07/17/2007
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
July 17, 2007
Present: Nicholas C. Fritsch Chair
Thomas Coates Board Member
Dana K. Tallman Board Member
Frank L. Dame Board Mefmber
Jordan Behar Board Member
Absent: Kathy Milam Vice-Chair
Doreen DiPolito Board Member
Daniel Dennehy Alternate Board Member
Also Present: Gina Grimes Attorney for the Board
Michael Delk Planning Director
Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney
Neil Thompson Development Review Manager
Brenda Moses Board Reporter
The Chair called the meeting to order at 1:02 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the 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:
June 19, 2007
Member Coates moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of June 19, 2007,
motion
as submitted in written summation to each board member. The was duly seconded and
carried
unanimously.
D. CONSENT AGENDA:
The following cases are not contested by the applicant, staff,
neighboring property owners, etc. and will be approved by a single vote at the beginning of the
meeting (Items 1 – 8):
1.
Item Pulled from Consent Agenda
Case:
FLD2007-05017 – 200-201 Skiff Point Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant:
Skiff Point of Clearwater, LLC.
Representative:
Ryan Oliver, Delta Seven Inc. (PO Box 3241, St. Petersburg, FL 33731;
phone: 727-823-2443; fax: 727-550-2513; e-mail: katie.victor@delta-seven.com).
Location:
0.50 acre located at the western terminus of Skiff Point, approximately 300 west
of Larboard Way.
Atlas Page:
267B.
Zoning District:
Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit a 15-slip, 1,666 square-foot multi-use
dock in conjunction with a 15-unit attached dwelling (condominium) development, under the
provisions of Section 3-601.C.2.
Proposed Use:
Multi-use dock of 1,666 square-feet for 15 slips, in conjunction with a 15-
unit attached dwelling (condominium).
Community Development 2007-07-17 1
Neighborhood Association:
Island Estates Civic Association (Sharon Wesler, 460 Palm
Island NE, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-442-2237); and Clearwater Neighborhoods
Coalition (Joe Evich, President, P.O. Box 8204, Clearwater, FL 33758).
Presenter:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Member Coates moved to accept Wayne Wells as an expert witness in the fields of
motion
zoning, site plan analysis, code administration, and planning in general. The was duly
carried
seconded and unanimously.
Senior Planner Wayne Wells reviewed the request. The 0.50-acre site is located at the
western terminus of Skiff Point, approximately 300 west of Larboard Way. The site has
approximately 80 feet of frontage on the cul-de-sac of Skiff Point and was formerly developed
with two residential buildings with a total of six attached dwellings (Demolition Permit BCP2006-
01035 issued January 17, 2006). On June 21, 2005, the CDB (Community Development Board)
approved, with 11 conditions, Case FLD2005-01012 to permit 15 attached dwellings. Building
Permit BCP2006-09200 has been issued to construct the foundation for the condominium
building and work is proceeding with its construction. Building Permit BCP2007-05139 has
been submitted and is currently being reviewed for the construction of the 15 attached dwellings
and the site improvements. There exists to the east on the north side of Skiff Point a three-story
attached dwelling building. Adjacent to the east at 211 - 221 Skiff Point is an approved, but yet
to be constructed, 12-unit, four stories over ground-level parking attached dwelling project
approved under Case FLD2005-04036 by the CDB on October 18, 2005, with 21 conditions).
Detached dwellings exist to the north across Clearwater Harbor. Clearwater Harbor exists to
the west of this site.
The development proposal consists of the construction of a 15-slip, 1,666 square-foot
multi-use dock as an amenity to the approved 15-unit condominium development on the upland
portion of the subject property. The design of the docks follows the arc of the upland property
seawall. The docks will be accessed via a sidewalk from the rear of the building and pool deck.
Pursuant to Section 3-601.C.2 of the Community Development Code, a multi-use dock is
defined as any dock owned in common or used by the residents of a multi-family development,
condominium, cooperative apartment, mobile home park or attached zero lot line development.
However, pursuant to Section 3.601.C.3 of the Community Development Code, any multi-use
dock with a deck area exceeding 500 square-feet shall be treated as a commercial dock. As the
proposed dock exceeds this threshold (687 square-feet), the dock is treated as commercial and
is subject to the relevant review criteria.
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject
property.
With regard to setbacks, the dimensional standards criteria set forth in Section 3-
601.C.3.h of the Community Development Code state that docks shall be located no closer to
any property line as extended into the water than the distance equivalent to 10% of the width of
the waterfront property line. The width of the waterfront property line is 283.64 feet; therefore
the proposed dock must be set back from the east and west property lines a minimum of 28.4
feet. As proposed, the dock will be set back from the east and west property lines in excess of
this requirement with distances of 37 feet each.
With regard to length, commercial docks shall not extend from the mean high water line
or seawall of the subject property more than 75% of the width of the subject property as
Community Development 2007-07-17 2
measured along the waterfront property line; thus the length of the dock cannot exceed 212.7
feet. As proposed, the dock has a length of 44 feet. The same threshold that applies to length
also applies to width; therefore the width of the proposed dock cannot exceed 212.7 feet. The
dock has a proposed width of 209.6 feet; thus compliance with this standard is achieved. While
not consistent with existing, older and shorter docks, the proposed docks are consistent with
newer docks required to meet today’s Codes, wherein the length takes into account the water
depth at mean low water.
The DRC (Development Review Committee) reviewed the application and supporting
materials at its meeting of June 7, 2007, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient
to move forward to the CDB, based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact: 1) That the 0.50 acre is located at the western terminus of Skiff Point,
approximately 300 west of Larboard Way; 2) That the property was approved on June 21, 2005,
by the CDB for the development of the upland with 15 attached dwellings (condominiums); 3)
That a building permit has been issued for the construction of the foundation for the proposed
building; 4) That a building permit has been submitted to construct the condominium building
and site improvements; 5) That the proposal consists of the construction of a 1,666 square-foot,
15 wet slip multi-use dock as an amenity for the 15-unit condominium development; 6) That the
proposed docks comply with the setback, width and length standards of Section 3-601.C.3.h of
the Community Development Code; 7) That the development proposal is compatible with dock
patterns of the surrounding area; and 8) That there are no outstanding Code Enforcement
issues associated with the subject property.
Conclusions of Law: 1) That the development proposal is consistent with the commercial
dock review criteria as per Section 3-601.C.3 of the Community Development Code and 2) That
the development proposal is consistent with the General Applicability criteria as per Section 3-
913.A of the Community Development Code.
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit a 15-slip, 1,666 square-foot multi-use dock in conjunction
with a 15-unit attached dwelling (condominium) development, under the provisions of Section 3-
601.C.2, with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval: 1) That boats moored at the docks be for the exclusive use by
the residents and/or guests of the condominiums and not be permitted to be sub-leased
separately from the condominiums; 2) That signage be permanently installed on the docks or at
the entrance to the docks containing wording warning boaters of the existence of protected sea
grasses and manatees in the vicinity; and 3) That a copy of the SWFWMD (Southwest Florida
Water Management District) and/or FDEP (Florida Department of Environmental Protection)
Permit, USACOE (United States Army Corps of Engineers) Permit and proof of permission to
use State submerged land, if applicable, be submitted to the Planning Department prior to
commencement of construction.
Neil Spillane requested party status.
motion
Member Coates moved to grant Neil Spillane party status. The was duly
carried
seconded and unanimously.
Party Status Holder Neil Spillane expressed concern regarding vessel size and
suggested the developer could construct fewer units and give away docks instead of selling
Community Development 2007-07-17 3
them. He questioned who signed the Affidavit to Authorize and if SWFWMD approvals were
obtained. He said double docks could accommodate large boats.
Mr. Wells stated Code does not limit the size of vessels at boat slips. The boat slips are
designed for boats under 30 feet and their use is limited to project residents and tenants. The
Code regulates dock construction but not prices. The appropriate authorization referred to has
been signed. Residents would not be precluded from owning more than one dock. He
suggested a condition could indicate if the number of units is reduced, the number of docks
must be similarly reduced.
Attorney for the Board Gina Grimes stated that Code requires that docks can be sold
only to owners for the use of owners/residents.
Katie Victor, representative, stated the applicant plans to construct 15 units.
Carroll Lovett requested party status.
motion
Member Tallman moved to grant Carroll Lovett party status. The was duly
carried
seconded and unanimously.
Mr. Lovett stated City documents indicate the applicant only paid for 14 residential units.
He questioned if roofs are permitted for boat slips and requested information regarding the
pilings.
Mr. Wells stated staff previously reviewed with Mr. Lovett the building plans for 15 units.
The applicant needs to pay Parks & Recreation fees for more unit. He said the CDB can add
conditions.
Ms. Victor said the plans comply with Code, including the pilings and number of units.
She said the applicant does not object to prohibiting roofs over boatlifts.
Discussion ensued with comments that evidence indicates the applicant wishes to
construct 15 units and 15 boat docks and that the application meets Code. Mr. Wells said the
applicant will not have to return to the CDB if the number of units is reduced.
Member Coates moved to approve CaseFLD2007-05017 on today’s Consent Agenda,
based on the evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report, and at
today’s hearing, and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law stated in the
Staff Report with conditions of approval as listed, and a condition that covered boatlifts be
motioncarried
prohibited. The was duly seconded and unanimously.
Member Dame moved to reconsider the motion to add a condition that the number of
boatslips would not exceed the number of dwelling units and not exceed 15 slips. The seconder
motion carried
agreed. The unanimously.
Community Development 2007-07-17 4
2. Case:
FLD2007-05014 – 300 South Belcher Road Level Two Application
Owner:
Housh Ghovaee.
Applicant:
Northside Engineering Services, Inc.
Representative:
Doreen Williams, Northside Engineering Services, Inc. (601 Cleveland
Street, Suite 930, Clearwater, FL 33756; phone: 727-443-2869; fax: 727-446-8036; e-mail:
doreen@northsideengineering.com).
Location:
0.60 acre located at the southwest corner of South Belcher Road and Rainbow
Drive.
Atlas Page:
289B.
Zoning District:
Commercial (C) District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit offices in the Commercial District with a
reduction to the front (east along South Belcher Road) setback from 25 feet to zero feet (to
existing pavement), reductions to the front (north along Rainbow Drive) setback from 25 feet
to two feet (to existing pavement) and to 11 feet (to proposed pavement), reductions to the
side (south) setback from 10 feet to seven feet (to existing building) and to zero feet (to
existing pavement and proposed dumpster enclosure), a reduction to required parking from
32 spaces to 28 spaces and a deviation to required stacking spaces at the driveways on
Rainbow Drive, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of
Section 2-704.C, and a reduction to the perimeter buffer (east) along South Belcher Road
from 15 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the perimeter buffer (north)
along Rainbow Drive from 10 feet to two feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the
perimeter buffer along the south property line from five feet to zero feet (to existing
pavement), a reduction to foundation landscaping from five feet to four feet wide, as a
Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use:
Offices of 8,000 square-feet.
Neighborhood Association:
Skycrest Neighbors (Joanna Siskin, President, 121 North
Crest Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33755); and Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Joe Evich,
President, P.O. Box 8204, Clearwater, FL 33758).
Presenter:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
The 0.60-acre site is located at the southwest corner of South Belcher Road and
Rainbow Drive. The property has been zoned commercially for some time. The existing
building on the property has been used for retail sales and offices in the past, but there has
been no valid occupational license since December 19, 2005. The existing building has 8,000
square-feet and 19 parking spaces. The site currently has a driveway on South Belcher Road
and two driveways on Rainbow Drive. There also is cross-access with the property to the south,
both on the east and west sides, and Albertson’s to the west.
The property to the north is zoned Institutional (I) District and is developed with the U.S.
Post Office. Properties to the east are located in unincorporated Pinellas County, designated
with Commercial General (CG) land use category and developed with retail sales and vehicle
service establishments. The property to the south is zoned Commercial (C) District and is
developed with offices. The property to the west is zoned Commercial (C) District and is vacant,
but also provides rear access to the Albertson’s retail sales store.
The development proposal is to permit offices within the existing building, with the
construction of additional parking, retention, landscaping and trash facilities. The building is
intended for two tenant spaces. The western tenant space of 6,000 square-feet is intended for
Northside Engineering Services. The eastern tenant space of 2,000 square-feet would be for an
office use (undetermined tenant at this point). The building design is basically rectangular with
a pitched roof, with gable end pediments with columns over building entrances. The building is
Community Development 2007-07-17 5
basically white in color, except the gable end and columns on the east side of the building are
painted a contrasting green color. The smaller gable ends and columns on the north side of the
building are not consistently painted as the eastern end of the building. Approval of this request
should be conditioned on all gable ends and columns being painted similarly to enhance the
building design.
Pursuant to Section 2-701.1 of the Community Development Code, the maximum
allowable FAR (Floor Area Ratio) for properties with a designation of Commercial General is
0.55. As such, the maximum development potential of the 0.60-acre parcel is 14,374.8 square-
feet. The existing building is 8,000 square-feet in size, which results in a FAR of 0.31. Based
upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with the Countywide Future Land Use
Plan with regard to the maximum allowable FAR.
Pursuant to Section 2-701.1 of the Community Development Code, the maximum
allowable ISR (Impervious Surface Ratio) is 0.95. The proposed ISR is 0.79, which is
consistent with the Code provisions.
Pursuant to Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code, the minimum lot area for
restaurants ranges between 3,500 and 10,000 square-feet. The lot area for this proposal is
26,136 square-feet, which exceeds Code provisions.
Pursuant to Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code, the minimum lot width for
offices ranges between 30 and 100 feet. The site is a corner lot, with 104.99 feet of frontage
along South Belcher Road on the east and 250 feet of frontage on Rainbow Drive on the north.
The lot width along both roadways is consistent with Code provisions.
Pursuant to Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code, the minimum front
setback is 25 feet and the minimum side setback is 10 feet. The proposed offices, being
processed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, includes a reduction to the front
(east along South Belcher Road) setback from 25 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement),
reductions to the front (north along Rainbow Drive) setback from 25 feet to two feet (to existing
pavement) and to 11 feet (to proposed pavement) and reductions to the side (south) setback
from 10 feet to seven feet (to existing building) and to zero feet (to existing pavement and
proposed dumpster enclosure).
The property currently is developed with a zero-foot front setback to pavement on both
South Belcher Road and Rainbow Drive, as well as a zero-foot side setback in the southeast
corner adjacent to South Belcher Road. This proposal includes re-use of the existing building
with landscaping improvements where possible. The applicant has redesigned the existing
parking lot to meet the dimensional standards of Section 3-1402.A. While the parking meets
these dimensional standards, due to the location of the existing building, setback reductions to
pavement are necessary. The applicant is removing an existing driveway from South Belcher
Road, which increases the opportunity for necessary parking spaces, while still allowing for
cross-access exiting to the property to the south. There is no opportunity to remove pavement
along South Belcher Road to meet any setback other than a zero-foot setback due to the
building location. The applicant is proposing to remove triangular areas of pavement from the
front of the spaces to create some amount of landscaping fronting on South Belcher Road. A
handicap accessible path is required to the sidewalk within South Belcher Road, where a zero-
foot side setback to the south property line will be maintained. Along Rainbow Drive the
applicant is proposing to remove two feet of pavement to create a landscape area able to be
planted with a hedge and accent trees. Parking spaces west of the eastern driveway on
Community Development 2007-07-17 6
Rainbow Drive will be maintained in their existing setback location. New parking spaces are
proposed accessed from the western driveway on Rainbow Drive at a front setback of 11 feet to
pavement. The setback reduction at this location is necessary to provide necessary parking for
the intended uses of the building. An existing concrete pad on the west side of the building at a
zero-foot side setback is utilized as a dumpster pad. In conjunction with the provision of
additional parking spaces on the west side, a dumpster enclosure is proposed for a rollout
dumpster maintaining the same zero-foot side setback, but moved closer to the drive aisle. It is
noted that cross-access with the property to the south is being maintained at the southwest
corner of the property. The setback reductions requested are necessary to provide an
adequate number of parking spaces and to meet the dimensional requirements for parking lots
of the Code, while providing a dumpster enclosure meeting Code design standards. While
setback requirements of 15 feet to pavement is not being achieved, it is the location of the
existing building that makes meeting this setback requirement a hardship. The applicant is
attempting to provide as much landscape area as possible, while trying to re-use the existing
building with a lower intense use.
Pursuant to Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code, the maximum allowable
height can range between 25 and 50 feet. The existing building has a pitched roof at a height of
21.5 feet at midpoint, meeting minimum Code requirements.
As part of the proposal, the applicant is removing the existing driveway on South Belcher
Road. Removal of this existing driveway, which is located close to the street intersection, will
reduce roadway hazards. Parking spaces on the east side of the building are angular and cross
access to the parking lot and driveway on the parcel to the south will be maintained. The
existing eastern driveway on Rainbow Drive is approximately 36 feet in width. To reduce
impervious surfaces and provide adequate growth area for the existing tree in the terminal
landscape island on the east side of this eastern driveway, the applicant proposes to reduce the
width of this driveway to 25 feet, increasing the width of this eastern terminal landscape island.
The applicant also is relocating the parking spaces on the west side of this eastern driveway on
Rainbow Drive to be adjacent to the driveway, thereby removing excess pavement at this
location.
The applicant is proposing two required handicap parking spaces for this site, one for the
eastern tenant and one for the western tenant (Northside Engineering Services). A handicap
space is proposed in the southeast corner of the property for the eastern tenant, with a
handicap accessible path to the sidewalk within the South Belcher Road right-of-way. A
handicap space for the western tenant space is proposed on the south side of the eastern
driveway adjacent to the building, with an accessible path in front of the parking spaces to the
sidewalk within the Rainbow Drive right-of-way. The applicant also is proposing a sidewalk to
the parking spaces on the west side as an extension of this handicap walk aisle. Construction
of a ramp into the building for the western tenant space will be required.
Pursuant to Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code, the minimum required
parking can range between three to four spaces per 1,000 square-feet GFA. Based on the
8,000 square-feet GFA of the existing building, a minimum of 24 to 32 parking spaces are
required for these proposed offices. The applicant proposes 28 parking spaces, which includes
two handicap spaces, at a parking ratio of 3.5 parking spaces per 1,000 square-feet. The
proposal includes a request to reduce the required parking from 32 to 28 spaces. Tenant
parking needs for the eastern tenant space of 2,000 square-feet is unknown as there is no
projected tenant for this space. The applicant is providing the required parking of four spaces
per 1,000 square-feet for this tenant space due this unknown parking need. The applicant is
Community Development 2007-07-17 7
proposing as part of the parking reduction to have 1,000 square-feet of Northside Engineering
Services’ floor area to be in accessory storage and employees’ gym.
A flexibility criteria for off-street parking reductions for offices under Section 2-704.H
states, “The physical characteristics of a proposed building are such that the likely uses of the
property will require fewer parking spaces per floor area than otherwise required or that the use
of significant portions of the building are for storage or other non-parking demand generation
purposes.” Based on the provision of this 1,000 square-feet in accessory storage and private
gym, the proposed reduction to required parking is justified and the number of provided spaces
will be adequate for the staff and clients parking needs for Northside Engineering Services
offices.
The request has been advertised including a deviation to required stacking spaces at the
driveways on Rainbow Drive. Code Section 3-1406.B.2 requires a minimum stacking distance
of 20 feet from the Rainbow Drive right-of-way and the first parking space or drive aisle. While
this dimension is met for the drive aisle east of the eastern driveway, the existing parking
spaces on the west side of this eastern driveway and the proposed parking on the east side of
the western driveway do not meet this stacking requirement. This requested reduction is
necessary to provide necessary parking to allow reasonable use of the existing building.
Pursuant to Section 3-201.D.1 of the Community Development Code, all outside
mechanical equipment shall be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or
abutting properties. Existing air conditioning units are located on the south side of the building,
which are screened by existing shrubbery on that side of the building. As such, the
development proposal is consistent with the Code with regard to screening of outdoor
mechanical equipment.
Pursuant to Section 3-904.A of the Community Development Code to minimize hazards
at street or driveway intersections, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will
obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20-
foot sight visibility triangles. There is a visibility triangle at the roadway intersection of South
Belcher Road and Rainbow Drive. There are two driveways to be retained on Rainbow Drive
with visibility triangles on either side. The proposed driveway reduction for the eastern driveway
will move the visibility triangle westward so that the existing tree will no longer encroach into the
visibility triangle. Parking spaces adjacent to Rainbow Drive will encroach upon the required
sight visibility triangles. The intent of the sight visibility triangles is to enable those vehicles
and/or pedestrians traversing a right-of-way and those vehicles stopped at a stop bar while
leaving a site to have a clear and unobstructed view of one another. The City’s Engineering
Department has indicated no objection to the location of these parking spaces at these
driveways on Rainbow Drive. These encroachments upon the sight visibility triangles will not
result in the grant of a special privilege as similar reductions have been approved elsewhere
under similar circumstances. The applicant has also noted that landscaping proposed within all
visibility triangles will be maintained below 30-inches to avoid sight visibility issues and no trees
are proposed within the sight visibility triangles. Based upon the above, positive findings can be
made with respect to allowing encroachments of pavement within the sight visibility triangles as
set forth in Section 3-904.A of the Community Development Code.
Pursuant to Section 3-911 of the Community Development Code, for development that
does not involve a subdivision, all utilities including individual distribution lines shall be installed
underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. Overhead utilities exist to the
building from Rainbow Drive. The civil site plan for this proposal indicates that all on-site
Community Development 2007-07-17 8
electric and communication lines will be placed underground in conformance with this Code
requirement. Any approval of this request should include a condition requiring such
undergrounding of the existing overhead on-site utility lines.
Pursuant to Section 3-1202.D.1 of the Community Development Code, this site is
required a 15-foot wide landscape buffer along South Belcher Road, a 10-foot wide landscape
buffer along Rainbow Drive and a five-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to other
nonresidential development (offices to the south). Buffers are to be planted with one tree every
35 feet and 100% shrub coverage is required. The proposal includes a reduction to the
perimeter buffer (east) along South Belcher Road from 15 feet to zero feet (to existing
pavement), a reduction to the perimeter buffer (north) along Rainbow Drive from 10 feet to two
feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the perimeter buffer along the south property line
from five feet to zero feet (to existing pavement) and a reduction to foundation landscaping from
five feet to four feet wide.
Landscape reductions requested are a result of the need to provide required parking for
the proposed use, the location of the existing building and the need to comply with the
dimensional standards for parking lot design of Section 3-1402. Given these design constraints,
the applicant is proposing to remove pavement at the ends of the angled parking spaces facing
South Belcher Road to create triangular landscape areas to provide some measure of screening
and buffering along the roadway, even though the northern points of the angled spaces will be
at a zero-foot front setback. The edges of these triangular planting areas must be curbed for
landscaping protection from vehicular encroachment. The applicant is also proposing to place a
hedge within the South Belcher Road right-of-way for such screening. The placement of the
hedge within the right-of-way will require a Right-of-Way Permit from Pinellas County prior to the
issuance of the site improvement permit. Along Rainbow Drive, the applicant is proposing to
remove two feet of pavement to create a two-foot wide buffer, within which a hedge and
flowering trees are proposed. The landscape plan will need to be revised prior to the issuance
of the site improvement permit to increase the size of these flowering trees to the Code
minimum eight-foot tall and two-inch caliper. Existing pavement in the southeast corner of the
site is located at a zero-foot side setback. Due to the design constraints of the property and
Code requirements, pavement at this location will need to remain at the same zero-foot setback,
disallowing the placement of little landscaping at this location. It is noted that the pavement
continues off-site onto the property to the south, beyond the control of the applicant. In order to
provide necessary parking and a solid waste enclosure meeting Code requirements, the
enclosure has been designed at a zero-foot side setback at the southwest corner of the
property, disallowing the provision of required buffering at this location. The front of the
proposed parking on the west side also will need to be curbed in accordance with Code
requirements. The existing building does not have any foundation landscaping. At each
building entrance there exists a columned gable end, where the columns extend four feet from
the main building face. Columns also are located at the northeast and southeast building
corners on the east side of the building. Between these columns there presently exists
pavement. The applicant proposes to remove the pavement between the columns, except at
the three building entrances, for foundation landscaping. While this represents a reduction from
the required five-foot wide foundation planting area, due to the location of the building and the
required dimensions for parking lot design, the four-foot foundation planting area is the
maximum possible. The proposed foundation planting area will be planted in accordance with
Code requirements and will assist with site beautification. The front perimeter buffer along
South Belcher Road will be planted with Gold Mound Duranta as the hedge, with Silver
Buttonwood trees. The front buffer along Rainbow Drive will be planted with viburnam as the
hedge, with Spicy Jatropha Patio trees. Wax myrtle and crape myrtle trees are planned along
Community Development 2007-07-17 9
Rainbow Drive between the driveways and between parking and the retention pond. Two
sycamore trees are proposed on the west side of the building.
Pursuant to Section 3-1202.G of the Community Development Code, the landscaping
requirements contained within the Code can be waived or modified if the application contains a
Comprehensive Landscape Program satisfying certain criteria.
As expressed above, the proposed Comprehensive Landscape Program has been found
to be consistent with all applicable criteria. The applicant is removing the driveway on South
Belcher Road and is proposing to landscape the entire northeast corner of the property. The
eastern driveway on Rainbow Drive is being reduced in width to provide a larger terminal
landscape island for the existing tree, which will be enhanced with variegated flax lily and dwarf
jasmine. The area on the west side of the building is proposed to be planted with viburnam,
variegated arboricola, philodendron, variegated flax lily, white Indian hawthorne and dwarf
jasmine. While perimeter buffers do not meet Code required widths, the proposal will visually
enhance views of the site both by the traveling public, patrons and the surrounding commercial
neighborhood. The only grass areas planned for the site are directly west of an exit door on the
west side of the building and the retention pond. The landscape treatment proposed in the
comprehensive landscape program may be considered demonstrably more attractive than
landscaping otherwise permitted under the minimum landscape standards. The landscape
treatment proposed will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate
vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
The development proposal includes the construction of a dumpster enclosure on the
south property line on the west side adjacent to proposed parking spaces. The existing
dumpster is located on the west side of the building on a concrete pad unscreened from view.
Due to the parking design, the dumpster will need to be a rollout dumpster. This does not
appear to be a problem with trash truck accessibility, as the truck driver will remove the
dumpster from the enclosure, dump it and then return the dumpster to the enclosure before
leaving to travel south on the western driveway (to Albertson’s or other businesses). Section 3-
201.D.1 requires the enclosure to be of materials and colors consistent with those used with the
proposed building, which the applicant indicates this proposal will comply with. The proposed
solid waste facility has been found to be acceptable by the City’s Solid Waste Department.
A freestanding sign exists at the front property line of South Belcher Road, which is
deemed to be nonconforming to required setbacks. The applicant is proposing to remove this
freestanding sign at the same time as the driveway on South Belcher Road and replace it with a
monument style freestanding sign a maximum of six feet in height and meeting Code
requirements. Any approval of this request should be conditioned on the freestanding sign
being restricted to a maximum of six feet, even through the Comprehensive Sign Program, and
its design to match the exterior materials and color of the building.
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meetings of June 7,
2007, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to move forward to the CDB,
based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact: 1) That the 0.60 acre is located at the southwest corner of South
Belcher Road and Rainbow Drive; 2) That the property is located within the Commercial (C)
District and the Commercial General (CG) Future Land Use Plan category; 3) That the existing
Community Development 2007-07-17 10
building on the property has been used for retail sales and offices in the past, but there has
been no valid occupational license since December 19, 2005; 4) That the development proposal
is to permit offices within the existing building, with the construction of additional parking,
retention, landscaping and trash facilities; 5) That the property currently is developed with a
zero-foot front setback to pavement on both South Belcher Road and Rainbow Drive, as well as
a zero-foot side setback in the southeast corner adjacent to South Belcher Road; 6) That while
the parking meets Code dimensional standards, due to the location of the existing building,
setback reductions to pavement are necessary; 7) That the setback reductions requested are
necessary to provide adequate number of parking spaces and to meet the dimensional
requirements for parking lots of the Code, while providing a dumpster enclosure meeting Code
design standards; 8) That the existing eastern driveway on Rainbow Drive is approximately 36
feet in width, but is proposed to be reduced in width to 25 feet, increasing the width of the
eastern terminal landscape island; 9) That the applicant is also relocating the parking spaces on
the west side of this eastern driveway on Rainbow Drive to be adjacent to the driveway, thereby
removing excess pavement at this location; 10) That the applicant is removing the existing
driveway on South Belcher Road, which is located close to the street intersection and will
reduce roadway hazards, as well as provide a landscape area at the street intersection; 11)
That the proposal includes a request to reduce the required parking from 32 to 28 spaces; 12)
That the applicant is proposing as part of the parking reduction to have 1,000 square-feet of
Northside Engineering Services’ floor area to be in accessory storage and employees’ gym,
providing the justification for the parking reduction; 13) That the proposal includes reductions to
landscape buffers and foundation planting area, where the justification for such reductions are
similar to the setback reductions requested; 14) That the applicant is proposing to remove the
existing freestanding sign on South Belcher Road in conjunction with the removal of the
driveway on South Belcher Road and replace it with a monument style freestanding sign a
maximum of six feet in height and meeting Code requirements; and 15) That there are no
outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
Conclusions of Law: 1) That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards
as per Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code; 2) That the development proposal is
consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-704.C of the Community Development
Code; 3) That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two
Approvals as per Section 3-913 of the Community Development Code; and 4) That the
development proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Landscape Program criteria as per
Section 3-1202.G of the Community Development Code.
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit offices in the Commercial District with a reduction to the front
(east along South Belcher Road) setback from 25 feet to zero feet (to existing pavement),
reductions to the front (north along Rainbow Drive) setback from 25 feet to two feet (to existing
pavement) and to 11 feet (to proposed pavement), reductions to the side (south) setback from
10 feet to seven feet (to existing building) and to zero feet (to existing pavement and proposed
dumpster enclosure), a reduction to required parking from 32 spaces to 28 spaces and a
deviation to required stacking spaces at the driveways on Rainbow Drive, as a Comprehensive
Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C, and a reduction to the
perimeter buffer (east) along South Belcher Road from 15 feet to zero feet (to existing
pavement), a reduction to the perimeter buffer (north) along Rainbow Drive from 10 feet to two
feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to the perimeter buffer along the south property line
from five feet to zero feet (to existing pavement), a reduction to foundation landscaping from five
feet to four feet wide, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section
3-1202.G, with the following Conditions of Approval: 1) That offices be the approved uses for
Community Development 2007-07-17 11
this building; 2) That the western tenant space be of approximately 6,000 square-feet, with
approximately 1,000 square-feet devoted and restricted to accessory storage and personal gym
for this tenant space. Building plans shall be submitted reflecting these square footages and
use restrictions; 3) That the northernmost angled parking space facing South Belcher Road be
signed and restricted to employee parking only; 4) That handicap accessible paths be provided
to both tenant space entrances and to the sidewalks within the rights-of-way; 5) That, prior to
the issuance of any permits, cross-access easements with the properties to the south and west
be recorded in the public records and copies of such recorded easements be provided to the
Planning Department; 6) That the edges of the triangular planting areas adjacent to South
Belcher Road and along the front of the western parking spaces be curbed for landscaping
protection from vehicular encroachment; 7) That, prior to the issuance of the site improvement
permit, a Right-of-way Permit from Pinellas County be obtained for the placement of the hedge
within the South Belcher Road right-of-way; 8) That, prior to the issuance of the site
improvement permit, the landscape plan be revised to provide foundation trees and accent trees
adjacent to Rainbow Drive meeting Code specifications; 9) That, prior to the issuance of the site
improvement permit, a Tree Preservation Plan acceptable to the Planning Department be
submitted; 10) That all existing on-site overhead utility and communication lines be placed
underground; 11) That, prior to the issuance of the site development permit, the dumpster
enclosure be approved by the Solid Waste Department, the dumpster(s) be rollout style, and the
enclosure be of a similar material and color as the principal building; 12) That the stormwater
plan be revised, prior to the issuance of the site improvement permit, to correct proposed site
and control structure elevations, provide adequate flumes to the pond, be designed for a 50-
year storm event and to provide required pond recovery based on the double ring infiltrometer
test results, acceptable to Stormwater Engineering; 13) That any freestanding signage be
limited to monument-style, not to exceed six feet in height and be designed to match the color
and material of the building; and 14) That all gable ends over the building entrances and all
columns be of similar color.
See motion of approval on page 38.
3.
Item Pulled from Consent Agenda
Case:
FLD2007-02006 – 1460-1480 South Missouri Avenue Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant:
TMJ of Pinellas County, Inc.
Representative:
Keith E. Zayac, P.E., RLA (701 South Enterprise Road East, Suite 404,
Safety Harbor, FL 34695; phone: 727-793-9888; fax: 727-793-9855; e-mail:
keith@keithzayac.com).
Location:
2.31 total acres located on the west side of South Missouri Avenue, south of
Bellevue Boulevard and 200 feet north of Woodlawn Street.
Atlas Page:
314A.
Zoning District:
Commercial (C) District (2.31 acres) and Low Medium Density Residential
District (0.60 acre).
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit vehicle sales/display in the Commercial
District with reductions to the front (east) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to pavement) and
from 25 feet to 13.7 feet (to existing building), a reduction to the side (south) setback from
10 feet to 3.9 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the rear (west) setback from 20 feet to 3.5
feet (to pavement and existing building), a reduction to required parking from 35 spaces to
10 spaces, a deviation to allow vehicle sales/display contiguous to residentially-zoned
property, a deviation to allow the display of vehicles for sale outdoors and a deviation to
allow direct access to a major arterial street, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C, and a reduction to the landscape buffer
width along South Missouri Avenue from 15 feet to 13.7 feet (to existing building), a
Community Development 2007-07-17 12
reduction to the landscape buffer width along the south property line from five feet to 3.9 feet
(to pavement), a reduction to the landscape buffer width along the west property line
adjacent to single family dwellings from 12 feet to 5.9 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the
landscape buffer width along the west property line adjacent to a nonresidential use from
five feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement and existing building) and a reduction to the foundation
landscaping adjacent to buildings from five feet to zero feet, as a Comprehensive
Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G.
Proposed Use:
Vehicle sales/display.
Neighborhood Association:
South Clearwater Citizens for Progress (Duke Tieman, 1120
Kingsley Street, Clearwater, FL 33756; e-mail: duketieman@aol.com); and Clearwater
Neighborhoods Coalition (Joe Evich, President, P.O. Box 8204, Clearwater, FL 33758).
Presenter:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Member Tallman moved to accept Wayne Wells as an expert witness in the fields of
motion
zoning, site plan analysis, code administration, and planning in general. The was duly
carried
seconded and unanimously.
Mr. Wells reviewed the request. The 2.31 total acres is located on the west side of
South Missouri Avenue, south of Bellevue Boulevard and 200 feet north of Woodlawn Street.
The overall lot is “L” shaped and has 464 feet of frontage along South Missouri Avenue and the
northern leg of the property extends approximately 496 feet deep from South Missouri Avenue.
The majority of the site is zoned Commercial District (1.70 acres), with the Commercial zoning
extending 297.6 feet deep from South Missouri Avenue along the north property line. The
westernmost 199.23 feet along the northern property line (0.61 acre) is zoned Low Medium
Density Residential (LMDR) District. The majority of the property has been used for vehicle
sales/display and an automobile service station. A majority of the northern leg of the property is
pervious surfaces with few trees. The significant portion of the entire frontage has been paved
or is the foundation/floor of commercial buildings previously demolished. There is very little
landscaping on this site. Nonresidential uses (retail sales, offices and vehicle sales/display) are
located along South Missouri Avenue. Adjacent in the corner of the “L” of the site, accessed by
South Michigan Avenue, is a contractor’s office and warehousing use (1461 South Michigan
Avenue). This contractor’s office and warehousing use has an existing access easement over
the subject property providing ingress/egress to South Missouri Avenue. Detached dwellings
are developed to the north, west and south of the subject property. An existing white vinyl fence
has been installed along the perimeter of the site and approximately 10 feet west of the existing
asphalt pavement on the northern portion of the site.
Vehicle sales and display previously occurred over the entire property, however, portions
of the property had not been properly authorized through appropriate City approvals for such
use. The large northern portion of the site north of Building A has not yet been approved for the
use of vehicle sales and display, as well as Lots 8 and 9 between Buildings B and C. There
used to be a retail building on the northern portion (formerly 1448 South Missouri Avenue) that
was demolished in 1994, but the building slab and pavement were not removed. Office
buildings previously existed on Lots 8 and 9 that were demolished in 2002 (formerly 1474 South
Missouri Avenue) and 2003 (formerly 1476 South Missouri Avenue). Legitimate use of other
portions of the property for vehicle sales and display has been authorized for Building A, B and
C. The prior owner purchased the large northern lot with the intent of improving the entire
property for the use of vehicle sales/display.
A prior proposal to develop the entire area, including that portion zoned LMDR District,
with a vehicle sales establishment was reviewed by the CDB on September 20, October 18, and
Community Development 2007-07-17 13
December 20, 2005 (Case FLD2003-08039). That portion within the LMDR District was for a
nonresidential off-street parking lot associated with the vehicle sales establishment. This
application was submitted to the City in August 2003, but was an incomplete application. By
letter dated November 3, 2003, the City cited the prior owner of various violations on the overall
property, including the installation of site improvements without any building permits and the
alteration or construction of buildings on-site without required building permits. Due to the
nature of some of the improvements constructed without authorization or permits, certain minor
improvements were issued permits in late November 2003. Certain improvements deemed
associated to the use of the property were to be reviewed as part of this Flexible Development
application. From a general “use” standpoint, portions of the property were developed legally
for the sale and display of vehicles. Other portions of the site have been used for vehicle
sales/display, but without City authorization. Case FLD2003-08039 was withdrawn by the
applicant at the December 20, 2005, CDB meeting.
Since there had been Code Enforcement Board action finding the owner in violation of
various City codes, a daily fine accrued on this overall property. The prior property owner filed
for bankruptcy and the subject property was recently purchased by the present owner. A
bankruptcy settlement with the City for the lien the City had on the property was agreed upon.
The development proposal is to permit vehicle sales/display in the Commercial District
only. This proposal is similar to the prior application, but with a different development approach
by the new owners. The owner has agreed to provide certain site improvements that Planning
Staff took issue with in the prior application. While the overall property includes 0.61 acre in the
northwest portion of the site zoned LMDR District, the applicant is not proposing any parking lot
nor other improvement related to vehicle sales/display except a portion of the required retention
pond. This area of the overall site zoned LMDR District will need to be tied to the balance of the
property zoned Commercial District through the recording of a Declaration of Unity of Title prior
to the issuance of any permits.
From a general “use” standpoint, portions of the property have been developed legally
for the sale and display of vehicles. Other portions of the site were used for vehicle
sales/display, but without City authorization. The expansion of this vehicle sales/display use is
appropriate, so long as reasonable Code provisions are met and the relationship of
improvements are compatible and consistent with the surrounding area and in general to similar
uses elsewhere in the City. This Staff Report will discuss the merits of the aspects of such
expansion, and the impacts of such improvements to the various portions of the property.
The proposal includes removing the carport structure south of Building A. This carport
was installed without the benefit of a building permit, does not meet required setbacks, and was
used previously in a manner inconsistent with Code provisions. Staff was made aware during
the review of the prior Flexible Development application that a building addition was constructed
to the rear of Building A (automotive repair building) by the prior owner without the benefit of a
building permit. Research of computer and microfilm records for this address do not indicate a
permit was obtained for its construction. This addition was not part of the original letter of
violations of November 2003. An after-the-fact building permit will now be required to be
obtained in a timely manner. The new owner only repairs his own vehicles associated with the
vehicle sales/display and does not perform automotive repair to the general public.
The proposal includes the removal of a carport structure south and west of Building C.
This carport structure was installed without permits and was included in the letter of violations of
November 2003. The prior owner used this carport structure for the detailing of vehicles. The
Community Development 2007-07-17 14
letter of violations in November 2003 also indicated that Building C was remodeled and
converted from an office without the benefit of building permits. Part of the remodeling included
the installation of overhead doors on the east and west sides of the building. The present owner
and applicant desire to use Building C for storage only. An after-the-fact building permit will also
be required for Building C to be obtained in a timely manner. Detached dwellings exist to the
west of Buildings B and C.
Pursuant to Section 2-701.1 of the Community Development Code, the maximum
allowable FAR for properties with a designation of Commercial General is 0.55. As such, the
maximum development potential of the 1.70-acre parcel is 40,780 square-feet. The existing
buildings total 4,956 square-feet in size, which results in an FAR. of 0.067. Based upon the
above, the development proposal is consistent with the Countywide Future Land Use Plan with
regard to the maximum allowable FAR.
Pursuant to Section 2-701.1 of the Community Development Code, the maximum
allowable ISR. in the Commercial District is 0.95. The proposed ISR within the Commercial
District is 0.664, which is consistent with the Code provisions.
Pursuant to Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code, the minimum lot area for
vehicle sales/display ranges between 10,000 and 40,000 square-feet. The lot area for this
proposal zoned Commercial District is 74,145 square-feet, which is consistent with Code
provisions.
Pursuant to Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code, the minimum lot width for
vehicle sales/display ranges between 100 and 200 feet. The site has 464 feet of frontage along
South Missouri Avenue, which is consistent with Code provisions.
Pursuant to Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code, the minimum front
setback is 25 feet, the minimum side setback is 10 feet and the minimum rear setback is 20
feet. The proposed vehicle sales/display, being processed as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project, includes reductions to the front (east) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet
(to pavement) and from 25 feet to 13.7 feet (to existing building), a reduction to the side (south)
setback from 10 feet to 3.9 feet (to pavement) and a reduction to the rear (west) setback from
20 feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement and existing building).
The site is located along a major arterial street. Code provisions require bringing the
overall site into full compliance with Code provisions for parking and landscaping. Code
requires the provisions of a 15-foot wide landscape perimeter buffer along South Missouri
Avenue. Code setback provisions to pavement also require a 15-foot front setback. Staff, and
the Community Development Board, has consistently required the provision of a minimum 15-
foot front setback/landscape buffer for vehicle sales/display uses along major roadways.
Different than the prior application, this applicant is complying with the 15-foot setback/
landscape buffer for the entire frontage, in compliance with Code provisions. The front property
line jogs westward 10 feet at the north line of Lot 10 north of Building B. One of the violations
listed in 2003 was the installation of concrete pavement within the area south of Building B,
including within the front setback area and within the South Missouri Avenue right-of-way of this
10-foot “jog” area. The prior owner displayed vehicles within this front setback area south of
Building B and within the South Missouri Avenue right-of-way without City authorization. The
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) will not permit the installation of landscaping
within the South Missouri Avenue right-of-way other than sod unless the City maintains the
landscaping. The City’s Engineering staff has indicated the City will not accept the maintenance
Community Development 2007-07-17 15
requirement for private landscaping. The proposal indicates the removal of the pavement within
this portion of the right-of-way and the installation of sod.
The proposal includes reductions to the front (east) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to
pavement) and from 25 feet to 13.7 feet (to existing building), a reduction to the side (south)
setback from 10 feet to 3.9 feet (to pavement) and a reduction to the rear (west) setback from
20 feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement and existing building). Staff has discussed the front setback/
buffer issue along South Missouri Avenue above. Building B exists at a front setback of 13.7
feet. The proposal includes the removal of the existing pavement east of Building B. Pavement
south of Building C is presently at a setback of 3.9 feet to the south property line. Pavement
south of Building A was installed with a building permit in 1990 and is at a south setback at the
property jog of 5.8 feet and a rear setback to the west of less than five feet. Pavement exists at
a rear setback west of Building B to the south property line of 5.9 feet. The prior owner has
removed much of the landscaping within these setback/buffer areas. The width of these areas
is acceptable so long as the landscaping is upgraded to comply with Code provisions. Required
setback and buffering is met on the northernmost parcel of this request.
Pursuant to Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code, the maximum allowable
height is 25 feet. Building A is 12 feet in height and Buildings B and C are 10 feet in height at
the midpoint of the pitched roofs. These existing building heights have blended well with the
surrounding neighborhood and the development proposal is consistent with the Code with
regard to the maximum allowable height.
The overall site today has seven driveways, many left over from prior development of the
various parcels that are part of the site. The proposal reduces the number of driveways to four.
Due to the location of a median break in South Missouri Avenue, the northern two driveways are
necessary for the delivery of vehicles by transport trucks. Transport trucks will enter the site
from the northernmost driveway, traverse the site and exit the next driveway south of this
northernmost driveway adjacent to the north side of Building A. The applicant is proposing to
close a driveway east of Building A. The driveway between Buildings A and B is necessary to
provide access to customer parking and the vehicle service building. The applicant desires to
retain the first existing driveway south of Building B and close the other two southernmost
driveways. While there are Code provisions regarding the maximum number of driveways for a
site, recognizing the size, configuration and existing/proposed use of certain portions of the site,
Staff can support the four driveways proposed. The proposal includes a deviation to allow direct
access to a major arterial street (South Missouri Avenue). The overall site has no other street
access options and historically direct access for commercial uses has not been an issue. The
proposal includes a deviation to allow vehicle sales/display contiguous to residentially zoned
property and a deviation to allow the display of vehicles for sale outdoors. There have been
legitimate authorizations for the sales/display of vehicles for portions of the site, which has
occurred adjacent to the detached dwellings to the west. The deviations requested are similar
to parking lots adjacent to residentially zoned properties, with the exception that the vehicles
may not move daily.
The applicant proposes a reduction in parking from 35 spaces to 10 spaces. The
applicant has submitted information that justifies the requested reduction. Customer and
employee parking will occur between Buildings A and B. While the site plan indicates 26
spaces are proposed, it is the request of the applicant to only provide the 10 parking spaces.
Even though the Code has been amended to its present requirement, this still produces an
extreme amount of required parking for this type of vehicle sales/display (a used car dealer).
Such a parking requirement may be appropriate for a new car dealer, where there are
Community Development 2007-07-17 16
manufacturer sales quotas and large sales and service staff, but such is uncommon for a used
car dealer. An additional 16 spaces (six spaces in front of Building A and 10 spaces at the rear
of the northernmost portion of the property) will be available for overflow parking in the event
such is needed; otherwise, these 16 spaces will be utilized for vehicle sales/display. The new
owner is presently located at the intersection of South Ft. Harrison Avenue and Lakeview Road.
His long-term experience at his present location has provided less than the proposed 10 spaces
without parking issues. Prior to the issuance of any permits, the site plan will need to be
amended to reflect the 10 parking spaces for customers and employees. Adequate off-street
parking will be available to avoid on-street or off-site parking.
Pursuant to Section 3-201.D.1 of the Community Development Code, all outside
mechanical equipment shall be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or
abutting properties. There exists at the rear of Building B an air conditioning unit, which is not
visible from South Missouri Avenue and neither from the detached dwellings to the west due to
a six-foot high fence along the west property line. As such, the development proposal is
consistent with the Code with regard to screening of outdoor mechanical equipment.
Pursuant to Section 3-904.A of the Community Development Code, to minimize hazards
at street or driveway intersections, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will
obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20-
foot sight visibility triangles. The proposed site plan shows all required visibility triangles at all
driveways to be retained. The intent of the sight visibility triangles is to enable those vehicles
and/or pedestrians traversing a right-of-way and those vehicles stopped at a stop bar while
leaving a site to have a clear and unobstructed view of one another. The City’s Engineering
Department has indicated no objection to the location of the parking spaces on either side of the
driveway between Buildings A and B as proposed. These parking space encroachments upon
the sight visibility triangles will not result in the grant of a special privilege as similar reductions
have been approved elsewhere under similar circumstances. The applicant has also noted that
landscaping proposed within the visibility triangles will be maintained below 30 inches to avoid
sight visibility issues and no trees are proposed within the sight visibility triangles. Based upon
the above, positive findings can be made with respect to allowing encroachments of pavement
within the sight visibility triangles as set forth in Section 3-904.A of the Community Development
Code.
Pursuant to Section 3-911 of the Community Development Code for development that
does not involve a subdivision, all utilities including individual distribution lines shall be installed
underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. Overhead utilities exist traversing
the northern portion of the site, serving both Building A and the off-site business to the rear at
1461 South Michigan Avenue. The existing electrical service to Buildings B and C is overhead
from the overhead lines along the west property line serving the detached dwellings south of
this site. The site plan indicates the removal of the utility pole and overhead lines north of
Building A to facilitate construction. Since there have been additions or remodeling of all
buildings on-site, all on-site electric and communication lines should be placed underground in
conformance with this Code requirement. Any approval of this request should include a
condition requiring such undergrounding of the existing overhead on-site utility lines. There are
no overhead utility lines along the site’s frontage along South Missouri Avenue. Lighting along
South Missouri Avenue to illuminate the vehicle sales/display areas were installed without the
benefit of required electrical permits. The applicant is working with Progress Energy to
determine the number of light poles desired. It has been recommended to the applicant to place
the light poles adjacent to the edge of the vehicle sales/display pavement, rather than at the
front property line, so that required landscaping does not shield lighting of the vehicles.
Community Development 2007-07-17 17
Electrical permits are necessary for site lighting along the front of the site, with service lines
underground. A utility pole and light (and its overhead service) at the western edge of the
northern portion of the site (zoned LMDR) will be removed with this proposal.
Pursuant to Section 3-1202.D.1 of the Community Development Code, this site is
required a 15-foot wide landscape buffer along South Missouri Avenue, a 12-foot landscape
buffer adjacent to the detached dwellings to the west of Buildings B and C and a five-foot wide
landscape buffer adjacent to other nonresidential development (commercial development to the
west at 1461 South Michigan Avenue and the north and south property lines adjacent to South
Missouri Avenue). Buffers are to be planted with one tree every 35 feet and 100% shrub
coverage is required. The proposal includes a reduction to the landscape buffer width along
South Missouri Avenue from 15 feet to 13.7 feet (to existing building), a reduction to the
landscape buffer width along the south property line from five feet to 3.9 feet (to pavement), a
reduction to the landscape buffer width along the west property line adjacent to single family
dwellings from 12 feet to 5.9 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the landscape buffer width along
the west property line adjacent to a nonresidential use from five feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement
and existing building) and a reduction to the foundation landscaping adjacent to buildings from
five feet to zero feet.
The landscape reduction along South Missouri Avenue is the result of a portion of
Building B being too close to the front property line. Since there are other portions of Building B
farther from the front property line, and the entire paved area east of Building B is being
removed and landscaped, the reduction can be viewed as being averaged out at this location.
The existing landscape areas along the south and west property lines south of Building A need
to be planted in accordance with Code requirements. The landscape plan is unclear as to the
type of landscaping proposed within these areas. Prior to the issuance of any permits, the
landscape plan will need to be revised to clarify proposed landscaping in these areas. There is
very little to no landscaping presently within these buffers. Additionally, the existing gravel
within these buffers will need to be replaced with organic mulch in accordance with Code
requirements. The proposed landscaping, especially along South Missouri Avenue, will be a
significant enhancement for this corridor due to the amount of frontage of this property along
South Missouri Avenue. The front perimeter buffer along South Missouri Avenue will be planted
with a pittosporum hedge and latana groundcover, with American elms and crape myrtle trees.
The number of trees, based on the trees being shade or accent trees, needs to meet Code
requirements (two accent trees equal one shade tree). The other buffer and interior areas of the
site are proposed to be planted with hibiscus, simpson’s stopper, dwarf Indian hawthorn, with
dahoon holly and foxtail palm trees. The applicant is requesting a reduction to the required
foundation landscaping facing South Missouri Avenue from five feet wide to zero feet. This
reduction is only in front of Buildings A and C. Due to the location of doors on the front of these
buildings, provision of the foundation landscaping is not possible or would produce an
inadequate area to provide meaningful landscaping. The provision of the 15-foot wide front
perimeter buffer will provide significant visual improvement to the property. Due to the limited
area in front of Building C, it is anticipated that there will only be sufficient area for one row of
vehicles to be displayed.
The proposal will visually enhance views of the site both by the traveling public, patrons
and the surrounding primarily commercial neighborhood. Further, with additional plantings of
landscape material acceptable to the Planning Department, the landscape treatment proposed
in the comprehensive landscape program will be demonstrably more attractive than landscaping
otherwise permitted under the minimum landscape standards. The proposed landscape
Community Development 2007-07-17 18
treatment will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate vicinity of the
parcel proposed for development.
The development proposal includes the construction of a dumpster enclosure meeting
Code requirements on the north side of the property at the rear of the parking/vehicle
sales/display area adjacent to the commercial property to the north. This location will permit the
trash truck adequate ingress/egress and turning movements on-site. Section 3-201.D.1
requires the enclosure to be of materials and colors consistent with those used with the
proposed building. The proposed solid waste facility has been found to be acceptable by the
City’s Solid Waste Department.
The proposal includes the removal of Sign B east of Building A and Sign A east of
Building B. Permits for Signs A and B could not be found and it was noted in the letter of
violations of November 2003 that these signs were altered also without permits. Due to the
property width of this site, more than one freestanding sign could be appropriate. However, the
proposal is to only construct one monument sign in front of Building A for this site.
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject
property.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meetings of June 7,
2007, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to move forward to the CDB,
based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact: 1) That the 2.31 total acres is located on the west side of South
Missouri Avenue, south of Bellevue Boulevard and 200 feet north of Woodlawn Street; 2) That
the overall lot is “L” shaped and has 464 feet of frontage along South Missouri Avenue and the
northern leg of the property extends approximately 496 feet deep from South Missouri Avenue;
3) That the majority of the site is zoned Commercial District (1.70 acres), with the Commercial
zoning extending 297.6 feet deep from South Missouri Avenue along the north property line; 4)
That the westernmost 199.23 feet along the northern property line (0.61 acre) is zoned Low
Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District; 5) That vehicle sales and display previously
occurred over the entire property, however, portions of the property had not been properly
authorized through appropriate City approvals for such use; 6) That a prior proposal to develop
the entire area, including that portion zoned LMDR District, with a vehicle sales establishment
was reviewed by the CDB on September 20, October 18 and December 20, 2005 (Case
FLD2003-08039). Case FLD2003-08039 was withdrawn by the applicant at the December 20,
2005, CDB meeting; 7) That the development proposal is to permit vehicle sales/display in the
Commercial District only, similar to the prior application; 8) That, while the overall property
includes 0.61 acre in the northwest portion of the site zoned LMDR District, the applicant is not
proposing any parking lot nor other improvement related to vehicle sales/display except a
portion of the required retention pond; 9) That the expansion of this vehicle sales/display use is
appropriate, so long as reasonable Code provisions are met and the relationship of
improvements are compatible and consistent with the surrounding area and in general to similar
uses elsewhere in the City; 10) That the proposal includes removing the carport structure south
of Building A and the removal of a carport structure south and west of Building C; 11) That a
building addition was constructed to the rear of Building A (automotive repair building) by the
prior owner without the benefit of a building permit and will require an after-the-fact building
permit to be obtained in a timely manner; 12) That, different than the prior application, this
applicant is complying with the 15-foot setback/landscape buffer for the entire frontage (except
due to the location of Building B at 13.7 feet, in compliance with Code provisions; 13) That,
Community Development 2007-07-17 19
while setback reductions are requested on various areas of the site, the width of these areas is
acceptable so long as the landscaping is upgraded to comply with Code provisions; 14) That the
proposal reduces the number of driveways from seven to four; 15) That the applicant proposes
a reduction in parking from 35 spaces to 10 spaces, which is justified given the type and
operation of the use; 16) That the proposed landscaping, especially along South Missouri
Avenue, will be a significant enhancement for this corridor due to the amount of frontage of this
property along South Missouri Avenue; and 17) That there are current outstanding Code
Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
Conclusions of Law: 1) That the development proposal is inconsistent with the
Standards as per Table 2-704 of the Community Development Code; 2) That the development
proposal is inconsistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-704.C of the Community
Development Code; 3) That the development proposal is inconsistent with the General
Standards for Level Two Approvals as per Section 3-913 of the Community Development Code;
and 4) That the development proposal is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Landscape
Program criteria as per Section 3-1202.G of the Community Development Code.
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development approval to permit vehicle sales/display in the Commercial District with reductions
to the front (east) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to pavement) and from 25 feet to 13.7 feet (to
existing building), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to 3.9 feet (to pavement),
a reduction to the rear (west) setback from 20 feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement and existing
building), a reduction to required parking from 35 spaces to 10 spaces, a deviation to allow
vehicle sales/display contiguous to residentially-zoned property, a deviation to allow the display
of vehicles for sale outdoors and a deviation to allow direct access to a major arterial street, as
a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-704.C, and a
reduction to the landscape buffer width along South Missouri Avenue from 15 feet to 13.7 feet
(to existing building), a reduction to the landscape buffer width along the south property line
from five feet to 3.9 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the landscape buffer width along the west
property line adjacent to single family dwellings from 12 feet to 5.9 feet (to pavement), a
reduction to the landscape buffer width along the west property line adjacent to a nonresidential
use from five feet to 3.5 feet (to pavement and existing building) and a reduction to the
foundation landscaping adjacent to buildings from five feet to zero feet, as a Comprehensive
Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. with the following Conditions of
Approval: 1) That a Declaration of Unity of Title for all parcels be recorded in the public records
prior to the issuance of any permits; 2) That outdoor vehicle display be confined to those areas
identified on the approved site plan, not encroach into any customer or employee parking
space, drive aisles or landscaped area and display areas be outlined with paint on the
pavement surface prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion. It shall be the applicant's
obligation to maintain the display painted outlines on the parking surface; 3) That the use of
outdoor phone ringer or pager systems be prohibited; 4) That the on-loading or off-loading of
vehicles from any transport vehicle occur on-site and not within any abutting right-of-way; 5)
That the applicant submit for permits to construct/reconstruct all site improvements (all non-
buildings) by October 17, 2007; 6) That, prior to the issuance of any permits, the site and
landscape plans be amended to reflect the 10 parking spaces for customers and employees
reflected in the parking reduction request and to improve landscape buffers and interior
landscape areas to meet Code requirements, acceptable to the Planning Department; 7) That
the carport structures south of Building A and south and west of Building C be removed by
October 17, 2007. Demolition permits shall be obtained from the City; 8) That Building C be
used for storage only for the used car dealership and the applicant submit for all after-the-fact
building permits for the remodeling of Building C, including the installation of overhead doors on
Community Development 2007-07-17 20
the east and west façades, by October 17, 2007; 9) That the applicant submit for an after-the-
fact building permit for the addition to the rear of Building A by October 17, 2007; 10) That the
two existing freestanding signs be removed and replaced with new freestanding signage, which
shall be monument-style sign a maximum six feet in height, designed to match the exterior
materials and color of the building. Any attached signage shall meet Code requirements; 11)
That the applicant submit for after-the-fact electrical permits for the outdoor lighting along South
Missouri Avenue by October 17, 2007; and 12) That prior to the issuance of the Certificate of
Completion for the site improvements, the existing overhead utility lines be placed underground
through appropriate permits.
In response to questions, Mr. Wells said grass will cover the western portion of the
property, west of the retention area. The applicant also will remove much of the night lighting.
Conditions of approval address the need for enhanced landscaping. There will be significant
landscaping along Missouri.
Keith Zayac, representative, reviewed the request, stating the project is a significant
improvement to the property.
Eleanor Breland requested party status.
Bernice Jenkins requested party status.
Member Coates moved to grant Eleanor Breland and Bernice Jenkins party status.
Party Status Holder Eleanor Breland expressed concern the retention pond could
overflow into backyards, breed mosquitoes, and become a major nuisance if the business
closes. She suggested the pond be relocated to the property’s south side and questioned future
maintenance plans. She opposed requested easements and variances and additional outdoor
lighting.
Party Status Holder Bernice Jenkins said she is a long-time resident and cannot afford to
move.
Mr. Wells said the property owner must maintain the retention pond.
Two persons spoke in support of the application.
Mr. Wells said the applicant’s representative had indicated that outfall from the retention
pond would flow onto Missouri Avenue, not to the property’s rear. Staff will ensure the applicant
shields outdoor lighting from neighboring properties.
Mr. Zayac stated it may be possible to relocate the retention pond. He said the outdoor
light on the west end of the property will be removed and no outdoor lighting will face
residences. He said SWFWMD issues periodic maintenance requests and a professional
engineer must certify that the retention pond is functional. The City also requires pond
maintenance. He said the applicant has made great efforts to address all residents’ concerns.
Ms. Breland said neighbors would support the proposed changes and want assurance
that the retention pond will be maintained.
Community Development 2007-07-17 21
Mr. Zayac said the applicant performed an area-wide investigation of outfalls. The City
requires a 100-year pond with outfall. He said no inlets connect the pond to the neighborhood.
An underground pipe to the inlet on Missouri Avenue would accommodate overflow. He said
the property’s elevation is fairly high and should drain quickly.
Member Dame moved to approve Case FLD2007-02006 on today’s Consent Agenda,
based on evidence in the record, including the application and the Staff Report, and hereby
adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law stated in the Staff Report, with conditions of
approval as listed, including a condition that the applicant remove outdoor lighting from the
motioncarried
residential area. The was duly seconded and unanimously.
The project’s engineer was commended.
4.
Item Pulled from the Consent Agenda
Case:
FLD2007-02003 – 69 Bay Esplanade Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant:
City of Clearwater.
Representative:
E. D. Armstrong III, Esq., Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP
(P.O. Box 1368, Clearwater, FL 33757; phone: 727-461-1818; fax 727-441-8617; e-mail:
ed@jpfirm.com).
Location:
4.26 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Mandalay
Avenue and Bay Esplanade.
Atlas Page:
258A.
Zoning District:
Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) and Preservation (P) Districts.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to permit in the submerged lands adjacent to the
Clearwater Beach Recreation Center a 42-slip marina dock in conjunction with the
Sandpearl Resort project (39 wet slips and three day slips, of which 15 slips will be for public
usage and 27 slips will be leased to the Sandpearl Resort) of 11,343 square-feet with a
deviation to allow the docks and tie poles to exceed the 25 percent of the width of the
waterway and a reduction to required parking from 24 to zero spaces, under the provisions
of Sections 2-1502.A, 3-601.C.3 and 3-603.
Proposed Use:
Docks of 39 wet slips and three-day slips, of which 15 slips will be for public
usage and 27 slips will be leased to the Sandpearl Resort.
Neighborhood Association:
Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive,
Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-443-2168; e-mail: papamurphy@aol.com); Clearwater
Neighborhoods Coalition (Joe Evich, President, P.O. Box 8204, Clearwater, FL 33758).
Presenter:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Member Dame moved to accept Wayne Wells as an expert witness in the fields of
motion
zoning, site plan analysis, code administration, and planning in general. The was duly
carried
seconded and unanimously.
Mr. Wells reviewed the request. The 4.26 acres is located at the southeast corner of the
intersection of Mandalay Avenue and Bay Esplanade. The site is currently developed with the
Clearwater Beach Recreation Center, with a recreation building on the east with basketball
courts, pool and tennis courts on the west and a parking lot between. The site has
approximately 1,024 feet of waterfront frontage on Clearwater Harbor. On January 20, 2005,
City Council approved Development Agreement Case DVA2004-00005 in conjunction with Case
FLD2004-09068 for the property at 470 and 500 Mandalay Avenue and 11 Baymont Street to
construct the Sandpearl project, a mixed-use (253 overnight accommodation units at 68.56
units/acre on hotel portion of site and a height of 95 feet, 119 attached dwellings at 49.38
units/acre on residential/retail portion of site and a height of 150 feet and 11,000 square-feet of
Community Development 2007-07-17 22
retail sales and services at a FAR of 0.105 on residential/retail portion of site). A portion of the
adopted Development Agreement included the establishment of a maximum of 57 boat slips in
the submerged lands adjacent to the Clearwater Beach Recreation Center. The Sandpearl
project is under construction and much of it is nearing completion. An amendment to the
adopted Development Agreement to update the site plan and provisions to reflect the proposed
dock design and the reduced number of slips under this application is also on the July 17, 2007,
CDB agenda for recommendation to City Council (Case DVA2007-00002).
A City fire station and park is located across Mandalay Avenue to the west side of this
site. There are overnight accommodations, retail sales and a church to the north of this site
across Bay Esplanade. The Belle Harbor attached dwelling project is located to the south
across the basin these proposed docks are to be located. The Belle Harbor project has docks
within the same basin as these proposed docks and on the east side of their property.
The development proposal consists of the construction of a 11,343 square-foot, 42 slip
dock, of which 27 slips will be leased to the Sandpearl project and 15 slips will be designated to
serve the public. Of the 27 slips to be leased to the Sandpearl project, there are three day-slips
on the west side designated for use by the Sandpearl hotel that will not be leased to others.
The three day-slips on the west side are accessed separately from the other 39 slips by a
sidewalk running along the seawall from the sidewalk within the Mandalay Avenue right-of-way
(currently exists). In accordance with the proposed amended Development Agreement, boat
lifts may be installed on a maximum of 13 of the 27 slips leased to the Sandpearl project (or a
maximum of 50% of the total Sandpearl slips if the number is reduced below 27 slips). The
majority of the slips (39 slips) will be accessed from the eastern end of the parking lot close to
the Beach Recreation Center by a sidewalk/elevated walkway, which will then have a main
access walkway following the edge of the water. All slips will be south of this main access
walkway.
The docks are on City property and will be owned by the City. The Development
Agreement allows the developer of the Sandpearl project to construct the docks at their
expense. The docks serve two purposes; one is to provide public day slips, where the slips will
be open and available to the public from 5:00 a.m.to midnight, and the other is to provide 24
slips leased to the Sandpearl project for long-term docking of private vessels and three day-slips
for the Sandpearl hotel. Since slips are to be leased to owners, tenants and guests of the
Sandpearl project, including Beach Club members and other owners and tenants that own or
lease residences within the geographical area bordered on the west by the Gulf of Mexico, on
the east by Clearwater Bay, on the north by Rockaway Street and on the south by Papaya
Street, these docks are deemed to be a marina. Restroom facilities are available at the
Recreation Center and pool during business hours and are available at the Sandpearl project.
A marina is subject to the relevant review criteria of Sections 2-1502.A, 3-601.C.3 and 3-
603. The proposed marina is not located in any of the areas of environmental significance listed
in the criteria. There are no commercial activities proposed at this marina. There are no live-
aboard vessels allowed and no fueling facilities or domestic sewage pump-out facilities
proposed. The restriction on overnight use of the public slips does provide for the mooring of a
fireboat or other boats operated by the City or other municipal or governmental entities for public
purposes. The setback criteria of Section 2-1502.A are not applicable. Access to the three day-
slips dock on the west side is from a sidewalk along the seawall, which exists today to an
existing dock, from the sidewalk within the Mandalay Avenue right-of-way. Access to the
majority of the docks is proposed from the parking lot close to the Beach Recreation Center on
Community Development 2007-07-17 23
the east side of the property, accessed from Bay Esplanade. Bay Esplanade is not an arterial
roadway.
The proposal includes a reduction to required parking from 24 to zero parking spaces.
The adopted Development Agreement and the proposed amended Development Agreement
provides a shuttle service from the Sandpearl project for persons needing to access their boats
in one of the leased Sandpearl slips. Boat owners and their guests are required to park their
vehicles at the Sandpearl project and either use the shuttle service or walk to the docks. Boat
owners who live within the specified geographical area set out in the amended Development
Agreement and who have leased one of the Sandpearl slips are expected to walk from their
residences to the boat dock or to utilize the shuttle service. The specified geographic area is
small enough and within close proximity of these docks to justify the parking reduction, as well
as requiring parking at the Sandpearl project if parking is necessary by the boat owner or
guests. Parking at this City site is metered with a maximum length of stay of five hours, where
violators are ticketed each hour. Parking in this public parking lot is enforced 8:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m. Monday through Saturday and 12:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday.
Access to the docks from the City parking lot and required fire lines for the docks will be
on the upland portion of the site. Due to the existence of trees and other plantings, as well as
water, sewer and irrigation lines, modification of the access and fire line may be necessary at
the permitting stage of development. The applicant will work with the City’s Parks and
Recreation Department to minimize interference with these upland features.
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject
property.
With regard to setbacks, the dimensional standards criteria set forth in Section 3-
601.C.3.h of the Community Development Code state that docks shall be located no closer to
any property line as extended into the water than the distance equivalent to 10% of the width of
the waterfront property line. The width of the waterfront property line is 1,024 feet; therefore the
proposed dock must be set back from the east and west property lines a minimum of 102.4 feet.
As proposed, the dock will be set back from the west and east property lines in excess of this
requirement with distances of 129 feet and 298 feet (from the east end of the dock to the
property line at Bay Esplanade), respectively.
With regard to length, commercial docks shall not extend from the mean high water line
or seawall of the subject property more than 75% of the width of the subject property as
measured along the waterfront property line; thus the length of the dock cannot exceed 768
feet. As proposed, the dock has a maximum length of 164 feet. The docks, as designed,
extend beyond the 25% of the waterway. The proposal includes a deviation to allow the length
of the docks and tie poles to exceed the 25% of the width of the waterway. The docks extend
beyond this 25% waterway line by 69 feet at its maximum point. This waterway between the
subject property and Belle Harbor to the south is an artificial basin created by the filling of
submerged lands in 1926. Historically, this basin has been developed with a covered docking
facility from approximately 1942 to 1973. The Belle Harbor docks were constructed in 2003
(approved by the CDB on September 17, 2002, under FLD2002-07020). Within this basin the
Belle Harbor docks extend from their seawall 40 feet into the water. Between these proposed
docks and the existing Belle Harbor docks there will be a minimum navigational clearance of 77
feet at its closest location, exceeding the 50-foot clearance recommended by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and the Army Corps of Engineers. The City’s Harbormaster does not have any
navigational issues. The same threshold that applies to length also applies to width; therefore
Community Development 2007-07-17 24
the width of the proposed dock cannot exceed 768 feet. The dock has a proposed width of 720
feet; thus compliance with this standard is achieved. While not consistent with existing, older
and shorter docks, the proposed docks are consistent with newer docks required to meet
today’s Codes, wherein the length takes into account the water depth at mean low water.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of April 5 and
June 7, 2007, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to move forward to the
CDB, based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact: 1) That the 4.26 acres is located at the southeast corner of the
intersection of Mandalay Avenue and Bay Esplanade; 2) That the site is currently developed
with the Clearwater Beach Recreation Center, with a recreation building on the east with
basketball courts, pool and tennis courts on the west and a parking lot between; 3) That on
January 20, 2005, City Council approved Development Agreement Case DVA2004-00005 in
conjunction with Case FLD2004-09068 for the property at 470 and 500 Mandalay Avenue and
11 Baymont Street to construct the Sandpearl project, a mixed-use (overnight accommodation
units, attached dwellings and retail sales and services). A portion of the adopted Development
Agreement included the establishment of a maximum of 57 boat slips in the submerged lands
adjacent to the Clearwater Beach Recreation Center; 4) That the site has approximately 1,024
feet of waterfront frontage on Clearwater Harbor; 5) That the development proposal consists of
the construction of a 11,343 square-foot, 42 slip dock, of which 27 slips will be leased to the
Sandpearl project and 15 slips will be designated to serve the public; 6) That a companion
application to amend the adopted Development Agreement to update the site plan and
provisions to reflect the proposed dock design and the reduced number of slips under this
application is also on the July 17, 2007, CDB agenda for recommendation to City Council (Case
DVA2007-00002); 7) That, while the docks are on City property and will be owned by the City,
the Development Agreement allows the developer of the Sandpearl project to construct the
docks at their expense; 8) That of the 27 slips to be leased to the Sandpearl project, there are
three day-slips on the west side designated for use by the Sandpearl hotel that will not be
leased to others; 9) That 24 of the slips are to be leased to owners, tenants, and guests of the
Sandpearl project, including Beach Club members and other owners and tenants that own or
lease residences within the geographical area bordered on the west by the Gulf of Mexico, on
the east by Clearwater Bay, on the north by Rockaway Street and on the south by Papaya
Street; 10) That since slips are to be leased to individuals the docks are deemed a marina; 11)
That the 15 public day slips will be open and available to the public from 5:00 a.m. to midnight;
12) That the proposal includes a reduction to required parking from 24 to zero parking spaces
for those 24 slips to be leased to owners, tenants and guests of the Sandpearl project, including
Beach Club members and other owners and tenants that own or lease residences within the
specified geographical area; 13) That the adopted Development Agreement and the proposed
amended Development Agreement provides a shuttle service from the Sandpearl project for
persons needing to access their boats in one of the leased Sandpearl slips; 14) That the
proposed dock meets the required setbacks and width criteria of the Code; 15) The proposal
includes a deviation to allow the length of the docks and tie poles to exceed the 25% of the
width of the waterway by 69 feet at its maximum point; 16) That the waterway between the
subject property and Belle Harbor to the south is an artificial basin that had a covered docking
facility from approximately 1942 to 1973; 17) That the Belle Harbor docks, constructed in 2003,
extend from their seawall 40 feet into the water; 18) That between these proposed docks and
the existing Belle Harbor docks there will be a minimum navigational clearance of 77 feet at its
closest location, exceeding the 50-foot clearance recommended by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and the Army Corps of Engineers; and 19) That there are no outstanding Code
Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
Community Development 2007-07-17 25
Conclusions of Law: 1) That the adopted Development Agreement between the City and
Sandpearl developers, as well as the proposed amended Development Agreement for
consideration on the same July 17, 2007, CDB agenda, included the establishment of boat slips
in the submerged lands adjacent to the Clearwater Beach Recreation Center; 2) That the
development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-1502.A of the
Community Development Code (Marinas); 3) That the development proposal is consistent with
the commercial dock review criteria as per Section 3-601.C.3 of the Community Development
Code; 4) That the development proposal is consistent with the marina review criteria as per
Section 3-603 of the Community Development Code; and 5) That the development proposal is
consistent with the General Applicability criteria as per Section 3-913.A of the Community
Development Code.
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit in the submerged lands adjacent to the Clearwater Beach
Recreation Center a 42-slip marina dock in conjunction with the Sandpearl Resort project (39
wet slips and three day slips, of which 15 slips will be for public usage and 27 slips will be
leased to the Sandpearl Resort) of 11,343 square-feet with a deviation to allow the docks and
tie poles to exceed the 25% of the width of the waterway and a reduction to required parking
from 24 to zero spaces, under the provisions of Sections 2-1502.A, 3-601.C.3 and 3-603, with
Conditions of Approval: 1) That approval of this Flexible Development case is subject to the
approval of a Development Agreement with the City (Case DVA2007-00002); 2) That a building
permit to install the fire hydrants and fire risers for the docks, acceptable to the Fire and Parks
and Recreation Departments, and upland sidewalk be submitted prior to Planning Department
sign-off on the County dock permit application. Prior to completion of the docks, the fire riser
and upland sidewalk permit shall be finalized; 3) That the docks be handicap accessible.
Compliance with this requirement shall be shown on plans prior to the issuance of any permits;
4) That a tree survey, with canopies, be submitted prior to the issuance of the upland building
permit, and that these trees be shown on the upland site plan to minimize conflicts with the
required fire line and access to the docks. In the event there are impacts with existing tree root
systems, the developer shall provide a tree aeration system acceptable to the City; 5) That there
be no live-aboard vessels in any of the slips, no fueling facilities and no domestic sewage pump-
out facilities at this site; 6) That one or more of the public use slips may be used in the future for
a City fire boat or other public purpose vessels, as provided for in the Amended Development
Agreement DVA2007-00002; 7) That boats moored at the 24 Sandpearl Resort slips be in
compliance with the Rental Agreement, as approved by City Council through the Amended
Development Agreement DVA2007-00002; 8) That lighting be provided at the ends of the docks
for night visibility; 9) That signage be permanently installed on the docks and at the entrance to
the docks listing the emergency contact phone numbers for both dock tenants, the general
public and local residents to report concerns of public safety and environmental protection; 10)
That boat lifts shall only be permitted in the Sandpearl leased slips, in a number and location
complying with the Amended Development Agreement DVA2007-00002; 11) That signage be
permanently installed on the docks or at the entrance to the docks containing wording warning
boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and manatees in the vicinity; and 12) That a
copy of the SWFWMD and/or FDEP Permit and Corps of Engineer's Permit, if applicable, be
submitted to the Planning Department prior to commencement of construction.
Mr. Wells requested that Condition 4 be modified: That prior to the issuance of the
upland building permit, the boardwalk and fire suppression system be field staked to ensure
avoidance of impacts on existing trees and their root systems. In the event there are impacts
Community Development 2007-07-17 26
with existing tree root systems, the developer shall provide a tree aeration system acceptable to
the City.
Ed Armstrong, representative, agreed with staff’s analysis. He said the project was
reduced from 54 to 42 boat slips in response to neighbor concerns. He said the project
complies with Code and will be a great waterfront amenity for the City.
One person spoke in support and one person spoke in opposition to the application.
In response to concerns, Mr. Wells said the Marine & Aviation Director has no navigation
objections to the proposal. Sandpearl residents must walk or ride a shuttle to the docks.
Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides said the referendum issue regarding City-owned
docks is not at issue today.
Mr. Armstrong said staff has indicated that docks historically have been on this site. He
said staff presented expert testimony regarding navigation issues. He felt reference to the City
Charter was misspoken. He said a referendum is not required. He said options imbedded in
the lease favor the City. He said the ability to construct these docks was a condition of the
Sandpearl’s construction.
Discussion ensued with comments that the 25% waterway rule applies to open water
while this is a basin. Concern was expressed that the term “low profile boatlifts” is not defined.
Limiting the height of pilings and boatlifts to 36 inches above the dock was recommended. Mr.
Armstrong stated the plans indicate the height will be five feet.
Ryan Oliver, representative, said under typical marina design, a five-foot height would
permit installation of a wide variety of lifts. Limiting the elevation to three feet would impact the
ability to install lifts. Mr. Armstrong said only 13 of 42 slips could install boatslips.
It was remarked that no low profile manufacturing companies’ products exceed 48
inches with most level with the dock. It was stated that staff supports the design and application
as submitted.
Member Coates moved to approve Case FLD2007-02003, on today’s Consent Agenda,
based on evidence in the record, including the application, and the Staff Report, and hereby
adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law stated in the Staff Report, with conditions of
motion
approval as listed, including Condition 4 as modified today. The was duly seconded.
Members Coates, Tallman, Behar, and Chair Fritsch voted “Aye”; Member Dame voted “Nay.”
carried
Motion .
Community Development 2007-07-17 27
5.
Item Pulled from Consent Agenda
Level Three Application
Case:
DVA2007-00002 – 470 and 500 Mandalay Avenue and 11 Baymont Street
Owner/Applicant:
The Sandpearl Resort, LLC and The Residences at Sandpearl Resort,
LLC.
Representative:
E. D. Armstrong III, Esq., Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP
(P.O. Box 1368, Clearwater, FL 33757; phone: 727-461-1818; fax 727-441-8617; e-mail:
ed@jpfirm.com).
Location:
9.77 total acres (hotel site 7.36 acres; 3.69 acres zoned Tourist District; 3.67
acres zoned Open Space/Recreation District; residential site 2.41 acres) located on the west
side of Mandalay Avenue between San Marco and Ambler Streets.
Atlas Page:
267A
Request
: Review of, and recommendation to the City Council, of an amendment to an
adopted Development Agreement between The Sandpearl Resort, LLC (formerly known as
CBR Development I, LLC) and The Residences at Sandpearl Resort, LLC (formerly known
as CBR Development II, LLC) and the City of Clearwater (previously DVA2004-00005
approved by City Council on January 20, 2005) relating to the provision of a 42-slip marina
dock in conjunction with the Sandpearl Resort project (39 wet slips and three day slips, of
which 15 slips will be for public usage and 27 slips will be leased to the Sandpearl Resort) in
the submerged lands adjacent to the Clearwater Beach Recreation Center (69 Bay
Esplanade).
Proposed Use:
Mixed-use (253 overnight accommodation units at 68.56 units/acre on hotel
portion of site and a height of 95 feet, 119 attached dwellings at 49.38 units/acre on
residential/retail portion of site and a height of 150 feet and 11,000 square-feet of retail sales
and services at a FAR of 0.105 on residential/retail portion of site).
Neighborhood Associations:
Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon
Drive, Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-443-2168; e-mail: papamurphy@aol.com);
Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Joe Evich, President, P.O. Box 8204, Clearwater, FL
33758).
Presenter:
Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III.
Mr. Wells reviewed the request. The 4.26-acre site is located at the southeast corner of
the intersection of Mandalay Avenue and Bay Esplanade. The site is currently developed with
the Clearwater Beach Recreation Center, with a recreation building on the east with basketball
courts, pool and tennis courts on the west and a parking lot between. The site has
approximately 1,024 feet of waterfront frontage on Clearwater Harbor. On January 20, 2005,
City Council approved Development Agreement Case DVA2004-00005 in conjunction with Case
FLD2004-09068 for the property at 470 and 500 Mandalay Avenue and 11 Baymont Street to
construct the Sandpearl project, a mixed-use (253 overnight accommodation units at 68.56
units/acre on hotel portion of site and a height of 95 feet, 119 attached dwellings at 49.38
units/acre on residential/retail portion of site and a height of 150 feet and 11,000 square-feet of
retail sales and services at a FAR of 0.105 on residential/retail portion of site). A portion of the
adopted Development Agreement included the establishment of a maximum of 57 boat slips in
the submerged lands adjacent to the Clearwater Beach Recreation Center. The Sandpearl
project is under construction and much of it is nearing completion. An amendment to the
adopted Development Agreement to update the site plan and provisions to reflect the proposed
dock design and the reduced number of slips under this application is also on the July 17, 2007,
CDB agenda for recommendation to City Council (Case DVA2007-00002).
A City fire station and park is located across Mandalay Avenue to the west side of this
site. There are overnight accommodations, retail sales, and a church to the north of this site
Community Development 2007-07-17 28
across Bay Esplanade. The Belle Harbor attached dwelling project is located to the south
across the basin from where these proposed docks. The Belle Harbor project has docks within
the same basin as these proposed docks and on the east side of their property.
The development proposal consists of the construction of a 11,343 square-foot, 42 slip
dock, of which 27 slips will be leased to the Sandpearl project and 15 slips will be designated to
serve the public. Of the 27 slips to be leased to the Sandpearl project, there are three day-slips
on the west side designated for use by the Sandpearl hotel that will not be leased to others.
The three day-slips on the west side are accessed separately from the other 39 slips by a
sidewalk running along the seawall from the sidewalk within the Mandalay Avenue right-of-way
(currently exists). In accordance with the proposed amended Development Agreement, boat
lifts may be installed on a maximum of 13 of the 27 slips leased to the Sandpearl project (or a
maximum of 50% of the total Sandpearl slips if the number is reduced below 27 slips). The
majority of the slips (39 slips) will be accessed from the eastern end of the parking lot close to
the Beach Recreation Center by a sidewalk/elevated walkway, which will then have a main
access walkway following the edge of the water. All slips will be south of this main access
walkway.
The docks are on City property and will be owned by the City. The Development
Agreement allows the developer of the Sandpearl project to construct the docks at their
expense. The docks serve two purposes; one is to provide public day slips, where the slips will
be open and available to the public from 5:00 a.m. to midnight, and the other is to provide 24
slips leased to the Sandpearl project for long-term docking of private vessels and three day-slips
for the Sandpearl hotel. Since slips are to be leased to owners, tenants and guests of the
Sandpearl project, including Beach Club members and other owners and tenants that own or
lease residences within the geographical area bordered on the west by the Gulf of Mexico, on
the east by Clearwater Bay, on the north by Rockaway Street and on the south by Papaya
Street, these docks are deemed to be a marina. Restroom facilities are available at the
Recreation Center and pool during business hours and are available at the Sandpearl project.
A marina is subject to the relevant review criteria of Sections 2-1502.A, 3-601.C.3 and 3-
603. The proposed marina is not located in any of the areas of environmental significance listed
in the criteria. There are no commercial activities proposed at this marina. There are no live-
aboard vessels allowed and no fueling facilities or domestic sewage pump-out facilities
proposed. The restriction on overnight use of the public slips does provide for the mooring of a
fireboat or other boats operated by the City or other municipal or governmental entities for public
purposes. The setback criteria of Section 2-1502.A are not applicable. Access to the three day-
slips dock on the west side is from a sidewalk basically along the seawall, which exists today to
an existing dock, from the sidewalk within the Mandalay Avenue right-of-way. Access to the
majority of the docks is proposed from the parking lot close to the Beach Recreation Center on
the east side of the property, accessed from Bay Esplanade. Bay Esplanade is not an arterial
roadway.
The proposal includes a reduction to required parking from 24 to zero parking spaces.
The adopted Development Agreement and the proposed amended Development Agreement
provides a shuttle service from the Sandpearl project for persons needing to access their boats
in one of the leased Sandpearl slips. Boat owners and their guests are required to park their
vehicles at the Sandpearl project and either use the shuttle service or walk to the docks. Boat
owners who live within the specified geographical area set out in the amended Development
Agreement and who have leased one of the Sandpearl slips are expected to walk from their
residences to the boat dock or to utilize the shuttle service. The specified geographic area is
Community Development 2007-07-17 29
small enough and within close proximity of these docks to justify the parking reduction, as well
as requiring parking at the Sandpearl project if parking is necessary by the boat owner or
guests. Parking at this City site is metered with a maximum length of stay of five hours, where
violators are ticketed each hour. Parking in this public parking lot is enforced 8:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m. Monday through Saturday and 12:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday.
Access to the docks from the City parking lot and required fire lines for the docks will be
on the upland portion of the site. Due to the existence of trees and other plantings, as well as
water, sewer and irrigation lines, modification of the access and fire line may be necessary at
the permitting stage of development. The applicant will work with the City’s Parks and
Recreation Department to minimize interference with these upland features.
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject
property.
With regard to setbacks, the dimensional standards criteria set forth in Section 3-
601.C.3.h of the Community Development Code state that docks shall be located no closer to
any property line as extended into the water than the distance equivalent to 10% of the width of
the waterfront property line. The width of the waterfront property line is 1,024 feet; therefore the
proposed dock must be set back from the east and west property lines a minimum of 102.4 feet.
As proposed, the dock will be set back from the west and east property lines in excess of this
requirement with distances of 129 feet and 298 feet (from the east end of the dock to the
property line at Bay Esplanade), respectively.
With regard to length, commercial docks shall not extend from the mean high water line
or seawall of the subject property more than 75% of the width of the subject property as
measured along the waterfront property line; thus the length of the dock cannot exceed 768
feet. As proposed, the dock has a maximum length of 164 feet. The docks, as designed,
extend beyond the 25% of the waterway. The proposal includes a deviation to allow the length
of the docks and tie poles to exceed the 25% of the width of the waterway. The docks extend
beyond this 25% of the waterway line by 69 feet at its maximum point. This waterway between
the subject property and Belle Harbor to the south is an artificial basin created by the filling of
submerged lands in 1926. Historically, this basin has been developed with a covered docking
facility from approximately 1942 to 1973. The Belle Harbor docks were constructed in 2003
(approved by the CDB on September 17, 2002, under FLD2002-07020). Within this basin the
Belle Harbor docks extend from their seawall 40 feet into the water. Between these proposed
docks and the existing Belle Harbor docks there will be a minimum navigational clearance of 77
feet at its closest location, exceeding the 50-foot clearance recommended by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and the Army Corps of Engineers. The City’s Harbormaster does not have any
navigational issues with the proposal. The same threshold that applies to length also applies to
width; therefore the width of the proposed dock cannot exceed 768 feet. The dock has a
proposed width of 720 feet; thus compliance with this standard is achieved. While not
consistent with existing, older and shorter docks, the proposed docks are consistent with newer
docks required to meet today’s Codes, wherein the length takes into account the water depth at
mean low water.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of April 5 and
June 7, 2007, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to move forward to the
CDB, based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Community Development 2007-07-17 30
Findings of Fact: 1) That the 4.26 acres is located at the southeast corner of the
intersection of Mandalay Avenue and Bay Esplanade; 2) That the site is currently developed
with the Clearwater Beach Recreation Center, with a recreation building on the east with
basketball courts, pool and tennis courts on the west and a parking lot between; 3) That on
January 20, 2005, City Council approved Development Agreement Case DVA2004-00005 in
conjunction with Case FLD2004-09068 for the property at 470 and 500 Mandalay Avenue and
11 Baymont Street to construct the Sandpearl project, a mixed-use (overnight accommodation
units, attached dwellings and retail sales and services). A portion of the adopted Development
Agreement included the establishment of a maximum of 57 boat slips in the submerged lands
adjacent to the Clearwater Beach Recreation Center; 4) That the site has approximately 1,024
feet of waterfront frontage on Clearwater Harbor; 5) That the development proposal consists of
the construction of a 11,343 square-foot, 42 slip dock, of which 27 slips will be leased to the
Sandpearl project and 15 slips will be designated to serve the public; 6) That a companion
application to amend the adopted Development Agreement to update the site plan and
provisions to reflect the proposed dock design and the reduced number of slips under this
application is also on the July 17, 2007, CDB agenda for recommendation to City Council (Case
DVA2007-00002); 7) That, while the docks are on City property and will be owned by the City,
the Development Agreement allows the developer of the Sandpearl project to construct the
docks at their expense; 8) That of the 27 slips to be leased to the Sandpearl project, there are
three day-slips on the west side designated for use by the Sandpearl hotel that will not be
leased to others; 9) That 24 of the slips are to be leased to owners, tenants, and guests of the
Sandpearl project, including Beach Club members and other owners and tenants that own or
lease residences within the geographical area bordered on the west by the Gulf of Mexico, on
the east by Clearwater Bay, on the north by Rockaway Street and on the south by Papaya
Street; 10) That since slips are to be leased to individuals the docks are deemed a marina; 11)
That the 15 public day slips will be open and available to the public from 5:00 a.m. to midnight;
12) That the proposal includes a reduction to required parking from 24 to zero parking spaces
for those 24 slips to be leased to owners, tenants and guests of the Sandpearl project, including
Beach Club members and other owners and tenants that own or lease residences within the
specified geographical area; 13) That the adopted Development Agreement and the proposed
amended Development Agreement provides a shuttle service from the Sandpearl project for
persons needing to access their boats in one of the leased Sandpearl slips; 14) That the
proposed dock meets the required setbacks and width criteria of the Code; 15) The proposal
includes a deviation to allow the length of the docks and tie poles to exceed the 25% of the
width of the waterway by 69 feet at its maximum point; 16) That the waterway between the
subject property and Belle Harbor to the south is an artificial basin that had a covered docking
facility from approximately 1942 to 1973; 17) That the Belle Harbor docks, constructed in 2003,
extend from their seawall 40 feet into the water; 18) That between these proposed docks and
the existing Belle Harbor docks there will be a minimum navigational clearance of 77 feet at its
closest location, exceeding the 50-foot clearance recommended by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and the Army Corps of Engineers; and 19) That there are no outstanding Code
Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
Conclusions of Law: 1) That the adopted Development Agreement between the City and
Sandpearl developers, as well as the proposed amended Development Agreement for
consideration on the same July 17, 2007, CDB agenda, included the establishment of boat slips
in the submerged lands adjacent to the Clearwater Beach Recreation Center; 2) That the
development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-1502.A of the
Community Development Code (Marinas); 3) That the development proposal is consistent with
the commercial dock review criteria as per Section 3-601.C.3 of the Community Development
Code; 4) That the development proposal is consistent with the marina review criteria as per
Community Development 2007-07-17 31
Section 3-603 of the Community Development Code; and 5) That the development proposal is
consistent with the General Applicability criteria as per Section 3-913.A of the Community
Development Code.
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development application to permit in the submerged lands adjacent to the Clearwater Beach
Recreation Center a 42-slip marina dock in conjunction with the Sandpearl Resort project (39
wet slips and three day slips, of which 15 slips will be for public usage and 27 slips will be
leased to the Sandpearl Resort) of 11,343 square-feet with a deviation to allow the docks and
tie poles to exceed the 25 percent of the width of the waterway and a reduction to required
parking from 24 to zero spaces, under the provisions of Sections 2-1502.A, 3-601.C.3 and 3-
603, with Conditions of Approval: 1) That approval of this Flexible Development case is subject
to the approval of a Development Agreement with the City (Case DVA2007-00002); 2) That a
building permit to install the fire hydrants and fire risers for the docks, acceptable to the Fire and
Parks and Recreation Departments, and upland sidewalk be submitted prior to Planning
Department sign-off on the County dock permit application. Prior to completion of the docks,
the fire riser and upland sidewalk permit shall be finalized; 3) That the docks be handicap
accessible. Compliance with this requirement shall be shown on plans prior to the issuance of
any permits; 4) That a tree survey, with canopies, be submitted prior to the issuance of the
upland building permit, and that these trees be shown on the upland site plan to minimize
conflicts with the required fire line and access to the docks. In the event there are impacts with
existing tree root systems, the developer shall provide a tree aeration system acceptable to the
City; 5) That there be no live-aboard vessels in any of the slips, no fueling facilities and no
domestic sewage pump-out facilities at this site; 6) That one or more of the public use slips may
be used in the future for a City fire boat or other public purpose vessels, as provided for in the
Amended Development Agreement DVA2007-00002; 7) That boats moored at the 24 Sandpearl
Resort slips be in compliance with the Rental Agreement, as approved by City Council through
the Amended Development Agreement DVA2007-00002; 8) That lighting be provided at the
ends of the docks for night visibility; 9) That signage be permanently installed on the docks and
at the entrance to the docks listing the emergency contact phone numbers for both dock
tenants, the general public and local residents to report concerns of public safety and
environmental protection; 10) That boat lifts shall only be permitted in the Sandpearl leased
slips, in a number and location complying with the Amended Development Agreement
DVA2007-00002; 11) That signage be permanently installed on the docks or at the entrance to
the docks containing wording warning boaters of the existence of protected sea grasses and
manatees in the vicinity; and 12) That a copy of the SWFWMD and/or FDEP Permit and Corps
of Engineer's Permit, if applicable, be submitted to the Planning Department prior to
commencement of construction.
In response to a question, Mr. Wells said the Code does not address low or high profile
boatlifts. It was remarked that most low profile lifts on the market are no more than 48 inches
high. It was felt that boatlifts should be limited, as this is a public area. Discussion ensued with
comments that the Council should address boatlift heights as CDB members are not experts in
this field. Concern was expressed that the agreement may establish a precedence that restricts
public access of public property. It was stated that the docks will provide a no-cost amenity to
the City.
Two persons spoke regarding to the application, stating that low profile should be
defined and that up to 5-footboatlifts is acceptable.
Community Development 2007-07-17 32
Member Dame moved to recommend approval of Case DVA2007-00002 on today’s
Consent Agenda, based on the evidence in the record, including the application and the Staff
Report, and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff
Report, including an amendment to request that staff define “low profile,” and that the applicant
motion
accept the definition. The was duly seconded. Members Coates, Tallman, Dame, and
carried.
Behar voted “Aye.” Chair Fritsch voted “Nay.” Motion
6. Case:
LUZ2007-05002 – 2990 Tanglewood Drive Level Three Application
Owner/Applicant:
Clearwater Housing Authority.
th
Representative:
Michael English, WilsonMiller, Inc. (2205 North 20 Street, Tampa, FL
33605; phone: 813-223-9500).
Location:
37.092 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Drew Street
and Bayview Avenue.
Atlas Page:
291B
Request
: Application for Land Use amendment approval to change Residential Urban (RU)
land use to Residential Medium (RM) land use.
Existing Use:
Vacant.
Type of Amendment:
Large Scale.
Neighborhood Association(s):
Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Joe Evich, President,
P.O. Box 8204, Clearwater, FL 33758).
Presenter:
Steven Everitt, Planner II
This Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) amendment application involves property comprising
approximately 37.092 acres of a 39.79-acre site owned by the Clearwater Housing Authority
(CHA). It had been known as Jasmine Courts but the site has been renamed Parkview Village.
The subject site is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Drew Street and
Bayview Avenue. The CHA proposes to redevelop the site as a mixed-use development with
556 attached dwelling units and nonresidential uses to primarily serve the Parkview Village
residents. The redevelopment of this site will allow a mix of housing prices. This site has a
Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) classification of Residential Urban (RU) and a zoning designation
of Medium Density Residential (MDR). The applicant is requesting to amend the FLUP
designation of the site to the Residential Medium (RM) classification in order to construct 556
attached dwellings. Professional market and real estate development analysts determined that
construction of 278 would not be economically successful. Attached dwellings in the MDR
zoning district requires site plan approval.
In order to facilitate the redevelopment of this site with a new traditional neighborhood
that was to include a mix of land uses, a variety of housing styles and price ranges, subsidized
and market-rate housing, the City Council approved a Zoning Atlas amendment for the 37.092
acre portion from Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) to MDR in October 2004 (REZ2004-
05001). The Council approved a Future Land Use Plan amendment for a 2.7 acre portion of the
overall site, located in the center of the Jasmine Court property abutting Drew Street, from RU
to Residential/Office/Retail (R/O/R) in October 2004 (LUZ2004-05004) and rezoned it from the
LMDR District to the Commercial (C) District.
In accordance with the Countywide Plan Rules, the FLUP amendment is subject to
approval by the Pinellas Planning Council and Board of County Commissioners acting as the
Countywide Planning Authority. Based on the size and density of the parcel, review and
approval by the Florida Department of Community Affairs is required.
Community Development 2007-07-17 33
Applicable Goals, Objectives and Policies from the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan in
support of the proposed land use plan amendment are as indicated below:
2.0 Goal – The City of Clearwater shall utilize innovative and flexible planning and
engineering practices, and urban design standards in order to protect historic resources,
ensure neighborhood preservation, redevelop blighted areas, and encourage infill
development.
2.1 Objective – The redevelopment of blighted, substandard, inefficient and/or obsolete
areas shall be a high priority and promoted through the implementation of
redevelopment and special area plans, the construction of catalytic private projects, city
investment, and continued emphasis on property maintenance standards.
2.2 Objective – The City of Clearwater shall continue to support innovative planned
development and mixed land use development techniques in order to promote infill
development that is consistent and compatible with the surrounding environment.
2.2.1 Policy - On a continuing basis, the Community Development Code and the site plan
approval process shall be utilized in promoting infill development and/or planned
developments that are compatible.
5.1.1 Policy - No new development or redevelopment will be permitted which causes the level
of City services (traffic circulation, recreation and open space, water, sewage treatment,
garbage collection, and drainage) to fall below minimum acceptable levels. However,
development orders may be phased or otherwise modified consistent with provisions of
the concurrency management system to allow services to be upgraded concurrently with
the impacts of development.
7.4 Objective – The City shall specifically consider the existing and planned Level-of-Service
on the road network affected by a proposed development, when considering an
amendment to the land use map, rezoning, subdivision plat, or site plan approval.
16.1 Objective for Adequate Housing – Assure an adequate supply of housing in Clearwater
by providing for addition new dwelling units in a variety of types, costs, and locations to
meet the needs of the residents of the City of Clearwater.
16.2 Objective for Affordable Housing – The City of Clearwater shall continue to provide
assistance and incentives for the development of housing that is affordable to Very Low,
Low, and Moderate Income households, including those with special needs, consistent
with the level of growth in these income categories.
18.8.7 Policy – The City shall continue to work with the Local Housing Authority in providing a
public housing stock that is consistent with the existing and future needs of the residents
of the City of Clearwater.
The development of attached dwellings at this location will be compatible with the
surrounding environment and will not negatively impact levels of City services. The
neighborhood land uses include attached dwellings, mobile home parks, RV parks, parks and
recreation facilities, and institutional uses. Providing subsidized and market rate housing is also
consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The proposed plan amendment is not in conflict
Community Development 2007-07-17 34
with any Clearwater Comprehensive Plan Goals, Objectives or Policies, and is consistent with
the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan.
The purpose of the proposed Residential Medium category, as specified in Section
2.3.3.2.2 of the Countywide Rules, is to depict those areas of the County that are now developed,
or appropriate to be developed, in a moderately residential manner; and to recognize such areas
as primarily well-suited for residential uses that are consistent with the urban qualities,
transportation facilities and natural resource characteristics of such areas. The category is
generally appropriate to locations within or in close proximity to urban activity centers; in areas
where use and development characteristics are medium density residential in nature; and in areas
serving as a transition between less urban and more urban residential and mixed use areas.
These areas are typically in close proximity to and may have direct access from the arterial and
thoroughfare highway network.
The property is located on Drew Street, a four-lane divided roadway. Due to the site’s
proximity to two major arterials, US Highway 19 and McMullen-Booth Road, this area is well
suited for mixed-use development. The site is also located in close proximity to Park Place, a
mixed-use Development of Regional Impact located to the west of the site. The subject
property is also located along a PSTA route, which will encourage the use of mass transit.
The proposed plan amendment is consistent with the purpose and locational
characteristics of the Countywide Plan; therefore, the proposed amendment is consistent with the
Countywide Plan.
The property is located along Drew Street in the vicinity of Hampton and McMullen-
Booth Roads and is characterized by a variety of land uses. Immediately to the east of the
subject site is Calvary Baptist Church and school campus. The City-owned Eddie C. Moore
Recreation Complex, a multi-family housing development and an elementary school are located
on the north side of Drew Street in the vicinity of the property. To the south of the site are a
mobile home park and a RV park and to the west is a mobile home park. The future land use
designations in this area allow residential development between 10 – 30 units per acre.
Further to the west on the south side of Drew Street between Hampton Road and US
Highway 19 is the Park Place Development of Regional Impact (DRI), which includes industrial,
residential, retail and office uses. To the west of that is a commercial shopping center located
at the southeast corner of Drew Street and US Highway 19.
The proposed FLUP amendment from the RU category to the RM category will enable the
CHA to develop a neighborhood incorporating a mix of land uses along Drew Street. This
proposed land use plan amendment is compatible with the surrounding residential, institutional,
recreation and tourist uses. The existing Commercial zoning district boundaries are generally
located in the center of the Parkview Village property abutting Drew Street and surrounded on the
west, east and south by the RU category of the remaining 37.09 acres.
The RM and R/O/R boundaries are appropriately located along Drew Street and will allow
a mixed-use development, which is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
The proposed FLUP designation is in character with the overall FLUP categories in the
area. They are compatible with surrounding uses and consistent with the character of the
immediate surrounding area and neighborhood.
Community Development 2007-07-17 35
As stated earlier, the overall subject site is approximately 37.092 acres in area and is
vacant. Under the current FLUP category of RU, 278 attached dwellings are permitted. Based
on a maximum permitted development potential in the proposed Residential Medium category,
556 dwelling units potentially could be constructed on this site.
The accepted methodology for reviewing the transportation impacts of proposed plan
amendments is based on the Pinellas Planning Council’s (PPC) traffic generation guidelines. The
PPC’s traffic generation rates have been calculated for the subject site based on the existing and
proposed FLUP categories and are included in the next table.
Based on the 2006 Pinellas County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Level of
Service Report, the segment of Drew Street, Hampton Road to Bayview Drive has a Level of
Service (LOS) of A.
The proposed FLUP category could generate 91 more p.m. Peak Hour trips onto Drew
Street than the current FLUP category. The net increase in trips is minimal and the LOS of the
adjacent roadway network will not be negatively impacted.
Even though the subject property is vacant and new trips will be generated by the
development of the property, the proposed plan amendment will not result in a degradation of the
existing LOS to the adjacent roadway network. Furthermore, the City of Clearwater Engineering
Department has concluded that the traffic generation associated with the proposed amendment
will increase existing p.m. peak hour trips by 5% on Drew Street, between Hampton Road and
Bayview Drive, and will not degrade the LOS.
The Citywide LOS for mass transit will not be affected by the proposed plan amendment.
The total miles of fixed route service will not change. The subject site is located directly on the
mass transit route along Drew Street.
The current FLUP category could use up to 69,500 gallons per day. Under the proposed
FLUP category, water demand could approach approximately 139,000 gallons per day.
The current FLUP category could produce up to or 55,600 gallons per day. Under the
proposed FLUP category, sewer demand could approach approximately 111,200 gallons per
day.
Assuming two residents per dwelling unit, the current FLUP category could result in the
production of 722.47 tons of solid waste per year. Under the proposed FLUP category, the
development of attached dwellings could generate 1,444.93 tons of solid waste per year.
The proposed future land use plan and current zoning designation will permit the
development of up to 556 attached dwellings. The use of the site is proposed to be limited to
residential, therefore, payment of Open Space, Recreation Land and Recreation Facility impact
fees will not be required at this time. The fees will be required prior to building permit and credit
will be given for any previous development.
Based upon the findings of fact, it has been determined that the traffic generated by this
plan amendment will not result in the degradation of the existing LOS to the adjacent roads.
Further, there is a minimal impact to water, wastewater, and solid waste service as each has
adequate capacity to handle an increase in dwelling units. Open space and recreation facilities
and mass transit will not be affected by the proposed future land use plan category.
Community Development 2007-07-17 36
No wetlands appear to be located on the subject site. This property is mostly grass and
has a limited number of trees. A Planning Department Arborist will inspect the site prior to site
plan approval to assess the quantity and quality of trees.
Prior to development of the subject property, the stormwater management system will be
required to meet all City and SWFWMD stormwater management criteria. Water quantity and
quality will be controlled in compliance with the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan.
Based on current information, no wetlands appear to be located on the subject site. The
natural environment will be protected through the City’s tree preservation and storm water
management requirements. There is minimal impact to the City of Clearwater by the
redevelopment of attached dwellings.
An amendment of the FLUP from the Residential Urban (RU) category to the Residential
Medium (RM) category for the subject site is requested. The proposed site to be developed is
37.092 acres of a 39.79-acre property and exceeds the minimum lot area and width requirements
for Attached Dwelling Uses within the Zoning District. A mix of multi-family residential, open
spaces, and institutional characterizes the neighborhood. The proposed future land use plan
amendment is compatible with the existing neighborhood.
The proposed Residential Medium (RM) FLUP classification is consistent with both the
City and the Countywide Comprehensive Plans, is compatible with the surrounding area, does
not degrade public services below acceptable minimal levels, is compatible with the natural
environment and is consistent with the development regulations of the City.
Approval of this land use plan amendment does not guarantee the right to develop on
the subject property.Transportation concurrency must be met, and the property owner will have
to comply with all laws and ordinances in effect at the time development permits are requested.
Based on the above analysis, the Planning Department recommends approval of the
Future Land Use Plan amendment from the Residential Urban Classification to the Residential
Medium.
See motion to recommend approval on page 38.
7. Case:
FLD2003-04020 – 19246 US Highway 19 N Level Two Application
Owner:
Nation Land Trust.
Applicant:
Lenore Jacobs.
Location:
0.44 acre located on the west side of US Highway 19 N, approximately 600 feet
north of Harn Boulevard.
Atlas Page:
309B.
Zoning:
C, Commercial District.
Request:
Delete a condition of approval (#5 on Development Order of June 20, 2003)
requiring all signage to meet Code and be architecturally integrated into the design of the
site and/or buildings, to implement Modification of Settlement Stipulation between City of
Clearwater and Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. in Case 93-174-CI-21.
Proposed Use:
Vehicle sales and display in association with an existing auto sales use.
Neighborhood Association: None.
Presenter:
Gina L. Clayton, Assistant Planning Director
Community Development 2007-07-17 37
The Settlement Stipulation between the City of Clearwater and the Patrick Media Group
was approved by the Circuit Court in 1998. One provision of the settlement gave Patrick Media
a one-time right to replace two billboards that were located on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard with two
billboards at any two locations along U.S. Highway 19. In December 2006, Clear Channel
(Patrick Media’s successor) submitted an application to erect a billboard at 19246 U.S. Highway
19 North. The sign permit was denied because the proposed sign was not consistent with the
Development Order governing the property, which was issued on June 20, 2003 for a vehicle
sales and display use (Case FLD 2003-04020). Specifically, condition five of the Development
Order states “That all signage must meet Code and be architecturally integrated into the design
of the site and/or building. All signage needs to be brought into compliance and inspected by
the Sign Inspector prior to the issuance of an Occupational License.” The proposed sign did not
meet Code because it exceeded the maximum permitted height of a freestanding sign pursuant
to Section 3-1806.B.1.e and the maximum permitted area pursuant Section 3-1806.B.1.c.
In April 2007, the CDB approved a site plan for a new 7 Eleven to be located on the
northeast corner of Belcher Road and Drew Street (FLD2006-10058A). A monopole billboard
currently exists on this site and was to remain on the site. Through discussions with Clear
Channel regarding the Belcher Road and U.S. Highway properties, the City and Clear Channel
agreed to file a joint motion to modify the 1993 Settlement Stipulation to address the sign at
Belcher Road and a new billboard at 19246 U.S. Highway 19 North. This modification, which
was approved by the Court on June 20, 2007, specifies that the City agrees that Clear Channel
may submit a sign application for a billboard 10 feet higher than the Stipulation originally
allowed (50 feet instead of 40 feet) at 19246 U.S. Highway 19 and that the City will support an
application by the property owner to the CDB for any necessary changes to the existing
Development Order. The modification obligates Clear Channel to remove the billboard located
at the Belcher Road property within 30 days of the issuance of the permit for the billboard at
19246 U.S. Highway 19.
Based on the above, the Planning Department recommends approval of the request to
delete condition five associated with the Flexible Development request approved on June 17,
2003 to reduce the lot width from 200 feet to 70 feet, reduce the front (west) setback from 25
feet to 15 feet, reduce the side (south) setback from 10 feet to 0.44 feet, reduce the side (north)
setback from 10 feet to four feet, and reduce the lot size from 40,000 square-feet to 19,250
square-feet, as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of
Sections 2-704., with a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Section 3-
1202. No other changes are requested and the previously imposed conditions one through four
shall remain in force as set forth below:
Conditions of Approval: 1) The outdoor vehicle display will not encroach into any
customer or employee parking spaces, drive aisles or landscaped areas; 2) The asphalt
removal will require removing base and to backfill with proper soil; 3) That the solid waste
dumpster (shared) on Harn Boulevard comply with City codes; and 4) That the on-loading or off-
loading of vehicles from any transport vehicle occur on-site and not within any abutting right-of-
way.
Member Dame moved to approve Case FLD2007-05014 and FLD2003-04020, and
recommend approval of Case LUZ2007-05002, on today’s Consent Agenda based on evidence
in the record, including the applications and the Staff’s Reports, and hereby adopt the Findings
motion
of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Reports. The was duly seconded
carried
and unanimously.
Community Development 2007-07-17 38
8.Resolution 07-14
Item Pulled from Consent Agenda
Public Participation Plan
Request:
Pass Resolution Pursuant to State Statutes and Florida Administrative Code,
Approving Public Participation Plan to meet requirements of Chapter 163 of the Florida
State Statutes, and Chapter 9J-5 F.A.C.
Presenter:
Catherine W. Porter, AICP
In response to a question, Planning Manager Catherine Porter said this change does not
eliminate the CAC (Citizens Advisory Committee). She requested the CDB adopt the resolution
as part of the CDB’s rules and recommend approval to Council.
Member Coates moved to recommend approval of Resolution 07-14 to Council. The
motioncarried
was duly seconded and unanimously.
E. LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (Items 1 –2):
1. Case:
FLD2007-03010 – 804-808 Ewing Avenue Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant:
Opti Development, Inc.
Representative:
Mary S. Sullivan (200 Beach Drive NE, #12, St. Petersburg, FL 33701;
phone: 727-892-9999; fax: 727-822-1104; e-mail: mary-sullivan@homevestors.com).
Location:
0.27 acre at the northwest corner of Jasmine Way and Ewing Avenue.
Atlas Page:
296A.
Zoning District:
Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District.
Request:
Flexible Development approval to reduce the minimum lot size from 5,000 square-
feet to 4,467 square-feet in association with the creation of a new parcel for a detached
dwelling (single-family residence) within the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR)
District as a Residential Infill Project, pursuant to Section 2-204.E of the Community
Development Code.
Proposed Use:
Detached Dwelling.
Neighborhood Associations:
Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Joe Evich, President,
P.O. Box 8204, Clearwater, FL 33758); and Harbor Oaks Neighborhood Association (Bob
Fritz, President, 320 Magnolia Drive, Clearwater, FL 33756).
Presenter:
Robert G. Tefft, Planner III.
Member Coates moved to accept Neil Thompson as an expert witness in the fields of
development code, transportation system planning, system development changes, and
motion carried
comprehensive plans. The was duly seconded and unanimously.
The 0.26-acre subject property is located at the northwest corner of Jasmine Way and
Ewing Avenue. The subject property has a zoning designation of Low Medium Density
Residential (LMDR) with an underlying and compatible future land use designation of
Residential Urban (RU).
Until recently the subject property consisted of three dwelling units, a single-family
detached dwelling located along the southern half of the parcel, and a duplex located on the
parcels northern half. However, the duplex was severely damaged in a fire and was demolished
in March of this year. The single-family detached dwelling was undamaged in the fire and is to
remain; however the property owner desires to construct a new single-family detached dwelling
in place of the demolished duplex.
Community Development 2007-07-17 39
In order to facilitate this construction, the owner seeks to subdivide the property into two
lots with the south lot containing the existing single-family detached dwelling and the north lot to
eventually contain a new single-family detached dwelling.
Due to the size and configuration of the existing structure on the parcel, the south lot
would be approximately 88.28 feet by 86.01 feet in size (7,593 square-feet), leaving roughly 88
feet by 50 feet for the north lot (4,467 square-feet). This dimension would result in a
nonconforming lot size of 4,467 square-feet as per the minimum development standards of the
LMDR district. Therefore, the applicant has requested a deviation from the minimum lot area
requirement as a Residential Infill Project in order to create the two lots as stated above.
The development proposal’s compliance with the various development standards of the
Community Development Code relative to the development proposal is discussed below.
Pursuant to Section 2-201.1 of the Community Development Code, the maximum ISR
within the RU Future Land Use category is 0.65. As noted above, the south parcel will contain
the existing single-family detached dwelling; thus it will have an ISR of approximately 0.17,
which meets the above requirement. The north parcel is presently not proposed with any
development. As such, ISR requirements will be assessed when a specific development
proposal is made.
Pursuant to Section 2-204 of the Community Development Code, within the LMDR
District the minimum lot size for a single-family detached dwelling is 5,000 square-feet. As
proposed, the south lot would total approximately 7,593 square-feet, which exceeds the
development standard. However, the north lot would total only 4,467 square-feet.
While the development standards for detached dwellings require a minimum lot size of
5,000 square-feet, the Code does allow for this standard to be reduced to 3,000 square-feet.
However, the applicable Flexibility Criteria [ref. Section 2-204.B] states that such a deviation is
for an existing developed lot or for the development of a vacant lot. In either case, the criterion
requires that the lot already exist in order to acquire the deviation. No provision is made for this
variation to be applicable to the creation of a new lot. As such, the applicant has made their
request as a Residential Infill Project, which does not set forth a specific minimum lot size
requirement.
The standard by which a deviated lot size is deemed appropriate through the Residential
Infill Project application process is through the following criterion:
Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height, off-street parking, access
or other development standards are justified by the benefits to community character and the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a
whole.
The applicant has stated in response to this criterion that “the creation of a new lot will
benefit the community character by providing a consistent streetscape facing Ewing Avenue in
keeping with the opposing southeast corner, which currently contains four similarly sized lots
under 5,000 square-feet. These are 903 Ewing Avenue, 1001, 1003 and 1003A Jasmine Way
sized at 3,250; 3,599; 2,800; and 3,950 square-feet respectfully. Additionally, the proposed lot
size is consistent with the character of lots in the community as eight other lots within 500 feet of
the proposed lot are smaller than 5,000 square-feet. The creation of a new lot will benefit the
City of Clearwater as a whole as it promotes housing near mass transit routes, in a pedestrian
Community Development 2007-07-17 40
friendly location, thereby encouraging mass transit use over automobiles. The size of the lot is
suitable for workforce or first time buyer housing, which benefits the community by promoting
homeownership at entry level price points. Finally, the creation of a new lot will add value to the
tax rolls, encourage construction of new housing, which will be maintained and taxed for the City
of Clearwater’s benefit”.
While the proposed lot size is inconsistent with those development standards set forth in
the Code as well as being inconsistent with the majority of the existing lots in the area, it is not
out of character for the area, and will not be detrimental to the area. The portion of the existing
lot proposed to be separated was previously occupied by a duplex, and the creation of a new lot
for a single-family detached dwelling will not increase demand for services in the area to any
greater capacity than it was at previously. Staff finds no outright reason why the request to
reduce the minimum lot size from 5,000 square-feet to 4,467 square-feet for the creation of a
new parcel for a detached dwelling (single-family residence) cannot be supported.
Pursuant to Section 2-204 of the Community Development Code, within the LMDR
District the minimum lot width for a single-family detached dwelling is 50 feet. As proposed, the
south lot will have a width of 86 feet and the north lot a width of 50 feet. Thus, compliance with
this minimum development standard will be achieved.
Pursuant to Section 2-202 of the Community Development Code, within the LMDR
District the minimum standard development side setback requirement is five feet. As proposed,
the existing structure on the south lot would have a setback of 5.9 feet from the newly created
property line. There are no changes to the parcel in any other capacity that would impact the
other existing setbacks; thus no deviations are necessary. Further, as nothing is presently
proposed on the north lot, no setback review or deviation is necessary.
Pursuant to Section 2-202 of the Community Development Code, within the LMDR
District the minimum standard development height for a single-family detached dwelling is 30
feet. The existing structure on the south lot is well below the maximum height and no change to
this structure is proposed; thus no deviation is necessary. Further, as nothing is presently
proposed on the north lot, no building height review or deviation is necessary.
Pursuant to Section 2-202 of the Community Development Code, within the LMDR
District, the minimum off-street parking requirement for a single-family detached dwelling is two
parking spaces. The existing dwelling on the south lot has the required two parking spaces, and
as nothing is presently proposed on the north lot, no deviations are necessary.
There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject
property.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of May 3,
2007, and deemed the development proposal to be sufficient to move forward to the CDB,
based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact: 1) That the 0.26-acre subject property is located at the northwest
corner of Ewing Avenue and Jasmine Way, and if subdivided will create a 0.102-acre (4,467
square-foot) north lot and a 0.174-acre (7,593 square-foot) south lot; 2) That the subject
property is located within the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District; 3) That the
subject property is located within the Residential Urban (RU) Future Land Use Plan category;
Community Development 2007-07-17 41
and 4) That there are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject
property.
Conclusions of Law: 1) That the development proposal is consistent with the applicable
Standards and Criteria as per Sections 2-201.1 and 2-204 of the Community Development
Code; 2) That the development proposal is inconsistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section
2-204.B.1 of the Community Development Code (Detached Dwelling); 3) That the development
proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Sections 2-204.B.2 and 3 of the
Community Development Code (Detached Dwelling); 4) That the development proposal is
consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-204.E of the Community Development
Code (Residential Infill Project); and 5) That the development proposal is consistent with the
General Standards for Level One and Level Two Approvals as per Section 3-913.A of the
Community Development Code.
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends approval of the Flexible
Development approval to reduce the minimum lot size from 5,000 square-feet to 4,467 square-
feet in association with the creation of a new parcel for a detached dwelling (single-family
residence) within the Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District as a Residential Infill
Project, pursuant to Section 2-204.E of the Community Development Code with Conditions of
Approval: 1) That prior to the submittal of a building permit application for the new single-family
detached dwelling on the north lot, a Minor Lot Adjustment be approved by the Planning
Department; 2) That prior to the submittal for a Minor Lot Adjustment, the existing concrete on
the proposed north lot and that concrete on the south lot within five feet of the property line
between the north and south lots must be removed; 3) That the newly created north lot is to be
exclusively used as a single-family detached dwelling; and 4) That the total square footage of all
buildings built on the north lot shall be no more than 10% greater than the average volume to lot
size ratio of all existing buildings within 500 feet of the lot (1,296 square-feet).
In response to a question, Development Review Manager Neil Thompson said the
application does not include a building plan. The lot’s footprint could accommodate a two-story
structure. It may be possible to save the oak tree if the house is designed around it. Staff has
received no proposal regarding the tree.
Mary Sullivan, representative, said the tree is dead and a tree removal permit has been
issued.
Mr. Thompson said previously, three dwelling units were on the site. This proposal for
two dwelling units results in lower density and less traffic. The property was nonconforming until
the fire when t will be brought into conformance with Code. Staff feels the project will enhance
property values in the area.
Member Coates moved to approve Case FLD2007-03010, based on the evidence and
testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today’s hearing, and hereby
adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report with conditions of
motioncarried
approval as listed. The was duly seconded and unanimously.
2.
Level Two Application
Case:
FLD2007-03007 – 685, 689, 693 and 699 Bay Esplanade
Owner/Applicant:
Peter Pan Developments, LLC, Petrit Meroli, Panayiotis Vasiloudes, Epic
Holdings South, LLC, and Somerset Place, Inc.
Community Development 2007-07-17 42
!
Representative: Sherry Bagley and/or Bill Woods, Woods Consulting (1714 County Road
1, Suite 22, Dunedin, FL 34698; phone: 727-786-5747; fax 727-786-7479; e-mail:
sbaq ley@woodsconsultinq.orq).
Location: 0.618 acre located at the northeast and southeast corner of the intersection of
Bay Esplanade and Somerset Street.
Atlas Page: 258A.
Zoning District: Tourist (T) District - Old Florida.
Request: Flexible Development approval to construct a 4,062 square-foot multi-use dock
facility to provide 16 slips as an amenity to a proposed 16 unit attached dwelling (two
buildings with eight dwelling units in each) in the Tourist (T) District with an increase to the
length of the southern dock from 75% of the lot width (93.75 feet) to 111 % of the lot width
(139 feet) under the provisions of Section 3-601.C.3.
Proposed Use: Multi-use dock of 4,062 square-feet for 16 slips, in conjunction with a 16-
unit attached dwelling (condominium).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive,
Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-443-2168; e-mail: papamurphy@aol.com); Clearwater
Neighborhoods Coalition (Joe Evich, President, P.O. Box 8204, Clearwater, FL 33758).
Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner II.
Ms. Grimes reviewed the Chair's e-mail to her, requesting that this item be removed
from the agenda, as the variance is not justified. She stated that the Chair also indicated he
made that statement to clarify the reason for the request, not that he had already made up his
mind regarding the project, and that he will listen to all testimony and review all evidence
presented when the case is heard. The Chair confirmed Ms. Grimes' statements.
Member Behar moved to accept Scott Kurleman as an expert witness in the fields of
zoning, site plan analysis, planning in general, landscape ordinance, tree ordinance, and code
enforcement. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Senior Planner Scott Kurleman reported that the representative had requested a
continuance as seven members of the board were not present. '
Member Coates moved to continue Case FLD2007-03007 to August 21, 2007. The
motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
F. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 3:21 p.m.
C 'r, Community Development Boa tl
Community Development 2007-07-17
43
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: July 17, 2007
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties.
Level Two Applications (Items 1-7)
1. /ase: FLD2007-05017 - 200-201 Skiff Point
-LYes no
2. Case: FLD2007-03010 - 804-808 Ewing Avenue
Yes
no
3. ~: FLD2007-05014 - 300 South Belcher Road
/' Y es no
4.
Ca,se: FLD2007-02003 - 69 Bay Esplanade
~
no
5.
Case: FLD2Z06 - 1460-1480 South Missouri Avenue
Yes no
6. /ase: FLD2007-03007 - 685,689,693 and 699 Bay Esplanade
Yes no
7. J2'se: FLD2003-04020 - 19246 US Highway 19 N
-LYes no
Level Three Applications (Items 1- 2)
1. ~ DV A2007-00002 - 470 and 500 Mandalay Avenue and 11 Baymont Street
,,/ Yes no
2. re: LUZ2007-05002 - 2990 Tanglewood Drive
LYes no
Signature: - - Date:.'1- / I} / U T
S:\Plannin e rtment\C D B\CDB, property investigation check list.do~ '
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: July 17, 2007
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties.
Level Two Applications (Items 1-7)
1. Case: FLD2007-05017 - 200-201 Skiff Point
/yes no
2. /ase: FLD2007-03010 - 804-808 Ewing Avenue
Yes no
3. / Case: FLD2007 -05014 - 300 South Belcher Road
Yes no
4. Case: FLD2007-02003 - 69 Bay Esplanade
/Yes no
5.. /ase: FLD2007-02006 - 1460-1480 South Missouri Avenue
/ Yes no
6. Case: FLD2007-03007 - 685,689,693 and 699 Bay Esplanade
I Yes
no
7. ,Case: FLD2003-04020 - 19246 US Highway 19 N
;'
I. Yes no
Level Three Applications (Items 1- 2)
1. rase: DV A2007-00002 - 470 and 500 Mandalay Avenue and 11 Baymont Street
V Yes no
I
2. / Case: LUZ2007-05002 - 2990 Tanglewood Drive
~Yes no
Slgnatu.., ~ ~ Dat" 7 / / '1/6 7
S:\Planning Dep rtment\C 0 B\CDB, property investigation check list.doc
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: July 17, 2007
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties.
Level Two Applications (Items 1-7)
1. Case: FLD2007-05017 - 200-201 Skiff Point
/ Yes no
+
2. / Case: FLD2007-0301O - 804-808 Ewing Avenue
/ Yes
0/' Case: FLD2007-05014 - 300 South Belcher Road
Yes no
4.)' Case: FLD2007-02003 - 69 Bay Esplanade
Yes no
no
5. Case: FLD2007 -02006 - 1460-1480 South Missouri Avenue
I Yes no
..r
6.
Icase: FLD2007-03007 - 685,689,693 and 699 Bay Esplanade
v Yes no
OJ
/
'If
Case: FLD2003-04020 - 19246 US Highway 19 N
.A
'.J
~..b.>(.r...\
Yes
no
Level Three Applications (Items 1-2)
1. Case: DV A2007-00002 - 470 and 500 Mandalay Avenue and 11 Baymont Street
Yes
no
,/-\.
, 2 '
"Y
Case: LUZ2007-05002 - 2990 Tanglewood Drive
C;;""'..-V olY
v
,',~",,:,) + t3a...{ .!./ I e L..)
"/
Yes
Signature:
S:\Planning De