04/17/2001
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING
CITY OF CLEARWATER
April 17, 2001
Present: Gerald Figurski Chair – arrived at 2:21 p.m.
Carlen A. Petersen Vice Chair
David Gildersleeve Board Member – arrived at 1:02 p.m.
Edward Mazur, Jr. Board Member
Shirley Moran Board Member
Alex Plisko Board Member
Ed Hooper Board Member
Also Present: Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney
Ralph Stone Planning Director – arrived at 3:30 p.m.
Cynthia Tarapani Assistant Planning Director
Lisa L. Fierce Development Review Manager
Patricia O. Sullivan Board Reporter
The Vice-Chair called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by
the Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order.
ITEM A - REQUESTS FOR CONTINUANCE/RECONSIDERATION
42 Midway Island
Item #A1 – : Ernest H. McDowell – Owner/Applicant. Request
reconsideration of a flexible development request to the reduce rear setback from 25
feet to 10 feet as part of Residential Infill Project at Island Estates of Clearwater Unit 3,
FL 01-01-02
Lot 8.
In his March 22, 2001 memorandum, representative Todd Pressman requested
reconsideration of this case.
Development Review Manager Lisa Fierce reviewed the applicant’s request to
reduce the rear setback on this Island Estates property from 25 feet to 10 feet to construct
a swimming pool, elevated 2.5-feet.
In reference to the CDB’s (Community Development Board) March 20, 2001 denial
of this request, Mr. Pressman requested reconsideration, stating the board had based their
decision on inaccurate information related to the proposed neighborhood conservation
overlay district. He submitted copies of the related petition, noting no reference is made
on either form to setbacks, as inferred at last month’s meeting. He said none of the
neighbors of the subject property object to the proposed elevation of the swimming pool.
Assistant Planning Director Cyndi Tarapani stated the City does not enforce deed
restrictions. She reviewed the neighborhood conservation overlay concept, indicating the
Coachman Ridge neighborhood is working on the process. She said 60% of the property
owners must agree to initiate the process to develop rules and establish plan goals and
strategies. With the petition, the Island Estates Civic Association had included a list of
items of interest for inclusion in the district. One item addressed increasing rear setbacks.
mcd0401 1 04/17/01
Once the City Commission approves initiating the process, a three- to six-month study
process will include intensive steering committee and planning meetings to develop an
agreement.
Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides said to reconsider a case, the board
must conclude that their decision was based on a mistake or incorrect information. It was
felt that was the case.
Member Hooper moved to reconsider Case FL 01-01-02 on May 15, 2001. The
motion carried
was duly seconded and unanimously.
ITEM B – CONTINUED ITEMS
2301 Campbell Road
Item #B1 – (Cont’d from 03/20/01) – : Paul A. Young, Carolyn L.
Young & Judith N. Coachman/City of Clearwater – Owner/Applicant. Request
annexation of 3.65 acres to the City of Clearwater and a Land Use Plan amendment to
RE, Residential Estate Classification, and rezoning to LDR, Low Density Residential
District at M&Bs 34/01 and 34/011 in Section 6, Township 29 South, Range 16 East.
ANX 00-09-16
Ms. Tarapani presented the request. This case, originally scheduled for March 20,
2001, was continued upon the request of owner, Paul A. Young. The 3.65-acre site, on
the southeast corner of Old Coachman and Campbell Road, is north of NE Coachman.
On July 2, 1981, property owners Francis S. Coachman and Judith S. Coachman signed
an ATA (Agreement to Annex) with the City to connect to the City’s sewer and/or water
system. At that time, the property was outside the City’s municipal boundaries and did
not meet the adjacency requirements for voluntary annexation. That agreement, binding
upon the owners, their successors, assigns, or any subsequent owner of this property,
consents to annex into the City when possible. As required, the City sent written notice
to the owner on October 6, 2000, stating its intent to annex this property. That notice
expired on December 5, 2000.
Since execution of this agreement, ownership of some of these parcels has
changed: 1) Judith N. Coachman owns the vacant large parcel (M&Bs 34-01) and 2)
Paul A. Young and Carolyn L. Young own the smaller corner parcel (M&Bs 34-011).
The City is initiating this annexation request. The subject property now is
contiguous with City boundaries. The City has provided the property with water and
sewer services since August 19, 1987. The proposal is consistent with Florida statutes
related to voluntary annexation regulations. Staff recommends the property have a land
use plan designation of Residential Estate and be zoned Low Density Residential (LDR).
The Young parcel features a single-family residence.
Member Gildersleeve moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 3.65
acres to the City of Clearwater and a Land Use Plan amendment to RE, Residential
Estate Classification, and rezoning to LDR, Low Density Residential District at M&Bs
motion
34/01 and 34/011 in Section 6, Township 29 South, Range 16 East. The was
carried
duly seconded and unanimously.
2394 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard
Item #B3 - (Cont’d from 03/20/01) - : Dayton Andrews, Inc.
A Florida Company - Owner/ Applicant. Request Flexible Development approval to
mcd0401 2 04/17/01
permit vehicle sales/display in Commercial District as part of a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project: 1) reduce lot size from 40,000 square-feet to 26,700 square-
feet; 2) reduce lot width from 200 feet to 100 feet; 3) permit vehicle display within front
setbacks along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard & Fernwood Avenue; 4) permit vehicle
sales/display on lot contiguous to property designated in zoning atlas as residential; 5)
permit vehicle sales/display on lot with less than 7,000 square feet of enclosed building;
6) permit vehicle sales/display outside enclosed building; 7) reduce parking spaces from
77 to 11 spaces; 8) reduce landscape buffer from 15 feet to 7.5 feet on Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard; 9) reduce landscape buffer from 15 feet to zero feet on Fernwood Avenue;
and 10) reduce landscape buffer from 12 feet to six feet along north property line at Sec.
FL 01-01-03
18-29-16, M&B 24.07.
Planner Mark T. Parry presented the request. On March 20, 2001, the CDB
reviewed this case. At that meeting, the applicant presented new information and a
revised site plan that had not been submitted previously. The Board continued the case
so the applicant could submit corrected plans and staff could analyze the revisions.
The 0.61-acre, rectangular site has 100 feet of frontage on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard
to the south and 267 feet of frontage on Fernwood Avenue to the west. The applicant
now proposes to remove the two curb cuts and aprons on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, and
provide 11 parking spaces, including one handicap space, and shade trees along
Fernwood, Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, and the north property line. The property, which has
undergone deterioration, has a single-story, 4,347 square-foot masonry-block building,
built in 1964, and 41-striped parking spaces. Most recently, the building featured a
nightclub, closed on August 19, 1999, plus two retail sales and service establishments,
closed June 7, 2000. The building is 100 feet from the north side, three feet from the
east side, 39 feet from the south front, and 40 feet from the west front property lines.
The applicant’s placement of vehicles for sale on every available portion of the lot,
including within all setbacks and rights-of-way, results in inefficient vehicle circulation.
The site has no landscaping. A dumpster is in the site’s right-of-way on its northwest
corner.
The applicant seeks approval of the vehicle sales and display business that has
been operating illegally on this site since 1999, when the applicant expanded Dayton
Andrews, a legally operating, vehicle sales and display establishment, to the subject site
without submitting a site plan application for a change use. The site has a current Code
violation (COD1999-03456) for illegal vehicle sales and display. After numerous
meetings between staff and the applicant to resolve the violations, this application was
submitted.
The site, in a highly developed, commercial area on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, is
adjacent to single- and multi-family residences to the north and across Fernwood
Avenue from the applicant’s main business. The applicant intends to operate the
subject site in conjunction with and support of the larger site. The sites are on two
separate lots.
The site has two curb cuts on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and two on Fernwood
Avenue. Display vehicles block all curb cuts except for the northernmost one on
Fernwood Avenue. Parking lot circulation is impeded, although a drive aisle runs
through the site and display vehicles are parked in the rights-of-way. A driveway
connects this site with Sweetwater’s Restaurant to the east.
mcd0401 3 04/17/01
The applicant proposes to apply a stucco finish on the building’s south and east
elevations and repaint the structure. The applicant proposes to install a 5.5-foot
landscape buffer within the Fernwood right-of-way, a six-foot buffer along the north
property line, a five-foot buffer along the east property line, and a 7.5-foot buffer along
Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. The new site plan indicates an optional sidewalk along
Fernwood, although the applicant proposes to install a 5.5-foot landscape buffer along
Fernwood in lieu of the required four-foot sidewalk. The proposal does not meet Code
landscape buffer minimums of 15 feet along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and 10 feet along
Fernwood.
Additional plantings typically are provided along road frontages where
developments lack sufficient landscaping. The proposed landscape plan does not meet
minimum Code requirements and is inconsistent with previously approved projects, Gulf-
to-Bay Boulevard redevelopment efforts, and the City. Staff recommends a minimum
landscape buffer of 15 feet on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and 10 feet on Fernwood, in
addition to a four-foot wide sidewalk within the Fernwood right-of-way. Shrub materials
proposed on the site plan will not reach 36 inches in height within 12 months as
required, negating their value as a landscape buffer.
At the March 20, 2001 CDB meeting, the applicant stated the landscape plan
would be revised to meet Code. Staff has not received the revised plan. On April 5,
2001, the applicant stated that all buffers will consist of plant materials, which will be 36
inches tall within 12 months of planting. If approved, staff recommends a condition
require staff approval of a revised landscape plan prior to the issuance of a Development
Order. Code requires shade trees be planted every 30 feet on center within all required
landscape buffers. While the applicant has proposed the required number of trees, they
are half the size required by Code. The applicant has stated that all trees will meet
Code requirements. Staff also recommends a condition requiring the landscape plan to
indicate which plants will be used.
Applications for Infill projects and Comprehensive Landscape Programs
generally provide upgraded landscaping to mitigate other site deficiencies. The
applicant’s proposal does not meet these goals. The proposed buffer along the east
property line will not stop cross access with the property to the east. The applicant has
submitted a draft of an agreement with that property owner. If approved, staff
recommends a condition require the applicant to obtain a cross access agreement with
the property to the east to maintain permanent legal access or a buffer along the full
length of the property line and file and record the agreement with Pinellas County. The
applicant stated at the March CDB meeting that a legal cross-access agreement would
be filed. Staff recommends the condition require proof of such an agreement be
submitted prior to the issuance of any permits.
The 48 square-foot, 20-foot high freestanding sign does not meet Code due to its
size and height. While the applicant has stated that all signage will comply with Code, a
plan has not been submitted. The 20 square-foot attached sign proposed for the
building’s south façade is twice as large as Code permits. Code permits one 10 square-
foot attached sign and one 10 square-foot freestanding sign. The amount of signage
may be doubled through a Comprehensive Sign Program. Staff has not received an
application. Staff recommends that all signage comply with Code.
mcd0401 4 04/17/01
On site business will operate from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. The applicant anticipates
no more than three employees will be on site and that approximately 35 vehicles will be
on display at any given time. Staff feels the site is too constrained to accommodate this
plan.
Staff feels the entire business establishment, at 2388 and 2394 Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard, should comply with Code if this expansion is approved. At the business’
main site at 2388 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, the applicant proposes to enlarge the
landscape buffer along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, install additional plantings along the main
entrance at the corner of Fernwood and Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, and enclose the
dumpster on the main site’s northwest corner. The applicant will replace an elevated
vehicle display structure on the main site’s southwest corner with a metal display
structure. Two similar structures will be added to the main site along Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard.
The applicant has proposed minimal improvements for the main site, including
replacement of dead or dying plant material, a basic Code maintenance requirement.
The applicant also proposes to enclose a dumpster and install plants along Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard within a 6.5-foot wide landscape buffer where 15 feet is required. The
applicant has proposed no other substantive improvements for the 3.83-acre main site.
The DRC (Development Review Committee) reviewed the application and
supporting materials on February 15, 2001. Staff recommends denial: 1) minimal
proposed landscaping does not meet Code for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project and is inconsistent with approved projects and Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard
redevelopment efforts; 2) landscape buffers along major arterial roads must be 15 feet in
width and along secondary streets must be 10 feet in width to mitigate deficiencies
elsewhere on site. Possible solutions include reducing the building’s size to lower
parking requirements and provide additional space for vehicle display and landscaping;
3) minimal improvements proposed for the building do not meet Code, Comprehensive
Infill Redevelopment Project requirements, and are inconsistent with approved projects
and Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard redevelopment efforts; 4) the plan lacks a sidewalk along
Fernwood to address pedestrian safety and does not provide adequate landscape
buffering between the subject site and adjacent residential uses to the north. The
proposed width of the landscape buffer along the north property line varies between five
and six feet where at least 10 feet is required; and 5) the applicant has proposed
minimal improvements to the master site to the west. Generally, redevelopment would
address the entire site and use. If approved, staff recommends twelve conditions.
In response to a question, Mr. Parry said Code requires a sidewalk be installed in
the right-of-way with 10-feet of landscaping within the property line along Fernwood.
The species of plants referenced on the site plan grows only to 24 inches in height
where 36 inches is requires. Concern was expressed when Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard
vehicle dealerships redeveloped their sites, the landscaping requirements were less
extensive. Mr. Parry said the spirit of Code landscaping requirements has not changed,
although landscaping requirements have increased. Previous dealership redevelopment
projects exceeded the previous Code’s landscaping requirements. Mr. Tarapani stated
staff is mindful of competition issues. Many properties have complied with the 15-foot
landscaping requirement. It was noted dealerships display vehicles to attract buyers. It
was felt the new Code is not fair as a 36-inch hedge would block drivers’ views of the
mcd0401 5 04/17/01
cars. Mr. Parry said all future redevelopment projects will meet these enhanced
landscaping requirements.
It was noted the board had continued this case to provide the applicant time to
submit corrected plans. Concern was expressed that little was accomplished. Ms.
Tarapani said staff had met with the applicant, who had indicated an unwillingness to
accept staff recommendations. It was stated it is disturbing the applicant had not
provided an adequate package for staff review.
Tim Johnson, representative, said the applicant has committed to providing
minimum landscape requirements. He reviewed the applicant’s landscape proposal,
stating the project, estimated to cost more than $150,000, will improve the
neighborhood. He had thought staff was satisfied with the application when staff
indicated a meeting between the two parties would not be necessary. He said staff later
requested a meeting where the applicant agreed to a host of conditions not previously
mentioned, such as reducing the size of the Fernwood egress and painting the garage
doors. He said the meeting was cordial and was shocked that staff continued to
recommend denial of the project.
He reviewed the staff recommended conditions. Mr. Johnson said the applicant
will accept a modification to the size of the landscape buffer in Condition #1 from 15 feet
to 10 feet. He said Condition #2 is unacceptable as it eliminates nine parking spaces.
The site currently is paved to the road. He suggested the condition allow the
landscaping to be located in the right-of-way. He said Conditions #3, #4, #5, and #6 are
acceptable, although the applicant may apply for a comprehensive sign plan in the
future.
Regarding Condition #7, Mr. Johnson said this would be the only portion of
Fernwood with a sidewalk. He said the applicant is willing to install a sidewalk in lieu of
the landscaping buffer. He said Conditions #8 and #9 are acceptable, noting a cross
easement agreement with Sweetwater’s Restaurant has been finalized. He agreed with
Conditions #10 and #11, and stated Condition #12 is almost acceptable. To replace the
elevated ramp, the applicant wishes to nestle single car ramps in the landscaping,
setback five feet, instead of ten. He said height of the ramps will be reduced from 5 feet
to 3 feet.
Concern was expressed the applicant had not submitted complete plans. Mr.
Johnson stated attitudes had been established early in the process. In response to a
question regarding landscape materials, Mr. Parry said site plans typically indicate the
types of plants to be installed. Mr. Johnson said it is written on the plan that all
landscaping requirements will be met. Bill Adams, of Adams Construction, stated the
final site plan, listing the correct plants, will be submitted when the application for a final
permit is submitted. It was stated it is the applicant’s responsibility to present drawings
which list correct plant materials and not up to staff to make corrections.
In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said staff would prefer the number of
parking spaces be reduced and retain the sidewalk and landscaping requirements. It is
difficult for staff to site plan a project at a CDB meeting. Mr. Johnson agreed to reduce
onsite parking to three parallel spaces. Ms. Tarapani said a site plan is a binding
authority. If the CDB wishes to approve the project, the submission of a revised site plan
mcd0401 6 04/17/01
that meets Code would be required. She said staff would agree to the proposed
modifications to Condition #2 and #12.
It was stated redevelopment efforts should incorporate current structures. It was
suggested a sidewalk along Fernwood is not necessary and that landscaping alone
would be acceptable.
Consensus was to remove the requirement for a sidewalk along Fernwood.
It was stated this is a key Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard redevelopment project.
Concern was expressed regarding difficulties. It was felt the project should move ahead.
It was stated landscape buffers are important to redevelopment efforts along Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard
Member Hooper moved to approve a Flexible Development request to permit
vehicle sales/display in the Commercial District as part of a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project: 1) reduce lot size from 40,000 square-feet to 26,700 square-
feet; 2) reduce lot width from 200 feet to 100 feet; 3) permit vehicle display within front
setbacks along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard & Fernwood Avenue; 4) permit vehicle sales/
display on lot contiguous to property designated in zoning atlas as residential; 5) permit
vehicle sales/display on lot with less than 7,000 square feet of enclosed building; 6)
permit vehicle sales/display outside enclosed building; 7) reduce parking spaces from 77
to 11 spaces; 8) reduce landscape buffer from 15 feet to 7.5 feet on Gulf-to-Bay
Boulevard; 9) reduce landscape buffer from 15 feet to zero feet on Fernwood Avenue;
and 10) reduce landscape buffer from 12 feet to six feet along north property line at Sec.
1) landscape buffer to be increased to 10
conditions
18-29-16, M&B 24.07 with :
feet along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard & corners at Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and
Fernwood Avenue to be improved with planters, similar in design and plant
species in lieu of 15-foot landscape buffer along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard to
mitigate reduced width; 2) 10-foot landscape buffer to be installed within
Fernwood Avenue right-of-way; 3) all perimeter buffers to include plant material
that will reach and be maintained at a height of at least 36 inches within 12
months of planting; 4) all dead and dying plant material to be replaced prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy; 5) all new plant material at 2388 and 2394
Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard to meet Code minimum size requirements; 6 ) all signage
on 2394 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard site to comply with Code; 7) two dumpsters at
northwest corner of 2388 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard to be enclosed by concrete
block wall & chain link gate; 8) cross access agreement to be executed prior to
issuance of Development Order; 9) south entrance along Fernwood Avenue for
2394 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard site to be a right-in only with its width reduced to 18
feet; 10) exterior of building at 2394 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard to be finished as
proposed and overhead doors on west façade to be painted to match building;
11) vehicle display platform at southwest corner of 2388 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard to
be removed and replaced with three, single-vehicle display platforms, no closer
that five feet from Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard property line and no more than three
feet in height; and 12) all landscaping to be installed prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy and that a corrected site plan reflecting planned
landscaping materials be filed with the City prior to issuance of Development
Order.
motion carried
. The was duly seconded and unanimously.
mcd0401 7 04/17/01
Concern was expressed the applicant had taken advantage of staff. It was felt
that staff had made a supreme effort and that attacks and criticisms were unfounded.
Staff was complimented for the helpful staff report.
ITEM C – LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS
812 Pinellas Street
Item #C1 – : Thompson Executive Center Partnership Number Two -
Owner/Applicant. Request Flexible Development approval to reduce the front setback
from 25 feet to 20 feet along Pinellas Street, reduce from 20 feet the east side setback to
five feet, the west side setback to zero feet, and the north rear setback to eight feet,
reduce the minimum lot area from 10,000 square feet to 7,492 square feet, and reduce
the minimum lot width from 100 feet to 55.5 feet, as part of a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Program with a Comprehensive Landscape Program at Lot 13 and
FL
south ½ of vacated alley adjoining on the North, Block 10, Milton Park Subdivision.
01-02-07
Planner W. Ryan Givens reviewed the request. The 0.17-acre parcel, south of
downtown, is east of Myrtle Avenue, a commercial and office corridor. The Thompson
Executive Center, west of the site, fronts Myrtle. This section of Pinellas Street has
modest single-family homes.
The parcel is zoned LMDR, Low Medium Density Residential District with an
underlying land use of RU, Residential Urban Classification. The site legally can support
residential uses with a special exception to permit non-residential parking. The site
currently is under review for a zoning change to O, Office District with a future land use
of R/OG, Residential/Office General Classification concurrent with this Flexible
Development application.
The vacant site, rarely used, is covered by shell rock and reserved for non-
residential, overflow parking for the adjoining office center. An alley to the rear of the
property is closed to vehicular traffic. One of the three oak trees in the front of the lot
has a healthy, 34-inch trunk. Two smaller oaks are to the rear.
The applicant recently acquired the site for approximately $83,000 and razed the
single-family residence to provide overflow parking that never materialized. The site is
unused. Assuming a modest, $60,000 home is built, it is unlikely the owner could
recoup an investment in excess of $142,000. Staff feels a small office would be a more
practical use for the property as it would be relatively low intensive and compatible with
the residential neighborhood, if designed appropriately.
This project will construct a 1,350 square-foot office building designed to
resemble a wood, bungalow-style house with a pitched-roof, porch, and columns. Five
parking spaces will be to the building’s rear to maintain the appearance of a single-
family home. All five oak trees will be preserved. Water detention will be provided
underground. Staff recommends access to the adjacent alley be prohibited as the
easement is far below engineering standards for a paved aisle.
The request to reduce all required setbacks would allow a reasonable use of the
property and a design that blends into the single-family residential neighborhood. As
many nearby front setbacks vary in size, the proposed 20-foot setback is consistent with
mcd0401 8 04/17/01
the neighborhood. The requested five-foot east side setback is consistent with
standards for a single-family residence. As the building will appear to be a home, the
reduced setback seems reasonable, especially if a dense landscaping buffer is
proposed. Staff recommends the project provide ingress and egress on Pinellas Street.
Given the narrow lot size, the minimum required driveway width of 19 feet can be
achieved only via an access easement with the neighboring office building, resulting in a
zero-foot west setback. Staff supports this solution. The applicant also wishes to
provide one more parking space than required by Code to prevent on-street parking.
One required parking space must be designated as handicap, preventing normal use.
The added space will reduce the rear setback to eight feet. Staff supports this request
only if the landscaping plan is amended to create a dense landscaping buffer along the
north property line. As submitted, the landscape plan features a tiered effect in the front
setback and a continuous hedge with trees along the east property line.
Considering the applicant’s attempt to provide a compatible design, staff feels the
requested setbacks seem reasonable and will not impact negatively on neighboring
properties. Staff feels the proposal is reasonable, due to the neighborhood’s condition,
the site’s location next to a large office building, and high, site-related economic factors.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on March 15, 2001.
Staff recommends approval with six conditions.
Bob Thompson, applicant, stated the rear of the buildings are not attractive. He
said the project will improve the neighborhood and shield unsightly views. The project
will retain the oak trees. He said the project will provide a transition between office and
residential uses. It was stated Mr. Thompson has made significant investment and
efforts to improve Myrtle Avenue.
Member Gildersleeve moved to approve the Flexible Development request to
reduce the front setback from 25 feet to 20 feet along Pinellas Street, reduce from 20
feet the east side setback to five feet, the west side setback to zero feet, and the north
rear setback to eight feet, reduce the minimum lot area from 10,000 square feet to 7,492
square feet, and reduce the minimum lot width from 100 feet to 55.5 feet, as part of a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Program with a Comprehensive Landscape
Program at Lot 13 and south ½ of vacated alley adjoining on the North, Block 10, Milton
conditions
Park Subdivision with : 1) vehicle access to adjacent alley to be prohibited; 2)
oak tree in adjacent right-of-way to be preserved prior to & during all construction
phases; 3) shared access easement for driveway to be secured and recorded with
Pinellas County; 4) all parking to be provided to building’s rear & screened from
roadway; 5) office building elevations to remain residential in character to include a
pitched-roof, front porch, and paned-windows as generally depicted in the submittal; and
6) landscape plan to be amended to include landscaping along north & west property
motion carried
lines. The was duly seconded and unanimously.
2634 Barksdale Court/
Item #C2 - : Winding Wood Condominium X AssociationJ.C.
Dubois - Owner/Applicant. Request Flexible Development approval to increase the
height of a fence from four feet to six feet as replacement fencing for outdoor patio
areas, as part of a Residential Infill Project at Winding Wood Condominium X.
FL 01-02-06
mcd0401 9 04/17/01
Mr. Givens reviewed the request. The 11.56-acre property, on the southeast
corner of Winding Wood Drive and Countryside Boulevard, is east of US 19N. The site
is one of ten phases of the Winding Wood Condominium Development. Condominium
developments are north, south, and east of the subject property. The immediate vicinity
is suburban in character with both attached and detached dwellings.
The site features 72 dwelling units in 36 wood buildings. The six-foot wood
fences, which enclose each unit’s outdoor patio, need repair and replacement. The
project includes new fence posts and panels. Code restrictions require a Level Two
application for this project. The new fences will be of the same design, height and taupe
color that currently exists. Residents enjoy their patios as a private place outside the
complex‘s common outdoor spaces.
Staff usually discourages tall fences near public rights-of-way for aesthetic and
safety purposes. However, these fences are set back more than 26 feet from
Countryside Boulevard. Many complex fences face interior green space. Replacing the
fences with shorter panels to meet Code would degrade residential privacy. Property
landscaping of several trees and sparse hedges front Countryside Boulevard and
Winding Wood Drive. Staff recommends enhancing property landscaping with additional
plantings to improve the buffer between the fences and rights-of-way. The split rail
fence along the Countryside Boulevard right-of-way is in poor condition. Staff
recommends the perimeter split rail fence be repaired as part of this application.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on March 15, 2001.
Staff recommends approval with three conditions.
In response to a question from representative Bruce Phillips, Mr. Givens
reviewed recommended landscape materials and height requirements. The permit will
allow the replacement of privacy fences and repair of the split rail fence.
Member Mazur moved to approve the Flexible Development request to increase
the height of a fence from four feet to six feet as replacement fencing for outdoor patio
areas, as part of a Residential Infill Project at Winding Wood Condominium X with
conditions
: 1) plant a three-foot continuous hedge along patio fences near Countryside
Boulevard and Winding Wood Drive to improve their appearance as seen from the
rights-of-way; 2) augment the hedge along Countryside Boulevard with additional
plantings to create a continuous buffer; and 3) repair the split rail fence along
motion carried
Countryside Boulevard as needed. The was duly seconded and
unanimously.
667 Bay Esplanade, Units #5, 6, & 7
Item #C3 - : Kelley Investment & Management
Corp./Paul Kelley - Owner/Applicant. Request Flexible Development approval to permit
a detached dwelling as part of a multi-family development, to reduce the minimum lot
width from 100 feet to 56 feet, to reduce the number of required parking from eight
spaces to six spaces, and to permit a parking design other than what is required by
Code, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Development Project at Mandalay Unit No. 5
FL 01-02-08
Replat, Blk 77, Lot 7.
Mr. Givens reviewed the request. The 0.278-acre site, on the east side of Bay
Esplanade adjacent to Clearwater Harbor, has seven dwelling units in three buildings.
The buildings are in good condition but lack architectural style. The site’s front is nearly
mcd0401 10 04/17/01
covered with asphalt and blends into the adjoining property’s parking area. Of four
perpendicular parking spaces in the right-of-way, the southernmost space blocks access
to the site’s interior. Another two spaces are in the center of the parcel. The buildings
and site configuration prevent an efficient parking and landscaping pattern.
Most of the immediate vicinity has attached dwellings and small motels, which
feature 1950s architecture and show signs of previous expansions. Bay Esplanade has
no sidewalks in this area. Many sites rely on public rights-of-way to accommodate
perpendicular, back-out parking. The streetscape needs redevelopment to improve
parking, pedestrian access, and aesthetics.
The beach redevelopment plan, Beach by Design, identifies this neighborhood as
the “Old Florida” District, with residential neighborhoods and limited retail uses to serve
local needs. Beach by Design recommends this area be redeveloped with single-family
dwellings and townhouses. Beach by Design acknowledges a lack of parking may
hinder revitalization, particularly on Bay Esplanade. The Plan suggests pursuing shared
parking strategies to assist revitalization efforts.
This proposal will convert the three-unit, two-story structure into a single-family
residence. The project will expand the building’s footprint by 361 square-feet and
convert the structure into a two-story, Key West-style home with an observation tower
and galvanized metal roof. The project must meet FEMA (Federal Emergency
Management Agency) flood construction requirements if the value of improvements
exceeds 50% of the structure’s value, assessed over five years.
The owner intends to pursue a phased approach to redevelopment due to
economic issues. This project will make little change to the parking configuration but
proposes landscaping improvements to a small area along Bay Esplanade and to the
site’s interior. The owner proposes to plant five Queen Palms along the harbor.
This request is to permit a detached dwelling in the Tourist District where the use
is not permitted. The site meets Code’s intent to permit multi-family development.
Attaching the building to other onsite structures would impede tenant access of the water
and be unattractive. Beach by Design recognizes neighborhood site constraints and
redevelopment difficulties.
The applicant also requests to reduce the minimum lot width from 100 feet to 52
feet. The triangular site’s irregular shape varies from 52 feet wide at the front setback to
more than 115 feet wide along the waterfront.
The applicant also requests to reduce the required number of parking spaces
from eight to six and to permit a parking layout different from Code. As proposed, the
site will retain six parking spaces, counting those in the right-of-way. While staff
normally does not support parking in the right-of-way, this type of parking already exists
and will not be expanded. To improve circulation, one parking space will be removed.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on March 15, 2001.
Staff recommends approval with two conditions.
Paul Kelley, applicant, was present. In response to a question, Mr. Givens
reviewed onsite driveway access issues.
mcd0401 11 04/17/01
Member Petersen moved to approve the Flexible Development request to permit
a detached dwelling as part of a multi-family development, to reduce the minimum lot
width from 100 feet to 56 feet, to reduce the number of required parking from eight
spaces to six spaces, and to permit a parking design other than what is required by
Code, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Development Project at Mandalay Unit No. 5
conditions
Replat, Blk 77, Lot 7 with : 1) future redevelopment initiatives to include a
parking design that complies with Code or is approved by the Community Development
Board and 2) that the applicant acknowledge that parking in the right-of-way is not
motion carried
guaranteed and may cease without notice. The was duly seconded and
unanimously.
1111 McMullen-Booth Road
Item #C4 - : PACT, Inc./City of Clearwater - Owner/
Applicant. Request Flexible Development approval to permit the expansion of an indoor
recreation/entertainment use within the I, Institutional District and reduce the west side
setback from 10 feet to zero feet, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
FL 01-02-10
Project at Sec. 09-29-16, M&B 24.03 & 24.04.
Mr. Mazur declared a conflict of interest and vacated the dais.
Planner Mark T. Parry reviewed the request. The 41-acre flag lot is on the east
side of McMullen-Booth Road, north of San Bernadino Street. The site, with 55 feet of
frontage on McMullen-Booth Road to the west, is more than 2,000 feet deep. The site’s
73,269 square-foot, 80 foot high masonry-block building is home to Ruth Eckerd Hall, a
performing arts facility, and is between 110 and 350 feet from all property lines. The
site’s 959 parking spaces are in four distinct lots, zero feet from the west, 60 feet from
the south, 35 feet from the north and 200 feet from the east side property lines. Only the
west half of the property is developed. Also, a 15-foot high, 5,400 square-foot masonry-
block studio building is north of Ruth Eckerd Hall, across the access drive.
The site has three zoning districts; 1) Open Space/Recreation; 2) Preservation;
and 3) Institutional. The far east portion, and a small area in the north central portion are
zoned OS/R. The Preservation District is between the two OS/R sections, along the
north portion of the site. The site’s OS/R and Preservation District portions are vacant
and are not part of this application. All development is exclusive to the Institutional
District portion of the site.
The site is within a residential area. Currently, PACT, Inc. owns 4.24 acres on
which Ruth Eckerd Hall sits. The City owns the other 36.76 acres, including the access
drive from McMullen-Booth Road, the studio building, and all parking lots. Ruth Eckerd
Hall, built in 1983, has operated continuously for 18 years. Since 1981, the City and
PACT, Inc. have had a joint access/use agreement. By the end of 2001, the property
owned by PACT, Inc. will revert to the City. Clearwater will own the entire property.
PACT, Inc. will continue to operate the site.
The applicant seeks to expand Ruth Eckerd Hall with a three-story, 40-foot high,
19,462 square-foot addition to the building’s northeast side. The project will expand the
building’s footprint approximately 60 feet and increase the total building area from
73,269 square-feet to 120,741 square-feet. Also proposed is additional space under the
auditorium’s seating area on the building’s southwest side, to provide an internal
corridor between both sides of the building. No such connection currently exists and
mcd0401 12 04/17/01
patrons must walk around the building’s exterior. The addition, including façade
refurbishment that will provide a unified appearance, is the facility’s first major
renovation.
The proposal includes extensive landscaping throughout the site that exceeds
Code. New landscaping will be installed at the McMullen-Booth Road entrance, around
the freestanding sign, and along the entire access drive. All redesigned parking areas
will be landscaped in excess of Code. All dead and dying plant material will be replaced.
The project will provide additional lobby, conference, office, and hallway space,
classrooms, rehearsal, and practice rooms, an expanded loading dock, new ticket office,
and restrooms. A new 176-seat studio theater will increase the facility’s total number of
seats to 2,351.
The proposal also will reconfigure several lots to improve circulation and add
approximately 82 parking spaces, primarily in the site’s northeast portion, for a total
1,041 parking spaces. Although Ruth Eckerd Hall is required to have 604 spaces, the
center historically has experienced parking shortages during some events.
The proposal also includes a 3,060 square-foot addition to the studio building for
supplementary studio and workshop space. That building, on City-owned land, is three
feet from the property line separating City and PACT, Inc. owned property. The addition
will cross the property line with a zero foot setback.
The Institutional District does not permit indoor recreation/entertainment use.
Ruth Eckerd Hall is a nonconforming use. As Code prohibits the expansion of
nonconforming uses, this application for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project
is necessary. This request is to permit the expansion of an indoor recreation/
entertainment use within the Institutional District.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on March 15, 2001.
Staff recommends approval.
In response to a question, Mr. Parry said staff is unaware of noise complaints
from the residential neighborhood. All expansion will be in the northeast section, toward
the site’s interior. The area fronts Alligator Creek and is heavily buffered.
Harry Cline, representative, was present. It was noted this expansion was part of
the facility’s original plan.
Member Petersen moved to approve the Flexible Development request to permit
the expansion of an indoor recreation/entertainment use within the I, Institutional District
and reduce the west side setback from 10 feet to zero feet, as part of a Comprehensive
motion
Infill Redevelopment Project at Sec. 09-29-16, M&B 24.03 & 24.04. The was
duly seconded. Members Gildersleeve, Moran, Petersen, Plisko, and Hooper and Chair
carried
Figurski voted “Aye.” Member Mazur abstained. Motion .
7 McMullen-Booth Road:
Item #C5 - K.B. Investment Group, Inc. – Owner/ Applicant.
Request Flexible Development approval to permit attached dwellings in the LMDR, Low
Medium Density Residential District within more than two buildings, on a lot which was
not vacant as of the date of the adoption of the Community Development Code and is
mcd0401 13 04/17/01
FL
not a corner lot, as part of a Residential Infill Project at Sec. 16-29-16, M&B 21.09.
00-11-53
Mr. Parry reviewed the request. The 0.84-acre site is on the east side of
McMullen-Booth Road, north of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. The City recently annexed the
property with zoning LMDR, Low Medium Density Residential District. The site is heavily
wooded and features a vacant, 1,516 square-foot, single-family residence. Several
specimen live oaks in the site’s southeast quadrant include two, 60-inch trees. A 30-
inch tree will be removed. Bayshore Townhomes are north and adjacent to the site. An
access road to the townhomes runs along the site’s north side and east rear property
lines. Single-family residences are west and south of the site, and across McMullen-
Booth Road. A mobile home park is to the south.
The applicant wishes to construct six townhome units in three 4,672 square-foot
buildings. The wood, two-story colonial-style homes will have peaked shingle roofs.
Each dwelling unit, to be platted as a condominium, will have 2,336 square feet, a two-
car garage, and be 24 feet in height. The homes will be finished with vinyl siding or
stucco. The design is consistent with the size and character of area houses. Two
retention areas, each approximately 1,700 square-feet, will be constructed in the site’s
northeast and southeast corners. As the site drains across private property to the east,
the retention ponds, designed to handle a 100-year storm event, must perk within 24
hours.
A private drive will bifurcate the subdivision and provide ingress/egress to
McMullen-Booth Road. The private drive requires approval of a Pinellas County
driveway permit prior to the issuance of any City permits. The homeowner’s association
will own and maintain the driveway.
Attached dwellings typically are permitted in the LMDR District as a Level One,
Flexible Standard Development request, provided the plan meets eight flexibility criteria.
The plan does not meet two criteria: 1) parcel developed before the Code was adopted
and 2) dwelling units are in more than two buildings. Developing the site with a
maximum of two buildings would be out of scale with the neighborhood. Application as a
Residential Infill Project development was necessary.
Site constraints, related to drainage and specimen trees, influenced the layout of
the three buildings, positioned to preserve many large trees. Staff has guided and
worked closely with the applicant to ensure that specimen trees will have the best
chance of survival. The applicant has worked to design buildings that are consistent
with neighborhood scales.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on December 14,
2000, and March 15, 2001. Staff recommends approval with three conditions.
In response to a question, Mr. Parry said staff is confident the trees will survive.
The City’s arborist has worked with the applicant on the site plan.
Todd Pressman, representative, introduced the developers.
Member Petersen moved to approve the Flexible Development request to permit
attached dwellings in the LMDR, Low Medium Density Residential District within more
mcd0401 14 04/17/01
than two buildings, on a lot which was not vacant as of the date of the adoption of the
Community Development Code and is not a corner lot, as part of a Residential Infill
conditions
Project at Sec. 16-29-16, M&B 21.09 with : 1) all necessary precautions be
taken prior to and during construction to preserve two 60-inch oak trees on site; 2)
should the two oak trees be damaged or destroyed, an equivalent number of caliper
inches to be replaced on site or through City’s tree replacement fund to staff satisfaction;
and 3) County driveway permits to be approved prior to issuance of any permits. The
motion carried
was duly seconded and unanimously.
1601 Druid Road East
Item #C6 - : Charles W. Hamrick, Dorothy E. Hamrick, Richard L.
Kamensky, TRE & Elizabeth Plecker (Sun Ketch Construction/Tom Quaretetti, V.P.) -
Owner/Applicant. Request Flexible Development approval to permit attached dwellings
in the LMDR District for more than two buildings, on a lot that was not vacant on the date
of the Code’s adoption; to reduce front setbacks along internal, private roads from 25
feet to 21 feet, reduce rear setbacks on internal property lines from 15 feet to 13 feet,
reduce side setbacks along internal property lines from 10 feet to 8.5 feet, and reduce
side setbacks from 10 feet to zero feet for common wall construction for all buildings;
and Preliminary plat approval of 32 lots for attached dwellings at Sec. 14-29-15, M&B
FL 00-11-60/PLT 00-11-05
43.10, 43.11, 43.12, and 43.16.
Mr. Parry reviewed the request. The 4.58-acre site consists of three parcels: 1)
Parcel 1 - 3.19 acres – southern portion; 2) Parcel 2 - 0.38 acre - southeast corner of
Druid Road East and Lake Drive; and 3) Parcel 3 – 1 acre –between Parcels 1 and 2.
Parcels 1 and 3, totaling 4.19 acres, are in Pinellas County. Companion application
ANX 00-12-03 requests annexation of that property into the City. The annexation will be
approved prior to the issuance of any building permits.
The site, developed as Hamrick Lumber, a sawmill/lumber yard, has 11 buildings,
which are between 140 and 19,000 square-feet in size. The business, which recently
closed, operated at this site for 53 years. Manufacturing is a nonconforming use in this
zone and district. Access to the property is via a curb cut that extends along most of the
west property line on Lake Drive. Surrounding properties are developed with single-
family residences. Staff recommends all buildings be fully secured until demolition.
The applicant wishes to maximize the site’s development potential,
accommodate the 20-foot grade change from north to south, complement the residential
neighborhood, and eliminate blight. The applicant proposes to construct 32 townhome
units in 16, 4,846 square-foot buildings. The two-story, 28 foot high buildings are
designed to fit into the neighborhood and will feature contemporary Mediterranean
architecture, with tile roofs and stucco exteriors. A common wall will separate each
townhome and shared, common courtyards will separate the structures.
The project also includes a community swimming pool between two private
drives accessing Lake Drive. A retention pond will be constructed in the site’s
southeast corner. A six-foot, white, vinyl privacy fence, with landscaping in excess of
Code intent, will be installed along Lake Drive. A six-foot, wood fence, along the east
property line, will separate the development from neighboring single-family residences.
The applicant has submitted a preliminary plat for the development of 32 lots.
The plat includes all Code required information. Prior to the issuance of any permits, the
applicant is required to file a final plat with Pinellas County and the City.
mcd0401 15 04/17/01
Attached dwellings typically are permitted in the LMDR District as a Level One,
Flexible Standard Development request, provided the plan meets eight flexibility criteria.
The plan does not meet two criteria: 1) parcel developed before the Code was adopted
and 2) dwelling units are in more than two buildings. Developing the site with a
maximum of two buildings would be out of scale with the neighborhood. Application as a
Residential Infill Project development was necessary.
The project includes two internal drives, which meet Code width requirements
and terminate in cul-de-sacs. The condominium association will own and maintain the
private drives, which will be platted as separate lots. The plat meets Code subdivision
requirements. The applicant requests to: 1) reduce front setbacks of four structures on
the two cul-de-sacs from 25 feet to 20 feet; 2) reduce the rear setbacks of two buildings
between the cul-de-sacs from 15 feet to 10 feet; 3) reduce the side setback from 10 feet
to zero feet for the common wall between townhomes; and 4) reduce all other side
setbacks internal to the site from 10 feet to seven feet.
The entire site is considered a corner lot with frontage on two streets and two
front setbacks. All required setbacks along the site’s perimeter will be met, including
25-foot front setbacks along Druid Road and Lake Drive and 10-foot side setbacks
elsewhere.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on December 14,
2000 and March 15, 2001. Staff recommends approval with four conditions.
Mr. Parry reviewed objections listed in the April 12, 2001 letter from Peter and
Patricia Scott. All departments had responded regarding listed concerns. The cul de
sacs are appropriate in size and will provide Solid Waste and Fire Department vehicles
adequate space to maneuver. The edges of the cul de sacs do not impinge on side
setbacks. Code requires all new construction to bury utilities. The applicant agreed to
locate the street lights so they do not shine on adjacent properties. The area features
other two-story structures. The proposed height is is two feet less than permitted.
Referenced easements are on adjoining lots and do not impact this project. The LMDR
district allows 7.5 dwelling units per acre.
In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said the easements will be corrected on
the site plan. The private road meets all City construction requirements. Concern was
expressed in the future the homeowners may request the City maintain the roads. Mr.
Parry said a condition could be added to the plat and related documents indicating
homeowners are prohibited from requesting City maintenance of the project’s private
roads. It was recommended this information be included to advise future homeowners.
Ms. Dougall-Sides reported the applicant does not control the entire property.
Two quick claim deeds must be submitted to the Legal Department before the property
can be annexed and permits issued.
Ralph Quaretetti, applicant, said the site is difficult to develop due to its shape
and topography. He said the project fits the neighborhood. He said has built these
popular models previously. In response to a question, he said he accepts the
conditions. He anticipated his attorney soon will resolve related ownership issues.
mcd0401 16 04/17/01
Five persons spoke in opposition to the project. In response, Ms. Tarapani said
the request does not change the site’s plan category or zoning. The LMDR district
allows attached single-family residences. The setbacks are consistent with single-family
residential development. If the site plan undergoes material changes, it must be
returned to the board for review.
Concern was expressed the separation is inadequate between the Lake Avenue
access points to private roads to the east and City streets to the west. Ms. Fierce said
the City engineer had signed off on the plan. Ms. Tarapani said several of the units
would be lost if the roads were aligned.
Octavio Cabrera, representative, said Lake Avenue is a County road. The
project must obtain driveway permits. He said the project addresses County concerns
regarding the separation issue. He said the jog exceeds Pinellas County requirements.
In response to questions, he stated the site naturally drains to the southwest, where a
pond will be installed. As the property drops four feet from east to west, he said the
project will not affect drainage to properties east of the site. He said the site is below the
property abutting on Druid Road East. Regarding privacy, he said the site will be fenced
and landscaped and meet required setbacks along its perimeter. Only one window in
each building’s second floor will face east. It was noted the property could have been
platted with single-family residences, with similar setbacks, and 30 feet in height.
Member Hooper moved to approve the Flexible Development request to permit
attached dwellings in the LMDR District for more than two buildings, on a lot that was not
vacant on the date of the Code’s adoption; to reduce front setbacks along internal,
private roads from 25 feet to 21 feet, reduce rear setbacks on internal property lines from
15 feet to 13 feet, reduce side setbacks along internal property lines from 10 feet to 8.5
feet, and reduce side setbacks from 10 feet to zero feet for common wall construction for
all buildings; and Preliminary plat approval of 32 lots for attached dwellings at Sec. 14-
conditions
29-15, M&B 43.10, 43.11, 43.12, and 43.16 with : 1) annexation of portion of
property currently in Pinellas County to be approved (ANX 00-12-03); 2) final plat, with
notes related to maintenance of private roads, to be recorded with Pinellas County and
City prior to issuance of any permits; 3) property ownership and maintenance documents
of common areas to be submitted to and approved by Legal Department prior to second
reading of annexation ordinance; and 4) all buildings to be fully secured until demolition..
motion
The was duly seconded. Members Gildersleeve, Mazur, Moran, Petersen, and
carried
Hooper and Chair Figurski voted “Aye”; Member Plisko voted “Nay.” Motion .
ITEM D - LEVEL THREE APPLICATIONS
1601 Druid Road East
Item #D1 – : Charles Hammrick, Dorothy E. Hammrick, Richard
L. Kamensky & Elizabeth Plecker (Sun Ketch Construction/Tom Quareteti, V.P.) -
Owner/ Applicant. Request annexation of 3.178 acres to the City of Clearwater, and
Land Use Plan amendment to RU, Residential Urban Classification, and rezoning to
LMDR, Low Medium Density Residential District at Sec. 14-29-15, M&B 43.10, 43.11,
ANX 01-12-03
43.12, and 43.16.
Mr. Parry presented the application. The property owners request annexation to
receive City water and sewer service. They are aware the sewer impact fee is $900 and
water impact fee is $480 per dwelling unit based on 5/8-inch meter. Fees must be paid
mcd0401 17 04/17/01
before building permits are issued. The applicants also are aware of additional costs to
connect to the City utility systems. Staff recommends approval with two conditions.
Member Hooper moved to recommend approval of the annexation of 3.178 acres
to the City of Clearwater, and Land Use Plan amendment to RU, Residential Urban
Classification, and rezoning to LMDR, Low Medium Density Residential District at Sec.
motion
14-29-15, M&B 43.10, 43.11, 43.12, and 43.16. The was duly seconded and
carried
unanimously.
812 Pinellas Street
Item #D2 – : Thompson Executive Center Partnership Number Two -
Owner/Applicant. Request amendment to Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map
from Residential Urban (RU) to Residential/Office General (R/OG), and rezoning from
the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district to the Office (O) district at Lot 13
and south ½ of vacated alley adjoining on the North, Block 10, Milton Park Subdivision.
LUZ 01-02-04
Mr. Givens reviewed the request. The property owner requests this plan
amendment and rezoning application to allow office redevelopment on this 0.17-acre
parcel. The subject parcel, currently vacant, was developed to provide non-residential
parking for the adjoining office center, developed with Thompson Executive Office
Center. The site is within two zoning districts and future land use plan classifications.
Lots 6, 7, 8, 11, & 12, to the west, belong to the applicant and are zoned Office (O)
district with a future land use plan classification of Residential/Office General. The
eastern portion of the property is zoned LMDR, Low Medium Density Residential with a
future land use plan classification of Residential Urban. The applicant wishes to rezone
the eastern parcel to Office (O) district with a future land use plan designation of
Residential/Office General. The property is on the north side of Pinellas Street, east of S.
Myrtle Avenue.
Office development is not permitted in a Residential Urban plan classification.
Recognizing this limitation, the applicant requests the changes to bring this parcel into
consistency with the Countywide Plan and City zoning district. The amendments will
allow the applicant to manage and use both parcels with the same use and redevelop
the subject site with the intended office use.
Also, the applicant has applied for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Program with a Comprehensive Landscape Program to streamline redevelopment
issues. That request has been reviewed by the CDB in Item #C1 (FL 01-02-07). The
PPC (Pinellas Planning Council) will review the land use plan amendment as a Level 1-
Type A sub-threshold amendment. Staff recommends approval.
Member Hooper moved to recommend approval to amend the Comprehensive
Plan’s Future Land Use Map from Residential Urban (RU) to Residential/Office General
(R/OG), and rezone the property from the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR)
district to the Office (O) district at Lot 13 and south ½ of vacated alley adjoining on the
motion carried
North, Block 10, Milton Park Subdivision. The was duly seconded and
unanimously.
1972 East Skyline Drive
Item #D3 – : Craig M. & Lisa M. Johnson - Owner/ Applicant.
Request annexation of 0.18 acre to the City of Clearwater and a Land Use Plan
amendment to RL, Residential Low Classification, and rezoning to LMDR, Low Medium
mcd0401 18 04/17/01
Density Residential District at Lot 66, Skyline Groves in Section 06, Township 29 South,
ANX 01-02-05
Range 16 East.
Staff distributed a copy of Planner Lochen Wood’s resume.
Member Petersen moved to qualify Lochen Wood as an expert in the field of
motion carried
planning. The was duly seconded and unanimously.
Ms. Wood presented the request. The property owners request annexation to
receive City water and sewer service. The 0.18-acre site has a single-family residential
home. The applicants paid the $900 sewer impact fee on February 21, 2001. They are
aware of approximately $800 in additional costs they must pay to extend sewer service
to their property. The City also requires payment of a utility deposit for the home. Staff
recommends approval.
Member Gildersleeve moved to recommend approval of a Land Use Plan
amendment to R/OL, Residential/Office Limited Classification and rezoning to O, Office
District of 0.67 acre at Lots 1 and 2, Crystal Heights Subdivision, in Section 16,
motion carried
Township 29 South, Range 16 East. The was duly seconded and
unanimously.
Comprehensive Plan Amendments Related to
Item #D4 – Beach by Design – City of
Clearwater Applicant. Request review and approval of amendments to the City’s
CPA 01-03-01
Comprehensive Plan.
Senior Planner Gina L. Clayton presented the recommended amendments.
Clearwater Beach, a 543-acre barrier island oriented north-south, is on the Gulf of
Mexico, west of Clearwater Harbor and the Intracoastal Waterway. Access from the
mainland is via Memorial Causeway and the Clearwater Pass Bridge. Memorial
Causeway and Pier 60 separate “North Beach” from “South Beach.”
The 1990 Census reported 3,466 residents live on Clearwater beach. Almost half
of the island has residential uses, including single- and multi-family residences,
townhouses, and condominiums. The remainder of the island is tourist-oriented, with
approximately 3,777 units in properties that range from “mom and pop” motels to large
chain hotels. The “North Beach” commercial district runs along Mandalay Avenue. The
“South Beach” commercial district is by Clearwater Pass and along Gulfview Boulevard.
In 1991, the City began discussing the need for a beach development plan and
ordered a traffic study. No real planning efforts occurred until 1996 when the City
ordered a parking feasibility study and redevelopment report on the Mandalay Avenue
area. The City Commission then authorized a RFP (Request for Proposals) to determine
if a beach CRA (Community Redevelopment Area) was plausible. In 1997, the final
report indicated a portion of the beach met the statutory requirements for CRA
designation. Due to concerns about adverse perceptions related to the designation, the
Commission did not pursue CRA approval.
Concerns continued regarding the condition of beach facilities and declining
tourist and market perceptions due to a lack of reinvestment in beach business
properties, poor traffic and pedestrian circulation, parking problems, and poor aesthetics.
Modern travelers perceived beach facilities, designed for 1960s and 1970s visitors, as
mcd0401 19 04/17/01
shabby, too small, and functionally obsolete. Due to density and height restrictions, large
private-sector developers did not attempt redevelopment projects, because the intensity
of development opportunities was insufficient to justify costs.
In 1997, the City hired a consultant to identify beach problems, desires, and
opportunities and to determine specific actions to preserve and improve the island. The
planning process to produce the strategic development plan, Clearwater Beach:
Strategies for Revitalization, involved extensive public input and three surveys of
stakeholders: 1) beach property owners; 2) beach visitors; and 3) hotel/motel
owners/operators. The Clearwater Beach Association, Clearwater Beach Chamber of
Commerce, and Greater Clearwater Chamber of Commerce Beach Area Council hosted
a series of public meetings. A two-day public design charette and several other public
meetings were conducted. This process identified a number of key issues and concerns,
including basic code enforcement and maintenance issues, complex redevelopment
needs, public services such as parking and transportation, public facilities, recreation
needs, public buildings, and safety. The Plan recommended 20 projects to address these
issues and opportunities. Many project ideas were formulated, discussed and critiqued at
the public design charette and gained significant public support.
The City hired consulting firm, Siemon and Larsen, to prepare an implementation
plan that considered fiscal and legal constraints, an economy and market analysis, and
changed conditions. Following Charlie Siemon’s presentation of Beach by Design: A
Preliminary Design for Clearwater Beach and Design Guidelines to the City in September
2000, 13 public meetings were conducted, including four Citywide public workshops. The
City Commission adopted the plan on February 15, 2001. Beach by Design strategies to
revitalize the beach include: 1) Land Use; 2) Mobility; 3) Off-Street Parking; 4) Catalytic
Projects; 5) Economic Feasibility & Financing; and 6) Design Guidelines
Regarding land use, Beach by Design affects most of the area between Acacia
Street, the Clearwater Pass Bridge, Gulf of Mexico, and Clearwater Harbor, excluding
Old
Devon Avenue and Bayside Drive. Beach by Design establishes districts: 1)
Florida
- low scale/intensity area of North Beach. Anticipate renovation/ revitalization.
Destination Resort
Densities generally limited to current levels; 2) - preferred
redevelopment mixes resort residential/hospitality uses on beach front with retail,
Marina Residential
restaurant, & residential uses fronting North Mandalay; 3) -
redevelopment of marina-based residential neighborhood with commercial uses
permitted in specified locations. Public boardwalk desired for neighborhood between
Causeway and Mandalay with potential development of marina-based hotel on Yacht
Retail and Restaurant
Basin Apartment site; 4) - plan stresses need for parking garage
Pier 60
to accommodate commercial development; 5) - beautification efforts for area
Small Motel District
surrounding roundabout. Area to remain a place of assembly; 6) -
retain most buildings for renovation except for Brightwater Drive, where Plan anticipates
Beach Walk
development of townhomes/timeshares; 7) – redevelop South Gulfview into
great beach front promenade. Remove some parking west of Gulfview. Strategy to
Clearwater Pass District
stimulate area redevelopment; and 8) - area of strategic
revitalization/renovation in response to improving conditions elsewhere on beach.
Regarding catalytic projects, the plan proposes to designate the beach as a CRD
(Community Redevelopment District) to allow the transfer of development rights within
the plan area and deviate from density standards in limited locations. To overcome
economic constraints associated with beach redevelopment, the plan suggests a few
mcd0401 20 04/17/01
catalytic resort projects would transform Clearwater beach into a quality family resort
community. For stimulation, the plan proposes to establish a pool of 600 additional hotel
rooms, available for five years in key beach locations designated as a CRD, upon
compliance with specific criteria. CRD locations: 1) Yacht Basin apartment property on
east side of Mandalay, north of Baymont Street; 2) land between Mandalay and Gulf of
Mexico between Baymont and Papaya streets; and 3) land south of Pier 60 parking lot
and north of southerly lot lines of Lots 77 and 126 of the Lloyd-White-Skinner
Subdivision between South Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive. Units not used
within five-year time frame would cease to exist.
Current density limits of 40 hotel units per acre constrain beach redevelopment
opportunities. The 600 resort-unit density pool will not adversely impact the island. To
ensure plan goals, development must meet 14 criteria, including a legally enforceable,
mandatory evacuation covenant requiring properties to close down as soon as practical
after the National Hurricane Center posts a hurricane watch. Tenancies will be limited to
30 days. Destination resort amenities will discourage guests from driving vehicles on
local streets.
Beach by Design guidelines will ensure private development and redevelopment
projects will meet City design objectives. Design guidelines address: 1) density; 2)
building height; 3) building design, scale, & mass; 4) setbacks; 5) street level facades; 6)
parking areas; 7) sidewalks; 8) street furniture; 9) street lighting; 10) fountains, and 11)
materials and colors.
Staff proposes revisions to expand and/or better define redevelopment policies,
recognize Beach by Design as the special area plan approved for Clearwater beach,
designate Clearwater beach as a CRD, create a limited resort unit density pool for three
specific areas, and address transportation concerns.
The City is substantially built-out and outlying areas are attracting residents and
businesses. For Clearwater to remain competitive, the City needs to be proactive.
While not blighted, many beach structures are considered obsolete or inefficient by
modern standards.
Proposed amendments support construction of catalytic private projects to spur
redevelopment and City investment in public facilities. Development incentives may be
necessary to stimulate private investment. The City previously has allowed higher
densities through the CRD, and significant consolidation within the Downtown Periphery
Plan’s boundaries. Clearwater permits the transfer of development rights within
approved areas. The policy recognizes that sometimes redevelopment needs to be
stimulated and the City needs the flexibility of various techniques, including development
incentives.
Renewal of the beach is critical to the City’s economic health. The beach, an
extraordinary natural resource, attracts potential residents, tourists, and a large seasonal
population. As the heart of the City’s tourist economy, Clearwater beach, which is less
than one square-mile, or 3% of the City’s land area, contributes 12% of ad valorem tax
revenues collected from the city.
mcd0401 21 04/17/01
A proposed amendment expands the concept of a renewed tourist district and
reflects the major elements of Beach by Design. The Code already features the concept
of shared parking.
Proposed revisions support the use of transfer of development rights as a
redevelopment tool within the Beach by Design plan area. County rules permit special
land use designations to exceed density and intensity limitations established by the
Countywide Future Land Use Plan. To be eligible for CRD designation, the area must
meet specific characteristics and the local government must adopt a special area plan
that governs development potential within the district. The Pinellas Planning Council
and Countywide Planning Authority must approve the special area plan and apply the
special land use designation to the Countywide Future Land Use Map.
The City Commission has adopted Beach by Design, a special area plan
described as a CRD. Clearwater beach, a focal point of the community and Pinellas
County, supports the tourist economy. The beach features numerous businesses and
City-owned recreational facilities, including a recreation center, swimming pool, boat
ramp, ball fields, Pier 60 Park, and the marina. The Beach by Design area has six land
use designations: 1) Residential High; 2) Resort Facilities High; 3) Commercial General;
4) Institutional; 5) Recreation/Open Space; and 6) Transportation/Utility. The plan
permits density increases beyond current levels only through the resort unit density pool.
The proposed policy provides the necessary regulatory link between Beach by
Design, the CRD, and the Countywide Future Land Use Plan. If the CRD designation is
applied to the City’s Future Land Use Map, a significant number of properties would
receive a new land use designation, though existing development potential would not
change. The CRD designation will permit increased flexibility related to allowable
density and intensity. Use of the density pool is limited to specific areas that feature
proximity to land assembly opportunities, or proximity to the dry sand beach, Clearwater
Harbor, or the proposed Beach Walk. Staff will monitor and track the density pool.
Beach Walk, an important component of Beach by Design, would relocate South
Gulfview west from the existing right-of-way, which would be vacated and given to
properties that front South Gulfview, increasing the size of small parcels. Beach Walk
would be a two-way, two-lane roadway with a pair of 30 foot-wide pathways along the
western edge - one for pedestrians - one for bicycles and roller bladers. The plan
proposes to reconstruct the eastern half of the existing right-of-way for a promenade with
sidewalk café seating and other sidewalk activities. Beach Walk would improve
pedestrian movement and create a drive with views of the beach and Gulf of Mexico.
Regarding mobility, Beach by Design focuses on the arrival and distribution of
traffic, and the need and desirability of alternative transportation modes including
pedestrian, bicycle, intra-beach, intra-Clearwater, and inter-island transit. Also
addressed is access rationing, which considers residential and guest priorities, and the
possibility of rationing access via controlled access lanes. Recommended
improvements include widening Coronado to three lanes, relocating South Gulfview to
the west to create Beach Walk along traffic-calmed South Gulfview, Mandalay Avenue
road improvements, a continuous sidewalk system south of the roundabout, sidewalks
along N. Mandalay, and an intra-beach transit system.
mcd0401 22 04/17/01
Staff supports Beach by Design’s proposal to improve the beach transportation
network’s arrival and distribution system and the need for alternative modes of
transportation. Clearwater beach, urban in nature, has limited access to and from the
mainland and a limited street network to handle island-wide transportation. A large
number of residents, visitors, business owners, and employees compete for access,
resulting in significant traffic delays, particularly during peak periods. The City has
committed to replacing the Memorial Causeway Bridge to improve service. The
proposed policy recognizes that improvements are necessary for beach traffic. The City
must evaluate the network to coordinate necessary improvements with construction of
the new bridge. The plan identifies the beach’s pedestrian environment as “hostile” and
addresses the need to develop a pedestrian system to reduce beach traffic. Beach by
Design recommends a continuous sidewalk system be constructed with sidewalk width
standards specific to areas within the CRD.
The proposed policy will require further evaluation of an intra-beach transit
system. This potentially long-term solution would reduce the number of intra-island
vehicular trips. Staff recommends evaluation of the potential route, costs and benefits of
such a system, and identification of funding source. Staff proposes amendments to the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, which currently does not address
traffic congestion on Clearwater beach. Staff proposes to recognize seasonal traffic
problems and to determine the feasibility of solutions. The City needs to monitor the
amount of traffic accessing the beach and how it navigates the beach. The City needs
to handle increased traffic by evaluating transportation alternatives, such as rationing
access, an express bus service from the mainland, intra-beach and inter-barrier island
transit, increased pedestrianism, etc. to determine which methods best address traffic
problems. Improvements are needed to improve year-round traffic flows. The City
should consider maintaining/improving levels of service, preserving commercial and
residential area accessibility, and remedying safety or operational problems.
Transportation improvements geared toward enhancing beach economic development
potential should be considered.
As vehicles visit the City’s coastal areas every day, transportation and parking
must be considered coastal management issues. Staff proposes amendments to the
Coastal Management Element of the Comprehensive Plan to encourage increased
transportation service to the beach, between barrier islands, and to determine if an intra-
beach transit system is feasible and affordable. While existing policy encourages trolley
service between the mainland and the beach, it is necessary also to address travel
between the City’s barrier islands, and beach communities south of the City, and focus
on ways to reduce the amount of traffic arriving and departing from the beach. The
average number of daily trips on roadways connecting the barrier islands range from
12,793 to 21,644. Reducing these numbers will reduce congestion and pollution, and
improve the quality of life.
PSTA (Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority) recently established trolley service
connecting the Clearwater section of Sand Key with Pass-A-Grille, the County’s most
southerly beach community. Beach by Design recommends the City work with PSTA to
extend the transit route to link Clearwater beach with other barrier island communities.
In addition to reducing the number of generated trips, this connection could enhance
County tourism.
mcd0401 23 04/17/01
To reduce beach congestion, Beach by Design suggests integrating an intra-
beach transit system into Beach Walk improvements. In addition to the roadway and
pair of trails, the plan recommends dedicating an area for a fixed transit guideway
system to transport passengers between North and South Beach to public parking and
commercial areas. Beach by Design supports a fixed guideway system, separated from
traffic to permit an operating schedule not affected by traffic, which encourages system
use. A fixed guideway offers pedestrians transportation options. Due to difficulties and
costs associated with developing a guideway system, staff proposes review to determine
costs and benefits.
Regarding economic reality and feasibility, the plan estimates public investment
costs for all proposed road, sidewalk, and landscaping improvements at $12-million.
The Plan proposes that City revenues such as Pennies for Pinellas and the capital
improvement program could finance improvements, as well as developer contributions,
tax increment financing, grants, and increased ad valorem taxes resulting from new
development. The plan also recommends seeking federal funding for capital costs
related to the intra-beach and beach access transit systems.
Regarding off-street parking, the plan proposes construction of at least two
garages when revitalization efforts generate additional demand. One garage is
proposed for south of Pier 60 and one behind Pelican Walk. Additional garage sites are
on the west side of Mandalay between Rockaway and Bay Esplanade, in the Clearwater
Pass District, and at the Clearwater Marina.
A total of 695 surface parking spaces are west of Gulfview, south of Pier 60.
While these valuable parking spaces, on publicly-owned beach front property provide
convenient beach access, they greatly compromise the beach’s natural beauty, obscure
the view of the Gulf, and preclude the use of this property from any pedestrian and/or
recreational uses. While the City acknowledges the number of needed parking spaces
will increase, it must balance parking demands with the need for an attractive public gulf
front amenity. The proposed policy recognizes the need to relocate some or all of these
spaces. It is unlikely enough land can be purchased to replace parking spaces with
another surface lot. Structured parking is the most attractive and realistic alternative.
The proposed policy also implies that the private sector also may provide structured
parking, open to the public should it not be economically feasible for the City to provide
such facilities
Public/private partnerships are valuable endeavors for most redevelopment
situations. Improvements, such as parking, usually aid redevelopment efforts but are
costly. Due to the significant cost of beach property and construction, the City may not
be able to afford to build parking structures. The City recognizes it may be best to work
with the private sector to provide new parking spaces as redevelopment occurs. The
proposed policy also encourages replacement of some or all public surface parking west
of Gulfview for construction of Beach Walk.
The objectives and policies of the Capital Improvements Element do not
recognize the importance of capital improvements recommended by redevelopment or
special area plans. As a key element of comprehensive planning efforts, the City’s
capital budgeting process should reflect redevelopment needs for investment in City-
owned infrastructure. These plans must be considered when prioritizing capital
improvements budget projects.
mcd0401 24 04/17/01
Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive
Plan, which redefine City redevelopment policies, recognize adoption of Beach by
Design, create a Community Redevelopment District for portions of Clearwater beach,
articulate the need to analyze and find solutions for beach traffic issues, support
relocating public parking from the gulf-front, encourage alternative modes of
transportation on the beach, support public/private partnerships for public beach parking,
and support integrating improvements proposed by special area plans into the capital
improvement budget process. These proposed amendments further the goals and many
objectives already in the Comprehensive Plan.
In response to a question, Planning Director Ralph Stone said the time limit
established for use of the 600 resort-unit density pool is intended to peak interest and
create a sense of urgency. A policy revision was recommended to allow the vacation of
a right-of-way when deemed appropriate. Mr. Stone agreed the vacation of rights-of-
way is an important tool for redevelopment projects. Design guidelines and land areas
will determine the ability to transfer development rights.
Member Petersen moved to recommend approval of amendments to the City’s
motion
Comprehensive Plan related to Beach by Design. The was duly seconded and
carried
unanimously.
ITEM E – APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Member Petersen moved to approve the minutes of regular meeting of March 20,
2001, as recorded and submitted in written summation to each board member. The
motioncarried
was duly seconded and unanimously.
ITEM F – DIRECTORS ITEMS
Consent Agenda
Discussion ensued regarding implementing a Consent Agenda. It was
suggested staff identify which items are not controversial, and have not been objected to
via letters or telephone calls. It was suggested each related item be identified for the
audience and a map of the property’s location be broadcast. If there are questions, the
item could be pulled from the Consent Agenda. All Consent Agenda items are approved
by one motion.
Concern was expressed the public may feel the board has not done its due
diligence. It was felt those interested in discussion would appear. Concern was
expressed interested parties may arrive late, assuming their item will be heard late in the
meeting. It was suggested this method be explained in advertisements and notices.
Member Petersen moved for the CDB to adopt the Consent Agenda process as
motion carried
part of its meeting procedures. The was duly seconded and
unanimously.
Meeting Start Time
It was suggested the start of meetings be rescheduled to 2:00 p.m.
mcd0401 25 04/17/01
Member Petersen moved to reschedule the start time of CDB meetings to 2:00
motion
p.m., starting June 19, 2001. The was duly seconded.
Concern was expressed the meetings will run too late. It was felt the meeting
process should be shorter if some items are considered and approved via a Consent
Agenda.
carried
Upon the vote being taken, the motion unanimously.
ITEM G - ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:12 p.m.
mcd0401 26 04/17/01