feet to five feet (to pavement) and a
reduction to the landscape buffer along the west property line from 10 feet to five feet (to
pavement). The setback and buffer reductions to pavement along South Missouri Avenue and
Druid Road are the same as or are greater than that indicated on the Certified Site Plan in 1998.
The Wendy's site to the south provided a five-foot setback to pavement to the common property
line with this site. The proposed setback and buffer reductions to this common property line, as
well as to the west property line, are based on mirroring the pavement location as that on the
Wendy's site. The residential building is located 16 feet from the south property line and 42 feet
from the north property line (Druid Road). The requested flexibility in regard to required
setbacks and to the buffer widths is justified by the benefits of an upgraded site appearance to
the surrounding area and the need to match the cross-access locations with the property to the
south.
The proposal includes significant landscaping of the site. No existing trees on the site
are worthy of preservation. Due to the existence of overhead utility lines within the rights-of-way
of South Missouri Avenue and Druid Road, trees within the front perimeter buffers are restricted
Community Development 2005-10-18
5
.
.
.
to understory type trees that will not grow to heights causing interference with the utility lines.
Due to this circumstance, the percentage of accent and palm trees exceeds the normal 25% of
such trees allowed. Code requires outside mechanical equipment to be screened from view
from public streets and abutting properties. Air-conditioning condensers are proposed to be
located on the ground adjacent to all four sides of the building. While the landscape plan does
not indicate the location of these condensers to coordinate their screening by hedges, the
landscape plan should be amended prior to the issuance of any permits to adequately provide
such screening.
The proposed four-story building has been designed compatible in character with the
residential buildings farther south within the Renaissance Square development, through the
actual building design and the exterior building materials and colors. The proposal includes an
increase to building height from 25 feet to 52.25 feet (to the midpoint of pitched roof), with an
additional 15.5 feet for a decorative clock tower on the northeast corner of the building. The
proposed building is similar or lower.in height to the other residential buildings in the
Renaissance Square development. The proposed clock tower is entirely decorative in nature,
providing an identifying feature to this project and architectural interest. The second level will
have 10 dwelling units and the clubroom, whereas the third and fourth levels will have 11
dwelling units per floor.
The applicant is proposing a project sign at the intersection of South Missouri Avenue
and Druid Road. While the design of the sign will occur later, the sign should not exceed six
feet in height and should be designed to match the exterior materials and colors of the building.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria
(Section 2-704.C) have been met. There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated
with this site.
Findinqs of Fact: 1) The subject 1.368 acres is located at the southwest corner of South
Missouri Avenue and Druid Road; 2) The site is currently vacant, but has previously been
developed commercially; 3) The site originally was part of a Certified Site Plan, known as
Renaissance Square, approved by the Development Review Committee on March 12, 1998,
which was a mixed-use redevelopment of the prior Sunshine Mall; 4) Much of the Renaissance
Square project is for residential (attached dwellings) development, while the entire Renaissance
Square project is zoned Commercial District; 5) This site originally was approved for a CVS
Pharmacy; 6) The proposed 32 attached dwellings are not a permitted use within the
Commercial District, requiring the processing of this request as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project; 7) The Commercial General land use category permits attached
dwellings at a permitted density of 24 dwelling units per acre; 8) The development of this site
residentially is compatible with the adjacent uses; 9) Reductions to setbacks and landscape
buffers are consistent with those setbacks and buffers previously approved under the Certified
Site Plan for this site; 10) The proposed building is similar or lower in height to the other
residential buildings in the Renaissance Square development; and 11) 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 further concludes that the proposal is in compliance with the General Applicability criteria
Community Development 2005-10-18
6
.
.
.
per Section 3-913 and the other standards of the Code; and 3) Based on the above findings and
proposed conditions, Staff recommends approval of this application.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 1, 2005. The
Planning Department recommends approval for the Flexible Development application to permit
attached dwellings as part of a mixed-use in the Commercial (C) District with a reduction to the
front (east along South Missouri Avenue) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement),
reductions to the front (north along Druid Road) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement
and dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to
pavement), reductions to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to pavement) and
from 10 feet to 9.7 feet (to dumpster enclosure) and an increase to building height from 25 feet
to 52.25 feet (to midpoint of pitched roof) with an additional 15.5 feet for a decorative clock
tower, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-
704.C, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along South Missouri Avenue from 15 feet to 10
feet (to pavement), reductions to the landscape buffer along Druid Road from 15 feet to 10 feet
(to pavement and dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the landscape buffer along the south
property line from 10 feet to five feet (to pavement) and a reduction to the landscape buffer
along the west property line from 10 feet to five feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive
Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202. G, for the site at 810 South
Missouri 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 2-704.C; 2) The proposal is in
compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per
Section 3-913; and 3) The development is compatible with the surrounding area.
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, prior to the
issuance of any permits, the landscape plan be revised to adequately screen from view from
public streets and abutting properties the air conditioning condensers located on all four sides of
the building; 3) That freestanding signage be designed as a monument-type, not exceeding six
feet in height and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building; 4) That
all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed underground; 5)
That, in the event these units are to be sold, a condominium plat be recorded prior to the
issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 6) That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid
prior to the issuance of any permits; 7) That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to
the issuance of any permits; and 8) That, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy,
traffic impact fees be assessed and paid.
See page 33 for motion of approval.
Community Development 2005-10-18
7
.
.
.
2 Case: FLD2005-07079 - 1825 Sunset Point Road Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Two to One, 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: 3.265 acres located on the south side of Sunset Point approximately 150 feet
east of Keene Road and on the east side of Keene Road approximately 150 south of
Sunset Point Road.
Atlas Page: 262A.
Zoning District: Office (0) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit the re-establishment of retail sales and
services (financial institution) as a primary use within the Office (0) District with a reduction to
the side (west) setback from 20 feet to 4.7 feet (to existing pavement) and a reduction to the
side (north) setback from 20 feet to four feet (to existing pavement), as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-1004.8, and a reduction to the side
(west) landscape buffer from five feet to 4.7 feet (to existing pavement) and a reduction to the
side (north) landscape buffer from five feet to four feet (to existing pavement), as a
Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Retail sales and services (financial institution) and office.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@Qte.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
The 3.265 acres is located on the south side of Sunset Point approximately 150 feet east
of Keene Road and on the east side of Keene Road approximately 150 south of Sunset Point
Road. The site has 414 feet of frontage on Sunset Point Road and 133 feet of frontage on
Keene Road. The site is currently developed with a two-story building presently used for
offices, but the property formerly was a financial institution (bank) in the late 1980s and early
1990s. The existing building is located on the west side of the site. Parking is located to the
south and west sides of the building. The eastern half of the site is a wetland conservation area
and is undeveloped.
The property to the west and north of the subject property at the southeast corner of
Sunset Point and Keene roads is developed with an automotive service station. The parcels to
the east are developed with an office building and with attached dwellings. The property to the
north is developed with attached dwellings. The properties to the south and west (across Keene
Road) are developed with detached dwellings.
The proposal is to re-establish a bank on the first floor of this existing building, while the
second floor would continue with an office use (anticipated to not be associated with the bank).
Financial institutions (banks) are included in the Community Development Code in the definition
of "retail sales and services." In the Office District, "retail sales and services" are accessory
type uses where occupancy of the primarily office building is limited to a maximum of 10% of the
gross floor area. Under the adopted Countywide Plan Rules, financial institutions are included
under the definition of "offices," which are permitted primary uses in the Residential/Office
General (R10G) land use classification. Due to its inclusion under the definition of "retail sales
and services" and its prohibitions and restrictions in the Office District, the applicant must
request approval of the proposed bank under the Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project
process.
Community Development 2005-10-18
8
.
.
.
Many site and building improvements for the prior bank still exist, including the drive-thru
lane and teller windows. The applicant will refurbish the first floor for the proposed bank, paint
portions of the exterior of the building (some existing portions are black slate that will be
retained), resurface the existing parking lot and install new landscaping. The applicant will be
removing existing pavement adjacent to Sunset Point and Keene roads to meet the minimum
landscape buffer width of 15 feet (in both cases the proposed setback to pavement is 23 feet).
A handicap accessible route is proposed to Sunset Point Road. A loading zone will replace
some parking spaces in the rear of the building. A new dumpster and enclosure is proposed
south of the adjacent automotive service station on the west side of the site. Landscaping
around the building and along Sunset Point and Keene roads will be enhanced. Any approval of
the request should be conditioned on the hedging and trees along Sunset Point Road meeting
the landscape buffer requirements of the Code.
The proposal includes a reduction to the side (west) setback from 20 feet to 4.7 feet (to
existing pavement) and a reduction to the side (north) setback from 20 feet to four feet (to
existing pavement) and, similarly, a reduction to the side (west) landscape buffer from five feet
to 4.7 feet (to existing pavement) and a reduction to the side (north) landscape buffer from five
feet to four feet (to existing pavement). These reductions are based on the distance the existing
pavement is with regard to the property lines with the adjacent automotive service station.
There is an existing hedge within these buffers, but this hedge will be replaced and also
enhanced with additional trees. The requested flexibility in regard to required setbacks and to
the buffer widths is justified by the benefits to an upgraded site appearance to the surrounding
area and the hardships of significant site modifications to move the existing pavement to meet
the minimum requirements. The proposed financial institution (bank) is compatible with
adjacent land uses.
There is an existing sign located on Sunset Point Road. While the sign meets the
required setback, the sign may exceed the area requirements of the Code. Any approval of this
request should be conditioned on signage meeting Code requirements. This site is considered
a corner lot providing for a freestanding sign on each frontage. A Comprehensive Sign Program
may be required if the sign area exceeds the provisions of the general Sign Code.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria
(Section 2-1 004.B) have been met. There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated
with this site.
FindinQs of Fact: 1) The subject 3.265 acres is located on Sunset Point Road and Keene
Road, with the building oriented toward Sunset Point Road; 2) The current use of the site is for
offices; 3) A financial institution (bank) operated from this site in the late 1980s and early 1990s;
4) The proposal includes re-establishing a financial institution (bank) on the first floor of the
existing building; 5) Financial institutions are included in the definition of "retail sales and
services," which is intended to be an accessory type use within an office building; 6) The
Countywide Rules includes financial institutions in the definition of "offices," which is a primary
use within the Office District and the Residential/Office General land use category; 7) Drive-thru
lanes for the bank still exist, as well as other teller windows; 8) The proposal includes
resurfacing the parking lot, the installation of significant landscape materials and the painting of
a portion of the exterior or the building; 9) Reductions to side setbacks and landscape buffers
Community Development 2005-10-18
9
.
.
.
adjacent to the automotive service station at the corner of Sunset Point and Keene roads are to
existing pavement; 10} Landscape buffers will be improved to meet Code requirements; 11} The
eastern half of the property is a wetland conservation area and is undeveloped; 12} The
proposal is compatible with the surrounding development; and 13} 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 2-1004.B; 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; and 3} Based on the above findings and
proposed conditions, Staff recommends approval of this application.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 1, 2005. The
Planning Department recommends approval for the Flexible Development application to permit
the re-establishment of retail sales and services (financial institution) as a primary use within the
Office (O) District with a reduction to the side (west) setback from 20 feet to 4.7 feet (to existing
pavement) and a reduction to the side (north) setback from 20 feet to four feet (to existing
pavement), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section
2-1004.B, and a reduction to the side (west) landscape buffer from five feet to 4.7 feet (to
existing pavement) and a reduction to the side (north) landscape buffer from five feet to four feet
(to existing pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of
Section 3-1202.G, for the site at 1825 Sunset Point Road with the following bases and
conditions:
Bases for Approval: 1} The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as
a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-1004.B; 2} The proposal is in
compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per
Section 3-913; and 3} The development is compatible with the surrounding area.
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, prior to the
issuance of any permits, the landscape plan be revised to meet the landscape buffer
requirements along Sunset Point Road; 3} That signage be brought into conformance with Code
requirements; 4} That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any
permits; and 5} That, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, traffic impact fees be
assessed and paid.
See page 33 for motion of approval.
Community Development 2005-10-18
10
.
.
.
3
Pulled from Consent Agenda
Level Two Application
Case: FLD2005-04036 - 211-221 Skiff Point
Owners: Raxit and Punit Shah.
Applicant: Battle Creek Hospitality, Inc.
Representative: John A. Bodziak, AlA (3637 4th Street North, Suite 230, St. Petersburg,
FL 33704; phone: (727) 822-2207; fax: (727) 822-5263; email: iackbodziak@aol.com).
Location: 0.419 acre located on the south side of Skiff Point, approximately 200 west of
Larboard Way.
Atlas Page: 267B.
Zoning Districts: Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District and Island Estates
Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (IENCOD).
Request: Flexible Development request to permit 12 attached dwellings with an increase to
building height from 30 feet to 48 feet (to roof deck) with an additional four feet for perimeter
parapets (from roof deck) and an additional seven feet for architectural embellishments (from
roof deck), a reduction to the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 13 feet (to parking), a
reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to parking), a reduction to the rear
(south) setback from 15 feet to 1.5 feet (to pool deck) and 10 feet (to pool), and a reduction in
the lot width from 150 feet to 142 feet as a Residential Infill Project under the provisions of
Sections 2-404.F and 2-1602.C and H.
Proposed Use: Attached Dwellings.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net); Island
Estates Civic Association (Frank Dame, 140 Island Way, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone 727-442-
2237; email: none); Dolphin Cove Condo Association (255 Dolphin Point, Clearwater, FL 33767;
phone: 727-442-7880; email: dlphincove1@netzero.com); and Village on Island Estates (Tom
Baiocco, 240 Windward Passage, Unit 803, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-461-3861; email:
narctom@msn.com).
Presenter: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III.
The 0.419-acre subject property, located on the south side of Skiff Point, approximately
200 feet west of Larboard Way, is zoned Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) with an
underlying Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) category of Residential High (RH). The property is
also located within the Island Estates Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (IENCOD).
According to the City's records, the subject property presently consists of two separate
developments: a single-story duplex with detached garage, located at 211 Skiff Point; and a
two-story apartment building consisting of three units and a nonconforming parking lot with
back-out parking, located at 221 Skiff Point. The site also contains two existing docks
approximately 30 feet in length which will retained for resident and guest usage only and will not
be subleased. All other existing improvements (buildings, pavement, walkways, etc.) will be
removed as part of the redevelopment.
The immediate vicinity is predominantly owner occupied and rented attached
condominium dwellings. Additionally, at its meeting of June 21, 2005, the CDB approved a
development proposal at the adjoining property to the west (201 Skiff Point) for a building 49
feet in height with 15 attached dwellings (30 du/ac).
The development proposal consists of the construction of a 47-foot high building (as
measured from BFE [Base Flood Elevation] to roof deck) containing 12 condominium units that
Community Development 2005-10-18
11
.
range in size from a 2,594 square-foot three-bedroom dwelling unit to a 3,035 square-foot three-
bedroom dwelling unit. Existing back-out parking onto Skiff Point will be eliminated with this
development proposal and new four-foot wide concrete sidewalk will be installed adjacent to the
property line. The development proposal also includes the provision of a swimming pool/spa
with associated deck at the southeast side of the building.
Pursuant to Section 2-404, there is no minimum required lot width for Residentiallnfill
Projects. It is noted, however, that the standard minimum lot width for development as attached
dwellings would be 150 feet, and the width of the subject property is approximately 142 feet.
Pursuant to Section 2-404, the development standards for residential infill projects are
guidelines that may be varied based upon the flexibility criteria specified for residential infill
projects. The development standards in Section 2-404 set forth a front setback of 10-25 feet, a
side setback of 0-10 feet, and a rear setback of 0-15 feet.
With regard to the proposed building, the rear (south) and side (east/west) setbacks
provided will meet with the above referenced development standards; however the development
proposal does include a request for a reduced front (north) setback to 15 feet. In addition, the
development proposal includes reductions to the front (north) setback to zero feet to
accommodate two parking spaces and a refuse staging area; and reductions to the rear (south)
and side (east) setbacks to accommodate the proposed swimming pool/spa, deck and two
parking spaces to zero feet and 4.75 feet, respectively.
.
Based upon the irregular shape of the lot, the requested reductions to the front setback
to building and pavement (refuse staging area and parking) can be supported. These setback
reductions are further supportable based upon the proposed landscaping which will mitigate the
reductions and buffer the adjacent uses, thereby adhering to neighborhood character.
The majority of the swimming pool deck is set back five feet from the rear property line
and the swimming pool itself is set back 10 feet from the rear property line. It is only the
pathways to the existing docks that encroach the entirety of the required rear setback. Further,
the swimming pool/deck covers roughly 30% of the rear yard; thus the requested reduction to
the rear setback can be supported.
With regard to the side (east) setback, the swimming pool has been set back 10 feet
from the property line with the associated deck set back 4.75 feet from the property line. While
the encroachment of the swimming pool/deck upon the rear setback is not of great concern as
the rear of the property abuts Clearwater Harbor, the east side of the subject property abuts
another condominium development. Staff has concerns regarding the proximity of the
swimming pool/ deck to this adjacent development. The swimming pool/deck may be better
suited and just as easily accommodated at the center of the rear yard with the southeast corner
of the property being landscaped to provide a meaningful buffer to the adjacent property. In
addition to the above, the requested side setback reduction to five feet for the two parking
spaces at the northeast corner of the site can be supported based upon the provision of
adequate landscaping along the east property line, although the proposed hedge should
continue across the full length of said property line.
.
As previously stated, the development standards set forth in Section 2-404 for residential
infill projects are guidelines that may be varied based upon the flexibility criteria speCified for
Community Development 2005-10-18
12
.
residential infill projects. Section 2-404 sets forth a building height of 30 feet for residential infill
projects; however it is also noted that the development standards for attached dwellings set
forth a maximum allowable height of 50 feet. The development proposal includes a request to
increase the building height to 47 feet (to roof deck) with an additional three feet for perimeter
parapets (from roof deck) and an additional 13 feet for architectural embellishments (from roof
deck).
The flexibility criteria for residential infill projects states that flexibility in regard to height
shall be justifiable based upon the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of
the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. The applicant has
indicated that the requested flexibility will allow for "optimal redevelopment of underutilized sites
presently supporting obsolete and aesthetically unattractive buildings that minimize use of the
waterfront assets of the City." The proposed redevelopment will be more aesthetically
appealing than what presently exists on site and will certainly benefit the immediate vicinity and
City in that respect. With specific regard to height, a majority of the buildings in the surrounding
area are one or two stories in height; however these buildings do not comply with FEMA
(Federal Emergency Management Authority) requirements as they pertain to habitable space
below the base flood elevation. In order for these buildings to comply with FEMA requirements,
it would necessitate a substantial increase in height to each building. It is further noted that
buildings do exist in the vicinity that are three stories over parking and another building that is
15 stories in height. Also, at its meeting of June 21, 2005, the COB approved a development
proposal at the adjoining property to the west (201 Skiff Point) which consisted of a building 49
feet in height.
.
Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with the flexibility criteria
for residential infill projects as they most closely pertain to increases in building height. The
development proposal is also compatible with existing and proposed development in the vicinity;
therefore the requested increase to height to 47 feet (to roof deck) can be supported.
Pursuant to Section 2-404, residential infill projects shall provide a minimum of one
parking space per unit. As such the proposed 12-unit development would require 12 parking
spaces. The development proposal includes the provision of 18 parking spaces; thereby
exceeding the requirement of the Code. It is noted that at the standard parking rate of 1.5
parking spaces per dwelling unit, as typically required for attached dwellings, would necessitate
the provision of 18 parking spaces, which as per the above, would be met by this development
proposal.
The development proposal includes the provision of a refuse holding area at the north
end of the building. In addition, a five-foot by five-foot concrete slab will be provided to the north
of the refuse holding area and adjacent to the public sidewalk for use as a refuse staging area.
Recycling bins will be provided on the ground level of the building adjacent to the western
stairwell.
The applicant is not proposing any signage with this development proposal. Any future
signage must be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building.
.
All on-site utility facilities (i.e. electric and telecommunication lines) are required to be
placed underground as part of the redevelopment of the site. Provisions for the future
undergrounding of existing aboveground utility facilities in the public right-of-way must be
Community Development 2005-10-18
13
.
.
.
completed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy in a manner acceptable to
the utility companies and the City.
The development proposal includes the provision of storm chambers along the majority
of the south and east property lines to accommodate on-site drainage. Staff has a concern that
the location of these storm chambers along the east property line will result in conflicts with the
proposed swimming pool, the foundation of the proposed building, and/or the proposed
perimeter landscaping. As such it is a condition of approval that the applicant work with the
Engineering/Stormwater Department to assure that no conflicts will exist between the final
locations of the storm chambers and the swimming pool, building foundation, and/or the
perimeter landscaping. There are no outstanding code enforcement issues associated with this
site.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on June 2, 2005. The
Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible Development request to permit 12
attached dwelling units with reductions to the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 13 feet to
parking; a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to five feet to parking; a reduction to
the rear (south) setback from 15 feet to 1.5 feet to pool deck and 10 feet to pool; a reduction in
the lot width from 150 feet to 142 feet, and an increase in height from 30 feet to 47 feet to roof
deck and additional eight feet for parapet and other architectural embellishments (from roof
deck to top of parapet) and an additional 12 feet for elevator/stairwell overrun (from roof deck),
as a Residentiallnfill Project, in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District /Island
Estates Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (IENCOD) under the provisions of Sections
2-404.F and 2-1602. C and H, for the site located at 211 and 221 Skiff Point, based upon the
following recommended findings of fact and conclusions of law and conditions of approval:
Findinqs of Fact and Conclusions of Law: 1) That the 0.419-acre subject property is
located within the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District and the Residential High
(RH) Future Land Use Plan category; 2) That the subject property is located within the Island
Estates Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (IENCOD) and therefore subject to the
requirements of Sections 2-1602.C. and H; 3) That the subject property is permitted a maximum
of 12 attached dwelling units (30 du/ac); 4) That the proposed building will have a height of 47
feet as measured from base flood elevation to roof deck; 5) That there are no pending Code
Enforcement issues with subject property; 6) That the development proposal is consistent with
the Flexible Development criteria as a Residentiallnfill Project as per Section 2-404.F; and 7)
That the development proposal is consistent with the General Applicability criteria as per
Section 3-913.
Conditions of Approval: 1) That any/all required Parks and Recreation fees are paid prior
to the issuance of a building permit; 2) That any/all required Transportation Impact Fees are
paid prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; 3) That all Fire Department
requirements be met, prior to the issuance of any permits; 4) That all Traffic Department
requirements be met, prior to the issuance of any permits; 5) That the final design and color of
the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to (or as modified by) the
COB, and be approved by Staff; 6) 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; 7) That any/all future signage meets the
requirements of Code and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building;
8) That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall
Community Development 2005-10-18
14
.
.
.
setbacks; 9) That the storage units located on the ground floor are used for storage only, in
compliance with all Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) rules and
guidelines and that evidence of this restriction of use, embodied in condominium documents,
homeowner's documents, deed restrictions or like forms, be submitted to the Building Official
prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 10) That all proposed utilities (from the
right-of-way to the proposed building) be placed underground. That conduit 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; 11) That a condominium plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the
first Certificate of Occupancy; 12) That evidence of a filing of Unity of Title with Pinellas County
be submitted to and approved by Staff prior to the issuance of any building permits; 13) That a
right-of-way permit be secured prior to any work performed in the public right-of-way; 14) That
the first building permit be applied for within one year (by October 18, 2006) of COB approval;
15) That the final Certificate of Occupancy be obtained within two years of issuance of the first
building permit; 16) That all utility equipment including but not limited to wireless communication
facilities, electrical and water meters, etc. be screened from view and/or painted to match the
building to which they are attached, as applicable prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy; 17) That the applicant coordinates with the Engineering/Stormwater Department to
assure that the final locations of the proposed storm chambers do not conflict with the swimming
pool, building foundation, and/or the perimeter landscaping; 18) That the swimming pool I deck
is relocated to the center of the rear yard and that the southeast corner of the property is
landscaped to provide a meaningful buffer to the adjacent property; 19) That the hedge along
the east property line is continuous across the full length of the property line; 20) That prior to
the issuance of any building permits, an oil and grease separator or comparable treatment
system is provided to capture automobile pollutants; and 21) That prior to the issuance of any
building permits, a vault maintenance schedule to include cleaning after construction completion
and on at least an annual basis thereafter is provided.
Frank Dame, President of the Island Estates Civic Association requested Party Status.
Alternate Member Dennehy moved to grant Party Status to Frank Dame. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Carroll Lovett requested Party Status.
Alternate Member Dennehy moved to grant Party Status to Carroll Lovett. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Neil Spillane requested Party Status.
Member Fritsch moved to grant Party Status to Neil Spillane. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides submitted the resume of Robert Tefft as an
expert witness. She objected to an attempt to contest the resume of Mr. Tefft, a City employee.
Community Development 2005-10-18
15
.
.
.
Alternate Member Dennehy moved to accept Robert Tefft as an expert witness in the
areas of Land Use Planning, Site Plan Review, and Zoning. The motion was duly seconded
and carried unanimously.
Planner Robert Tefft reviewed the request and condition prohibiting conflicts between
the swimming pool and stormwater vaults.
John Bodziak, representative, stated that the applicant accepts all staff recommended
conditions of approval. He reviewed the request and efforts to work within City guidelines to
develop the unusually shaped lot on a cui de sac. He said minimum setbacks have been
requested for walkways and the pool deck. He said while adjacent properties violate current
setback requirements, this project meets those standards.
Party Status Grantee Frank Dame said the Island Estates Civic Association opposes the
project as its size, scale, bulk, and density do not conform with the neighborhood and proposed
parking is inadequate.
Party Status Grantee Carroll Lovett supported Mr. Dame's remarks.
Party Status Grantee Neil Spillane expressed concern that water pressure is inadequate
to meet Fire Department requirements.
In response to questions from Party Grantees, Mr. Tefft reviewed conditions of approval:
1) #3 compels project to meet all Fire Department requirements and 2) #8 requires project to
meet Chapter 39 of the Building Code related to seawall setbacks and construction. The City
has no mechanism that would force applicants to provide more parking than required by Code.
Planning Director Michael Delk said staff has requested additional parking many times for
developments and it is provided on occasion.
In response to questions from Party Grantees, Mr. Bodziak said the site plan was
changed when another parcel of land was added to the development and the project will not be
larger than currently proposed. He said parking meets Code requirements. He said the
development will not encroach on the required 18-foot setback to the seawall, which will be
repaired or replaced to meet current standards.
Party Status Grantees Dame, Lovett, and Spillane opposed the project, and expressed
concerns that the structure is too big, that no visitor parking has been provided, and the project
will cause safety problems, parking problems, and additional traffic.
Alternate Member Dennehy moved to approve Item E3, Case: FLD2005-04036 for 211-
221 Skiff Point based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as listed, the Staff report, and
including Conditions of Approval, as listed. The motion was duly seconded. Members
Johnson, Tallman, Fritsch, Alternate Board Member Dennehy, and Acting Chair Plisko voted
"Aye"; Member Milam voted "Nay." Motion carried.
Community Development 2005-10-18
16
.
.
.
4 Case: FLD2005-07067 - 1100 Cleveland Street Level Two Application
Owners: Guy and Susan Bonneville, Sebastian and Elizabeth Dormer, and Anthony
Dormer.
Applicant: Clearwater Center, LLC.
Representative: Keith E. Zayac, P.E., RLA (701 Enterprise Road East, Suite 404, Safety
Harbor, FL 34695; phone: 727-793-9888; fax: 727-793-9855; email:
keith@keithzavac.com).
Location: 2.48 acres located at the northeast corner of Cleveland Street and Martin
Luther King Jr. Avenue and at northeast corner of Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and NE
Cleveland Street.
Atlas Page: 287 A.
Zoning District: Downtown (D) District.
Request: (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for height (148 feet to roof deck where a
maximum of 75 feet would be permitted under current Code), under the provisions of Section 6-
109; and (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a mixed-use (71 attached dwellings and
44,300 square-feet of non-residential floor area), and to increase the building height an
additional 27 feet for architectural embellishments (from roof deck), as part of a Comprehensive
Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Section 2-903.C.
Proposed Use: Mixed-Use (71 attached dwellings and 44,300 square-feet of non-residential
floor area).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III.
The 2.48-acre subject property, located at the northeast corner of Cleveland Street and
Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue, is within the Downtown (D) District and the Town Lake
Residential character district of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The subject
property consists of a 151,000 square-foot, 148-foot high office building with an accessory 164-
space parking lot. The surrounding area consists of a variety of uses including: automotive
sales (vacant), detached dwellings, offices, overnight accommodations, restaurant, and retail
with these uses being located within structures that typically are between one and three stories
in height.
The development proposal consists of the conversion of the existing 151,000 square-
foot office building into 71 attached dwelling units; the construction of a building addition
consisting of 21,300 square-feet of office floor area; 23,000 square-feet of retail floor area; a
237 -space parking garage; and the addition of a 15-foot tall"high-hat" for architectural
embellishments and screening of mechanical equipment. The development proposal also
includes the development of the parcel to the north across NE Cleveland Street as a 26-space
parking lot.
Pursuant to the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan, the maximum allowable
density for attached dwellings within the Town Lake Residential character district is 30 dwelling
units per acre. As such, the 2.48-acre subject property is permitted a maximum of 74 attached
dwelling units and only 71 attached dwelling units are proposed (28.63 du/ac). Therefore, the
development proposal is consistent with the Plan with regard to density.
Pursuant to the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan, the FAR (Floor Area Ratio)
for properties located within the Town Lake Residential character district is 1.0. Based upon the
Community Development 2005-10-18
17
.
.
.
above and as the development proposal for the 2.48-acre subject property will consist of 71
attached dwelling units, a maximum of 4,936 square-feet of non-residential floor area is
permissible. However, the development proposal consists of 44,300 square-feet of non-
residential floor area - 39,364 square-feet more than is allowable. As such, the applicant has
requested the use of 39,364 square-feet of floor area from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool
as made available by the Plan. The development proposal's compliance with the requirements
for the use of this floor area from the Pool is discussed later.
The development proposal includes a request for termination of status of nonconformity
with regard to the existing building height of 148 feet (to roof deck) where a maximum of 75 feet
would otherwise be permitted under current Code. The criteria for termination of status of
nonconformity, as per Section 6-109, including compliance with perimeter buffer requirements,
the provision of required landscaping for off-street parking lots and bringing nonconforming
signs, lighting and accessory uses/structures into compliance with the Code will be met with this
development proposal.
Pursuant to Section 2-903 and the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan, the
maximum allowable height within the Town Lake Residential character district is 75 feet. As
previously discussed, the existing building that is to remain as part of this development proposal
has a nonconforming height of 148 feet (to roof deck), for which the nonconformity is to be
terminated. In addition to terminating the status of nonconformity with regard to the existing
building height, the applicant also has proposed the addition of a 15-foot tall "high-hat" (as
measured from roof deck to mean roof line) to provide balance between the architectural
improvements to the building fac;ade and the roofline, as well as to conceal the buildings'
elevator overruns and associated mechanical equipment.
Pursuant to the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan, the COB may consider
granting an increase in the maximum building height specified in a character district if the
developer of a site plan application provides a major public amenity, and the increase in height
does not exceed 20% of the maximum permitted height. The maximum permitted height within
the Town Lake Residential character district is 75 feet; therefore an increase in building height
may not exceed 15 feet.
To obtain the additional 15 feet of height permitted by the Plan, the development
proposal will provide major public amenities including: residential dwelling units within the
Downtown area, a mixed-use project that will further the Plan's major redevelopment goals and
character district vision, as well as significant contributions to the Master Streetscape and
Wayfinding Plan. Based upon the provision of the above amenities, the requested additional 15
feet of height for the "high-hat" is supportable.
It is noted, however, that extending above the pitched roof component of the "high-hat" is
a six-foot tall rounded parapet. This parapet serves to conceal the elevator overruns within the
building; and therefore as per the definition of building height (Height, building or structure), is
permitted to project up to 16 feet higher than the maximum height otherwise specified for the
zoning district. Thus, the six-foot tall parapet is allowed.
Pursuant to Section 2-903, parking is required to be provided at a rate of 1.5 parking
spaces per dwelling units for attached dwellings; 3 parking spaces per 1,000 square-feet of
gross floor area for offices; and 4 parking spaces per 1,000 square-feet of gross floor area for
Community Development 2005-10-18
18
.
.
.
retail sales and service. Therefore, the proposed 71 attached dwellings (106.5), 21,300 square-
feet of office floor area (63.9), and 23,000 square-feet of retail floor area (92) requires a total of
263 parking spaces. Pursuant to Section 3-1405, when any land, building or area is used for
two or more uses that are listed in the shared parking table, the minimum number of required
parking spaces shall be determined by multiplying the individual minimum parking requirements
by the appropriate percentages. The development proposal requires a minimum of 221 parking
spaces. As proposed, a total of 263 parking spaces will be provided; thus the development
proposal exceeds its parking requirement.
The development proposal includes the provision of a refuse/recycling holding area or
"trash room" at the ground level of the tower. The holding area will have access to the internal
circulation drive aisles of the parking garage, which in turn access the proposed staging area on
the north end of the development with access to NE Cleveland Street.
The applicant is not proposing any signage concurrent with this development proposal.
Any future signage must be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building.
All on-site utility facilities (i.e. electric and telecommunication lines) are required to be
placed underground as part of the redevelopment of the site. Provisions for the future
undergrounding of existing aboveground utility facilities in the public right-of-way must be
completed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy in a manner acceptable to
the utility companies and the City.
The subject property is located within the Town Lake Residential character district of the
Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan
envisions the district as being redeveloped as a residential district with neighborhood
commercial uses and more intense commercial and office development along Myrtle and Martin
Luther King, Jr. Avenues, and Cleveland, Court and Chestnut Streets. The Plan further states
that the addition of new residences in the Town Lake Residential District will enliven Downtown
and provide a market for new retail and restaurant development.
To assist in the transformation of downtown Clearwater into a quality place in which to
live, work and play, the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan establishes a Public
Amenities Incentive Pool of 2,296 dwelling units and 2,119,667 square-feet of floor area for non-
residential uses. The applicant is proposing the use of 39,364 square-feet of non-residential
floor area from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool. The amenities provided by this
development in order to justify the request from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool include the
provision of 71 residential units in the Town Lake Residential District and a streetscape
consistent with the City's Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding Plan and including landscaping,
lighting, pavers and fountains. Based upon the provision of these amenities, which are
consistent with the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan, the request for 39,364 square-
feet of non-residential floor area from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool can be supported;
however it is noted that a formal streetscape plan must be submitted for review and be deemed
acceptable by staff prior to the issuance of a Development Order.
The development proposal consists of two distinct parts: the architectural redesign of the
existing 148-foot high tower, and the construction of the new 47-foot high office/retail/parking
addition along Cleveland Street and Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue. The existing tower's
architectural elevations are very stark and the tower does not relate well to the immediate
Community Development 2005-10-18
19
.
.
.
vicinity. The proposed revisions include the outward extension of the lower ten levels on the
south, east and west elevations to give the tower step-backs within its elevations, the addition of
numerous windows and balconies (tempered glass and aluminum) across the whole of the
elevations, the provision of ornamental bandings (stringcourses) at 45 feet and 60 feet in height,
and the addition of a "high-hat" atop the tower to provide architectural balance to the building
elevations and conceal the elevator overruns and mechanical equipment. The "high-hat" will
consist of a barrel tile hip roof, while a decorative parapet cap with varying heights will be
provided for the balance of the tower.
With regard to high-rise buildings, the Design Guidelines state the following: 1) Building
stories or step backs differentiated by architectural features including but not limited to coping,
balustrades, cornice lines, change in materials, etc. and 2) A proportional relationship between
the height of a building and the number and dimensions of step backs used to mitigate the
height of the building.
As previously stated, the proposed modifications to the existing tower will create step-
backs within the elevations and will provide decorative string courses a 45 feet and 60 feet in
height to differentiate various levels of the tower. The height of the existing tower will be
mitigated by its setbacks from abutting rights-of-way and property lines, as well as the proposed
officelretaillparking addition, which will provide pedestrian scale development along the abutting
rights-of-way and create a buffer between the rights-of-way and the tower.
The new officelretail/parking addition will conceal the base of the tower, and the
office/retail component of the addition will conceal the parking garage from view. The
architecture of the new addition will be consistent with that proposed for the tower, including
barrel tile hip roofs at varying heights, windows with decorative E.I.F.S. trim, pre-cast simulated
stone architectural columns, decorative storefronts with awnings above the entrances, and faux
balconies for the upper level offices. As previously stated, the proposed addition will be
approximately 47 feet in height at its highest measured point (corner of NE Cleveland Street and
Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue), while the balance of the addition will be between 33 feet and 24
feet in height. The proposed heights are consistent with the standards set forth in the
Cleaiwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and will provide pedestrian scale development
along the abutting rights-of-way, as well as creating a buffer between these rights-of-way and
the existing tower.
The color scheme for the development proposal consists of light tan (Navajo White-
SW6126) and gold (Blonde-SW6128) for the upper and lower portions of the building,
respectively, and pale beige (Egret White-SW2004) for the trim and accents. The balcony
railings will be painted bone white.
The design of the development proposal is consistent with the intent and direction of the
Design Guidelines contained within the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The office
and retail portions of the new addition will conceal the associated parking garage from view
along the abutting rights-of-way. It is noted that within the Design Guidelines there exists a
provision that it is appropriate that buildings on corner lots emphasize their prominent location
through the use of additional height, massing, distinctive architectural treatments, and/or other
distinguishing features. With regard to the proposed office/retail/parking addition, the building
will not arrive at or exceed the maximum height stated in the Plan; however the tallest portions
of this building are located at the corners of the property. With regard to the site as a whole, the
Community Development 2005-10-18
20
.
.
.
existing/proposed 148-foot tower will provide the emphasis sought by the above referenced
provision.
It is noted that the surrounding area predominantly consists of one and two-story
buildings with a minimal inclusion of three-story buildings, specifically the property located at
1024 Cleveland Street being adjacent to the subject property across Martin Luther King, Jr.
Avenue. As such, the existing 148-foot (15-story) tower is neither in harmony with the scale,
bulk, coverage, density and character of the adjacent properties, nor is it consistent with the
community character of the immediate vicinity. However, improvements associated with this
development proposal will result in a building that is more architecturally appealing to the
surrounding areas, and the provision of the officelretail/parking addition will result in
development that is of a pedestrian scale and consistent with the scale, bulk, coverage, and
character of the adjacent properties. Based upon the above, the development proposal will
result in a significant improvement upon the current state of the subject property and will be
more harmonious with the immediate vicinity.
A review of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan was conducted and the
following applicable Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies were identified:
Vision: 1) Downtown Clearwater is a major center of activity, business and governments.
The development proposal will result in the adaptive reuse of an existing 151,000 square-foot
office building as 71 attached dwelling units. The development proposal also includes the
construction of a pedestrian scale addition consisting of 21,300 square-feet of office floor area,
23,000 square-feet of retail floor area, and a 237 space parking garage. According to the
applicant, the existing building is less than 50% occupied and it is anticipated that occupancy
will drop further; therefore the existing development is not operating in accordance with the.
above Vision statement. The proposed redevelopment will generate new "traffic" that will help
to stimulate the surrounding neighborhoods and further this Vision statement; 2) Downtown will
be an integrated community with a mix of retail, residential, office and recreational opportunities.
The development of a variety of residential projects to attract new residents to Downtown is
critical to the success of a revitalized Downtown. The development proposal will provide
neighborhood and community-scale commercial uses, urban residential dwelling units, a
streetscape consistent with the City's Master Streetscape and Wayfinding Plan, and buildings
located along and oriented towards the abutting streets. As such, the development proposal will
further this Vision statement; 3) Quality urban design is critical to new construction and
renovated buildings. The development proposal will rehabilitate and transform the existing
building in a means consistent with the Plan. The redevelopment of the "tower" includes, but is
not limited to, the provision of a roof top "high-hat" and parapet walls, the build out of the lower
10 floors on the east, south and west sides of the building, and the addition of ornamental
banding along the building perimeter at 45 feet and 60 feet in height. In addition, a two/three-
level commercial/parking addition will be constructed around the "tower" providing pedestrian
level amenities, and giving the existing "tower" the appearance of being stepped back from the
surrounding properties. The level of architectural detail being provided in this renovation will
transform the existing bland tower into a Mediterranean Revival development that is consistent
with the quality urban design envisioned in the above Vision statement; and 4) An adequate
parking supply must be available coterminous with new uses. As previously discussed under
the Off-Street Parking analysis, the development proposal requires a total of 221 parking
spaces and will provide 237 parking spaces within the on-site parking garage, and 26 parking
spaces within the parking lot across NE Cleveland Street. Therefore a total of 263 total parking
Community Development 2005-10-18
21
.
.
.
spaces will be provided for the development proposal, which exceeds the requirements of code
and is consistent with this Vision statement.
Goal 1 : Downtown shall be a place that attracts people for living, employment and
recreation. The City shall encourage redevelopment that will attract residents and visitors to
Downtown as a recreation, entertainment and shopping destination. The development proposal
consists of 44,300 square-feet of non-residential floor area and 71 attached dwelling units within
the Town Lake Residential District. Therefore, the development proposal is consistent with this
Goal.
Obiectives: 1) Objective 1A: All development within Downtown shall further the goals,
objectives and policies of this Plan and shall be consistent with the character districts, the
design guidelines and the Downtown zoning district. The development proposal will provide for
71 attached dwellings and 44,300 square-feet of non-residential floor area as part of an
attractive mixed-use development. As such, the development proposal is consistent with this
Objective; 2) Objective 1 E: A variety of businesses are encouraged to relocate and expand in
Downtown to provide a stable employment center, as well as employment opportunities for
Downtown residents. As previously stated, the existing 151,000 square-foot office building is
less than 50% occupied and it is anticipated that occupancy will drop further. The development
proposal will replace the existing square footage with 71 attached dwelling units and ancillary
facilities (i.e. lobby, storage, etc.). A building addition will also be constructed around the
existing "tower" consisting of 21,300 square-feet of office floor area and 23,000 square-feet of
retail. The new residences and redesigned commercial floor area will provide a more stable
employment center for Downtown residents; therefore the development proposal will be
consistent with this Objective; 3) Objective 11: The City shall use all existing incentives to
encourage Downtown housing and shall evaluate other incentives to encourage residential uses
to locate Downtown. The Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan provides for a Public
Amenities Incentive Pool from which development proposals may acquire additional non-
residential floor area in excess of what the applicable FAR would otherwise allow. This
development proposal includes a request to utilize 39,364 square-feet of non-residential floor
area from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool that will be used to provide ground floor retail as
well as office floor area along Cleveland Street and Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue. The
provision ofthe non-residential floor area will serve to increase the viability and vibrancy of the
project. Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with this Objective; and
4) Objective 21: Redevelopment and public improvements shall create and contribute to
pedestrian linkages throughout the Downtown. The development proposal includes the
provision of streetscaping along Cleveland Street and Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue that is
consistent with the City's Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding Plan; thus compliance with this
Objective has been achieved.
Policies: 1) Policy 1: The Design Guidelines establish the quality and design features
expected for renovation, redevelopment and new construction in the Downtown with which all
projects must be consistent. The development proposal is consistent with the Design
Guidelines as it incorporates a cementitious finish over concrete block construction with
decorative E.I.F.S. trim and accents. The pitched roofs will be clay barrel tile, while the flat roof
sections of the building will be accented with decorative parapets. The building design
incorporates both vertical and horizontal architectural elements providing relief throughout the
elevations and the provision of numerous windows of various sizes and styles. Based upon the
above, the development proposal is consistent with this Policy; 2) Policy 2: The character of
Community Development 2005-10-18
22
.
.
.
each district shall be reinforced through the site plan and design review process. Projects shall
be consistent with and contribute positively to the vision of the character district in which it is
located. As discussed later in this staff report, the development proposal is found to be in
compliance with the policies governing development within the Town Lake Residential District.
Therefore, the development proposal is consistent with this Policy; 3) Policy 3: The design of all
projects in Downtown shall make meaningful contributions to the pedestrian environment
through site and building design. The proposed officelretail/parking addition will establish a
pedestrian scale building on the subject property abutting the Cleveland Street, NE Cleveland
Street, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue rights-of-way. In addition to the provision of non-
residential floor area, the development proposal will also provide 71 new dwelling units within
the Downtown, and streetscape improvements including landscaping, lighting, pavers, fountains
and a PST A (Pine lias Suncoast Transit Authority) bus shelter (the shelter will need to be
designed to be consistent with the Design Guidelines). Based upon the above, the
development proposal is consistent with this Policy; however it is noted that a streetscape plan
that is consistent with the City's Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding Plan must be submitted
for review and be deemed acceptable by staff prior to the issuance of a Development Order; 4)
Policy 6: The City shall establish a Public Amenities Incentive Pool that provides density and
intensity increases for projects located in all character districts, except as limited in Old Bay, in
excess of the allowable maximum development potential based on a provision of selected
amenities. To overcome the numerous constraints affecting redevelopment, the Clearwater
Downtown Redevelopment Plan establishes the Public Amenities Incentive Pool, consisting of
2,296 dwelling units and 2,119,667 square-feet of floor area for non-residential uses, available
to all property within the Plan area. This provides an opportunity for the private sector to gain
additional development potential while assisting the public to achieve its redevelopment goals
for Downtown Clearwater. This development proposal will utilize 39,364 square-feet of non-
residential floor area from the Pool. The amenities provided by this development to justify the
request include the provision of 71 residential units in the Downtown Plan area and a
streetscape consistent with the City's Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding Plan. Based upon
the above, compliance with this Policy has been achieved; and 5) Policy 19: Residential
development shall provide appropriate on-site recreation facilities based on the scale of the
project. The development proposal will provide several amenities for the residents, including: a
swimming pool with spa, fitness spa, resident storage facilities, clubhouse, and a concierge.
Based upon the above, the development proposal has provided sufficient amenities for the
scale of the project and is consistent with the above Policy.
The following policies shall govern development within the Town Lake Residential
District, as well as City actions: 1) New construction and renovations of existing single-family
platted areas in the northeast section of the District shall maintain the character of the
neighborhood with regard to lot sizes, setbacks and building height. The subject property is not
located within an existing single-family platted area; therefore this policy is not applicable to the
development proposal; 2) Preferred housing styles north of Laura Street are single-family
detached duplexes and townhouses. Other styles of attached dwellings may be considered
upon assembly of at least one City block. The subject property is not located within the area
north of Laura Street; therefore this policy is not applicable to the development proposal; 3) One
dwelling unit may be permitted as accessory to a single-family or two-family dwelling provided
sufficient parking exists on site. This unit will not be considered when calculating density for the
site. The development proposal does not involve either a single-family or two-family dwelling;
therefore this policy is not applicable to the development proposal; 4) Community scale
commercial uses that serve the general needs of multiple neighborhoods are only permitted on
Community Development 2005-10-18
.
.
.
Myrtle Avenue, Cleveland, Court and Chestnut Streets. The development proposal includes the
provision of large-scale commercial tenant spaces (ground level retail/second level office)
along Cleveland Street that will serve the general needs to the surrounding neighborhoods.
Therefore, compliance with this policy has been achieved; 5) Neighborhood scale commercial
and office uses that serve the daily or convenience needs of the immediate neighborhood may
be permitted on Drew Street and Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue. The development proposal
includes the provision of small-scale commercial tenant spaces (ground level retail/second
level office) along Martin Luther King, Jr. Street. It is a condition of approval that the non-
residential uses along Martin Luther King, Jr. Street are limited to neighborhood scale uses so
that continued compliance with this policy can be achieved; 6) Neighborhood commercial uses
may be permitted south of Cleveland Street and east of Prospect Avenue provided such uses
are integral to a residential project. The subject property is not located south of Cleveland
Street and east of Prospect Avenue; therefore this policy is not applicable to the development
proposal; and 7) Existing neighborhood office and commercial uses north of Laura Street are
encouraged to remain and be renovated. The subject property is not located north of Laura
Street; therefore this policy is not applicable to the development proposal.
Based upon the above and subject to conditions of approval, the development proposal
is found to be in compliance with the policies governing development within the Town Lake
Residential District. There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the
subject property.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on August 5, 2005. The
applicant has worked with staff over the past several months to provide an attractive, well-
designed development that will enhance the local area and City as a whole. The development
will further the City's goals of improving the character of the area and promoting private sector
investment within the Downtown. Further, the development proposal is in compliance with the
standards and criteria for Flexible Development approval for a Comprehensive InfHI
Redevelopment Project, General Applicability Standards, as well as the Downtown Design
Guidelines.
The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible Development approval
to permit a mixed-use (71 attached dwellings and 44,300 square-feet of non-residential floor
area) with an additional 15 feet (as measured from roof deck to mean roof line), as part of a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Section 2-803.C; and
Termination of Status of Nonconformity for height (148 feet to roof deck where a maximum of 75
feet would be permitted under current Code), under the provisions of Section 6-109, based upon
the following findings of fact and conclusions of law and with the following conditions of
approval:
Findinqs of Fact and Conclusions of Law: 1) That the subject property totals 108,080.94
square-feet (2.48 acres); 2) That the subject property is located within the Downtown (D) District
and the Central Business District (CBD) Future Land Use Plan category; 3) That the
development proposal is subject to the requirements of the Clearwater Downtown
Redevelopment Plan and the Design Guidelines contained therein as it is located within the
Town Lake Residential character district; 4) That the proposed use of 39,364 square-feet of
non-residential floor area from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool is consistent with the
provisions of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan; 5) That the development proposal
is consistent with the Downtown Design Guidelines; 6) That the development proposal is
Community Development 2005-10-18
24
.
.
.
consistent with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project as per Section 2-903.C; 7) That the development proposal is consistent with the General
Applicability Criteria as per Section 3-913; 8) That the development proposal is consistent with
the Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan
and the Town Lake Residential character district; and 9) That the development proposal is
compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts.
Conditions of Approval: 1) That the non-residential uses proposed to be located on the
site are consistent with the permitted uses listed within the Community Development Code and
the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan; 2) 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; 3) That a Transportation Impact Fee be paid, prior to the issuance of
a Certificate of Occupancy; 4) 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; 5) That all utility
equipment including but not limited to wireless communication facilities, electrical and water
meters, etc. be screened from view and/or painted to match the building to which they are
attached, as applicable prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; 6) That all Fire
Department requirements be met, prior to the issuance of any permits; 7) That all Traffic
Department requirements be met, prior to the issuance of any permits; 8) That any/all future
signage meets the requirements of Code and be architecturally integrated with the design of the
building with regard to proportion, color, material and finish as part of a final sign package
submitted to and approved by Staff prior to the issuance of any permits which includes: a) All
signs fully dimensioned and coordinated in terms of including the same color and font style and
size and b) All signs be constructed of the highest quality materials which are coordinated with
the colors, materials and architectural style of the building; 9) That a right-of-way permit be
secured prior to any work performed in the public right-of-way; 10) That the first building permit
be applied for within one year of the CDB approval (by October 18, 2006); 11) That the final
Certificate of Occupancy be obtained within two years of issuance of the first building permit;
12) That all streetscaping along Cleveland Street and Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue be
installed to the satisfaction of Staff prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 13)
That a certified Arborist ensure that the proposed swale will not impact the critical root zones of
the trees as set forth on the tree preservation plan prior to the issuance of any building permits;
14) That a certified Arborist ensure that the canopy of the existing Oak tree located at the
easternmost end of the property will not be adversely impacted by the proposed building prior to
the issuance of any building permits; 15 That complete applications for the vacation of drainage
and utility easement(s) are submitted; 16) That a turning template of a scaled passenger car
making turns at corners is depicted and that vehicles must not encroach into the opposing lane;
17) That the non-residential uses along Martin Luther King, Jr. Street are limited to
neighborhood scale uses; and 18) That a formal streetscape plan is submitted for review and is
deemed acceptable by staff and consistent with the City's Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding
Plan prior to the issuance of a Development Order.
See page 33 for motion of approval
Community Development 2005-10-18
25
.
.
.
5 Case: FLD2005-07078 - 665-667 Bay Esplanade Level Two Application
Owners: Melodie A. Ferguson Revocable Living Trust Agreement DTD, Robert M.
Pennock II Revocable Living Trust Agreement DTD, and Paul and Tracey Kelley.
Applicants: Robert Pennock and Paul Kelley.
Representative: Keith E. Zayac, P.E., RLA (701 Enterprise Road East, Suite 404, Safety
Harbor, FL 34695; phone: 727-793-9888; fax: 727-793-9855; email:
keith@keithzavac.com).
Location: 0.52 acre on the south side of Bay Esplanade, approximately 600 feet east of
the northern intersection with Poinsettia Avenue.
Atlas Page: 258A.
Zoning District: Tourist (T) District.
Request: (1) Flexible Development approval to permit 12 attached dwellings with an increase to
height from 35 feet to 69 feet (to roof deck), with an additional four feet for perimeter parapets
(from roof deck), a reduction to the north (side) setback from 10 feet to 9.21 feet (to pavement),
a reduction to the south (rear) and east (rear) setbacks from 20 feet to zero feet (to deck), as
part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Section 2-803.C;
and (2) Transfer of Development Rights (TDR2005-07025) of two dwelling units from 120
Brightwater Drive under the provisions of Sections 4-1402 and 4-1403.
Proposed Use: Attached Dwellings.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net); and
Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive, Clearwater, FL 33767, phone:
727 -443-2168; email: papamurphv@aol.com).
Presenter: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III.
The 0.52-acre subject property is comprised of two lots and located on the south side of
Bay Esplanade, approximately 400 feet south of Somerset Street. The subject property is
zoned Tourist (T) District with an underlying Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) category of Resort
Facilities High (RFH). The property is also located within the special area redevelopment plan,
Beach by Design, as part of the "Old Florida District."
According to the City's occupational license records, 665 and 667 Bay Esplanade are
each developed with four attached dwellings (8 dwellings total). The property, located at 665
Bay Esplanade, consists of a two-story building with an accessory swimming pool between the
building and the right-of-way as well as a large asphalt parking area that "backs out" into the
right-ot-way. The property, located at 667 Bay Esplanade, consists ot a two-story building and
two single-story buildings with the majority of the property consisting of paved surface and
parking backing out into the right-of-way.
It is noted that at its meeting of April 19, 2005, the CDB approved a development
proposal at 665 Bay Esplanade for five attached dwellings within a building 59 feet in height (to
roof deck) and having reductions to the rear (south) setback from 20 feet to 18 feet (to building),
3.5 feet (to swimming pool), and zero feet (to pool deck).
The development proposed consists of the construction of a 65-foot high building (as
measured from BFE to roof deck) containing a total of 12 attached dwellings. Each habitable
level within the building will contain two three-bedroom dwelling units with each unit being 4,227
square-feet in size.
Community Development 2005-10-18
26
.
The existing back-out parking within the Bay Esplanade right-of-way will be removed and
replaced with sod and a five-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the property line. It is noted that no
sidewalk presently exists adjacent to the subject property. The development proposal also
includes the provision of a swimming pool/spa with deck at what is effectively the southeast
corner of the site. Parking and a solid waste staging area will be located on the ground floor.
Pursuant to Section 2-803, the Tourist (T) District allows a standard maximum height of
35 feet that may be increased to a maximum height of 100 feet, based upon meeting certain
criteria. However, as the subject property is located within the "Old Florida District" of the Beach
by Design special area plan, height is further limited by the standards set forth in the Plan as
being low- to mid-rise in accordance with the Community Development Code. Analysis with
regard to the proposed building height is part of the Beach by Design analysis.
Pursuant to Section 2-803, attached dwellings are required to provide a front setback of
0-15 feet, a side setback of 0-10 feet, and a rear setback of 10-20 feet. The proposed building
has been designed to either meet or exceed these setback requirements; however deviations
have been requested to allow for the encroachment of the refuse staging area into the
northwest (front) setback to zero feet, the encroachment of a walkway into the north (side)
setback to 9.21 feet, and the encroachment of the swimming pool deck into the rear (south and
east) setbacks to zero feet.
.
The walkway associated with the reduction to the side (north) setback is necessary to
provide adequate egress from the stairwell, and the refuse staging area is necessary for solid
waste pick-up. As such, the requested reductions associated with these areas are supportable
and similar reductions have been approved in the past. With regard to the requested reductions
to the rear (south and east) setbacks to accommodate the proposed swimming pool/deck, it is
noted that the pool/deck area accounts for approximately 40% of the rear yard. Based upon this
approximate rear yard coverage, the atypical lot configuration and the buildings setback, which
generally is in excess of 20 feet, the reduced rear (south and east) setbacks can be supported.
As noted, the subject property is located within the RFH FLUP category, which permits a
maximum density of 30 attached dwelling units per acre. Thus, the 0.52-acre subject property is
permitted a maximum of 15 attached dwelling units. However, prior to the submittal of this
application, the applicants had entered into density transfer agreements with another entity for a
total of five of the permitted dwelling units (two from 665 Bay Esplanade and three from 667 Bay
Esplanade). Therefore, based upon the above, only 10 attached dwelling units remain available
on the collective subject property.
The development proposal is for 12 attached dwelling units. As such, the applicants
have submitted an application for Transfer of Development Rights (TOR) of two dwelling units to
the subject property from 120 Brightwater Drive. An analysis of this application is discussed
below.
Pursuant to Section 4-1402, parcels governed by a special area plan, such as Beach by
Design, may only receive density transfers from parcels within the same special area plan and
may not exceed the otherwise applicable maximum density by more than 20%.
.
Based upon the above, the subject property can receive a TOR (Transfer of
Development Rights) for a maximum of three dwelling units. The TOR application submitted
Community Development 2005-10-18
27
.
proposes the transfer of two dwelling units from 120 Brightwater Drive, which is located within
the Beach by Design special area plan, the same as the subject property. The maximum
number of permitted attached dwelling units for the 120 Brightwater Drive property (the "sender"
site) is 10 dwelling units. It is noted that the site recently has been developed with six attached
dwellings and therefore has four dwelling units available for transfer.
Accordingly, the proposed TDR is consistent with the requirements of Section 4-1402 as
noted above. Further, it is noted that the transfer of two dwelling units onto the site will result in
the provision of only 12 attached dwelling units on site, three fewer than the property would
have been permitted by right if the property owners had not previously transferred development
rights away from the property.
Pursuant to Section 2-803, attached dwellings units require the provision of 1.5 parking
spaces per dwelling unit. Therefore, the proposed 12 attached dwelling units require a total of
18 parking spaces and the development proposal includes the provision of 22 ground level
parking spaces. Based upon the above, compliance with the requirements of Section 2-803 as
they pertain to off-street parking has been achieved.
The development proposal includes the provision of a refuse holding area or "trash
room" at the center of the building. In addition, a 10-foot by 10-foot concrete slab will be
provided to the north side of the entrance for use as a refuse staging area. Recycling bins will
be provided on the ground level within the refuse holding area.
.
The applicant is not proposing any signage with this development proposal. Any future
signage must be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building.
All on-site utility facilities (Le. electric and telecommunication lines) are required to be
placed underground as part of the redevelopment of the site. Provisions for the future
undergrounding of existing aboveground utility facilities in the public right-of-way must be
completed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy in a manner acceptable to
the utility companies and the City.
In 1997 and 1998, a Plan was prepared for the City entitled "Clearwater Beach:
Strategies for Revitalization." This Plan was prepared after an extensive public process,
directive surveys and input from the City Council and City administration. The purpose of Beach
by Design, which was adopted by the City Council in 2001, is to implement the
recommendations of that Plan and regulate development within certain areas of the beach.
The subject property is located within the "Old Florida District" of the Beach by Design
special area redevelopment plan and is defined as "an area of transition between resort uses in
Central Beach to the low intensity residential neighborhoods to the north of Acacia (Street)." In
order to implement this vision, Beach by Design states that building heights should be low to
mid-rise in accordance with the Community Development Code. While "mid-rise" is not
specifically defined within the Community Development Code, based upon the height standards
set forth in the Medium Density Residential (MDR), Tourist (T), and High Density Residential
(HDR) Districts, the Planning Department previously has interpreted "mid-rise" development as
having a maximum height of 50 feet. Accordingly, the proposed height of the building (65 feet to
roof deck) would be inconsistent with the above definition of mid-rise development.
.
Community Development 2005-10-18
28
.
On September 1, 2005, the City Council discussed a new policy direction with regard to
the "Old Florida District." This policy direction calls for limiting the height of buildings on those
properties north of Somerset Street to 35 feet; limiting the height of buildings on the first 60 feet
south of Somerset Street to 50 feet; and limiting the height of buildings in the balance of the
District to 65 feet. In addition, the Council gave direction for increased site design performance
by way of larger setbacks and/or building step backs.
As previously stated under the "Setbacks" analysis, the proposed building either meets
or exceeds all required setbacks. With regard to the front of the building, the structure has been
designed with a "V" shaped recess that steps back approximately 50 feet from each side (north
and west) of the building. The building also has been designed with numerous angles, beveled
edges, and recessed balconies that will give the building the appearance of having additional
step backs. Based upon the above, the development proposal, and the proposed height of 65
(to roof deck) would seem compatible with the new policy direction set forth by the City Council.
There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site.
.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 1, 2005. The
Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible Development application to permit
12 attached dwellings with an increase to height from 35 feet to 65 feet (to roof deck), with an
additional four feet for perimeter parapets (from roof deck), a reduction to the northwest (front)
setback from 15 feet to zero feet (to pavement), a reduction to the north (side) setback from 10
feet to 9.21 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the south (rear) and east (rear) setbacks from 20
feet to zero feet (to deck), as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the
provisions of Section 2-803.C; and Transfer of Development Rights (TDR2005-07025) of two
dwelling units from 120 Brightwater Drive under the provisions of Sections 4-1402 and 4-1403,
based upon the following recommended findings of fact and recommended conclusions of law
and conditions of approval:
FindinQs of Fact and Conclusions of Law: 1) That the 0.52-acre subject property is within
the Tourist (T) District and the Resort Facilities High (RFH) Future Land Use Plan category; 2)
That the subject property is located within the special area redevelopment plan, Beach by
Design, as part of the "Old Florida District"; 3) That the City's occupational license records
indicate the subject property currently being developed with a total of eight attached dwellings;
4) That there are no pending Code Enforcement issues with the subject property; 5) That the
proposed building height is 65 feet as measured from BFE to roof deck; 6) That the subject
property is permitted a maximum of 15 attached dwelling units (30 du/ac); 7) That the applicants
have previously entered into density transfer agreements with another entity removing a total of
five permitted dwelling units (two from 665 Bay Esplanade and three from 667 Bay Esplanade)
from the subject property; thereby reducing the available density of the subject property to 10
attached dwelling units; 8) That the development proposal is consistent with the Transfer of
Development Rights standards and criteria as set forth in Sections 4-1402 and 4-1403,
respectively; 9) That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexible Development
standards as set forth in Section 2-803; 10) That the development proposal is consistent with
the Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment criteria as set forth in Section 2-803.C; and 11) That
the development proposal is consistent with the General Applicability criteria as set forth in
Section 3-913.A;
.
Conditions of Approval: 1) That any/all required Parks and Recreation fees are paid prior
to the issuance of a building permit; 2) That any/all required Transportation Impact Fees are
Community Development 2005-10-18
29
.
.
.
paid prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; 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 all proposed utilities (from the right-of-way to the proposed
building) be placed underground. That conduit 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; 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 signage meet
the requirements of Code and be limited to attached signs on the canopies or attached directly
to the building and be architecturally-integrated with the design of the building with regard to
proportion, color, material and finish as part of a final sign package submitted to and approved
by Staff prior to the issuance of any permits which includes: a) All signs fully dimensioned and
coordinated in terms of including the same color and font style and size; and b) All signs be
constructed of the highest quality materials which are coordinated with the colors, materials and
architectural style of the building; 8) That a right-of-way permit be secured prior to any work
performed in the public right-of-way; 9) That the first building permit be applied for within one
year (by September 20, 2006) of CDB approval; 10) That the final Certificate of Occupancy be
obtained within two years of issuance of the first building permit; and 11) That all utility
equipment including but not limited to wireless communication facilities, electrical and water
meters, etc. be screened from view and/or painted to match the building to which they are
attached, as applicable prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
See page 33 for motion of approval
Community Development 2005-10-18
30
.
.
.
6 Case: FLD2005-06054 - 1770 Drew Street Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: Thomas C. Jessup.
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: 0.68 acre located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Drew Street
and Mars Avenue.
Atlas Page: 279B.
Zoning District: Commercial (C) District and Medium Density Residential (MDR) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval (1) to permit the expansion of retail sales in the
Commercial District with reductions to the front (west along Mars Avenue) setback from 25 feet
to 3.5 feet (to pavement) and from 25 feet to 15.5 feet (to building), a reduction to the front
(south along Drew Street) setback from 25 feet to 4.2 feet (to pavement) and reductions to the
front (east along North Keene Road) setback from 25 feet to five feet (to pavement) and from 25
feet to nine feet (to existing building) and a reduction from 38 parking spaces to 28 parking
spaces, 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
reductions to the front (west along Mars Avenue) from 25 feet to 8.5 feet (to pavement) and
from 25 feet to 11 feet (to dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the front (east along North Keene
Road) from 25 feet to five feet (to pavement) and a deviation to place landscaping on the inside
(south) side of the fence rather than the outside (north) side, as a Residentiallnfill Project,
under the provisions of 2-304.D; and a reduction to the front (west along Mars Avenue)
landscape buffer from 10 feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the front (south along
Drew Street) landscape buffer from 15 feet to 4.2 feet (to pavement), and reductions to the front
(east along North Keene Road) landscape buffer from 15 feet to 5 feet (to pavement) and from
15 feet to nine feet (to existing building), as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program under
the provisions of Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Bicycle shop (retail sales and services) with parking.
Neighborhood Associations: 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.
This 0.68-acre site is located on the north side of Drew Street, at the southwest corner of
the intersection of Drew Street and Mars Avenue. The surrounding land use is commercial,
consisting of restaurants, retail services, and automotive sales and repair. There also is a large
amount of single-family residential land use at the rear of the site. The site presently has a one-
story 7,925 square-foot building, where the sales and service of bicycles occur. There is
customer parking at the front and along the west side of the existing building. Two large storage
trailers are located at the rear of the building. These portable storage units are the focus of a
City of Clearwater code enforcement case at this site.
The proposal in part is to remedy the code enforcement case regarding the storage
trailers. The proposal includes the addition of 1,663 square-foot building to the existing building,
and a new parking lot at the rear of the site. The trailers will be removed from site and are not
shown on the site plan. The application is seeking reductions to required setbacks, parking
spaces, and landscape buffers.
The setback and landscape buffer reductions are necessary in order to make this site
work for a 9,588 square-foot building with parking, landscaping, and vehicular ingress/egress.
Community Development 2005-10-18
31
.
.
.
Considerable landscaping is proposed to improve this site, which also will help toward visual
harmony along the Drew Street corridor. A Comprehensive Landscape Program application has
been filed.
The south (front) elevation will have a painted cement plaster finish and decorative
banding. Display windows in the shape of bicycle tires will accent the building design for the
new building. The original main building will be refaced with architectural embellishments such
as decorative roof arches, which emulate bicycle fender curves. Fa<;:ade improvements a/so will
include exterior lighting and wall sconces. The building height is proposed at 21 feet to the
highest point of the roof. Most of the building height will be less than 17 feet.
Proposed landscaping includes a variety of plant species, including crape myrtles and
Indian Hawthorne. Waste removal will be by pick-up from a dumpster. The dumpster will be
located within an enclosure with a gate, at the northwest corner of the site. There is an active
code enforcement case regarding two outside portable storage units (trailers).
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 1, 2005. The
Planning Department recommends approval (1) to permit the expansion of retail sales in the
Commercial District with reductions to the front (west along Mars Avenue) setback from 25 feet
to 3.5 feet (to pavement) and from 25 feet to 15.5 feet (to building), a reduction to the front
(south along Drew Street) setback from 25 feet to 4.2 feet (to pavement) and reductions to the
front (east along North Keene Road) setback from 25 feet to five feet (to pavement) and from 25
feet to nine feet (to existing building) and a reduction from 38 parking spaces to 28 parking
spaces, 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
reductions to the front (west along Mars Avenue) from 25 feet to 8.5 feet (to pavement) and
from 25 feet to 11 feet (to dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the front (east along North Keene
Road) from 25 feet to five feet (to pavement) and a deviation to place landscaping on the inside
(south) side of the fence rather than the outside (north) side, as a Residentiallnfill Project,
under the provisions of 2-304.0; and a reduction to the front (west along Mars Avenue)
landscape buffer from 10 feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the front (south along
Drew Street) landscape buffer from 15 feet to 4.2 feet (to pavement), and reductions to the front
(east along North Keene Road) landscape buffer from 15 feet to 5 feet (to pavement) and from
15 feet to nine feet (to existing building), as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program under
the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. for the site at 1770 Drew Street, based upon the
recommended findings of fact, conclusions of law and conditions of approval as follows:
FindinQs of Fact: 1) Subject property is 29,695 square-feet (0.68 acre), approximately
135 feet wide; 2) The site is within the Commercial (C) District and the Commercial General
(CG) future land use plan classification and in the Medium Density Residential (MDR) District
and Residential Medium (RM) Category; 3) The applicant seeks to redevelop and expand an
existing bicycle store with parking lot, with reductions to the front (west along Mars Avenue)
setback from 25 feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement) and from 25 feet to 15.5 feet (to building), a
reduction to the front (south along Drew Street) setback from 25 feet to 4.2 feet (to pavement)
and reductions to the front (east along North Keene Road) setback from 25 feet to five feet (to
pavement) and from 25 feet to nine feet (to existing building) and a reduction from 38 parking
spaces to 28 parking spaces, 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 reductions to the front (west along Mars Avenue) from 25 feet to 8.5 feet
Community Development 2005-10-18
32
.
.
.
(to pavement) and from 25 feet to 11 feet (to dumpster enclosure), a reduction to the front (east
along North Keene Road) from 25 feet to five feet (to pavement) and a deviation to place
landscaping on the inside (south) side of the fence rather than the outside (north) side, as a
Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of 2-304.D; and a reduction to the front (west
along Mars Avenue) landscape buffer from 10 feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the
front (south along Drew Street) landscape buffer from 15 feet to 4.2 feet (to pavement), and
reductions to the front (east along North Keene Road) landscape buffer from 15 feet to 5 feet (to
pavement) and from 15 feet to nine feet (to existing building), as part of a Comprehensive
Landscape Program under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G; 4) Other improvements include
the addition of 1,663 square-feet to the building, provision of a new parking lot, landscaping,
fayade improvements, and exterior painting; 5) Two storage trailers will be removed from site as
they are not shown on the site plan; and 6) No other changes are proposed for the site or
building.
Conclusions of Law: 1) Staff finds the proposal compliant with the General Purposes of
the Code per Sections 1-103.A, B.2, E.9 and E.12; 2) Staff finds the proposal generally
compliant with the Flexible Development criteria; 3) Staff finds the proposal generally consistent
with the Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill and Residentiallnfill criteria; 4) Staff further
finds the proposal compliant with the General Applicability Standards per Section 3-913; and 5)
Staff recommends Board approval of FLD2005-06054 based on the recommended findings of
fact and conditions as stated.
Conditions of Approval: 1) That the site plan be revised, prior to building permit
issuance, to state the existing conditions within the site data table; 2) That a SWFWMD Permit
or Letter of exemption be provided prior to building permit issuance; 3) That all signage meet
Code, including the removal/redesign of any existing nonconforming signs, through building
permits prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the applicable site; 4) All Fire
Department comments are to be met prior to any building permit issuance; and 5) That a
Transportation Impact Fee of $6,141.33 be paid prior to Certificate of Occupancy.
Member Johnson moved to approve Item E1, Case: FLD2005-07076 for South Missouri
Avenue based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as listed, the Staff report, and
including Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval, as listed; Item E2, Case: FLD2005-
07079 for 1825 Sunset Point Road based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as listed,
the Staff report, and including Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval, as listed; Item E4,
Case: FLD2005-07067 for 1100 Cleveland Street based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law as listed, the Staff report, and including Conditions of Approval as listed; Item E5, Case:
FLD2005-07078 for 665-667 Bay Esplanade based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
as listed, the Staff report, and including Conditions of Approval as listed; and Item E6, Case:
FLD2005-06054 for 1770 Drew Street based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as
listed, the Staff report, and including Conditions of Approval as listed. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
F. LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (Items 1 - 3):
Community Development 2005-10-18
33
.
.
.
1 Case: FLD2005-07075 - 2430 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Level Two Application
Owner: Rophie Family Partnership.
Applicant: DC Customs.
Representative: John Atanasio (1420 Court Street, Clearwater, FL 33756; phone: 727-
443-07182207; fax: 727-447-2369).
Location: 0.964 acre located on the northwest corner of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and
Kilmer Avenue and on the south side of Shelly Street.
Atlas Page: 290B.
Zoning District: Commercial (C) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval to allow Vehicle Service Major in an existing 9,000
square-foot building located in the Commercial zoning district with a reduction to front (north
along Shelly Street) setback to pavement from 25 feet to 11.39 feet, reduction to front (east
along Kilmer Avenue) setback from 25 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement), reduction to front
(south along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard) setback from 25 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement),
reduction to the minimum number of required parking spaces from 14 spaces (1.5 spaces per
1000 square-feet of gross floor area) to 13 spaces (1.44 spaces per 1000 square-feet of gross
floor area) and to permit a six-foot high non-opaque fence within the required front setbacks
(north along Shelly Street and east along Kilmer Avenue), as a Comprehensive Infill Project
under the provisions of Section 2-704.C; with a reduction to front (east along Kilmer Avenue)
landscape buffer from 10 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement) and reduction to front (south
along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard) landscape buffer from 15 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement),
as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Vehicle Service Major.
Neighborhood Associations: 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.
The 0.964-acre site is located on the northwest corner of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and
Kilmer Avenue and on the south side of Shelly Street. The site is a triple frontage with
approximately 150 feet of frontage on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard to the south, 280 feet of frontage
on Kilmer Avenue along the east, and 150 feet of frontage on Shelley Street to the north. The
property currently is developed with a Vehicle Sales use, Enterprise Rent-A-Car, in the 2,520
square-foot building to the south, facing Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. The 9,000 square-foot building
to the north has been vacant for approximately two years and the previous occupant, Lokey
Motors, operated its body shop at this location.
No evidence could be found in City records indicating that vehicle service had been
approved at this location. Parking for the entire site is not well defined. Parking for the current
development of the north building is located in a non-conforming gravel lot between the building
and the Shelley Street right-of-way. Parking for Enterprise Rent-A-Car is asphalt and located
between the building and Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard right-of-way. The Enterprise Rent-A-Car
parking lot is non-conforming to front setbacks for Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and Kilmer Avenue,
with the asphalt running from property line to property line. Additionally, the non-conforming lot
line to lot line parking lot causes an inability to meet the required fifteen-foot landscape buffers
along the Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and Kilmer Avenue rights-of-ways.
Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is designated a scenic corridor requiring additional landscaping.
The existing building proposed for vehicle service is one-story in height and has four overhead
bay doors, two of which front on Kilmer Avenue and the remaining are internal to the west of the
Community Development 2005-10-18
34
.
.
.
site. The existing signage on the building indicates Lokey Motors and Saturn Body shops. The
proposal only includes improvement to the site and the building located to the north of the
Enterprise Rent-A-Car business. The Enterprise Rent-A-Car portion of the site will receive no
improvements due to lease constraints involving Enterprise Rent-A-Car and the property owner.
An Advanced Auto Parts store with accessory vehicle service exists across Kilmer
Avenue to the east of the site. There are detached dwellings to the north of this site across
Shelley Street. An existing retail sales/service strip center, including an adult use is located
contiguously to the west. In addition, behind the retail sales/service strip center is an existing
vehicle service use, A to Z Auto Care also contiguous to the west. The applicants also own this
property. To the south, across Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard are an existing motel, office building, and
two mobile home parks.
The applicant proposes a car customizing business where customers bring their
automobiles for personalized services such as: painting, custom bodywork, interior work, audio
and video systems, and installation of wheels for the northern portion of the parcel only. The
southern portion is to remain as it exists.
At a predevelopment meeting, prior to the applicant making their Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project application, staff advised the applicants of the concerns of a major
vehicle service use at this location and that applying for this application would require that the
entire site be brought into compliance with current code requirements.
The proposal includes a request to allow Vehicle Service Major in an existing 9,000
square-foot building located in the Commercial zoning district, as a Comprehensive Infill Project.
The Code defines Vehicle service, major as: Vehicle repairs which include engine repairs where
the cylinder head, pan or exhaust manifold is removed; steam cleaning of engines;
undercoating; vehicle spray painting; auto glass repair and replacement; repair and replacement
of transmission, differential, transaxles, shaft and universal joints, wheel and steering linkages
and assemblies; rebuilding and upholstering the interior of vehicles; customizing, restoration or
rebuilding of vehicles; chassis, frame, body, fender and bumper molding, straightening,
replacement and finishing; and repairs involving extensive welding, racing of engines or lengthy
or overnight idling of engines.
Staff's concern relative to the vehicle service major use is its proximity to the single-
family residential dwellings located across Shelley Street to the north. Based on the proposal
that has been submitted, staffs concern is that the vehicle service major use is too intense for
an area that has two existing vehicle service businesses in the immediate vicinity and in addition
the close proximity to the single-family residential development to the north. As such, staff does
not support this proposal.
The applicant also is requesting a waiver to the parking and landscaping requirements to
bring the Enterprise Rent-A-Car (southern) portion of the property into compliance as required
for establishing a new use on the site, as a whole. Staff's concern relative to the parking and
landscaping waiver is that the Community Development Code requires when a new use or a
change of use occurs that certain aspects of site redevelopment occur. These aspects
specifically are parking, landscaping, and signage. While staff realizes that even the proposed
partial redevelopment of this site is an improvement to the site, the failure to bring the remainder
of site (the frontage along the scenic corridor, Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard) is not in compliance with
Community Development 2005-10-18
35
.
.
.
the Code. As such, staff does not support this proposal for the following reasons: 1) The
purpose of the Landscape Code Division is to establish minimum landscaping/tree protection
standards in order to promote the preservation of existing tree canopies, to promote the
expansion of that canopy and to promote the enhancement of the quality of existing and future
development in the City; 2) The purpose of Scenic Corridors is to establish areas in the City
which have particular significance, in terms of tourism, economic development or community
character, and which therefore should have enhanced and differentiated landscaping
requirements. It is anticipated that specific corridor plans will be approved by the City Council
for each corridor and that when such plans are adopted, they shall constitute the requirements
for landscaping along these corridors; 3) The purpose of the Parking Code Division is to
establish standards which promote the orderly, efficient, and safe layout of parking and loading
areas; and 4) It is not understood how partial redevelopment of the site will constitute an
upgrade or create a form and function that will enhance the community character of the
immediate vicinity and the City of Clearwater, as a whole.
A positive aspect of the proposal includes a reduction to front (north along Shelly Street)
setback to pavement from 25 feet to 11.39 feet. Staff believes this will create an orderly and
safe parking layout that should be more appealing to the residential neighbors to the north. The
proposal includes reduction to front (east along Kilmer Avenue) setback from 25 feet to zero feet
(to existing pavement), reduction to front (south along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard) setback from 25
feet to zero feet (to existing pavement). Staff does not support this portion of the proposal due
to the non-compliance with the above-mentioned parking, landscaping, and scenic corridor
issues.
The proposal also includes a reduction to front (the southern portion of the property, east
along Kilmer Avenue) landscape buffer from 10 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement) and
reduction to front (south along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard) landscape buffer from 15 feet to zero feet
(to existing pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of
Section 3-1202.G. Staff does not support this portion of the proposal due to the non-compliance
with the above-mentioned parking, landscaping, and scenic corridor issues.
The Comprehensive Landscape Program Architectural Theme criterion requires that the
landscaping be demonstrably more attractive than otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed
for development under minimum landscape standards. The landscaping proposed with the
redevelopment of this property only consists of the northern portion of the property, and as such
does not meet the above criterion.
The Comprehensive Landscape Program Community Character criterion requires that
the landscaping will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. The
landscaping proposed with the redevelopment of this property only consists of the northern
portion of the property, and as such does not meet the above criterion.
The Comprehensive Landscape Program Property Values criterion requires that the
landscaping will have a beneficial impact on the value of the properties in the immediate vicinity.
While the landscaping proposed will have a beneficial impact to the residential properties
located to the north of the parcel. The landscaping proposed with the redevelopment of this
property only consists of the northern portion of the property, and as such does not meet the
above criterion.
Community Development 2005-10-18
36
.
A positive aspect of the proposal includes a request to permit a six-foot tall site
obscuring fence within the required front setbacks (north along Shelly Street and east along
Kilmer Avenue) that will buffer the parking area to the residential neighbors to the north, in a
more appealing manner than existing conditions.
The proposal includes a reduction to the minimum number of required parking spaces
from 14 spaces (1.5 spaces per 1,000 square-feet of gross floor area) to 13 spaces (1.44
spaces per 1,000 square-feet of gross floor area). The applicants parking analysis indicates
that the proposed parking for the northern portion of the property provides only two standard
and one handicapped parking spaces for customers. Staff does not support this portion of the
proposal because the number of parking spaces for customers appears to be inadequate.
Additional positive aspects of the proposal include the construction of a sidewalk within
the rights-of-way of Kilmer Avenue for pedestrian safety, where no sidewalk presently exists.
Site drainage is proposed within a ten-foot wide landscape buffer along the north side of the
property along the Shelley Street property line. A fifteen-foot landscape buffer is to be provided
along the northern portion of Kilmer Avenue. This enhancement will not only provide a storm
water treatment area, but the additional landscaping will assist in buffering the fence and
parking area to the residential neighbors to the north, in a more appealing manner than existing
conditions.
The applicant is proposing a single attached sign. It will need to meet the minimum
requirements of the sign code or the applicant may apply for consideration under the
Comprehensive Sign Program (CSP).
.
Staff's opposition for this project is based on the reasons enumerated above, including,
but not limited to the failure to incorporate improvements to the entire site and the intensification
of the incompatible uses to the residential properties in the immediate vicinity. All applicable
Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General Applicability criteria
(Section 3-913) and Comprehensive Infill Project criteria (Section 2-704.C) have not been met.
There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site.
.
FindinQs of Fact: 1) The parcel proposed for redevelopment is a triple-fronted lot
addressed off of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, which is an established scenic corridor and requires
enhanced landscaping requirements; 2) The Community Development Code requires when a
new use or a change of use occurs that the parking, landscaping, and signage of the parcel will
be brought into compliance with current code; 3) The proposed request to waive the required
development requirement (parking, landscaping, and signage) for the Enterprise Rent-A-Car
(southern) portion of the parcel proposed for development is not consistent with the requirement
of current Code; 4) The proposed partial redevelopment of the parcel will not create a form or
function that will enhance the community character of the immediate vicinity or the City of
Clearwater as a whole; 5) The proposed Vehicle Service Major use is defined as repairs which
include engine repairs where the cylinder head, pan or exhaust manifold is removed; steam
cleaning of engines; undercoating; vehicle spray painting; auto glass repair and replacement;
repair and replacement of transmission, differential, transaxles, shaft and universal joints, wheel
and steering linkages and assemblies; rebuilding and upholstering the interior of vehicles;
customizing, restoration or rebuilding of vehicles; chassis, frame, body, fender and bumper
molding, straightening, replacement and finishing; and repairs involving extensive welding,
racing of engines or lengthy or overnight idling of engines; 6) The vehicle service major use is
Community Development 2005-10-18
37
.
.
.
too intense for an area that has two existing vehicle service businesses in the immediate
vicinity; 7) The proposed use is compatible with to the adjacent Retail strip center to the west.
The close proximity to the single-family residential development to the north is not compatible;
8) The existing unimproved parking area for the northern portion of the property will be replaced
with an improved parking lot that will be buffered with a six-foot tall fence and a landscaping ten-
foot landscaping buffer along the north and a fifteen-foot landscaping buffer along the east
provide the residential properties to the north of Shelley Street a more appealing view; 9) The
proposed ten-foot wide storm water drainage swell along Shelley Street is a positive aspect of
the request, as it will provide some water quality treatment to a site that has no existing facilities;
10) The proposed construction of a sidewalk within the rights-of-way of Kilmer Avenue for
pedestrian safety is a positive aspect of the request; 11) Three of the five Comprehensive
Landscaping program criteria have not been met due to the partial redevelopment of the parcel;
and 12) There are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel.
Conclusions of Law: 1) Staff concludes that the proposal does not comply with the
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria per Section 2-704.C; 2) Staff further
concludes that the proposal is not in compliance with the General Applicability criteria per
Section 3-913 and the other standards of the Code; and 3) Based on the above findings, Staff
recommends denial of this application.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 1, 2005. The
Planning Department recommends denial of the Flexible Development approval to allow Vehicle
Service Major in an existing 9,000 square-foot building located in the Commercial zoning district
with a reduction to front (north along Shelly Street) setback to pavement from 25 feet to 11.39
feet, reduction to front (east along Kilmer Avenue) setback from 25 feet to zero feet (to existing
pavement), reduction to front (south along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard) setback from 25 feet to zero
feet (to existing pavement), reduction to the minimum number of required parking spaces from
14 spaces (1.5 spaces per 1,000 square-feet of gross floor area) to 13 spaces (1.44 spaces per
1,000 square-feet of gross floor area) and to permit a six-foot high non-opaque fence within the
required front setbacks (north along Shelly Street and east along Kilmer Avenue), as a
Comprehensive Infill Project under the provisions of Section 2-704.C; with a reduction to front
(east along Kilmer Avenue) landscape buffer from 10 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement)
and reduction to front (south along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard) landscape buffer from 15 feet to zero
feet (to existing pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of
Section 3-1202.G. with the following bases:
Bases for Denial: 1) The proposal does not comply with the Flexible Development
criteria for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, per Section 2-704.C.; 2) The proposal
is not in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria
per Section 3-913; and 3) The development is not compatible with the surrounding area and will
not enhance other redevelopment efforts.
Ms. Dougall-Sides submitted the resume of John Schodtler as an expert witness.
Alternate Member Dennehy moved to accept John Schodtler as an expert witness in the
areas of Planning, Zoning, and Site Plan Review. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously
Planner John Schodtler reviewed the request.
Community Development 2005-10-18
38
.
.
.
John Atanasio, representative, reviewed the history of the property, originally developed
in 1959 for American Motors and later replaced by Lokey, which did onsite vehicle sales and
repairs. He said the property has been difficult to lease and has been empty for two years. He
said the proposal is for a business that customizes brand-new vehicles, and will not be a
standard repair and machine shop. He said the property has had the same use for 45 years
and the building cannot be moved to meet current setback requirements. He said the proposal
includes a fence and landscaping to buffer nearby residential properties. He said nearby
residents had not complained about the use in the last 16 years.
In response to a comment that other commercial uses are in the same block of Gulf-to-
Bay Boulevard, Ms. Schodtler reviewed staff concerns regarding another major vehicle service
use in the immediate area. Meeting the Code requirement to bring the entire site into
compliance if any part of the site is modified would enhance the property's appearance. It was
stated that Code requirements help enhance the City's vibrancy.
Steven Lincoln, representative, said the front of the site cannot be modified nor
impervious surfaces removed to meet Code as the rent-a-car tenant's lease permits parking and
the display of vehicles on that surface. He said the property has no Code enforcement
problems. He said the applicant had worked with staff and has proposed rear landscaping that
exceeds Code requirements. He said the proposal will improve the site. In response to a
question, Mr. Atanasio said, with options, the rent-a-car agency lease could extend to 2035.
In response to a staff suggestion, it was stated that a retail use would be impractical in
the rear of a building in a block dominated by motor vehicle sales and service. Mr. Schodtler
expressed concern that the use later could be modified to major body and engine work. He said
while the tenant's other business is well run and clean, it cannot be guaranteed that the shop
will work exclusively on brand new vehicles and not do other types of repair work. Mr. Delk
recommended against putting staff in a position to determine the type of auto repair that is
permitted. Ms. Dougall-Sides reviewed auto repair uses permitted by Code, which include
major repairs.
It was stated a previous COB approval for a specific use could be enforced as it had
been granted to a property owner, not a tenant. Concern was expressed that the applicant may
not have done all possible to negotiate with the rent-a-car agency to increase the property's
landscaping
In response to questions, Mr. Atanasio said the initial lease with Enterprise Rent-A-Car
is from 2000 to 2010. It was questioned if he had contacted the rent-a-car agency to negotiate
the installation of landscaping. Mr. Atanasio replied that the City previously had permitted
parking in the front of the property to display cars.
In response to a suggestion that approval expire at the end of the initial lease if
landscaping requirements for the entire site are not met, Mr. Delk said it would be difficult for the
City to enforce a 5-year landscaping deadline. Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is a designated scenic
corridor and the City wants to improve the community. Staff has concerns regarding continued
auto repair activity in this location near residential uses.
Community Development 2005-10-18
39
.
.
.
Member Fritsch moved to deny Item F1, Case: FLD2005-07075 for 2430 Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and Bases of Denial as listed,
and the Staff report. The motion was duly seconded.
In response to a question, Mr. Atanasio said he did not wish to request a continuance.
Upon the vote being taken, Members Milam, Tallman, and Fritsch and Alternate Board
Member Dennehy voted "Aye"; Member Johnson and Acting Chair Plisko voted "Nay." Motion
carried.
2 Case: FLD2005-07077 - 107 McMullen-Booth Road Level Two Application
Owners/Applicants: Patrick and Toni Hickey.
Representative: Keith E. Zayac, P.E., RLA (701 Enterprise Road East, Suite 404, Safety
Harbor, FL 34695; phone: 727-793-9888; fax: 727-793-9855; email:
keith@keithzavac.com).
Location: 0.264 acre located on the east side of McMullen-Booth Road, approximately
100 feet south of Bay Lane.
Atlas Page: 292B.
Zoning District: Office (0) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit a doctor's office in the Office (0) District with
a reduction to the minimum lot width of 100 feet to 64.08 feet, a reduction to the front (west)
setback from 25 feet to 16 feet (to pavement), reductions to the side (north) setback from 20
feet to 10.7 feet (to existing building), from 20 feet to one-foot (to pavement) and from 20 feet to
five feet (to sidewalk) and reductions to the side (south) setback from 20 feet to 7.1 feet (to
existing building), from 20 feet to 9.7 feet (to pavement) and from 20 feet to 7.3 feet (to
sidewalk), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-
1004. B, and reductions to the landscape buffer along the north property line from 12 feet to 10.7
feet (to existing building), from 12 feet to one-foot (to pavement) and from 12 feet to five feet (to
sidewalk), reductions to the landscape buffer along the south property line from 12 feet to 7.1
feet (to existing building), from 12 feet to 9.7 feet (to pavement) and from 12 feet to 7.3 feet (to
sidewalk) and a reduction to foundation landscaping from five feet to zero feet, as a
Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use: Doctor's office.
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President,
2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@qte.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Ms. Dougall-Sides submitted the resume of Wayne Wells as an expert witness.
Member Johnson moved to accept Wayne Wells as an expert witness in the fields of
General Planning, Zoning, Site Plan Analysis, and Code Administration. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously
Planner Wayne Wells reported the applicant is requesting that the item be continued.
Keith Zayac, representative, requested the item be continued to November 15, 2005, to
allow the applicant time to work out remaining issues of disagreement with staff.
One resident opposed the continuation, as he wanted to comment on the item.
Community Development 2005-10-18
40
.
.
.
Mr. Zayak said he had worked in good faith with staff and noted his right to request a
continuance, as the full board is not present. He said he will make his best effort to make this
the last continuance he requests. In response to a question, he agreed to a December
continuance date.
One resident opposed continuing the item to December, as many residents who oppose
the proposal will be out of town then.
Mr. Zayak requested that the item be continued to December 20, 2005, to allow him time
to work out remaining issues with staff.
Member Johnson moved to continue Item F2, Case: FLD2005-07077 for 107 McMullen-
Booth Road to December 20, 2005. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
3 Case: FLD2005-07080 - 862 Bayway Boulevard Level Two Application
Owner: Hamilton Family Trust.
Applicant: Regatta Bay 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@mindsprina.com).
Location: 0.167 acres located on the north side of Bayway Boulevard, approximately 800
feet east of Gulf Boulevard.
Atlas Page: 2858.
Zoning District: Tourist (T) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval to permit five attached dwellings in the Tourist (T)
District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from 10,000 square-feet to 7,280 square-feet, a
reduction to lot width from 100 feet to 60 feet, reductions to the front (south) setback from 15
feet to nine feet (to building) and from 15 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), reductions to
the side (west) setback from 10 feet to eight feet (to building) and from 10 feet to four feet (to
sidewalk), reductions to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to seven feet (to building) and from
10 feet to eight feet (to pavement), reductions to the rear (north) setback from 20 feet to 18 feet
(to building) and from 20 feet to 15 feet (to pavement), an increase to building height from 35
feet to 77 feet (to top of lighthouse) and a deviation to permit the building within the sight
visibility triangles, under the provisions of Section 2-803.B.
Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (five condominiums).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Point 1 Beach House 16 (845 Bayway Blvd,
Clearwater, FI 33767; phone: 727-535-2424); Clearwater Point 3 Marina House 17 (868 Bayway
Blvd #212, Clearwater, FI33767); Clearwater Point 4 Island House 1(895 S Gulfview Blvd,
Clearwater, F133767; phone: 727-530-4517); Clearwater Point 5 Admiral House 19 (825 S
Gulfview Blvd #104, Clearwater, F133767; phone: 727-447-0290); Clearwater Point 7 Inc, Yacht
House (851 Bayway Blvd, Clearwater, F133767; phone: 727-441-8212; e-mail:
cpoint7@knoloqv.net); Clearwater Point 8 Shipmaster, Sail (800 S Gulfview Blvd, Clearwater, FI
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:
papamurphv@aol.com); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544
Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@ate.net).
Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Community Development 2005-10-18
41
.
The 0.167 acre is located on the north side of Bayway Boulevard, approximately 800
feet east of Gulf Boulevard. The site is 60 feet wide and 7,280 square-feet in area. The site
currently is developed with a two-story residential building with four attached dwellings. Parking
for the current development backs into the Bayway Boulevard right-of-way. All existing
improvements are proposed to be demolished.
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 Shells Restaurant at 551 Gulf Boulevard and the Clearwater Yacht Club at 830
Bayway Boulevard are the only nonresidential uses existing east Gulf Boulevard. The
Clearwater Yacht Club was approved by the CDB on May 17, 2005, to be reconstructed with a
three story (46.5 feet to mean roof height), 18,500 square-foot building with offices, exercise
room, restaurant, and a parking garage structure, with pavement at a zero-foot front setback
and the garage structure at a four-foot front setback (FLD2005-01008). The property directly
west at 850 Bayway Boulevard was approved by the CDB on September 21, 2004, to be
reconstructed with a mixed-use development of 13 attached dwellings and six hotel rooms/units
in a building 49 feet tall with the building at a 20-foot front setback, the pavement at a front
setback of 6.03 feet and the building/pavement at a 20-foot side setback to 862 Bayway
Boulevard (FLD2004-04026) (Note: A time extension to September 21, 2006, to submit for a
building permit was approved by the Community Development Director September 21, 2005).
Attached dwellings in a three-story building are located directly east of the subject property. To
the south and west of the subject property are four, nine-story residential buildings.
The proposal is to demolish the existing residential building and site improvements and
construct a new residential building with five living floors over ground level parking. The existing
residential building is located toward the rear of the property. The site has been designed with
the building oriented north/south with all parking located under the building. The existing dock
will be retained.
The request includes a reduction to the minimum lot area from 10,000 square-feet to
7,280 square-feet and a reduction to lot width from 100 feet to 60 feet. In order to redevelop
this parcel, it appears that the owner is without options to comply with the minimum lot area and
lot width requirements. The property to the east is developed with a large attached dwelling
complex, while the property to the west has been approved to be redeveloped on its original
property. Unless this developer can combine this property with that to the west, redevelopment
of this parcel is limited to the existing lot area and lot width. The limited lot width does pose
design issues for the site. The dimensional requirements for parking require an east/west
dimension of 43 feet minimum. Including the wall and column dimensions with the parking
dimensions produces a building that is 45 feet in width, leaving only 15 feet for setbacks. The
proposal includes reductions to the side setback requirements to provide a seven-foot setback
on the east and an eight-foot setback on the west to the actual building. The requested
reductions to the minimum lot width requirement is minimal, in light of the site design where the
applicant has been able to provide a majority of site improvements meeting Code requirements.
The present lot width of 60 feet, combined with the dimensional requirements for parking,
.
Community Development 2005-10-18
42
.
.
.
produces a hardship to redevelopment of the site. The reduction in lot width will not result in a
building that is out of scale with existing buildings in the immediate vicinity.
The proposal includes reductions to the front (south) setback from 15 feet to nine feet (to
building) and from 15 feet to zero feet (to trash staging area), reductions to the side (west)
setback from 10 feet to eight feet (to building) and from 10 feet to four feet (to sidewalk),
reductions to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to seven feet (to building) and from 10 feet to
eight feet (to pavement), and reductions to the rear (north) setback from 20 feet to 18 feet (to
building) and from 20 feet to 15 feet (to pavement). With regard to the front setback reduction
related to the trash staging area, the building will have refuse and recycling collection rooms on
the ground floor within the parking garage. Dumpsters and recycling containers 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 and is common
with many newer developments. In contrast, the attached dwelling buildings to the east and
south roll their dumpsters into the roadway as the staging area. The reduction to the front
setback to nine feet for the building is solely for the stairway to the second floor. The building
then steps back to a 12.5-foot setback from the front property line to an additional interior
stairwell providing access from the second to fifth floors and open-air front entries/balconies for
the dwelling units. Therefore, the actual living area of the units is setback approximately 20 feet
from the front property line. The building to the west at 850 Bayway Boulevard was approved at
a 20-foot front setback and the building at 706 Bayway Boulevard was approved at an 18-foot
front setback. The parking garage structure for the Clearwater Yacht Club at 830 Bayway
Boulevard was approved at a four-foot front setback.
With regard to the side setback reductions to the building along the east (seven feet) and
west (eight feet) sides, as discussed above, the reductions are a function of the lot width and
the parking dimensional requirements. The proposal includes a reduction to the west side
setback to four feet to provide for a sidewalk from the stairwell located midway in the building,
where the Building Code requires such sidewalk on the outside of the building to the public
sidewalk within the Bayway Boulevard right-of-way. This sidewalk does not extend the entire
distance along the west side of the building, and therefore provides adequate planting area for
landscaping. The proposal also includes a reduction to the rear setback to both the building and
to pavement. This proposed rear setback to the building is consistent with setbacks approved
by the COB for properties along Bayway Boulevard (620 Bayway Boulevard [27 feet]; 656
Bayway Boulevard [28 feet]; 674 Bayway Boulevard [30 feet]; 692 Bayway Boulevard [30 feet];
706 Bayway Boulevard [18 feet]; 830 Bayway Boulevard [18 feet]; and 850 Bayway Boulevard
[20 feet]). The proposed rear setback to the building is also consistent with the Building Code
setback requirement of at least 18 feet from the seawall. The rear setback reduction to
pavement is consistent with reductions approved at 706 Bayway Boulevard and 830 Bayway
Boulevard.
The proposal includes an increase to building height from 35 feet to 77 feet (to top of
lighthouse). The building is proposed with one dwelling unit per floor for Floors 2 - 4, with each
unit 3,510 square-feet of living area. There are two dwellings proposed on Floors 5 and 6, to be
constructed townhome-style where each of these units is two-stories in height, with each unit
2,512 square-feet of living area. The western penthouse unit includes a spiral stair to a
"widow's walk" deck with a "lighthouse." Based on the design of this building and the definition
of "building height" in the Code, the height of this building falls into the "other" category where
Community Development 2005-10-18
43
.
the building height is measured to the highest point of the building (top of the lighthouse). The
lighthouse is nonfunctional, where it will be lit internally for aesthetic purposes only.
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. While adjacent to existing or proposed buildings less than 50 feet in height,
the four residential buildings to the south between Bayway and South Gulfview Boulevards east
to Gulf Boulevard are each nine stories in height. The proposed height is compatible and
consistent with other projects within this "South Beach/Clearwater Pass District."
.
Parking spaces for the current residential building are located on-site, but require
vehicles to back into the Bayway Boulevard right-of-way to exit the spaces. The proposal will
eliminate all of these parking spaces and will provide eight parking spaces on-site (Code
minimum requirement is 1.5 spaces per unit or eight spaces for the five dwellings). Parking will
be provided at ground level under the building. The northernmost parking space to the rear of
the building is located partially under the building and partially under an overhang roof structure.
With the proposed site design eliminating the back-out parking which covers much of the front of
the property and restricting access to the single two-way driveway, the proposal minimizes
traffic congestion. The building design will fully enclose the parking level to screen views of the
vehicles from adjacent properties and rights-of-way, except a portion of the east side of the
building. Any approval of this request should be conditioned on the installation of a minimum
four-foot high landscaped fence or wall to screen the parking area from view from the property
to the east. A portion of the building is located within the sight visibility triangles at the driveway.
On the east side of the driveway, only a column is located within the visibility triangle, whereas
the enclosed stairs and recycling bin room encroaches into the visibility triangle on the west side
of the driveway. Due to vehicle turning movements, the issues of visibility at this driveway has
been determined to have minimal impacts on vehicular and pedestrian safety. A sidewalk will
be constructed in the right-of-way where vehicle pavement currently exists, increasing
pedestrian safety.
The design locates the trash room in the center of the building between the elevator and
the stairwell. Recycling bins have been designed under the front entry stairs, where residents
access the bins by "windows" on the inside of the building adjacent to the first parking space.
These bins are removed from this room to be placed in the trash staging area via a pedestrian
door adjacent to the driveway. The size of the trash room and the design of the recycling bin
room will need to meet the requirements of the Solid Waste Department.
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
would need to be a monument-style sign a maximum four feet in height, designed to match the
exterior materials and color of the building.
All applicable Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General
Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and attached dwelling criteria (Section 2-803.B) have been
met. There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site.
.
Community Development 2005-10-18
44
.
.
.
FindinQs of Fact: 1) The subject 0.167 acre is zoned Tourist District and is located within
the "South Beach/Clearwater Pass District" of Beach by Design; 2) The current use of the site is
four attached dwellings in a two story building with parking that is located within, and requires
vehicles to back into, the Bayway Boulevard right-of-way; 3) The lot area is 7,280 square-feet,
which does not meet the Code requirement of 10,000 square-feet; 4) The lot width is 60 in
width, which does not meet the Code requirement of 100 feet; 5) The proposal is for the
construction of five attached dwellings; 6) The proposed residential building is 77 feet tall (to top
of lighthouse); 7) The front setback of nine feet to building is to a stairwell, where the living area
of the dwelling units is at a 20-foot front setback; 8) Front setbacks vary along Bayway
Boulevard, with the property to the west approved at a 20-foot front setback to building, whereas
the property at 830 Bayway Boulevard was approved at a four-foot front setback to the parking
structure; 9) Side setback reductions are a function of the lot width and the dimensions for
parking design standards; 10) The proposed height is consistent and compatible with other
buildings in close proximity, where nine-story residential buildings are located across the
Bayway Boulevard; 11) The proposal will construct parking under the building at the minimum
amount required by Code for the proposed number of dwellings; 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 for attached dwellings per Section 2-803.B; 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 Beach by
Design; and 4) Based on the above findings, Staff recommends approval of this application.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 1, 2005. The
Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible Development application to permit
five attached dwellings in the Tourist (T) District with a reduction to the minimum lot area from
10,000 square-feet to 7,280 square-feet, a reduction to lot width from 100 feet to 60 feet,
reductions to the front (south) setback from 15 feet to nine feet (to building) and from 15 feet to
zero feet (to trash staging area), reductions to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to eight feet
(to building) and from 10 feet to four feet (to sidewalk), reductions to the side (east) setback
from 10 feet to seven feet (to building) and from 10 feet to eight feet (to pavement), reductions
to the rear (north) setback from 20 feet to 18 feet (to building) and from 20 feet to 15 feet (to
pavement), an increase to building height from 35 feet to 77 feet (to top of lighthouse) and a
deviation to permit the building within the sight visibility triangles, under the provisions of Section
2-803.B, for the site at 862 Bayway Boulevard with the following bases and conditions:
Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria for
attached dwellings per Section 2-803.B; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other standards
in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The
development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment
efforts.
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 trash and
recycling room design, sizes and locations meet the requirements of the Solid Waste
Department prior to the issuance of any permits; 3) That, prior to the issuance of any permits,
the site and landscape plans be amended to screen parking from view along the east side by a
minimum four-foot high solid landscaped fence or wall; 4) That any future freestanding sign be
Community Development 2005-10-18
45
.
.
.
monument-style, a maximum four feet in height and designed to match the exterior materials
and colors of the building; 5) 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; 6) That a condominium
plat be recorded prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy; 7) That boats moored
at the existing or future 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; 8)
That all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met related to seawall
setbacks; 9) That all Fire Department requirements be met prior to the issuance of any permits;
10) That, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, traffic impact fees be assessed
and paid; 11) That all Parks and Recreation fees be paid prior to the issuance of any permits;
and 12) That a stop sign or stop arm shall be installed at the parking garage exit.
Ms. Dougall-Sides submitted the resume of Wayne Wells as an expert witness.
Member Johnson moved to accept Wayne Wells as an expert witness in the fields of
General Planning, Zoning, Site Plan Analysis, and Code Administration. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
Mr. Wells reviewed the request and reported that staff had received one letter opposing
the proposal and one letter requesting that the item be continued.
Housh Ghovaee, representative, said the current site features back-out parking and
does not meet FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Authority) or ADA (Americans with
Disabilities Act) requirements. He said the applicant has worked closely with staff on this
project and no problems have occurred.
Patti Stough, representative, said the site was difficult to develop, and the project
includes substantial parking and meets Code as best it can.
Three residents spoke in opposition to the project as it is too tall, too large, destroys
neighbor views, and does not conform with the neighborhood.
In response to a concern regarding the visibility triangle, Ms. Dougall-Sides submitted
the resume of Scott Rice as an expert witness.
Member Fritsch moved to accept Scott Rice as an expert witness in the fields of Civil
Engineering, land Development, Environmental Engineering and Hydraulic. The motion was
duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Engineering Manager Scott Rice discussed staff review of the project, and said staff had
determined that the proposed sight distance is adequate. Concern was expressed that a health
and safety issue exists as the proposed visibility triangle does not meet Code and does not
provide ample distance for exiting vehicles to see approaching pedestrians. It was stated that
the Code should be amended if the City has determined that a smaller visibility triangle is
Community Development 2005-10-18
46
.
.
.
sufficient. Mr. Rice said staff reviews each case individually and considers traffic levels. He
reviewed other locations where visibility triangles are impacted. He agreed flipping the structure
would provide enhanced visibility for exiting vehicles.
In response to a concern that the structure will create a canyon effect along the road, Mr.
Wells said it will be set farther back from the street than buildings on Brightwater. Mr. Ghovaee
agreed to a condition requiring the installation of a stop sign at the parking garage's exit. He
said proposed setbacks are generous and that the applicant had tried to create an ability to view
the water from the sides of the building. He said the applicant was unable to purchase more
property and enlarge the site. He said the project meets Code requirements and is consistent
with height restrictions.
Member Johnson moved to approve Item F3, Case: FLD200S-07080 for 862 Bayway
Boulevard based on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as listed, the Staff report, and
including Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval, as listed and to add a condition of
approval that a stop sign or stop arm shall be installed at the parking garage exit. The motion
was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
The COB recessed from 3:03 to 3: 12 p.m.
G. DIRECTORS ITEM: (1)
1. Holiday Luncheon
Consensus was to schedule the holiday luncheon at the Harborview Center, prior to the
December 20, 200S COB meeting.
Consensus was to adopt a charity and bring a gift to the luncheon. Members will contact
charities and report on special needs.
Staff Request
Planning Manager Neil Thompson requested that board members return their COB
booklets to staff on November 1S, 200S, for updates.
Final Order
Attorney for the Board Gina Grimes requested that members review details of a Final
Order, which upheld a COB decision, and said Hearing Officers review every word of testimony.
The new procedure to establish expert testimony will facilitate future hearings.
Live Work Policy
In response to a question, Mr. Delk said staff will review the Live Work policy by early
next year, when it revisits Beach by Design.
Visibility Triangle
Community Development 200S-1 0-18
47
.
.
.
Ms.. Dougall-Sides reviewed criteria in Code that permit deviations to standards if doing
otherwise would be economically impractical. She said Code review is needed to distinguish
standards that are flexible from those which are not.
H. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:05 p.m.
Community Development 2005-10-18
48
~
.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: October 18, 2005
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the
following properties.
CONTINUED ITEM (Item 1):
1. Case: FLD2003-08039 - 1460, 1470 and 1480 South Missouri Avenue
Level Two Application
+yes
no
LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (Items 1-10):
1. Case: FLD2005-07075 - 2430 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
~yes no
2. Case: FLD2005-04036 - 211-221 Skiff Point
+es no
3. Case: FLD2005-07067 - 1100 Cleveland Street
+yes no
4. Case: FLD2005-07078 - 665-667 Bay Esplanade
-4-yes
no
5.
Case: FLD~5-06053 - 1101 South Fort Harrison Avenue
yes no
6.
Case: FLD2005-06054 - 1770 Drew Street
__Lyes
no
r
"
7. Case: FLD2005-07077 - 107 McMullen Booth Road
+yes
no
8. Case: FLD2005-07076 - 810 South Missouri Avenue
-Lyes
no
9. Case: FLD2005-07080 - 862 Bayway Boulevard
-A-yes
no
10. Case: FLD2005-07079 - 1825 Sunset Point Road
+yes
no
Signature:
S:\Planning Department\C D B\CDB, property investigation check list.doc
Date:
2
..
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: October 18, 2005
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the
following properties.
CONTINUED ITEM (Item 1):
1. Case: FLD200~1460' 1470 and 1480 South Missouri Avenue
yes no
Level Two Application
1.
LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (Items 1 - 10):
Case: FLD200~075 - 2430 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
~ ~es no
2.
Case: FLD2005736 - 211-221 Skiff Point
~ yes no
3.
Case: FLD2005-07067 - 1100 Cleveland Street
yes
no
4.
Case: FLD2005-~ - 665-667 Bay Esplanade
/ yes no
5.
6053 - 1101 South Fort Harrison Avenue
yes no
6.
Case: FLD2005-06054 - 1770 Drew Street
v:::
no
.
,
,
7.
Case: FLD2005-07077 - 107 McMullen Booth Road
t,h:
no
8.
Case: FLD~- 810 South Missouri Avenue
yes no
9.
Case: FLD2005-0~;c- 862 Bayway Boulevard
~yes no
10.
Case: FLD2~29 - 1825 Sunset Point Road
yes no
Signature:
S:\Planning Dep rtrnent\C D B\CDB, property investIgation check list.doc
Date: (01/7/0 S-
2
..
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: October 18, 2005
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the
following properties.
CONTINUED ITEM (Item 1):
1. Case: FLD2003-08039 - 1460, 1470 and 1480 South Missouri Avenue
Level Two Application
,/
V'.
yes
no
LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (Items 1-10):
1. Case: FLD2095-07075 - 2430 Gulf to Bay Boulevard
./ yes no
2. Case: FLD2005-04036 - 211-221 Skiff Point
/ yes
no
3.
Case: FLD2005-07067 - 1100 Cleveland Street
~yes no
4.
Case: FLD2005-07078 - 665-667 Bay Esplanade
/ yes no
5.
Case: FLD200j-06053 - 1101 South Fort Harrison Avenue
V yes no
6.
Case: FLD2005-06054 - 1770 Drew Street
v' yes
no
1.1
..
7.
Case: FLD2005-070n - 107 McM;len Booth Road
yes ~ no
8.
Case: FLD2005-07076 - 810 South Missouri Avenue
-/
yes
no
9.
Case: FLD2005-07080 - 862 Bayway Boulevard
1yes
no
10.
Case: FLD2005-07079 - 1825 Sunset Point Road
/ yes no
Signaluref);~~ ~
S:\Planning Department\C D B\CDB, property investigation check list.doc
Date: /0-:: IG;--or
2
"
\I
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: October 18, 2005
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the
following properties.
CONTINUED ITEM (Item 1):
1. Case: FLD2003-08039 - 1460, 1470 and 1480 South Missouri Avenue
~yes no
Level Two Application
LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (Items 1 - 10):
1. Case: FLD2005-07075 - 2430 Gulfto Bay Boulevard
L,./ yes no
2. Case: FLD2005-04036 - 211-221 Skiff Point
v'" yes
no
3. Case: FLD2005-07067 - 1100 Cleveland Street
\ /' yes
no
4. Case: FLD2005-07078 - 665-667 Bay Esplanade
/' yes no
5. Case: FLD2005-06053 - 1101 South Fort Harrison Avenue
~ yes no
6. Case: FLD2005-06054 - 1770 Drew Street
~
no
,.
,.
.
7. Case: FLD2005-07077 - 107 McMullen Booth Road
~yes
no
8. Case: FLD2005-07076 - 810 South Missouri Avenue
~s
no
9. Case: FLD2005-07080 - 862 Bayway Boulevard
~yes
no
10. Case: FLD2005-07079 - 1825 Sunset Point Road
~ no
Signature:
S:\Planning D
Date:
I(?-/(-t/f
CD B\CDB, property investigation check list.doc
2