The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2015-05019, s � 1 �� _ � e� �a�t�r J MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: CASE: REQUEST: GENERAL DATA: Agent... ... ... .. . ... ... ... ... . .. .. . Applicant / Owner... ... ... ... Location ... ... . .. ... ... . .. ... ... . . COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT August 18, 2015 F.2. FLD2015-05019 Flexible Development application to permit the construction of a new accessory use boat dock and boat lifts for a single-family detached dwelling with a proposed length of 81 feet and a reduced side (north) setback for a boatlift to 7.67 feet where 10 feet is required within the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) Zoning District Section 3-601.C.1., Community Development Code. Speeler Foundations, Inc. Julie A. Bills 839 Bay Esplanade; located at the southeast corner of Bay Esplanade and the termination of Gardenia Street with the Mandalay Channel Properry Size ... ... ... ... ... .... 9,234.72 SF (0.212 acres) Future Land Use Plan........ Residential Urban (RU) Zoning ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District Special Area Plan ............... Adjacent Zoning.... North: South: East: West: Existing Land Use ............. Proposed Land Use ... ... ... N/A Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) Preservation (P) Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) Detached Dwelling Detached Dwelling ' VI�.tFl 1'1'�1�� Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PL^�NG& nEVecorMExr p Pp DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION � _. ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The subject property is a 0.212 acre site located at the southeast corner of Bay Esplanade and the termination of Gardenia Street with the Mandalay Channel. The site features a one-story detached dwelling with an attached accessory garage along the northern edge of the property. The subject property is located within the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District with an underlying Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) category of Residential Urban (RU). The immediate vicinity is characterized primarily by detached dwellings between one and two stories. Site History: The existing detached dwelling was constructed in 1951 and the existing accessory boat dock features a walkout to a dock platform measuring 70 feet in length. The existing dock was permitted in 1999, has fallen into disrepair and will be removed. The current owner obtained the property in February of 2015 and now wishes to expand the dock and add two covered boatlifts. In order to implement the project and create safe mooring opportunities for the dock and boatlifts, the dock will need to be reconstructed. The new construction will provide the opportunity to extend the dock beyond the existing sea grass beds. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property. Development Proposal: The proposal includes a single-family dock with two covered boatlifts. The dock will feature a length of 81 feet and will be placed generally within the center one-third of the waterfront property with a side (north) setback of 20.08 feet and a side (south) setback of 45.67 feet. Access to the dock will be through a proposed four foot wide walkout which will begin at the seawall and terminate at the dock. The dock platform will measure 10 feet by 20 feet with a two covered boatlifts. The resulting side (south) setback to the Community Development Board — August 18, 2015 FLD2015-05019— Page 1 r C�4N1 1'�al�.t Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review FLANNING&DEVELOPMENT p pP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION _. � . , boatlifts will be 30.67 feet which complies with the minimum requirement of 10 feet. The side (north) setback to the boatlift will be 7.67 feet where 10 feet is required. This request requires flexibility from the CDC, but will not present navigational issues as the layout does not encroach onto the neighboring property to the north. The application is being reviewed as a Level Two, Flexible Development application, consistent with the recently adopted changes to Section 3-601 through Ordinance No.8654-15, which were approved by City Council on February 5, 2015. Specifically, Section 3-601.C.l.g.iii, which provides for deviations for dock length which may be approved through a Level Two application subject to conditions being satisfied. The following report will detail the project compliance with the required conditions. ,_., _. . _ _ _a,. _ , �,�� .,lL _,.-..._..._'_3 i' 6,.-�� f`�`��`� � �� :� i � IB'8"� � _ � � I I r"�" ti� / � T Q I I � l� �, I �� `'� � ,: .� �,1, � , --- _ - , ---�� b � ��F��.��t�, i � � F`�,��;r I � � � �� . . � .„ �I � � . � .�-3� 1 (�" � I f� �� IJ _ . . �:;�., � `-�,. � I . , � I ! ' f � I � � ll.; !�,-,1a,L� �tt,^ . _ 1_ ____ --L- -, �-30'-P�'----1.� , �.€,� r 1-- E;�� ; l z--�` Plan and Elevation view of proposed dock and covered boatlifts Comprehensive Plan: The proposal is supported by various Goals, Objectives and/or Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan as follows: Future Land Use Plan Element Objective A.5.5 - Promote high quality design standards that support Clearwater's image and contribute to its identity. The proposal includes the construction of a single-family dock for an existing detached dwelling which will serve as an accessory use for the property owner. The majority of the surrounding properties also feature a variety of dock structures as consistent with the sizes of the properties and frontages along the waterway. The proposal will meet all of the required bulk and dimensional specifications for a single-family dock as detailed within the CDC with a reduction Community Development Board — August 18, 2015 FLD2015-05019— Page 2 � Cli.Ll� 1'� (iL�.l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT P pP DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION " � ,. , in the side setback for a boatlift from 10 feet to 7.67 feet. The proposal will enhance the existing waterfront use and is supported by this Objective. Policy A. S. S.1 Development should be designed to maintain and support the existing or envisioned character of the neighborhood. As mentioned above, the proposal is consistent with other docks in the area with regard to the size and configuration of the subject property, complies with all requirements of the CDC and is consistent with this Policy. Community Development Code: The proposal supports by the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code as follows: Section 1-103.B.1. Allowing properry owners to enhance the value of their property through innovative and creative redevelopment. The property owner seeks to provide a typical amenity of waterfront dwellings, an accessory use dock with two covered boat lifts. The dock has been designed to avoid the delineated sea grass beds and provide adequate water depth for owner's boats. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 1-103.B.2. Ensuring that development and redevelopment will not have a negative impact on the value of surrounding properties and wherever practicable promoting development and redevelopment which will enhance the value of surrounding properties. Surrounding properties have been developed with detached dwellings most of which include docks. The proposed dock setbacks are 20.08 feet to the north and 45.67 feet to the extended south property line, which exceeds the Code requirement of 20 feet. The proposal is not anticipated to have a negative impact on the value of surrounding properties. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 1-103.B.3. Strengthening the city's economy and increasing its tcrx base as a whole. The proposal includes an accessory dock to serve the existing detached dwelling use. The proposal is expected to enhance the value of the overall project thereby positively contributing to the City's economy and its tax base. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 1-103.D. It is the further purpose of this Development Code to make the beautification of the city a matter of the highest prioriry and to require that existing and future uses and structures in the city are attractive and well-maintained to the maximum extent permitted by law. The proposal includes a new dock which will serve as an accessory feature for the detached dwelling. The dock has been specifically designed to avoid the existing sea grass beds and provide adequate depth to prevent prop dredging. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 1-103. E. S. Preserve the natural resources and aesthetic character of the community for both the resident and tourist population consistent with the city's economic underpinnings. Community Development Board — August 18, 2015 FLD2015-OSOI 9— Page 3 : C�LLti� 1'�al.l.l Level II Flexibte Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P pP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � � °�. �� As mentioned, the proposal preserves the sea grass beds and should prevent or limit incidents of prop dredging. The proposal will support the existing detached dwelling and the utilization of the Mandalay Channel. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 2-801.1 Intent of the LMDR District and R U FL UP classification. The CDC provides that the intent of the LMDR District is to protect and preserve the integrity and value of existing, stable residential neighborhoods of low to medium density while at the same time, allowing a careful and deliberate redevelopment and revitalization of such neighborhoods in need of revitalization or neighborhoods with unique amenities which create unique opportunities to increase property values and the overall attractiveness of the City. The proposed project is consistent with the Countywide Future Land Use Plan as required by state law. Section 2.3.3.1.5 of the Countywide Plan Rules provides that the purpose of the RU FLUP classification is to depict those areas of the County that are now developed, or appropriate to be developed, in an urban low density residential manner; and to recognize such areas as primarily well-suited for residential uses that are consistent with the urban qualities and natural resource characteristics of such areas. The proposal includes an accessory use to an existing detached dwelling as permitted by the RU FLUP classification. The surrounding area has been developed in accordance with the intensity of use permitted by the underlying FLUP classification of RU. Development Parameters: Section 3-601.C.1.a-g., CDC, provides development criteria and standards for single-family docks. a. A dock shall be placed in the center one-third of the lot or 20 feet from any property line extended into the water, whichever is less, unless the dock is proposed to be shared by adjoining properties whereupon the dock may be constructed on the common property line provided that all other standards of this division are met. Boatlifts and service catwalks shall be a minimum of one foot ff-om any extended property line. Single pile davits and personal watercraft lifts are exempt from these setback requirements provided they are contained entirely within the extended property lines. All watercraft must be contained entirely within the extended properry lines. The proposed dock will feature a side (north) setback of 20.08 feet and a side (south) setback of 45.67 feet, which complies with this section. b. The length of docks and boatlifts shall not exceed 25 percent of the width of the waterway or half of the width of the property measured at the waterfront property line, whichever is less, up to a maximum of 250 feet. The waterfront property length is 67.5 feet which would permit a dock length of 33.75 feet; however this length would negatively impact the delineated sea grass beds as they extend approximately 45 feet from the seawall. Therefore, a length of 81 feet is proposed. Deviations from this section are provided in Section 3-601.C.1.g and will be addressed within the following portions of this report. Community Development Board — August 18, 2015 FLD2015-05019— Page 4 ? Cl�� 1'!' [il�t,.l Level II Fiexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT - p pp DEVELOPMENT REVI&W DIVISION „ ,��•. ,. c. The width of docks, excluding boatlifts, shall not exceed 35 percent of the width of the property measured at the waterfront property line or SO feet, whichever is less. The proposed dock width is 20 feet which is less than 35 percent (23.63 feet) of the 67.5 foot waterfront property length and complies with this section. d. Covered boatlifts are permitted provided a permanent and solid roof deck is constructed with material such as asphalt shingles, metal, tile or wood. Canvas and canvas like roof materials are prohibited. Vertical sidewalls are prohibited on any boatlift or dock. The proposed dock includes two covered boatlifts that will consist of wood with architectural asphalt shingles and no vertical sidewalls, which complies with this section. e. No more than one dock structure shall be located at a single family dwelling and no dock shall provide more than two slips for the mooring of boats. Personal watercraft lifts are not considered to be boat slips. The proposal includes one dock with two covered boatlifts for the existing detached dwelling. The proposed complies with this Section as the proposed boatlifts are the only means for a boat to be moored at the dock. f. Service catwalks shall not exceed three feet in width. The proposed dock does not include any service catwalks. g. Deviations. ii. No dock shall be allowed to deviate from the length requirements specified in Section 3- 601. C.1. b., CDC, by more than an additional SO percent of the allowable length or project into the navigable portion of the waterway by more than 25 percent of such watenvay, whichever length is less, except as stipulated in Section 3-601. C. l.g. iii and iv., CDC. This deviation would provide for a dock length of 50.63 feet which would negatively impact the delineated sea grass beds as they extend approximately 45 feet from the seawall. Therefore, a length of 81 feet is proposed. iii. Deviations for dock length in excess of that which is permitted in Section 3-601. C. l.g. ii above may be approved through a Level Two (flexible development) approval process only under the following conditions: a) A dock of lesser length poses a threat to the marine environment, natural resources, wetlands habitats or water quality; and The proposed dock length of 81 feet will extend beyond the limits of the existing sea grass beds which have been inspected by Pinellas County Environmental Management. The site visit and field work resulted in the determination that the existing sea grass beds extend approximately 45 feet from the seawall. In order to minimize impacts to the environmentally sensitive areas, the dock was extended to 53.83 feet so that no portion of the T-head dock, roof, or lifts would be located within the sea grass bed areas. Community Development Board — August 18, 2015 FLD2015-05019— Page 5 ' C��µ��1. Level II Flexible Develo ment lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P APP DEVELOPMENT REVffiW DIVISION .. : �r;.. � . . � . . b) A literal enforcement of the provisions of this section would result in extreme hardship due to the unique nature of the project and the applicant's property; and The waterfront property dimension is 67.5 feet and the maximum flexibility under a Level One application would result in a dock the length of 50.63 feet which would result in significant negative impact of the dock and mooring areas to the existing sea grass beds. The proposed dock and boatlift length of 81 feet has necessitated the submittal of the Level Two application. c) The deviation sought to be granted is the minimum deviation that will make possible the reasonable use of the applicant's property; and The extent of the sea grass beds is approximately 45 feet from the seawall and the T- head portion of the dock will extend 53.83 feet from the seawall. The western most boatlift extends approximately nine feet towards the seawall from the dock platform. This placement results in ease of navigation and mooring for the boatlifts and will prevent prop washing and negative impacts to the sea grass beds. This will ensure that any proposed boating activity by the applicant will occur outside of the environmentally sensitive sea grass beds. d) The granting of the requested deviation will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this section and will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental or of adverse effect to the public interest or welfare. The proposed dock is in harmony with the general intent and purposed of the section for the following reasons: the proposed length of 81 feet is the minimum flexibility needed in order to have full utilization of a dock at the subject property without negatively impacting the environmentally sensitive sea grass beds; the proposed dock is in character with the size, shape and dimensions of docks in the immediate area; the proposed dock will comply with all other requirements for a single-family dock with the minor exception of a 2.33 foot reduction in the side (north) setback to a boatlift; and the proposed dock will not encroach into the navigable waterway of the Mandalay Channel. Please note that the Harbor Master has reviewed the submittal and has no objection to the proposed dock coniiguration. It should also be noted that dock permits are ultimately issued by Pinellas County Water and Navigation. General Applicability Criteria Requirements: The proposal supports of the General Applicability requirements of this Code as follows: Section 3-914.A.1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The proposed single-family private dock will be in character with the scale of the other docks in the area given the width and overall size of the site. The chart on the following page details an overview of dock information for the surrounding properties within the blocks to the north and south of the subject property. The average dock length of these properties, excluding the 56-foot outlier, is 81.6 feet. The proposed dock length of 81 feet is consistent with this average as well as with the allowable deviations of the Code. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Community Development Board — August 18, 2015 FLD2015-05019— Page 6 ' C��.t�r 1'r al�e� Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT p pp DEVELOPMENT REV�W DIVISION - ,..�� . � 839 Bay Esplanade — Area Property Dock Analysis Maudalay Cl�an�n�el width range 700 feet to 8S0 feet Address Water�rout Lot DockLength Level One Eaisting Width permitted by right, aPplication Dock Section 3-601.C.1,b DockPermitted LengtW'�ie Poles (leas�r of �S% of �t�rway or SO% watearfront pmperty ; line) ._ �. �...�._ _ �_ ___.n.. � ,_ __�� ..� _ ._ _ . . �_��_. _��., _ �.. �_ __� .. .. .. . .�.,�,,. _ __ .. � . , P ... . . , � . _ , �..� � . t . t �� . � _ _ ._. v..� _,_ . R�� .� 859 Bay Esplanade 60 feet 30 feet 45 feet f 91 feet 855 Bay Esplanade 60 feet 30 feet 45 feet f 79 feet 849 Bay Esplanade 60 feet 30 feet 45 feet f SS feet 845 Bay Esplanade 60 feet 30 feet 45 feet f 85 feet 841 Bay Esplanade 60 feet 30 feet 45 feet f 77 feet a. a� ,�' . .. ,� � : �� ;.. e , � . . . �, , a. a .` 7 c,, f a " t�` " e �s � �� k.'��a��,�'w, �� r '�:'� ; �.,. _ .. ,..��". �. ,� .. ... ....�`:.°�. ... ,. ... . . �.a. � . .."�. .. „�. � ... �'+. �. � .. ,.. � , . . , .. . ,`� t.-9, � �. .. ,`�i. �xY r.��;"4 839 Bay Esplanade 68 feet � 34 feet 51 feet f 70 feet 835 Bay Esplanade 68 feet 34 feet 51 feet f 74 feet 831 Bay Esplanade 68 feet 34 feet 51 feet No Dock 829 Bay Esplanade 68 feet 34 feet 51 feet f 56 feet 821 Bay Esplanade 68 feet 34 feet 51 feet f 86 feet 819 Bay Esplanade 68 feet 34 feet 51 feet f 88 feet Section 3-914.A.2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. The proposal is generally consistent with the character of adjacent properties with regard to scale and scope and should enhance that value of the subject property as the improvement costs will impact the assessed property value. Additionally, the proposed project will not hinder the usage of adjacent properties as the proposed dock will be contained within the extended property lines of the subject parcel. The proposal will have no impact on the ability of adjacent properties to be redeveloped. It is not expected that the proposal will significantly impair the value of adjacent land and buildings. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 3-914.A.3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. The proposed dock will be for the use of the upland resident which will not include any fueling, pump out services, boat repairs or public use permitted. The proposal will likely have no effect on the health and/or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Community Development Board — August 18, 2015 FLD2015-05019— Page 7 ' v�Lt�� 1'��ll.i Level II Flexible Development Application Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION Section 3-914.A.4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. The proposal will likely have minimal effect, negative or otherwise, on traffic congestion as the dock will be for the utilization of the upland resident of the subject property. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A. S. The proposed development is consistent with the communiry character of the immediate vicinity. The subject property is consistent with the zoning and future land use category which is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. Additionally, the proposed dock is consistent with the scale and character of other existing docks within the immediate area. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 3-914.A.6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. The dock will be constructed with wood fixed in placed by wooden pilings and the installation requirements will adhere to the Pinellas County dock construction code. There will also be no walls or enclosures on the dock, only the roof structure over the two boatlifts. The design should not result in any adverse olfactory, visual and acoustic impacts on adjacent properties. There will be no fueling, pump out services, boat repairs or public use permitted. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 4-206.D.4: Burden of proof. The burden of proof is upon the applicant to show by substantial competent evidence that he is entitled to the approval requested. The applicant has adequately demonstrated through the submittal of substantial competent evidence that the request is entitled to the approval requested as required by Section 4-206.D.4., CDC. Compliance with Standards and Criteria: The following table depicts the development criteria as per CDC Section 3-601.C.1: proposals consistency with the standards and Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent Dock Setbacks Center one-third of lot or 20 feet North: 20.08 feet X (Minimum) South: 45.67 feet X Boatlift Setbacks Ten feet from property line North: 7.67 feet X' (Minimum) South: 30.67 feet X Tie Pole Setbacks One foot from property line North: N/A X (Minimum) South: N/A X Dock Length Half width property at water frontage 81 feet XZ (Maximum) (33.75 feet) Dock Width 35% width of property at water frontage 20 feet X (Maximum) (23.6 feet) � See analysis in Staff Report 2 Requires Level Two Review Compliance with Flexibility Criteria: The Flexibility Criteria for a single-family dock are set forth in Section 3-601.C.l.g.iii; Deviations for dock length in excess of that which is permitted in Section 3-601.C.l.g.ii may be Community Development Board — August 18, 2015 FLD20 1 5-05 0 1 9— Page 8 � V�1,µl 1'!'RLe� Level II Flexible Development Application Review . ....Y... ... . . � PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION approved through a Level Two approval process only under the following conditions of a-d which are set forth in the following table: a. A dock of lesser length poses a threat to the marine environment, natural resources, wetlands habitats or water quality; and b. A literal enforcement of the provisions of this section would result in eztreme hardship due to the unique nature of the project and the applicant's property; and c. The deviation sought to be granted is the minimum deviation that will make possible the reasonable use of the applicant's property; and d. The granting of the reguested deviation will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this section and will not be injurious to the area involved or othenvise detrimental or ofadverse e[�'ect to the public interest and welfare. � See analysis provided by the applicant in the application submittal Consistentl Incon sistent X X X X Compliance with General Applicability Standards: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level One and Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A: _ Consistentl � Inconsistent 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, I X density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate viciniTy. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. � See analysis in Staff Report X X X X X SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of July 2, 2014, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient, based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: Findings of Fact: The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact: 1. The 9,234.72 square foot (0.212 acre) subject property is located at the southeast corner of Bay Esplanade and Gardenia Street; 2. The subject property is located within the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District and the Residential Urban (RU) Future Land Use Plan category; 3. The subject property is not located in a special area plan; 4. The proposal is to construct approximately 1,385 square feet of new boat dock with two covered boatlifts; 5. The existing property features 67.5 feet of linear water frontage along the Mandalay Channel; Community Development Board — August 18, 2015 FLD2015-05019— Page 9 ' �T�] +p 1. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT e�� Yt (�Ll�i Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION : e -, Ye,� 6. The proposal includes a dock with a length of 81 feet, a width of 20 feet, a side (north) setback of 20.08 feet to dock, a side (south) setback of 45.67 feet; two covered boatlifts with dimensions of 15 feet by 37.5 feet and 15 feet by 12 feet with side (south) setback of 30.67 feet and a side (north) setback of 7.67 feet; 7. The proposal will serve as an accessory use to the existing detached dwelling; and, 8. There is no active Code Compliance case for the subject property. Conclusions of Law: The Planning and Development Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law: 1. That the development proposal has been found to be consistent with the applicable portions of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 2. That the development proposal has been found to be consistent with the General Purposes of the CDC pursuant to Section 1-103, CDC; 3. That the development proposal has been found to be consistent with the standards for pocks pursuant to Section 3-601, CDC; 4. That the development proposal has been found to be consistent with the General Standards for Level One and Two Approvals pursuant to Section 3-914.A., CDC; and, 5. That the development proposal has been found to be consistent with the requirement for the submittal of substantial competent evidence pursuant to Section 4-206.D.4., CDC. Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development application to permit the construction of a new accessory use dock and boat lifts for a single-family detached dwelling with a proposed length of 81 feet and a reduced stde (north) setback of 7.67 feet to boatlift located within the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District pursuant to Section 3-601.C.1., Community Development Code, subject to the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: l. That the proposed dock and boatlifts be for the exclusive use by the resident of the detached dwelling; 2. That reflective material, white or yellow in color, be installed above the mean high water line on all vertical elements of the eastern most boatlift which extends past the end of the dock so as to alert all boaters within the Mandalay Channel; 3. That fueling, pump out services, boat repairs or public use be prohibited; 4. That a building permit be obtained for the proposed boatlifts; and, 5. That a Private Dock Permit be obtained from Pinellas County Water and Navigation. Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: �� c�c��ov�,-r Melissa Hauck-Baker, AICP, Senior Planner Attachments: Site Photos; Resume Community Development Board — August 18, 20] 5 FLD2015-05019— Page 10 0 View of the property from Bay Esplanade. View of the property and termination of Gardenia Street. View of Mandalay Channel looking north. _,�. _ �' .�r� ,L��- View of the existing dock at 839 Bay Esplanade and the Mandalay Channel looking south. 839 Bay Esplanade FLD2015-05019 Mehssa Ha uc1�Ba 1� r, AICP, NJPP 100 South Myrtle Avenue Cleaiwater Fbrida 33'756 727.562.4567 z2855 melissa.hauck-bakeran,mvclearwater.com PRnFF:��iONAi. FXPF,RiF.N('.F: • Senior Planner, Development Review Division — August 2015 - Present • Planner II, Development Review Division - July 2013 to August 2015 City ofClearwater, FL Provide professional urban plarn�ing services to citizens, City Officials and b�inesses regarding Lar�d Developmerrt Review procedures and legal requiremerrts of the Community Development Code for the City. Asast in the day to day plarnung arxl zoning operations as well as long range planning initiatives, irrterdepartmerrtal cooperation and assistance. Conduct plan reviews, site investigations, report preparation, meeting attendance and preserrtation of findings as relating to proposed developmerrt projects and required regulatory review procedures Professio�ral PlannerCo�uultant - Maich 2010 toJime 2013 Melissa Ha uck-Baker, AICP,IV.TPP Provide consulting services to clierns as requested for various residerrtial and c�nmercial scale projects as relating to the necessary zoning and planning review processes required by the specific governing errtity. Supervise the preparation of reports and plans, cond�t site visits, attend and preserrt findings at municipal and all related public meetings, coardir�ate with applicatrt, various municipal staff arxi related professional consultarrts SeniorAssociate —January 2005 toMaich2010 Project Manager-Apri12001 toJanuary 2005 KEPG, LLC, Atlantic City, NJ Oversee consulting services provided to rrnmicipal clierrts in the area of zoning, plarnung master plarming and redevelopment planning. Review all proposed projects before any required municipal board, authority and commissi� as v�tll as arry additi�al jurisdictional requiremerrt of other local, state and federal errtities. Provide �ofessional guidance reg�rding planning and zoning c�cepts, zoning ordinance developmerrt, urban design iss�s, master plans, and redeveloprrr�rn plans as outlined within the New Jersey Mwucipal Land Use Law. Supervise the preparation of reports and plans, conduct site visits� attend and preserrt findings at mwucipal and all related public meetings, coordinate with firm staff, various municipal staff and related consultaYrts to effectuate an efficierrt and thorough review process. Zoning Admin�trator - June 1998 to Apri12001 City Pla nner - November 199�4 to May 1998 Historic Pieseivation Specialist - September 1993 to October 1994 City ofReading, PA Staff liaison and administrator to the Zoning Hearing Board, Plarnung Commission, Board, Reading Redevelapment Authority and Fine Arts Board. Enforcemerrt, Histaric Architectural Review ir�erpretatian and regulatory cooperation of the following ordinances; subdivision, land development, historic preservation, redevelopmerrt arid zoning Provide assistance with downtown, neighborhood, comprehensive master plan, parks� recreation, and public property planning. Conduct site irnpections, process violations, and purs�e cases through the court system Assist with review of �oposed developmerrt projects in conjunction with planning engineering and building code staff as well as with the preparation of the Comprehens�ve Master Plan. Generate graphics for various preserrtations as required by the departmerrt. FniTCATinN Bachelor of Landscape Architect�e, Magna Cum Laude, State University of New Yark, Syracuse, 1993 i.i('F.NSF,S AND AS�('TATinN MF.MRF.R�HIPS Arrierican In�itute ofCertifiedPlaimers#023351 (2A09 toPresent) AmericanPlarn�ing Association (2001 toPreserrt) Florida Chapter (2013 to Preserrt) New Jersey Chapter (2001 to2012) Licensed New Jersey Professional Plarmer #33LI00609500 (2009 toPreserrt) o Planning & Development Department } C earwater Flexible Develo ment A lication � p pp � Detached Dwellings, Duplexes orAssociated Accessory Use/Structures IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT COMPLETE AND CORRECT INPORMATION. ANY MISLEADING, DECEPTIVE, INCOMPLETE OR INCORRECT INFORMATION MAY INVALIDATE YOUR APPLICATION. ALL APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE FILLED OUT COMPLETELY AND CORRECTLY, AND SUBMITTED IN PERSON (NO FAX OR DELIVERIES) TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY NOON ON THE SCHEDULED DEADLINE DATE. A TOTAL OF 11 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 10 COPIES) AS REQUIRED WITHIN ARE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. SUBSEQUENT SUBMITfAL FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD WILL REQUIRE 15 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 14 COPIES). PLANS AND APPLICATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE COLLATED, STAPLED AND FOLDED INTO SETS. THE APPLICANT, BY FILING THIS APPLICATION, AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. FIRE DEPT PRELIMARY SITE PLAN REVIEW FEE: $200 APPLICATION FEE: $300 PROPERTY OWNER (PER DEED): ��i�lie A BiIIG MAILING ADDRESS: 935 Glengate PI. Sandy Springs, GA. 30328 PHONE NUMBER: 4(14-�94-44R1 EMAII: ebills@allianceobgyn.com AGENT OR REPRESENTATIVE: Speeler Foundations, Inc. MAILING A��RESS: 6111 142nd Ave. N. Clearwater FL. 33760 PHONE NUMBER: 727-535-5735 ' 1-, i- C.� .-- - . ADDRESS OF SUBIECT PROPERTY: $39 Bay Esplanade Clearwater, FL. 33767 PARCEI NUMBER(S): 05/29/15/54666/039/0050 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Mandalay Sub Blk 39. Lot 5 PROPOSED USE(S): Sinqle-familv residential dock. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: WP ara raq ia. ' g a varian .. to Divicion 6 .tion �-601 C(�(al( ii) of the Clearwater Code of ordinances Specifically identify the request Which states that no dock shall be ailowed to deviate form the length requirements specified in Section 3-601 (include all requested code flexibility; ,C.1.b. by more than an additionai 50 percent of the ailowable length. We are requesting to build a dock that e.g., reduction in reguired num6er of parking spaces, height, setbacks, Iot exceeds the allowable lenqth by more than 50% in order to avoid submerqed resources and to have the size, !ot width, specific use, etc.): mooring areas in suffcient water depth. Pianning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-0865 Page 1 of 7 Revised 01/12 ° - learwater �C U Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application Data Sheet PLEASE ENSURE THAT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS FILLED OUT, IN ITS ENTIRETY. FAILURE TO COMPLETE THIS FORM WILL RESULT IN YOUR APPLICATION BEING FOUND INCOMPLETE AND POSSIBLY DEFERRED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION CYCLE. ZONING DISTRICT: FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION: LMDR-Low Medium Density Residential Residential Urban EXISTING USE (currently existing on site): Single-family hOme PROPOSED USE (new use, if any; plus existing, ifto remain): Single-family home to remain SITE AREA: N/A sq. ft. GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage of all buildings): Existing: N/q sq. ft. Proposed: sq. ft. Maximum Allowable: sq. ft. acres GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage devoted to each use, if there will be multiple uses): First use: N/A sq. ft. Second use: sq. ft. Third use: sq. ft. FLOOR AREA RATIO (total square footage of all buildings divided by the total square footage of entire site): Existing: N/A Proposed: Maximum Allowable: BUILDING COVERAGE/FOOTPRINT (15i floor square footage of all buildings): Existing: N/A sq. ft. ( % of site) Proposed: sq. ft. ( % of site) Maximum Permitted: sq. ft. ( % of site} GREEN SPACE WITHIN VEHICULAR USE AREA (green space within the parking lot and interior of site; not perimeter buffer): Existing: N/q sq. ft. ( % of site) Proposed: sq. ft. ( % of site) VEHICULAR USE AREA (parking spaces, drive aisles, loading area): Existing: N/A sq. ft. ( Proposed: sq. ft. ( % of site} % of site) Planning 8� Development Department, 700 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 2 of 7 Revised 01112 IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO (total square footage of impervious areas divided by the total square footage of entire site): Existing: N/A Proposed: Maximum Permitted: DENSITY (units, rooms or beds per acre) Existing: N/A Proposed: Maximum Permitted: OFF-STREET PARKING: Existing: N/A Proposed: Minimum Required: BUILDING HEIGHT: Existing: Proposed: Maximum Permitted: ► _ Note: A parking demand study must be provided In conjunction with any request to reduce the amount of required off-street parking spaces. Please see the adopted Parking Demand Study Guidelines for further information. WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED TOTAL VALUE OF THE PROJECT UPON COMPLETION? $ 80,000.00 ZONING DISTRICTS FOR ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY: North: South: East: West: LMDR LMDR Water LMDR STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all Sworn to and subscribed before me this _ day of representations made in this application are true and �� ,�'�� , to me and/or by accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize � � �f�r � City representatives to visit and photograph the ��._ , who is personaily known has property described in this application. produced �� as identification. ��yi�g��,�- �= ��`-��n�� Signature of property owner or representative Notary public, My commission expires: �,Q � � � ( � � CHRISTINA S. CA3HMAN Notary Pub�ic, Sta�t,e� � �17 My Comm• Exqre$ No. FF 31265 Pianning 8� Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Ciearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 3 of 7 Revised 01/12 o Planning & Development Departtnent � C earwater Flexible Develo ment A lication p pp � Site Plan Submittal Package Check list IN ADDITION TO THE COMPLETED FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT (FLD) APPLICATION, ALL FLD APPLICATIONS FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED DWELLING, DUPLEX, OR ACCESSORY USE/STRUCTURE ASSOCIATED WITH EITHER A SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED DWELLING OR DUPLEX SHALL INCLUDE A PLOT PLAN WITH THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: ❑ Responses to the General Applicability criteria as set forth in Section 3-914.A. The attached Flexibie Development Application General Applicability Criteria sheet shall be used to provide these responses. ❑ Responses to the flexibility criteria for the specific use(s) being requested as set forth in the Zoning District(s) in which the subject property is located. The attached Flexible Development Application Flexibility Criteria sheet shall be used to provide these responses. ❑ A signed and sealed survey of the property prepared by a registered land surveyor including the location of the property, dimensions, acreage, location of all current structures/improvements, location of all public and private easements including official records book and page numbers and street right(s)-of-way within and adjacent to the site. ❑ If the application would result in the removal or relocation of mobile home owners residing in a mobile home park as provided in F.S. § 723.083, the application must provide that information required by Section 4-202.A.5. ❑ If this application is being submitted for the purpose of a boatlift, catwalk, davit, dock, marina, pier, seawall or other si milar marine structure, then the application must provide detailed plans and specifications prepared by a Florida professional engineer, bearing the seal and signature of the engineer, except signed and sealed plans shall not be required for the repair or replacement of decking, stringers, railing, lower landings, tie piles, or the patching or reinforcing of existing piling on private and commercial docks. ❑ A tree survey showing the location, DBH (diameter at breast height), and species on the parcel proposed for development with a DBH of four inches or more and identifying those trees proposed to be removed. ❑ A site plan with the following information: ❑ North arrow, scale, location map and date prepared. ❑ Location of the Coastai Construction Control Line (CCCL), whether the property is located within a Special Flood Hazard Area, and the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of the property, as applicable. ❑ Location, setbacks and use of all existing and proposed building and structures. ❑ Location of all existing and proposed parking areas, sidewalks and driveways. ❑ Location, type of material and height of all existing and proposed fences. ❑ Location of all existing and proposed utilities, including water, sewer, gas, and stormwater. ❑ Location of all existing utility easements, inciuding Official Records book and page numbers, and any proposed utility easements. ❑ Building or structure elevation drawings that depict the proposed building height, building materials, and concealment of all mechanical equipment located on the roof. Planning 8� Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Ciearwater, FL 33756, Tet: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 4 of 7 Revised 01N2 ° �learwater � Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application � General Applicability Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE SIX (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA EXPLAINING HOW, IN DETAIL, THE CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. 1. The proposed development of the land wiil be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The proposed dock structure will be in harmony with the above. Many of the existing adjacent docks are longer than the dock length allowable by the code without a variance. 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buiidings or significantly impair the value thereof. The proposed dock structure will not hinder or discourage any use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair their value Docks are usual and customary on waterfront property 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The proposed structure will have not effect on the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. The proposed structure will be located on the water, thereby having no effect on traffic congestion. The structure will create no naviqational issues on the waterbody. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. The proposed dock structure is consistent with the other docks in the vicinity. The other structures in the area are also longer than typically allowed due to the water de�ths and submerged resources in the vicinity 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. The proposed dock structure will have no adverse effects on adjacent properties. Docks are usual and customary on waterfront property Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 5 of 7 Revised 01112 0 � C ear�vater U Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application Flexibilitv Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO THE APPLICABLE FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA FOR THE SPECIFIC USE(S) BEING REQUESTED AS SET FORTH IN THE ZONING DISTRICT(Sj IN WHICH THE SUBIECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED. EXPLAIN HOW, IN DETAIL, EACH CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL (USE SEPARATE SHEETS AS NECESSARY). 1. Constructinq a dock of a lesser lenqth will pose a threat to the naturai submerqed resources located on-site. A representative from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection has aiready made a site visit and the design is based on his findings to avoid the submerged resources. z. A literal enforcement of the provisions of this section would resuit in extreme hardship. Without the requested variance, the homeowner would not be able to construct a dock and boatlifts, which is usual and customary for waterfront properties, due to the submerged resources and shallow water depths in the area. 3. The deviation sought is the minimum deviation that will make possible the reasonable use of the applicant's property. The structure has been designed to keep the terminal platform and mooring areas just outside of the submerged 4 Granting the deviation will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this section and will not be injurious �� 6. 8. to the area. The dock length will be consistent with other docks in the area. The proposed structure will not create any navigational issues. Planning & Development Department,10U S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 6 of 7 Revised 01112 o �� r � � e r�vate Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application U Affidavit to Authorize Agent/Representative 1. Provide names of ali property owners on deed — PRINT full names: Ju1ie A. Sills 2. That {I am/we are) the owner(sj and record title holder(s} of the following described property: 839 Bay Esplanade Clearwater, �L. 33767 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a requesE for (describe request): A fength variance for the construction of a dock, boatlifts, and roof is being requested. 4. That the undersigned (hasjhave� appointed and (does/do) appoint: Speeler Foundations, Inc. as {hisJtheirj agent(s� to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 5. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Fforida to consider and act on the above described property; 6. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this applicatian and the owner authorizes City representatives to visit and photograph #he property described in this application; 7. That(I/we), theundersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correc#. Prop Owner Property Owner Property Owner STATE OF PLORIDA, CQUNTY QF PINELLAS Property Owner BEFORE ME THE UNDERSIGNED, AN OFFICER DULY COMMISSIONED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ON TFilS �� DAY OF `I ' �-� �' , `�" � � , PER50NALLY APPEARED O Li, G L� T� �� WHO HAVING BEEN FtRST DULY SWORN DEPOSED AND SAYS TNAT HE/SHE FULLY UNDERSTANDS THE CONTENTS OF THE AFFIDAVIT THAT HE/SHE SIGNED. CHRISTINA S. CASHMAN Notary Public, State of Fbrida My Camm. Expires J�xie 28, 2017 No. FF 31265 Notary Seal/Siamp (�'�!��% �� .��l� Notary Public Signature My Commission Expires: �I 2� � � � Planning & Development Department,100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, TeL- 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Aage 7 of 7 Revised 41/12 PRIVATE DOCK NAME: Bills, Julie 839 Bay Esplanade Clearwater, FL. 33767 M11W M LW BOTTOM ENG. SCALE: I " = 20' Application # (OFFICIAL USE ONLY) Profile View � DOCK SQUARE FEET 475•33' \ I/ TOTAL SQUARE FEET I,385' Plan View WATERWAY WIDTII 830' �— � (applicant and ad�acent docks) wATERFRONT WIDTf1 67.5' /\ P�L P/L I r—"-37'-6" � �9 �� • --� � / I �'-8" � O _ ��p I I ��—��I / N PNNEBpqTUPTI I 6� o ADJACENT DOCK MANDALAY CHANNEL I —— I I 6'-9" q � � � � �, I I � � � I PROPOSED � I I ° ROOF � . .. .-�-a �. � �w SUBMERGED � . o ro 'NEPTIINF�r "� '° 8 � � I RESOURCES W �?r��Fl w. NO DOCK 4 CITY OWNED END OF GARDENIA S 1----2 2'--.� .. . � W • � . � - ° W 63'- I 0" ( 4 2" `. � 4, y.". . W�3'-10" �m�� R��a�as�a I- � , br �� C'q R`�ri . . . . . i a, � � `�,�? �a y T I . ' I �(5�°'�„�.�;'9� ,�5�•'�'� �� I ".r�". .. ". v �`d .� I � � . � � 3'13 �.�'�- � . . � �y, . . < . d . ..", a � :C�: n �° y �4'". "_ w' � �;�s`< Sil��E oF •'�� 2'- I�"I 6'--14 �,L_ w . ` . . --y� • Q 4'•' �� e„ I 5 ---�_30'-8" _--�� I 0'-7"--1 ''fi�� `� � ��'� C��3 � i 1 l �� r7 y^ �(I f � � A M1, ;;, ': R f. i. w.':. 67'-6" The undersigned does not ob�ect to the proposed dock and rec�uested variances as drawn in the space provided above. Left Owner: City of Clearwater �ignature ianali Ri ht Owner: Pats S. Loke Date Signature See Previous Signature Date Water and Naviqation 0 0 CASE #: FLD2015-05019-839 BAY ESPLANADE • We propose to construct a new single-family docking structure with two (2) boatlifts and a roof that covers both boatlifts. • The structure requires a hearing due to the proposed length of the structure. • The width of the property is 67.5'. The property width allows for a maximum dock length of 50.625' in order to meet the criteria of the code. • Due to submerged aquatic resources and shallow water in the proposed area, the docking structure must be longer than allowable without a hearing. • The docks in the surrounding area are all affected by these circumstances and, as shown on the attached aerial, are longer than allowable without a hearing. • The proposed structure has been designed to eliminate impacts to the submerged resources as shown on the attached drawing. The dock, boatlifts, and roof have all been located so that only the 4' walkway is located over the submerged resources. • The overall structure will extend 81' into the waterway. This will cause no navigational issues as the width of the waterbody is 830'. There are existing structures in the surrounding area that are as long, or longer, than our proposed structure. • The proposed structure will only extend 11' beyond the existing dock and tie poles that are currently in place. The structure must be extended in order to eliminate impacts to the submerged resources. • The proposed structure is in harmony with the surrounding structures. The proposed use is for the residents of the upland single-family residence. LIST OF BUILDING MATERIALS & CONSTRUCTION METHOD FOR PROPOSED BOATLIFT ROOF COVERING CASE #: FLD2015-05019-839 BAY ESPLANADE • 2.5 CCA PRESSURE TREATED TIMBER PILING • PERIMETER FRAMING TO BE 2" X 12" MARINE GRADE PRESSURE TREATED LUMBER • 5/8" STAINLESS STEEL BOLTS � ROOF TRUSSES TO BE PRESSURE TREATED WITH GALVANIZED GUSSET PLATES. ENGINEERED TO WITHSTAND 140 MPH WIND SPEED AT 2:12 PITCH • PLYWOOD SHEETING TO BE 5/8" MARINE GRADE PRESSURE TREATED � ALL NAILS FOR FRAMING TO BE STAINLESS STEEL • PLYWOOD SHEETING WILL BE NAILED WITH GALVANIZED NAILS • SUB-FASCIA WILL BE 2" X 8" MARINE GRADE PRESSURE TREATED • ROOFING WILL BE GAF TIMBERLINE ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLES WITH 4" DRIP EDGE AND 30# UNDERLAYMENT � ROOF WILL START 12' ABOVE THE DECK � ROOF PEAK WILL BE NO HIGHER THAN 13'-5" ABOVE THE DECK • ROOF TRUSSES WILL BE TIED DOWN WITH GALVANIZED SIMPSON CLIPS SPECIFIED BY THE TRUSS ENGINEER FOR PROPER UPLIFT .� � �' *�� , �� 85' � ' s ,� ;` ` f� 72' �� ,+� � �•-� ° . �if! � � F��i „ , ' �„�. . „ . �. ! � � y a ' , E �� ' � � �.�..�.Y �. �. � ' . �av x �"�'r d� T ..'� &��-^ �:� ��. � )°ra� � .. , . ,, e t � y= SITE � � n� i i� t , ��v � �. . a;xq.�, t�`, . �° fi M � � ��, "� . ,� �:�w . , �� .� �� , . �.� �� J � h • � :� � � ,� ,! °� � �: �� ,. 86� Fl: ,r. 1 � 'p. � � ; i a � f le earth �� u oCO�r� �mOZ C�n�� + D � Cm')�pW� �7 0 � C 0 — T. .-L7 Z � O D � � .D�DO Z�Zoo r Q n CO D � D y � � � � C7 - Z � 0 � ��a T N Z D p—iG�m � � O n D � = D �m� _cWi,�D m � � V L7 C � r � "'� � m=—p m D =m� m�� c��o� rz-n� D m r.i � O � � D � T O � m O � � mD:iJ� -�Gm=z rn o�x D� -G BAY ESPLANADE WALK N2°32'04"E 67.73'(M) 67.50'(P) 68.39'(m) 67.50(p) � TOFIR ��'`'�,°i :� �' ::ti�;ih';' ' � d.+:� .;; �•' o w .:�c�,_,�' .'i � a '.P: � . �r � i:,''.;:::;i rSl'!L El'OL �•`'m��':•: T z I SZ'Sl '�',•. � >- o -�o � �-;r' ' co � Z N � � � 0 v r O .A � � � � rn 5S'fil �' � rn "(7 � f�TI m � � (n � '� Cn *t m � r w W � � 5C£l � 9� � � C�O 56'OZ .:'.i;,';•; .' � •::F•I:i.'j ��r�.'-.' ^ b • ; . .: � .. ;;:�. o .�•,5,.1 ,.m'Z! .ts � • , .�'•. �`.�n., i�;;'f :: I r:. ° ' I �, � a Z N � ��h V m :�, N cn = -n y SEAWALL < ° T Z o o N4°14'S5"E 67.96'(M) 6.5 '(p) � m�.o z � { o� r m Z � m r m D � � � D --I m � `s�� o 0 �•o 0 10' 20' 40' � SCALE: 1 "= 20' 0 � � o I T (n T O ._fl m� r IJ 2 p mZ THIS SURVEY IS MADE FOR 7HE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE GURRENT OWNERS OF 7HE PROPERTY AND AL50 7HOSE WHO PURCHASE, MORTCAGE OR WARAN7EE 1HE 7171E 7HERETD WI7HIN ONE YEAR OF 7HE Fl0.D DA7E NOIED ON THIS SURVEY. � �wxe � � � �� - X - �' CH41N LINK FENCE - ' - fi' WOW FFNCE NOTES: (1) IN COMPLIANCE H77H F.AC. 61G17-6.0031-4-E, IF LOCA710N OF EASEMEN75 OR RIGH75-OF-WAY OF RECORD, OTHFR IHAN THOSE ON RECORD PLATS, IS REWIRED, 7HIS INFORNA710N MUST BE FURNISHED TO iHE SURVEYOR AND MAPPER. (2) IF APPUCABLE, FEN(:ES SHOWN MEANDER ON OR OFF LINES. (APPROX.) (3) NO IXCAVA710N OR MMPING OF UNDERGROUND IMPROVEMENTS HAS BEEN PERFORMED. CORNER MARKERS ARE 1/2' DIAME1Efi UNLE55 NOIED 07HERN7SE. BA515 OF BEARINGS IS R/W LINE (USING PUT BEMING OR ASSUMW) UNLESS N07ED O7HERWISE LEGEND: (c) - cu.auho. c/ - cmve uuueoe . ce. c� eox. tr. uc�rt ro�. c/s � ca+cxn[ sue, ar - auN �wic �wcG ca+c - ca+cnt� CSW � CONCREIE 9DEWNX. (D) � DFED. DE � DRNNACE EASEMQlT, 01� URNN IN�EL EOW � mCE Oi WAIFR, E/V � EDCE OF PAYF)AENT. (� . FEID,F/C � fENCE CORNQt, FCPt � FlR CAPPED, F]IC � iWND % CUT. FCN � FWtA CONCRE7E MONUYEHT. FlP . iWND RON P� RR � iOUND IRON ROD, FN � FWlD WJ� FND � FWND NAIL h DISK ID � IDENIIFlCA710N, (M) � NF.ASURm, YH - N�WfOLF, NCF � NO NARNER iWND, OXW OR pIP � OYFpNEAD NiNE, 0/A � OYER ALL, (P) � PLAT, P/E�POOL EWIP. PP � 70WER GIXE, POB � POPIT OF BEdNNP1G POC � PdNT OF WMMENC�AENT. VPY � PEPMANENT REFFRQlCE NONUAIENT, R/W � PoGHT OF MAT. SIN � SEf 1/Y IRWI ROD lH eY17. SND m SET NALL AND DISI( le BW2 iNF� 7RANSiORNQt. TOB . TOP OF BMllf. iP� PHONE PEDESTA4 UE � UTLITY EASEMENL WDF . WOOD fENCE WN � WAIEN NEIER Know It Now, Inc. FloAdaBuslnessCeN�caleIN LOCA710N - 2011 HEIDEIBERG AVENUE, DUNmIN, R AultwrizallanNUmberL86912 VOICE 727-415-8305 FAX 727-736-2 CERTIFIED EXCLUSIVELY TO THE BELOW PARTIE: ELBRIDGE F. BILLS, II BRYAN J. STANLEY P.A. CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY PHILIP E. LOKEY J I HEREBY CERfIFY 7HAT THIS SKEfCH OF SURVEY WAS MqDE UNDER Att RESPONSIBLE CFIRRCE AND TO THE BEST OF W NNOWLEOCE AND BELIEF SUD SURVEY MEEfS TiE MINIMUN TECHNIGV. S7ANDARDS SEf FORTFI BY 7HE FLORIOA 6d1RD OF PR�FESSIONAL IAHD SURVEYORS IN CIUPTER SJ-77 FLORIW MWNISTRATNE CODE NRRIER . 7HI5 DOCUMENT 6 ELECfRONICALLY SN7Nm AND SFALID PURSUANT TO SECTION 472.027, OF THE FIORiDA SiA1URS AND CFNPfQt 5J-17 OF 7HE FlARIDA ADMINISTRAlNE CODE �K.Nw SurveyaBMapperNUmher4636 p� � ��, DATE OF FIELD WORK: 4-30-2014 ��/'ti DATE SIGNED 5-2-14 ;�?\�� y � \�;RVEY� � FLORIDASURVEYOR@AOL.COM BILL HYATT