Loading...
TA00-07-05 TA 00-07-05 2nd Deferred Amendments Code . . Clearwater City Commission Agenda Cover Memorandum W orksession Item # Final Agenda Item # Meeting Date Aug. 17.2000 SUBJECT/RECOMMENDATION: Amendments to the Community Development Code. MOTION: APPROVE text amendments to the Community Development Code and PASS Ordinance No. 6595-00 on first reading. o and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. SUMMARY: The comprehensive amendments to the Community Development Code were effective on June 29th. A second ordinance that includes deferred amendments is scheduled for second reading on August 3rd. At the time of first reading of this ordinance, the parking on the grass issue was deferred for further evaluation. A revised provision restricting parking on the grass is included in the attached proposed Ordinance No. 6595-00. Additionally, three other issues have surfaced through this code review process which are included in the proposed ordinance for consideration. The first issue is to clarify the permitted flexibility with regard to development standards for residential infill projects. The second is to allow temporary yard signs on non-residential properties; and the third is to exclude the use of the comprehensive sign program for certain permitted monument signs. At the July 18th Community Development Board meeting, staff presented the issues in the proposed ordinance, except for the provision restricting parking on landscaped areas. The Board conceptually supported all of the amendments. The Board will review the proposed amendments at its regularly scheduled meeting on August 15, 2000 and make a formal recommendation to the Commission at that time. Staff will report the recommendation at the City Commission meeting. The Community Response Team has reviewed the proposed parking on the grass provision and suggests that that the determination of the designated parking location and/or whether it needs to be filled in with suitable parking materials be determined by the Code Manager and/or designee. To avoid neighborhood feuds and prevent any interpretation of selective enforcement, the inspector should have the authority on a case-by-case basis to determine what is appropriate for the property owner and surrounding neighbors thus promoting consistency, fairness and impartiality. Reviewed by: Legal Budget Purchasing Risk Mgmt. IS ACM Other Originating Department: Planning and Development Gina L. Clayton User Department: Costs: Commission Action: o Approved Total 0 Approved with Conditions o Den ied Current Fiscal Year 0 Continued to: N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Advertised: Date: Paper: o Not Required Affected Parties o Notified o Not Required Funding Source: o Capital Improvement: o Operating: o Other: Attachments: Submitted by: Appropriation Code o None City Manager o Printed on recycled paper ... . . ~ Clearwater u To: City Commission Members From: Cyndi Hardin, Assistant Planning Director Date: August 16, 2000 RE: Proposed Amendments to Ordinance No. 6595-00 1. At the August 14th Commission Workshop, staff was directed to revised the temporary yard sign provision to include specific regulations for signs relating to political candidates and issues. Below please find the original and the revised language. The revised language has been included in the proposed ordinance. A. Original Proposed Provision for Temporary Yard Signs - 3-1807(N) N. One temporary yard sign for each road frontage per parcel of land provided that such signs are displayed no more than three times a year for a total of 90 days during a one year period, and provided that the total sign face area of each sign does not exceed six square feet of total sign face area on parcels of land designated or used for residential purposes and thirty-two square feet of total sign face area on parcels of land designated or used for non-residential purposes. B. Revised Provision for Temporary Yard Signs. N. Temporary Yard Signs. 1. One temporary yard sign shall be allowed for each political candidate or issue for each frontage per parcel of land. Such signs shall be erected no sooner than sixty (60) days prior to the election for which they were intended. and shall be removed within seven (7) days after the election for which they are intended. The total sign face area of each sign shall not exceed six (6) square feet in area on parcels of land designated or used for residential purposes and thirty-two (32) square feet of total sign face area on parcels of land designated or used for non-residential purposes. " . . 2. One other temporary yard sign shall be permitted for each road frontage per parcel of land provided that such signs are displayed no more than three times a year for a total of 90 days during a one year period, and provided that the total sign face area of each sign does not exceed six square feet on parcels of land designated or used for residential purposes. II. At the August 15th meeting, the Community Development Board recommended approval of Ordinance No. 6595-00 with three changes to the parking on the grass provision. The Assistant City Attorney also recommended one change. Both of these have been incorporated below. These recommended changes have not been included in the revised ordinance. A. Original Provision Regulating Parking on the Grass - Section 3-1407(A)(4) 4. Parking on the grass in a required front setback shall occur only in a designated location. This designated parking area shall be located adjacent to a driveway. if one exists. or in a location approved bv the City Manager or designee. If this designated parking location cannot be maintained as a grass area and is reported by neighboring residents as a detrimental property. it is required that the designated parking area be filled in. by the property owner. with pavers. concrete. turf block. or other approved suitable parking material. B. Revised Provision Regulating Parking on the Grass - Section 3-1407(A)(4) 4. One designated parking space may be located on the grass in a required front setback adjacent to the existing paved driveway or existing designated non-paved driveway located on the property. Access to such designated parking space shall be by way of the property's driveway. If the designated parking space can not be maintained as a landscaped area and is either reported by neighboring residents as a detrimental property or is determined by any Code Inspector to be in violation of this provision. such designated parking space shall be filled in. by the property owner. with pavers. concrete. turf block or other approved suitable parking material. III. In response to citizen concerns, a new provision is proposed to be added to Ordinance No. 6595-00 which reaffirms that the sign ordinance is content neutral. Below please find the proposed amendment to Section 3-1804. This provision has been added to the ordinance. H. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code. no sign shall be subject to any limitation based on the content of the messaged contained on such sign. . . Clayton, Gina From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Sullivan, Patricia Friday, July 21,200012:51 PM Clayton, Gina Goudeau, Cyndie RE: Hooper's language re parking on the grass July 20, 2000 City Commission Meeting Commissioner Hooper's amendment tocode change re parking on grass "If parking on the grass is required, this is to occur in a designated location. This designated parking area is to be located adjacent to a driveway (if one exists) or located as approved by the ~zoning departmEtnt. If this designated parking location cannot be maintained as a grass area and is reported by neighboring residents as a detrimental property, it is required that the designated parking area be filled in, by the property owner, with pavers, river stone, concrete, turf block, or other suitable parking material." pat -----Original Message----- From: Goudeau, Cyndie Sent: Friday, July 21 , 2000 11 :33 AM To: Sullivan, Patricia Subject: Hooper's language re parking on the grass Pat - please send the language Commissioner Hooper recommended re parking on the grass to Gina Clayton in Planning. Copy me please. thanks. ~Je -Se~ ~. {or hls~' 'D'(~ tJy&. tLt(\~W-~ -'/ f\W{N~ ~ ~ fY\()J\()f.Y t k~ !!YI{V Cyndie tfl oY dJft10fi1 t{ fw\g ,fJ)vofl tAt cttJte- 10 C;U pPssLwu. ~ ~ /t CM1 u>>vl( ~-v . bJL r!U((~ ~ tJ M~' . . NOTICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENT The City of Clearwater, Florida, proposed to adopt the following ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 6595-00 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE BY AMENDING ARTICLE 2, ZONING DISTRICTS BY CLARIFYING THAT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS ARE GUIDELINES; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BY ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION TO SECTION 3-1407(A) PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION 3-1805 SIGNS PERMITTED WITHOUT A PERMIT, BY REVISING SECTION 3-1805(N) TEMPORARY YARD SIGNS; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION 3-1807(B) BY PROHIBITING MONUMENT SIGNS TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PROGRAM; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THIS MATTER: Community Development Board Meeting Tuesday, August 15,2000, at 1:00 p.m. CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS, City Hall, 3rd Floor 112 S. Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, Florida Additional information is available in the Planning and Development Services Department at the Municipal Services Building, 100 South Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, Florida. Florida Statute 286.0105 states: Any person appealing a decision of this board must have a record of the proceedings to support such an appeal. A person taking an appeal will need to ensure that a verbatim record, including testimony and evidence, is made. The inclusion of this statement does not create or imply a right to appeal the decision to be made at this hearing if the right to an appeal does not exist as a matter of law. Citizens may appear to be heard or file written notice of approval or objection with the Planning and Development Services Director or the City Clerk prior to or during the public hearing. A COPY OF THIS AD IN LARGE PRINT IS A V AILABLE IN THE CITY CLERK DEPT. AND ANY PERSON WITH A DISABILITY REQUIRING REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING SHOULD CALL THE CITY CLERK DEPT WITH THEIR REQUEST AT (727) 562-4090. City of Clearwater P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, Fl 33758-4748 Cynthia E. Goudeau, CMC/AAE City Clerk Ad: 07/29/00 e e ACTION AGENDA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING CITY OF CLEARWATER August 15, 2000 Meeting called to order at 1 :00 p.m. at City Hall ITEM A - REQUESTS FOR CONTINUANCE/RECONSIDERATION - None. ITEM B - CONTINUED ITEMS - None. ITEM C - LEVEL 2 APPLICATIONS Item #C1 - 320 Palm Island SE: Charles Bentler - Owner/Applicant, Request approval of Flexible Development of a Residential Infill Project to reduce rear setback from 25 feet to 17 feet to expand the single-family residence by 771 square-feet. Lot 20, Unit 6A, Island Estates of Clearwater. FL 00-06-24 ACTION - APPROVED 6:0 Item #C2 - 1485 Gulf to Bay Boulevard: Fraternal Order of Eaqles Greater Clearwater AERIE #3452 - Owner/Applicant, Request Flexible Development approval to reduce the front setback from 25 feet to 15 feet along San Juan Street to construct a 623 square-foot addition. Parcel Number: 14-29-15-10476-010-0030. FL 00-06-21 ACTION - APPROVED subject to conditions that the site be redeveloped in phases: 1) Phase One - complete prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for building addition: a) landscape northeast property line along Gulf to Bay Boulevard & portion of northwest property line; b) install roof-high trellises, planted with evergreen flowering vines on building facades along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and San Juan Street; c) pave two handicap-parking spaces, a small driving aisle, and drive apron on Gulf to Bay Boulevard; and d) bring attached signage into compliance with Code; 2) Phase Two - complete by February 15, 2001, within 18 months of Flexible Development approval: a) landscape remainder of property, to include perimeter along south and west property lines and balance of northwest property line; 3) Phase Three - complete by August 15, 2003, within three years of Flexible Development approval: a) pave parking lot, including 13 parking spaces, b) remove all excess pavement within Florida Department of Transportation right-of-way on Gulf to Bay Boulevard; and c) provide an on-site, storm water retention system, and 4) install irrigation system during Phase One, or incrementally with each phase of landscape enhancement. 6:0 Item #C3 - 401 Belcher Road, 2200 & 2218 Gulf to Bay Boulevard: Metro Group Construction, LLC - Owner/Applicant, Request Flexible Development approval of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project to permit a vehicle service establishment within the Commercial District, with a preliminary plat, Comprehensive Sign Program, and Comprehensive Landscape Program to construct mcd0800 08/15/00 ~ - e a 7,240 square-foot vehicle service establishment, Allied Tire, and a 10,880 square- foot retail sales establishment, CVS/Pharmacy. Parcel Numbers: 18-29-16-00000- 230-1200,18-29-16-00000-230-1300, and 18-29-16-00000-230-1100. FL 00-06-23 and PL T 00-06-04 ACTION - APPROVED subject to conditions: 1) require applicant to submit written documentation addressing relocation of mobile home residents in accordance with Florida law, to satisfaction of staff, prior to issuance of development order; 2) limit signage to request in Comprehensive Sign Program application, with no additional signage, light pole flags, banners, etc.; 3) design overhead doors to Allied Tire service bays with an opaque finish; 4) revise note on site plan to prohibit outdoor repair and service; 5) prohibit outdoor tire storage; and 6) modify language to require site to meet City stormwater requirements. 6:0 ITEM D - LEVEL 3 APPLICATIONS Item #D1 - 18167 US 19N: St. Joe Company/City of Clearwater - Owner/Applicant, Request annexation of 8.63 acres into the City in accordance with provisions of approved Agreement To Annex and approval of a Land Use Plan of Commercial General Classification and rezoning to Commercial District. Parcel Number: 29-29-16-00000-220-0200. ANX 00-06-11 ACTION - APPROVED 6:0 Item #D2 - 7 S. McMullen-Booth Road: KB Investments Group/Kraiq Burzlaff - Owner/Applicant. Request annexation of 0.84 acre into the City to receive City water and sewer service and approval of a Land Use Plan of Residential Urban Classification and rezoning to LMDR (Low Medium Density Residential District). Parcel Number: 16-29-16-00000-210-0900. ANX 00-06-12 ACTION - APPROVED 6:0 Item #D3 - Text Amendment Request Amendments to Community Development ~esidential infill projects, parking in residential areas and signage. - ACTION - RECOMMEND APPROVAL of proposed changes to Community Development Code included in Ordinance #6595-00, as proposed. 6-0 ITEM E - APPROVAL OF MINUTES - July 18, 2000 ACTION - APPROVED ITEM F - DIRECTOR'S ITEMS City Commission consideration of land use plan amendment for Las Brisas project scheduled for September 21, 2000. mcd0800 2 08/15/00 . e e Planner Lochen Wood introduced to board. Rescheduled December meeting to December 12, 2000, at 2:00 p.m., following board luncheon at location to be determined. Staff awaits Administrative Law Judge's decision regarding appeal of COB decision related to proposed construction of InfoAge communications tower. ITEM G - ADJOURNMENT - 2: 13 p.m. mcd0800 3 08/15/00 -. - -- _._~ --, :". " . ,-, . ORDINANCE NO. 6595-00 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; AMENDING ARTICLE 2, ZONING DISTRICTS BY CLARIFYING THAT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS ARE GUIDELINES; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BY ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION TO SECTION 3-1407(A) PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, TO ADD SECTION 3-1804(H); AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION 3- 1805 SIGNS PERMITTED WITHOUT A PERMIT, BY REVISING SECTION 3-1805(N) TEMPORARY YARD SIGNS; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION 3-1807(B) BY PROHIBITING MONUMENT SIGNS TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PROGRAM; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater has conducted an in-depth review of the Community Development Code and has identified development standard which need amendment to clarify the intent of certain provisions; WHEREAS, the Community Development Board, pursuant to its responsibilities as the Local Planning Agency, has reviewed these amendments, conducted a public hearing to consider all public testimony and has determined that this amendment is consistent with the City of Clearwater's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Commission has fully considered the recommendation of the Community Development Board and testimony submitted at its public hearing; now therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-104, "LDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residential Infill Project as follows: Section 2-104. Flexible development. The following Level Two uses are permitted in the LDR District subject to the standards and criteria set out in this Section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Ordinance No. 6595 -00 . . Table 2-104. "LDR" District Flexible Development Standards Use Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street Area Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking (Sq. ft.) (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Attached 10,000 100 25 10 15 30 1.5/unit dwellinqs Overnight 20,000 100 25 15 25 30 1/unit Accommodations Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000SF Recreation land area or as Facilities determined by the Community Development Director based on the ITE Manual standards Residentiallnfill@ n/a n/a 10 - 0--15 0-15 30 1/unit 25 Schools 40,000 200 25 15 25 30 1/3 students (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback on a waterfront lot to be at least eighteen (18) feet from a seawall. (2) The development standards for residential infill proiects are guidelines and may be varied based on the criteria set forth in Section 2-104(0). Section 2. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-204, "LMDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residential Infill Projects as follows: Table 2-204. "LMDR" District Flexible Development Use Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Size Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street (sq. ft.) Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Attached 10,000 100 25 5 15 30 1.5/unit Dwellinqs Detached 3,000-- 25-50 15--25 2--5 5-15 30 2/unit Dwellinqs 5,000 2 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Non- n/a n/a 25 10 10 n/a n/a Residential Off Street Parkina Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 Recreation SF land area Facilities or as determined by the Community Development Director based on ITE Manual standards Residential n/a n/a 10--25 0--5 0-15 30 1/unit Infill Proiects(2) Schools 40,000 200 35 25 15 30 1/3 students (1) Waterfront detached dwellings in LMDR District should be 25 feet except as provided in Article 3 Division 8, Section 3-805 and Division 9, Section 3-904 and except where adjacent structures on either side of the parcel proposed for development are setback 20 feet and then the rear setback shall be 20 feet. The Building Code may require the rear setback to be at least 18 feet from a seawall. (2) The development standards for residential infill proiects are auidelines and mav be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 2-204(E). Section 3. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-304, "MDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residential Infill Projects as follows: Section 2-304. Flexible development. The following Level Two uses are permitted in the MDR District subject to the standards and criteria set out in this Section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Table 2-304. "MDR" District Flexible Development Uses Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street Area Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking (sq. ft.) (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Assisted Living 20,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1 per 2 Facilities residents 3 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Attached 10,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1.5funit DwellinQs Congregate Care 20,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1 per 2 residents Non-Residential nfa nfa 25 5 10 nfa nfa Off-Street Parkina Overnight 20,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1funit Accommodations Parks and nfa nfa 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 Recreational SF land area Facilities oras determined by the Community Development Director based on ITE Manual standards Residential Infill nfa nfa 10-25 0--5 0-10 30--50 1 funit Projects[2j (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback to be at least 18 feet from any seawall. (2) The development standards for residential infill proiects are guidelines and may be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 3-304(G). Section 4. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-404 "MHDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residential Infill Projects as follows: Section 2-404. Flexible development. The following Level Two uses are permitted subject to the standards and criteria set out in this section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Table 2-404. "MHDR" Flexible Development Use Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street Area Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking ( sa. ft.) (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Attached 15,000 150 15-25 o --1 0 1 0--1 5 30--50 1.5funit DwellinQs Congregate Care 15,000 150 25 10 15 30 1 per 2 residents 4 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Non-Residential n/a n/a 25 5 10 n/a n/a Off-Street Parkinq (2) Overnight 15,000 150 15-25 0--1 0 1 0--15 30 1/unit Accommodations Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 recreation facilities SF land area oras determined by the Community Development Coordinator based on the ITE Manual standards Residentiallnfill n/a n/a 10-25 0--1 0 0--15 30 -- 1/unit Projects L3j 50 Residential 15,000 150 25 10 15 30 2/1,000 Shelters GFA (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback on a waterfront lot to be at least 18 feet from a seawall. m Non-residential parking lots shall not exceed 3 acres. Any such use, alone or when added to contiguous like uses which exceed 3 acres shall require a land use plan map amendment to the appropriate land use category. (3) The development standards for residential infill proiects are guidelines and may be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 2-404(F). Section 5. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-504, "HDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it related to Residential Infill Project as follows: Section 2-504. Flexible development. The following Level One uses are permitted in the HDR District subject to the standards and criteria set out in this section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Table 2-504. "HDR" Flexible Development Standards Use Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street Area Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking ( sq. ft.) (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Attached 15,000 150 15-- 0-10 1 0- -15 30-- 1.5/unit Dwellinqs 25 130 5 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Congregate Care 15,000 150 25 10 15 30 1 per 2 residents Overnight 15,000 150 15-- 0-10 10-15 30 1/unit Accommodations 25 Parking Garage 20,000 100 50 15-25 10 10 -- n/a and Lots (2) 20 Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 recreational SF land area facilities or as determined by the Community Development Coordinator based on ITE Manual standards Residentiallnfill n/a n/a 10 - - 0-10 0--1 5 30- 1/unit Projects (3) 25 130 (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback on a waterfront lot to be at least 18' from a seawall. (2) Parking garages shall not exceed 3 acres. Any such use, alone or when added to contiguous like uses which exceed 3 acres shall require a land use plan map amendment to the appropriate land use category. (3) The development standards for residential infill proiects are quidelines and may be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 2-504(F). Section 6. Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-1407, Parking restrictions in residential areas, is hereby amended by adding a new subsection (4) to Section 3-1407(A) as follows: 4. Parkinq on the grass in a required front setback shall occur onlv in a designated location. This designated parking area shall be located adiacent to a driveway. if one exists. or in a location approved bv the Citv Manager or desiqnee. If this desiqnated parkinq location cannot be maintained as a qrass area and is reported by neighboring residents as a detrimental property. it is required that the desiqnated parking area be filled in. bv the property owner. with pavers. concrete. turf block. or other approved suitable parking material. Section 7. Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3.1804(H) is hereby added as follows: H. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code. no siqn shall be subiect to any limitation based on the content of the message contained on such siqn. Section 8. Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-1805(N) is hereby amended by revising temporary yard signs as follows: 6 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . N. Temporary Yard Siqns. 1. One temporary yard sign shall be allowed for each political candidate or issue for each frontage per parcel of land. Such siqns shall be erected no sooner than sixty (60) days prior to the election for which they were intended. and shall be remoyed within seven (7) days after the election for which they are intended. The total siqn face area of each siqn shall not exceed six (6) square feet in area on parcels of land designated or used for residential purposes and thirty-two (32) square feet of total sign face area on parcels of land desiqnated or used for non-residential purposes. 2. One other temporary yard sign shall be permitted for each road frontage per parcel of land provided that such signs are displayed no more than three times a year for a total of 90 days during a one year period. and provided that the total siqn face area of each siqns does not exceed six square feet on parcels of land desiqnated or used for residential purposes. ~J. One temporary yard sign for each ro::ld frontage per parcel of l::lnd provided th::lt cuch signs are displayed no more than three timen a year for a total of 90 days during a one year period, and provided that the total sign face area of each sign does not exceed six Gquare feet of total sign face area on parcels of land designated or used for residential purpoces.:. Section 9. Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-1807(8), is hereby amended by revising the permitted signage section of the Comprehensive Sign Program as follows: 8. Permitted Signage. Signage which is proposed as part of a comprehensive sign program may deviate from the minimum sign standards in terms of numbers of signs per business or parcel of land, maximum area of a sign face per parcel of land and the total area of sign faces per business or parcel of land, subject to compliance with the flexibility criteria set out in Section 3-1807(C). Monument signs. permitted pursuant to Section 3- 1806(8)(1 )(q) and Section 3-1806(8)(2) shall not be eliqible for comprehensive sign program. A comprehensive sign program shall be approved as part of a level one or level two approval, as the case may be. 7 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Section 10. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption. PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Brian J. Aungst Mayor-Commissioner Attest: Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk 8 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . ORDINANCE NO. 6595-00 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; AMENDING ARTICLE 2, ZONING DISTRICTS BY CLARIFYING THAT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS ARE GUIDELINES; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BY ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION TO SECTION 3-1407(A) PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION 3-1805 SIGNS PERMITTED WITHOUT A PERMIT, BY REVISING SECTION 3- 1805(N) TEMPORARY YARD SIGNS; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION 3-1807(B) BY PROHIBITING MONUMENT SIGNS TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PROGRAM; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater has conducted an in-depth review of the Community Development Code and has identified development standard which need amendment to clarify the intent of certain provisions; WHEREAS, the Community Development Board, pursuant to its responsibilities as the Local Planning Agency, has reviewed these amendments, conducted a public hearing to consider all public testimony and has determined that this amendment is consistent with the City of Clearwater's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Commission has fully considered the recommendation of the Community Development Board and testimony submitted at its public hearing; now therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-104, "LDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residential Infill Project as follows: Section 2-104. Flexible development. The following Level Two uses are permitted in the LDR District subject to the standards and criteria set out in this Section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Table 2-104. "LDR" District Flexible Development Standards Use Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street Area Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking (sa. ft.) (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Attached 10,000 100 25 10 15 30 1.5/unit dwellinqs Ordinance No. 6595 -00 . . Overnight 20,000 100 25 15 25 30 1/unit Accommodations Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000SF Recreation land area or as Facilities determined by the Community Development Director based onthelTE Manual standards ResidentiallnfillQ.1 n/a n/a 10- 0--15 0-15 30 1/unit 25 Schools 40,000 200 25 15 25 30 1/3 students (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback on a waterfront lot to be at least eighteen (18) feet from a seawall. (2) The development standards for residential infill proiects are guidelines and mav be varied based on the criteria set forth in Section 2-104(0). Section 2. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-204, "LMDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residential Infill Projects as follows: Table 2-204. "LMDR" District Flexible Development Use Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Size Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street (sq. ft.) Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Attached 10,000 100 25 5 15 30 1.5/unit Dwellinqs Detached 3,000-- 25-50 15--25 2--5 5-15 30 2/unit Dwellings 5,000 Non- n/a n/a 25 10 10 n/a n/a Residential Off Street Parking 2 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 Recreation SF land area Facilities or as determined by the Community Development Director based on ITE Manual standards Residential n/a n/a 10--25 0--5 0-15 30 1/unit Infill ProjectsL2} Schools 40,000 200 35 25 15 30 1/3 students (1) Waterfront detached dwellings in LMDR District should be 25 feet except as provided in Article 3 Division 8, Section 3-805 and Division 9, Section 3-904 and except where adjacent structures on either side of the parcel proposed for development are setback 20 feet and then the rear setback shall be 20 feet. The Building Code may require the rear setback to be at least 18 feet from a seawall. (2) The development standards for residential infill proiects are guidelines and mav be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 2-204(E). Section 3. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-304, "MDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residential Infill Projects as follows: Section 2-304. Flexible development. The following Level Two uses are permitted in the MDR District subject to the standards and criteria set out in this Section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Table 2-304. "MDR" District Flexible Development Uses Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street Area Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking (Sq. ft.) (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Assisted Living 20,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1 per 2 Facilities residents Attached 10,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1.5/unit Dwellings 3 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Congregate Care 20,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1 per 2 residents Non-Residential n/a n/a 25 5 10 n/a n/a Off-Street Parkina Overnight 20,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1/unit Accommodations Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 Recreational SF land area Facilities or as determined by the Community Development Director based on ITE Manual standards Residential Infill n/a n/a 10-25 0--5 0-10 30--50 1/unit Proiects(2) (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback to be at least 18 feet from any seawall. (2) The development standards for residential infill proiects are quidelines and may be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 3-304(G). Section 4. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-404 "MHDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residential Infill Projects as follows: Section 2-404. Flexible development. The following Level Two uses are permitted subject to the standards and criteria set out in this section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Table 2-404. "MHDR" Flexible Development Use Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street Area Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking (sq. ft.) (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Attached 15,000 150 15-25 o --1 0 1 0--15 30--50 1.5/unit Dwellinas Congregate Care 15,000 150 25 10 15 30 1 per 2 residents Non-Residential n/a n/a 25 5 10 n/a n/a Off-Street Parkina (2) 4 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Overnight 15,000 150 15-25 0--1 0 1 0--15 30 1/unit Accommodations Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 recreation facilities SF land area or as determined by the Community Development Coordinator based on the ITE Manual standards Residential Infill n/a n/a 10-25 0--1 0 0--15 30 -- 1/unit Projects Gll 50 Residential 15,000 150 25 10 15 30 2/1,000 Shelters GFA (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback on a waterfront lot to be at least 18 feet from a seawall. m Non-residential parking lots shall not exceed 3 acres. Any such use, alone or when added to contiguous like uses which exceed 3 acres shall require a land use plan map amendment to the appropriate land use category. (3) The development standards for residential infill proiects are quidelines and may be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 2-404(F). Section 5. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-504, "HDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it related to Residential Infill Project as follows: Section 2-504. Flexible development. The following Level One uses are permitted in the HDR District subject to the standards and criteria set out in this section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Table 2-504. "HDR" Flexible Development Standards Use Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street Area Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking ( sq. ft.) (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Attached 15,000 150 15-- 0-10 1 0- -1 5 30-- 1.5/unit DwellinQs 25 130 Congregate Care 15,000 150 25 10 15 30 1 per 2 residents 5 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Overnight 15,000 150 15-- 0-10 10-15 30 1/unit Accommodations 25 Parking Garage 20,000 100 50 15-25 10 10 - - n/a and Lots (2) 20 Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 recreational SF land area facilities oras determined by the Community Development Coordinator based on ITE Manual standards Residentiallnfill n/a n/a 10 - - 0-10 0--1 5 30- 1/unit Proiects (3) 25 130 (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback on a waterfront lot to be at least 18' from a seawall. (2) Parking garages shall not exceed 3 acres. Any such use, alone or when added to contiguous like uses which exceed 3 acres shall require a land use plan map amendment to the appropriate land use category. (3) The development standards for residential infill proiects are quidelines and may be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 2-504(F). Section 6. Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-1407, Parking restrictions in residential areas, is hereby amended by adding a new subsection (4) to Section 3-1407(A) as follows: 4. Parking on the qrass in a required front setback shall occur onlv in a desiqnated location. This designated parkinq area shall be located adiacent to a driveway, if one exists. or in a location approved by the City Manaqer or designee. If this designated parking location cannot be maintained as a grass area and is reported bv neiqhboring residents as a detrimental property. it is required that the desiqnated parkinq area be filled in. bv the propertv owner. with pavers. concrete. turf block. or other approved suitable parkinq material. Section 7. Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-1805(N) is hereby amended by revising temporary yard signs as follows: N. Temporary Yard Signs. 1. One temporary yard sign shall be allowed for each political candidate or issue for each frontage per parcel of land. Such signs shall be erected no sooner than sixty (60) days prior to the election for which they were intended. and shall be removed within seven (7) days after the election for which they are intended. The total siqn face area of each sign shall not exceed six (6) square feet in area on parcels of land desiqnated or used for residential 6 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . purposes and thirty-two (32) sauare feet of total sign face area on parcels of land desianated or used for non-residential purposes. 2. One other temporary yard sign shall be permitted for each road frontage per parcel of land provided that such sians are displayed no more than three times a year for a total of 90 days durina a one year period. and provided that the total sian face area of each signs does not exceed six sauare feet on parcels of land designated or used for residential purposes. N. One tempor3ry yard Gign for e3ch road frontage per paroel of land provided th3t Guoh GignG are diGplayed no more th3n three timee a year for a total of 90 daYG during a one year period, and provided th3t the tot31 eign boe are3 of eaoh eign doee not exceed Gix equ3re feet of tot31 eign fuce 3rea on paroels of land deeign3ted or ueed for roeidential purpoeeG.:. Section 8. Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-1807(B), is hereby amended by revising the permitted signage section of the Comprehensive Sign Program as follows: B. Permitted Signage. Signage which is proposed as part of a comprehensive sign program may deviate from the minimum sign standards in terms of numbers of signs per business or parcel of land, maximum area of a sign face per parcel of land and the total area of sign faces per business or parcel of land, subject to compliance with the flexibility criteria set out in Section 3-1807(C). Monument sians. permitted pursuant to Section 3- 1806(B)(1)(g) and Section 3-1806(B)(2) shall not be eliaible for comprehensive sign program. A comprehensive sign program shall be approved as part of a level one or level two approval, as the case may be. 7 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Section 9. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption. PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Brian J. Aungst Mayor-Commissioner Attest: Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk 8 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . COB Meeting Date: August 15. 2000 Case: TAOO-07-05 Agenda Item: 03 CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATION STAFF REPORT TEXT AMENDMENT REQUEST: Amendments to the Community Development Code - Ordinance No. 6595-00 INITIA TED BY: Planning Department BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the July 18th Community Development Board meeting, staff presented several issues for discussion that were not included in Ordinance 6573-00. Issues discussed included: residential infill projects, corner lot fences, temporary yard signs for nonresidential property and the prohibition of the use of the comprehensive sign program for certain monument signs. The Board supported all of the amendments except for the one proposed for corner lot fences. At the July 20th City Commission meeting, the Commission postponed action on the proposed prohibition of parking on landscaped areas in the front yard of residential properties due to a proposed revision. The Commission requested additional time to consider the amendment prior to voting on it. The issues listed above are being addressed in the attached proposed Ordinance No. 6595-00. Although the Board discussed these issues and provided staff direction, a formal recommendation should be made after conducting an advertised public hearing on the issues. ANALYSIS: Proposed Ordinance No. 6595-00 includes amendments addressing four items. Below please find a description of each proposed amendment. 1 . . 1. Residential Infill Project (Pages 1 - 6 of proposed ordinance.) Staff is proposing an amendment to the flexible development use tables in the Low Density Residential, Medium Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Medium High Density Residential, and High Density Residential Zoning Districts that more clearly identifies the flexibility permitted with regard to development standards for residential infill projects. Currently, review criteria for residential infill projects permits flexibility in development standards by permitting setback and parking requirements to be reduced beyond what is listed in the use charts. Staff is proposing to add a footnote to each flexible development use chart in the above districts that specifies that the development standards for residential infill projects are guidelines and may be varied based on the flexibility criteria. 2. Parking on Landscaped Areas (Page 6 of the proposed ordinance.) At the July 20th meeting, the City Commission did not act on the proposed amendment prohibiting the parking of vehicles on landscaped areas in a required front setback. The new language introduced for consideration would permit parking on the grass if it were in a designated space adjacent to a driveway. The proposal also specifies that if the parking location is not maintained as a grass area and if a neighbor complains, the property owner would be required to fill in the area with a suitable parking material. The proposed ordinance contains an amendment reflecting this. 3. Temporary Yard Signs (Pages 6 - 7 of the proposed ordinance.) Staff is proposing to expand Code Section 3-1805(N) that regulates temporary yard signs. The content of these signs is not regulated in any manner and can be used for any type of speech. The current provision specifies the permitted size and the length of time temporary yard signs can be erected on residential property. Staff is proposing to expand this provision to also apply to non-residential properties. The proposed amendment would permit temporary yard signs, not exceeding thirty-two (32) square feet in area, on parcels ofland used for non-residential purposes. 4. Comprehensive Sign Program (Page 7 of the proposed ordinance.) During the six-month code update, two new provisions permitting monument signs were added to the sign ordinance. Under current provisions, any type of permitted sign may be eligible for comprehensive sign program, which allows an increase of up to 100% in sign size. Staff never contemplated that the new provisions permitting monument signs in the Tourist and Downtown Districts or the provision allowing monument signs to exceed the permitted freestanding sign area by 25% could be subject to the comprehensive sign program. Staff is proposing an amendment to Code Section 3-1807(B) that specifically excludes the use of the comprehensive sign program for those signs. 2 . . CRITERIA FOR TEXT AMENDMENTS: Code Section 4-601 specifies the procedures and criteria for reviewing text amendments. Any code amendment must comply with the following. 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with and furthers the goals, policies, objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Below please find a selected list of goals, policies, objectives from the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan that are furthered by the proposed amendments to the Community Development Code: . Goal 2 - "Clearwater shall focus on the renewal of declining areas, stabilization of built-up neighborhoods, and infill development to encourage economic vitality and counteract the scarcity of vacant land." The provisions allowing development standards to be varied for residential infill projects will further the goal of renewing declining areas and stabilizing built-up neighborhood by allowing variations if the flexibility criteria can be met through the site plan review process. The restriction on parking on landscaped areas promotes stability, heightened property maintenance standards, and aesthetics. . Policy 2.4.2 - "Neighborhood preservation and infill development shall be encouraged by maintenance and upgrading of public and private property." The provisions allowing development standards to be varied for residential infill projects and the restriction on parking on landscaped areas in the front setback will further neighborhood preservation by encouraging property maintenance and the upgrading of private property. . Objective 4.1 - "All signage within the City of Clearwater shall be consistent with the Clearwater sign code, as found within the Community Development Code, and all proposed signs shall be evaluated to determine their effectiveness in reducing visual clutter and in enhancing the safety and attractiveness of the streetscape." The proposed revision to temporary yard signs and the comprehensive sign program will not increase visual clutter or have a negative impact on safety. 2. The proposed amendments further the purposes of the Community Development Code and other City ordinances and actions designed to implement the Plan. The proposed text amendments revise zoning district standards found in Article 2, parking restrictions in the residential districts and sign regulations in Article 3. The proposed amendments are consistent with the following purposes of the Code. 3 . . . Section 1-103(A) - It is the purpose of this Development Code to implement the Comprehensive Plan of the city; to promote the health, safety, general welfare and quality of life in the city; to guide the orderly growth and development of the city; to establish rules of procedures for land development approvals; to enhance the character of the city and the preservation of neighborhoods; and to enhance the quality oflife of all residents and property owners of the city; . Section l-103(E)(2) - Protect the character and the social and economic stability of all parts of the city through the establishment of reasonable standards which encourage the orderly and beneficial development of land within the city; and . Section 1-103(E)(3) - Protect and conserve the value of land throughout the city and the value of buildings and improvements upon the land, and minimize the conflicts among the uses of land and buildings. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The proposed amendments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Community Development Code. The amendments clarify the flexibility permitted for residential infill projects, allows parking on the grass in residential districts under limited circumstances, provide businesses with the ability to erect temporary yard signs, and prohibits permitted monument signs from being increased in size through the comprehensive sign program. The Planning Department Staff recommends APPROVAL of Ordinance No. 6595-00 that revises the Community Development Code. Prepared by: Gina L. Clayton A TT ACHMENT: Proposed Ordinance No. 6595-00 4 . . ORDINANCE NO. 6595-00 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; AMENDING ARTICLE 2, ZONING DISTRICTS BY CLARIFYING THAT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS ARE GUIDELINES; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BY ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION TO SECTION 3-1407(A) PARKING RESTRICTIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION 3-1805 SIGNS PERMITTED WITHOUT A PERMIT, BY REVISING SECTION 3- 1805(N) TEMPORARY YARD SIGNS; AND AMENDING ARTICLE 3, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION 3-1807(B) BY PROHIBITING MONUMENT SIGNS TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PROGRAM; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater has conducted an in-depth review of the Community Development Code and has identified development standard which need amendment to clarify the intent of certain provisions; WHEREAS, the Community Development Board, pursuant to its responsibilities as the Local Planning Agency, has reviewed these amendments, conducted a public hearing to consider all public testimony and has determined that this amendment is consistent with the City of Clearwater's Comprehensive Plan; and - WHEREAS, the City Commission has fully considered the recommendation of the Community Development Board and testimony submitted at its public hearing; now therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-104, "LOR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residential Infill Project as follows: Section 2-104. Flexible development. The following Level Two uses are permitted in the LOR District subject to the standards and criteria set out in this Section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Table 2-104. "LOR" District Flexible Development Standards Use Min. Lot Width ft. Min. Setbacks (ft. ) Max. Height (ft. ) Min. Off-Street Parking Front Ordinance No. 6595 -00 . . Attached 10,000 100 25 10 15 30 1.5/unit dwellinQs Overnight 20,000 100 25 15 25 30 1/unit Accommodations Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000SF Recreation land area or as Facilities determined by the Community Development Director based on the ITE Manual standards Residentiallnfill.0 n/a n/a 10 - 0--15 0-15 30 1/unit 25 Schools 40,000 200 25 15 25 30 1/3 students (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback on a waterfront lot to be at least eighteen (18) feet from a seawall. (2) The development standards for residential infill proiects are Quidelines and may be varied based on the criteria set forth in Section 2-104(0). Section 2. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-204, "LMDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residential Infill Projects as follows: Table 2-204. "LMDR" District Flexible Development Use Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Size Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street (sq. ft.) Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Attached 10,000 100 25 5 15 30 1.5/unit DwellinQs Detached 3,000-- 25-50 15--25 2--5 5-15 30 2/unit DwellinQs 5,000 Non- n/a n/a 25 10 10 n/a n/a Residential Off Street ParkinQ 2 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 Recreation SF land area Facilities or as determined by the Community Development Director based on ITE Manual standards Residential n/a n/a 10--25 0--5 0-15 30 1/unit Infill Proiects(2) Schools 40,000 200 35 25 15 30 1/3 students (1) Waterfront detached dwellings in LMDR District should be 25 feet except as provided in Article 3 Division 8, Section 3-805 and Division 9, Section 3-904 and except where adjacent structures on either side of the parcel proposed for development are setback 20 feet and then the rear setback shall be 20 feet. The Building Code may require the rear setback to be at least 18 feet from a seawall. (2) The development standards for residential infill proiects are Quidelines and may be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 2-204(E). Section 3. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-304, "MDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residential Infill Projects as follows: Section 2-304. Flexible development. The following Level Two uses are permitted in the MDR District subject to the standards and criteria set out in this Section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Table 2-304. "MDR" District Flexible Development Uses Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street Area Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking (sq. ft.) (ft. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Assisted Living 20,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1 per 2 Facilities residents Attached 1 0,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1.5/unit Dwellings 3 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Congregate Care 20,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1 per 2 residents Non-Residential n/a n/a 25 5 10 n/a n/a Off-Street ParkinQ Overnight 20,000 100 25 5 10 30--50 1/unit Accommodations Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 Recreational SF land area Facilities or as determined by the Community Development Director based on ITE Manual standards Residentiallnfill n/a n/a 10-25 0--5 0-10 30--50 1/unit Proiects(2) (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback to be at least 18 feet from any seawall. (2) The development standards for residential infill proiects are Quidelines and may be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 3-304(8). Section 4. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-404 "MHDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it relates to Residentiallnfill Projects as follows: Section 2-404. Flexible development. The following Level Two uses are permitted subject to the standards and criteria set out in this section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Table 2-404. "MHDR" Flexible Development Use Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street Area Width (f1. ) (f1. ) Parking (sq. f1.) (f1. ) Front Side Rear (1 ) Attached 15,000 150 15-25 0--10 1 0--15 30--50 1.5/unit DwellinQs Congregate Care 15,000 150 25 10 15 30 1 per 2 residents 4 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Non-Residential n/a n/a 25 5 10 n/a n/a Off-Street Parking (2) Overnight 15,000 150 15-25 0--1 0 1 0--15 30 1/unit Accommodations Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 recreation SF land area facilities or as determined by the Community Development Coordinator based on the ITE Manual standards Residentiallnfill n/a n/a 10-25 0--1 0 0--15 30 -- 1/unit Projects L:n 50 Residential 15,000 150 25 10 15 30 2/1,000 Shelters GFA (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback on a waterfront lot to be at least 18 feet from a seawall. m Non-residential parking lots shall not exceed 3 acres. Any such use, alone or when added to contiguous like uses which exceed 3 acres shall require a land use plan map amendment to the appropriate land use category. (3) The development standards for residential infill proiects are Quidelines and may be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 2-404(F). Section 5. Article 2, Zoning Districts, Table 2-504, "HDR" District Flexible Development Standards is hereby amended by revising the table as it related to Residential Infill Project as follows: Section 2-504. Flexible development. The following Level One uses are permitted in the HDR District subject to the standards and criteria set out in this section and other applicable regulations in Article 3. Table 2-504. "HDR" Flexible Development Standards Use Min. Min. Min. Max. Min. Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street Area Width (ft. ) (ft. ) Parking (sq. ft.) (ft. ) Front I Side I Rear (1) 5 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . Attached 15,000 150 15-- 0-10 1 0--15 30-- 1.5/unit Dwellings 25 130 Congregate Care 15,000 150 25 10 15 30 1 per 2 residents Overnight 15,000 150 15-- 0-10 10-15 30 1/unit Accommodations 25 Parking Garage 20,000 100 50 15-25 10 10 -- n/a and Lots (2) 20 Parks and n/a n/a 35 20 25 30 1 per 20,000 recreational SF land area facilities or as determined by the Community Development Coordinator based on ITE Manual standards Residentiallnfill n/a n/a 10 -- 0-10 0--15 30- 1/unit Projects (3) 25 130 (1) The Building Code may require the rear setback on a waterfront lot to be at least 18' from a seawall. (2) Parking garages shall not exceed 3 acres. Any such use, alone or when added to contiguous like uses which exceed 3 acres shall require a land use plan map amendment to the appropriate land use category. (3) The development standards for residential infill proiects are Quidelines and may be varied based on the criteria specified in Section 2-504(F). Section 7. Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-1407, Parking restrictions in residential areas, is hereby amended by adding a new subsection (4) to Section 3-1407(A) as follows: 4. ParkinQ on the Qrass in a required front setback shall occur only in a desiQnated location. This desiQnated parkinQ area shall be located adiacent to a driveway. if one exists, or in a location approved by the City ManaQer or desiQnee. If this desiQnated parkinQ location cannot be maintained as a Qrass area and is reported by neiQhborinQ residents as a detrimental property. it is required that the desiQnated parkinQ area be filled in. by the property owner, with pavers, concrete. turf block, or other approved suitable parkinQ material. Section 8. Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-1805(N) is hereby amended by revising temporary yard signs as follows: N. One temporary yard sign for each road frontage per parcel of land provided that such signs are displayed no more than three times a year for a total of 90 days 6 Ordinance No. 6595-00 . . during a one year period, and provided that the total sign face area of each sign does not exceed six square feet of total sign face area on parcels of land designated or used for residential purposes and thirty-two square feet of total sion face area on parcels of land desionated or used for non-residential purposes. Section 9. Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-1807(B), is hereby amended by revising the permitted signage section of the Comprehensive Sign Program as follows: B. Permitted Signage. Signage which is proposed as part of a comprehensive sign program may deviate from the minimum sign standards in terms of numbers of signs per business or parcel of land, maximum area of a sign face per parcel of land and the total area of sign faces per business or parcel of land, subject to compliance with the flexibility criteria set out in Section 3-1807(C). Monument sions, permitted pursuant to Section 3- 1806(B)(1)(0) and Section 3-1806(B)(2) shall not be elioible for comprehensive sion prooram. A comprehensive sign program shall be approved as part of a level one or level two approval, as the case may be. Section 10. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption. PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED Brian J. Aungst Mayor-Commissioner Approved as to form: Attest: Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk 7 Ordinance No. 6595-00 RUG. 17.2000 9:14AM SIE~10N & LHRSUj ~iO . qS P.1. . . SIEMON & LARSEN LAW OFFICES MIZNER PARK 433 PLAZA R.lW,., sum: m BQC.6. JtI.. TON. PLOJUOA 3343:2 TEl$PJlONE<'U) 36Msoe FACSWUU (sn) 361.4008 a.MAlL: almboca@sate,net August 17, 2000 Please deliver upon receipt to: Name' Cyndi Hardin Firm, City of Clearwater FAX Number: 727/562~4865 From: SQIly Stroh beck Message: Charlie asked me to convey the following to yo~: "Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code, no sign shall be subj eot to any limitation based on the content of the message contained on such sign." ~ 11 1\C(ffr ~. Total Pages Includinl Cover Sheet: 1 Client: Clearwater Matter: A&D CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE nmINfORMATlON CONTAINEDJN '!HIS FACSIMlLEMESSAOE IS PRIVILEGED AND CON1'IPENTlAL, JNTI!NDED lI'OR m: USE 01' nm ADORESSllE ABOVE, IF YOU ARE NEITHER THE l!'.1'ENDED RECIPIENT NOR nlE EMPLOYEE. OR AGENT RESPONSmL8 FOR DP.UVEIUNG nus M!~AOE TO tHE II'f1'P.NDED RECIPIENT. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIllI2D T['IAT ANY DISCl.OStml. COPYING, DIS'l'roBUTION OR TI.n~ T Al{ING OF ACTION IN Rf.JJANCE O~ nm CONTENTS OF THIS TELRCOPIED IN1l0RMA '!TO~ IS S'IfUCrLV PROHIBI'IED. IF YOU IiAVE RECEIVED THrs TELtCOPY IN ERROR, l'LEASE NOTljlY CO\.'NSEL AlJOVE IMMEDIAT~LY BY TELel'HONE TO ARRANGE FOR RETURN OF Tal ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS TO THE COUN~EL NAMED ABOVE. ~ \~\~~~ . . . . ~f1~ ,..,111 ..j~~~LOF rJi;~-r~.. \\.~ ~.JIlI.'L""~~~"'_ ..t-:::.,," ~~~~~~":. ....;:-.;;,,' ,III.. ":.!?;.. ~"",-/---<,. '. ~ -. ~crc~~~".~~. . ~: ..~.-~ . .~~.. ":.?.L'\'"~~~ . .' ,"c--.''i,' ~,..T;p~;;W"'~~~\ ...~...~:4TER,.,j. ''''IJI'' CITY OF CLEARWATER POST OfFICE Box 4748, CU:.\RWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 CITY R-IlL, 112 SOUTH OSCEOlA AVENUE, CLL~RWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4050 E,,"x (727) 562~4052 CrTY COMMISSION June 6, 2000 William C. Jonson Chair, Development Code Committee Coalition of Clearwater Homeowner Associations 2694 Redford Court West Clearwater, FL 33761 Dear Mr. Jonson: We are in receipt of your recent correspondence regarding adding back into the sign portion of the Development Code a First Amendment protection clause from the old Clearwater sign code. Thank you for your continued diligence. We will be back with you soon on your observations. Sincerely, ;, At- r g,lJ. ..1~ ~ ~ (~~ r 1~/4- ;:;r- Brian J. Aungst Mayor BJA/cb 0:\[ CITY. 0:\[ FLn:RE. BI(L\f\ J. AUf\GST, \L\YOR~CmlMISSIOI\ER lB. JOHf\SOf\, VICE MAYOR~CmL\lISSIOI\ER ED HARr, CO.\l\llSSIOf\ER * BOB ClARK, CO.\l\lISSJONFR ED HOOPER, Cml\llSSIOf\E!( "EQL'.-\I. E~lPLOY"IE:\T A:\[) AFFm"I\TIVF Acno:\ E\II'LO\D(" .' .WILLIAM C. JONSON 2694 REDFORD COURT WEST, CLEARWA1ER, FLORIDA 33761 . June 2, 2000 The Honorable Brian Aungst Mayor, City of Clearwater. Post Office Box 4748 Clearwater, Florida 33758 Dear Mayor Aungst and City Commissioners: At last night's City Commission meeting I reconunended adding back into the sign portion of the Development Code a First Amendment protection clause from the old Clearwater sign code. I am enclosing a court decision from August, 1999, which deals in part with First Amendment issues. On page 17 there is a footnote 11 which directly deals with this issue. It ends by saying: "The City could likely save this portion of the ordinance by adding such a provision." I observe that the current sign code is not completely content neutral. For example Sec. 3-1805 C allows temporary signs related to "the principle use of the parcel". Thus it seems that we are subject to a First Amendment challenge. For several months I have been attempting to find out why the language was deleted. It seems that the abundance of caution would recommend adding this statement to the current code. Is there a downside to this approach? 1;lL William C. Jons Chair, Development Code Committee Coalition of Clearwater Homeowner Associations CC: Rich Glasgow, President End: Outdoor Systems, Inc., vs. The City of Merriam, Kansas, Aug. 30, 1999 Language reconunended by the Southern Environmental Law Center from the old Clearwater Sign Code .. . '. , . - :.. '-1. ~ \' (~' T '\:"' .... T I '\' . "T' 'L~.' ,r. " -..- '....___~.....""........', .. ............. __ :-.~ '. '.l_.',::. (3\ If signs are authorized t.o be placed b,y this chapter on the basis of property being afforded n1ul tiple street frontages, then each such sign shall be positioned to be primarily viewed from each such fronta e. . --i: I t i ~ the 1 n ten t 0 f the city com mi s s ion t hat protection of First .:\nlendment rights shall be af. fo:--dec1 such that any sign, display or device al- lo\\red under this chapter may contain, in lieu of any other c~P, any otherwise laVY1ul noncommer- ciaJ Jnessage that does not. direct attention to a business operated for profit or to a commodity or service for sale and that complies \\rith the size, lighting and spacing requirements of this chapter, (Code 1980, S 134.018(a)-(c); Ord. No. 5257, ~ 5! 9.17-92) Sec. 44.08. Exempt signs. The following t~ypes of signs are exempt from the permitting requirements of this chapter, pro- Of?'~ ~ .n. ~ ... h "" .... ~ ,. ~ ~ L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ -1 _..I 1 1 . . , .. ,4 Chan This I the s: ,- ComT (OJ days, t 1 n1 e 15 cia incl uc ilar dj but d( ofty"p this c: i 6' Canst ' I lot fro playec . perml . SIgnS Zonin . ,... ._" ,.,_...l ...~(i,n sqz .... '. .....~ SinglE .. . ~\1I.-01-00 04:51pm From-ALLEN BRINTON ~MONS ~043538770 . T-596 P.18/ZZ F-3ZZ 67 F,Supp.2d 1258 (Cite as: 67 F.Supp.2d 1258, *1270) Page 17 zoning dist+icts under the current ordinance, the City may wish to clarify this point if and when it redrafts the ordinance. In summary, the Court finds that Sections 6-104(N), 6~10S, 6-107(A)( 6- 201, 6-202, and 6-203 of the Merriam Sign Ordinance are unconstitutional. [FN11] Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on this issue is sustained and defendant's motion is overruled. FN11. These provisions violate the First Amendment principles enunciated in Metromedia because the ordinance (unlike many sign ordinances) does not allow noncommercial speech to be substituted in lieu of the various ca~egories of permitted speech. Cf. Outdoor Sys., Inc. v. City of Lenexa, 67 F,SuPp.2d 1231 (finding permissible ordinance stating that "any permitted sign is allowed to contain noncommeroial speech in lieu of any other speech") (D.Kan. July 26, 1999); Outdoor Sys., Inc. v. City of Mesa, 997 F,2d 604( 611 (9th Cir.1993) (ordinances which allow noncommercial messages in lieu of any other message satisfy free speech requirements); National Adver. Co, v. City & County of Denver, 912 F.2d 405, 408-10 (10th Cir. 1990) ("the preference for noncommercial over commercial advertising under the new ordinance is the kind of underinclusiveness the First Amendment toleratesrr); Georgia Outdoor Adver., Inc. v, City of Waynesville, 833 F.2d 43, 46 (4th Cir.1987) (upholding ordin~nce similar to ones in City of Mesa, supra ), ip~€'ityeoU1d.:tike'ly save this portion of the ordinance by adding such a provision. II. Discretion Of Community Development Committee [6] [7] [8) An ordinance that requires a permit before a sign may be displayed ~annot grant a government official unfettered discretion to deny a permit application, See City of Lakewood v. Plain Dealer Publ'g Co., 486 U.S, 750, 772, 108 S,Ct. 2138, 100 L.Ed.2d 771 (1988) (citing Freedmsn v. Maryland, 380 J.3. 51, 85 s.et, 734, 13 L.8d.2d 649 (1965)). Limits on the administrator's luthority must be imposed either by explicit "textual incorporation, binding jUdicial or administrative construction, or well~ established practice." jakewood, 486 U,S. at 770, 108 S,Ct. 2138. Moreover, a prior restraint upon the Lssuance of sign permits must place limits on the time within which the iecisionmaker *1271 must issue a license. See FW/PBS, Inc, v. City of Pallas, 193 U.S, 215, 226, 110 S.Ct. 596, 107 L.Ed.2d 603 (1990); Freedman, 380 U,S. at ~9, 85 s.et. 734. (9) Here, the Zoning Administrator first reviews permit applications for ~ompliance with certain standards and guidelines. See Merriam Code ~ 6~ .03 (8) (1). Within 30 days of the application, the Zoning Administrator must ;ubmit each application to the Community Development Committee (t.he "CoIW11ittee" )f the City Council. See id. ~ 6-103 (8) (2). The Committee reviews the \pplication at its next regularly scheduled monthly meeting. Plaintiff argues that the ordinance is unconstitutional because it grants the ~ommittee unfettered discretion to issue sign permits and does not contain a .ime limit for ~he Committee to review an application. Defendant responds by .oting that the Zoning Administrator must follow specific gu~delines ana s~bmit Copr. @ West 2000 No Claim to Orig, D.S; Govt. Works I . . . ~/~ uRlo {j, 7l~ / ,8,~ ~q~a>>7~~-;J?~~ ~ ;117~ tJ!:Inhp~ -~ ~/f#?2lh ~~~-~/UUC ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~4UP?y~~-r ~~t/~~ o/~--z<'~ r~~~qnJp ~-- /2&#~~~/?J ~~....:: 11~;;n~~~~~,w25h<g~ (;;~ ~ 7'ltL &~~ /UiPqv/~ ~ ~& ~1J7I/k? /1 *~ ~1}-~ff;~ ro~ f the basis that it impermissibly favored commer- cial speech over noncommercial speech. However, and more important, seven justices explicitly concluded that the City's interest in its appearance would justifY a ban on billboards. The majority agreed that regulation which favors on-site commercial advertising over off- site commercial advertising is legitimate, but that regulation cannot favor on-site commercial over noncommercial speech. In other words, an ordinance prohibiting new billboard construction or banning billboards altogether can be valid as long as it meets the other tests described below. Key billboard indus- try arguments - that tough controls on bill- boards always violate either First Amendment speech protections or "equal protection" (by distinguishing between on- and off-premise signs) - are clearly false. Obviously, the distinction between on- and off-site signs is critical. Other decisions uphold- ing billboard regulation include Georgia Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Waynesville, 838 F. 2d 43 (4th Cir. 1986) and National Advertising Co. v. City of Roleigh, 947 F.2d 1158 (4th Cir. 1991). Repeated court rulings in favor of tough bill- board control have not discouraged the billboard industry, however. Indeed, many good billboard regulations finally do end up in court because bill- board operators hope to delay implementation of tough laws, to wear down battle-weary communi- ties, and to outlast changing legislative bodies. When billboard regulations are challenged, courts will typically ask the following questions, which are sometimes known as the Central Hudsrm test, so named for the US Supreme Court decision, Central Hudson v. Public Service Crrmmissirm, 447 US 557, 553-556,100 S. Ct. 2343 (1980): :3 i II at se lat ~lr 11- pe l h. ,ue lat 3 urt )n 1) Is the ordinance content-neutral and impartially administered? The first hurdle for an ordinance to pass is that of content neutrality. Your ordinance may not favor commercial messages (which on- premise signs usually arc) over noncommercial or public service ads (which billboards occasionally, though infrequently, provide). To pass the con- tent-neutrality test, it's wise to state in your sign ordinance that noncommercial messages may be placed anywhere that commercial messages are allowed. The Southern Environmental Law Center recommends the following statement: "Any sign, display or device allowed under this chapter may contain, in lieu of any other copy, any otherwise lawful noncommercial message that does not direct attention to a business operated for profit, or to a commodity or service for sale, and that complies with all other requirements of this chapter." Raleigh, NC is known for its parks and attractive neighborhoods. It has taken down over 200 billboards through its amortization ordinance. Neighboring Durham removed more than 75 billboards in 1998, FIGHTING BILLBOARD BLIGHT 35 ;;;-= / - 14:5'3 . / _ i "j !~ ' f'\./ / J o lnteroffice correspondence Sheet COPIES 10: COMMISSION TO~ from: Cc: f\e: Date: BiU Horne, lnterim Cit'l Manager Vice Mav'" J. 8. Johnson Cf~ Mav'" 8< commissioners (J CommunitY Development Board August 1 . 2000 AUG - 1 2000 PRESS Cl..ERK' "TTORNEV ~_.._--_._~._-_._._--_._..._-_._._-_._.._----_.._--_..--- AS I mentioned to VOU lest night, it is mv request that the parking on grass question be on the agenda AUgust 11" in lieu of the proposed September data. The eommunitv DevelOpment Board meetS August I 5" so there iso't any reeson to ",ait until Septamber. I ",ould also hope commissioner Hooper'S concerns ara addressed during the ",ork session on August 14th. JBJ/cb Cc: RI'ph Stone, P&OS CVndie Goudeau, CitY Cler\<. /-~~C-\f r"'--- \' \ , NJG - \ L\JGG .""'_"'",,,.,c. i P\~O;:"~N1 SUW\Cl S (,11'( 0\ CC \; "H\N"H\~__..- TOTRL '