The URL can be used to link to this page

11/16/2004 . . . COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER November 16, 2004 Present: David Gildersleeve Alex Plisko Shirley Moran J. B. Johnson Dana K. Tallman Daniel Dennehy Chair Vice Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member - arrived at 2:10 p.m. Acting Board Member Absent Kathy Milam Board Member Also Present: Leslie Dougall-Sides Cyndi Tarapani Frank "Chip" Gerlock Patricia O. Sullivan Assistant City Attorney Planning Director Development Review Manager Board Reporter The Chair called the meeting to order at 1 :00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: October 19, 2004 Member Plisko moved to. approve the minutes of the regular meeting of October 19, 2004, as submitted in written summation to each board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D. DISCUSSION ITEM: (Items 1 - 2): 1) Expert Witness List Addition Member Johnson moved to approve additions to the City's Expert Witness List: 1) John V. Schodtler as an expert in planning, zoning, and site plan review and 2) Karl M. Wielecki as an expert in planning, general zoning, and site plan review. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2) Downtown Design Guidelines Training Long Range Planning Manager Gina Clayton said as they have been developed, staff has applied new design guidelines to all Downtown projects. Planner Mark Parry reviewed the six Downtown character districts and design guidelines. He reviewed pending projects and related issues related to the new guidelines, Le. onsite vehicular circulation, drive-thru location, building design and distance from street, curb cuts, pedestrian paths highlighting, etc. Downtown residential and business elevations are rendered the same level of staff review. It was recommended staff be sensitive to construction costs. The Community Development 2004-11-16 1 . . . process is time consuming. Mr. Parry estimated three to four renditions of all projects are developed during the review process. Design guidelines require a consistent style and shape of windows and color and architectural features that complement overall building design. Concern was expressed the process requires staff interpretation. Mr. Parry said most developers will agree their projects are improved by the process. The guidelines do not require a specific architectural style. In response to a question, Mr. Parry said while developers may claim that market driven demands conflict with City design guidelines, no commonality among complaints is evident. No early vulnerabilities in the guidelines are apparent. Planning Director Cyndi Tarapani said the City Council has authorized the new guidelines, which has resulted in a policy shift. Staff training is underway. Staff was complimented on their efforts. In response to a concern, Mr. Parry said staff wants development to occur and provides options to help projects move forward. He said large corporations, such as McDonald's, have complained City guidelines are unworkable before adjusting to the changes and completing successful projects. The CDB recessed from 2:00 to 2: 1 0 p.m. E. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE (Item 1): Case reviewed after 2:00 p.m. 1. Case: FLD2004-02010 - 503 Marshall Street Level Two Application Owner/Applicant: 1504 Garden Inc. Representative: Hashim Sullaiman (1504 N. Garden Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone: 727-542-2629; fax: 727-813-910-1285; email: hsullaiman@aol.com). Location: 0.18 acres located at the southeast corner of Marshall Street and North Fort Harrison Avenue. Atlas Page: 268B. Zoning District: Commercial (C). Request: Flexible Development approval to permit retail sales within an existing two-story commercial building with a reduction to lot area from 10,000 square-feet to 7,720 square-feet, a reduction to lot width (west) from 100 feet to 50.81 feet, reductions to the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 19 feet (to existing and proposed building) and from 25 feet to 14 feet (to proposed pavement), a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to proposed pavement), reductions to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to one-foot (to existing and proposed building) and from 10 feet to zero feet (to proposed pavement) and a reduction to required parking from five to 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square-feet, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the south property line from five feet to zero feet and a reduction in the width of the required foundation landscaping adjacent to the building (west side) from five feet to 3.75 feet, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3- 1202.G. Proposed Use: Retail sales and services. Neighborhood Associations: Old Clearwater Bay Neighborhood Association (Vicky Morgan, 301 Cedar Street, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone: 727-461-1995; email: vmorqan@tampabav.rr.com); North Myrtle Avenue Association; (Tom Sehlhorst, 1010 Blanche B Littlejohn, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone: 727- 443-3699); North Greenwood Association, Inc. (Jonathon Wade, 908 Pennsylvania Ave, Clearwater, FL 33755); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, Community Development 2004-11-16 2 . . . President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@Qte.net). Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. Member Johnson moved to continue Item E1, Case FLD2004-0201 0 for 503 Marshall Street to December 14,2004. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. F. CONSENT AGENDA: Cases reviewed after 2:00 p.m. The following cases are not contested by the applicant, staff, neighboring property owners, etc. and will be approved by a single vote at the beginning of the meeting (Items 1 -7): 1. Level Two Application Case: FLD2004-07052 - 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 and 304 Coronado Drive (Related to DV A2004-00002) Owner: Beachwalk Resort, LLC (fka Clearwater Seashell Resort, L.C.). Applicant: Taub Properties, Inc. Representative: Housh Ghovaee, Northside Engineering Services, Inc. (601 Cleveland Street, Suite 930, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone: 727-443-2869; fax: 727-446-8036; email: nestech@mindsprinQ.com). Location: 1.63 acres located between South Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive at Third Street. Atlas Page: 276A. Zoning District: Tourist (T). Request: Flexible Development application to amend a previously approved FL 01-01-01 (COB approved on February 20, 2001) to permit an additional 24 overnight accommodation units from the density pool (in addition to the previously approved 250 overnight accommodation units) as a mixed use, with a maximum of 70,000 square-feet of amenities accessory to the hotel and a minimum of 400 public parking spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C. Proposed Use: Hotel of 250 rooms (153.37 rooms/acre on total site), 18 attached dwellings (11.04 units/acre on total site) and a maximum of 70,000 square feet (0.98 FAR on total site) of amenities accessory to- the hotel, at a height of 150 feet (to roof deck). Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association (David MacNamee, 827 Mandalay Ave., Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-446-5801; email: dmacnav@att.net); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@Qte.net). Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. On October 19, 2004, the COB (Community Development Board) continued this application, at the applicant's request, to today's meeting. The existing properties total 1.63 acres and are located between South Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive at Third Street. The properties are developed with two motels (Glass House and Beach Place Motel). The surrounding area is intensely developed with predominantly commercial uses including restaurants, motels, hotels and retail sales and services. A City-owned parking lot is across Gulfview Boulevard to the west. All existing structures (buildings and pavement) within the site will be razed for construction of the proposed Community Development 2004-11-16 3 . improvements. The site also includes a portion of the eastern half of the South Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way and the Third Street right-of-way between South Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive. The site is within the Beach Walk District of the Beach by Design Plan. On February 20, 2001, a Flexible Development request for this property was approved with three conditions to construct a 250-room full service hotel with an 800 parking space garage (of which 400 spaces are for public parking) (Case FL 01-01-01). The City Commission approved a companion Development Agreement on March 1,2001 (Case DA 01-01-01). These development proposals approved included 183 rooms from the Density Pool, the hotel at a height of 150 feet, and the vacation of Third Street and the east half of South Gulfview Boulevard (vacation was approved but is not effective until actual construction of the hotel begins). The proposal includes the dedication of 10 feet for additional right-of-way for Coronado Drive. On August 20, 2002, the COB approved, with five conditions, creation of a 155-space, public parking lot as an interim use (Case FLD 02-04-12). The City Commission approved a companion Development Agreement on August 22,2002 (Case DA 01-01-01 amended). This interim parking lot has not been constructed. . This application for Flexible Development approval is being processed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project as it originally was processed in 2001 due to the height, setbacks and scale of this project. The project, originally approved in 2001, included a resort hotel of 250 overnight accommodation rooms. The 250 rooms included 183 hotel rooms from the Beach by Design density pool and 67 existing hotel rooms. This current proposal requests an additional 24 overnight accommodation rooms from the density pool. The applicant intends to convert 24 of the existing hotel rooms into 18 attached dwellings (condominium) to be located on the top two floors (13th and 14th floors) of the building as a mixed use without any modification to the height or basic structure of the approved building. Overnight accommodation rooms have been reduced in size from that originally approved to accommodate this inclusion of attached dwellings. Based on this current proposal, the hotel density will be 153.37 rooms/acre on total site. The proposed 18 attached dwelling condominiums produce a density of 11.04 units/acre on total site. The Planning Director approved minor revisions to the architectural design of the building by letter dated October 4, 2004. Some changes are the result of modification to FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Authority) flood designations, which restrict or prohibit habitable floor area below the velocity zone elevation of 14 feet, and require changes to the construction of the lowest floor of the building. A level of parking was moved to be below the main hotel floor (with hotel registration and office functions, restaurants, meeting rooms, and ballroom). It is noted that when the project originally was approved in 2001 under FL 01-01-01 that the required 100-foot distance between the towers, as required by Beach by Design, is being met by the face of the exterior building wall, however, balconies encroach by four feet on either tower, producing only 92 feet between the actual building towers. In order to meet Beach by Design requirements for tower separation distances, designers of the hotel/condominium project to the north (Markopoulos; now K & P Clearwater Estate, LLC; FLD2004-02013) provided a 100-foot separation between this project's north tower and their tower. Again, this is being met to the face of the exterior wall of the subject north tower (balconies encroach six feet into this 100-foot separation distance). Discrepancies between the approved building elevations and building cross-sections under FL 01-01-01 produced the lesser dimensions. . Community Development 2004-11-16 4 . . . Additionally, building columns that support a terrace on the west side of the building encroach into the non-vacated right-of-way of South Gulfview Boulevard. Again, the applicant has relied on these previously approved plans under FL 01-01-01 in 2001 to prepare and submit plans for this proposal, retaining the columns and terrace as previously approved. The proposal includes the dedication of an additional 10 feet for the Coronado Drive right-of-way. Plans indicate a canopy over the main entry doors encroaching into the right-of-way of Coronado Drive, but do not indicate compliance with Code provisions for such encroachment (Section 3- 908.A). Prior to the issuance of any building permit, compliance with these Code provisions will need to be shown on site and building plans. On the west side of the building on Level 2, an elevated pedestrian bridge from the hotel to the beach is continued to be provided. This bridge creates a recognizable feature for motorists and pedestrians, providing a functional Beach Walk entrance portal for hotel visitors and guests, as well as providing a safe pedestrian access over the relocated South Gulfview Boulevard between the beach and beach parking within this building. The overall height of this building continues to be 150 feet above the FEMA elevation of 14 feet. There are no other major changes in the building architecture from that previously approved (with the minor changes approved by letter dated October 4,2004). Building setbacks remain the same as approved in 2001. All parking for this development will be within an enclosed garage facility. Due to the reduction of public parking along South Gulfview Boulevard and to the west of this roadway, the developer is providing a minimum of 400 public parking spaces (405 actual parking spaces) (at a fee, managed by the developer) within the garage. There are 195 hotel parking spaces, where hotel guests will park themselves. There are 165 valet parking spaces on various parking levels, many of which are "stacked spaces" (one or more cars in front of another, requiring the valet to temporarily relocate one or two cars to remove the innermost vehicle). Included as part of this request is the approval of the "stacked" parking, which is not allowed by Code, and which was not included in plans approved in 2001. The applicant's intention is that a majority of the hotel guests will use valet parking. To increase the efficiency or response time to return vehicles to guests, the majority of stacked valet parking spaces are located on the ground floor parking level. Stacked valet parking spaces on the upper parking levels will be used primarily for long-term storage of vehicles, when guests do not expect to be using their vehicles soon. Stacked parking is very common in hotel uses (where space is at a premium). Hotel guests will be asked when they next expect to use their vehicle, and then the vehicle will be parked in a non-stacked or a stacked space based on the anticipated next use of the vehicle. The applicant advises that either the valet or hotel guests might utilize the "hotel guest" designated parking spaces (once the entire valet parking spaces are filled). Restrictor devices (type as yet to be determined by the applicant) are intended to be incorporated into the valet parking spaces to keep the general public or hotel guests from parking in them. To meet engineering requirements to meet Building Code provisions, sheer walls required between parking spaces can create visibility issues for motorists exiting these spaces. Measures to reduce visibility restriction issues need to be addressed with the City's Traffic Engineering Department prior to the issuance of building permits. All applicable Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria (Section 2-803.C) have been met. A companion Development Agreement application is being Community Development 2004-11-16 5 . . . considered with this site plan application (DVA2004-00002). This application is contingent upon approval of the revised Development Agreement by City Council. The proposal includes the vacated eastern portion of South Gulfview Boulevard and the vacated Third Street from Coronado Drive to South Gulfview Boulevard. The vacation of these rights-of-way was approved by the City Council in 2001, but was not effective until commencement of construction. As proposed in Beach by Design, South Gulfview Boulevard will be relocated farther west as part of a serpentine, Beachwalk design. Its new configuration will include a two-way, two-lane road section and pedestrian way and bicycle path. The proposal continues to include the dedication by the developer of 10 feet of right-of-way along Coronado Drive The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 9, 2004. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible Development application to amend a previously approved FL 01-01-01 (CDB approved on February 20, 2001) to permit an additional 24 overnight accommodation units from the density pool (in addition to the previously approved 250 overnight accommodation units) as a mixed use, with a maximum of 70,000 square-feet of amenities accessory to the hotel and a minimum of 400 public parking spaces, asa Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C, for the sites at 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 and 304 Coronado Drive, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code, including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The proposal complies with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design, as described in detail in this report and Conditions of Approval: (*Indicates prior condition of approval adopted February 20, 2001, under FL 01-01-01 that is carried forward): 1) That the application be effective upon development agreement approval by City Council;* 2) That the South Gulfview Boulevard and Third Street rights-of-way be vacated by City Council;* 3) That the final design of building be consistent with conceptual elevations submitted and/or modified by the Community Development Board;* 4) That hotel rooms not incorporate lockout units with separate corridor doors. This shall be shown on building plans prior to the issuance of building permits; 5) That, prior to the issuance of building permits, the stormwater design be approved by the City Engineering Department; 6) That site plans indicate the dedication of 10 feet for the Coronado Drive right-of-way prior to the issuance of any permits; 7) That, prior to the issuance of building permits, compliance with Code encroachment provisions into the right-of-way of Coronado Drive be shown on site and building plans for the canopy over the main entry doors; 8) That measures to reduce visibility restriction issues of sheer walls within the parking areas be addressed to the satisfaction of the City's Traffic Engineering Department prior to the issuance of building permits; and 9) That, prior to the issuance of building permits, Open Space and Recreation Impact Fees be paid. See page 17 for motion of approval. Community Development 2004-11-16 6 . . . 2. Level Three Application Case: DVA2004-00002 - 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230,300 and 304 Coronado Drive (Related to FLD2004-07052) Owner: Beachwalk Resort, LLC (fka Clearwater Seashell Resort, L.C.). Applicant: Taub Properties, Inc. 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: 1.63 acres located between South Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive at Third Street. Atlas Page: 276A. Zoning District: Tourist (T). Request: Review of, and recommendation to the City Council, of an amended Development Agreement between Clearwater Seashell Resort, LC, (the property owner) and the City of Clearwater (previously approved DA 01-01-01 by City Council on March 1,2001). Proposed Use: Hotel of 250 rooms (153.37 rooms/acre on total site), 18 attached dwellings (11.04 units/acre on total site) and a maximum of 70,000 square-feet (0.98 FAR on total site) of amenities accessory to the hotel, at a height of 150 feet (to roof deck). Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association (David MacNamee, 827 Mandalay Ave., Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-446-5801; email: dmacnav@att.net); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@ate.net). Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. On October 19, 2004, the CDB continued this application, at the applicant's request, to today's meeting. The existing properties total 1.63 acres and are between South Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive at Third Street. The properties are developed with two motels (Glass House and Beach Place Motel). The surrounding area is intensely developed with predominantly commercial uses including restaurants, motels, hotels and retail sales and services. A City- owned parking lot is across Gulfview Boulevard to the west. All existing structures (buildings and pavement) within the site area will be razed for the construction of the proposed improvements. The site also includes a portion of the eastern half of the South Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way and the Third Street right-of-way between South Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive. The site is located within the Beach Walk District of the Beach by Design Plan. On February 20, 2002, a Flexible Development request was approved for this property to construct a 250-room full service hotel with an 800 parking space garage (of which 400 spaces are for public parking) (Case FL 01-01-01). The City Commission approved a companion Development Agreement on March 1, 2001 (Case DA 01-01-01). These development proposals approved included 183 rooms from the Density Pool, the hotel at a height of 150 feet and the vacation of Third Street and the east half of South Gulfview Boulevard (vacation was approved but is not effective until actual construction of the hotel begins). On August 20, 2002, the CDB Board approved the creation of a 155-space, public parking lot as an interim use (Case FLD 02-04-12). The City Commission approved a companion Development Agreement on August 22,2002 (Case DA 01-01-01 amended). This interim parking lot has not been constructed. Community Development 2004-11-16 7 . . . The proposal includes a companion Flexible Development application to amend a previously approved FL 01-01-01 (CDB approved on February 20, 2001) to permit an additional 24 overnight accommodation units from the density pool (in addition to the previously approved 250 overnight accommodation units) as a mixed use, with a maximum of 70,000 square-feet of amenities accessory to the hotel and a minimum of 400 public parking spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under provisions of Section 2-803.C. The applicant proposes to convert 24 of the existing overnight accommodation units to 18 attached dwelling units (condominiums), to be included primarily within the existing proposed building structure. This Flexible Development request provides for a hotel of 250 rooms (153.37 rooms/acre on total site), 18 attached dwellings (11.04 units/acre on total site) and a maximum of 70,000 square-feet (0.98 FAR) of amenities accessory to the hotel, at a height of 150 feet (to roof deck) (Case FLD2004-07052). As part of the development proposal, the applicant will still be providing a minimum of 400 parking spaces available to the public. The proposed Development Agreement amends the previously approved Development Agreement and sets forth public/private obligations. The City recognizes the economic and aesthetic benefits that will result from private development. The applicant recognizes the benefit of public improvements that directly affect the marketability of the project and the character of the general area surrounding the project. The Development Agreement sets forth the following main provisions: 1) Increase the number of hotel units allocated from the Beach by Design density pool from 185 to 209 units, an increase of 24 units. The project will still consist of a total of 250 resort hotel rooms. (Section 3.01.1); 2) Add a new use to the project of 18 residential condominium units, to be converted from 24 of the developer's existing hotel units. (Section 2.03.1.d); 3) Reduce the amount of retail/restaurant use from 50,000 square feet to 25,000 square feet. (Section 2.03.1.c); 4) Beachwalk is now being designed and constructed solely by the City, revised from the previous agreement where the developer had the option of constructing the project with repayment tothe City less his fair share. (Section 5.04.1); 5) A revision in the method of payment for the developer's fair share of Beachwalk from the original method based on the proportion of the project's front footage to a fixed cost of $ 1,190,000, subject to construction costs escalator should payment be received after April 1, 2005. (Section 5.05.5b); 6) The City will phase the Beachwalk project in a schedule more acceptable to the developer so that construction of the hotel and the road project are proceeding simultaneously as much as practicable. Beachwalk will be phased to construct the portion adjacent to the hotel project earlier than the southern half of the road project. The developer agrees to pay the additional costs of $280,000 associated with accelerating the construction schedule. Therefore, the total funds to be paid by the Developer for Beachwalk is $1,470,000 comprised of the fair share amount and the accelerated construction payment. (Section 5.05.5b and Exhibit D); 7) A change in the concession agreement to provide that the Developer no longer has exclusive rights to concession of beach chairs and umbrellas on the beach in front of their site, rather the City retains the rights to providing these specific concessions throughout the Beach including the property in front of the Beach. The City has agreed to certain quality standards regarding the provision of these specific concession materials; should the City's concessionaire not meet these quality standards, the Developer may demand compliance with the quality standards and if not cured, the Developer may provide these specific concessions instead of the City's concessionaire. The Developer retains the right to provide concessions of beach sundries. (Section 5.04.7); 8) New language has been added to confirm/clarify that the Developer's method of ownership of the hotel is permissible but that the hotel units must operate as a hotel under a single operator and not be used for permanent residential use. (Section 2.03.1.c. and 2.03.2); 9) All references throughout the document to Marriott Hotel as the operator are revised Community Development 2004-11-16 8 . . . to Hyatt or other operator meeting the quality stanctards; and 1 0) References to the Interim Project are deleted throughout the document. The Interim Project would have allowed a surface public parking lot until hotel construction was initiated. The CDB has been provided with the most recently negotiated Development Agreement, submitted and dated stamped November 3, 2004. The City Council may enter into Development Agreements to encourage a stronger commitment on comprehensive and capital facilities planning, ensure the provision of adequate public facilities for development, encourage the efficient use of resources, and reduce the economic cost of development. The CDB is required to review the proposed Development Agreement and make a recommendation to the City Council. The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 9, 2004. The Planning Department recommends recommendation to the City Council, of an amended Development Agreement between Beachwalk Resort, LLC (fka Clearwater Seashell Resort, L.C.) (property owner) and the City of Clearwater (previously approved DA 01-01-01 by City Council on March 1, 2001) for the sites at 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 and 304 Coronado Drive, with Bases for Approval: 1) The amended Development Agreement is consistent with and furthers the goals, policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan; 2) The amended Development Agreement complies with the standards and criteria of Section 4-606; 3) The amended Development Agreement implements and formalizes the requirements for the construction of site and off-site improvements under the related site plan proposal (FLD2004-07052);and 4) The amended Development Agreement is in compliance with Beach by Design. It was recommended the City create a communication Task Force to include representatives of the City's Economic Development Department, the local Chambers of Commerce, and all project developers to discuss development issues i.e. Beachwalk and major projects, and related road closures that interfere with tourism and bus traffic and develop schedules and time lines. It was suggested regular meetings and communication would ease and lessen related prQblem~. Ms. Tarapani said requiring developer participation would require an amendment to the development agreement and approval of the City Council. Housh Ghovaee, representative, offered to participate in establishing the Task Force but did not think the developer's participation should be part of the development agreement. He said the developer always intended to work with neighborhood residents and businesses. It was noted this Task Force would apply to a number of developments. See page 17 for motion of approval. Community Development 2004-11-16 9 . . . 3 Case: FLD2004-08060, 1250 Palmetto Street Leve/ Two Application Owner: City of Clearwater Applicant: Le'Azon Technology Institute, Inc. Representative: Laron Barber, (P.O. Box 4097, Clearwater, FL 33758; phone: 727-712- 9733). Location: 0.379 acre located at the northeast corner of Palmetto Street and Holt Avenue. Atlas Page: 269B. Zoning District: Institutional (I). Request: Flexible Development approval to permit a social public service agency in the Institutional District, with deviations to allow a social public service agency adjacent to residentially zoned property and to allow a social public service agency within 1,500 feet of an existing social public service agency, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-1204.A. Proposed Use: Non-profit educational training facility. Neighborhood Association: North Greenwood Association, Inc. (Jonathon Wade, 908 Pennsylvania Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone: 461-5291); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725- 3345; email: Diw@ate.net). Presenter: Frank "Chip" Gerlock, Development Review Manager. The 0.378-acre site is located at the northeast quadrant of Holt Avenue and Palmetto Street. Improvements on the site include a one-story concrete block constructed building of approximately 3,338 square-feet. The building was constructed in 1986 and has an appraised value of $203,000. The building is owned by the City and functioned as the "North Greenwood Branch Library" from 1986 to 2003. . From. January of 2003 to May 2004, the facility served as storage for the Clearwater Main Library. The applicant has entered into a lease agreement with the City to lease the structure at 1250 Palmetto Street for a period of five years. The applicant proposes to utilize the existing structure to provide educational training services to the community. Per the lease agreement, there can be no structural changes or improvements made without consent of the City. Existing parking and landscaping meets code requirements. Additional parking is provided with a parking agreement between the City and School Board of Pinellas County. This agreement provides for an additional ten parking spaces for a period of ten years, commencing August 23, 2005 and ending August 22, 2015. Initially, the factors that directed this project to the Comprehensive Infill process were: 1) the proposed use (social/public service agency) will be adjacent to residentially zoned properties and 2) the social/public service agency is within 1,500 feet of an existing social/public service agency (African American Leadership Co.). On October 14,2004, the "African American Leadership Co." located at 1250 Holt Avenue, moved to a new location (1201 Douglas Avenue) that is more than 1,500 feet of 1250 Palmetto Street. Presently, the one factor requiring Comprehensive Infill approval is that the 1250 Palmetto Street location for the social/public service agency is adjacent to residentially zoned properties to the east and south. The proposed use (educational training services) is very similar in nature and impact as the previous library use. As there are no physical improvements requested or required, it appears that the change of use will be minimal in any impacts to the neighborhood. Community Development 2004-11-16 10 . . . The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on October 7,2004. Planning Department recomm~nds approval of the Flexible Development application to permit a social/public service agency adjacent to residentially zoned property as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under provisions of Section 2-1204.A, for the site at 1250 Palmetto Street, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-1204.A; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts AND Conditions of Approval: 1) That all signage meet Code, including the removal/redesign of any existing signs, through building permits prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the applicable site and 2) That a fire inspection is performed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. See page 17 for motion of approval. 4. Case: ANX2004-08012 - 1208 Claire Drive Level Three Application Owner/Applicant: Richard Stover (11739 Tarpon Springs Road, Odessa, FL 33556; phone: 813-920-1099). Location: 0.212 acre located on the north side of Claire Drive, approximately 550 feet west of Betty Lane. Atlas Page: 269A. Request: a) Annexation of 0.212 acre to the City of Clearwater; b) Land Use Plan amendment from the Residential Low (RL) Category (County) to the Residential Low (RL) Category (City of Clearwater); and c) Rezoning from the R3, Single Family Residential District (County) to the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District (City of Clearwater). Proposed Use: Single-family home. Neighborhood Association(s): North Greenwood Association, Inc. (Jonathon Wade, 908 Pennsylvania Ave, Clearwater, FL 33755); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@Qte.net). Presenter: Gina Clayton, Long Range Planning Manager. The subject property is on the north side of Claire Drive, approximately 550 feet west of Betty Lane. The parcel is 0.21-acre in area and is occupied by an existing single-family detached dwelling. The applicant is requesting this annexation to receive City solid waste service. The property is contiguous with existing City boundaries to the north and west; therefore, the proposed annexation is consistent with Florida Statutes with regard to voluntary annexation. It is proposed that the property have a Future Land Use Plan designation of Residential Low (RL) and a zoning category of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). The proposed annexation can be served by City services including solid waste, police, fire and emergency medical services without any adverse effect on the service level. The proposed annexation is consistent with both the City's Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with Florida law regarding municipal annexation through its adjacency with existing City boundaries. Based on their analysis, the Planning Department recommends approval of the annexation of the property located at 1208 Claire Drive, of the Residential Low (RL) Category Community Development 2004-11-16 11 . pursuant to the City's Comprehensive Plan and of the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) zoning district pursuant to the City's Community Development Code. See page 17 for motion of approval. 5. Case: FLD2004-06043 -1425 Sunset Point Road Level Two Application OwnerlApplicant: Schlau Properties Co. Representative: Timothy A. Johnson, Jr., Esq., Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP. (911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756; phone: 727-461-1818; fax: 727-462- 0365; email: timj@jpfirm.com ). Location: 0.38 acres located on the south side of Sunset Point Road, approximately 400 feet east of the intersection of Kings Highway and Sunset Point Road. Atlas Page: 261A. Zoning District: Office (0). Request: Flexible Development approval to allow Retail Sales and Service (a funeral home) as a primary use in the Office Zoning District, with a reduction of the front setback from 25 feet to 13 feet (to pavement), reductions of the side (east) setback from 20 feet to four feet (to building and sidewalk), a reduction of the side (west) setback from 20 feet to eight feet (to pavement), and a reduction of the rear setback from 20 feet to 11 feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Section 2-1004.B. and as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. Proposed Use: Funeral Home. Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@ate.net). Presenter: Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Planner III. . This 0.38-acre site is located on the south side of Sunset Point Road, approximately 400 feet east of the intersection of Kings Highway and Sunset Point Road. An office building occupies this small lot. There is an existing driveway access to this site from Sunset Point Road. There is an exiting concrete sidewalk along the front of the site. The proposal seeks approval to allow Retail Sales and Service asa primary use within the Office District. Section 1-1003. K. limits retail sales and service to not more than 10% of the building floor area within the Office Zoning District. Buildings within the Office District need to be used primarily for office purposes. This application is seeking to use the entire property, building and parking lot, for a funeral home. The Clearwater zoning code considers a funeral home as "Retail Sales and Service." In addition, the proposal is seeking setback reductions. Because Retail Sales and Service is not permitted as a stand-alone use on property within the Office District, the applicant has filed a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment application. A Comprehensive Landscape application has been applied for as well. The applicant proposes to use the existing office building as a funeral home. The existing building is setback approximately 54 feet from the front property line. The proposal exceeds the minimum-parking requirement of nine spaces by proposing 18 parking spaces. A loading zone will accommodate hearse or limousine parking. Solid waste will be serviced through black barrel service. The building height, at 9.75 feet from grade to roof midpoint, is existing and will not change. The building design will not be altered from its present appearance. The building is yellow with a pitched roof and white columns. The roof and . Community Development 2004-11-16 12 . . . column design provide a front porch type effect facing the front of the site and Sunset Point Road. The landscape plan includes a mix of plants including red maple, parsonii juniper, crape myrtle, and American sycamore trees. Any proposed signage will be reviewed by staff as a separate process. Signage will need to be architecturally-integrated into the design of the site (freestanding) and building (attached). Channel-letters should be used should attached signage be requested. A low, monument-style sign is appropriate should a freestanding sign be requested. The setback reductions are proposed to help make the existing office site work as a funeral home. Improvement to the impervious surface ratio (ISR) is proposed through pavement reduction. The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on October 7,2004. The Planning Department recommends approval to allow Retail Sales and Service (a funeral home) as a primary use in the Office Zoning District, with a reduction of the front setback from 25 feet to 13 feet (to pavement), reductions of the side (east) setback from 20 feet to four feet (to building and sidewalk), a reduction of the side (west) setback from 20 feet to eight feet (to pavement), and a reduction of the rear setback from 20 feet to 11 feet (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Section 2- 1004.B. and as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. for the site at 1425 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 proposal is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance redevelopment efforts AND Conditions of Approval: 1) That the site plan be revised to correctly state within the site data table, the ISR and existing building height, prior to building permit issuance; 2) That all Fire Department concerns be addressed prior to building permit issuance; 3) Provide a revised landscape plan to the satisfaction of Planning staff, prior to building permit issuance; 4) That a Traffic Impact fee to be assessed and paid prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, by the applicant; and 5) That all signage meet Code, consist of channel letters for any attached signs, and low monument-style for a freestanding sign and be architecturally-integrated into the design of the building and site. Development Review Manager Chip Gerlock said staff had recommended deleting one condition. Timothy Johnson, representative, agreed with the change. See page 17 for motion of approval. Community Development 2004-11-16 13 . . . 6. Case: FLD2004-07054 -111 South Belcher Road Level Two Application Owner/Applicant: Ocean Properties of Clearwater, LLC (3891 Coquina Key Drive SE, St. Petersburg, FL 33705; phone: 727-820-9826; fax: 727-527-6084). Location: 0.72 acre located on the east side of Belcher Road, approximately 1,300 feet south of the intersection of Drew Street and South Belcher Road. Atlas Page: 290A. Zoning District: Commercial (C). Request: Flexible Development approval to permit retail sales within an existing one-story commercial building with reductions to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to six feet (to existing building) and from 25 feet to 12.5 feet (to proposed pavement), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to four feet (to existing and proposed pavement), as a Flexible Development Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.N, and reductions to the landscape buffers along the south property line from five feet to four feet and a reduction in the front (west) landscaping adjacent to the building (west side) from 15 feet to six feet, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. Proposed Use: Retail Sales and Services. Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@ate.net). Presenter: Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Planner III. This.72-acre site on the east side of South Belcher Road is approximately 1,300 feet south of the intersection of Drew Street and South Belcher Road. The site has an existing 5,000 square-foot building with a curb cut on Belcher Road. The site is located along the very busy north-south Belcher Road corridor and is diagonally across the street from Clearwater's main branch of the US Postal Service. West of the site is an office complex and the very busy intersection of Cleveland Street and South Belcher Road. Immediately south of the site is a veterinarian's office. East of the site is a mobile home park. As the building has been vacant for longer than a year (not housing retail uses for at least that time period), the site is going through Flexible Development Review to address nonconforming site issues (setbacks). The proposal is to establish retail sales within the existing 5,000 square-foot building. An approval of the setback reductions will allow this existing building with an improved site layout to be re-occupied. The proposal also seeks to reduce landscape buffers, but is compensating landscape buffer reduction with other plantings through the Comprehensive Landscape Program. The existing building is not expanding, but will have some exterior decorative improvements. The site itself will be improved through an increase in landscaping and a defined parking lot. The impervious surface ratio (ISR) will be improved. Proposed parking meets the minimum parking required. Solid waste removal will be by dumpster service. The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on October 7,2004. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible Development application to permit retail sales within an existing one-story commercial building with reductions to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to six feet (to existing building) and from 25 feet to 12.5 feet (to proposed pavement), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to four feet (to existing and proposed pavement), as a Flexible Development Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.N, and reductions to the landscape buffers along the south property Community Development 2004-11-16 14 . . . line from five feet to four feet and a reduction in the front (west) landscaping adjacent to the building (west side) from 15 feet to six feet, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G., for the site at 111 South Belcher Road, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) Theproposal.complies with the Flexible Development criteria per Sections 2-702 and 2-704; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts, and Conditions of Approval: 1) That the landscape plan be revised to the satisfaction of Planning staff prior to any building permit issuance; 2) That all Fire Department concerns be addressed prior to Certificate of Occupancy; 3) That dumpster service be established with a dumpster enclosure installed to city specifications, prior to Certificate of Occupancy; 4) That a Traffic Impact fee to be assessed and paid prior to Certificate of Occupancy by the applicant; and 5) That all signage meet Code, consist of channel letters for any wall signs, and be architecturally integrated to the design of the building and site. See page 17 for motion of approval. 7. Case: FLD2004-08058 - 2201 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Level Two Application Owner: Ellis & Co., Ltd., a Florida Limited Partnership Applicant: Peter Marich, (410 South Lincoln Avenue, Suite B, Clearwater, FL 33756; phone: 727-461-2402; fax: 727-447-7243; email: mar410@aol.com). Location: 0.488 acre located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Belcher Road and Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. Atlas Page: 299A. Zoning District: Commercial (C). Request: Flexible Development approval for the change of use of an existing automobile service station to a 2,266 square-foot restaurant, with a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to pavement), a reduction of the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to pavement), reductions of the side (east) setback from 10 feet to three feet (to building), from 10 feet to zero feet (to exterior seating wood deck), and from 10 feet to zero feet (to dumpster enclosure), a reduction of the side (south) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to two feet (to dumpster enclosure), a reduction in the required parking from 34 spaces to 21 spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C., and as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. Proposed Use: Restaurant. Neighborhood Association: Skycrest Neighbors (Elizabeth France, 1629 Cleveland Street, Clearwater, FL 33765, phone: 727442-5856; email: eaf5054@earthlink.net emailto:eaf5054@earthlink.net); 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 item was continued to today's meeting to allow for the applicant and staff to resolve site issues. This 0.488-acre site, on the southeast corner of Belcher Road and Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, has an abandoned automobile service station. The proposal is to establish a restaurant in place of the service station. The plan for the restaurant seeks five setback Community Development 2004-11-16 15 . . . reductions, but is adding considerable landscaping. The auto service facility has been vacant for some time. The 2,266 square-foot restaurant building will be 298 square feet larger than the vacant 1,968 square-foot auto service garage. The restaurant will feature both interior and outside deck seating. The north (front) elevation will have an arched portico style doorway, vertical columns, and large windows. The exterior design is impressive, with a pale yellow color and medium brown columns, accented by gooseneck style lamps attached to the building fayade. Proposed landscaping includes a 20-foot tall existing live oak, nine sable palm trees, and other plantings as specified on the site plan. An automatic underground irrigation system is proposed to maintain the landscaping. The end result will be a significant improvement to what is now a vacant building and asphalt covered site. Waste removal will be by pick-up from a dumpster located within an enclosure with a gate. The proposal is seeking setback reductions, and a reduction in required parking spaces. The setback reductions are necessary to fit the restaurant on the site. Staff recommends that the owner of the restaurant seek a written parking agreement with the neighboring shopping center owner to accommodate the parking deficiency. Adequate parking can then be provided to accommodate the restaurant. The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on September 9, 2004. The Staff recommendation for this case continues to be for approval of the Flexible Development Application for a change of use of an existing automobile service station to a 2,266 square-foot restaurant, with a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to pavement), reductions of the side (east) setback from 10 feet to three feet (to building), from 10 feet to zero feet (to exterior seating wood deck), and from 10 feet to zero feet (to dumpster enclosure), a reduction of the side (south) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pavement) and from 10 feet to two feet (to dumpster enclosure), a reduction in the required parking from 34 spaces to 21 spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C., and as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202. G. for the site at 2201 Gulf to Bay Boulevard with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-704.C; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; and 3) The proposal is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance redevelopment efforts. AND Conditions of Approval: 1) That the site plan be revised, prior to building permit issuance, to correct the proposed building height stated within the site data table; 2) That a revised landscape plan be submitted, acceptable to Planning staff, prior to any building permit issuance; 3) That all Fire Department concerns be addressed prior to building permit issuance; 4) That an approved SWFWMD permit or letter of exemption be provided prior to building permit issuance; 5) That the existing billboard at 2223 Gulf to Bay Boulevard (site location is also at 501-525 South Belcher Road) be removed before or on May 1, 2005; 6) That the existing freestanding sign at 2201 Gulf to Bay Boulevard (near the intersection of Gulf to Bay Boulevard and South Belcher Road) be removed prior to building permit issuance;7) That a Traffic Impact fee to be assessed and paid prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, by the applicant; 8) That all proposed on-site utilities, including electric, phone and cable television, be located underground; and 9) That all signage meet Code, consist of channel letters for any Community Development 2004-11-16 16 . . . attached signs, and low monument-style for a freestanding sign and be architecturally integrated into the design of the building and site. Mr. Gerlock reviewed proposed conditions, reporting one related to the billboard is not necessary as the landowner has terminated the billboard lease with Viacom and a notice of termination has been submitted to the City. The billboard will be removed. Acting Member Dennehy moved to approve Item F1, FLD2004-07052 for 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230,300, and 304 Coronado Drive with Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, Item F2, DVA2004-00002 for 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230,300, and 304 Coronado Drive with Bases of Approval as listed, Item F3, FLD2004-08060 for 1250 Palmetto Street with Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, Item F5, FLD2004-06043 for 1425 Sunset Point Road with Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, Item F6, FLD2004-07054 for 111 South Belcher Road with Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed, and Item F7, FLD2004-08058 for 2201 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard with Bases of Approval and Conditions of Approval as listed and recommend approval of Item F4, ANX2004-08012 for 1208 Claire Drive. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. G. CONTINUED ITEM: (Item 1) This case was reviewed after 2:00 p.m. 1. Case: FLD2004-06044 - 115 North Keystone Drive Level Two Application Owner/Applicant: David and Sharon Cote (111 North Keystone Drive, Clearwater, FL 33755; phone: 727-455-2130; fax: 727-461-1649). Location: 0.162 acre located at the southeast corner of North Keystone Drive and Grove Street. Atlas Page: 288B. Zoning District: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). Request: Flexible Development approval for 1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density for the purpose of adding a two-car garage, under the provisions of Section 6-109, and 2) expansion of attached dwellings with a reduction to the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 20 feet (to building) and a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to building), as a Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-203.C, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the south property line from 10 feet to five feet, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. Proposed Use: Construction of a two-car attached garage in association with an existing nonconforming attached dwelling (duplex). Neighborhood Associations: Keystone Manor (Ken Strickland, 1634 Laura Street, Clearwater, FL 33755); Skycrest Neighbors (Elizabeth France, 1629 Cleveland Street, Clearwater, FL 33765; phone: 727-442-5856; email: eaf5054CCi>.earthlink. netmailto:eaf5054CCi>.earthlink. net); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: DiwCCi>.ate.net). Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. Planner Wayne Wells reviewed the request. The CDB reviewed the application on October 19, 2004, and directed the applicant to reduce their proposal to a two-car garage, but did not specify a maximum size or height for the garage. Community Development 2004-11-16 17 . . . The applicant has submitted a revised proposal for a two-car garage with two separate garage doors. The proposed garage building has been reduced from the original proposal of 32-foot wide to 30-foot wide. This reduction to the garage width increases the distance to the east property line from 20 feet to 22 feet. The applicant has not proposed to reduce the 26-foot depth of the garage. The applicant has not proposed to reduce the 22-foot height to the peak of the garage roof. The revised plans indicate that each side of the garage will be separated by a partition wall, each with pull-down access to the upper attic storage area, and separate driveways in front of the garage doors. Plans indicate the exterior of the garage will be finished with stucco-stone panels to match the duplex at the front (north) corners of the garage. The lower side and rear of the garage will have tooled horizontal bed joints to match the existing duplex. The upper portions of the garage will have plank lap siding. The windows on the lower portion of the rear (south side) of the garage have been eliminated. The proposed breezeway has been changed to a screened porch, showing the washer and dryer the applicant had indicated at the October 19, 2004, CDB meeting to be provided within this area for the residents, with the southern edge to be wall rather than screening. Door access into the western portion of the garage would be through the screened porch. The applicant is indicating sidewalk access from both units to the screened porch and garage. The 0.162-acre site is located at the southeast corner of North Keystone Drive and Grove Street. This 51-foot by 137.5-foot site is developed with a nonconforming attached dwelling structure (duplex), located toward the western portion of the lot. There are presently two driveways off of Grove Street on either side of the duplex providing one off-street parking space per unit. Surrounding uses are primarily detached dwellings. There is a nonconforming duplex located one half block the east at 1666 Grove Street (also zoned Low Medium Density Residential [LMDR] District). Additionally, there is a nonconforming attached dwelling of three dwelling units located on the northwest corner of Grove Street and North Duncan Avenue (116 N. Duncan Avenue; zoned LMDR District). There are a number of attached dwellings (duplexes) located to the north along both sides of Drew Street (zoned Medium Density Residential District). As a nonconforming use (duplex), Section 6-103.B does not permit the expansion of the use, but only provides for normal maintenance and repair. The applicants propose to construct a 30-foot wide by 26-foot deep, two-car garage on the east side of the duplex, connecting the garage by a 12-foot wide by 20-foot deep screened porch to the duplex, for the purpose of providing the garage and outdoor parking for the residents of the duplex. In order to accomplish their proposal, the applicants have requested to Terminate the Status of Nonconformity to make the duplex a conforming use, which then would allow for the proposed garage expansion. Since the proposal attaches to the principal structure, the addition does not have any restriction on size (different than accessory structures that are restricted to 10% of the principal structure floor area). The proposed garage is 22 feet in height to the peak of the roof, within the 30-foot maximum height of Minimum Standard Development in the LMDR District. The applicants desire to allow storage over the garage parking. Under the Termination of Status of Nonconformity provisions, there are four required improvements: 1) Installation of perimeter buffers. As attached dwellings adjacent to detached dwellings and local streets, 1 O-foot wide landscape buffers are required. The site meets the 10- foot buffers adjacent to both streets and along the east side of the property. The applicant has requested to reduce the setback/buffer along the south property line to five feet in width, which Community Development 2004-11-16 18 . . . is adjacent to the applicant's home; 2) Improvemehtof off-street parking lots. The applicant is attempting to improve the off-street parking circumstances of the property through this proposal; 3) Removal of nonconforming signs, outdoor lighting or other accessory structures. There are no nonconforming signs or outdoor lighting on the premises. There is an existing storage shed in the southeast corner, at undetermined setbacks (only a five-foot side setback is required from both the east and south property lines). The proposal includes removal of this shed; and 4) Use of Comprehensive Sign Program and Comprehensive Landscape Programs to satisfy requirements. There is no need for a Comprehensive Sign Program, as there are no signs. The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Landscape Program to satisfy the requested reduction to the 10-foot buffer requirement along the south property. Nonconforming attached dwellings (duplexes and triplexes) are located at 116 N. Duncan Avenue (triplex zoned LMDR; one block to the east) and 1666 Grove Street (duplex zoned LMDR; 1/2 block to the east). The applicant has indicated in their submittal information that 1625 Laura Street is a duplex, yet City and Property Appraiser records indicate the use to be a single-family dwelling. There are a number of attached dwellings on both sides of Drew Street one block to the north, but these attached dwellings are located in the Medium Density Residential District. The applicant also has requested to reduce the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 20 feet and to reduce the side (south) setback and buffer from 10 feet to five feet. Given the north/south lot dimension of 51 feet and the required setbacks totaling 35 feet, there is insufficient area to construct a garage that could house any vehicles (only 16 feet left after setback requirements). The reduction to the front setback will allow vehicles to park outside of the garage and not overhang the property line. The reduction to the side (south) setback will allow for a sufficient depth of garage for vehicles to park within. There is already a heavy landscape buffer existing along the south property line. The existing structure is located 10.6 feet from the Grove Street front property line. Addition of the garage and screened porch would not appear to have any negative impact on surrounding property values (surrounding property values within ~ block range between $69,900 and $122,600, with the majority up to the mid- $80s; subject property value currently is $72,500) To ensure use of this addition is for residents of the duplex, any approval should be conditioned on restricting use of the garage and storage area to the residents of the duplex. While retaining the existing western driveway, the eastern existing driveway is assumed to be removed. Approval should be conditioned on removal of this eastern, existing driveway. To ensure use of the screened porch by the residents of the duplex, sidewalk access should be provided from the units. The applicant proposes additional landscaping on the property. Code requirements for proposed trees will need to be met. The redevelopment of this site, with enhanced landscape improvements, will improve the appearance of this site and the surrounding area. All applicable Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General Applicability criteria (Section 3-913) and Residentiallnfill Project criteria (Section 2-404.F) have been met. The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on May 6, 2004. The Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible Development application for (1) the Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density for the purpose of adding a two-car garage, under the provisions of Section 6-109, and (2) the expansion of Community Development2004~11-16 19 . attached dwellingswith a reduction to the front (north) setback from 25 feet to 20 feet (to building) and a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to building), as a Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-203.C, and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the south property line from 10 feet to five feet, as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G, for the site at 115 North Keystone Drive, with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residentiallnfill Project per Section 2-404.F; 2) The proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; 3) The proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G; and 4) The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts AND Conditions of Approval: 1) That use of the garage and storage area above be restricted to resident use of the duplex only; 2) That, prior to the issuance of a building permit, the site plans indicate the existing, eastern driveway be shown to be removed; and 3) That, prior to the issuance of a building permit, the landscape plan be revised to indicate trees meeting Code size requirements. Mr. Wells said staff has had significant discussion with the property owner since the last meeting. The applicant has revised and resubmitted the plans, reducing the project's scope to a two-car garage. Access to the storage area will be via pull-down ladders. The plan removed windows from the rear elevation. He reported the Zubeks, who testified at October's meeting, own abutting property but do not live next door. Douglas Knight, who was granted party status in October, was present. In response to a request, Acting Member Dennehy moved to grant party status to Alicia . Farrell. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. In response to a request, Acting Member Dennehy moved to grant party status to Pamela Pettinato. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. . David Cote, applicant, reviewed his request, indicating he had made changes to the plan as requested by the CDB and stated many two-story homes are in the neighborhood. Pamela Pettinato and Alicia Farrell and two other people spoke in support of the request. Donald Knight and one other person spoke in opposition to the request. Member Plisko moved to approve Item G1, FLD2004-06044 for 115 North Keystone Drive with Conditions of Approval and Bases of Approval as listed. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. H. LEVEL TWO APPLICATION: (Item 1) Case reviewed after 2:00 p.m. Community Development 2004-11-16 20 . . . 1. Case: FLD2004-08059/TDR2004-08008 - 15 - 17 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street Owners: Lamer Beach Club LLC, Allan J. Crooker and McSmith Inc. Applicant: Aqua Sun Development, 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: nestechCCD.mindsprina.com). Location: 0.299 acre located between Avalon Street and Kendall Street, approximately 200 feet west of Mandalay Avenue. Atlas Page: 258A. Zoning District: Tourist (T). Request: 1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (15 overnight accommodation units - to be converted to 11 dwelling units), under the provisions of Section 6-109; (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a total of 13 attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District and Tourist (T) District with reductions to lot area in the MHDR District from 15,000 square-feet to 8,700 square-feet and in the T District from 10,000 square- feet to 4,350 square-feet, reductions to lot width in the MHDR District from 150 feet to 100 feet and in the T District from 100 feet to 50 feet, reductions to the front (north along Avalon Street - MHDR District) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to dumpster staging pad), a reduction to the side (west - MHDR District) from 10 feet to zero feet (to building), a reduction to the rear (south - MHDR District) from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the front (south along Kendall Street - T District) from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the side (west - T District) from 10 feet to zero feet (to building), an increase to building height in the MHDR District from 30 feet and in the T District from 35 feet to 69.5 feet (to roof deck) with perimeter parapets of 3.67 feet (from roof deck) and decorative roof structures of 10.1 feet (from roof deck) and to permit a building within the visibility triangles, as a Residentiallnfill Project in the MHDR District and as a Comprehensive lnfill Redevelopment Project in the T District, under the provisions of Sections 2-404.F and 2-803.C; (3) Reduction to the front perimeter buffer along Avalon Street in the MHDR District from 10 feet to zero feet (to dumpster staging pad) and a reduction to the side (west) landscape buffer in the MHDR District from 10 feet to zero feet (to building), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G; and (4) Transfer of Development Rights (TDR2004-08008) of one dwelling unit to this site from 321 Coronado Drive, under the provisions of Section 4-1402. Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (13 condominium units). Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association (David MacNamee, 827 Mandalay Ave., Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-446-5801; email: dmacnavCCD.att.net); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: DiwCCD.ate.net). Presenter: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. Mr. Wells reviewed the request. The 0.299-acre site is between Avalon and Kendall streets, approximately 200 feet west of Mandalay Avenue. The site has 100 feet of frontage on Avalon Street (north) and 50 feet of frontage on Kendall Street (south). The proposed site is composed of three parcels. The parcel at 15 Avalon Street is zoned Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District and currently is developed with a nonconforming, five-unit overnight accommodation use. The parcel at 17 Avalon Street is zoned MHDR District and is currently developed with one detached dwelling. The parcel at 16 Kendall Street is zoned Tourist (T) Districtand currently is developed with a nonconforming, 1 O-unit overnight accommodation use. All existing Community Development 2004-11-16 21 . improvements are planned to be demolished. While some on-site parking exists, parking straddles the front property line along Avalon Street (partially on-site and partially within the right-of-way). City metered parking lots are to the west and north (across Avalon Street) of the subject property. The Palm Pavilion restaurant and overnight accommodation use is to the south across Kendall Street. Development along Mandalay Avenue to the east includes retail, restaurant, an automobile service station, overnight accommodation, and attached dwelling uses. Overnight accommodation and attached dwelling uses are east of the subject property. The proposal includes constructing 13 attached dwellings (condominiums) in a building with six living floors over two levels of parking. The proposal includes an increase to the building height from 30 feet (MHDR District) and 35 feet (T District) to 69.5 feet from the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) to the highest roof deck. The applicant has submitted information that the highest roof deck, at 69.5 feet, accounts for 54.5% of the total roof area. Additional information submitted by the applicant indicates other roof levels of the proposed building are 58.6 feet, accounting for 24% of the total roof area, 39.2 feet (11.5%) and 29.6 feet (10%). Staff has not been able to verify the 58.6-foot height, nor percentages of the total roof area. . Staff has calculated the heights and percentages as follows: (Note: Projections above any roof, such as stair towers, elevator towers, mechanical rooms, or gazebos have been counted as part of the roof level it projects above, which is the same basis used for percentages calculated for the "LaRisa" project at 650 Bay Esplanade) 1) Main roof - 69.5 feet above BFE and 80.57% of total roof area; 2) Sixth Level - 43.67 feet above BFE, not 39.2 feet as indicated (actually Level 6.5 - pool deck level is 10.33% of total roof area) and 3) Fifth Level - 29.5 feet above BFE and 9.1 % of total roof area The roof level the applicant indicates at 58.6 feet above BFE is actually for penthouse terraces on Level 8, which is covered by the main roof. Staff has not counted this as a roof, just as the applicant has not counted any other terrace on any other level as a roof, and was similarly discounted on the "LaRisa" project. Two blocks to the. north, on the north side of Glendale Street and adjacent to undeveloped Beach Drive, is a residential condominium building of five living floors over ground level parking. The Colony Surf Condominium building on the north side of Cambria Street is three living floors over ground level parking (approximately 35 feet in height from BFE to roof deck). Under construction on the north side of Somerset Street is a project by the same developers as this proposal (Chalets on White Sands residential condominiums) with five living floors over ground level parking at a height of 56 feet to the roof deck (FLD2002-09031, approved by COB on November 19, 2002). Between Somerset and Cambria Street is a project (Chateau on White Sands residential condominiums) approved by the COB, but not yet under construction, in a building of five living floors over two floors of parking at an approved height of 61.66 feet to the roof deck (FLD2004-01 002fTDR2004-01 006, approved by the COB on June 15,2004). The subject site is within the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design and has been designated for multi-family town homes and condominiums of low to mid-rise building heights. The immediate vicinity is almost entirely composed of attached dwellings and small motels of one to two-stories. Building styles generally resemble architecture from the 1950s and appear . Community Development 2004-11-16 22 . . . to have been progressively expanded. The proposed height of this building at 69.5 feet to the roof deck may be viewed as being consistent with building heights approved by the CDB in the "Old Florida District," and similar to that approved for the "LaRisa" project at 650 Bay Esplanade, but also must be viewed in concert with other provisions of this proposal as to acceptability. Staff is using the "LaRisa" project as a benchmark for this area, where that project's highest roof deck was approved at 69.5 feet above the BFE line (although only accounting for 57% of the total roof - other roof decks were at 58.5 feet above BFE [17.5%], 48 feet above BFE [18.1%] and 37.5 feet above BFE [7.4%]). While this proposal's highest roof deck is the same 69.5 feet above BFE, its percentage is much higher (80% to 57%) than that of "LaRisa." The applicant's attorney asserts that the impact of a 40-foot tall building would have the same impacts as the proposed building height. Staff disagrees with this assertion and prefers a building 40 to 50 feet in height. The proposal includes a request to increase the height of perimeter parapets around the edge of the roof deck an additional 3.67 feet (from roof deck), where the Code permitted maximum is 30 inches. This increase may be viewed as making the parapets proportional in respect to the height of the building and to aid in the screening of the rooftop air conditioning units. Additionally, the proposal includes a request to increase the building height another 10.1 feet (from roof deck) for decorative roof structures on the north side of the building. The proposal includes a request to Terminate the Status of the Nonconformity for the nonconforming density related to the two overnight accommodation uses on the property. Based on current Land Use Category density limitations of 40 units/rooms per acre for overnight accommodation uses, or 30 dwelling units per acre for residential uses, the overall subject site may be developed with a maximum of 11 overnight accommodation units/rooms or a maximum of eight dwelling units. These two overnight accommodation uses currently total 15 overnight units/rooms. The applicant is requesting to terminate the nonconforming density in order to convert the 15 overnight units/rooms to 11 dwelling units, based on the 40/30 conversion factor. The applicant is achieving the proposed number of dwelling units for this property by adding in the existing one dwelling unit at 17 Avalon Street and adding in one dwelling unit by the Transfer of Density Rights. Under the Termination of Status of Nonconformity provisions, there are four required improvements: 1) Installation of perimeter buffers. Perimeter buffers are not required in the Tourist District (southern portion of the property). On the northern portion of the property zoned MHDR District, the applicant is providing the required 1 O-foot wide landscape buffers along Avalon Street (with the exception of the dumpster staging area) and the east and south sides of the property. The applicant is requesting to reduce the landscape buffer along the west side of the property from 10 feet to zero feet, which is adjacent to a City parking lot; 2) Improvement of off-street parking lots. The applicant is removing all existing improvements and is providing parking that meets Code provisions in the two levels of the parking garage; 3) Removal of nonconforming signs, outdoor lighting or other accessory structures. The applicant is removing all existing improvements. Any future signage will need to meet current Code provisions; and 4) Use of Comprehensive Sign Program and Comprehensive Landscape Programs to satisfy requirements. At this time there is no need for a Comprehensive Sign Program, as there are no signs proposed. The applicant has submitted a Comprehensive Landscape Program to satisfy Community Development 2004-11-16 23 . the requested reduction to the 10-foot landscape buffer requirement along the west side of the property. Staff's concern relative to the termination of the nonconforming density is the net increase of four dwelling units proposed to be constructed on this small piece of property. This concern also must be reviewed in light of the other reductions or increases of this proposal reviewed here. Reductions to lot area and lot width for attached dwellings are part of this proposal. The request includes a reduction in the MHDR District from 15,000 square-feet to 8,700 square-feet and in the T District from 10,000 square-feet to 4,350 square-feet. The proposal also includes reductions to the lot width in the MHDR District from 150 feet to 100 feet and in the T District from 100 feet to 50 feet. The reductions to lot area amount to a 42% reduction in the MHDR District and a 56.5% reduction in the T District. Staff consistently has advised the applicant on this proposal that the land area is too small and needs to be combinedwith adjacent property to properly design a project that complies with the objectives of Beach by Design and more closely complies with requirements of the Community Development Code. The applicant's attorney opines that the lot size cannot be solved. Staff disagrees, in that the development on these three small lots is premature and should be enveloped into a larger property where design compromises are not so extreme. The lot width is a contributing factor to this property being too small, forcing a design that requires excessive compromises. . With the exception of the LaRisa II project at 669 Bay Esplanade (FLD2004-03018, approved by the CDB on October 19, 2004), all other projects approved in the "Old Florida District" have greatly exceeded lot area and lot width requirements. The shape of the property also contributes to design issues requiring excessive compromises and does not promote redevelopment that is in scale with the character and function of Clearwater beach. The request is being processed as a Residentiallnfill Project in the MHDR District and as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project in the T District due to the height increase and setback reductions being requested to the building, pavement and dumpster staging area. The proposal includes reductions to the front (north along Avalon Street - MHDR District) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to dumpster staging pad), a reduction to the side (west - MHDR District) from 10 feet to zero feet (to building), a reduction to the rear (south - MHDR District) from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the front (south along Kendall Street - T District) from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building) and a reduction to the side (west - T District) from 10 feet to zero feet (to building). Staff acknowledges that reductions to the front setbacks from Avalon and Kendall Streets are similar to those reductions approved for the projects at 14 Somerset Street (FLD2002-09031, approved by the CDB on November 19, 2002) and 15 -17 Somerset Street and 16 Cambria Street (FLD2004-01 002fTDR2004-01 006, approved by the CDB on June 15, 2004). However, a main difference with this proposal is the zero setback requested on the west side of the property. While this is a City parking lot, it should not be discounted as not being affected. The applicant's attorney, in a letter dated November 4, 2004, asserts "all maintenance of the building and .Iandscaping proposed for the building can be accomplished inside the lot lines without use of the City owned property to the west." At a zero setback, staff is unclear how the building can be maintained (such as painting) without overhanging the City's property. The applicant proposes creeping fig vines cascading from Level 3 downward along the garage wall . Community Development 2004-11-16 24 . facing the City property. All of the cascading vines will be over City property, where eventually it could affect the City's use of its property. Such an excessive reduction will set an unnecessary precedent for this area, which could lead to other similar requests. Building Code provisions also restrict the amount of openings in the exterior wall based on how close the building is to the lot line. At a zero setback there can be no openings, whereas at between three to 10 feet only 10% openings are allowed and 20% above 10-foot setback. The applicant has indicated on the building elevations how the proposal meets these Building Code restrictions. The site today has some existing on-site parking spaces, but an existing parking straddles the front property line along Avalon Street (partially on-site and partially within the right-of-way). The applicant has advised that some guests utilize parking spaces on the adjacent City parking lot to the west and/or to the north. The proposal is to eliminate all parking within the right-of-way and provide 24 parking spaces on-site (Code requirement is 1.5 spaces per unit or 20 spaces; proposal is at 1.846 spaces per unit). Parking will be provided on two levels and will be fully screened from view by solid walls on both levels of parking. A gated driveway on Avalon Street will access the first level of parking of 10 spaces. The building and site plans submitted for the CDB indicate what appears to be stacked parking on the west side of the first level of parking, which is not allowed by Code and has not been requested as part of this proposal. Staff has not discussed such a request with the applicant,nor was it part of the Development Review Committee considerations. A gated driveway on Kendall Street will access the second level of parking of 14 spaces. . Sidewalks will be constructed within the rights-of-way of both Avalon and Kendall streets for pedestrian safety, whereno sidewalks presently exist. The northern stairwell presently is shown to empty into the parking garage (a more hazardous area), and does not meet Fire and Building Code requirements. Should the CDB approve this proposal, the applicant will need to redesign this northern stairwell to provide an accessible path to the outside of the building to meet the Fire and Building Code provisions. As indicated previously, the proposed building will have six living floors, with varying numbers of units per floor. Levels 3 and 4 are proposed with three units each, with units ranging between 2,141 and 2,702 square-feet of living area. Levels 5 and 6 are proposed with two units, with 2,505 or 2,702 square-feet of living area. Level 5 also provides a clubroom on the east side of the building. Level 6 also is proposed with a pool, which is up a half-level accessed by stairs and a handicap chair lift (Level 6.5). Level 7 is proposed with two units, with 2,702 or 2,825 square-feet of living area. The top floor (Level 8) is a single penthouse of 4,847 square-feet of living area. Most units will have a westerly orientation, with the exception of two units on the Levels 3 and 4 on the eastern side of the building. Elevators from a lobby in the center of the building will access units. Stairwells are located on the northern, center and southern portions of the building. Concurrent with the front setback reductions in this proposal is the reduction to the front landscape buffer along Avalon Street in the MHDR District from 10 feet to zero feet (to dumpster staging pad) and a reduction to the side (west) landscape buffer in the MHDR District from 10 feet to zero feet (to building). The applicant acknowledges the limitation or lack of area for landscaping due to the proposed site design. The reduction on the west side is severe and cannot be made up elsewhere on-site to mitigate the starkness created on the west side, especially with a blank wall for the first two floors. The public will have to view this for quite some time, as vines will take some time to mature to provide their cascading effect envisioned . Community Development 2004-11-16 25 . . . by the applicant. The reductions proposed will not be in compliance with the criteria for the Comprehensive Landscape Program that requires the landscape design, character, location and/or materials to be demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted. With the front setbacks proposed, the building's structural column on the east side and a portion of the stairwell wall will be within the visibility triangles at the Avalon Street driveway (as well as the west side of the building adjacent to Kendall Street). While indicated on the first level architectural plans with openings in the walls to provide views through it for visibility purposes, the building elevations do not indicate such. The applicant is not proposing any signage at this time. The applicant's attorney indicates that redevelopment of this property is inevitable, due to rising property values resulting in increased taxes. Staff agrees with these assertions, however, this marketplace circumstance should not abrogate appropriate development on appropriately sized parcels more closely meeting Code provisions. This proposal includes the Transfer of Development Rights of one unit to this site from 321 Coronado Drive (where a maximum of four units are permitted), where only one dwelling unit may be transferred to this site under provisions of Section 4-1402. While in compliance with the maximum number of units able to be transferred to the subject site, this portion of the request also must be reviewed in light of other reductions or increases of this proposal. The increase by one additional unit further exacerbates staff's concern of overbuilding this site with too many units, on too little land, with too little setbacks. The proposal is not in compliance with the criteria of Section 4-1403, as it will not appropriately upgrade the immediate vicinity nor create a design that enhances the form and function of the community character for the immediate vicinity. Staff does not support this proposal for the myriad of reasons enumerated. This project is premature, as the site should be enveloped into a larger parcel to appropriately design a project complying, or more closely complying, with Code provisions and the vision of Beach by Design. Many facets embraced in staff's recommendation are related and do not rely on one issue: the lot area of the property; the lot width of the property; the use of the provision of Termination of Status of Nonconformity to exceed the number of units appropriate for the property; the use of the Transfer of Development Rights to further exacerbate the proposed number of dwelling units; the height and percentage of total roof area of the proposed building; proposed setbacks; lack of adequate landscape area to mitigate the effects of the site design; and the proposed mass and scale of the building. The proposal is not compatible with surrounding properties, due to these issues. The redevelopment of this site will not improve the appearance of this site and the surrounding area. All applicable Code requirements and criteria including, but not limited to, General Applicability criteria (Section 3-913), Residentiallnfill Project criteria (Section 2-404.F) and Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria (Section 2-803.C) have not been met. The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and supporting materials on March 4, 2004, April 1, 2004, and May 6, 2004. The Planning Department recommends denial of the Flexible Development request for 1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (15 overnight accommodation units - to be converted to 11 dwelling units), under the provisions of Section 6-109; 2) Flexible Development approval to permit a total of 13 attached dwellings in the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District and Tourist (T) District with reductions to lot area in the MHDR District from 15,000 square-feet to 8,700 square-feet and in Community Development 2004-11-16 26 . . . the T District from 10,000 square-feet to 4,350 square-feet, reductions to lot width in the MHDR District from 150 feet to 100 feet and in the T District from 100 feet to 50 feet, reductions to the front (north along Avalon Street - MHDR District) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building) and from 25 feet to zero feet (to dumpster staging pad), a reduction to the side (west - MHDR District) from 10 feet to zero feet (to building), a reduction to the rear (south - MHDR District) from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the front (south along Kendall Street - T District) from 15 feet to 10 feet (to building), a reduction to the side (west - T District) from 10 feet to zero feet (to building), an increase to building height in the MHDR District from 30 feet and in the T District from 35 feet to 69.5 feet (to roof deck) with perimeter parapets of 3.67 feet (from roof deck) and decorative roof structures of 10.1 feet (from roof deck) and to permit a building within the visibility triangles, as a Residentiallnfill Project in the MHDR District and as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project in the T District, under the provisions of Sections 2-404.F and 2-803.C; 3) Reduction to the front perimeter buffer along Avalon Street in the MHDR District from 10 feet to zero feet (to dumpster staging pad) and a reduction to the side (west) landscape buffer in the MHDR District from 10 feet to zero feet (to building), as a Comprehensive Landscape Plan, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G; and 4) Transfer of Development Rights (TDR2004-08008) of one dwelling unit to this site from 321 Coronado Drive, under the provisions of Section 4-1402 for the site at 15-17 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street, with the following Bases for Denial: 1) The proposal does not comply with the Flexible Development criteria as a Residentiallnfill Project per Section 2-404.F; 2) The proposal does not comply with the Flexible Development criteria as.a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-803.C; 3) The proposal is not in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; 4) The development is not compatible with the surrounding area and will not enhance other redevelopment efforts; 5) The proposal is not in compliance with the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design; 6) The proposal is not in compliance with the criteria for the Transfer of Development Rights per Section 4- 1403.A; and 7) The Community Development Code does not permit stacked parking. Roger Larson, representative, said the lots originally platted in 1925 to be 50 feet wide and 87 feet deep have been changed since then. He displayed an aerial photograph of the site, indicating the subject site interfaces with the City parking lot. He said very few garages are located nearby. He said the project's proposed height will not block site lines. He said parking and driveway requirements affect project setbacks that create the building's footprint. He said stacked parking has been removed from the request. He said the sight lines have been altered to comply with Code. He said the applicant has met staff design recommendations wherever possible. He said the west side setback cannot be changed due to the location of the stairwell and walkway. He said the project will not impact the City nor impair the City's site, which probably will be a parking lot for a long time. He estimated planned vines would take approximately three years to attach themselves, not penetrate, the entire outside walls. He said the project is requesting 10-foot setbacks on three sides of the building. He said a 69-foot building is a mid-rise consistent with the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design. Four people spoke in support of the project and three people spoke in opposition. Mr. Wells said developer measures to improve the visibility triangle fall short as the building remains in the visibility triangle. Ms. Tarapani reviewed conflicts between the "Old Florida District" of Beach by Design and zoning rules. Beach by Design prescribes lower density than zoning requirements. The Community Development 2004-"11-"16 27 . . . plan supercedes zoning requirements. The City Council has requested a more detailed study to examine the entire "Old Florida District" beginning in January 2006. The intensive public involvement process will take approximately eight months. The City Council shares staff concerns regarding conflicts between plan language, zoning districts, and development plans being submitted. Mr. Larson said the applicant has designed around every staff concern but the zero lot line. He said Plexiglas has been proposed to provide sight lines. He said the building's height is dictated by the need for two levels of parking. He said height is not a bad thing, considering current land shortages. He said this is a good project. He said the applicant wants to continue working with staff. Discussion ensued with a suggestion that the item be continued to allow time for the developer to address staff concerns and a concern stated the applicant has made no changes to the project's mass or scale. It was felt the project will improve Clearwater beach. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said the City Council wants to clarify conflicts between the plan document and zoning requirements. Some Councilmembers have expressed concern some CDS approved projects do not meet Beach by Design language related to mass and height in the "Old Florida District." She requested if the CDS continues this item that they identify which issues they want addressed. Discussion ensued with comments that a larger assemblage of land is necessary for the project to succeed, the proposal is too massive and bulky for the size of the lot, and that continuing the item would be a waste of time. Member Johnson moved to approve Item H1, FLD2004-08059fTDR2004-08008 for 15 - 17 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street with no Conditions of Approval. There was no second. Acting Member Dennehy moved to continue Item H 1, FLD2004-08059fTDR2004-08008 for 15 - 17 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street to December 14, 2004 with direction for staff to review minor revisions and a possible reduction in units and the project's height. The motion was duly seconded. Members Johnson and Tallman and Acting Member Dennehy voted "Aye"; Members Plisko and Moran and Chair Gildersleeve voted "Nay." Motion failed automatically. Member Plisko moved to uphold staffs recommended denial of Item H1, FLD2004- 08059fTDR2004-08008 for 15 - 17 Avalon Street and 16 Kendall Street. The motion was duly seconded. Members Plisko, Moran, and Tallman and Chair Gildersleeve voted "Aye"; Member Johnson and Acting Member Dennehy voted "Nay." Motion carried. The CDS recessed from 4:04 to 4: 13 p.m. Community Development 2004-11-16 28 . . . I. CONSIDERATION OF LEVEL 1 APPEAL: (Item 1) Case reviewed after 2:00 p.m. 1. Case: APP2004-00007 - 752 Eldorado Avenue Level One Application Owners: Robert D Basham (2202 North Westshore Boulevard, Suite 500, Tampa, FL 33607). Applicant/Appellant: Sandra Britton (750 Mandalay Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-443-4466). Location: 0.151 acre located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Eldorado Avenue and Bohenia Circle. Atlas Page: 249A. Zoning: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). Request: An appeal of the decision of a Level One application (Flexible Standard Development case FLS2004-05033), under the provisions of Section 4-501, that approved an application reducing the front (east) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building), reducing the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to building), increasing the height of a wall from three feet to seven feet in the front (east and south) setbacks, as part of a Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2-203.C. Proposed Use: Construction of a detached dwelling. Neighborhood Association(s): Clearwater Beach Association (David MacNamee, 827 Mandalay Ave., Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-446-5801; email: dmacnav@att.net); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@Qte.net). Presenter: John Schodtler, Planner I. Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides reviewed CDB procedures and recommended the CDB conduct a full quasi-judicial hearing on this case. Planner John Schodtler reviewed the case. This 0.15-acre site is on the west side of Eldorado Avenue, at the intersection of Eldorado and the Bohenia Circle South beach access. The surrounding area is characterized by detached residential homes. The parcel contains an accessory shed for the single-family dwelling located at 756 Eldorado. The proposal includes demolition of the existing accessory shed. This case is an appeal ofa Level One (Flexible Standard. Development) that approved an application reducing the front (east) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet to the structure, front (south) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet to the structure and to allow a concrete wall four feet in height along the front (south) property line and a non-opaque (wrought iron type) fence along the front (east) side of the building, as a Residentiallnfill Project, under the provisions of Section 2- 203.C., under Case. FLS2004-05033. The application was considered by the Development Review Committee at its meeting on August 12, 2004. A Development Order was issued approving the request on September 27,2004. The appellant filed this appeal on October 4, 2004. Section 4-501.A.3 of the Community Development Code states that the CDB has the authority to hear appeals from Level One approval decisions. Section 4-502.A provides that an appeal of a Level One approval (Flexible Standard Development) may be initiated by an applicant or property owner within the required notice area and who presented competent substantial evidence in the Level One review within seven days of the date the Development Order is issued. The filing of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of the decision pending the final determination of the case. Section Community Development 2004-11-16 29 . . . 4-504.B states that upon receipt of the application/notice of appeal, the CDB shall place the appeal on the consent agenda of the next scheduled meeting. Notice of the date of such meeting shall be provided the applicant and the appellants by mail and by telephone. The appeal may be removed from the consent agenda only by a vote of at least four members of the CDB. If the appeal is not removed from the consent agenda, the decision of the Community Development Coordinator is confirmed as part of the consent agenda by a vote of the majority of the members of the CDB. If the appeal is removed from the consent agenda, the CDB shall review the application, the recommendation of the Community Development Coordinator, conduct a quasi-judicial public hearing on the application in accord with Section 4-206 (notice and public hearings) and render a decision in accordance with the provisions of Section 4- 206.0.5 granting the appeal, granting the appeal subject to specified conditions or denying the appeal. Pursuant to Section 4-504.C of the Community Development Code, in order to grant an appeal, overturning or modifying the decision appealed from, the CDB shall find that based on substantial competent evidence presented by the applicant or other party: 1) The decision appealed from misconstrued or incorrectly interpreted the provisions of the Community Development Code; and 2) That the decision will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Community Development Code; and 3) Will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare. Appellant Sandra Britton submitted additional petition signatures supporting her appeal. She reviewed the Code related to residential infill projects and stated the proposed residence does not meet Code requirements. She reviewed standards and stated the proposed development does not meet standards as the building will be too tall and the proposed setback would impede visibility at the intersection. Harry Cline, representative of the property owner, objected to the form of the appeal, stating he reserved his right to appeal based on technical grounds that related paperwork indicates appeals must be processed by abutting property owners. He claimed Ms. Britton provided no evidence to support her appeal. He presented photographs of similar developments at nearby street ends. Ms. Dougall-Sides said paperwork does not reflect amendments made in 2000 and 2002 to appeal requirements. Property owners no longer have to own abutting properties to appeal. Six people spoke in support of the appeal. Ms. Britton said a large number of people use this busy access. She said the proposed building will block pedestrian views of traffic and endanger neighborhood children. Mr. Cline said no evidence was presented to reverse staff's decision. He said no one has testified that the development will ruin abutting property. He said an aO-foot vista will remain, consistent with nearby streets. Member Johnson moved to deny the appeal, Item 11, APP2004-00007 for 752 Eldorado Avenue. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Community Development 2004-11-16 30 . . . J. RECONSIDERATION REQUEST: (Item 1) Case reviewed after 2:00 p.m. 1. Case: FLD2004-07050fTDR2004-09012 - 600 Bayway Boulevard Level Two Application Owners: Baywatch Suites Inc. Applicant: Newkirk Group 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@mindsorina.com). Location: 0.558 acre located on the north side of Bayway Boulevard, immediately north of the intersection of South Gulfview Boulevard and Bayway Boulevard. Atlas Page: 276A. Zoning District: Tourist (T). Request: Flexible Development application to permit attached dwellings with reductions to the front setback from 15 feet to zero feet (to pavement and trash staging area), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to three feet (to pavement), reductions to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to 7.1 feet (to pavement) and 7.3 feet to building, reductions of the rear setback from 20 feet to zero feet (to pool deck) and from 20 feet to 9.7 feet (to building), and to increase the building height from 35 feet to 45.43 feet (from Base Flood Elevation to roof deck) with an additional six feet (from roof deck for perimeter parapets), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C. and the Transfer of Development Rights for three dwelling units from 620 Bayway Boulevard (one unit), 674 Bayway Boulevard (one unit), and 645 Bayway Boulevard (one unit). Proposed Use: Attached dwelling units (19-unit condominium; fourlevels of living area over ground-level parking). Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Beach Association (David MacNamee, 827 Mandalay Ave., Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-446-5801; email: dmacnav@att.net); Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Doug Williams, President, 2544 Frisco Drive, Clearwater, FL 33761; phone: 727-725-3345; email: Diw@ate.net). Presenter: Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Planner III. Ms. Dougall-Sides reported the City had received a notarized letter withdrawing the request for reconsideration of the ruling. No action is required. K. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS: (Items 1 - 3) 1) Review and Recommendation to City Council - Evaluation of the Coachman Ridge and Island Estates Neighborhood Conservation Districts. Ms. Clayton reviewed the history of the Coachman Ridge and Island Estates Neighborhood Conservation Districts. The City Council has requested an evaluation of NCODs (Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Districts). The Council will discuss them on December 14, 2004. Ms. Clayton reported the City's level of service has not increased since the NCODs were approved. Other neighborhoods, such as Momingside, had expressed interest in adopting a NCD. However, the City Council blocked further NCD discussions until outcomes were reviewed. Community Development 2004-11-16 31 . . . Due to scant City resources, Ms. Tarapani recommended a competitive process determine the next neighborhood that goes through the NCOD process. In response to a comment, Ms. Clayton indicated the Island Estates NCOD approved only four items, including increased setbacks and minimum lot size. A strong and stable neighborhood association is critical to the process. In NCODs, neighborhood associations are the first line of code enforcement and are responsible for educating property owners regarding NCOD rules. 2) Review of New CDB Handbook Ms. Tarapani reviewed the contents of the new CDB handbook, designed to provide board members all the tools they need to reach decisions. 3) Proposed Amendments: Community Development Board Rules of Procedure Ms. Tarapani reviewed proposed changes to CDB Rules of Procedure. In response to a question, she recommended providing 10 minutes for presentations to allow broader discussions and expert testimony. The rules allow the CDB to provide additional time, depending on the situation. In response to a question, Ms. Tarapani said the City Council had last approved Code amendments in September 2003. Staff has a small list of contemplated changes to expedite certain procedures for City Council consideration next year. Acting Member Dennehy moved to accept all staff recommended changes to the Community Development Board Rules of Procedure. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Announcements Ms. Tarapani encouraged CDB members to attend the frequent user group meeting at the Harborview Center on November 17, 2004. Ms. Tarapani reported CDB Code training has been scheduled for December 10, 2004, at 8:30 a.m. in Council Chambers. The training session will be videotaped for review by those who cannot attend and by new board members and new staff. Ms. Tarapani requested CDB members telephone Administrative Analyst Sherrie Watkins to coordinate gifts for the Community Pride Organization, to be presented at December's holiday luncheon. Member Tallman was welcomed to the board. Gratitude was expressed for the efforts of former CDB members Hooper and Doran. Happy Thanksgiving wishes were offered. Task Force It was stated it is within the CDB's jurisdiction to establish a committee, that includes a board members, staff, and potential frequent users to discuss concerns and offer ideas, such as Community Development 2004-11-16 32 . . . raising user fees. It was suggested the committee could bring back recommendations to the CDB for implementation. Discussion ensued with comments the committee could evaluate the fee structure, review issues, recommend ways. to improve and streamline processes, and develop a list of proposed code changes. It was recommended discussion of this issue be continued. L. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 5:08 p.m. Attest: ~~7JW?4! oard Reporter Community Development 2004-11-16 33 ~ . .. ,; 7. 8. 1. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD Meeting Date: November 16" 2004 I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties. 1. Case: FLD2004-02010'03 Marshall Street yes no 2. Case: FLD2004-07052 - 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 & 304 Coronado Drive (R#ted to DV A2004-00002) yes V no 3. Case: DV A2004-00002 -229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 & 304 Coronado Drive ~ed to FLD2004-07052) yes no 4. Case: FLD2004-080~01 Gulfto Bay Boulevard yes no 5. Case:FLD2004-0604L'115 Keystone Drive yes J no 6. C~D2004-08059rrDR2004-08008 - 15-17 Alvalon Street & 16 KeudaU Street yes no Case: FLD2004-0671425 Suuset Poiut Road yes zno Case: FLD2004-0705 -111S. Belcher Road yes no 1 , ~ 9. 10. 11. Signature: Case: FLD2004-~1250 Palmetto Street yes no Case: ANX2004-08012;;'208 Claire Drive yes tI no Case/APP2004-0007 -752 Eldorado Avenue J yes no S:\Plamring Department\C D mCDB, property investigation check listdoc 2 Date: " '. ,t 1. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD Meeting Date: November 16.2004 I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties. 1. cas~fLD2004-02010 - 503 Marshall Street I yes no f 2. Case: FLD2004-07052 - 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 & 304 Coronado Drive (Related to DV A2004-00002) ~es no 3. Case: DV A2004-00002 -229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 & 30t:ronado Drive (Related to FLD2004-07052) es no 4. Casr;.D2004-08058 - 2201 Gnlf to Bay Bonlevard es no 5. ca~F~D2004-06044 - 115 Keystone Drive es no 6. ca~ ~D2004-08059ffDR2004-08008 - 15-17 AIvalon Street & 16 KendaU Street es no 7. Case: FLD2004-06043 -1425 Sunset Point Road ~es no Cj:. . FLD2004-07054 -111S. Belcher Road ~es no , 8. 1 . f . 9. Case: FLD2004-08060 - 1250 Palmetto Street ~fS no 10. cai1\ ANX2004-0~. 2. -1208 Claire Drive ~fS no 11. caS%PP2004_0007 - 752 Eldorado A venne es no " '~ ',,-- "-. - . \ " Signature: '''' > ~." -. S:\Planning Department\C D B\CDB, property investigation check list. doc 2 Date: i \ \ilo\o-t .~ 7. 8. 1. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD Meeting Date: November 16" 2004 I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties. 1. Case: FLD2004-020703 Marshall Street yes no 2. Case: FLD2004-07052 - 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 & 304 Coronado Drive (Related to DV A2004-00002) ~ves no 3. Case: DV A2004-00002 -229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 & 304 Coronado Drive (Related to FLD2004-07052) ~es no 4. Case: FLD2004-08058 - 2201 Gulf to Bay Boulevard ~es no 5. Case:FLD2004-06044 - 115 Keystone Drive v;.es no 6. Case: )'LD2004-08059ffDR2004-08008 -15-17 Alvalon Street & 16 Kendall Street J yes no C7LD2004-06043 - 1425 Sunset Point Road yes no Case:/LD2004-07054 - 111S. Belcher Road J yes no 1 ,. 9. 10. 11. Signature: Case: FLD2004-08060 - 1250 Palmetto Street /' yes no Case: ANX2004-08012 -1208 Claire Drive yes /" no Case: APP2004-0007 -752 Eldorado Avenue / yes no S:\Planning Department\C D B\CDB, property investigation check Iistdoc 2 Date: f/ I f'" J 0 f ,\~ , t 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD Meeting Date: November 16" 2004 I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties. 1. ca~::;:.;n2004-0201 0 - 503 Marshall Street es no~ Case: FLn2004-07052 - 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 & 304 Coronado nrive (Related to nv A2004-00002) ~ no 2. 3. Case: nv A2004-00002 -229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 & 3~ado Drive (Related to FLD2004-07052) es no 4. Case: FLn2004-08058 - 2201 Gulf to Bay Boulevard ~ yes no Case:FLn2004-06044 - 115 Keystone nrive 0es no Case: FLn2004-08059trnR2004-08008 -15-17 Alvalon Street & 16 Kendall Street ~ no C~2004-06043 - 1425 Sunset Point Road es no Case: ~2004-07054 - 111S. Belcher Road v" yes no 1 9. Case: FLD2004-08060 - 1250 Palmetto Street ~es no 10. Case: ANX2004-08012 -1208 Claire Drive ~es no 11. ~P2004-0007 - 752 Eldorado Avenue yes no Signature~~ - S:\Planning Department\C D B\CDB, property investigation check list.doc 2 Date/! -Mf ..- . . , . 6. 7. 8. 1. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD Meeting Date: November 16.2004 I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties. 1. Case: FLD2004-0201~503 Marshall Street yes no 2. Case: FLD2004-07052 - 229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 & 304 CJronado Drive (Related to DV A2004-00002) .; yes no 3. Case: DV A2004-00002 -229 and 301 South Gulfview Boulevard and 230, 300 & 304 <jOronado Drive (Related to FLD2004-07052) II yes no 4. CaseyFLD2004-08058 - 2201 Gulf to Bay Boulevard rI yes no 5. case:FLD2004-0604~ Keystone Drive yes no Case: FLD2004-0807R2004-08008 - 15-17 Alvalon Street & 16 Kendall Street yes no Case: FLD2004-06043 -1425 Sunset Point Road yes no Cast(: FLD2004-07054 -111S. Belcher Road V yes no 1 ',"" I-- , . 9. 10. 11. Signature: Case: FLD2004-08060 - 1250 Palmetto Street yes ~o Case: ANX2004-0801:r 1208 Claire Drive yes no Case: APP2004-0007 7752 Eldorado Avenue yes (/ no M?4 tI..{ vot Date: S:\Planning Department\C D B\CDB, property investigation check Iistdoc 2