TA00-03-02
T A 00-03-02
Ord.6526-00
Community
Development Code
.
.
~"rwater
u
TO:
Community Development Board Members
FROM:
Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
DATE:
April 6, 2000
RE:
Proposed Amendments to the Community Development Code
Following the March 21, 2000 Community Development Board meeting, issues were
brought forward to staff that warranted additional amendments to the Community
Development Code. Provisions were also found that needed further refinement. Below
please find additional amendments made by staff that were not presented to the Board at
the March 21 st meeting and will be presented to the City Commission on May 2, 2000,
The following changes are substantive in nature:
1. Deleted "bicycle" from definition of "vehicle," Revised the definition of retail sales
to include the leasing of any goods.
2. Revised fence regulations by: permitting fences within the setback on all waterfront
lots - not just residential lots; added provision permitting deviations from the fence
requirements for public projects pursuant to a Level One (flexible standard) approval
process; added clarification that chain link fences abutting any public right-of-way
are prohibited; and added provision allowing fence boards to be replaced on
nonconforming fences provided the posts are not replaced.
3, Changed the floor area ratio requirement in the Tourist District from .30 to 1.0 to
reflect Land Use Plan FAR.
4. Reduced signage permitted on portable storage units from sixteen (16) to twelve (12)
square feet to be consistent with changes proposed for signage for other temporary
uses,
5, Added provisions restricting the amount of development rights that can be transferred
from and to any site.
1
.
.
6. Increased tree replacement costs from $42 to $48 per inch and revised language of
this section to only permit payment into the tree bank if the Community Development
Coordinator determines there is not sufficient space to replace the equivalent of all
protected trees on site, Also, refined the language and chart relating to tree
replacement requirements,
7, Expanded districts where Christmas tree and pumpkin sales are permitted.
8, Added changes requested by the Pinellas Planning Council to ensure consistency with
the Countywide Rules. Maximum lot areas were imposed for certain uses such as
utility/infrastructure facilities, public transportation facilities, parking lots,
governmental uses, places of worship, vehicle sales, adult uses, nightclubs, residential
shelters, and transient accommodation in certain zoning districts based on
Countywide Rules threshold requirements. Added requirement that any use
approved as a comprehensive infill redevelopment project be permitted by the
underlying land use category. Changed several permitted uses in the Open
Space/Recreation District to accessory uses and revised the definition of density to be
consistent with the Countywide Rules definition,
9, Added criteria restricting the height of any residential infill project in the High
Density Residential District to eighty (80) feet unless located on Clearwater Bay.
10, Added section requiring the maintenance of all aspects of an approved plan including
but not limited to paved areas, landscaped areas, irrigation systems, storm water
facilities, and detention/retention ponds,
11. Increased the number of beds for nursing homes from 2.5 to 3,0 to be considered
equivalent to one dwelling unit.
12. Added exception that would permit nonconforming owner occupied single family
dwelling units to be reconstructed with the same setbacks if destroyed beyond 50% of
the value of the structure.
13, Added provision permitting deviations from loading requirements through a Level 1
(flexible standard) approval process.
The following changes were made by staff and are minor in nature:
1. Deleted the following definitions: shopping center, existing manufactured home park,
expansion of manufactured home park; and new manufactured home. Added Chinese
Tallow Sapium sebiferum to the definition of prohibited tree,
2. Revised the paint permit provision to apply to commercial structures instead of
commercial buildings.
2
.
.
3, Reduced the setback for freestanding signs from ten (10) feet from any property line
to five (5) to reflect the changes approved in the summer amendments.
4. Increased the height permitted for residential infill projects in the Medium High
Density Residential District from 30' to a range of 30' - 50',
5, Clarified that the tree credit proposed for undeveloped commercial property also
applies to multi-family property,
6, Revised the native understory credit provision so that a credit is also possible if
enhanced tree preservation methods are undertaken during construction.
7, Moved an exception sentence that had been added to the land clearing and grubbing
permit provisions to another part of the section.
8. Deleted unnecessary language from the proper tree care section
9. Eliminated off-street parking as a flexible standard use in the Institutional District. It
had been added in the proposed amendments, however, it was eliminated because
parking garages and lots are already permitted in the district.
10, Deleted temporary use provision which states "Special sales markets shall not be
approved for improved properties principally used for retail sales between
Thanksgiving Day and New Year's Day."
11. Added an exception for minor site plan amendment to the proposed triggers for
parking and landscaping requirements. Deleted the requirement that properties along
a scenic corridor must comply with all landscaping requirements,
12, Clarified language relating to appeals.
13. Added requirement that any affected neighborhood association and citywide
neighborhood association should be notified of any public hearing for a Level 2 or
Level 3 approval.
14. Added language to the definition of sign that specifies that any sign seen from a body
of water shall be considered a sign.
15, Deleted references to the MU District in the Use Table at the beginning of Article 2
and in the parking/loading section.
16, Changed the parking requirements for comprehensive infill from "refer to specific
use" to "Determined by the Community Development Coordinator based on the
specific use and/or ITE Manual standards."
3
.
.
17. Changed the criteria for reducing certain side and rear setbacks from "the reduction
does not reduce the amount of landscaped area otherwise required" to "the reduction
results in landscaping in excess of the amount required,"
18. Deleted criteria prohibiting research and technology uses in the Industrial, Research
and Technology District from being contiguous to any residential parcel.
19. Deleted provision for self storage uses in the Industrial, Research and Technology
District from being contiguous to any land used for residential purposes. Retained
portion of criteria that such use shall not be contiguous to land which is designated as
residential on the Zoning Atlas.
20, Revised language permitting monument signs in the non-residential zoning districts.
21, Changed the location of the definition of limited vehicle service.
4
CDB Action Agenda - 3/2'
Page 5
.
3. Case: FL 00-02-07 - 970 Eldorado Avenue
Owner/Applicant: Bridget M. and 1. Wayne Phillips.
Location: 0.15 acres located on the southwest corner of Juniper Street and
Eldorado Avenue,
Zoning: LMDR, Low Medium Density Residential District.
Request: Flexible Development approval of a Residential Infill Project, with a
reduction in front setback from 25 feet to five feet (Juniper Street).
Proposed Use: A 3,586 square foot single-family dwelling.
Presenter: Mark T. Parry, Planner,
ACTION: The Board approved this case. The appeal period expires April 4, 2000.
E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: February 15, 2000
ACTION: The Board approved the minutes,
~
F.
DIRECTOR'S ITEMS:
Case: Text Amendment TAOO-03-02 - Community Development Code
Request: Comprehensive amendment to the Community Development Code as
result of the required update.
Presenter: Gina L. Clayton, Senior Planner.
ACTION: The Board conducted a public hearing on the proposed Code amendment. It
recommended approval of the proposed 31-day minimum rental period, agreed accessory
retail and restaurant uses in the Office District cannot have signs and limited the use of
PODS on any property to a maximum of 48 hours. The Board determined the proposed
amendments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The recommendation will be
forwarded to the City Commission.
G. ADJOURNMENT
S:\C D Blagendas DRC & CDB\CDB\2000\03 Marchlcdb action agenda 3-21-00,doc
.
.
CDB Meeting Date: March 21.2000
Case: TAOO-03-02
Agenda Item: Director's Item
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
STAFF REPORT
TEXT AMENDMENT
REQUEST:
Amendments to the Community Development Code as a Result
of the Required Update - Ordinance No. 6526-00.
INITIATED BY:
City of Clearwater Planning Department
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The foundation of the One City, One Future redevelopment initiative was the creation of
the new Community Development Code, which became effective on March 8, 1999. In
order to provide a new framework for development and redevelopment in the City of
Clearwater, the Code was structured to encourage desired development and
redevelopment and provide property owners with measured flexibility with regard to use
and intensity of use and bulk standards,
After the Code went into effect, the Planning Department staff was charged with
evaluating the Code to determine if it was achieving its goals. Since March 1999, staff
has had ample opportunity for using the Code and evaluating its effectiveness. Staff has
approved approximately 1,300 applications requiring minimum zoning approval. The
Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed over 83 flexible standard
development cases, The DRC and the Community Development Board (CDB) have
reviewed approximately 35 flexible development cases, Staff has also reviewed
approximately thirty comprehensive sign program applications, During the past year,
only one appeal has been filed and that was resolved in a mutually beneficial manner.
After the Code went into effect, staff began to record any inconsistencies, deficiencies, or
problems found in the Code. Comments were collected from Planning and Development
Services staff, Community Response Team members, Parks and Recreation staff, the
Harbormaster and Public Works staff Additionally, comments and suggestions have
been obtained from design and development professionals, contractors and residents,
During the Code update process, which began in September 1999, staff has met with
numerous groups and individuals to solicit input on the update including the Island
Estates Homeowners Association, Sand Key Civic Association, the Clearwater Coalition
of Homeowners Association, the Government Affairs Committee of the Chamber of
Page I
.
.
Commerce, the Clearwater Beach Chamber of Commerce, the Clearwater Board of
Realtors, the Clearwater Environmental Advisory Board, and the Downtown
Development Board.
Through working with the Code on a daily basis and with community stakeholders has
staff been able to compile a comprehensive list of amendments to recommend to the
Community Development Board,
ANALYSIS:
Staff is recommending a number of amendments to the Community Development Code,
Of those, 30 are considered major policy issues, The remainder are editorial in nature,
provide additional flexibility criteria, or are refinements to existing provisions.
Below please find a summary of the most noteworthy proposed amendments organized
by Article, Attached please find a comprehensive listing of all proposed amendments,
Amendments are organized by Section and page number. Also attached is Ordinance No,
6526-00 which includes the ordinance title and the Community Development Code with
all specific amendments noted, Text that is underlined indicates proposed language and
text containing strikethroughs indicate deletions.
Article 1 - General Provisions.
. Adding language to the purpose section of the Code to enhance the quality of life of
all residents and property owners of the city.
Article 2 - Zonin!!: Districts.
. Permitting parks and recreation facilities as flexible development uses in the
residential zoning districts and minimum or flexible standard uses in the commercial
zoning districts.
. Creating more flexibility in setbacks for particular uses primarily in the nonresidential
districts and establishing criteria for the additional flexibility.
. Eliminating the "economically feasible" criteria from the residential and
comprehensive infill uses,
. Clarifying that permitted overnight accommodation in the residential districts is an
accessory use to the principal dwelling and reducing the number of rooms permitted,
. Eliminating the requirements that congregate care and assisted living facilities be
located on a major arterial or corner lot.
. Permitting shared parking options in the Tourist (T) and Downtown (D) Districts.
Page 2
.
.
· Eliminating the requirements that medical clinics front on major arterials but not
access such arterials.
· Permitting new uses such a limited vehicle service, light assembly, limited vehicle
sales and display, and mixed use,
· Eliminating the Mixed Use District in its entirety.
Article 3 - Development Standards.
· Increasing the amount (percentage of gross floor area) allowed for accessory uses,
· Revising the dock provisions to be more consistent with the Pinellas County Water
and Navigation Control Authority,
· Fences: reorganizing the entire fence section; providing guidance for the location of
fences on corner lots and double frontage lots; revising landscaping requirements for
chainlink fences; and requiring a 4 feet high fence enclosing swimming pools,
· Providing for density and intensity averaging on any unified site with different land
use categories,
· Requiring a permit for painting commercial properties.
· Prohibiting the rental of residentially zoned dwellings for less than 31 days.
· Permitting multi-stand newsracks to be located side by side for a distance of six feet
provided separation requirement of 300 feet is maintained between multi-stand
newsracks,
· Prohibiting semi-trailer trucks and cabs from parking on residentially zoned property,
· Prohibiting commercial vehicles from parking on commercial property unless they
are affiliated with the property on which they are parked.
· Prohibiting parking on the grass in the front setback of residentially zoned properties
if other alternative paved areas exist.
· Eliminating cap on maximum amount of parking that can be provided on a site,
· Clarifying triggers for compliance with landscaping and parking requirements,
· Incorporating additional tree protection measures into the Community Development
Code.
Page 3
.
.
· Allowing a 25% tree replacement credit for undeveloped commercial properties only.
· Requiring a tree removal permit for palms with a 10 feet clear and straight trunk.
· Establishing a minimum number of trees required on single-family and two-family
properties instead of requiring tree replacement on an inch per inch basis,
· Allowing 25% more signage on nonresidential sites if a monument sign is erected
instead of a freestanding sign.
· Permitting a grand opening sign twelve (12) square feet in area.
· Providing for park and school signage five (5) in height and twenty (20) square feet in
area.
· Permitting monument sIgns, In addition to attached sIgns, In the Tourist and
Downtown Districts.
· Permitting changeable messages on signs to be changed once every six hours,
· Clarifying telecommunication tower provisions regarding the required evaluation of
existing alternative towers and the weighing of criteria to grant approval of towers,
· Prohibiting temporary uses which are independent of the principal use on the site,
· Permitting portable storage units on any property forty-eight (48) hours without a
permit; permitting portable storage units in conjunction with an active construction
permit; and restricting construction related signage on the site to one sign with a
maximum sixteen (16) square feet sign.
Article 4 - Development Review Procedures.
· Changing caliper in many instances to DBH (diameter breast height) to be consistent
with industry standards.
· Increasing the notice requirement for flexible standard cases from abutting properties
to those within 200 feet and registered neighborhood associations,
· Requiring the issuance of a development order for a flexible standard development.
· Requiring land use and rezoning cases to be heard by the City Commission within six
months of the CDB meeting or the case will be deemed withdrawn.
Page 4
.
.
· Permitting cases to be amended during the approval process provided the
amendments are less intensive than the original application. If a case is amended to
be more intensive, the case will be required to be re-advertised and start the process
from the beginning,
· Requiring public notice to be given for any continued case instead of only those
where the case was not continued to a date certain,
· Deleting the requirement that an applicant submit a summary of evidence, list of
witnesses, and disclose all related reports ten (10) days before the public hearing,
· Increasing the required percentage of homeowner signatures from 50% to 60% in
order to initiate neighborhood conservation overlay designation, Requiring the
neighborhood to educate its property owners and residents of overlay regulations and
requiring neighborhood participation in enforcement.
. Developing procedures for minor lot adjustments,
· Changing the standards for requiring traffic impact studies from a specific number of
trips generated by the proposed development to the potential degradation of a
roadway's Level of Service as established in the Comprehensive Plan,
· Prohibiting the transfer of development rights to any property zoned LDR or LMDR.
Revising the transfer distance limitation from a I-mile radius to allowing transfers
from the barrier islands to properties only located on the barrier islands and allowing
transfers from property on the mainland to any other property on the mainland,
Article 5 Decisionmakim! and Administrative Bodies
No changes are proposed to Article 5,
Article 6 - Nonconformity Provisions.
· Permitting properties with nonconforming density to be reconstructed with the same
density provided all other code requirements are met.
· Permitting the development of residential lots of record as a Level One (minimum
standard) development provided all requirements can be met.
Article 7 - Enforcement Proceedines and Penalties.
· Providing the municipal code enforcement board or special master the ability to
impose increased fines,
· Requiring a written notice prior to issuing a notice to appear in County court,
Page 5
.
.
Article 8 - Definitions and Rules of Construction.
· Adding definitions of uses listed as permitted, deleting definitions for terms that are
not found in the Code, and revising definitions to be more concise,
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."
· Policy 2.1,1 - "Renewal of the beach tourist district shall be encouraged by
consideration of maintenance of existing densities, selection of a design theme,
innovative shared parking solutions, establishment of mainland employee park and
ride lots, possible land acquisition, transportation improvements, and establishment of
a community redevelopment area or areas,"
· Policy 2.4.2 - "Neighborhood preservation and infill development shall be
encouraged by maintenance and upgrading of public and private property."
· Objective 2,5 - "Compact urban development within the urban service area shall be
promoted through application of the Clearwater Land Development Code,"
. Policy 2,5,1- "The development and redevelopment of small parcels [less than 1 acre]
which are currently receiving an adequate Level of Service shall be specifically
encourage by administration of land development and concurrency management
regulatory systems as a method of promoting urban infill."
· Goal 3 - "The character of Clearwater as a high quality, attractive environment for
resort, residential, and business activities shall be enhanced and encouraged through
implementation of Clearwater's Comprehensive plan,"
. Policy 3,5.1 - "Tree protection and replanting requirements should address both
quantity and quality of post-development landscape."
Page 6
.
.
· Policy 3.7.3 - "Sign identification of City parks and buildings shall be used as a
positive example of aesthetic and legible site information,"
In addition to furthering the goals of the comprehensive plan, the proposed amendments
more fully implement the One City, One Future redevelopment initiative, Examples of
relevant amendments are as follows: additional flexibility in bulk regulations; shared
parking options in the D and T Districts; streamlining the review process of minor lot
adjustments and residential lots of record; permitting the redevelopment of properties
with nonconforming density provided all code requirements are met; and establishing
time, place and manner regulations for newsracks,
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 include a broad range of regulations ranging from
permitted uses, numerical standards, flexibility criteria, procedures, enforcement and
definitions, The proposed amendments are consistent with the provisions of Section I-
103 which lists the purposes of the Code,
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The proposed amendments to the Community Development Code are consistent with the
Clearwater Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of the Community Development Code,
They also further the original goals that established the Code, The amendments
encourage new uses to assist in stimulating development and redevelopment; provide for
improved site design by requiring a high standard of site planing, significant landscaping
and limited signage; and maintain flexibility in setbacks while ensuring neighborhood
compatibility, The proposed amendments promote more site specific solutions and
promote economic development while maintaining high standards for development which
are essential in a community undergoing redevelopment.
The Planning Department Staff recommends APPROVAL of Ordinance No. 6526-00
which makes revisions to the Community Development Code,
Prepared by: Gina L. Clayton ~j
ATT ACHMENT:
Proposed Ordinance No, 6526-00.
Summary of Proposed Community Development Code Amendments
Page 7
.
.
NOTICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE
TEXT AMENDMENT
ORDINANCE NO. 6526-00
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, BY MAKING COMPREHENSIVE
AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; AMENDING ARTICLE 1,
GENERAL PROVISIONS; AMENDING ARTICLE 2, ZONING DISTRICTS, BY MAKING CHANGES
IN THE MINIMUM STANDARD, FLEXIBLE STANDARD, AND FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT USES,
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS, AND FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA; AMENDING ARTICLE 3,
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, BY MAKING COMPREHENSIVE CHANGES TO DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS; AMENDING ARTICLE 4, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND OTHER PROCEDURES
BY REVISING LEVELS 1, 2, AND 3 APPROVALS; AMENDING ARTICLE 6, NONCONFORMITY
PROVISIONS; AMENDING ARTICLE 7, ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS AND PENALTIES TO
CONFORM TO RECENT STATUTORY CHANGES; AMENDING ARTICLE 8, DEFINITIONS AND
RULES OF CONSTRUCTION BY REVISING, ADDING, AND DELETING CERTAIN DEFINITIONS;
REPEALING SECTION 28,10, CODE OF ORDINANCES, REGARDING NEWSRACKS AND
VENDING MACHINES; REPEALING SECTIONS 52,08, 52,09. AND 52.10, CODE OF
ORDINANCES, REGARDING PROTECTIVE BARRIER REQUIREMENTS AND PROTECTION
DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITES, PROPER TREE CARE; PROHIBITED TREE PRUNING;
AND TREE SERVICE COMPANIES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER:
Community Development Board Meeting
Tuesday, March 21,2000, 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 tillS 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 THEm REQUEST AT (727) 562-4090.
City of Clearwater
P,O. Box 4748
Clearwater, F1 33758-4748
Cynthia E. Goudeau, CMCI AAE
City Clerk
Ad: 03104/00
Clearwater City Commission
Agenda Cover Memorandum
W orksession Item #
Final Agenda Item #
Meeting Date
06-20-02
SUBJECT/RECOMMENDATION:
Amendments to the Community Development Code Regarding Temporary Signs, Changeable Copy Signs
and Use of the Comprehensive Sign Program in the Downtown and Tourist Districts,
Appeals.
MOTION: APPROVE text amendments to the Community Development Code and PASS Ordinance
No. 6997-02 on first reading.
D and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same,
SUMMARY: In a pending lawsuit filed in federal court, Granite State Outdoor Advertising Co. v. City of
Clearwater. et aI., allegations have been made that city officials have "unfettered" discretion in connection
with the review and approval of signs. The City believes that the Community Development Code and the
provisions contained in Article 3, including the purposes set forth in Section 3-1802, remove the review and
approval process from being one of "unfettered" discretion, However, the City believes that it would be in the
public interest to clarify the standards for review and approval of certain sign types and to clarify the
allowance of certain sign types without development review, Also, the City desires to provide additional
flexibility criteria for certain signs in the Tourist and Downtown Districts and to provide additional
consistency criteria.
Ordinance No, 6997-02 proposes to make the following amendments to the sign City's sign regulations.
. Reorganizes the location of provisions which allow certain signs such as governmental and public purpose
signs, special event signs, signs on publicly owned land and easements and sandwich board signs;
. Identifies more specifically the criteria to be used in determining whether or not to approve certain
temporary signs and changeable copy signs on public property;
. Provides a definition for public purpose signs; and
Reviewed Jf8~ Originating Department: Costs: Commission Action:
by: Planning and LegalQv
Legal o Approved
Budget N/A Gina L, Clayton i Total o Approved with
Conditions
Purchasing N/A U,,, D,p.rtm'"t~ 0 Denied
Risk Mgmt. N/A Planning Current Fiscal Year 0 Continued to:
IS N/A Funding Source:
ACM N/A o Capital Improvement:
Other N/A Advertised: 0 Operating:
Date: 0 Other: Attachments:
Paper: Planning Dept. Staff Report
Submitted 0 Not Required Appropriation Code Ordinance No,6997 -02
by: Amendments to Sign
Regulations
Affected Parties
0 Notified
City Manager 0 Not Required 0 None
...
~" Printed on recycled paper
Clearwater City Commission
Agenda Cover Memorandum
Worksession Item #
Final Agenda Item #
Meeting Date
06-20-02
SUBJECTIRECOMMENDA TION:
Amendments to the Community Development Code Regarding Development Review Procedures and
Appeals.
MOTION: APPROVE text amendments to the Community Development Code and PASS Ordinance
No. 6998-02 on first reading,
o and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same.
SUMMARY:
Article 4 of the Community Development Code provides for development review and other procedures,
including the review of decisions involving sign permits. In a recent lawsuit, Granite State Outdoor
Advertising Co. v. City of Clearwater, et aI., a Georgia Corporation alleged that the Code's review procedures
involve an unconstitutional "prior restraint" on free speech. The City disagrees with that position; however,
believes that it would be in the public interest to clarify the review procedures for the benefit of the
development community.
Ordinance No. 6998-02 proposes to make the following amendments to Article 4.
. Clarify that when an application for development approval is determined to be legally insufficient by the
City, this decision can be appealed.
. Create a new section which specifies that an annual review schedule must be established for flexible
standard and flexible development applications which comply with the review time frames established by
the Code. Since adoption of the 1999 Code, the Planning Department has reviewed projects according to
a published annual schedule.
Reviewed Originating Department: Costs: Commission Action:
by: fh-i- Planning and Lega~~[)
Legal o Approved
Budget N/A Gina L. Clayton! Total o Approved with
Conditions
Purchasing N/A User Departme~ 0 Denied
Risk Mgmt. N/A Planning Current Fiscal Year 0 Continued to:
IS N/A Funding Source:
ACM N/A 0 Capitallmprovemenl:
Other N/A Advertised: 0 Operating:
Date: 0 Other: Attachments:
Paper: Planning Dept. Staff Report
Submitted 0 Not Required Appropriation Code Ordinance No.6998-02
by: Amendments to
Development Review
Procedures and Appeals
Affected Parties
0 Notified
City Manager 0 Not Required 0 None
ft
".': Printed on recycled paper
Clearwater City Commission
Agenda Cover Memorandum
W orksession Item #
Final Agenda Item #
Meeting Date
06-20-02
SUBJECT/RECOMMENDATION:
Amendments to the Community Development Code Regarding Temporary Signs, Changeable Copy Signs
and Use of the Comprehensive Sign Program in the Downtown and Tourist Districts,
Appeals.
MOTION: APPROVE text amendments to the Community Development Code and PASS Ordinance
No. 6997-02 on first reading.
D and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same.
SUMMARY: In a pending lawsuit filed in federal court, Granite State Outdoor Advertising Co. v. City of
Clearwater, et aI., allegations have been made that city officials have "unfettered" discretion in connection
with the review and approval of signs. The City believes that the Community Development Code and the
provisions contained in Article 3, including the purposes set forth in Section 3-1802, remove the review and
approval process from being one of "unfettered" discretion, However, the City believes that it would be in the
public interest to clarify the standards for review and approval of certain sign types and to clarify the
allowance of certain sign types without development review. Also, the City desires to provide additional
flexibility criteria for certain signs in the Tourist and Downtown Districts and to provide additional
consistency criteria.
Ordinance No. 6997-02 proposes to make the following amendments to the sign City's sign regulations.
. Reorganizes the location of provisions which allow certain signs such as governmental and public purpose
signs, special event signs, signs on publicly owned land and easements and sandwich board signs;
. Identifies more specifically the criteria to be used in determining whether or not to approve certain
temporary signs and changeable copy signs on public property;
. Provides a definition for public purpose signs; and
Reviewed ;{1)4- Originating Department: Costs: Commission Action:
by: Planning and LegalQ~
Legal o Approved
Budget N/A Gina L, Clayton i Total o Approved with
Conditions
Purchasing N/A ".., o.p.rtm.nt~ o Denied
Risk Mgmt. N/A Planning Current Fiscal Year 0 Continued to:
IS N/A Funding Source:
ACM N/A o Capital Improvement:
Other N/A Advertised: 0 Operating:
Date: 0 Other: Attachments:
Paper: Planning Dept. Staff Report
Submitted 0 Not Required Appropriation Code Ordinance No,6997 -02
by: Amendments to Sign
Regulations
Affected Parties
0 Notified
City Manager 0 Not Required o None
~
~" Printed on recycled paper
Clearwater City Commission
Agenda Cover Memorandum
W orksession Item #
Final Agenda Item #
Meeting Date
06-20-02
SUBJECT/RECOMMENDA TION:
Amendments to the Community Development Code Regarding Development Review Procedures and
Appeals.
MOTION: APPROVE text amendments to the Community Development Code and PASS Ordinance
No. 6998-02 on first reading,
o and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same.
SUMMARY:
Article 4 of the Community Development Code provides for development review and other procedures,
including the review of decisions involving sign permits, In a recent lawsuit, Granite State Outdoor
Advertising Co. v. City of Clearwater, et aI., a Georgia Corporation alleged that the Code's review procedures
involve an unconstitutional "prior restraint" on free speech, The City disagrees with that position; however,
believes that it would be in the public interest to clarify the review procedures for the benefit of the
development community.
Ordinance No, 6998-02 proposes to make the following amendments to Article 4,
. Clarify that when an application for development approval is determined to be legally insufficient by the
City, this decision can be appealed.
. Create a new section which specifies that an annual review schedule must be established for flexible
standard and flexible development applications which comply with the review time frames established by
the Code, Since adoption of the 1999 Code, the Planning Department has reviewed projects according to
a published annual schedule.
Reviewed Originating Department: Costs: Commission Action:
by: th-J- Planning and Lega~)CJ
Legal o Approved
Budget N/A Gina L. Clayton! Total o Approved with
Conditions
Purchasing N/A User Departme~ 0 Denied
Risk Mgmt. N/A Planning Current Fiscal Year 0 Continued to:
IS N/A Funding Source:
ACM N/A o Capitallmprovemenl:
Other N/A Advertised: 0 Operating:
Date: 0 Other: Attachments:
Paper: Planning Dept. Staff Report
Submitted 0 Not Required Appropriation Code Ordinance No,6998-02
by: Amendments to
Development Review
Procedures and Appeals
Affected Parties
0 Notified
City Manager 0 Not Required 0 None
..
".: Printed on recycled paper
Clearwater City Commission
Agenda Cover Memorandum
W orksession Item #
Final Agenda Item #
Meeting Date
06-20-02
SUBJECT/RECOMMENDATION:
Amendments to the Community Development Code Regarding Temporary Signs, Changeable Copy Signs
and Use of the Comprehensive Sign Program in the Downtown and Tourist Districts.
Appeals.
MOTION: APPROVE text amendments to the Community Development Code and PASS Ordinance
No. 6997-02 on first reading.
D and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same.
SUMMARY: In a pending lawsuit filed in federal court, Granite State Outdoor Advertising Co. v. City of
Clearwater, et a1., allegations have been made that city officials have "unfettered" discretion in connection
with the review and approval of signs. The City believes that the Community Development Code and the
provisions contained in Article 3, including the purposes set forth in Section 3-1802, remove the review and
approval process from being one of "unfettered" discretion, However, the City believes that it would be in the
public interest to clarify the standards for review and approval of certain sign types and to clarify the
allowance of certain sign types without development review. Also, the City desires to provide additional
flexibility criteria for certain signs in the Tourist and Downtown Districts and to provide additional
consistency criteria.
Ordinance No. 6997-02 proposes to make the following amendments to the sign City's sign regulations,
· Reorganizes the location of provisions which allow certain signs such as governmental and public purpose
signs, special event signs, signs on publicly owned land and easements and sandwich board signs;
· Identifies more specifically the criteria to be used in determining whether or not to approve certain
temporary signs and changeable copy signs on public property;
· Provides a definition for public purpose signs; and
Reviewed
by:
Legal
Budget
Originating Department:
Costs:
Commission Action:
Purchasing
Risk Mgmt.
IS
ACM
Other
Planning and LegaIQ,'(/
Gina L, Clayton I
User Department,^^ V
Planning ~
o Approved
Total 0 Approved with
Conditions
o Denied
Current Fiscal Year 0 Continued to:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Advertised:
Date:
Paper:
o Not Required
Funding Source:
o Capital Improvement:
o Operating:
o Other:
Submitted
by:
Appropriation Code
Attachments:
Planning Dept. Staff Report
Ordinance No,6997 -02
Amendments to Sign
Regulations
City Manager
Affected Parties
o Notified
o Not Required
o None
~
"'.1 Printed on recycled paper
Clearwater City Commission
Agenda Cover Memorandum
W orksession Item #
Final Agenda Item #
Meeting Date
06-20-02
SUBJECT/RECOMMENDA TION:
Amendments to the Community Development Code Regarding Development Review Procedures and
Appeals.
MOTION: APPROVE text amendments to the Community Development Code and PASS Ordinance
No. 6998-02 on first reading.
o and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same.
SUMMARY:
Article 4 of the Community Development Code provides for development review and other procedures,
including the review of decisions involving sign permits. In a recent lawsuit, Granite State Outdoor
Advertising Co. v. City of Clearwater. et aI., a Georgia Corporation alleged that the Code's review procedures
involve an unconstitutional "prior restraint" on free speech. The City disagrees with that position; however,
believes that it would be in the public interest to clarify the review procedures for the benefit of the
development community,
Ordinance No. 6998-02 proposes to make the following amendments to Article 4,
· Clarify that when an application for development approval is determined to be legally insufficient by the
City, this decision can be appealed.
· Create a new section which specifies that an annual review schedule must be established for flexible
standard and flexible development applications which comply with the review time frames established by
the Code, Since adoption of the 1999 Code, the Planning Department has reviewed projects according to
a published annual schedule.
Reviewed Originating Department: Costs: Commission Action:
by: fh-:i-
Legal Planning and Lega~JC) o Approved
Budget N/A Gina L, Clayton: Total o Approved with
Conditions
Purchasing N/A userDepartme~ 0 Denied
Risk Mgmt. N/A Planning Current Fiscal Year 0 Continued to:
IS N/A Funding Source:
ACM N/A 0 Capital Improvement:
Other N/A Advertised: 0 Operating:
Date: 0 Other: Attachments:
Paper: Planning Dept. Staff Report
Submitted 0 Not Required Appropriation Code Ordinance No,6998-02
by: Amendments to
Development Review
Procedures and Appeals
Affected Parties
0 Notified
City Manager 0 Not Required 0 None
n-
".,1 Printed on recycled paper
.
.
~ i:I::;:iiiii;;:I,jjj::::\::::=:: t
~ '!k,!,llrwa er
u
To:
Michael Roberto, City Manager ~
Ralph Stone, Planning Director f20'
From:
Date:
June 13,2000
RE:
Amendments to Ordinance No, 6526-00 for 2nd Reading
Below please find the two amendments to Ordinance No. 6526-00 which staff discussed with the
Commission at the June 12th workshop, Staff is recommending that the Commission consider
these amendments at the time of second and final reading on June 15th, Please find below the
proposed amendments along with the code section where the changes would occur, Please find
attached the revised pages of Exhibit A of the ordinance incorporating the proposed amendments,
1. Required Setbacks
Delete portable storage unit from Section 3-903(A) as follows so there is no conflict with
placement allowances proposed in Section 3-2103(B)(3)(b) on page 3-123 of the ordinance:
A. Except for fences, walls, outdoor lighting and signs, no building or structure or portable
storage unit shall be permitted in a setback required by the applicable zoning district.
2. Replacement of Protected Trees and Palms
In order to clarify that trees on single-family and two-family properties can only be eliminated
if the removal criteria is met, the following language is proposed to Section 3-1205(D)(2) on
page 3-64 of the ordinance,
2, Single-familv and two-familv properties. The following shall govern the minimum number
of trees that shall be required on a single-family or two-family lot. This does not exclude
compliance with Section 3-1205(B) Criteria for issuance of a removal permit which may
result in the number of trees in excess of the minimum required.
Attachment
cc: Pam Akin, City Attorney
Cyndie Goudeau, City Clerk
.
.
DIVISION 9, GENERAL APPLICABILITY STANDARDS
Section 3-901. General/technical codes.
The following technical standards and codes are hereby incorporated by reference as if
fully set out herein, and shall be maintained and kept on file in the office of the city manager:
A. Florida Department of Transportation's Standard Specifications and Roadway and Traffic
Design Standards (latest edition),
B, City of Clearwater Subdivision Design Standards and Stormwater Drainage Criteria
Manual.
C. Sidewalk Construction Specifications,
Section 3-902. Comprehensive plan densities/intensities.
A. Notwithstanding any provision in Article 2 of this development code, no application for
development approval shall be granted for any development which exceeds the
densities and intensities for that development in the comprehensive plan.
B, Density averaging is permitted provided the entire area under consideration is considered
as one proiect in which the property is located and the total dwelling unit and transient
accommodation count does not exceed what is otherwise allowed for the total area under
consideration,
C. Intensity averaging is permitted provided the entire area under consideration is considered
as one proiect in which the property is located and the total amount of impervious
surfaces and floor area located on the site does not exceed what is otherwise allowed for
the total area under consideration.
Section 3-903. Required setbacks.
A. Except for fences, walls, outdoor lighting and signs, no building or structure or portable
storage unit shall be permitted in a setback required by the applicable zoning district.
B. Irregularly shaped lots (i,e, those lots having property lines not generally parallel with or
perpendicular to adjoining street rights-of-way or street right-of-way easements) shall
have side and rear setbacks established by the community development coordinator
generally consistent with the side or rear setback requirements for the applicable zoning
districts and the orientation of the lots to adjoining properties and structures.
C. A double frontage lot located within a plat of record which has a deed or plat restriction
prohibiting access to the nonfrontage, i.e, the street with no address, may use the required
rear setback for the "nonfrontage" portion of the lot.
Page 3 - 41
.
.
D, Corner lots shall have two front setbacks and two side setbacks.
E, Properties traversed by the coastal construction control line shall be governed by the
setback requirements of that line, if such requirements are more restrictive than those
required in the applicable zoning district.
F, Freestanding, (i,e, not affixed on top of a building), radio and television antennas shall be
set back from all property lines a distance equal to 50 percent of the height of the antenna.
G. Swimming pools and screened pool enclosures shall comply with the setbacks required in
the applicable zoning district for the principal use, unless otherwise permitted pursuant to
flexibility criteria in that district.
H. Mechanical equipment,
}, Except as provided in subsection H(2) of this section, air conditioning equipment,
pool equipment and similar mechanical equipment not enclosed within a building
shall be exempt from side and rear setback requirements but shall comply '..vith the
screening proT/isions of section 3 20} (D) of this development code be screened
from any public right-of-way and adiacent properties.
2, No air conditioning equipment, pool equipment or similar mechanical equipment
shall be permitted within a reduced side setback which has been approved as a
level one flexible standard development or as a level two flexible development.
Section 3-904. Sight visibility triangle.
A. To minimize traffic hazards at street or driveway intersections, no structure or landscaping
may be installed which will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and
seven eight (8) feet above grade within the sight distance triangle described in the
following figure.
INSET: diagram
B, To enhance views of the water from residential waterfront property, no structure or
landscaping may be installed, other than a fence around a swimming pool or any non-
opaque fences not exceeding 36 inches in the 45 angle formed by ten feet back from the
property line on the water and along the side property line.
INSET: diagram
Section 3-905. Coastal construction control line.
A. Purpose. This section establishes within the city the coastal construction control line as the
line of reference from which setbacks shall be measured along the Gulf of Mexico for
Page 3 - 42
.
.
J, Required shade trees planted shall not be topped, shaped or severely pruned, but must be
allowed to grow to maturity and attain their natural form so that crown development is
not inhibited,
K All landscaping near public sidewalks must be maintained to allow unobstructed passage
of pedestrians.
L. Dead, declining, missing and diseased plant material shall be replaced with healthy material
of similar type in keeping with the landscaping requirements at the time of original
planting and in accordance with the approved landscape plan.
M, Landscaping will be inspected periodically by the City, but not less frequently than every
three years to ensure that proper maintenance is provided,
Section 3-1205. Tree protection.
A. Removal permit--Required No person may remove or cause to be removed any protected
tree or any palm with a 10' clear and straight trunk without first having procured a permit
as provided in Article 4, Division 12,
B. Criteria for issuance of a removal permit,
1, No permit shall be granted for the removal of a specimen or historic tree.
2. In determining whether or not a required removal permit shall be granted, the
community development coordinator shall consider the following:
a. The condition and location of the protected tree or palm with respect to
disease, insect attack, danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed
structures and interference with utility services.
b, Protected trees and palms shall be preserved to the maximum extent
possible and reasonable flexibility in the design of permitted uses shall be
granted, within the parameters of the zoning district within which the
property is located, in order to ensure such preservation.
c, Whether protected trees or palms can be successfully relocated on-site in
order to accommodate the proposed development.
d. If a protected tree or palm must be removed in order to permit an
economic use of the property which would otherwise be permitted, the
applicant must give the city a reasonable opportunity to relocate the tree to
another site in accordance with the provisions of section 3-1205(C) and
replace protected trees on-site in accordance with the provisions of section
3-1205(D) or pay into the city's tree bank for every protected tree that is
removed in accordance with the provisions in section 3-1205(D),
Page 3 - 63
.
.
C. Relocation by city or county. The applicant for a tree removal permit may authorize the
city to enter upon the property and remove a tree or palm at the city's expense prior to
the owner's proposed removal, if in the opinion of the city manager, such tree is of
sufficient value to warrant relocation by the city. The city manager, in deciding whether to
accept or reject such a donation, shall consider the tree's physical condition, health or
other circumstances, such as potential damage to utility lines, that may be anticipated to
occur during such relocation as well as the city's need for the proposed donation. Such
donated trees will be utilized for landscaping on public lands or as otherwise determined
by the city manager,
D, Replacement of protected trees and palms. If the applicant for a tree remo'.'al permit elects
to replace the protected trees on site, the total amouflt of caliper DBH removed shall be
replaced on an inch for inch basis.. The replacement of protected trees and palms shall
be in compliance with Section 3-1202(B)(1) and the following:
1, Multi-family and commercial properties. The total amount of DBH removed
from a multi-family or commercial site shall be replaced on an inch-for-inch basis.
2, Single-family and two-family properties. The following shall govern the minimum
number of trees that shall be required on a single-family or two-family lot. This
does not exclude compliance with Section 3-1205(B) Criteria for issuance of a
removal permit which may result in the number of trees in excess of the minimum
required,
Required Number of Trees on Single-Family and Two-
F amil Lots
Lot Size (square footage) Number of Required Trees
Less than 5.000 2
5.000 - 10.000 4
10.001- 15.000 6
Over 15.001 8
-l- }, '.\Then tree replacemeflt requirements are so great that sufficieflt space is not
a'.:ailable to replace the equivalent of all protected trees on site in accordance '.'lith
these requirements, or when the applicant chooses not to replace some or all the
protected trees removed, the remaining caliper deficit shall be met by paying a fee
to the tree bailie in lieu of replacement. The fee shall be $81.00 for each two
inches caliper DBH of deficit. This value '.vas determined using a base 'lalue of
$27.00 per square inch of cross sectional area,
EXAMPLE: The fee for a deficit often diameter inches \.vould be 10
inches x $81.00 per t'.'.'o inches - 5 inches x $81.00 - $120,00,
When the Community Development Coordinator determines that there is not
sufficient space available to replace the equivalent of all protected trees on-site in
Page 3 - 64
eearwater City Commission
Agenda Cover Memorandum
W orasion Item #
Final Agenda Item #
Meeting Date
June 15,2000
SUBJECT/RECOMMENDA TION:
Amendments to the Community Development Code as a result of the six month update,
MOTION: APPROVE comprehensive text amendments to the Community Development Code and PASS
Ordinance No, 6526-00 on second reading.
D and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same,
SUMMARY: Attached please find Ordinance No, 6526-00 which includes the proposed amendments to
the Community Development Code, At the June 1, 2000 City Commission meeting, the proposed
ordinance was passed on first reading with the following amendments:
· Social and Community Centers - Social and community centers were added as a flexible development
use in the Institutional District (development standards found in Table 2-1204, pp. 2-160 - 161,
flexibility criteria found in Section 2-1204(B), p, 2-162), A definition of social and community centers
was also added in Section 8-102, p, 8-35,
· SocialIPublic Service Agencies - Social/public service agencies were added as a flexible development
use in the Commercial, Downtown, Institutional and Industrial, Research, and Technology Districts.
Development standards are found in Table 2-704, pp. 2-66-68; Table 2-903, pp, 2-115-116; Table 2-
1204, pp, 2-160 - 161; and Table 2-13 04 p, 2-172, Flexibility criteria are found in the following
sections: Section 2-704(P), pp, 2-79-80; Section 2-903(0), pp, 2-124-125; Section 2-1204(C), p. 2-
162; and Section 2-1304(H), p, 2-175, A definition of social/public service agencies was added in
Section 8-102, p, 8-35)
· MarinasIMarina Facilities - Marina/marina facilities were added as a flexible development use in the
Downtown District, Table 2-903, pp. 2-115-116, The flexibility criteria was added to Section 2-903(H)
on p, 2-121.
leviewed by:
Legal
Budget
Purchasi ng
Ris< Mgmt.
IS
ACM
Other
:HH:ii:~iMrH:"
..................................................
.............................................. .
Coss:
Connisaon Action:
o Approved
o Approved with Conditions
o Denied
o Continued to:
Funding Source:
o Capitallmprovement:
o Operating:
o Other:
Attac/ments:
SJbnitted by:
o Not Required
Affected Parties
o Notified
o Not Required
o None
City Manager
.~
U Printed on recycled paper
+ Setbacks for Parking Lots - 4uction in the front setback requirem6as permitted for parking
lots through a flexible standard development approval process in the Commercial (Table 2-703, pp, 2-56
y - 58), Office (Table 2-1003, pp. 2-127 - 129), and Industrial, Research, and Technology Districts (Table
2-1303, pp, 164 - 166), The same reduction was also permitted in the Industrial, Research, and
Technology District through the flexible development review process in Table 2-1304, p, 172. Criteria
was included which specifies that the reduction may be permitted if the land area is not sufficient to
acconunodate the full setback requirement and the reduction results in an improved site plan or improved
design and appearance and landscaping is in excess of the minimum required.
+ Retail Sales and Services - The proposed change to Section 2-1203(M) (p, 3-159) making retail sales
a principal use in the Institutional District was eliminated, Retail sales will be permitted only as an
accessory use,
+ Accessory Structures - The potential to increase the height of an accessory structure in the residential
zoning districts to twenty (20) feet through a flexible development review process was added to Section
3-201(B)(8) on p, 3-21.
+ Fences - The proposed provision requiring new swimming pools to be completely enclosed with a fence
in Section 3-807(A) on p, 3-39 was eliminated, However, language recognizing the ability of property
owners to erect such fence was maintained, The exception to Section 3-904(B), p. 3-42 was revised to
recognize that fences around pools could be located on waterfront lots around the perimeter of the
property, The original language referred to "required pools,"
+ Parking on the Grass - The proposed provision prohibiting the parking on the grass in the front yard of
residentially zoned property was deleted, This was Section 3-1407(A)(4) and would have been found on
p. 3-76,
+ Telecommunication Towers - A maximum additional height of twenty-five (25) feet for
telecommunication towers was added in Section 3-200 1 (D)(4)(a), p. 3-118 provided such increase
eliminates the need for additional towers,
+ Portable Storage Units - The following revisions/additions were made to the portable storage unit
proVISIOns:
o The size of signage was reduced from twelve (12) square feet in area to 12" x 18" in Section 3-
2103(B)(3)(t), p, 3-123 and in Section 3-2103(C)(2), p. 3-124,
o The use of portable storage units was limited to no more than four times a year in Section
3-2103(A)(6), p. 3-121 and Section 3-2103(B)(3), p. 3-124,
o The size of portable storage units was restricted to 8 feet in height, 8 feet in width, and 16 feet in
length in Section 3-2103(B)(3), p. 3-123.
o Storm safety and enforcement provisions were added to Section 3-2103(B)(3), pp. 3-123-124. A
reference to the enforcement provision was also added to Section 3-2 103 (C)(2), p, 3-124,
2
.
.
'.
· Applications for Development Approval - A provision requiring elevation drawings for single-family
residential infill projects, unless waived by the Community Development Coordinator was added to
Section 4-202(A)(9), p, 4-5, A provision requiring elevation drawings for residential infill and
comprehensive redevelopment projects was added to Section 4-202(A)(Il), p, 4-7. The same provision
was also added to Section 4-202(A)(23) on p, 4-8 which applies to sites exceeding one acre in area,
· Transfer of Development Rights - Site plan/compatibility review criteria was added to transfer of
development rights in Section 4-1403(A), p. 4-63-64.
· 30 Day Rental Requirements - All provisions regarding the 30 day rental rule were deleted and
deferred to a later discussion, This included eliminated proposed Section 3-917 Renting of residential
dwellings (would have been on p, 3-50) and all revisions to Section 8-102, Definitions of overnight
accommodations (p, 8-24) and residential use (p. 8-29). This issue will be addressed in a separate
ordinance at the July 20, 2000 Commission meeting,
The Commission also discussed window signage and toaster covers at the June 1 st meeting and deferred
action on these issues until the July 20, 2000 meeting, The proposed ordinance did not have any proposed
language addressing these two issues, therefore, no changes were required to Ordinance No. 6526-00 to
accommodate the deferral.
As a result of public comments/questions, staff was directed to review the outdoor sales/display provisions.
Staff also met with business owners Angel Santiago and Laurel Zyualosbi on June 6th to discuss the
possibilities of having outdoor displays at their businesses.
Outdoor sales/display is permitted in the Commercial District as a flexible development use, There are nine
review criteria, The most limiting provisions of the flexibility criteria are that a minimum lot size of 20,000
square feet is required, the parcel proposed for development cannot be adjacent to a residentially zoned
property, and no goods/materials other than living plant material may be stored within a required setback.
There are at least two alternatives if a business owner can not meet the standards established in the outdoor
sales/display provisions. An application for comprehensive infill to have outdoor sales/displays can be filed
or building modifications can be made to incorporate glass showrooms to display merchandise.
Staff surveyed Pinellas Park, Dunedin, Largo, and Pinellas County to determine how these area communities
regulate outdoor sales/displays, These communities permit this use within certain parameters. Pinellas
County restricts outdoor display to outdoor type uses, Other communities don't have that restriction but
require a public hearing process or site plan review process in order to approve such displays,
Staff does not recommend any changes to the current outdoor sales/displays provisions, One major goal of
the new code was to improve the appearance of Clearwater. The current outdoor sales/displays
requirements impose requirements that will ensure that the lot is large enough to provide all required
landscaping, parking and sufficient area to accommodate a display/sales area, These provisions minimize the
possibility of unattractive outdoor displays,
The final issue discussed was the tree replacement provision for single family and two family properties. In
order to clarify that trees on single family and two family properties can only be eliminated if the removal
criteria is met, staff is proposing to add the following language to Section 3-1205(D)(2) on page 3-64 as
follows:
3
.
.
2, Single-family and two-family properties. The following shall govern the minimum number of trees that
shall be required on a single-family or two-family lot. This does not exclude compliance with Section 3-
1205(B) Criteria for issuance of a removal permit which may result in the number of trees in excess of
the minimum required.
Required Number of Trees on Single-Family and Two-
Family Lots
Lot Size (square footage) Number of Required
Trees
Less than 5,000 ~
5,000 - 10.000 1
10.001- 15,000 6
Over 15,001 ~
4
.
.
LL'::::::::::::::I'" ::::::::::"
.... . .......
... .. .......
... .........
... . .. ........
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
o it ,:/:i::/ ~:?::::?/:
... ....... . . .
... ....... . .
.... ....... . .. . .
....... .............. . .' . .
. . . . . . . . . .. .
....... ............... ....
,......1,"""......1....0".... rwater
.... ....... .......
>-:j :(:)\ ~ )j{:
..... ... . . ..
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
..... ... . .
I- ,',',',',',' ,','
..:.:;::::-.........: ......:::.......;::::.
......... .........
......- ........
. . . . . . . .
To:
Michael Roberto, City Manager
/ ,-
Ralph Stone, Director ofPlanninJ2L>{;:r- .
From:
Date:
May 31,2000
RE:
Additional Amendments to the Community Development Code
Subsequent to the City Commission Special Workshop on May 2nd and the Workshop on May 30,
2000 on the proposed amendments to the Community Development Code, several issues have
surfaced which need to be addressed.
First, staff is recommending that the Commission defer action on the 30 day rental amendments
(transient accommodations) so that staff can work with area condominium associations, Board of
Realtors, Apartment Association and the Pinellas Planning Council (Section 3-917, p, 3-50;
Section 8-102, Overnight Accommodations, p, 8-24 and Residential Use, p. 8-29).
At the May 30th workshop, the Commission directed staff to prepare alternative language on the
following issues for consideration at the time of first reading of Ordinance No. 6526-00 on June
1 st,
1. SETBACKS FOR PARKING LOTS
Add a footnote to the flexible standard development tables in the Commercial, Office,
and Industrial, Research, and Technology Districts (Tables 2-703, 2-1003, and 2-1303)
and in the flexible development table in the Industrial, Research, and Technology
District (Table 2-1304) that allows the front setback to be reduced to fifteen (15) feet for
parking lots provided the reduction results in an improved site plan or improved design
and appearance and landscaping in excess of the minimum required and the land area
is not sufficient to accommodate the full setback requirement.
2. PORTABLE STORAGE UNITS
Reduce the amount of signage allowed for portable storage units in Sections 3-
2103(B)(3)(f) and 3-2103(C)(2) from twelve square feet to 12" x 18".
1
.
.
Reduce amount of time portable storage units may be located on a property from 96
hours to 48 hours with no additional provisions for portable storage units when
associated with an active building permit.
3. FENCE REQUIREMENTS
Eliminate the regulations requiring new swimming pools to be completely enclosed with
a four feet high fence in Section 3-807(A) and re-Ietter remaining subsections.
Eliminate added language to Section 3-904(B) regarding required fences around
swimming pools.
4. TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS
Revise proposed language in Section 3-2001(D)(4)(a) to allow telecommunication towers
up to 25 feet of additional height if the need for additional towers would be eliminated.
5. TEMPORARY YARD SIGNS
Increase the duration of temporary signs during a one year period on residential
properties from 60 days to 90 days.
Clarify that the total number of days a temporary yard sign may be erected during a
one year period shall not exceed either 60 or 90 days (based on Commission direction
above).
As presented at the May 30th Workshop, staffis also recommending that the Commission consider
adding eight additional amendments to Ordinance No. 6526-00 at the time offirst reading on June
1 st. Please find below the proposed amendments along with the code section where the changes
would occur,
6. RETAIL SALES AND SERVICES IN THE INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT
Eliminate proposed change to Section 2-1203(M), Retail sales and services in the
Institutional District (p. 2-156) to ensure consistency with the Countywide Rules. This
change would maintain the current code which allows retail only as an accessory use in
the Institutional District.
2
e
.
7. SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY CENTERS AND SOCIALIPUBLIC SERVICE
AGENCIES
Add social and community centers and social/public service agencies as new flexible
development uses in Section 2-1204, Institutional District (pp. 2-157 - 2-158) as follows:
Section 2-1204. Flexible development.
Table 2-1204, "I" District 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
Social and 20.000 100 15- -25 10 15-- 20 30 4 -5 per
community 1000 GFA
centers
Social/public 10.000 100 15- -25 10 15- -20 30 2- -3 per
servIce - 1 OOOGF A
-
aQencies 20.000
Add the following flexibility criteria and re-Ietter remaining subsection (p. 2-159).
Section 2-1204(B) Social And Community Centers.
1, The parcel proposed for development does not abut any property designated as
residential in the Zoning Atlas.
2, Front Setback. The reduction in front setback results in an improved site plan or
improved design and appearance.
3. Side and rear setback. The reduction in side and/or rear setback is necessary to
preserve protected trees and/or results in an improved site plan or more efficient
design and appearance and results in landscaping in excess of the minimum
required,
Section 2-1204(C) Social/Public Service Agencies.
1, The parcel proposed for development does not abut any property designated as
residential in the Zoning Atlas.
2, The social/public service agency shall not be located within 1.500 feet of another
social/public service agency.
3
e
.
3, Front Setback. The reduction in front setback results in an improved site plan or
improved design and appearance.
4, Side and rear setback, The reduction in side and/or rear setback is necessary to
preserve protected trees and/or results in an improved site plan or more efficient
design and appearance and results in landscaping in excess of the minimum
required,
Add social/public service agencies in the Commercial District as a flexible development
use in Table 2-704 (pp. 2-66 - 2-68) as follows:
Table 2-704. "e" District Flexible Development Standards
Use Min. Min, Max. Min. Min, Min. Min,
Lot Area Lot Height Front Side Rear Off-Street
(sq. ft,) Width (ft,) (ft.) (ft,) (ft.) Parking
(ft.)
Social/public 5.000--10,000 50--100 25- -50 15- - 25 0-10 10 --20 3- -4 per 1.000
service GFA
al!:encies(2 )
(2) SociaVpublic service agencies shall not exceed 5 acres,
Add flexibility criteria for social/public service agencies to Section 2-704 and re-Ietter
remaining sections (p. 2-79).
Section 2- 704(P) Social/Public Service Agencies.
1. The parcel proposed for development does not abut any property designated as residential
in the Zoning Atlas,
2. The social/public service agency shall not be located within a 1.500 feet of another
social/public service agency.
3. Lot area and lot width: The reduction in lot area and lot width will not result in a building
which is out of scale with existing buildings in the immediate vicinity of the parcel
proposed for development.
4, Front setback: The reduction in front setback results in an improved site plan or improved
appearance and landscaped areas are in excess of the minimum required.
5. Side and rear setback:
4
.
.
a, The reduction in side and rear setback does not prevent access to the rear of any
building by emergency vehicles: and
b. The reduction in side and rear setback results in an improved site plan. more
efficient parking or improved design and appearance and landscaped areas are in
excess of the minimum required,
Add social/public service agencies in the Downtown District as a flexible development
use in Table 2-903 (pp. 2-114 - 2-115) as follows:
Table 2-903. "D" District Flexible Development Standards
Use Max. Height (ft.) Min. Off-Street Parking
Social/public service 30-100 3 - -4 spaces per 1 000 GF A
a!Zencies
Add flexibility criteria for social/public service agencies to Section 2-903 and re-Ietter
remaining section (p. 2-123).
Section 2-903(N) Social/public service agencies.
1. Height:
a. The parcel proposed for development is located to the west of Myrtle. south of Drew
and north of Court:
b. The increased height results in an improved site plan and/or improved design and
appearance:
2. All street frontage is designed and used for customer service purposes or is designed
and/or screened to contribute to an active urban street environment:
3, Off-street parking:
a. 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
the physical context. including adiacent buildings and uses are such that there is a high
probability that patrons will use modes of transportation other than the automobile to
access the use:
5
.
.
b, Adequate parking is available on a shared basis as determined by all existing land uses
within 1.000 feet of the parcel proposed for development. or parking is available
through any existing or planned and committed parking facilities or the shared parking
formula in Article 3. Division 14:
4, The design of all buildings complies with the Downtown District design guidelines in
Division 5 of Article 3,
5, The parcel proposed for development does not abut any property designated as residential
in the Zoning Atlas,
6, The social/public service agency shall not be located within 1.500 feet of another
social/public service agency.
Add social/public service agencies in the Industrial, Research and Technology District
in Table 2-1304 (p. 2-168) as follows:
Table 2-1304. "IRT" District Flexible Development
Uses Min, Min. Min. Max, Min.
Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street
Area Width (ft.) (ft.) Parking
(sa, ft.) (ft.)
Front Side/Rear
Social/public 10.000 100 20 12 30 3/1.000 SF
servIce GFA
aQencies(5)
(5) Social/public service agencies shall not exceed 5 acres,
Add flexibility criteria for social/public service agencies to Section 2-1304 and re-letter
remaining section (p. 2-171).
Section 2-1304(H) Social/public service agencies.
1. The parcel proposed for development is not contiguous to a parcel of land which is
designated as residential in the Zoning Atlas,
2. The social/public service agency shall not be located within 1.500 feet of another
social/public service agency,
6
.
.
Add the following definitions of social and community center and social/public service
agency to Section 8-102 (p. 8-36):
Social and community center means an association organized and operated on a nonprofit basis
for persons who are bonafide dues paying members established for fraternaL sociaL educational
recreational or cultural enrichment of its members. Food. meals. and beverages may be served
on premIse,
Social/public service agency means a nonprofit organization whose primary purpose is to
enhance the social welfare and improve the living conditions of society. Such uses include but
are not limited to food pantries. counseling centers. rehabilitation clinics. etc. This does not
include residential uses such as community residential homes. halfway houses. residential
shelters. etc.
8. PORTABLE STORAGE UNITS
Revise Section 3-2103 by adding a limit of 4 times a year that a portable storage unit is
permitted on a property (p. 3-123):
Portable storage units 96 hours (not more than 4 times per All districts
year) unless associated with permitted
construction. Refer to Sections 3-
2103(B)(3) and 2 103 (C)(2) for
additional requirements.
Add the following dimensional provisions to portable storage unit regulations - Section
3-2103(B)(3) (p. 3-124) :
Portable storage units, not exceeding 8 feet in height 8 feet in width. and 16 feet in length.
may be permitted on a site with an active building permit for the storage of items from the
site. The portable storage unit may remain on the site for the length of the active permit.
Portable storage units shall comply with the following provisions:
Add two new subsections to Section 3-2103(B)(3) regarding storm safety and
enforcement as follows (p. 3-124):
h. If the National Weather Advisory Service or other qualified weather advisory service
identifies weather conditions which are predicted to include winds of 75 mph or greater.
all portable storage units shall be removed from all properties and placed in approved
storage locations at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the predicted onset of such winds
or as soon as reasonably practical if less notice is provided. This requirement may be
modified by the Building Official upon receipt of adequate documentation from a
7
.
.
registered architect or engineer or other professional qualified to give such opinion that a
greater wind loading pertain to a particular portable storage unit model or manufacturer so
that the portable storage unit is unlikely to be moved by winds greater than the predicted
winds. As an alternative to removaL the portable storage vendor may submit a tie down
proposal for approval by the Building Official and each portable storage unit not removed
shall be tied down in the approved manner,
1. Any portable storage unit which is not removed at the end of the time for which it may
lawfully remain in place. or immediately upon the direction of a code enforcement officer
for removal of such temporary structure for safety reasons. may be removed by the City
immediately. without notice. and the cost of such removaL together with the cost of
administration of its removal. may be assessed against the property on which the
temporary structure was located and may be filed as a lien against such property by the
City Clerk.
Add new provision regarding duration for portable storage units to Section 3-
1203(C)(2) as follows (p. 3-125):
.L Portable storage units for a period not exceeding 96 hours no more than four (4) times a
year. A sticker shall be affixed to the unit indicating the date on which it is delivered to
the property. One sign face, no more than twelve (12) square feet in area, shall be
permitted on a portable storage unit. The removal provisions of Section 3-2103(B)(3)(i)
above shall also apply,
9. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
Add the following provision to increase the accessory structure height through the staff
approval process in Section 3-201(B)(8) (p. 3-12):
8. No accessory structure shall exceed fifteen (15) feet in height in any residential zoning
district and no more than the allowable height for the principal use in any nonresidential
zoning district. Such structures may be permitted up to twenty (20) feet in height in the
residential zoning districts if approved through a Level One (flexible standard
development) approval process,
10. TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
To provide guidance for the review of transfer of development rights, the following site
plan and compatibility standards are proposed to be added to Section 4-1403(A) (p. 4-
63). This criteria will form the basis ofthe staff's review and the Community
Development Board's decision on whether to approve or deny a transfer of development
rights application.
8
.
.
A. Any development right which has been transferred may be used in the development of
another parcel of land in the city if approved by the community development board as a
level two approval in accordance with the applicable standards of the district and this
section and the following criteria:
1. The development of the parcel proposed for development will not reduce the fair
market value of abutting properties:
2. The uses within the project are otherwise permitted in the City of Clearwater:
3. The uses or mix of uses within the project are compatible with adjacent land uses;
4, The development of the parcel proposed for development will upgrade the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development: and
5, The design of the proposed project creates a form and function which enhances the
community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development and the City of Clearwater as a whole,
11. MARINAS/MARINA FACILITIES
Currently, marinas are not allowed in the Downtown even though this use would
contribute to the desired urban people-oriented downtown ambience. Therefore, staff
recommends adding marinas/marina facilities to Table 2-903 as a permitted flexible
development use in the Downtown District as follows (p. 2-114 - 2-115):
Table 2-903. "D" Flexible Development Standards
Use Max. Height (ft.) Min. Off-Street Parking
Marinas/marina facilities 30 1 space per 2 slips
Add a new subsection to Section 2-903 as follows and re-Ietter remaining subsections
(p.2-119):
Section 2-903(H) Marinas and marina facilities,
1. The parcel proposed development is not located in areas identified in the
Comprehensive Plan as areas of environmental significance including:
9
. .
a, The north end of Clearwater Beach:
b, Clearwater Harbor grass beds;
c, Cooper's Point:
d, Clearwater Harbor spoil islands;
e, Sand Key Park:
f The southern edge of Alligator Lake,
2, No commercial activities other than the mooring of boats on a rental basis shall be
permitted on any parcel ofland which is contiguous to a parcel ofland which is
designated as residential in the Zoning Atlas. unless the marina facilities are totally
screened from view from the contiguous land which is designated as residential and
the hours of operation of the commercial activities are limited to the time period
between sunrise and sunset:
3, The design of all buildings complies with the Downtown District design guidelines
in Division 5 of Article 3,
12. SIGNS
To clarify that temporary sign covers are not allowed, add the following provision to
Section 3-1803, Prohibited Signs (p. 3-94).
Z. Temporary sign covers typically known as toaster covers. sign boots. or sign socks.
13. APPLICA TIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
To clarify that the review of elevations is a critical component of a residential infill or
comprehensive infill redevelopment projects, add a new subsection to Section 4-
202(A)(9) as follows (p. 4-5):
1. Elevation drawings where the applicant is seeking approval of a residential infill proiect,
unless waived by the Community Development Coordinator.
Add a new subsection to Section 4-202(A)(1l) as follows (p.4-7):
x, Elevation drawings where the applicant is seeking approval of a residential infill proiect or
a comprehensive infill redevelopment proiect. unless waived by the Community
Development Coordinator.
10
.
.
Add the following to Section 4-202(A)(12)(23) (p. 4- 8):
23, In the event the application involves development where design standards are an issue,
such as in the Tourist and Downtown Districts, or where the applicant is seeking approval
of a Residential InfiII Proiect or Comprehensive InfiII Redevelopment Proiect,
Comprehensive Sign Program or Comprehensive Landscaping Plan, the applicant shall
submit proposed elevation drawings. unless waived by the Community Development
Coordinator.
11
.
.
LL """""":"~'" ""':"""
n. . .......
... '" .......
. . . .. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
... .. . .........
o ii '::\\i)'::::/
... ....... . .. .
... ....... . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
... ....... . .
.... ....... ...
... ........ .
.... ....... ..
.., ........ ..
"'.."',1",..........1....,8".... rwater
.... ....... .......
>-(::~))\ : )I{"
:.:.:.;.: .:.:.:.: .: '.'
. . . . . . . . . . .
..... . o.
f- ""'"":"""",,,," "'<\::::;/::'
To:
Michael Roberto, City Manager ~
Ralph Stone, Director ofPla~
From:
Date:
May 25,2000
RE:
Additional Amendments to the Community Development Code
Subsequent to the City Commission Special Workshop on May 2, 2000 on the proposed
amendments to the Community Development Code, several issues have surfaced which need to be
addressed,
First, staff is recommending that the Commission defer action on the 30 day rental amendments
(transient accommodations) so that staff can work with area condominium associations, Board of
Realtors, Apartment Association and the Pinellas Planning Council (Section 3-917, p. 3-50;
Section 8-102, Overnight Accommodations, p. 8-24 and Residential Use, p, 8-29).
Staff is also recommending that the Commission consider adding eight additional amendments to
Ordinance No, 6526-00 at the time of first reading on June 1 st, Please find below the proposed
amendments along with the code section where the changes would occur,
1. RETAIL SALES AND SERVICES IN THE INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT
Eliminate proposed change to Section 2-1203(M), Retail sales and services in the
Institutional District (p. 2-156) to ensure consistency with the Countywide Rules. This
change would maintain the current code which allows retail only as an accessory use in
the Institutional District.
2. SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY CENTERS AND SOCIAL/PUBLIC SERVICE
AGENCIES
Add social and community centers and social/public service agencies as new flexible
development uses in Section 2-1204, Institutional District (pp. 2-157 - 2-158) as follows:
.
.
Section 2-1204, Flexible development.
Table 2-1204, "I" District 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
Social and 20,000 100 15- -25 10 15- - 20 30 4 -5 per
community 1000 GFA
centers
Social/public 10,000 100 15- -25 10 15- -20 30 2- -3 per
servIce - 1 OOOGF A
-
aQ:encies 20,000
Add the following flexibility criteria and re-Ietter remaining subsection (p. 2-159).
Section 2-1204(B) Social And Community Centers.
1. The parcel proposed for development does not abut any property designated as
residential in the Zoning Atlas.
2, Front Setback. The reduction in front setback results in an improved site plan or
improved design and appearance,
3, Side and rear setback. The reduction in side and/or rear setback is necessary to
preserve protected trees and/or results in an improved site plan or more efficient
design and appearance and results in landscaping in excess of the minimum
required.
Section 2-1204(C) Social/Public Service Agencies,
1. The parcel proposed for development does not abut any property designated as
residential in the Zoning Atlas.
2, The social/public service agency shall not be located within a 1.500 feet of another
social/public service agency,
3. Front Setback. The reduction in front setback results in an improved site plan or
improved design and appearance,
2
.
.
4, Side and rear setback. The reduction in side and/or rear setback is necessary to
preserve protected trees and/or results in an improved site plan or more efficient
design and appearance and results in landscaping in excess of the minimum
required,
Add social/public service agencies in the Commercial District as a flexible development
use in Table 2-704 (pp. 2-66 - 2-68) as follows:
Table 2-704. "e" District Flexible Development Standards
Use Min. Min, Max, Min, Min. Min, Min.
Lot Area Lot Height Front Side Rear Off-Street
(sq, ft,) Width (ft,) (ft,) (ft.) (ft.) Parking
(ft.)
Social/public 5,000--10,000 50--100 25- -50 15- - 25 0-10 10 --20 3- -4 per 1,000
servIce GFA
a~encies(2 )
(2) SociaVoublic service agencies shall not exceed 5 acres.
Add flexibility criteria for social/public service agencies to Section 2-704 and re-Ietter
remaining sections (p. 2-79).
Section 2-704(P) Social/Public Service Agencies.
1. Lot area and lot width: The reduction in lot area and lot width will not result in a
building which is out of scale with existing buildings in the immediate vicinity of
the parcel proposed for development.
2. Front setback: The reduction in front setback results in an improved site plan or
improved appearance and landscaped areas are in excess of the minimum required.
3, Side and rear setback:
a, The reduction in side and rear setback does not prevent access to the rear
of any building by emergency vehicles: and
b, The reduction in side and rear setback results in an improved site plan.
more efficient parking or improved design and appearance and landscaped
areas are in excess of the minimum required.
3
.
.
Add social/public service agencies in the Downtown District as a flexible development
use in Table 2-903 (pp. 2-114 - 2-115) as follows:
Table 2-903, "D" District Flexible Development Standards
Use Max, Height (ft,) Min. Off-Street Parking
Social/public service 30-100 3 - -4 spaces per 1000 GF A
a!!encies
Add flexibility criteria for social/public service agencies to Section 2-903 and re-Ietter
remaining section (p. 2-123).
Section 2-903(N) Socia//public service agencies.
1, Height:
a. The parcel proposed for development is located to the west of Myrtle. south of Drew
and north of Court:
b, The increased height results in an improved site plan and/or improved design and
appearance:
2. All street frontage is designed and used for customer service purposes or is designed
and/or screened to contribute to an active urban street environment:
3, OU-street parking:
a, 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
the physical context. including adiacent buildings and uses are such that there is a high
probability that patrons will use modes of transportation other than the automobile to
access the use:
b, Adequate parking is available on a shared basis as determined by all existing land uses
within 1.000 feet of the parcel proposed for development. or parking is available
through any existing or planned and committed parking facilities or the shared parking
formula in Article 3. Division 14:
4, The design of all buildings complies with the Downtown District design guidelines in
Division 5 of Article 3,
4
.
.
Add social/public service agencies in the Industrial, Research and Technology District
in Table 2-1304 (p. 2-168) as follows:
Table 2-1304, "IRT" District Flexible Development
Uses Min, Min, Min, Max. Min.
Lot Lot Setbacks Height Off-Street
Area Width (ft,) (ft,) Parking
(sa, ft,) (ft,)
Front Side/Rear
Social/public 10.000 100 20 15 30 3/1. 000 SF
servIce GFA
aQencies(5)
(5) SociaVpublic service agencies shall not exceed 5 acres,
Add flexibility criteria for social/public service agencies to Section 2-1304 and re-letter
remaining section (p. 2-171).
Section 2-1304(H) Social/public service agencies.
1, The parcel proposed for development is not contiguous to a parcel of land which is
designated as residential in the Zoning Atlas,
Add the following definitions of social and community center and social/public service
agency to Section 8-102 (p. 8-36):
Social and community center means an association organized and operated on a nonprofit basis
for persons who are bonafide dues paying members established for fraternal. social. educational
recreational or cultural enrichment of its members, Food. meals. and beverages may be served
on premIse.
Socia//public service agency means a nonprofit organization whose primary purpose is to
enhance the social welfare and improve the living conditions of society. Such uses include but
are not limited to food pantries. counseling centers. rehabilitation clinics. etc, This does not
include residential uses such as community residential homes. halfway houses. residential
shelters. etc,
5
.
.
3. PORTABLE STORAGE UNITS
Revise Section 3-2103 by adding a limit of 4 times a year that a portable storage unit is
permitted on a property (p. 3-123):
Portable storage units 96 hours (not more than 4 times per All districts
year) unless associated with permitted
construction, Refer to Sections 3-
2103(B)(3) and 2103(C)(2) for
additional requirements.
Add the following dimensional provisions to portable storage unit regulations - Section
3-2103(B)(3) (p. 3-124) :
Portable storage units, not exceeding 8 feet in length. 8 feet in width. and 16 feet in length.
may be permitted on a site with an active building permit for the storage of items from the
site, The portable storage unit may remain on the site for the length of the active permit.
Portable storage units shall comply with the following provisions:
Add two new subsections to Section 3-2103(B)(3) regarding storm safety and
enforcement as follows (p. 3-124):
h. If the National Weather Advisory Service or other qualified weather advisory service
identifies weather conditions which are predicted to include winds of75 mph or greater,
all portable storage units shall be removed from all properties and placed in approved
storage locations at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the predicted onset of such winds
or as soon as reasonably practical if less notice is provided. This requirement may be
modified by the Building Official upon receipt of adequate documentation from a
registered architect or engineer or other professional qualified to give such opinion that a
greater wind loading pertain to a particular portable storage unit model or manufacturer so
that the portable storage unit is unlikely to be moved by winds greater than the predicted
winds, As an alternative to removaL the portable storage vendor may submit a tie down
proposal for approval by the Building Official and each portable storage unit not removed
shall be tied down in the approved manner.
1. Any portable storage unit which is not removed at the end of the time for which it may
lawfully remain in place. or immediately upon the direction of a code enforcement officer
for removal of such temporary structure for safety reasons. may be removed by the City
immediately. without notice. and the cost of such removaL together with the cost of
administration of its removaL may be assessed against the property on which the
temporary structure was located and may be filed as a lien against such property by the
City Clerk.
6
.
.
Add new provision regarding duration for portable storage units to Section 3-
1203(C)(2) as follows (p. 3-125):
2, Portable storage units for a period not exceeding 96 hours no more than four (4) times a
year. A sticker shall be affixed to the unit indicating the date on which it is delivered to
the property, One sign face, no more than twelve (12) square feet in area, shall be
permitted on a portable storage unit. The removal provisions of Section 3-2103(B)(3)(i)
above shall also apply,
4. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
Add the following provision to increase the accessory structure height through the staff
approval process in Section 3-201(B)(8) (p. 3-12):
8. No accessory structure shall exceed fifteen (15) feet in height in any residential zoning
district and no more than the allowable height for the principal use in any nonresidential
zoning district. Such structures may be permitted up to twenty (20) feet in height in the
residential zoning districts if approved through a Level One (flexible standard
development) approval process.
5. TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
To provide guidance for the review of transfer of development rights, the following site
plan and compatibility standards are proposed to be added to Section 4-1403(A) (p. 4-
63). This criteria will form the basis of the staff's review and the Community
Development Board's decision on whether to approve or deny a transfer of development
rights application.
A. Any development right which has been transferred may be used in the development of
another parcel of land in the city if approved by the community development board as a
level two approval in accordance with the applicable standards of the district and this
section and the following criteria:
1, The development of the parcel proposed for development will not reduce the fair
market value of abutting properties:
2, The uses within the project are otherwise permitted in the City of Clearwater;
3, The uses or mix of uses within the project are compatible with adjacent land uses:
4, The development of the parcel proposed for development will upgrade the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development: and
7
e
.
5, The design of the proposed proiect creates a form and function which enhances the
community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for
development and the City of Clearwater as a whole,
6. MARINAS/MARINA FACILITIES
Currently, marinas are not allowed in the Downtown even though this use would
contribute to the desired urban people-oriented downtown ambience. Therefore, staff
recommends adding marinas/marina facilities to Table 2-903 as a permitted flexible
development use in the Downtown District as follows (p. 2-114 - 2-115):
Table 2-903, "D" Flexible Development Standards
Use Max, Height (ft.) Min, Off-Street Parking
Marinas/marina facilities 30 1 space per 2 slips
Add a new subsection to Section 2-903 as follows and re-Ietter remaining subsections
(p.2-119):
Section 2-903(H) Marinas and marina facilities.
1, The parcel proposed development is not located in areas identified in the
Comprehensive Plan as areas of environmental significance including:
a, The north end of Clearwater Beach:
b, Clearwater Harbor grass beds:
c, Cooper's Point:
d, Clearwater Harbor spoil islands:
e, Sand Key Park:
f. The southern edge of Alligator Lake,
8
.
.
2. No commercial activities other than the mooring of boats on a rental basis shall be
permitted on any parcel of land which is contiguous to a parcel of land which is
designated as residential in the Zoning Atlas, unless the marina facilities are totally
screened from view from the contiguous land which is designated as residential and
the hours of operation of the commercial activities are limited to the time period
between sunrise and sunset:
3. The design of all buildings complies with the Downtown District design guidelines
in Division 5 of Article 3.
6. SIGNS
To clarify that temporary sign covers are not allowed, add the following provision to
Section 3-1803, Prohibited Signs (p. 3-94).
Z. Temporary sign covers typically known as toaster covers, sign boots, or sign socks.
7. APPLICA TIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
To clarify that the review of elevations is a critical component of a residential infill or
comprehensive infill redevelopment projects, add a new subsection to Section 4-
202(A)(9) as follows (p. 4-5):
1. Elevation drawings where the applicant is seeking approval of a residential infill proiect.
unless waived by the Community Development Coordinator.
Add a new subsection to Section 4-202(A)(1l) as follows (p.4-7):
x. Elevation drawings where the applicant is seeking approval of a residential infill project or
a comprehensive infill redevelopment proiect. unless waived by the Community
Development Coordinator.
Add the following to Section 4-202(A)(12)(23) (p. 4- 8):
23. In the event the application involves development where design standards are an issue,
such as in the Tourist and Downtown Districts, or where the applicant is seeking approval
of a Residential Infill Project or Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Proiect.
Comprehensive Sign Program or Comprehensive Landscaping Plan, the applicant shall
submit proposed elevation drawings, unless waived by the Community Development
Coordinator.
9
.
.
...
CDB Meeting Date: March 2 L 2000
Case: TAOO-03-02
Agenda Item: Director's Item
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
STAFF REPORT
TEXT AMENDMENT
REQUEST:
Amendments to the Community Development Code as a Result
of the Required Update - Ordinance No. 6526-00.
INITIATED BY:
City of Clearwater Planning Department
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The foundation of the One City. One Future redevelopment initiative was the creation of
the new Community Development Code, which became effective on March 8, 1999. In
order to provide a new framework for development and redevelopment in the City of
Clearwater, the Code was structured to encourage desired development and
redevelopment and provide property owners with measured flexibility with regard to use
and intensity of use and bulk standards.
After the Code went into effect, the Planning Department staff was charged with
evaluating the Code to determine if it was achieving its goals. Since March 1999, staff
has had ample opportunity for using the Code and evaluating its effectiveness. Staff has
approved approximately 1,300 applications requiring minimum zoning approval. The
Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed over 83 flexible standard
development cases. The DRC and the Community Development Board (CDB) have
reviewed approximately 35 flexible development cases. Staff has also reviewed
approximately thirty comprehensive sign program applications. During the past year,
only one appeal was filed and that was resolved in a mutually beneficial manner.
After the Code went into effect, staff began to record any inconsistencies, deficiencies, or
problems found in the Code. Comments were collected from Planning and Development
Services staff, Community Response Team members, Parks and Recreation staff, the
Harbormaster and Public Works staff. Additionally, comments and suggestions have
been obtained from design and development professionals, contractors and residents.
During the Code update process, which began in September 1999, staff has met with
numerous groups and individuals to solicit input on the update including the Island
Estates Homeowners Association, Sand Key Civic Association, the Clearwater Coalition
of Homeowners Association, the Government Affairs Committee of the Chamber of
Page 1
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
Commerce, the Clearwater Beach Chamber of Commerce, the Clearwater Board of
Realtors, the Clearwater Environmental Advisory Board, and the Downtown
Development Board.
Through working with the Code on a daily basis and with community stakeholders has
staff been able to compile a comprehensive list of amendments to recommend to the
Community Development Board.
ANALYSIS:
Staff is recommending a number of amendments to the Community Development Code,
some of which are considered significant policy issues. The remainder are editorial in
nature, provide additional flexibility criteria, or are refinements to existing provisions.
Below please find a summary of the most noteworthy proposed amendments organized
by Article. Attached please find a comprehensive listing of all proposed amendments.
Amendments are organized by Section and page number. Also attached is Ordinance No.
6526-00 which includes the ordinance title and the Community Development Code with
all specific amendments noted. Text that is underlined indicates proposed language and
text containing strikethroughs indicate deletions.
Article 1 - General Provisions.
1. Adding language to the purpose section of the Code to enhance the quality of life of
all residents and property owners of the city.
Article 2 - Zonine Districts.
2. Permitting parks and recreation facilities as flexible development uses in the
residential zoning districts and minimum or flexible standard uses in the commercial
zoning districts.
3. Creating more flexibility in setbacks for particular uses primarily in the nonresidential
districts and establishing criteria for the additional flexibility.
4. Restricting the height of residential infill projects in the High Density Residential
District to eighty (80) feet unless located on Clearwater Bay.
5. Adding standards to be consistent with the Countywide Rules.
6. Permitting new uses suc1li\imited vehicle service, light assembly, limited vehicle
sales and display, and mixeili'se.
7. Eliminating the Mixed Use District in its entirety.
Page 2
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
Article 3 - Development Standards.
8. Increasing the amount (percentage of gross floor area) allowed for accessory uses.
9. Revising the dock provisions to be more consistent with the Pinellas County Water
and Navigation Control Authority.
10. Fences: reorganizing the entire fence section; providing guidance for the location of
fences on corner lots and double frontage lots; revising landscaping requirements for
chainlink fences; permitting fences within the setback on all waterfront lots whereas
the fences were only permitted on residential property; permitting deviations from the
fence requirements for public projects pursuant to a Level One (flexible standard)
approval; and requiring a four feet high fence enclosing swimming pools.
11. Providing for density and intensity averaging on any unified site with different land
use categories.
12. Requiring a permit for painting commercial structures.
13. Prohibiting the rental of residentially zoned dwellings for less than 31 days to be
consistent with the Countywide Rules.
14. Permitting multi-stand newsracks to be located side by side for a distance of six feet
provided separation requirement of 300 feet is maintained between multi-stand
newsracks.
15. Prohibiting the parking of semi-trailer trucks and cabs on residentially zoned
property; prohibiting the parking of commercial vehicles on commercial property
unless they are affiliated with the property on which they are parked; and
prohibiting parking on the grass in the front setback of residentially zoned properties
if other alternative paved areas exist.
16. Eliminating cap on maximum amount of parking that can be provided on a site.
17. Clarifying triggers for compliance with landscaping and parking requirements.
18. Landscaping: allowing a 25% tree replacement credit for undeveloped multi-family
and commercial properties; requiring a tree removal permit for palms with a 10 feet
clear and straight trunk; establishing a minimum number of trees required on single-
family and two-family properties instead of requiring tree replacement on an inch per
inch basis; increasing the tree replacement costs from $42.00 to $48.00 per inch of
DBH; and incorporating additional tree protection measures into the Community
Development Code.
19. Allowing 25% more signage on nonresidential sites if a monument sign is erected
instead of a freestanding pole sign.
Page 3
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
20. Permitting monument signs, In addition to attached signs, In the Tourist and
Downtown Districts.
21. Permitting changeable messages on signs to be changed once every six hours.
22. Prohibiting temporary uses which are independent of the principal use on the site.
23. Permitting portable storage units on any property for forty-eight (48) hours and
restricting signage on such units to one sign face not exceeding twelve square feet in
area.
Article 4 - Development Review Procedures.
24. Increasing the notice requirement for flexible standard cases from abutting properties
to those within 200 feet and registered neighborhood associations.
25. Requiring land use and rezoning cases to be heard by the City Commission within six
months of the CDB meeting or the case will be deemed withdrawn.
26. Permitting cases to be amended during the approval process provided the
amendments are less intensive than the original application. If a case is amended to
be more intensive, the case will be required to be re-advertised and start the process
from the beginning.
27. Deleting the requirement that an applicant submit a summary of evidence, list of
witnesses, and disclose all related reports ten (10) days before the public hearing.
28. Increasing the required percentage of homeowner signatures from 50% to 60% in
order to initiate neighborhood conservation overlay designation. Requiring the
neighborhood to educate its property owners and residents of overlay regulations and
requiring neighborhood participation in enforcement.
29. Restricting the amount of development rights that can be transferred from and to any
site. Prohibiting the transfer of development rights to any property zoned LDR or
LMDR and revising the transfer distance limitation from a I-mile radius to allowing
transfers from the barrier islands to properties only located on the barrier islands and
allowing transfers from property on the mainland to any other property on the
mainland.
Article 6 - Nonconformitv Provisions.
30. Permitting properties with nonconforming density to be reconstructed with the same
density provided all other code requirements are met.
Page 4
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
Article 8 - Definitions and Rules of Construction.
31. Adding definitions of uses listed as permitted, deleting definitions for terms that are
not found in the Code, and revising definitions to be more concise.
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."
· Policy 2.1.1 - "Renewal of the beach tourist district shall be encouraged by
consideration of maintenance of existing densities, selection of a design theme,
innovative shared parking solutions, establishment of mainland employee park and
ride lots, possible land acquisition, transportation improvements, and establishment of
a community redevelopment area or areas."
· Policy 2.4.2 - "Neighborhood preservation and infill development shall be
encouraged by maintenance and upgrading of public and private property."
· Objective 2.5 - "Compact urban development within the urban service area shall be
promoted through application of the Clearwater Land Development Code."
· Policy 2.5.1- "The development and redevelopment of small parcels [less than 1 acre]
which are currently receiving an adequate Level of Service shall be specifically
encourage by administration of land development and concurrency management
regulatory systems as a method of promoting urban infill."
· Goal 3 - "The character of Clearwater as a high quality, attractive environment for
resort, residential, and business activities shall be enhanced and encouraged through
implementation of Clearwater's Comprehensive plan."
· Policy 3.5.1 - "Tree protection and replanting requirements should address both
quantity and quality of post-development landscape."
Page 5
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
. Policy 3.7.3 - "Sign identification of City parks and buildings shall be used as a
positive example of aesthetic and legible site information."
In addition to furthering the goals of the comprehensive plan, the proposed amendments
more fully implement the One City. One Future redevelopment initiative. Examples of
relevant amendments are as follows: additional flexibility in bulk regulations; shared
parking options in the D and T Districts; streamlining the review process of minor lot
adjustments and residential lots of record; permitting the redevelopment of properties
with nonconforming density provided all code requirements are met; and establishing
time, place and manner regulations for newsracks.
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 include a broad range of regulations ranging from
permitted uses, numerical standards, flexibility criteria, procedures, enforcement and
definitions. The proposed amendments are consistent with the provisions of Section I-
103 which lists the purposes of the Code.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The proposed amendments to the Community Development Code are consistent with the
Clearwater Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of the Community Development Code.
They also further the original goals that established the Code. The amendments
encourage new uses to assist in stimulating development and redevelopment; provide for
improved site design by requiring a high standard of site planing, significant landscaping
and limited signage; and maintain flexibility in setbacks while ensuring neighborhood
compatibility. The proposed amendments promote more site specific solutions and
promote economic development while maintaining high standards for development which
are essential in a community undergoing redevelopment.
The Planning Department Staff recommends APPROVAL of Ordinance No. 6526-00
which makes revisions to the Community Development Code.
Prepared by: Gina L. Clayton
ATTACHMENT:
Proposed Ordinance No. 6526-00.
Summary of Pro posed Community Development Code Amendments
Page 6
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
NOTICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT
AMENDMENT
The city proposes to adopt the text amendment described in greater detail below.
ORDINANCE NO. 6526-00
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, BY MAKING COMPREHENSIVE
AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; AMENDING ARTICLE 1,
GENERAL PROVISIONS; AMENDING ARTICLE 2, ZONING DISTRICTS, BY MAKING CHANGES
IN THE MINIMUM STANDARD, FLEXIBLE STANDARD, AND FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT USES,
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS, AND FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA; AMENDING ARTICLE 3,
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, BY MAKING COMPREHENSIVE CHANGES TO DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS; AMENDING ARTICLE 4, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND OTHER PROCEDURES
BY REVISING LEVELS 1, 2, AND 3 APPROVALS; AMENDING ARTICLE 6, NONCONFORMITY
PROVISIONS; AMENDING ARTICLE 7, ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS AND PENALTIES TO
CONFORM TO RECENT STATUTORY CHANGES; AMENDING ARTICLE 8, DEFINITIONS AND
RULES OF CONSTRUCTION BY REVISING, ADDING, AND DELETING CERTAIN DEFINITIONS;
REPEALING SECTION 28.10, CODE OF ORDINANCES, REGARDING NEWSRACKS AND
VENDING MACHINES; REPEALING SECTIONS 52.08, 52.09. AND 52.10, CODE OF
ORDINANCES, REGARDING PROTECTIVE BARRIER REQUIREMENTS AND PROTECTION
DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITES, PROPER TREE CARE; PROHIBITED TREE PRUNING;
AND TREE SERVICE COMPANIES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER:
City Commission Meeting
Thursday, June 1,2000
(at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter can be heard)
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 AVAILABLE 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: OS/20/00
.
.
"
ORDINANCE NO. 6526-00
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA,
MAKING COMPREHENSIVE AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CODE; AMENDING ARTICLE 1, GENERAL
PROVISIONS; AMENDING ARTICLE 2, ZONING DISTRICTS, BY
MAKING CHANGES IN THE MINIMUM STANDARD, FLEXIBLE
STANDARD, AND FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT USES, DIMENSIONAL
STANDARDS, AND FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA; AMENDING ARTICLE 3,
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, BY MAKING COMPREHENSIVE
CHANGES TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; AMENDING ARTICLE
4, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND OTHER PROCEDURES, BY
REVISING THE PROVISIONS REGARDING LEVEL 1, 2, AND 3
APPROVALS; AMENDING ARTICLE 6, NONCONFORMITY
PROVISIONS; AMENDING ARTICLE 7, ENFORCEMENT
PROCEEDINGS AND PENALTIES, TO CONFORM TO RECENT
STATUTORY CHANGES; AMENDING ARTICLE 8, DEFINITIONS AND
RULES OF CONSTRUCTION, BY REVISING, ADDING, AND
DELETING CERTAIN DEFINITIONS; REPEALING SECTION 28.10,
CODE OF ORDINANCES, REGARDING NEWSRACKS AND VENDING
MACHINES; REPEALING SECTIONS 52.08, 52.09. AND 52.10, CODE
OF ORDINANCES, REGARDING PROTECTIVE BARRIER
REQUIREMENTS AND PROTECTION DURING CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITIES, PROPER TREE CARE, PROHIBITED TREE PRUNING,
AND TREE SERVICE COMPANIES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater adopted a new Community Development Code on
January 21, 1999 which was effective on March 8, 1999, and
WHEREAS, since the effective date of the new Community Development Code, the City of
Clearwater has reviewed numerous development proposals in all the new zoning districts in all
parts of the City and which utilize Minimum, Standard, Flexible Standard, and Flexible levels of
review, and
WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater has conducted an in-depth review of the Community
Development Code and has identified development standards, procedures, zoning districts and the
allowable uses which need amendment to more fully implement the redevelopment intent of the
Code; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Board, pursuant to its responsibilities as the
Local Planning Agency, has reviewed this amendment, conducted a public hearing and considered
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 recommendations of the
Community Development Board and testimony submitted at its public hearing; now, therefore,
Ordinance No. 6526-00
.
.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Amendments to the Land Development Code of the City of Clearwater (as
adopted by Ordinance No. 6348-99 and subsequently amended) are hereby adopted to read as
set forth in Exhibit A to this Ordinance, which Exhibit is incorporated in this Ordinance as if fully
set forth herein.
Section 2. The following provisions of the City of Clearwater Code of Ordinances are
hereby repealed in their entirety: Section 28.10, Newsracks and Vending Machines, of Chapter
28, Streets, Sidewalks, Other Public Places; Sections 52.08, Protective barrier requirements
and protection during construction activities, 52.09, Proper tree care; prohibited tree pruning,
and 52.10, Tree service companies, of Chapter 52, Tree Protection.
Section 3. The City of Clearwater does hereby certify that the amendments contained in
Exhibit A to this Ordinance, as well as the provisions of this Ordinance, are consistent with and
in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Section 4. Should any part or provision of this Ordinance be declared by a court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a
whole, or any part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid.
Section 5. Notice of the proposed enactment of this Ordinance has been properly
advertised in a newspaper of general circulation in accordance with applicable law.
Section 6.
adoption.
The provisions of this Ordinance shall take effect 14 days following
PASSED ON FIRST READING
June I. 2000
PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL
READING AND ADOPTED
June 15, 2000
Bria a ungst r--
Ma or-Commissioner
Approved as to form:
Attest:
1 S-1L 2.
Cy t ia E. Goudeau
City lerk
. ~,~~_.-
.-----.........
2
Ordinance No. 6526-00
.earwater City Commission
Agenda Cover Memorandum
W or!sion Item #
Final Agenda Item #
Meeting Date
June L 2000
SUBJECTfRECOMMENDA TION:
Amendments to the Community Development Code as a result of the six month update.
MOTION: APPROVE comprehensive text amendments to the Community Development Code and PASS
Ordinance No. 6526-00 on first reading.
o and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same.
SUMMARY: Attached please find the following documents relating to the proposed amendments to the Community
Development Code:
· Ordinance No. 6526-00.
· The staff report which details the most noteworthy proposed amendments, and the review criteria required for text
amendments.
· A comprehensive listing of all proposed amendments.
· Correspondence from the Pinellas Planning Council regarding the treatment of temporary lodging in residential land
use categories.
· Correspondence from the Clearwater Regional Chamber of Commerce regarding its position on various proposed
code amendments.
The Community Development Board reviewed the proposed amendments at its March 21, 2000 meeting and made a
recommendation to approve the ordinance with the following two changes.
· Permit portable storage units (PODS) on any property for a period of no more than forty-eight (48) hours.
· Prohibit signage for accessory restaurants and accessory retail sales in the Office District.
At the May 2,2000 City Commission Workshop, the following changes were made to the ordinance:
· Deleted provision requiring a permit to paint commercial structures (Section 3-910, p. 3-47); and
· Revised the portable storage unit provision by permitting such units for 96 hours unless associated with permitted
construction. If associated with a permit, the unit may stay on site for the length of the permit. Locational
requirements were added, as well as a requirement for a sticker indicating the date on which the portable storage
unit is delivered to a property (Sections 3-2101(A)(6), (B)(3), and (C)(2), pp. 3-123 - 3-125).
Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs
Legal Info Svc Planning & Develop. Admin. Total N/A
- -
Budget N/A Public Works N/A User Dept.: Funding Source:
- -
Purchasi ng N/A DCM/ACM N/A Planning Current FY CI
- -
Risk Mgmt N/A Other N/A Attachments OP
- -
Saff Report Othe
Ord. No. 6526-00 r
SJbmitted by: D None
City Manager Appropriation Code:
_no
~" Pri ntAli nn ...,.,....AIi ruN>r
.
.
CDB Meeting Date: March 2 L 2000
Case: T AOO-03-02
Agenda Item: Director's Item
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
STAFF REPORT
TEXT AMENDMENT
REQUEST:
Amendments to the Community Development Code as a Result
of the Required Update - Ordinance No. 6526-00.
INITIATED BY:
City of Clearwater Planning Department
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The foundation of the One City. One Future redevelopment initiative was the creation of
the new Community Development Code, which became effective on March 8, 1999. In
order to provide a new framework for development and redevelopment in the City of
Clearwater, the Code was structured to encourage desired development and
redevelopment and provide property owners with measured flexibility with regard to use
and intensity of use and bulk standards.
After the Code went into effect, the Planning Department staff was charged with
evaluating the Code to determine if it was achieving its goals. Since March 1999, staff
has had ample opportunity for using the Code and evaluating its effectiveness. Staff has
approved approximately 1,300 applications requiring minimum zoning approval. The
Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed over 83 flexible standard
development cases. The DRC and the Community Development Board (CDB) have
reviewed approximately 35 flexible development cases. Staff has also reviewed
approximately thirty comprehensive sign program applications. During the past year,
only one appeal was filed and that was resolved in a mutually beneficial manner.
After the Code went into effect, staff began to record any inconsistencies, deficiencies, or
problems found in the Code. Comments were collected from Planning and Development
Services staff, Community Response Team members, Parks and Recreation staff, the
Harbormaster and Public Works staff. Additionally, comments and suggestions have
been obtained from design and development professionals, contractors and residents.
During the Code update process, which began in September 1999, staff has met with
numerous groups and individuals to solicit input on the update including the Island
Estates Homeowners Association, Sand Key Civic Association, the Clearwater Coalition
of Homeowners Association, the Government Affairs Committee of the Chamber of
Page 1
Revised 5-04-00
.
.
Commerce, the Clearwater Beach Chamber of Commerce, the Clearwater Board of
Realtors, the Clearwater Environmental Advisory Board, and the Downtown
Development Board.
Through working with the Code on a daily basis and with community stakeholders has
staff been able to compile a comprehensive list of amendments to recommend to the
Community Development Board.
ANALYSIS:
Staff is recommending a number of amendments to the Community Development Code,
some of which are considered significant policy issues. The remainder are editorial in
nature, provide additional flexibility criteria, or are refinements to existing provisions.
Below please find a summary of the most noteworthy proposed amendments organized
by Article. Attached please find a comprehensive listing of all proposed amendments.
Amendments are organized by Section and page number. Also attached is Ordinance No.
6526-00 which includes the ordinance title and the Community Development Code with
all specific amendments noted. Text that is underlined indicates proposed language and
text containing strikethroughs indicate deletions.
Article 1 - General Provisions.
1. Adding language to the purpose section of the Code to enhance the quality of life of
all residents and property owners of the city.
Article 2 - ZOOiD!! Districts.
2. Permitting parks and recreation facilities as flexible development uses in the
residential zoning districts and minimum or flexible standard uses in the commercial
zoning districts.
3. Creating more flexibility in setbacks for particular uses primarily in the nonresidential
districts and establishing criteria for the additional flexibility.
4. Restricting the height of residential infill projects in the High Density Residential
District to eighty (80) feet unless located on Clearwater Bay.
5. Adding standards to be consistent with the Countywide Rules.
6. Permitting new uses such as limited vehicle service, light assembly, limited vehicle
sales and display, and mixed use.
7. Eliminating the Mixed Use District in its entirety.
Page 2
Revised 5-04-00
.
.
Article 3 - Development Standards.
8. Increasing the amount (percentage of gross floor area) allowed for accessory uses.
9. Revising the dock provisions to be more consistent with the Pinellas County Water
and Navigation Control Authority.
10. Fences: reorganizing the entire fence section; providing guidance for the location of
fences on corner lots and double frontage lots; revising landscaping requirements for
chainlink fences; permitting fences within the setback on all waterfront lots whereas
the fences were only permitted on residential property; permitting deviations from the
fence requirements for public projects pursuant to a Level One (flexible standard)
approval; and requiring a four feet high fence enclosing swimming pools.
11. Providing for density and intensity averaging on any unified site with different land
use categories.
12. (Deleted provision requiring a permit to paint commercial structure per the May 2,
2000 City Commission Workshop.)
13. Prohibiting the rental of residentially zoned dwellings for less than 31 days to be
consistent with the Countywide Rules.
14. Permitting multi-stand newsracks to be located side by side for a distance of six feet
provided separation requirement of 300 feet is maintained between multi-stand
newsracks.
15. Prohibiting the parking of semi-trailer trucks and cabs on residentially zoned
property; prohibiting the parking of commercial vehicles on commercial property
unless they are affiliated with the property on which they are parked; and
prohibiting parking on the grass in the front setback of residentially zoned properties
if other alternative paved areas exist.
16. Eliminating cap on maximum amount of parking that can be provided on a site.
17. Clarifying triggers for compliance with landscaping and parking requirements.
18. Landscaping: allowing a 25% tree replacement credit for undeveloped multi-family
and commercial properties; requiring a tree removal permit for palms with a 10 feet
clear and straight trunk; establishing a minimum number of trees required on single-
family and two-family properties instead of requiring tree replacement on an inch per
inch basis; increasing the tree replacement costs from $42.00 to $48.00 per inch of
DBH; and incorporating additional tree protection measures into the Community
Development Code.
Page 3
Revised 5-04-00
.
.
19. Allowing 25% more signage on nonresidential sites if a monument sign is erected
instead of a freestanding pole sign.
20. Permitting monument signs, in addition to attached Signs, In the Tourist and
Downtown Districts.
21. Permitting changeable messages on signs to be changed once every six hours.
22. Prohibiting temporary uses which are independent of the principal use on the site.
23. Permitting portable storage units on any property for ninety-six (96) hours unless
associated with a construction permit. Restricting signage on such units to one sign
face not exceeding twelve square feet in area and requiring a sticker on the unit
indicating the date on which the unit was located on a property. (Revised per the May
2,2000 City Commission Workshop.)
Article 4 - Development Review Procedures.
24. Increasing the notice requirement for flexible standard cases from abutting properties
to those within 200 feet and registered neighborhood associations.
25. Requiring land use and rezoning cases to be heard by the City Commission within six
months of the CDB meeting or the case will be deemed withdrawn.
26. Permitting cases to be amended during the approval process provided the
amendments are less intensive than the original application. If a case is amended to
be more intensive, the case will be required to be re-advertised and start the process
from the beginning.
27. Deleting the requirement that an applicant submit a summary of evidence, list of
witnesses, and disclose all related reports ten (10) days before the public hearing.
28. Increasing the required percentage of homeowner signatures from 50% to 60% in
order to initiate neighborhood conservation overlay designation. Requiring the
neighborhood to educate its property owners and residents of overlay regulations and
requiring neighborhood participation in enforcement.
29. Restricting the amount of development rights that can be transferred from and to any
site. Prohibiting the transfer of development rights to any property zoned LDR or
LMDR and revising the transfer distance limitation from a I-mile radius to allowing
transfers from the barrier islands to properties only located on the barrier islands and
allowing transfers from property on the mainland to any other property on the
mainland.
Page 4
Revised 5-04-00
.
.
Article 6 - N onconformitv Provisions.
30. Permitting properties with nonconforming density to be reconstructed with the same
density provided all other code requirements are met.
Article 8 - Definitions and Rules of Construction.
31. Adding definitions of uses listed as permitted, deleting definitions for terms that are
not found in the Code, and revising definitions to be more concise.
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."
. Policy 2.1.1 - "Renewal of the beach tourist district shall be encouraged by
consideration of maintenance of existing densities, selection of a design theme,
innovative shared parking solutions, establishment of mainland employee park and
ride lots, possible land acquisition, transportation improvements, and establishment of
a community redevelopment area or areas."
. Policy 2.4.2 - "Neighborhood preservation and infill development shall be
encouraged by maintenance and upgrading of public and private property."
. Objective 2.5 - "Compact urban development within the urban service area shall be
promoted through application of the Clearwater Land Development Code."
. Policy 2.5.1- "The development and redevelopment of small parcels [less than 1 acre]
which are currently receiving an adequate Level of Service shall be specifically
encourage by administration of land development and concurrency management
regulatory systems as a method of promoting urban infill."
Page 5
Revised 5-04-00
.
.
· Goal 3 - "The character of Clearwater as a high quality, attractive environment for
resort, residential, and business activities shall be enhanced and encouraged through
implementation of Clearwater's Comprehensive plan."
· Policy 3.5.1 - "Tree protection and replanting requirements should address both
quantity and quality of post-development landscape."
· Policy 3.7.3 - "Sign identification of City parks and buildings shall be used as a
positive example of aesthetic and legible site information."
In addition to furthering the goals of the comprehensive plan, the proposed amendments
more fully implement the One City. One Future redevelopment initiative. Examples of
relevant amendments are as follows: additional flexibility in bulk regulations; shared
parking options in the D and T Districts; streamlining the review process of minor lot
adjustments and residential lots of record; permitting the redevelopment of properties
with nonconforming density provided all code requirements are met; and establishing
time, place and manner regulations for newsracks.
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 include a broad range of regulations ranging from
permitted uses, numerical standards, flexibility criteria, procedures, enforcement and
definitions. The proposed amendments are consistent with the provisions of Section 1-
103 which lists the purposes of the Code.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The proposed amendments to the Community Development Code are consistent with the
Clearwater Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of the Community Development Code.
They also further the original goals that established the Code. The amendments
encourage new uses to assist in stimulating development and redevelopment; provide for
improved site design by requiring a high standard of site planing, significant landscaping
and limited signage; and maintain flexibility in setbacks while ensuring neighborhood
compatibility. The proposed amendments promote more site specific solutions and
promote economic development while maintaining high standards for development which
are essential in a community undergoing redevelopment.
The Planning Department Staff recommends APPROVAL of Ordinance No. 6526-00
which makes revisions to the Community Development Code.
Prepared by: Gina L. Clayton
Page 6
Revised 5-04-00
.
.
ATTACHMENT:
Proposed Ordinance No. 6526-00.
Summary of Proposed Community Development Code Amendments
Page 7
Revised 5-04-00
.clearwater City Commission
_genda Cover Memorandum
W.ssion Item #
Final Agenda Item #
Meeting Date
Mav 18. 2000
SUBJECT/RECOMMENDATION:
Amendments to the Community Development Code as a result of the six month update.
MOTION: APPROVE comprehensive text amendments to the Community Development Code and PASS
Ordinance No. 6526-00 on first reading.
D and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same.
SUMMARY:
Attached please find the following documents relating to the proposed amendments to the Community Development
Code:
· Ordinance No. 6526-00.
· The staff report which details the most noteworthy proposed amendments, and the review criteria required for text
amendments.
· A comprehensive listing of all proposed amendments.
· Correspondence from the Pinellas Planning Council regarding the treatment of temporary lodging in residential land
use categories.
· Correspondence from the Clearwater Regional Chamber of Commerce regarding its position on various proposed
code amendments.
The Community Development Board reviewed the proposed amendments at its March 21, 2000 meeting and made a
recommendation to approve the ordinance with the following two changes, which staff has incorporated in the
ordinance:
· Permit portable storage units (PODS) on any property for a period of no more than forty-eight (48) hours.
· Prohibit signage for accessory restaurants and retail sales in the Office District.
Reviewed by:
Legal
Budget N/A
Purchasing N/A
Risk Mgmt N/A
Info Svc
Public Works N/A
DCM/ACM N/A
Other N/A
Originating Dept.:
Planning & Develop. Admi
User Dept.: 1lJ.il~
Planning ~
Attachments
gaff Report
Ord. No. 6526-00
Costs
Total N/A
Funding Source:
Current FY CI
OP
Othe
&Ibmitted by:
City Manager
o None
(} Printati nn rAr"....I.o.rI rurww
Appropriation Code:
.
.
CDB Meeting Date: March 21, 2000
Case: TAOO-03-02
Agenda Item: Director's Item
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
STAFF REPORT
TEXT AMENDMENT
REQUEST:
Amendments to the Community Development Code as a Result
of the Required Update - Ordinance No. 6526-00.
INITIATED BY:
City of Clearwater Planning Department
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The foundation of the One City. One Future redevelopment initiative was the creation of
the new Community Development Code, which became effective on March 8, 1999. In
order to provide a new framework for development and redevelopment in the City of
Clearwater, the Code was structured to encourage desired development and
redevelopment and provide property owners with measured flexibility with regard to use
and intensity of use and bulk standards.
After the Code went into effect, the Planning Department staff was charged with
evaluating the Code to determine if it was achieving its goals. Since March 1999, staff
has had ample opportunity for using the Code and evaluating its effectiveness. Staff has
approved approximately 1,300 applications requiring minimum zoning approval. The
Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed over 83 flexible standard
development cases. The DRC and the Community Development Board (CDB) have
reviewed approximately 35 flexible development cases. Staff has also reviewed
approximately thirty comprehensive sign program applications. During the past year,
only one appeal was filed and that was resolved in a mutually beneficial manner.
After the Code went into effect, staff began to record any inconsistencies, deficiencies, or
problems found in the Code. Comments were collected from Planning and Development
Services staff, Community Response Team members, Parks and Recreation staff, the
Harbormaster and Public Works staff Additionally, comments and suggestions have
been obtained from design and development professionals, contractors and residents.
During the Code update process, which began in September 1999, staff has met with
numerous groups and individuals to solicit input on the update including the Island
Estates Homeowners Association, Sand Key Civic Association, the Clearwater Coalition
of Homeowners Association, the Government Affairs Committee of the Chamber of
Page 1
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
Commerce, the Clearwater Beach Chamber of Commerce, the Clearwater Board of
Realtors, the Clearwater Environmental Advisory Board, and the Downtown
Development Board.
Through working with the Code on a daily basis and with community stakeholders has
staff been able to compile a comprehensive list of amendments to recommend to the
Community Development Board.
ANALYSIS:
Staff is recommending a number of amendments to the Community Development Code,
some of which are considered significant policy issues. The remainder are editorial in
nature, provide additional flexibility criteria, or are refinements to existing provisions.
Below please find a summary of the most noteworthy proposed amendments organized
by Article. Attached please find a comprehensive listing of all proposed amendments.
Amendments are organized by Section and page number. Also attached is Ordinance No.
6526-00 which includes the ordinance title and the Community Development Code with
all specific amendments noted. Text that is underlined indicates proposed language and
text containing strikethroughs indicate deletions.
Article 1 - General Provisions.
1. Adding language to the purpose section of the Code to enhance the quality of life of
all residents and property owners of the city.
Article 2 - Zonin2 Districts.
2. Permitting parks and recreation facilities as flexible development uses in the
residential zoning districts and minimum or flexible standard uses in the commercial
zoning districts.
3. Creating more flexibility in setbacks for particular uses primarily in the nonresidential
districts and establishing criteria for the additional flexibility.
4. Restricting the height of residential infill projects in the High Density Residential
District to eighty (80) feet unless located on Clearwater Bay.
5. Adding standards to be consistent with the Countywide Rules.
6. Permitting new uses such a limited vehicle service, light assembly, limited vehicle
sales and display, and mixed use.
7. Eliminating the Mixed Use District in its entirety.
Page 2
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
Article 3 - Development Standards.
8. Increasing the amount (percentage of gross floor area) allowed for accessory uses.
9. Revising the dock provisions to be more consistent with the Pinellas County Water
and Navigation Control Authority.
10. Fences: reorganizing the entire fence section; providing guidance for the location of
fences on corner lots and double frontage lots; revising landscaping requirements for
chainlink fences; permitting fences within the setback on all waterfront lots whereas
the fences were only permitted on residential property; permitting deviations from the
fence requirements for public projects pursuant to a Level One (flexible standard)
approval; and requiring a four feet high fence enclosing swimming pools.
11. Providing for density and intensity averaging on any unified site with different land
use categories.
12. Requiring a permit for painting commercial structures.
13. Prohibiting the rental of residentially zoned dwellings for less than 31 days to be
consistent with the Countywide Rules.
14. Permitting multi-stand newsracks to be located side by side for a distance of six feet
provided separation requirement of 300 feet is maintained between multi-stand
newsracks.
15. Prohibiting the parking of semi-trailer trucks and cabs on residentially zoned
property; prohibiting the parking of commercial vehicles on commercial property
unless they are affiliated with the property on which they are parked; and
prohibiting parking on the grass in the front setback of residentially zoned properties
if other alternative paved areas exist.
16. Eliminating cap on maximum amount of parking that can be provided on a site.
17. Clarifying triggers for compliance with landscaping and parking requirements.
18. Landscaping: allowing a 25% tree replacement credit for undeveloped multi-family
and commercial properties; requiring a tree removal permit for palms with a 10 feet
clear and straight trunk; establishing a minimum number of trees required on single-
family and two-family properties instead of requiring tree replacement on an inch per
inch basis; increasing the tree replacement costs from $42.00 to $48.00 per inch of
DBH; and incorporating additional tree protection measures into the Community
Development Code.
19. Allowing 25% more signage on nonresidential sites if a monument sign is erected
instead of a freestanding pole sign.
Page 3
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
20. Permitting monument signs, In addition to attached signs, In the Tourist and
Downtown Districts.
21. Permitting changeable messages on signs to be changed once every six hours.
22. Prohibiting temporary uses which are independent of the principal use on the site.
23. Permitting portable storage units on any property for forty-eight (48) hours and
restricting signage on such units to one sign face not exceeding twelve square feet in
area.
Article 4 - Development Review Procedures.
24. Increasing the notice requirement for flexible standard cases from abutting properties
to those within 200 feet and registered neighborhood associations.
25. Requiring land use and rezoning cases to be heard by the City Commission within six
months of the CDB meeting or the case will be deemed withdrawn.
26. Permitting cases to be amended during the approval process provided the
amendments are less intensive than the original application. If a case is amended to
be more intensive, the case will be required to be re-advertised and start the process
from the beginning.
27. Deleting the requirement that an applicant submit a summary of evidence, list of
witnesses, and disclose all related reports ten (10) days before the public hearing.
28. Increasing the required percentage of homeowner signatures from 50% to 60% in
order to initiate neighborhood conservation overlay designation. Requiring the
neighborhood to educate its property owners and residents of overlay regulations and
requiring neighborhood participation in enforcement.
29. Restricting the amount of development rights that can be transferred from and to any
site. Prohibiting the transfer of development rights to any property zoned LDR or
LMDR and revising the transfer distance limitation from a I-mile radius to allowing
transfers from the barrier islands to properties only located on the barrier islands and
allowing transfers from property on the mainland to any other property on the
mainland.
Article 6 - Nonconformitv Provisions.
30. Permitting properties with nonconforming density to be reconstructed with the same
density provided all other code requirements are met.
Page 4
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
Article 8 - Definitions and Rules of Construction.
31. Adding definitions of uses listed as permitted, deleting definitions for terms that are
not found in the Code, and revising definitions to be more concise.
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."
· Policy 2.1.1 - "Renewal of the beach tourist district shall be encouraged by
consideration of maintenance of existing densities, selection of a design theme,
innovative shared parking solutions, establishment of mainland employee park and
ride lots, possible land acquisition, transportation improvements, and establishment of
a community redevelopment area or areas."
· Policy 2.4.2 - "Neighborhood preservation and infill development shall be
encouraged by maintenance and upgrading of public and private property."
· Objective 2.5 - "Compact urban development within the urban service area shall be
promoted through application of the Clearwater Land Development Code."
· Policy 2.5.1- "The development and redevelopment of small parcels [less than 1 acre]
which are currently receiving an adequate Level of Service shall be specifically
encourage by administration of land development and concurrency management
regulatory systems as a method of promoting urban infill."
· Goal 3 - "The character of Clearwater as a high quality, attractive environment for
resort, residential, and business activities shall be enhanced and encouraged through
implementation of Clearwater's Comprehensive plan."
· Policy 3.5.1 - "Tree protection and replanting requirements should address both
quantity and quality of post-development landscape."
Page 5
Revised 4-10-00
.
e
· Policy 3.7.3 - "Sign identification of City parks and buildings shall be used as a
positive example of aesthetic and legible site information."
In addition to furthering the goals of the comprehensive plan, the proposed amendments
more fully implement the One City. One Future redevelopment initiative. Examples of
relevant amendments are as follows: additional flexibility in bulk regulations; shared
parking options in the D and T Districts; streamlining the review process of minor lot
adjustments and residential lots of record; permitting the redevelopment of properties
with nonconforming density provided all code requirements are met; and establishing
time, place and manner regulations for newsracks.
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 include a broad range of regulations ranging from
permitted uses, numerical standards, flexibility criteria, procedures, enforcement and
definitions. The proposed amendments are consistent with the provisions of Section I-
103 which lists the purposes of the Code.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The proposed amendments to the Community Development Code are consistent with the
Clearwater Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of the Community Development Code.
They also further the original goals that established the Code. The amendments
encourage new uses to assist in stimulating development and redevelopment; provide for
improved site design by requiring a high standard of site planing, significant landscaping
and limited signage; and maintain flexibility in setbacks while ensuring neighborhood
compatibility. The proposed amendments promote more site specific solutions and
promote economic development while maintaining high standards for development which
are essential in a community undergoing redevelopment.
The Planning Department Staff recommends APPROVAL of Ordinance No. 6526-00
which makes revisions to the Community Development Code.
Prepared by: Gina L. Clayton
ATTACHMENT:
Proposed Ordinance No. 6526-00.
Summary of Proposed Community Development Code Amendments
Page 6
Revised 4-10-00
r~J PINELLAS Pe\NNING COUN~
COUNCIL MEMBERS
February 29, 2000
Councilmember Robert A. Kersteen, Chm.
Mayor Tom De Cesare, Vice Chm.
Councilmember Chuck Williams, Treas.
Commissioner Nadine S. Nickeson, Sec.
School Board Member Lee Benjamin
Mayor Frank DiDonato, D.C.
Mayor Robert DiNicola
Commissioner Calvin D. Harris
Commissioner Ed Hart
Vice-Mayor Janet Henderson
Vice-Mayor Robert Jackson
Vice-Mayor William B. Smith
Council member Babe Wright
Ms. Gina L. Clayton, Senior Planner
City of Clearwater Planning and Development Services
PO Box 4748
Cleanvatei,.F;L 33758",4748
David P. Healey, AICP
Executive. Director
Re: Countywide Rules and Transient Accommodation Uses
Dear Ms. Clayton:
This correspondence is in response to your request for information regarding the treatment
of temporary lodging in residential land use categories. Specifically, you inquired as to
whether potential changes to the City's code to establish a minimum duration of time
properties in residential land use categories could be rented or leased would be consistent
with the Rules Concerning the Administration of the Countywide Plan (the Rules).
The Rules define a facility offering temporary lodging accommodations offered at intervals
of thirty (30) days or less as a "Transient Accommodation". Transient Accommodation uses
are not permitted in any residential land use plan classification. They are permitted as
primary uses in the following individual plan categories:
· ResidentiallOffice/Retail
. .;> Resort Facilities Overlay
· Resort Facilities Medium
· Resort Facilities High
· Commercial Limited
· Commercial General
Such uses are permitted as secondary uses in the following two plan categories:
· Commercial Recreation
· Industrial Limited
600 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 850 · CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755-4160
TELEPHONE (727) 464-8250 · FAX (727) 464-8212
.
.
Page two
February 29,2000
Under the Countywide Rules, the renting or leasing of a residential dwelling unit for thirty
(30) days or less could only occur in the plan categories listed on the previous page. It is the
intent of the Countywide Rules that, within the residential plan categories, renting or leasing
could not occur for less than thirty-one (31) days. Thus, for example, if the City chose to
limit renting or leasing to no less than three (3) months in any residential plan category, this
would be considered consistent with the Rules. Conversely, if the City were to permit a
rental period of three (3) weeks, this would not be consistent.
If you have any further questions please let me know. If the City dees decide to amend its
code to deal with this issue, please be sure to submit the proposed amendments to the PPC
not less than twenty-one (21) days prior to the initial public hearing. PPC staff will conduct
a formal review of the amendment for consistency with the Rules within fifteen (15) days
of receipt and provide you with written confirmation of consistency.
Sincerely,
~~
David P. Healey,
Executive Director
cc: Commissioner Ed Hart, PPC Representative
F:\USERS\ WPDOCS\DPH\FebOOCor\letter2cl:J.}'ton- r~- transient-accolJunodatiollS. wpd
1 pO CLEVELAND STREET,
CLEARWATER, FL 33755-4841
www.clearwaterAorida.org
, 727/461-0011
FAX 727/449-2889
Executive Committee
Ed Armstrong
Chairman of the Board
Frank Murphy
Chairman-Elect
John Connelly
Vice Chairman . Small Business
Gary S. Gray
Vice Chairman. Membership
Holly Duncan
Vice Chairman. Governmental
Affairs/Econmic Development
Ed Droste
Vice Chairman. Special Events
Greg Brosius
Vice Chairman . Tourism
Robert Kinney
Vice Chairman. Area Councils
Pat Duffy
Treasurer
Judy Mitchell
Immediate Past Chairman
Julius J. Zschau
Legal Counsel
Mike Meidel
President, CEO
Board of Directors
Dan Andriso
Keith Appenzeller
Janice Case
Steve Chandler
Theresa Crane
Karen Dee
Ann Duncan
Raymond Ferrara
Doug Fredericks
Judy Ganisin
Doug Graska
Hoyt Hamilton
Williom Heller
Guy Jasmin
Jean Kingsbury
Darlene KoIe
Charlotte Korba
Don Lucas
Alan Manning
Jim Myers
David Nadeau
Barbora Pacheco
Jeanie Renfrow
Charles Riggs
Joe Ritchie
Daryl Seaton
David Sipe
Ron Stuart
John Timberlake
Doug Williams
.
(1 Clea:Water
~~~ REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
March 20, 2000
Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, FL 33756
Dear Mr. Stone:
Thank you for taking the time to present the proposed changes to the city's
Community Development Code to our organization. The effort the city has
taken in revising this code reflects your commitment to making it easier to do
business in the city of Clearwater.
The Board of Directors of the Clearwater Regional Chamber of Commerce
has reviewed the attached revisions and supports each of the proposed items
with the exception of numbers 5 and 6.
The Chamber opposes requiring permits for the painting of commercial
structures. This additional permit will cause time delays and unnecessary
expense and inconvenience for businesses trying to upgrade their properties.
The Chamber is withholding a position on item 5, prohibiting rentals ofless
than 30 days, until we are able to explore its potential economic impacts.
Thank you again for including the Chamber in this review process.
Sincerely, .
..~' . ~.'
.---. ~,/1' /. ~ , ;'."/'
, .., \ " /J.' _ . .//
~/? ," ,Ai::// 7/ti-~~-;/-
/' ;j'~h .,;-~~ // /
[1-0 [E(C[E~~[E-o=\
, I
MAR 2 2 2000 I L::)
Michael Meidel
President & CEO
enclosure
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
C!TY OF CLEARWATr:R
The Voice of Business in our Community
.
.
Clearwater Code Amendments
As presented to Clearwater Regional Chamber Board of Directors
1. Permit density/intensity averaging on site having two different land use
categories provided the use is permitted in both categories.
2. Permit light assembly type uses that have no external impacts in the
Commercial District (e.g. dental labs, pill assembly, etc.)
3. Permit "limited vehicle service" uses as a flexible development use in the
Commercial District subject to design criteria (e.g. car wash, oil change, etc).
4. Permit shared parking options, including payment in "lieu of' in the Tourist
District.
5. Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the
Tourist, Commercial or Downtown Districts.
6. Require permit for painting commercial structures.
7. Amend newsrack regulations based on task force and commission direction.
8. Clarify what triggers compliance with new code provisions for landscaping,
parking, and signage. (proposed: renovations costing up to 25% of assessed
value of property will be allowed without triggering retroaction)
9. Measure sign height of freestanding signs above the crown of the road so that
signs for business at US 19 overpasses will be visible.
10. Eliminate cap on maximum amount of parking that can be provided on a site.
Control only through the site plan review approval process.
11. Revise the distance requirements for Transfer of Development Rights (TOR) so
that if a property is located on the barrier islands the TDR can go anywhere on
the islands. If the site is on the mainland, the transfer can go anywhere on the
mainland. Prohibit the transfer of any development rights to the Low Density
Residential and Low Medium Density Residential Districts. Commissioner Hart
is proposing four regions: mainland, Island Estates, Beach, Sand Key.
12. When terminating a property status as nonconformity, residential and transient
uses may be exchanged and/or reconstructed subject to meeting parking,
landscaping and sign requirements.
.
.
FYI
April 21, 2000
The Members of the City Commission:
Mayor-Commissioner Brian J. Aungst
Commissioner Ed Hooper
Commissioner J.B. Johnson, Jr.
Commissioner Robert Clark
Commissioner Ed Hart
at their usual places of residence,
Clearwater, Florida
NOTICE OF SPECIAL WORKSESSION
A special worksession of the City Commission is hereby called for
Tuesday, May 2, 2000, at 9:00 a.m., in City Commission Chambers,
in City Hall, 3rd floor, at 112 S. Osceola Avenue, Clearwater,
Florida for six month review of the Community Development Code.
City of Clearwater
P.O. Box 4748
Clearwater, FL 33758-4748
Cynthia E. Goudeau, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
.
.
April 21, 2000
The Members of the City Commission:
Mayor-Commissioner Brian J. Aungst
Commissioner Ed Hooper
Commissioner J.B. Johnson, Jr.
Commissioner Robert Clark
Commissioner Ed Hart
at their usual places of residence,
Clearwater, Florida
NOTICE OF SPECIAL WORKSESSION
A special worksession of the City Commission is hereby called for
Tuesday, May 2, 2000, at 1:30 p.m., in City Commission Chambers,
in City Hall, 3rd floor, at 112 S. Osceola Avenue, Clearwater,
Florida to discuss funding options related to the proposed Fire
Department 2000/01 Budget & Fire Task Force Report.
City of Clearwater
P.O. Box 4748
Clearwater, FL 33758-4748
Cynthia E. Goudeau, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
.
.
~ _liarwater
o
TO:
Michael Roberto, City Manager /J J~
Ralph Stone, Director of Planning ( ~-
FROM:
DATE:
April 10, 2000
RE:
Proposed Amendments to the Community Development Code
Attached please find proposed Ordinance No. 6526-00 which includes the proposed
amendments to the Community Development Code. This proposed ordinance was
presented to the Community Development Board at the March 21 st meeting. The Board
recommended approval of the ordinance with following two changes which have been
incorporated into the proposed ordinance:
· Permit portable storage units (PODS) on any property for a period of forty-eight (48)
hours. Staff proposed permitting portable storage units on any property with an
active construction permit for the duration of the permit. Signage on the entire site
was proposed to be in compliance with construction sign requirements).
· Prohibit signage for accessory restaurants and retail sales in the Office District. Staff
did not address this issue.
This ordinance has been scheduled for discussion by the City Commission at a special
workshop on May 2, 2000. First reading is scheduled for May 18, 2000 and second
reading /adoption is scheduled for June 1, 2000.
In addition to Ordinance No. 6526-00, please find the following attachments:
· The staff report presented to the Community Development Board which details the
process used during the update, the most noteworthy proposed amendments, and the
review criteria required for text amendments.
· A comprehensive listing of all proposed amendments.
· Correspondence from the Pinellas Planning Council regarding the treatment of
temporary lodging in residential land use categories.
1
e
e
· Correspondence from the Clearwater Regional Chamber of Commerce regarding
its position on various proposed code amendments.
2
.
.
CDB Meeting Date: March 21, 2000
Case: TAOO-03-02
Agenda Item: Director's Item
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
STAFF REPORT
TEXT AMENDMENT
REQUEST:
Amendments to the Community Development Code as a Result
of the Required Update - Ordinance No. 6526-00.
INITIATED BY:
City of Clearwater Planning Department
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The foundation of the One City. One Future redevelopment initiative was the creation of
the new Community Development Code, which became effective on March 8, 1999. In
order to provide a new framework for development and redevelopment in the City of
Clearwater, the Code was structured to encourage desired development and
redevelopment and provide property owners with measured flexibility with regard to use
and intensity of use and bulk standards.
After the Code went into effect, the Planning Department staff was charged with
evaluating the Code to determine if it was achieving its goals. Since March 1999, staff
has had ample opportunity for using the Code and evaluating its effectiveness. Staff has
approved approximately 1,300 applications requiring minimum zoning approval. The
Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed over 83 flexible standard
development cases. The DRC and the Community Development Board (CDB) have
reviewed approximately 35 flexible development cases. Staff has also reviewed
approximately thirty comprehensive sign program applications. During the past year,
only one appeal was filed and that was resolved in a mutually beneficial manner.
After the Code went into effect, staff began to record any inconsistencies, deficiencies, or
problems found in the Code. Comments were collected from Planning and Development
Services staff, Community Response Team members, Parks and Recreation staff, the
Harbormaster and Public Works staff. Additionally, comments and suggestions have
been obtained from design and development professionals, contractors and residents.
During the Code update process, which began in September 1999, staff has met with
numerous groups and individuals to solicit input on the update including the Island
Estates Homeowners Association, Sand Key Civic Association, the Clearwater Coalition
of Homeowners Association, the Government Affairs Committee of the Chamber of
Page 1
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
Commerce, the Clearwater Beach Chamber of Commerce, the Clearwater Board of
Realtors, the Clearwater Environmental Advisory Board, and the Downtown
Development Board.
Through working with the Code on a daily basis and with community stakeholders has
staff been able to compile a comprehensive list of amendments to recommend to the
Community Development Board.
ANALYSIS:
Staff is recommending a number of amendments to the Community Development Code,
some of which are considered significant policy issues. The remainder are editorial in
nature, provide additional flexibility criteria, or are refinements to existing provisions.
Below please find a summary of the most noteworthy proposed amendments organized
by Article. Attached please find a comprehensive listing of all proposed amendments.
Amendments are organized by Section and page number. Also attached is Ordinance No.
6526-00 which includes the ordinance title and the Community Development Code with
all specific amendments noted. Text that is underlined indicates proposed language and
text containing strikethroughs indicate deletions.
Article 1 - General Provisions.
1. Adding language to the purpose section of the Code to enhance the quality of life of
all residents and property owners of the city.
Article 2 - Zoniol! Districts.
2. Permitting parks and recreation facilities as flexible development uses in the
residential zoning districts and minimum or flexible standard uses in the commercial
zoning districts.
3. Creating more flexibility in setbacks for particular uses primarily in the nonresidential
districts and establishing criteria for the additional flexibility.
4. Restricting the height of residential infill projects in the High Density Residential
District to eighty (80) feet unless located on Clearwater Bay.
5. Adding standards to be consistent with the Countywide Rules.
6. Permitting new uses such a limited vehicle service, light assembly, limited vehicle
sales and display, and mixed use.
7. Eliminating the Mixed Use District in its entirety.
Page 2
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
Article 3 - Development Standards.
8. Increasing the amount (percentage of gross floor area) allowed for accessory uses.
9. Revising the dock provisions to be more consistent with the Pinellas County Water
and Navigation Control Authority.
10. Fences: reorganizing the entire fence section; providing guidance for the location of
fences on corner lots and double frontage lots; revising landscaping requirements for
chainlink fences; permitting fences within the setback on all waterfront lots whereas
the fences were only permitted on residential property; permitting deviations from the
fence requirements for public projects pursuant to a Level One (flexible standard)
approval; and requiring a four feet high fence enclosing swimming pools.
11. Providing for density and intensity averaging on any unified site with different land
use categories.
12. Requiring a permit for painting commercial structures.
13. Prohibiting the rental of residentially zoned dwellings for less than 31 days to be
consistent with the Countywide Rules.
14. Permitting multi-stand newsracks to be located side by side for a distance of six feet
provided separation requirement of 300 feet is maintained between multi-stand
newsracks.
15. Prohibiting the parking of semi-trailer trucks and cabs on residentially zoned
property; prohibiting the parking of commercial vehicles on commercial property
unless they are affiliated with the property on which they are parked; and
prohibiting parking on the grass in the front setback of residentially zoned properties
if other alternative paved areas exist.
16. Eliminating cap on maximum amount of parking that can be provided on a site.
17. Clarifying triggers for compliance with landscaping and parking requirements.
18. Landscaping: allowing a 25% tree replacement credit for undeveloped multi-family
and commercial properties; requiring a tree removal permit for palms with a 10 feet
clear and straight trunk; establishing a minimum number of trees required on single-
family and two-family properties instead of requiring tree replacement on an inch per
inch basis; increasing the tree replacement costs from $42.00 to $48.00 per inch of
DBH; and incorporating additional tree protection measures into the Community
Development Code.
19. Allowing 25% more signage on nonresidential sites if a monument sign is erected
instead of a freestanding pole sign.
Page 3
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
20. Permitting monument sIgns, In addition to attached signs, In the Tourist and
Downtown Districts.
21. Permitting changeable messages on signs to be changed once every six hours.
22. Prohibiting temporary uses which are independent of the principal use on the site.
23. Permitting portable storage units on any property for forty-eight (48) hours and
restricting signage on such units to one sign face not exceeding twelve square feet in
area.
Article 4 - Development Review Procedures.
24. Increasing the notice requirement for flexible standard cases from abutting properties
to those within 200 feet and registered neighborhood associations.
25. Requiring land use and rezoning cases to be heard by the City Commission within six
months of the CDB meeting or the case will be deemed withdrawn.
26. Permitting cases to be amended during the approval process provided the
amendments are less intensive than the original application. If a case is amended to
be more intensive, the case will be required to be re-advertised and start the process
from the beginning.
27. Deleting the requirement that an applicant submit a summary of evidence, list of
witnesses, and disclose all related reports ten (10) days before the public hearing.
28. Increasing the required percentage of homeowner signatures from 50% to 60% in
order to initiate neighborhood conservation overlay designation. Requiring the
neighborhood to educate its property owners and residents of overlay regulations and
requiring neighborhood participation in enforcement.
29. Restricting the amount of development rights that can be transferred from and to any
site. Prohibiting the transfer of development rights to any property zoned LDR or
LMDR and revising the transfer distance limitation from a I-mile radius to allowing
transfers from the barrier islands to properties only located on the barrier islands and
allowing transfers from propelty on the mainland to any other property on the
mainland.
Article 6 - Nonconformitv Provisions.
30. Permitting properties with nonconforming density to be reconstructed with the same
density provided all other code requirements are met.
Page 4
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
Article 8 - Definitions and Rules of Construction.
31. Adding definitions of uses listed as permitted, deleting definitions for terms that are
not found in the Code, and revising definitions to be more concise.
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."
. Policy 2.1.1 - "Renewal of the beach tourist district shall be encouraged by
consideration of maintenance of existing densities, selection of a design theme,
innovative shared parking solutions, establishment of mainland employee park and
ride lots, possible land acquisition, transportation improvements, and establishment of
a community redevelopment area or areas."
. Policy 2.4.2 - "Neighborhood preservation and infill development shall be
encouraged by maintenance and upgrading of public and private property."
. Objective 2.5 - "Compact urban development within the urban service area shall be
promoted through application of the Clearwater Land Development Code."
. Policy 2.5.1- "The development and redevelopment of small parcels [less than 1 acre]
which are currently receiving an adequate Level of Service shall be specifically
encourage by administration of land development and concurrency management
regulatory systems as a method of promoting urban infill."
. Goal 3 - "The character of Clearwater as a high quality, attractive environment for
resort, residential, and business activities shall be enhanced and encouraged through
implementation of Clearwater's Comprehensive plan."
. Policy 3.5.1 - "Tree protection and replanting requirements should address both
quantity and quality of post-development landscape."
Page 5
Revised 4-10-00
.
.
. Policy 3.7.3 - "Sign identification of City parks and buildings shall be used as a
positive example of aesthetic and legible site information."
In addition to furthering the goals of the comprehensive plan, the proposed amendments
more fully implement the One City. One Future redevelopment initiative. Examples of
relevant amendments are as follows: additional flexibility in bulk regulations; shared
parking options in the D and T Districts; streamlining the review process of minor lot
adjustments and residential lots of record; permitting the redevelopment of properties
with nonconforming density provided all code requirements are met; and establishing
time, place and manner regulations for newsracks.
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 include a broad range of regulations ranging from
permitted uses, numerical standards, flexibility criteria, procedures, enforcement and
definitions. The proposed amendments are consistent with the provisions of Section I-
103 which lists the purposes of the Code.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The proposed amendments to the Community Development Code are consistent with the
Clearwater Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of the Community Development Code.
They also further the original goals that established the Code. The amendments
encourage new uses to assist in stimulating development and redevelopment; provide for
improved site design by requiring a high standard of site planing, significant landscaping
and limited signage; and maintain flexibility in setbacks while ensuring neighborhood
compatibility. The proposed amendments promote more site specific solutions and
promote economic development while maintaining high standards for development which
are essential in a community undergoing redevelopment.
The Planning Department Staff recommends APPROVAL of Ordinance No. 6526-00
which makes revisions to the Community Development Code.
Prepared by: Gina L. Clayton
ATTACHMENT:
Proposed Ordinance No. 6526-00.
Summary of Proposed Community Development Code Amendments
Page 6
Revised 4-10-00
FILE No.745 05/02 '00 09:01
11iiJEARWATER-CHAMBER
FAX:72741J89
PAGE 2/ 2
1130 WMI.ANP STReeT,
CLeARWA 'ER, Fl33755-4841
www.c~ ~rwolerl1orido.org
7:7/46HlOll
~"7 / 449-2889
~
rong
1~ BQg,d
phy
'led
,Uy
1U Busitww
y
..be,ship
'1monlal
opment
MnIS
IT!
leils
y
.
ba
.ng
~
sou
:heco
,frow
.i99S
,hie
;cion
Sipe
JllJart
, fimberlake
Uol ~ WilliQm~
Clearwater
~ RIiGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Ii 0 lEelE~~lEJrY
: ! MAY 2 2fD) i...." '
near M'y~;: 1/'1'(1 f1 I t, PLANNING & OEVELOPM~:;~ ·
I SERVICES
The Board of Directors of the Clearwater Regional ~hamber ~d)fufi~WATER
would like to express its concern regarding two proposea Land Development
Code revisions, specifically those requiring pennits to the paint commercial
structures and to mandate a 31-day minimum stay for overnight
accormnodations.
April 27, 2000
Mayor Brian Aungst
112 S- Osceola Ave.
Clearwater) FL 33756
The ban on short-term rentals of certain properties located throughout the city
and beaches has a detrimental impact upon property owners, entrepreneurs,
and our vital tourism industry.
The Chamber is opposed to this proposed code change as we feel this is not a
city government issue. but one that should be addressed by individual
homeowners and condominium associations. In addition, intervention 00 the
part of a governmental entity constitutes a violation of a citizen's private
property rights.
The Board would like to again express its objection to further complicating
the permitting process by requiring a permit for the painting of conunercial
structures. This additional permit will cause time delays and inconvenience
for businesses trying to upgrade their properties and will serve as a
disincentive for those business people striving to make their properties better.
We urge you to consider these matters when the code reVisions are presented
to you in the coming weeks.
-~
Sincerely, Ii!
Ed Armstrong, Chairman of the Board
Partner, Johnson, Blakely, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Bums, P.A.
The Voi&e ofBu.riness in our Community
MRY-26-2000 12:37
.
P.01
.
Page I of3
Brink, Carolyn
From: Dave Campbell [clearwaterGPGbox,comJ
Sent: Thuf$dsy, May 25,200010:44 PM
To: Clayton, Gina
Cc: Mayor and Commissioners; Michael Roberto; Bill Home
SUbJect: RE: Window and YaRt Signs
\"O~I!8 re.
COMMISSION
MAY 2 6 2000
Hi Gina,
PRESS
ClERK I A TTOANEV
Yesterday, I did a little random survey of SOllIe local stores. I picked two stores with lots of windows
to calculate the difference in sign allOWances for both the 'four foot rule" and the '100 square fool
rule'. I am attaching the results of those rneasureJnents and calQIlations as drawings and a
spreadsheet.
The SPreadsheet is pteIIy self.explanatory. It shows the ditnensions ofeach of the windows for Publix,
at 525 South Belcher and PayJess Shoe Store at 2100 Gulf To Bay_
The drawin&s attaciunent consists of four e"bibits, two each for Publix and two for Payless. Each pair
shows a sketch of the 'fuur foot rule' and of the '100 square foot' rule. The overall square footage
between the two is DlOre or I... a wash, but the dillerence between the two as measured in visual
pollution is quite conspicuous_
In any event" whether the current ""de or the old code is used, the definition ofwindow needs to he
defined in alesa ambi_ manner. In othen words is 'window' a single pane or is It the total
window area of the property? The same question applies to the term "windowarea"_
I am also attaching photos of several stores that provide a reality check on the difFerence between the
two rules. The photo. depict the contrast between 0Jristing sign sizes and the 'four foot rule". Pi....
keep in I11ind. the total square footage under eJther rule is virtuaUy identical. It's the distribution of the
total square footage that's the issue. As you can .... with the 'four fOot rule' a merchant would have
many. many times more signs but not have any Jess total square footage.
Please take one more look.
Dave
"0-- [E(C[E~~[E \1
I I .
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT I
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
Thanks!
At 08:37 5/25/00, Clayton, Gina wrote;
Hi Dave,
We reviewed the window sign provision again. If someone wants to have more
than 20%/4 s.f. of window signage, they may make use of the area allowed for
attached signage. Also, the maximum permitted area of a freestanding sign
face is 64 square feet in area. Based oq these two facts, staff is not
recommending to increase the pennitted amount of window signage. Increasing
window signage beyond what is allowed in the code would he counter to the
Sf. :6/00
MRY-26-2000 12:37
.
.
philosophy of the sign code.
Let me know if you have any additional questions or conunents. Have a great
Memorial Day weekend!
--~Original Message~---
From: Dave Campbell rmailto:clearwater@pobox.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 11: S4 AM
To: Clayton, Gina
Cc: Mayor and Commissioners; Michael Roberto; Bill Home
Subject: Window and Yard Signs
Hi Gina.
Thanks for your reply to my suggestions.
Regarding the windows signs. I commend your intentions in wanting to
minimize window coverage but feel keeping the current Section 3-180S.Q has
little ifany improvement over the Section 44.08(19) that it displaced. The
net result of your decision could easily allow substantially more total
signage. The older Section 44.08(19) limited the total amount to 100 square
feet - period. The current Section 3-J80S.Q has no limit.
Please re..consider re.instating the original verbiage of Section 44.08(19)
by including such a change in the Current CDC change proposal package
scheduled for first reading lune 1, 2000. (See attachment for complete
wording suggestion.)
Regarding the 6 month "temporary" yard signs, I agree that first amendment
right must be considered. But allowing up to two signs each of six square
feet per face (thatls up to 24 square feet of total signage) in residential
areas is, in my opinion excessive. Such a rule is an open invitation to a11
residential properties to have a "permanent" sign(s) for no more than 6
months every year.
Why do we even need such an ordinance? Please reconsider rescinding Section
3-1805.N or at a minimum, tone it down to something far more reasonable. I
don~ really want · neighborbood full of signs, I IE ~ IE ~ o/J IE
Thank YOU" 0 0
11:135/18/00 I you wrote: i MAY 2 6 2000
Dave,
Staff has reviewed your suggested changes to t
supports the current window signage regulations. The current provisions
ensure that windows will not be covered with signage. They also ensure that
5/26/00
P.02
Page 2 of3
MAY-26-2000 12:37
.
.
the signage is proportional with the actual window area in which it is
located. Twenty percent is the typical amount of window signage allowed in
many communities.
With regard to the temporary yard sign. This provision was specifically
drafted to comply with 1st Amendment requirements. It allows a property
owner the ability to convey any type of speech - messages like Vote for Jim
Smith, Save the Whales, I love Jesus, Joe's Air Conditioning Stinks, etc.
When we first started the code update, we wanted to add specific allowances
for political signs. The City Attorney and Mr. Siemon advised us that
pursuant to case law one type of speech can not be favored over another
kind, therefore, we could not add a specific provision for political signs.
Due to the fact that communities must permit free speech, staff can not
support rescinding this section of the sign code.
If you have any questions or additional input, please let me know.
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
5/26/00
P.03
Page 3 of3
MAY-26-2000 12:38
P.04
.
.
H W Sq Inch Sq ft 20% Allowed Currently Allowed
(north) northern 1/4 75.0 54.0 4050.00 28.13 5.e3 4.00
(north) northern 214 75.0 54.0 4050.00 28.13 5.63 4.00
(norht) northern 314 75.0 54.0 4050.00 28.13 5.63 4.00
(north) northern 4/4 75.0 54.0 4050.00 28.13 5.63 4.00
(north) mid 1/4 75.0 41.0 3075.00 21.35 4.27 4.00
(north) mid 214 75.0 41.0 3075.00 21.35 4.27 4.00
(north) mid 3/4 75.0 41.0 3075.00 21.35 4.27 4.00
(north) mid 4/4 75.0 41.0 3075.00 21.35 4.27 4.00
(north) southern 1/4 75.0 42.5 3187.50 22.14 4.43 4.00
(north) southern 214 75.0 42.5 3187.50 22.14 4.43 4.00
(north) southern 314 75.0 42.5 3187.50 22.14 4.43 4.00
(north) southern 4/4 75.0 42.5 3187.50 22.14 4.43 4.00
(south) norther 1/5 75.0 46.0 3450.00 23.98 4.79 4.00
(south) norther 2/5 75.0 46.0 3450.00 23.96 4.79 4.00
(south) norther 315 75.0 46.0 3450.00 23.96 4.79 4.00
(south) norther 4/5 75.0 46.0 3450.00 23.96 4.79 4.00
(south) norther 5/5 75.0 46.0 3450.00 23.96 4.79 4.00
(south) mid 1/6 75.0 42.0 3150.00 21.88 4.38 4.00
(south) mid 2J6 75.0 42.0 3150.00 21.88 4.38 4.00
(south) mid 3J6 75.0 29.0 2175.00 15.10 3.02
(south) mid 416 75.0 12.0 900.00 6.25 1.25
(south) mid 516 75.0 42.0 3150.00 21.88 4.38 4.00
(south) mid 616 75.0 42.0 3150.00 21.88 4.38 4.00
(south) southern 1/5 75.0 41.0 3075.00 21.35 4.27 4.00
(south) southern 215 75.0 40.5 3037.50 21.09 4.22 4.00
(south) southern 315 75.0 40.0 3000.00 20.83 4.17 4.00
(south) southern 4/5 75.0 40.0 3000.00 20.83 4.17 4.00
(south) southern 5/5 75.0 40.0 3000.00 20.83 4.17 4.00
Total Publlx 820.05 124.01 108.27 100.00
side 1/8 78.0 50.0 3900.00 27.08 5.42 4.00
side 2/8 23.5 50.0 1175.00 8.16 1.63 1.63
side 3/8 78.0 50.0 3900.00 27.08 5.42 4.00
side 4/8 23.5 50.0 1175.00 8.1e 1.63 1.63
side 5/8 78.0 50.0 3900.00 27.08 5.42 4.00
side 6/8 23.5 50.0 1175.00 8.16 1.63 1.63
side 7/8 78.0 50.0 3900.00 27.08 5.42 4.00
side 8/8 23.5 50.0 1175.00 8.18 1.63 1.63
door 1/4 . 22.0 50.0 1100.00 7.64 1.53 1.53 18 12
door 2/4 76.0 50.0 3800.00 26.39 5.28 4.00
door 314 22.0 50.0 1100.00 7.64 1.53 1.53
door 4/4 76.0 50.0 3800.00 26.39 5.28 4.00
front 1/16 78.0 50.0 3900.00 27.08 5.42 4.00
front 2/16 23.5 50.0 1175.00 8.16 1.63 1.63 20 12
front 3/16 78.0 50.0 3900.00 27.08 5.42 4.00
front 4/16 23.5 50.0 1175.00 8.16 1.63 1.63
front 5/16 78.0 50.0 3900.00 27.08 5.42 4.00""'-
front 6/16 23.5 50.0 1175.00 8.16 1.63 1.63' 0
Ii
"
\ \
i
!
\
rU.~J~mlc:. &. Q~"HOP~~~NL... i
-.,.- .-+-.
SERVICES I
CITY OF CLEARWATER
c~-o ~(C~~\ij~ 0 I
MAY 2 6 2000
I
I
I
I
MRY-26-2000 12:38
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
P.05
09....
~ C, ~\e
4etiJ ~'l>
v ~~'l>
MAY-26-2000 12:39
.
-l4'
1:" .
. .~.. .
~~&:
',.>(~
i j ~t~~~~ D
,\ 1
\ ! MAY 2 6 2000 j
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
P.06
r_09....
~v ~e
4et!J .~0-o
V ~0\
p;
P.07
r_o9~
~ v X>~
e~ \\~
o ~~
p;
P.08
o9~
~ G ~\e
4.eti1 \\~
v~~~
P.09
09....
~ G ~\e
4.e~ :~~
v ~~
p;
MAY-26-2000
12:42
P.10
~
,._09 0
~v ~~
etb ~~~
~ ~~
~
MRY-26-2000
12:43
P.ll
09'1
\. V ~\0
6"e'iJ ~~~
v ~~
p;
P.12
09....
\." ~\0
40~ ~~
V ~~
p;
P.l3
~
(jO~~0
~ ~
0~ ~~~
~ ~~
~
P.14
o9~
~ V X',0
40~ ~~
V ~~
p;
MAY-26-2000 12:47
P.1S
~
~ (j~~\
0~ .~~
~ .l~
"
MRY-26-2000
P.16
~
,.~O-Q 0
~v ~~
0~ :~~
~ ~~
~
P.l?
~
(j09~0
(f)tf., .~ 'a-~
&0 'a-~
V~.J
MRY-26-2121121121
P.18
~
,,0'9 ~0
~ &.~
~ ~~v
<Q0.J~
~
P.19
~
(jo'9 ~0
~\, .~'lJ.~
40 'lJ. 'i.
V~~
MRY-26-2000 12:52
P.20
~
(jO~~0
~ df1()
e~ ~~v
~ -4~
~
P.21
.
~
(jO~~0
~ &'()
~ ~~v
</10 ..l~
~
P.22
~
,.O~ 0
~v ~~
et!J ~~~
~ .J~
~
MRY-26-2000
P.23
.-\
VO'Q~0
~ ",,"'0
~ ~~v
<1.;10 4~
~
MAY-26-2000
P.24
~
(jo'9 ~0
~" .~IlJ.'O
A0 Ib-~
V~~
I
P.25
~
(jO-Q ~0
~-., .~0~
&0 0'"
v~4
P.26
~
r.09 0
~v ~~
etb ~~~
~ .J~
~
MAY-25-2000 12:59
..1"".:
'.... H..' ..
.'" ",'
P.27
;-\
oq~0
()~
(?J~ ~~~
<q0 ~~
~
MAY-25-2000 13:00
P.28
~
(j09..,0
~ ~
40tb :~~
V ~~
~
.
.
.
~
,..09 0
~v ~~
etf:J ~~~
~ .J~
~
P.29
MAY-26-2000 13:02
.
MAY-26-2000 13:04
P.30
.
~
r.O~ "
~V ~~
e/b ~~~
<l1 .J~
~
.
.
~
VO-Q~0
ffJ'\, .~~~
40 ~~
V~~
P.31
MAY-25-2000 13:05
.
TOTAL P.31
MAY-31-2000 10:47
.
.
ITa, \""~~
P.01
Brink. Carolyn
To: Dave Campbell
Subject: RE: poes
Cear Mr. Campbell: Thank you for your a-mail. It will be copied and distributed to the Mayor and
Commissioners.
-original Message-
Prom: Dave Campbell [mailto:cJcarwater@pobox.coml
Se.lt: Wednesday, May H. 2000 8:11 AM
To: Mayor and Commissioners
~c: clearwatcrhomeowners@egroUps.COl1t~ph Stone;~ Clayton
Subject: PODS
Dear Mayor and Conunissioners:
I watched your Work Session yesterday regarding the duration allowance for PODS. The
question was whether to allow them for the duration of a construction permit.
You could have a win-win solution if you would adhere to the 48 hour limitation for all
but constnlction permit cases. For them, allow them to be used for the duration of the
construction permit, provided they are used in non-residential areas.
Thank you.
Dave Campbell
Clearwater, Florida
COPIES TO:
COMM\5SION
"'\ I ,-,'.'n
~I ,\.' .' :. i
l~Ii-, . . J ..
PRESS
CLERK i A.I To\~NE'I(
I
/
5/31/00
TOTAL P.01
MAY-16-2000 12:12
~_ . ~C~
&7~
Dave & argaret Eldridge
C" nt Beach Club II
ulf Boulevard, Unit 5..G
Clearwater Beach, FL 33767
(727) 596..5067
P.01/04
.
COPIES TO:
COMMISSION
MAY 1 6 '/1(1(1
'-1..,\....\..
PRESS
CLERK I ATTORNEY
May 12, 2000
\\blpr
C~_C~~fV\M ___
o ~(C~~~~,i
!
Mayor Brian Aungst, Sr.
City of Clearwater Beach
Post Office Box 4748
Clearwater Beach, FL 33758-4748
MAY t 6 2000
'.
RE: Proposed Amendments to the Community Development
PLANNING & OEVELOPMb\f
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
Dear Mr. Mayor:
Thank you for taking time to review another taxpayer's and Sand Key Resident's concern over
the proposed raising of the two-weekrental minimum to 31 days. . ,
We are full-time residents and registered voters of Clearwater and have liv~d at Crescent Beach
Club II for three years. Like all condominium projects, Crescent Beach has an association. For
the past few years a group of owners has tried to change the two-week rental rule and has always
lost in a vote of the homeowners. The same has been true at Lighthouse Towers. Since they have
not been able to get the association votes to change the minimum, this group now has turned to
you and the City of Clearwater to request this rule change outside of the association. We feel this
is not proper and even may be illegal.
The group advocating this change is well organized and. in their communication with you and the
media, often has implied that they speak for all the owners in our complex. This is absolutely not
a fact.
When we first moved to Sand Key we took two years to consider which condominium
development we wanted as our permanent residence. Because of our work/travel schedules, one
important component of that process was being able to rent for two-week periods, if we chose to
do so. It was a major part of our decision to purchase in Crescent Beach Club in Clearwater as
opposed to other sites in nearby cities. Every person buying in this project was fully aware of the
governing rules. If they opposed the shorter rental period, they should have selected another
development.
We bave attended association meetings and expressed our opposition to the 31-<iay minimum.
The other group is wrong in saying that two-week renters cause the bulk of problems for
residents. They cannot substantiate that allegation. To our knowledge. very few problems have
arisen here and the "troublemakers'" have been a mix of short and long term renters, as well as
MRY-16-2000 12:12
Page 2
.
.
P.02/04
Office of the Mayor
05112/00
Owners. Our personal experience has been that when you have 250 residents anywhere, issues
will arise. It is the Association's responsibility to enforce the rules and regulations of our
condominium, not the responsibility of the City of Clearwater. Perhaps that is where Crescent
Beach Club is lacking and needs to improve.
Another consideration that concerns us as taxpayers is the impact this proposed change would
have On tax revenues. Disallowing two-week rentals will cause prospective tenants who have
been coming here for years to choose another city ifthey are unable to secure short-term leases at
Sand Key. Citizens recently experienced a steep increase in property taxes. Newspaper reports
indicate the need to cut expenses from the City Budget. It seems to us that a decision which
reduces tax revenues unnecessarily would be imprudent at this time.
In summary we wanted to express our conCerns over the more vocal few. Since we are
employed, we have been unable to attend the City Work Sessions on this issue. We do not
believe that it is fair, just, or legal for the City to impose regulations affecting OUt property rights-
We urge you to vote against the proposal of restricting rental to 31-day minimums or, in the
alternative, grandfather the properties established before the change.
Thank you for reviewing our position and we trust you will do the right thing by turning the issue
back to the condominium associations. .
Sincerely,
u2a
David M. Eldridge
t1~ E~
Margaret Eldridge
cc; City Commissioners
MAY-16-2000 12:13
.
P.03/04
I ,~!!!~
.
CtWlA. KempA.B.R., CR.s., G.lt1.
'I: '1a,lIIIel 1111I. ...., & Clltl C...I..I.
1111111II1.11I ......
ell.lWltlr, R 331M
IE: '1~lIc Inrlll" ...11.2'"
COPIES TO:
COMMISSION
MAY 1 6 2000
1It1lll1.: ..If lllallllllt sr..
C_IIII.., It 1111
.1.......I'.Y....r
........., I" 1111l
.........., 1.1. I.....
PRESS
CLERK I ATTORNEY
With regard to the public hear.ing scheduled for May 18. 2000. please
be advised. that 1 strongly urge you to vote against the misguided
proposed code change that would ban short~term rental agreements.
Thank you for your attention and antiCipated cooperation.
CAROL A. KEMP, ABa CRS. GRl
Kemp Real Estate. Inc.
4822 Mile Stretch Road
Holiday, J:i"L 34690
(727) 934-0837
a~
Ph~ose prepare CI respane.
for the Mayor's sIgnature.
ee: Cliy Com~r'Or'l
Due dote: f113
dcd
4822 Mile Stretch Drive'" P.o. Box 3134 · Holiday, FL 34690.-0134
Phone (727) 934-0837 or (721) "7..2331 · FAX (727) 938-6399
MAY-16-2000 12:13
P.04/04
.
~o.-
+ Qa"'M
BAY AREA
APARTMENT ASSOCIATION
COPIES TO:
COMMISSION
May t 2, 2000
MAY 1 6 ~~:'0
I.- . _ '..-
The Honorable Brian Aungst, Sr.
Office of the Mayor & City Commission
POBox 4748
Clearwater FL 33758-4748
PRESS
CLERK I A TIORNEV
Re: Proposed Code Change, Section 3~917, "Renting of Residential Dwellings"
Dear Mayor Aungst:
The Bay Area Apartment Association represents the owners and managers of apartment communities as
well as associated professionals and suppliers. Our members own or manage more than 80,000 units in
the Tampa Bay area. Following a review of the proposed code change addressing short-term rentals, the
officers and staff of the Association request multi-family apartment communities of four or more units
be excluded from the proposed regulation.
Apartment communities are licensed to provide rental units through the Hotel-Motel Division of the
Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation. As a result of this license, our members are
held to a commercial standard for life safety, occupancy, construction, noise, trash, and other issues. In
several cases, the standards apartments are held to are higher than the standards ofhotets and motels
under Chapter 509 of the Florida Statutes (e.g. balcony safety, fire extinguishers).
We urge you not to address alleged problems in condominiums or plaMed unit developments by limiting
the ability of apartment communities to assist individuals who are temporarily assigned to Clearwater on
business Or individuals who have sold one home and are not yet able to move into their new home. We
also point out most of our members provide on-site management at their communities. These individuals
are charged with controlling the types of disturbances described in recent newspaper articles.
We understand you are considering Section 3-917 in order to ensure the city is in compliance with a
Pinellas Planning Council (PPC) rule. The Bay Area Apartment Association will present its concerns to
the PPC and the Board of County Commissioners. In the meantime, we ask you to vote against this city
code change on J Wle 1.
We are prepared to provide more infonnation about our industry and answer any questions for you.
Thank you for your consideration.
4509
Tampa, Florida 33634 · (813) 882-0222 · 1-800-344-9373 · Fax (813) 884-0326
TOTAL P.04
e
.
Community Development Board Members
c/o: Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 South Myrtle Avenue
C'learwater, Florida, 33756-5502.
March 13, 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS # 11.
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless
located in Tourist, Commercial or Downtown Districts.)
Dear Board Members;
I am Jo Anne Zimmerman, owner of Unit # 708 of Lighthouse Towers
Condominium, 1290 Gulf Blvd, Clearwater, Florida 33767.
This letter is written to clarify my position and sta"nd on the above
subject of renting of any condo in Lighthouse Towers Condominium for less
than 30 days. I am opposed to any Code mange or amendments that would
allow rentals for a period of less than 30 days.
The Lighthouse Tower Condominium Owners / Association have voted down
amending or changing the By-Laws of our Association in the past. Now to
circumvent the Associations decision and attempt to get a zoning change, I
donlt feel is correct. Again I state that I am opposed to rentals in Light-
house Tower Condo's of less than 30 days.
Any previous letters, petitions or requests that I may have inadvertently
signed indicating anything but opposition on this matter are to be considered
null and void.
s(cJ.r~ rz to -~-
A7~~~f~~\~JA;--- - .SA ~
Unit # 708 12i~~lf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Condominiums
Clearwater, Florida, 33767.
Permanent Mailing address:
Jo Anne Zimmerman
1212 South Garfield Avenue
Traverse City, Michgian, 49686-4331
Ikt~
:::\\: ~*\ \(0
6)~
~~~
Community Development BoAVtembers
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone. DirectR Planning
City of Clearwater / 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
.
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentaV lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist. Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & " approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and ILwith Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours; ~_ .~~
/ ~2~~
v/ J~ <:. k Mite ko'v E /Z
&AJIJ/ f /I1ttcjP-LJvFf2-
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club g.,ner ~ .?!--"LcL "",,'7 !
UNIT# / d1 8 ~~&:L ';--.
.?
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNlT#
,
.
.
Gerald Figurski
City of Clearwater
Community Development Board
2975 Eagle Estates CIR. W.
Clearwater, FL 33761
ORIG\NAL
February 24, 2000
fiLE COP,
PLEASE EXEMPT SAND KEY DEVELOPMENTS
FROM THE RENTAL LIMITATION CODE REVISION
The application of the 30 day minimum rental restriction for Sand Key condominiums is,
as I'm sure you are aware by now, a power / control issue at the three Sand Key
developments which permit less than 30 day rentals. The 20'0 full time residents
owners do not want the other 80'0 non-resident owners to have their units occupied by
tenants. Rather the minority resident owners prefer the non-resident owners occupy
them only occasionally. This of course is contrary to the purposes for which many of
the units were marketed and purchased.
Future meetings and hearings of the Community Development Board will no doubt be
well attended by vociferous "20'0 residents", from other than the three developments
directly effected, supporting the rental limitation. The 80'0 non-resident owners,
most of which are non-local, of course will be unable to attend or unaware of the
hearings on the proposed rental restriction. Most Condominium Associations do not keep
the non resident owners informed of issues that may impact the value and / or
usability of their investment property, unless they want funds to make improvements
primarily intended for comfort and undisturbed enjoyment of the full time resident
owners.
The remaining three condominium development with less than 30 day rental periods
have By-Law provisions to democratically change the minimum rental period by obtaining
approval of 75'0 of all owners. Numerous attempts to do so have failed. Now the
minority losers want the City to penalize the majority by petitioning the Community
Development Board to approve Zoning Code revisions that will have the direct or
potentially indirect impact of establishing a 30-day minimum rental period.
The City and or Sand Key Civic Association has no role in this issue
unless there is a threat to the safety, health and welfare of the
majority of property owners on Sand Key, Clearwater FL.
PLEASE EXEMPT SAND KEY
Thank You, The Concerned Tourist and Property Tax Paying Property Owners of
Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach Club I & II
For additional information please contact: Mackram Demian NJ 973 344 4434, Sonia
Grimm OH 740 423 4055, Lynn Nellenbach FL 904 308 7067
C: Ralph Stone, Gina Clayton
(
! ..'
.
.
Clearwater Gazette & Beach Views February 14, 12000
Attention: Un Howard
RE: February 10, 2000 -Sand Key Residents Support Redefinin:J Rental Restrictions'
The above referenced article was misleading. I suspect you may not ~ been provided all
the facts and information to write a balanced article. There are only three (3)
condominium buildings (Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I and Crescent Beach Club
n) that permit rental of less than 30 days.
The proposed change of the City Code to a 30 day minimum r'entnl period, I'm sure has
merIt in r-esiderrtial neighborhoods of free standing homes in the City of Clearwater, but
such a restriction is totally inappropriate and not necessary for Sand Key. At Lighthouse
Towers the atronsient' issue caused by less than 30 day rentals is percei~d and not
Supporfed by facts. During January and February 2000. only 2 of the 85 rented units are
for le.z than 30 day5. I assume the same is true at Crescem- Beach Qub I & n.
TIte Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) and its members were not elected and do not haw
legal authorrty to represent individual owners or condominium tlSSociation$ on the proposed
Code revision. Only the individual owners of each Sand Key condominium how: the
authority to estQ})lish minimum rental periods for thei,. buildings. Lighthouse T ewers'
owners ha\fe on five prior oCatSions ( the most recent in 199B ) rejected proposed changes
to theil"' condominium documents ~Ioted to its 14 day minimum rental period.
Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach Club I & n. the only Sand Key buildings that would
be effected by the proposed Code revision, were marketed and purchased as residential
rental prcputy in the late 1980's and continue to be used as such today. At Lighthouse
Towers only 31 or 21.5'0 of the units are oC~ied full-time by the owners.
The article did not disclose that :roe Calia is a permanent resident and newly elected
President of Lighthouse Towers. Earlier this month a Ughthouse Towers Board appointed
Cornmittee of owners again did not support changing it's minimum rental period without
preserving it for' current owners. It appears that Joe Callo has not accepted the
recomrnendation. It appears he rnay be a'ttempting to use his influence with the 5KCA and
Rdph Stone -rn fulfill his and a minor-Hy of LHT owner's personal agenda to place
restrictions on nOtl resident owners and the minimum rental period at Lighthouse Towers
end indirectly the Crescent Beach Club developments.
City politics has no ralle in this issue unless their is potential harm to the safety. health
and welfare of the properiy owners of Sand Key, Clear-water.
Lynn J. Ne.llenbach - LHT #1105
2598 5coTt Mill Lane
Jacksonville. R.. 32223
H. 904 880 8697 0 - 904 308 7067
--
."
(
r
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting ofany dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist. Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club 1 & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # 11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Your~: /:). /;/~/.'. '-;;?.~.....,.. '......,.,',...,.. ,,:;:::;::?:
/" /~~'" /~,.,::",....;, ,..:-;.', , ~-,,~/" --)
a;;..-,#"..,...; ,_ />" "" ' ?~4"'".-"v"",,'-c~
.,#,,~ ,,',,:
, ,."
(-,/'
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# 7 C
*************************************
USA
OQ:O
Edward Mackus
1118N 118thSt
Wauwatosa, WI 53226-3339
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
FEB 2 5 2000
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or mdividual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist. Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 #11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #1] to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# I t..\ c.. (il.L.so.v-!- &~ A'-~ Cf vb J::
.
.
r ""0
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
FE8 2 5 2000
February 14,2000
j
Re: POLICY ISSUEI ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
011 Sand Ke\r. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 #11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
~l
// )J.
/(LJ~
-.:::;:>
,j- I 7-<-0
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# c!}o:5
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/ lease periods ofless than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid] 980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club 1 & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City uf Ct:arwarer 5houid not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and PinelIas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
FEB 2 9 2000
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# gOG
1310 & 1340 GulfBI
Crescent Beach Club
UNIT#
PLANNING & DEw-
SERVr,
CITY OF (
...--.J
;
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o M r. Ralph Stone. Director of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater. Florida 33756-5502
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or mdlvidual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/ lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist. Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts. the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 #11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore. please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # 11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
I t would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
C'..-r\
... ---
I~
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
13]0 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Ow
UNIT# ~ a.. oM;: 01
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods ofless than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # I I will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #1 I to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
FEB 2 9 2000
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf I
Crescent Beach Club
UNIT# G .&(~ :rr
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater / 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or indiVIdual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/ lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus. they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
YOurs;~\~~ h~(,c\~'
~(c~~%7t 0
FEB 2 9 tm)
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater / 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/ lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve .i.heir personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
~U~~~ .1\- ~,,~
of~ '~!Et!E~\#!E
~ 1340 GulfB P
Crescent Beach Club
UNIT#
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
FEB 2 9 2(D)
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
ertv OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone. Director of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/ lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore. please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
it wouid decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUEI ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
lorporate or individual intereSts.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentaV lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & 11 approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and 11, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# i u) 0 5"
1310 & 1340 Gulf.
Crescent Beach CI
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUEI ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or mdividual interesls.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & 11 approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It wou ld decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
:?~/t1, ~:<j /(i/c;o
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf
Crescent Beach Clu
UNIT# /:1 b I
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUEI ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
cOfj)Ulate or indi viduai imt;.'es~s.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # II to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City ofCiearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# 150 ;;,
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
C1IY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUEI ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They art> r.0~ ~!ect;;d ~r ~l!;th~~~?ed by c'.:m0~min;'..!m en'rers to represent thei~
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # II to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
/""
/~CtW il,. ~huL
~~~~~~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers .Owner
UNIT# I () 0 Lf
FEB 2 9 200l
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd
Crescent Beach Clu
UNIT#
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater / 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual mterests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & " approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
~ 1340Gul
Crescent Beach CI
UNIT#
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
e
e
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/ lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The c;ty of Cka.waier should not impo~e rentai period restrictions on Sand Key Condommiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthousi Towers Owner
UNIT# '2 () L(
~~~~~~
FEB 2 9 2000
pLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
:SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
e
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater / 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
en Sand Key. The)' a,~ not elected vi' authuriL..~d Ly CVlIdOliliniufu o\vners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
~ ---
~+\} ~).dto.\>~
fE8L2~ am
s Owner
~~LOPMeNT
crrv~~~~ "
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
res cent Beach Club Owner .l \ .....,
UNIT# '1~ (,eJCe;..4 !\1QC"t, C. '-.)..\:, !.
.J
.
.;.. '--.\."
.
..., ......
i')i~
'. )i,l ~
..... ~.~
.;
"",
_,_.,~o,o.<'V<lo""""",,~""r'~'--""- ...
~. ".f''', ')
I
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone. Director of Planning
City of Clearwater / 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater. Florida 33756-5502
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individuai Interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they arc attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore. please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
1290 Gulf
Lighthouse
UNIT#
1 I I
c
';L,---
'j}-f/i to( f!/I/Z-
c-
PLANNI~G & DEVElOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUEI ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authOrIzed by condomInIUm owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts. the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and 11. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yot2(k'~jrr
/i;je,:::i A. C/\J i/(SHritJIr(
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# 70/
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave,
Clearwater. Florida 33756-5502
FEB 2 5 2000
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUEI ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days. unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial. or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMYfION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or indIvidual mterests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts. the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus. they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore. please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and 11. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
k~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310& 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# 1 C
.
.
FEB 2 5 2000
Community Development Board Members i
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
u-'febrtlary 14, 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners 10 represent their
corporate Of indIvidual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and 11. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
~\u~
/ {
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse_I.ow~wner
UNIT# S:.o~
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
FEB 2 5 2000
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
~J'ebrJLarY 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMYfION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corpol'?te or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist. Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus. they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It wou Id decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours: ). d~
;;{il/lcL Y6~y/~ .
! //J'~)/;/
/'/1. ',/'7;/-7'77/77' . . . / . c. I //V
/t/,-,r . I. . L--- ' .'.
" ,I / .. ,~- '.'
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
uNIT# _
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# (Ie!-
~
....' -". ;~
.
.'=-
FEB 2 5 2QOJ
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone. Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater. Florida 33756-5502
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporat(~ or i!1divdu21 interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for thc Codc Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
, ~~- }A..{,
/
)f-r'Y~'-_n
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310& 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# 1/ L-.
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone. Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
FEB 2 5 2000
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days. unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial. or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # II to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and 11. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental pe,iod restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
4L(~r;J
/ ..
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310& 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# I J. C
.
.
FEB 2 5 2UC~
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or indIvidual mterests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
Qw~~.
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# /;< 0..3
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
David Gildersleeve
City of Clearwater
Community Development Board
3350 San Pedro Street
Clearwater, FL 33759
February 24, 2000
PLEASE EXEMPT SAND KEY DEVELOPMENTS
FROM THE RENTAL LIMITATION CODE REVISION
The application of the 30 day minimum rental restriction for Sand Key condominiums is,
as I'm sure you are aware by now, a power / control issue at the three Sand Key
developments which permit less than 30 day rentals. The 20% full time residents
owners do not want the other 80'0 non-resident owners to have their units occupied by
tenants. Rather the minority resident owners prefer the non-resident owners occupy
them only occasionally. This of course is contrary to the purposes for which many of
the units were marketed and purchased.
Future meetings and hearings of the Community Development Board will no doubt be
well attended by vociferous "20% residents", from other than the three developments
directly effected, supporting the rental limitation. The 80% non-resident owners,
most of which are non-local, of course will be unable to attend or unaware of the
hearings on the proposed rental restriction. Most Condominium Associations do not keep
the non resident owners informed of issues that may impact the value and / or
usability of their investment property, unless they want funds to make improvements
primarily intended for comfort and undisturbed enjoyment of the full time resident
owners .
The remaining three condominium development with less than 30 day rental periods
have By-Law provisions to democratically change the minimum rental period by obtaining
approval of 75'0 of all owners. Numerous attempts to do so have failed. Now the
minority losers want the City to penalize the majority by petitioning the Community
Development Board to approve Zoning Code revisions that will have the direct or
potentially indirect impact of establishing a 30-day minimum rental period.
The City and or Sand Key Civic Association has no role in this issue
unless there is a threat to the safety, health and welfare of the
majority of property owners on Sand Key, Clearwater FL.
PLEASE EXEMPT SAND KEY
Thank You, The Concerned Tourist and Property Tax Poying Property Owners of
Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach Club I & II
For additional information please contact: Mackram Demian NJ' 973 344 4434, Sonia
Grimm OH 740 423 4055, Lynn Nellenbach FL 904 308 7067
C: Ralph Stone, Gina Clayton
.
. .. ."'~"''''.,
· J" (~~~~\0!~ 0\
iJ ~ r~~-;-;-~-l:J
FebruJry 14. 2000 I.
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMYfION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
coroorate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist. Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
werc marketed and purchased as residential rental property in thc mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The CIty of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It wou Id decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310& 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner LJ /J l-'
UNIT#~ {ltf'ES[cA)r- oelfUl-d/uoJ.
.
~lr,"-)' l~ ~ ~ ~ \W l~
I'~
I FEB23~l
e ruary 14. 2000
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
D'
I
i!
.. ' ,
." II ,
./ /
..-/
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate 0f individual intaests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # II to EXEM PT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and I L with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Your~, J~
~~"\....~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310& 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# S'G. t::...h ~
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests,
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus. they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City ofCiearwater shouid not impose rental perioa restnctlOns on Sand Key Condommiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
~EB 2 3 2000
"
_.......#
--- --- -. -... -.. - ------_J-
PLj\N~~I.''';G & CLVU_OF)MENT
SUNICES
r:1TY OF C! f MN/ Ll.1TIl
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
--. -.--..--.---.-..---.--.-..-
"
.
.
!-.-
I r- ----,
liP 1~~I~~-~~fRln.,
I I (CP J rw,'V' II '
. I bru! Ui 2....1" 'I ii I !:, ,.
i,.l Lry Lf,2000" I'
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
PLMJ~'1~!C 8, i " ,,-
c: r: D' !'.'
'-.-'.._, II'"
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS CITY Of C.
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist~-'---~
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
1"'.....';-, ~_.l"'....-t-"-, 0~ ~......;,.:" ,: ,J,:. 1 :_..,..,._.....:_4-~
'lo"Vi pv~ ............... v. ... .w." IULO.'":4J lJlL\..1 \"'Jl~.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & 11 approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach 1 and 11. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater shcm!r1 !lot .;r!"!pa~e rer;~~:! per:od restrictioiis or. San~ Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
J/jZ 7 SAWltA~ b( ·
f!!.. UrtrIS_R<<
?A-t.M iPrl.lo~ flA.,
3'1bif
~) 12.7- '1'7/-00//
Z) 127-S'3b-'12.Y1
. . ------ --- - - .- ---n r .-;----- ·
',. I , ,'I I '\\ II \ L-.
." I . \ I \1' \_-'
, ') \ ~ r ) U '0 .~
Community Development Board Me e - --- -- ..----.
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle v~ 1-" .
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502 · ___. __..--J
PLANN\;1G F. :Y.~VELOPMENT
SGWICES
>; TER
February 14.2000
\
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 ZO .
(Prohibit the renting of any dwellmg or less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corponut: 01 individual intt:.rests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club 1 & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #1 I to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours; ~!k' .~,
/! /~ / /
. .-r ~ ".:/
{11/ .. ~. ic~f
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club .oFQg...,..
UNIT# 6 C 1,'(.- jJ..
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
-
.
14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in t e ourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corparute or individual i:-:tercsts.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods ofless than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be .L. j)
used as such today. We.. ~{,K. ~ 1"VtA;1'~ ~'"r> eur.JJ. ~ ~C".....,..o..v-c.""'a
L~I~v...J-t~ ~ ~.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # 11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
I t would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
M~J~
516 <)-c> i 7
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# 5'G-
(JS' ~ LuJ.e ~~ ~ v-. .~ ~ ' wk-. ~ cL--~~ ~~: .9"1
~ . j--. V J. Ju ~ a.-\t --? ,~ ~ L
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c:::i..-? c.U,..U;'''V ~,,;v-
fr', .ah\sf {~ ~. l.'VU-:P ~. ~/?--UJ-Il 6~' ~~
~ ft/\..l~~~~---"'-' ~ Cl v .
e .
J--) ~ ~ cJ ,~ ~ v-.{/~ /'-' ~ ~L~ ~ C~
/~ 6-'t.0~~' <>k- ~"" ~a-d- ~ ~~ .
"
'\ '.
<.
J !h~~~,~
~~~
. .,_..1
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14, 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corpc;-::te o. ind:vidu~l interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
Yours;
ff;tk tit ~.k/
~~~s~~tl~:~c~~\~:I~d \0 ~t~~J~ r ~,l
UNIT# I$-c' '\ 1 r :, i
: \ L i, FEB 2 4 2000 I,"
p, ;;
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not electecl or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 #11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach 1 and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#~
PLA~~NING & Di.:VELOPMENT
SERVICES
T\ (,)f~ CL~-:j\FiV';,';TER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individwll interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club 1 & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach 1 and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The C!~, 0f C!~a!'wate!' ~hc;;:!d not ir:1pcse rCiital pCii0d iestrictioiis on Suild Key Cc,ndOiYiiHiunI:-..
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# ~OJ
Your'1naJ:/ 11~
0~~
. , - ._...-,----_._---~~--
1310 & 1340 GUlfBIV~...... "')\,. l~ (C. ,~~'#~ 0
Crescent Beach Club OWl'er.'j r---. 1
UNIT# " '\ " i
I II I--~B 2 3 2(11) I
: ...\ n- ... .....J
f 1_". '/
':-'> . .----J ~.,..'
rbAr~NING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
GlfY OF CL::ARWATER
Thank You and Sincerely
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individull1 intprests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # II to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and 11, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
lit:: Cil)' ufC;earwa(i~1 sbuuki not ;mpose rentai period restnctions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
1290 Gulf Blvd
Li~hthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# //; () 7
~ &' C?n~_
~~-~~
! "'''D". .~.~ !~ ~~i~W' r----' fI--'
. I I ') i /I S \
1310 & 1340 GUlfBIVd....:fJ{J' L'=o ~,,=_c_ ' L[e 0 \
i:~;t Beach Club 0: FEB 2 3 ;- --]1 .. J) i
I OOOL~"J I
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT'" I
SER~CES I
- CITY OF CLEARWATER i
Yours;
Thank You and Sincerely
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater. Florida 33756-5502
,- ---- - -l
~ebru~rrl~'~~fs~VJ~ ~~
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - WNING DISTRICTS #11 : i J -;EB 2 3 am l .j i
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days. unless located in' the fiSt. =-.../
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.) , PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) ha e 0 e
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
wrpurare or individuai interests.
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus. they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which 1
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and PineIlas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours: ~ ~~
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# ~.R eGG-I..- f
,}~(~~.
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods ofless than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus. they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
(2;. ~y
I L~ ~; If; ~ \if re-o-
1310 & 1340 Gulf BlVd... ~"U/ {----.-- is.
Crescent Beach Club o..wner I ~
UNIT#/O--B i ~23. II_~/
I PLANNING p'.-.f'-.'-. -.--..1 I
(" (',iCE'S,-OPMENT j
( '". ".. ,'. Tr il I
------..
.
.
ff~o'\lE ~~~ w lE .
\1 r:'~.LUf~l~ ili&fio~-l 0
LJ ~I J---
~.., --..-.-"-..---,.".- ".. --" .-.,---- - .._--
PLAr!r"~'C ,'I" DE'/ELOPMENT
SERVICES
(iT" OF CI E,.\RV/ATER
. thei6Unst.
..
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS 11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days. unless I
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMYfION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corpurate Oi illuiviuual illtertsts.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus. they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictIons on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310& 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#-1 <t- () C t3C-1-
YlVft1,
.
~F cc ~ ~~ ~l1011
\ \ I, FEB 2 3 !JOO :" /
'~,.1l J ,,-- ~/
PLANNING & DEVELOPMEi'lT
February ftF.lMijijS
CITY OF CLEARWATER . "
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
.:...- C'.....,.~ 1,1'~... T~,-.. ..........-:or. ~.....} _,..,.1cv"~l3d ",. <f"ll'lthrv-;'7rtld by ror'nr1""""n:n:."m ,"",~l.ln/"'''''''''''''o ......n...O('lont thplr
Vii oJ(:.;.llU 1'"-""'j_ J .........) LU,,", i.\Jl. """.I......"""\.\""O V.I. Uu., '"'i"........... "''V' l.:.J.vllllJ1..U.:.:. "V". .w.;::';.. .I'....Pil"',.:;<...~ ..J._U
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & 11 approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
ofr-~~ ))~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# (/{)~
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone. Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE ~ - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMYfION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individl'f'.! int~rests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/ lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist. Commercial. or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus. they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore. please dismiss their requesl
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developmenls.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and I I. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period reslrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
()~ frI.~
1310Xr~ulfB.IYd.)\.L~~~~W~ D
Cresc~ Club Own ," . 1
UNIT# Ie: I
, irES 2 3 2000 . .
" l__~__..__.~
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
.
.
J
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #1\ to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
/7 I
Yours; f jA/~ . . /
/f~~~t:/~
, ~0~ ~~-----
~& 1340GUlfBI~tlrJ ~(c~~%7~ u.
Crescent Beach Club dwn. I ~'
UNIT# '3-/ i ~ ;" :
'i! ~23aJOO j_
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
~!TY ()r: Ct [,VNc',\Tr;
Thank You and Sincerely
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone. Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater. Florida 33756-5502
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days. unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial. or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # 11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
f t wou Id decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
PL^N~jINC;~P. [1fVUO!'ME~n
~-3r.p,\/lCL~-:)
"'-". r.,'
['
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMYfION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corrf)r~t~ ()r indi"idua! in.tefpsts,
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus. they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rentai penod restnctions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours; ~. . .
~/ #.~.~
-'--'-/'"'L:~ ?~=t:2 -O~t-1'
, I
1310& 1340 GulfBlv 0 ~~~_~~~ ,I
UNIT# '-" -- r- L
I
_~_ _~ ____ ____J
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Yours;
~~ vr~
~r~: [E(C[E[\W[E ~~
1310 & 1340 Gulf B~JJ I I n II
Crescent Beach Club Pt.ne FEB 2 3 2000.. : . I'.
UNIT# e 6 C ( t:rl q 'I ~. I
: '> I ~" I
I J I
Thank You and Sincerely
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
PLJ\r--J N 1 ~,JC; f", r) [~_\/ c l__C) ~~' f\.~ E N-;
S [-:~Fi\/!CCS
T'i C)I- (~II /~;-,,\" ,:'i.T~
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and 11, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period i"estrictions on Sand Key Condomiiiiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
t f/Uv~ ~-t-t-.J l' ~C{,..,... ~
'1
(?/ ('.I.-f.~/vf ~"f;~Att~~V
~ VI' ;/
//
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# 17 () 7
,
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
cOqJOiaLC 01 illJividuai inl\;fcsi.3.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club 1 & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condomimums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
~~~.
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# / ~tJ 3
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
e
'II.-J'..:-l~~~.j.~\f~l.-n-\..:.!.,.'
~.: r--'---. .!
\ \ i FEB 2 3 2000 i L:'. ' .:
,. L I
- . __......____J
-~---~ ..
PLANNI~~~~4-~j~t~T
CITY or r:L[AF1WATfC~;
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
--------
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corpora"Le or individual inierests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # II to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City ofClelllwakr should nOl impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
lT~IT# / ~/)~
/
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater / 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome, Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
~4 /<"v<-( WI [) C H) (,; VI'
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner (j)
UNIT# 11- G
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
40/''''''"1# V-e NH e, '"
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner I J.,
UNIT# L (J ( l ;1 f>"Y .
/1- /==
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rentai period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
L2 ,D e~~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# II tP I
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
1
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. wtih Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
~.~~
113iQx" 1340 Gulf Blvd.
~t Beach Club Owner
UNIT# '" S ~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
.... ...",~~
R l'I . ,)J
\lV \J~
\1\,'"
,
February 14, 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # 11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
T~e C;t:1 of Cle2~'.:I::'~~~ sh:.'~!d ne! ~mpcse :-en:~1 period re::;tric::0:1S G:i Sund KCj' C~ndvi1li:1:umJ.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours; ..-
CO
~\.
.- /1/1, ,..-':r
t:::: . u "Co.; I C.
A
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# .:-:- I') -
-".. cA..../
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent thcir
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to usc their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have.
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # II to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 gay rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Yours; ~l V ~
17 fJ THo~'t V. If II ~ I.GA--
Thank You and Sincerely
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Bejlch Club Owner
UNIT# ,.q:,"6 T~
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C!o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMYfION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
cOipoiatc Oi individual inielt;.)ls.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 #11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they arc attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
crescentJlJth CluW;wner
UNIT# .62 1/1
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or inclivicl'lal intprP:ft~
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The. r;-hr ,....+rl.o"..., ,n..o... ....~......Jl,1 _;..... =___ -'-"'_ ~._--+.,._, -- - :. _.1 ,';-:l..;.t"~-'l::.:(.;i.,;'~;-,~-} r,.-., -. ." Co' ..
. ". ~".f ~. ~.~~. V';...~I .....\;....U hUL ll"pU:>~ I ellLal ~ellUl. . ",s I "lIUIl:> on ~ano hey on omlnJums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
. ( .~
~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lightho~ owers Owner
UNIT# (0 g
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impuse Icntai period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Be~> Clu~ Owner
UNIT# It{:> F
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater. Florida 33756-5502
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days. unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial. or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKC A) have requested the Cod\?
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist. Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts. the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achievc thcir personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot spcak for us. Therefore, please dismiss thcir request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
TheCity of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes tor the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
-
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 134
Crescent Be
UNIT#
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
,:-'L", f\j''''
Community Development Board Members
C!o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
~:-~; i :\/: ( ': :
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICT~ #11 CiTY 1)1 I; r i
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
-----~----~
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # 11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and 11. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater shouki not impose rentai period restrictions on SaM Key CondomInIUms.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Yours; ~+3 alt~
11t2JdL~
Thank You and Sincerely
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner - ~
UNIT# L(-E.
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
l
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days. unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial. or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized bv condominium owners 10 rerre<;;ent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which 1
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
0Jd~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310& 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#~A
.
.
1290 Gulf Boulevard
Unit 1202
Clearwater, Florida 33767
Earl & Lynn Michaels
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWA TEA
I
!
/
I
,
February 24, 2000
CommWlity Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33576-5502
Dear Board Members:
Weare writing you this letter as affected parties to your pending consideration of recommendation to modify Policy
Issue! Article 2 -Zoning Districts # II. It is our Wlderstanding that this modification would prohibit the rental of any
dwelling for a period ofless than 30 days, Wlless located in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown Districts. Please be
advised that we are the owners of unit 1202 in the Lighthouse Towers Condominiwn, located at 1290 Gulf Boulevard, in
Sand Key.
This modification, if passed would violate the covenants of the Declaration of Condominiwn for Lighthouse Towers, as
recorded in Official Records Book 5475, page 189, of the Public Records of Pine lias COWlty, Florida. Specifically the
proviso permitting a minimwn rental of 14 days is in direct contrast to the modification Wlder consideration.
Accordingly, we feel that the City should exclude the Lighthouse Towers Condominiwn from consideration of this
modification.
Although we can Wlderstand the justification of this modification for commWlities that are traditional full-time
residences, such as single family residences and condominiwns that are so organized, by their Declaration of
Condominiwn, we do not find it equitable, or otherwise reasonable for a political subdivision to contradict what has been
notoriously set in the Public Records for nearly twenty years, absent an issue of public health, safety and welfare.
It is our Wlderstanding that the Sand Key Civic Association has come out in support of this modification, as a majority of
their membership reside in dwellings that were specifically structured by their Public Declaration for a minimwn thirty
day rental, which is consistent with the pending modification. However, it our current Wlderstanding that in addition to
Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I and II are similarly structured to allow 14-day rentals. Such being the case, it
would seem to us that if the modification is otherwise deemed appropriate for commWlities within your jurisdiction, then
Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, should, as a minimum, be exempt from the modification to prevent
conflicting with the provisos ofthe publicly-recorded Condominiwn Declarations that were in place when we purchased
our Condominium, and still remain in place.
Please do not consider this letter as a self-serving, or as an economically motivated plea. Although we are not 'full-time"
residents, we do not currently, nor do we have plans to in the near future, rent our Condominiwn for any length oftime.
We merely feel that we purchased our Condominiwn with full knowledge ofthe provisos of the Declaration of
Condominiwn, and do not feel that it is the duty of the public body to contradict them as a part of a broader intent to
perhaps regulate other commWlities that might otherwise warrant such consideration. We can be contacted during the
day at 813-931-8900.
Earl & Lynn Michaels
cc: Joe Calio
Lynn Nellenbach
. . . .
..........
I
I
FEB 19 '00 :5:42 NELLENBACH JACKS~LLE FL
904 880 8597
. 8135840509
Pel 1
Community Development Board Members
c/o Hr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
PO BOX 4748
Clearwater, ~lor1da 33750-4748
February lO, 2000
Re : POLICY :ISSUJI I UTICIa. 2 - ~OMmO DIS'l'RrC'l'8 111
" prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless
located in the Tourist, commercial, or Downtown Districts"
BXlllPTIOK POJt SAM!) ItBY CONI)OIIIHItJJIS:
I un~.rstand the Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) may have requested the Code
Revision Policy Issue / Article - 2 I zoning Districts Ul. SKCA does not
have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments on Sand
Key, Member5 of SKCA were not elected or authorized by condominium owners to
represent their corporate or individual interests.
some Sand Key condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods
of less than 30 days. Assuming Sand Key condominiums are not in the Tourist.
commercial, or Downtown zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2
#11 will impair the owner'S right to use their investment property as
permitted by condominium documents. Many sand K@y condom1niums have a
preponderance of one bedroom units. which were marketed and purchased a.s
residential rental property in the mid 1980'S and continue to be used as such
today.
TO change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I ,
II, approval of 75\ of the owners must be obtained. NumerouS attempt.a to
change the rental period have failed. Some SKCA members from these three
condominiums with personal interests may not have accepted the owner's
majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to use the SKCA proposed
code revision and the Community Development Board to achieve the1r personal
agenda and override the owner'S eollective decisions. SXCA oannot speak for
U8. Therefore, plea.e diem1.. the 9~CA reque.t for tbe Code aevi.ion.
please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to JIXBIIP'r lAIR) KIIY condominium
developments. or at least the three (3}; Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach
I and II, w1th Declarations and Documents which permit les8 than 30 day rental
period..
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand
Key Condom1niums. I would expect a 30 day limitation would decrease Tourism
and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I understand
generate substantial property taxes for the City and pine1las County.
Thank You and Sincerely
Crescent Beach Club
tlNIT ~ ~
Lighthous@ Towers Owner
UNIT #
.
.
ROBERT E. VAUGHN
POST OFFICE Box 781
BRANDON, FLORIDA 33509
FED 2 5 2000
February 19, 2000
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
P. O. Box 4748
Clearwater, FL 33750-4748
Re: POLICY ISSUE / ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
To Whom It May Concern:
Enclosed is a form letter which is self explanatory with
reference to the above. Please be advised that I have asked the law
firm of Carlton Fields to oppose this ordinance. As drafted it would
severely limit the use of our unit and thus reduce the value of the
unit. We think the ordinance as drafted is not enforceable and
violates our property rights.
Very truly yours,
~t:~~
cc. Lavinia J. Vaughn, Esq.
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial. or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It wou Id decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
---~'. jJ
L,..-~ \J--CA......./-
r-- 4
c..:::..-\. Ei- \ 'I:.. A--.v I V Ai-.M . ---
r 1,~~lE~~lE
LJ f'
~td L 8 2(8)
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310& 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Ow r
UNIT# 3 c.. cJ3. \
PlANNlNG & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMYfION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # 11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
1 t would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
..--'"
,NNlNG & OEVELOPMEN1
SERVICES
'Y OF CLEARWATER
l___ - --
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporale or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & H approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The Cit} of C:t:aiwater should nm imp03e remai period resuiclions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
,-
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# ~ 0 <6
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
YOU~~~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# /007
1310& 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which [
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# 1/03
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentaV lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and 11, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# 70 g
~J
r'! I' r-J'lING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial. or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and I I. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
'v Q.-J. ~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Ow
UNIT# C' R ~ ~\.
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
2:: Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by !.'ond~~:r';mn ov'ner" to rerre<;el1t their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
.1 9
f . [,/t ,Iy
t eJ-/ it /vf/""
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums. ~ . J) / ..l- ,j
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I t ~1' ;;f'~I[,
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country. )/I::i. . .../
, , )I
/ . ^ () IJ
( X
{^j v4 ~ A'l
" ~ ~. 1,I(/"V
k'? - -d- ~. cl.1~ /1';/
VJ2U/v- , . . '-"-.. ..-. -.'.---.--'-- .... .... .-..----. -".... -....
JI'" .." -.;...." ~._-"': /---... ~ ,--'~ " -......, ,.........'''_~f
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd. : ..... ..\ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ Wj ~ '0 j
Crescent Beach Club own. e r,. . '~. I
UNIT# .
IJ FEB2S311
Yours;
Thank You and Sincerely
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# /;;0 If
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Rpvision They do not hnve leg:ll :lu1hority to rf"f'rpSi"nt individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthous~\}frs Owner
UNIT# (/'l
fEB 2 8 2(D)
-~
Ol'
}i
I
I
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We unperstand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 #11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% ofthe owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
iT wouid decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
"'
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# '00 ~
1310 & 1340 GulfBI
Crescent Beach Club
UNIT#
pLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
~
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater. Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial. or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMYfION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
~orpofdtc or individual intelests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial. or Downtown
zoning districts. the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
~~ ~Y-e~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd
Crescent Beach Club 0
UNIT# ~ 0 ,~
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
'-.~",=.....
. '..=d=~-
,\
\ ~I
:;1
FEB 2 5 2000
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
'TebrnaryI4.2000'
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
'.;orporate 0:- ind~vidua! inte;:-ests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # 11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
J'. , ' I). I' 1\ .'1
:' lu:',v0l f- U[L-ttUcr f/iN) e)'l.IrrDU
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
'-.0+ A./) (}-Vt ( Q'ijk t-_'L c ~<1..t. () w'\
r
-
"; I ~Ptf- r<, CiAr
cr~\;l{ t7J ~~k"7CC. 0,,- p-(V C L( .1..-. flu"'!:re b:5 ir'ucl!<2I^"
01 '. ' 'j " \/, t () c:ur' O~j.Ch'0/l Ii-- m-</(\J'--l iln^ 11 i) CL~ .
i u.i<....'-- K." U /" I Vy~ /-"' ~
JJ1WvJt '?f"'1A.
M.. 4v\. {~ fJ U1.IA tJ.'tl C <<- J-ric
j
ff~
.
.
fEB 2 5 2000
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
,~or!,or:.lte or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club 1 & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Ciearwaier shouid nut illlf10St; rt;litai period it;Sirici.ions 011 Sand Key COlldominiums.
It wou Id decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
AitP
NI{ ~;. L
/JL.
L e( ~;6
&V'~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# Lf 0 1
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
.
., t I ...
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
(';OIpVralt or iflJi"iuUiAi mWIl:SIS.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and 11, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The Ci!y o~. Clea"water sho;.;:d not impose rental period restrictiulls on Santi l~ey Condominiuills.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
/~ ,..., fl '\ ~~,
II ~ I c, u \:/ ~ I'r-"'\\
I <i-/i,1 I,
1310 & 13J~ Q Al.'Vd' MAR i! l.~,./
Crescent B~bh Cl~~Owner
UNIT# - ---
)1 .,\~,I~! ~ ,". (j n' ~-"._~"j
:" ,!,~(.,,( uE-VELOPMEJn
.;, :(~i:S
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
r< I,' ~'~. -- r-~
~. ~' -" , :~ ti
-_"~'"-_._-,_.--,
.
.
.. t' -.
March 8, 2000
Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, FI. 33756-5502
Dear Mr. Stone,
My name is Dan Inman. My wife and I own and permanently reside in unit #508 of the
Lighthouse Towers Condominium (LHT). Please let this letter serve as our notification
that we are in favor of increasing the "rental" time to not less than thirty (30) days.
Recently you have received signed copies of the "enclosed" letter. Not only does this
letter distort the facts; it only represents the viewpoint of a very minor segment of the unit
owners at LHT.
1. The letter states "----members of Sand Key Civic Association have requested
a code change that would prohibit the renting of any residential dwelling for
less than (30) days. They do not have the legal authority to represent
individual buildings." RESPONSE: The Sand Key Civic Association is not
attempting to represent any individual building. However, any individual or
group of individuals has the right and privilege, as members of the city, to
request a code change - just as the author of that letter is asking for an
exception of the "proposed" code change be granted to LHT. That same
author does not represent any individual building on Sand Key.
2. The letter states "numerous attempts to change the rental period have "failed'"
RESPONSE: There have been only (2) votes taken in 18 years. The outcome
of the most recent vote (1998) was approximately" 61 "in favor of30 day
rentals with only" 17" opposed. That is a 4 to 1 ratio! (Hardly a failure.)
The only disappointment was that only 50% of the owners voted and a 75%
majority is required.
In closing, it is not a coincidence that 22 out of 25 condo buildings located on Sand Key
already have a (30) day (or longer) rental period.
Finally, just ask yourself, how would you like it if you had a new next door neighbor
move in every two (2) weeks!?
Respe,.<;t. fuH~)--~, _.s',!',-~~ ','__ ,'--,.-.-,::-.----'---
i,ID, Ie ./ c.: ,,', .~:J l''',~,,'
;/ ;,ir- (ilP I::::J II r l"" \
!~I ~~ ILl \;
I L-, I "
I,' ," 'f, ~fld11 /:-l J /J
Dfff, ,~'l i\.'I!'R I - :,1 J )/!
.i ~JanL i ". L::./ I
',-- '
; r -.J
.'1 ^~IN'ING 0 r)~V I
c,.. Y c. L t: ELOPMENT ;
Sf.:P'jiCES
F!\R'NA T':R
,....,-r,
\...1 i:
In
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
.~eviSlOli. They do not have legal authOiiry to represent inoiviJuai wmiotninium Jeveiopments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit Jess than 10 d~y rental pe!,i0ds.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
.'
l
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# $ () /
i [
t.' I 1
iin,t
1310 & 1340 Gul~B.jvd. U:
Crescent Beach CI~b Owner~__ _______
UNIT# r'lM"r-,JI:'\IG [, DEVELOPMENl
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWAT:::R
. ;'~<'~r'''''''''/
,
L_~
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owner~ must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Ciearwater snouid 110t impose IClltai period restrictions on SanG Key Corllio.niuiuiliS.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# I
DEVELOPMENT
"\'iCES
en ',C"'l~ T:R
Thank You and Sincerely
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corpomte or individual jntere~t<;
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # II will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Uearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
I <.< ICuJ
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
.
: AN~,J!NG 8. DEVELOPMENT
SC:P'/!CES
,-"l're (~lEAfl'vVA,Tc:R
..-...-....-.... .-.,. '._-'-~. '---"-- '_I
---
......
March 8, 2000
Mem bers of the Community Development Board
Clearwater, Florida, 33765
REGARDING: Revision of City Land Use Code
Attention: Members
As the owner of property located at Crescent Beach Club on Sand Key, I would
like to take this opportunity to give you my opinion of the Revision of City Land Use
Code pertaining to thc lease options of short-term tenters.
1 take pride in the way my buildings and amenities are taken care of by the other
owners. You may say there is an "unspoken" agreement that we have to keeping our
vacation/retirement homes in such beautiful condition.
Having short-term renters is very common and in some cases a major nescience to
owners, like me, who see on a regular basis the carelessness of those who do not own the
property where they stay.
Please take into consideration that a 30 or 90 day lease to short-tenn renters
would, very possibly, eliminate many concerns that property owners in the Clearwater
area may have to short-tenn renters.
Thank you for giving me this chance to tell you h7l/}
SincerelY,/V~~< ",...:
'.
Denise Athanasion
Crescent Beach Club I
1340 Gulf Blvd, Unit lS-t>
Clearwater, FL 33765
.
[)
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater 1100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14.2000
Re: POLICY ISSUEI ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporntc or ~ndividi.ial iiitCicstS.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they arc attempting to change the code
thru thc Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours: 1M=~"L
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNlT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# \ 06
.
.
o
Bayside Gardens III & W
1301 Gulf Boulevard, #111
Clearwater, Florida 33767
717 - 595-8471
March 20.2000
Mr. Ralph Stone. Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33767-5502
Dear Mr. Stone:
Bayside Gardens III & IV are aware of the fact that on March 21. 2000 the
Community Development Board will consider an ordinance that will establish a minimum rental
time in condominiums of 30 days.
This letter is intended to encourage you not to favorably consider this proposal.
Prior to purchasing a condominium unit, all buyers are given a complete set of documents that
enumerate all the provisions, restrictions. requirements and responsibilities of ownership in the
condominium. Every buyer. therefore, knows the provisions and by purchasing a unit accepts
them. Provision is also made in the condominium documents to change them. Usually. to
prevent change at the whim of a few, 75% of the ownership must vote and agree to the
change. This high percentage is done for good and sufficient reason and that is to be sure that
a change is not taken lightly and rammed through in the dark of the night.
The three buildings in question are not new. They are over 10 years old and, therefore, have
been operating with a minimum two week rental for quite a while. If. in fact. the majority of the
ownership desired the change. a change to a 30 day minimum rental would have been
accomplished a long while ago.
Bayside Gardens III & IV have 76 units and we encourage you to allow the state laws and our
own condominium documents to govern our daily operation. It should be pointed out that we
have a minimum three month rental and are only interested in encouraging the city not to get
involved with the micro management of the real estate in the city.
ry truly yours,
~~
:;/ ) - ..
'cC C_ mc~,/~
.
e
D
John & Carol McGinn
1351 Gulf Boulevard, #210
Clearwater, Florida 33767
727 - 595-1141
March 20, 2000
Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Dear Mr. Stone:
We are writing as residents of Clearwater concerned about the City entering into an area
where intervention is not necessary.
Unlike private home ownership, when one buys a condominium unit part of the purchase
includes accepting the provisions of the condominium documents. If, as a resident you desire
a change, the procedure to make that change is spelled out in detail. That change usually
requires 75% agreement to prevent a few people from making changes to satisfy their own
personal agenda. To own in common is just that. The vast majority must see benefit before a
change can be enacted.
It has been represented to the Community Development Board that security and vandalism is
a problem in the three buildings on Sand Key that are seeking city intervention. It should be
pointed out that each building has its own security staff as well as video camera surveillance.
Obviously, if some residents feel there are unacceptable activities taking place, increased
surveillance should be considered as a primary method of preventing it.
For over 8 years we owned a rental unit at 14440 Gulf Blvd, Indian Shores. This building is strictly
a rental building that has a daily minimum rental policy. During the period of our ownership,
the "renter" was never a problem. The pool was never closed because of mistreatment nor
was unruly conduct a problem. Other than normal wear and tear there was no excessive
damage or vandalism done to the property. The only policing of this building was the
screening by the rental agents and the presence of a maintenance man on premises.
I urge the board not to vote the city into the real estate management business and rather
allow existing state laws and condominium documents to govern the operation of the
condominiums and co-ops in Clearwater.
Very truly yours,
___~oL ~)Jj1~
vC! o--;-I?t J~/ ~A ~
John A. McGinn /v ,- ~
Carol A. McGinn
r
.
.
Community Development Board Members
c/o: Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida, 33756-5502.
March 13, 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRfCTS # 11.
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless
located in Tourist, Commercial or Downtown Districts.)
Dear Board Members;
I am Jo Anne Zimmerman, owner of Unit # 708 of Lighthouse Towers
Condominium, 1290 Gulf Blvd, Clearwater, Florida 33767.
This letter is written to clarify my position and sta'nd on the above
subject of renting of any condo in Lighthouse Towers Condominium for less
than 30 days. I am opposed to any Code Change or amendments that would
allow rentals for a period of less than 30 days.
The Lighthouse Tower Condominium Owners / Association have voted down
amending or changing the By-Laws of our Association in the past. Now to
circumvent the Associations decision and attempt to get a zoning change, I
don't feel is correct. Again I state that I am opposed to rentals in Light-
house Tower Condo's of less than 30 days.
Any previous letters, petitions or requests that I may have inadvertently
signed indicating anything but opposition on this matter are to be considered
null and void.
S(jL ?
~~NNE ZJ, E MAN
Unit # 708 129 ulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Condominiums
Clearwater, Florida, 33767.
,
----
---~
Permanent Mailing address:
-'-~~-'-' "'\
Jo Anne Zimmerman
1212 South Garfield Avenue
Traverse City, Michgian, 49686-4331
'6 ~(G~~~~l\fJ
\ \. n \ \ lAAR I 6;roJ Ii '- )
\ d \J \ \....-/ i
\.,J L __ -' I
\ PLANNING & OEVELOfJMENT \
SERVICES _
i CITy 01' CLEARWATER I
-----
.
e
Bayside Gardens I & II
1451 Gulf Boulevard, #203
Clearwater, Florida 33767
727-593-0362
March 1 7, 2000
Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Dear Mr, Stone:
As president of Bayside Gardens I & II which contain 76 units on 7 1/2 acres of
beautiful Sand Key I would like to voice an objection to the possible change to
one month minimal rental for condominiums in Clearwater.
Our minimal rental period in Bayside Gardens I & II is three months so we have
no vested interest in the change currently being considered by the
Community Development Board. I wish to alert the city that the three buildings
seeking the change are governed, as all condominiums are, by state
regulations and their own condominium documents.
As condominium owners, we all accepted the terms and conditions in our
respective condominium documents prior to purchasing our units. Obviously, if
we had an objection to a provision, we had the option not to purchase a unit.
In the interest of enforcement, it would seem prudent if the city allowed the unit
owners to chart and control their own destiny. They have the opportunity to
change the documents if, in the interest of the majority, it is felt to be beneficial.
Realizing provisions for change are already in place, I would encourage the
city not to approve this suggested ordinance that would involve them in
policing every condominium within the city limits.
I trust you will acknowledge, by turning down this proposal, that the state laws
and building documents prevail.
Very;jJ'UIYY. urs, .
~ /~
(J: P rter
.
.
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14. 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Codc
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individtllll interest<;
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they arc attempting to changc the codc
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # II to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The CilY ul C:h::arwall;~r ShOllid not impose rentai period restrictions on Sand K.ey CondomIniums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Kcy condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours: ,G:
"~'\)),'\SQ~\G)
~t 1~:~C~~'I~~lo.vt~l.f (C rE ~ W rE fn11]J
UNIT# lei i ~~. III ),1
! I I! : MAR' 6 am II i
I, ,.. 1..;.' ./
l I~---'
I PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
I ~I SERVICES
i C ,TY or CLEARWATFq
---~."~--------------
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
, ,
.
.
Community Development Board Members -~_.._......,..,,-
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning fO) []; @ rE n m .': -\ f.
~:~:;~~~7::i~a ~~~~l-55~tle Ave. wI F=~;; ~4.'ig~l~
Re: poLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS 11I'1 . -.- ----:-c::;rr; Lcs\
(ProhIbit the rentIng of any dwellIng for less than 30 days, unless ~ated-mLhe'16rrriSC
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They Ilre not elected or authorized by condominium owner3 to represent their
corporate or ind~vidua! interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rental/lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key cond ini ms, w
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the C' y an P'
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# "2 () - P.
.
.
~ rc: ~ ~ Q \~ l~ \'" r,,!, ',"
U;l.J.':.'.=,-, . \ '.i
; ::\
\! ' MAR 2 , '9S9 .' :_~\
\ J 1'\ \.-----' i
','" ---1 +,
. . ('0. !r('1
, PLANNING & OEV;..;L:. . .... ;:\"':j
L CITY OF CLEAh." . .
March 14, 2000
Community Development Board Members
C/O Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater, FL 33756-5502
RE: Policy Issuel Article 2-Zoning Districts # II
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 Days, Unless located in the Tourist, Commercial, or
Downtown Districts.)
Dear Board Members,
I understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code revision. They
do not have the legal authority to represent individual condominium developments or individuals on Sand
Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their corporate or individual
interests.
I purchased a condominimun (and paid a premium) at The Crescent Beach Club in September of 1999
because I wanted the flexibility offered by the Associations two week minimum rental policy. The
property was built as a rental community and every owner at The Crescent Beach Club agreed to this policy
prior to purchasing. To change this policy 75% of the Crescent Beach Clubs owners must vote to approve
it. Several homeowners are trying to circumvent this requirement through the Community Development
Board to achieve their personal objectives and override the owner's collective decision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # 11 to exempt Sand Key Condominium developments or at
lease the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. With declarations and
documents which permit less than 30-day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums which
have been marketed and sold as residential rental property since the mid 1980's. It would lower the
property value of the condominiums listed above.
Sincerely,
,---- )" .....-
...-._ C' "
t,.~. Ii .
" U -----
Thomas J. Dusing
1340 Gulf Blvd Unit 5F
Crescent Beach Club Owner
. .
M. CHRIS DICKSON
1100 VIA CALLEJON
SAN CLEMENTE, CA 92673
PHONE (714) 361-9900
/
\
February 17, 2000
FE8 2 5 2000
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Re Policy Issue Article 2 Zoning Dist.11
Dear Sir:
This is to advise you that we are whole heartedly behind this zoning. People
who rent condos in our complex for less than 30 days treat it like a second rate
hotel. Frankly I would prefer a minimum of 6 months but we'll settle for 30
days for the time being.
PLEASE DO NOT AMEND ARTICLE 2.
Thank you.
---I ery tru.IY.V YMrs,
{/dJ' ~f~
M. Chris Dickson
Crescent Beach I
Unit G-16
.
.
Mayor Brian J. Aungst, Sr.
Commissioner J.B. Johnson
Commissioner Bob Clark
Commissioner Ed Hooper
Commissioner Ed Hart
P.O. Box 4748
Clearwater, FL. 33756
April 8, 2000
Dear Mayor Aungst and Commissioners,
RE: Proposed Amendments to the Community Development Code.
As an owner of a condominium on Sand Key, I am appalled that this change is being considered. Residential use
( By your definition on page 28 of the Proposed Amendments to the Community Development Code) means a
permanent place of residence for a family and where rented or leases for no less than thirty one (31) days. I looked
up the word ''family'' in the dictionary. It is defined as a group of persons, consisting of parents and their children.
According to the public records, there are 68 one bedroom units, (between 885 sq. ft. & 1020 sq. ft. ) between
these 3 buildings. These buildings were marketed to investors and not specifically for residential use.
However, I do agree on rental limitations on residential single family homes. This is fair.
In order to be approved for purchase in these Condominium Buildings, you must read and accept the
Condominium Documents and Rules & Regulations. These documents allowed a minimum rental period of not less
than 14 days. This was my choice. As stated by Joe Calio, President of Lighthouse Towers, in his letter to Ralph
Stone, published by the Clearwater Gazette, There are 22 Condominium Buildings on Sand Key with longer
minimum rental periods. Every buyer has a choice. Let me also mention that my husband and I live in Crescent
Beach Club with Homestead exemption. Not all permanent residents want this change.
This proposed change will not effect only these 3 buildings on Sand Key. There are hundreds of owners of
condominium units in Clearwater and Clearwater Beach, that cater to tourists on a short term basis. A privileged
few are able to take a 30 day vacation. The majority of condo renters stay a week or two. Tourist expenditures in
Pinellas County is over $2.3 billion a year. Add that to the more than 65,000 jobs tourism creates, we are looking
at over $4.6 billion.
A passing of the proposed amendments would not only lower the value of these condominiums, it would force
many of our tourists to go somewhere else. We would all lose.
Please consider all owners of condominiums and Tourism in your decision.
sm=~~--' ,,-:?
Rosalie M. Zeh
1310 Gulf Blvd. 3-F
Clearwater, FI. 33767
I'
.
.
Community Development Board Members
c/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
PO Box 4748
Clearwater, Florida 33750-4748
February 7, 2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE / ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
"Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts"
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
I understand the Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) may have requested the Code Revision Policy Issue
/ Article - 2/ Zoning Districts #11. SKCA does not have legal authority to represent individual
condominium developments on Sand Key. Members of SKCA were not elected or authorized by
condominium owners to represent their corporate or individual interests.
Many Sand Key condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall/ease periods of less than 30 days.
Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown zoning districts, the
proposed Policy Issue Article 2 #11 will impair the owner's right to use their investment property as
permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key condominiums have a preponderance of one
bedroom units, which were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and
continue to be used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval of 75% of
the Owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have failed. Some SKCA
members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not have accepted the owners
voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to use the SKCA proposed code revision and the Community
Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the owners collective decisions,
SKCA cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss the SKCA request for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments, or at least
the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and Documents which
permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums. I would
expect a 30 day limitation would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums,
which I understand generate substantial property taxes for the City and Pinellas County.
Thank You and Sincerely I J AA A f)
k--'~~ )/~'-
Lighthouse Towers Owner - Unit.-'...1.PS' Crescent Beach Club Owner lor 11- Unit_
25~ ~ rtI JvJ k...
~.#Y ..~
,
t:t.
JUZ-3
I
I.
" II
FIB , 0 ?nnn
,I
.~
SEriViCf:S
CITY OF CLEAfiw'n~:;
~
<""I
N
..=jN
g-~
.g:;::
Q)~..J
- ~
'Qt:: ~
ZOQ)
U=
00 ....
a 00 ~
~Q'\ 0
_lrlc:n
N~
cti
~
x
.
..
,,-
't ..-
(' ..~
f"- .....::
~ --
I .-..::
o :~
lI.t . ::
(' ._-:;
.. ...-
"'" . :
~ N~~
~
I~:I
" .,,/.
I'~:'
'::1'
I~:i
t.':.
J'''
(,)
(,)
02/14/00 12:32 FAX 9043087062
.
AUDIT SERVICES
141 004
.
""
Clearwater Gazette & Beach Views February 14, 12000
Attention: Lin Howard
RE: February 10, 2000 "Sand Key Residents Support Redefining Rental Restrictions"
The above referenced article was misleading_ I suspect you may not have been provided all
the facts and infor'lTlation to write a bal~nced aM-ide. There are only three (3)
condominium buildings (Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club 1 and Crescent Beach Club
II) that permit rental of less than 30 days.
The proposed change of the City Code to a 30 day minimutn r'ental period, I'm sure has
merit in residential neighborhoods of free standing homes in the City of Clearwater, but
such a restriction is totally inappropriate and not necessary for Sand Key, At Lighthouse
Towers the "tr'ansientP issue caused by less than 30 doy rentals is perceived and nOT
supported by facts. During January and February 2000, only 2 of the 85 rented units are
for less than 30 days. I assume the same is true at CrescenT Beach Club I & II.
The Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) and its members were not elected and do not have
legal authority to represent individual owner'S or condotninium associations on the proposed
Code revision. Only the indi...idu~1 ownerS of each Sand Key condominium have the
authority to establish tninitnum rental periods for their buildings. Lighthouse Tower'S'
ownerS have on five prior occasions ( the most recent in 1998 ) rejecTed proposed changes
to their c:ondominiutn documents related to its 14 day tninimum rental period.
Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach Club I & II, the only Sand Key buildings that would
be effected by the proposed Code revision, were marketed and purchased 05 residential
rental property in the late 1980's and c:ontinue to be used as such today. At Lighthouse
Towers only 31 or 2L5':10 of the units are occupied full-titne by the owners.
The article did not disclose thaT Joe Calia is a permanent resident and newly elected
President of Lighthouse Towers. Earlier this tnonth a Lighthouse Towers Board appoinTed
Committee of ownerS again did not support changing it's minimum rental period without
preserving it for current owners. It appears that Joe Calio has not accepted the
recommendation. It appears he may be attempting to use his influence with the SKCA and
Ralph Stone to fulfill his and a rninor'ity of LHT owner's personal agenda ta place
restrictionS on non resident owners and the tninimum rental period at Lighthouse Towers
and indirectly the Crescent Beach Club developtnents.
City politics has no role in This issue unless their is potential harm to the safety, health
and welfare of the property owners of Sand Key. Clearwater.
Lynn J. Nellenbach - LHT #1105
2598 Scott Mill Lane
Jacksonville. FL 32223
H - 904 8808697 0 - 904 3087067
PLANNING & DEVnOPMENf
SERVICES
CITY OF ClEARWAT!fII
'r
02/14/00 12:32 FAX 9043087062
.
AUDIT SERVICES
[4] 003
.
"'
L
CONFIDENTIAL
F A X
T RAN S M
T TAL
-
DATE: ~/4/00
TOTAL PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET: 2
(;., /tJA C I A'f' 7O,J
51.2. 457~
Ne, lieN bAc.h..
308 ? ob7
, ()(,2-
TO:~~
'27
FROM: /,.y",,.,,
PHONE #: 904
FAX#:
FAX#:
If you do not receive this fax in its entirety or it is
unreadable please call 308-70e)/. Tl1anks.
7
17. (10~~ ;t, ~ w- *&,.,l, --e.
+~- t ~ C;f)c. ~
ThOm!:.i'~f"=~W:t_~~.~~:'~~~.~ ~
1"'ivikS~, confidential. and excmp\ from di,~logllr~ Ilnder Bpplkablc Ie.....
If tile reader of 1l1is message is ...(\t tlla intended recipienL Dr the emplo)'ee or :Ie(!1l1 res~ollSible fOT delivering the ml:lissge Lo the intended
rc:cipie.n\. )lOll ~te h~r~bY 1I01jficd that any disseminnLion, Dr ropying (Irllle commllniC3l.ion is prohibita!. If you have Te!;Civcd 1l1iti
conununh:a~lol1 in m-or. p]~:;e Tlollfy us immediately by Lelephon~ (~l\~el). TIl:lnk you.
.
.
March 23, 2000
William L. Johnson
479 Eastshore Drive, #1
Clearwater, Florida 33767
Carlen Peterson
2582 Anderson Drive West
Clearwater, Florida 33761
Dear Mr. Johnson and Ms. Peterson;
I was shocked and disappointed by your apparent reversal of opinion on the thirty-day rental
limitation zoning change when it came to a vote after nearly four hours of public hearing and
testimony at the Community Development Board Meeting on March 21, 2000.
It was quite obvious that each of you understood and appeared to be sympathetic to the
rationale presented on behalf of the three condos for the City not to get involved and for the
condos to solve their own issue, which is only a concern to the estimated 20% full-time
resident owners.
The other estimated 80% non-resident owners, who pay additional taxes because of not
being able to use the homestead exemption, pay a combined 11 % tourist and state tax on
rental fees and cannot vote in City elections and are unable to attend such meetings for
obvious reasons were penalized by your action.
The non-resident owners have made $100,000 - $300,000 investment in their condominium
units under documents and bylaws which permit fourteen day rentals. Your vote has caused
real and quantifiable economic damage to these unit owners in Crescent Beach Club I and II
and Lighthouse Towers.
Please take time to replay the video of the closing moments of the public hearing and
observe your cavalier behavior, disregard for the 4 hours of convincing testimony, and
shallow reasoning for voting in favor of the zoning rental restriction. You should be ashamed
and embarrassed for ignoring and not granting a permitted exemption for pre 1989
developments as expiained to you in detail by the Board's attorney and the Citls Director of
Planning.
Sincerely, ~
~ ~bach
2598 scot~~1I Lane
Jacksonville, Florida 32223
c:
Gerald Figurski
Edward Mazur, Jr.
Alex Plisko
David Gildersleeve
Shirley Moran
~alph Stone
.
.
Dear Sand Key Condominium Owner,
We have all received letters for and against the changing ofthe minimum rental period from 14 days to 30
days to 90 days. I feel obligated to give my opinion. I am an owner in Crescent Beach Club II and also a
Licensed Realtor. In 1980, I completed a Real Estate Appraisal Course at Hillsborough Community
College, In 1983 I obtained my Real Estate License, In 1987, I earned my Real Estate Broker License
and the designation" Realtor ". I have been selling real estate for almost 17 years. I chose to buy in
Crescent Beach because of the 14 day minimum rental period, I was confident unit values would be
sustained. I have watched values on the beach go up and down for many years, During the down years, It
was Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach Clubs I & II that held their own.
Shorter minimum rental periods uphold the value of your investment. For those who do not believe this,
please get another opinion. Ask any Realtor on the beach, In fact, ask all the Realtors on the beach.
. I ran a comparable market analysis from my M,LS. service. I limited this search to buildings of the
same concrete structure and built during the 1980's, All sales are public record and can be verified, This
search gives an average price per square ft, for sales in the past year, An individual unit would be adjusted
up or down depending on size, condition & amenities.
.
. Name
.
Address
Yr. bit.
Minimum
Rental
Average Price
Per Sq. Foot
Lighthouse Twrs. 1290 Gulf Blvd. 1983 14 days $ 171.19
Crescent Bch. II 1310 Gulf Blvd. 1989 14 days $ 178.55
Crescent Bch. I 1340 Gulf Blvd. 1986 14 days $ 162.12
Landmark I 1230 Gulf Blvd. 1980 30 days $ 149.00
Landmark II 1250 Gulf Blvd. 1981 30 days $ 151.11
South Beach 1460 Gulf Blvd. 1980 90 days $ 120.18
South Beach 1480 Gulf Blvd. 1982 90 days $ 119.99
Dan's Island 1600 Gulf Blvd. 1985 365 day $ 131.53
Dan's Island 1660 Gulf Blvd. 1982 365 day $ 140.82
It is up to YOU 1. Our Mayor Brian J. Aungst, Sr, and City Commissioners will decide whether or not to
change the proposed amendments to 30 days on May 18th, They are having a workshop on May 2nd. for
the Commissioners. You may go to this workshop but not participate. ( Note: these days are subject to
change, please check. )
GET INVOLVED * WRITE LETTERS * EM AIL * CALL * SHOW UP * DO IT NOW
sm7~#p
Rosalie M. Zeh
Ene!.: Copy of my letter to the Mayor & Commissioners
Every effort has been made to provide accurate information. Any errors or omissions are not the responsibility of
Zeh Realty or Rosalie M. Zeh.
FEB-08-2000 10:15
P.01/04
,
'2&:h
e
eOPIES TO:
COMMISSION
Nicholas and Jena Fritsch
1310 Gulf Boulevard # 8-0
Clearwater, FL 33767-2860
(727) 595-6528
FEB - 8 2000
1 he Members of the Community Development Board
! ubject: Proposed Change to the City Development Code to re-define Transient/Hotel Property
fl'om 14 to 30 days Lease/rental periods
C ear COB Board Members,
We are out of town unfortunately for your scheduled workshop on 2-15-00; but we are anxious to
sl lare the facts on this issue as it applies to our neighbortJood. There are 26 condominiums on
Clearwater, Sand Key, All of those properties have 90 day minimum lease periods, except 3
(12%). We reside in one of the 3 buildings with a minimum lease period of 14 days.
On three previous occasions, our owners have voted to increase the minimum rental period from
1t~ to 30 days. In every election! the majority of owners of units in our building (Cee II), 1310 Gulf
Blvd., and our sister building (Cae I), 1340 Gulf Blvd., have overwhelmingly voted for a change to 30
de IY minimum leases. The vote summary:
cae I 1340 cae II 1340
YES Yes % NO YES Yes % NO
SElp.24, 1991 56 62% 34 74 76% 23
Nov. 5, 1991 65 61% 42 86 80% 21
Allg. 10, 1992 50 63% 38 71 70% 32
e :>pies of the official minutes of the Association meetings which attest to these facts are attachecL
He lWever, the total number of non-votes was sufficient to prevent the change.
According to the records of our association, the majority of the owners of units who lease, live
ou t of the county and most outside of Florida and therefore, do not suffer the consequences of
inc reased security issues, maintenance problems to repair and maintain, and the disrespectful
be'avi:r;sd:::::~horttennrenmrs. ) ~t~~\V~--- \i
· ~ ~3 of 26 condos (88%) already have adopted a 90 day minimum lease pe..'--' .1 I 0 I
· =: of the 3 con.dos have previously voted in a strong majority (61- 80%) tq in \: s'~"W'mn .., ... I.
rer taVlease pened to 30 days. : J I. . \._ , !
· t,e majority of out-of-county/state owners who benefit fro":, the leSSF! a~ 30 ~~~I~~ar5~~-R~~M~NT
suffer the consequences of short tenn renters and do not vote In local e lOti$'; .sEnvlcEs
· The County Code already has adopted the 30 day period. CITY OF rt FH"" .
L._..______ _...
Thank you for your time and consideration and we expect your support in favor of the
reo Jmmendation of the City Staff to raise the minimum to 30 days and that no grandfather clause, be
incJJded in the revised COde.a ~
Sinc~y, ~ ~ '::tf~ ""Clse pl'fpore Q rts"onH
(),~ ~L f~- ~_ for the Ma.yor's sJgl'ltJture.
Nid 10laS FritsCh Jena Fritsch ec; City com~s~op
Due date; 02 l<r -Il '" _ J .
ct.: City of Clearwater Commissioners and City Manager ~
PRESS ~ebruary 4,2000
CLERK I A TTORNEV-
.
.
,
'.
I b-;/tJA ~ JtVm'
I
flG'b -J) ?l) pur!ut'"
Ct:' /)1& ->. ./~ C.l)/~
I~ ,Nb% rV("""'s ""
/
r:;/ t-tF.
~4
fa~&-
. ....;.
.... .
'}
--
-
-.'
~~
~
.~
.--
~. .
~!
'K
_.
~:;".'
-
..,..'-~
~~.
..-: .
-~~
_...~ -
FEB-08-2000 10:16
P.02/04
.
.
..
(
m: C'JmS~ BD.cr ~ ~ SDO XC' ~J;UJ.( ASSOcnTION, me:
lIUAlW crY ~~.teS' 91r.C""'..:q;' )fI'\"I'l,NG ~'!~l.'GmR Z4-, I99 L
;
T!m' -":"""';1'\1(:10 WXS C.llr....~:I1" m OIWlS.tt ~ AP~HO~~ 7:.Z0 P.M BY
-- ~-- -. -'I"...AoM -
w~ ~~.,.yor:;:!, ~"""""""'''"4
l:It'Tr.T: ~. I:2::I::D-O-"UR$~"
.:zcmr rl:Zl.~s., ~ SCB![:'!.t,t"'.I:iR.,
IT.t~ n'M.,m,....am mmr ~Im'r.
DS!'J\I!I!: ~~ ~("::.An
~: 1!':I:J:t Os:alllW
n~~D'
mufC: ~
~ ~ TED MTt;;"e~ON,- ESQ., A~RNEY FOR
ASSCI:: I A."IUlV
MIL J'Omr.n~~ ~DOcstr TJm ~SON, ESQ.
'JS' ~l:r':~~ US 't'tJ /'(Nt<: I) (NFX m MIt... t"!!1I;~~SCN. AND BE READ
'mE:: ~ 'rD: US VC~ QN:.. .A.R':' CAZiTOlt VOL~l'.ED 1'0
e;ol.l.lt:~ 'IE vcms:..
~ ~s.nr.~. OF' '!!E von ~-
.-
c::sc = -.s:.s:!ES
CSC ::= - 74: !IZ
3'4 NO
Z3. NO
1~~Wt<: "Q5 .Dr USlSIlII"....r..:.! ~;l)I:'r W:M'Mt."R OF VC'1%S', ~ 75%: m ~ASS
!1\t ~..t"H..: te aJ J I r .11. ~.cI\i..
'~11l:;~ W!S' A D:l:S.~n05'.!iQB ~ ADD~a u m '!!HE' ~RCS' DD ONS:..
~ r..rr!';'u.ol~ DS ~11~~ J:!!!' 7:.4!0 P'..L
,
-f
FEB-08-2000 10:17
.
.
P.03/04
~
--.... .
;
'5IX CRESC1DlT' BEACX CLtm A1' SAND KEY CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.
BOJUm OF' ODmcm~ SPECI'AL. MEE1'ING N'OVEMBER 5, 19~1..
'rB'E. MBETING WAS' CALLED TO' .ORDD AT APPROJIMAmLy 8: 00 P. M. BY
JOHN OATES, PRESIDENT'
ROLL. CALL: DIRECTORS":.
JOHN OATES AND SAUL SCHECHTER
ABSENT': SUZANNE LECLAIR AND JAMES HAMMOND
MANAGEMENT: BILL OS:atJ'RN
KAREN SILER
NANCY MCNU'!'T
GUEST PRESENT: TED CULBERTSON, ESQ., ATTORNEY FOR
ASSOCIATION
MR. JOHN OATES INT!<<)OOCEO TED CULBERTSON, ESQ'.
THE MEE.'l'ING WAS: TUmIED OVER TO MR.. CULBERTSON AND HE READ
THE: AMENDMEN'T' TD:r WAS VOTED ON..
-
TIm: RES~S OF THE" vom WERE: CBe:r - 65 ~s
CBe II - 86 YES
4.2 NO
2.1 NO
T.B::EBE WAS At~ INSUFFICIENT' NUMBER OF" VOTES I LACKING 7S% TO PASS
IN .t:i..I..'J:~ BUILDING.
TB:RK WAS A DrsCO'SS:I:ON FROM THE' AUDIENCE AS' TO THE" PROS AND CONS,
AND DI,S'COSSION HELD ON THE' DAMAGE REPORT.
T1m' .ME:E!rJ:NG WAS ADJOtmNED A~ 8:20 P ..M..
RESPEC'n1ILL.Y S'OBH:I.TTED,
FEB 8 2000
.......
!
____J
PLANNING & m:V[LOPMU~ 1
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATf:r,
'.
P.04/04
FEB-08-2000 10:17 ~ ~
I . THE cnBSCIlIlT ~ cr.ca u SJ\ND I\E2' COlID~ lISSOCIATION. INC.
BOARD OF' OJ:BEC!'ORS. s1?E.CI'AL. 1!IEE".1:.UlG. AUGUST 10, 1992~
THE MEE.T:ING'. WAS" CALLED TO OROE.R . AT' APPROXIMA'I!ELY 7: 2S P -M.
BY SAUL.SCBECRTER, PRESIDENT
ROLL. CXLL.: DIRECTORS: SAUL S'CHECH'PJ;!'R,. J'AM:ES' .B'AMMOND" AND
ART CANTOR
ABSENT:. BOB BUTLi:R AND TONY DIGrOVANNA
MANAGEMENT: KAREN . SIUR
B'RIAN SMITH
NANCY MCNUTT
THE PURPOSE OF THE SPECIAL MEETING WAS TO .AMEND THE CONDOMINIUM
DOC1JME:NTS !?ROM A MI:NIMtIM RENTAL !JERIODS OF L4 DAYS TO A MINIMUM
:RENTAL 'E&RIOD OF ONE MONirH.
O "
. . . ..:.:.':
. A. B.RIEF STX~ WAS" RDD:B.Y MR:;,; S~('"fI'I''':-Wi. ENCLOSED AND
1iEBE:IN MADE: A EART OF"' TliE'SX' MINUTES.
.-
, ,
COMMENTS,' WEllE' ACCEPmn. FRO!!. tlNU OWNERS RE:GAB.DING. THE. P'ROPOSED
AMENDMENT"..
TB:E 'lom vms. '!'BEI.\r TAREN. THE' RESULTs: OF. TBE' VOTE. WERE:
CBC 1 - sa. ns CBe 2. - 71 YES.
. 3:8 NO 3:2 NO
LAClO:NG' 75% ~ VOTES' TO PASS, THE. PROPOSED AMENDMENT
WAS" D~'M:PU. nt. Bom BtlILDUTGS.
co~ WERE:. :EmJt'1m,FROM . '!HE: AUDIENCK..
THE MtE.'nNG ADJOomreo AT 8:.20 P.M.
~- .'
~~~. ~ .-...
RESPECTFtlIiL.y ~.,
-
-
,.
, .
~..:::... '-p'" '
~ .
.~.:.~~
..... '\:)0' +
.:,'~l
) ~,
~
.......
",,,,,,,,",,,,,,.. ...
':.t.T
:':.~:..-:,""': .
C,;,':;;,'
. .,~..' ..
-.~ . '~.... ..
~ :i.~~":~~~~~:~:;t.-.,,.
.... '" . - . "--'''~ .~~ .
JAME:S HAMMOND,. SEcn~RY
. BOARD OF DDEcmtts
, .. " - '" '-,
. .~;' .;.~c:'.;:~::_i;.:J. -:".i~\ ..~.:.'::~:
~) '\ ~~::J' \L~ lS
J ~
, I
d I FEe 8 zoo~
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES'
ClTY OF CLEARWATER
'~l ,.x~,
6 I \'
J i
TOTAL P.04
.
CIearwatw ~
.....1Ia
By MIlt month. ~ IMRIQefS ...
lhe dy IimiIs 01 CIIIIrwarIr nwt bllaang
I bIft Oft ..uas DI"'..31 Up. 11w
(,....~~1oi1rd
oda4 4,2 ... ..... 10 ban .. shocHtcm
'entail, till inIIiIIM ... ~ parr Of
a '-at' ..... ~ cIIy ......... NIls
Iftd .. be tanSidertd br tar ~ c:amrniI-
siDn ned monIa. 4....... 11Ift ha been in
IffIct ift ... F10ricIa ~ since Jian'*'f
,lit _ Ills Md __Impact on...
tNIIrn Ind proper\) ..... morbII.
~_... fbIda s..... Cou"
hIS Uned .... rlqlMlt "1M Monroe
coune, Vaabon ~ ~. to
.... ... petition ID MrIUm 1M bin.
Mayor & City Commission
Contact Information and
Hours
Address/Location
Mailiag Address:
Office of the Mayor
Offices ofthc City Commission
PO Box 4148
Clearwater, FL 33758-4748
Location:
Offices of the Mayor & City Commission
Clearwater City Hall, 3rd Floor
112 S. Osceola Ave.
Clearwater, FL 33756
Locator MQ
Telephones/Email
Voice. Mayor: (727) 562-4050
Voice, Commissioners: (727) 562-4042
FAX: (727) 562-4052
Email: citycomm@ctearwater-fl.com
Hours
Dear Cle8rwater CondoDliDium Owaer:
Monday through Friday: 8:30am-5:00pm
Your short term investment reatal is about to become a monthly rent.l. We need your
help. Get involved !
EBCl: Copy of my letter to tbe Mayor A City Commissioaen.
Copy or my letter to Sand Key Co.domini.m Ownen.
'b .- ~_ ----.a .
.
.
~S.a.'
::c CUll ~ (!!tM~ c!y;1~ obar
tdClr.h~ %JJ.e ~ ~ kb.
w~ fcdJ~ rde ~etdT ~ed
~ eX ~/. 'Mt'Il Cl- ~ cy
3D d:fS; ~. t2/;~ cUt ~ ~ 3/
l3~s .. C/Ld tWdllr,(IJJf~~ ~cd~;e.
T-s ~ ~JK~~
c!:~-& 10 fr"-ef-/f, -/Iu:c ~:/
a<<~ ~ 11 iVdlt fke ~ ~ 7kL
~~~~/=:tl1if:~::
j-AtWft- y~ ~ ~~
~ ~;;::;:Z15 &OF
e rZ.
.
.
Mr. and Mrs. NICHOLAS C. FRITSCH
1310 Gulf Boulevard # 8 -0
Clearwater, FL 33767 -2860
(727) 595-6528
March 22, 2000
City of Clearwater
Mr. Gerald Figurski, Chair and Members of the Community Development Board
Dear Mr. Figurski, Gildersleeve, Johnson, Mazur Jr., Plisko and Ms. Peterson and
Moran,
On behalf of the 40 or so citizens who attended yesterday's Community
Development Board meeting and the dozens who wrote letters, I express our
sincerest appreciation for the quality of your process as a board and the good
thought that you apply to the agenda before you. While we may not all agree,
you provide an environment that is fair and respectful of all who come before
you. On your second anniversary, I offer our congratulations and the City
officials and its citizens can be very proud of you.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
~n~~ts~~
cf: Mike Roberto, City Manager
.
..,,-\"\.., ,\. -~.. ~.,
L .! I . . '" ..~, ..._.J
--' } ,----------,
.~ I I
'.J-' \ \ iifiAH 2 7 7000 .
: Ul J---/
I ffiitWijiN\il f4~~aeeOPMENT
I "SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
\
\. \
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater I 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Re: POLICY ISSUEI ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist.
Commercial. or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
Wc understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to represent individual condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
COrr!):.~te or iT'dividlHlI ipt~rests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of 75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to changc the rcntal period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achievc their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, plcasc dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Plcase amend the proposed Article 2 # 11 to EXEM PT SAN D KEY condominium dcvelopments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II. with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The C it)' of C lean-vater should not impvse n::iital period restrictions Oil Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower propcrty values of Sand Key condominiums. which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours:
1
(',P~O
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT# C Be. I IIf F
.
.~[Ett~~[E 0 I
U U . - i~ <UOO I
I
PI-^NNI,fj'~~~et\up~T
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWAT~R
"_'_-'_._-P_'_~_"_--'_"'--"'-'---- _... ~_.,~~..._,______.~J 'If
Community Development Board Members
Clo Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater !IOO S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Re: POLICY ISSUE! ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requested the Code
Revision. They do not have legal authority to re!,resent individua I condominium developments
on Sand Key. They are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to represent their
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit rentall lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key Condominiums are not in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium documents in Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I & II approval
of75% of the owners must be obtained. Numerous attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA members from these three condominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted outcome. Thus, they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
owner's collective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore, please dismiss their request
for the Code Revision.
Please amend the proposed Article 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
~
c..f(f.
r-
~
Hlol.../
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# I 0 0 s:
1310& 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Club Owner
UNIT#
.
~WV(& U-IS~
~ 13>;11 JOvtJ00-
Clearwater Development Code Update
What are open issues?
Recommendations
1. PODS:
a. Sec 3-2103(C)(2) allows a portable storage unit with limited signage for
96 hours. Simple understandable - we all now agree.
b. Sec 3-2103(B)(3) allows a portable storage unit related to construction.
This is a mess. Still many questions:
i. how should we treat residential differently than commercial?
ii. how long should we allow them during a lengthy period of
construction?
111. when does an active building permit end?
IV. Should this be limited to only certain kinds of permits (permit for a
new swimming pool do I get/need a POD)?
Staff says work on this some more in July.
c. RECOMMENDATION: First, delete Sec 3-2103(B)(3) from
consideration today. Second, if you think this needs more consideration
let the staff and the public work on this and come back in July.
2. Temporary Yard Signs
a. Current code allows commercial advertising signs in residential areas for
up to 90 days a year. Why do we need commercial signs in residential?
b. This area is dealing with political speech something that Belleair and
Clearwater both had problems with when challenged in court. Restricting
free speech is a high risk area. Best to get expert advice.
c. RECOMMENDATION: Add this subject to the agenda for the July
reVIew.
3. First Amendment Protection Language
a. Uncertain of status
b. RECOMMENDATION: Put on agenda for July review
4. Parking on Grass prohibition when suitable paved surfaces are available.
a. Support to do this tonight rather than waiting for separate first and second
reading on July 20 and Aug 3.
b. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt tonight.
5. Temporary Signs Sec 3-1805(C):
a. You are adding "grand opening" with the amendments tonight.
b. Recent feedback from Community Response Team indicates this section is
an enforcement problem.
c. RECOMMENDATION: Put on agenda for July review.
6. Wish you would reconsider: Telecommunication tower height and Transfer of
Development Rights.
.
June 1, 2000
Mayor Aungst
Vice Mayor Johnson
Commissioner Hart
Commissioner Hooper
Commissioner Clark
City of Clearwater, Florida
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed the proposed Ordinance addressing portable storage units and offer the following
suggestions and requests for your consideration.
Signs: The proposed Ordinance limits the signage on portable units to one sign no more than twelve
square feet in area. Other cities in the area require signs on the units facing the street. Since we cannot
detennine in advance which side of the unit will be facing the street we need to have signs on both sides.
We are attempting to minimize the impact of the signs by converting all of our units to smaller "flip down"
signs, however this is a major [mancial undertaking for us and we request that we be allowed to accomplish
this conversion over time. The size of the sign area once the sign is "flipped" is 12" by 18" compared with
4' by 10' for our standard sign today. Some of our existing signs can be "flipped" but not all. We will be
retrofitting our fleet with smaller pennanent signs of either 3 W by 8' (on our 16' unit) or 3' by 4' (on our
12' unit). These signs will be easier to flip to the smaller size for 10ng-tenn storage.
Time Limit: The proposed Ordinance provides a 96-hour limit for loading or unloading a unit. We feel 96
hours is a minimum amount of time as it gives homeowners a convenient amount of time to pack and load
their belongings while maintaining their busy work and family schedule.
Commercial Storage: There is not provision in the Ordinance, that we can see, for use of portable units
for 10nger-tenn storage in non-residential areas. We believe that this is an important addition to your
Ordinance as many portable units are currently in use.
Residential On-site Storage During Construction and Redecoration: We believe the proposed
Ordinance allows a unit to be located on a residential property during an active construction period with
when a building pennit has been issued. Many of our customers use PODS when they are increasing the
value of their property through redecoration. We ask that a provision be made to accommodate a
controlled period of time for this type of usage.
Thank you for your consideration and for the opportunity to present our concerns.
Sincerely,
(]1J~~
Peter S. Warhurst
President
PODS, Inc.
PODS, Inc.
6061 45th St. N.
St. Petersburg, FL 33714
www.putitinapod.com
PODse and PODSN are service and trademarks of PODS. Inc.
1.888.776.PODS (7637)
Fax: (727) 520.0830
.
fu&lV<'d oJ-
. J.JV\{. \ s-tIL (PW\VI-1.~;",
~
1
To
From
Re
Clearwater City Commission
James Rapp
Sign Code
I propose that the Commission alter the sign code as follows:
Section 3-1807
Subsection C
Item 4
Comprehensive sign program
Flexibility criteria
4. Total area of sign faces. The toal area of sign faces which are proposed as a
part of a comprehensive sign program shall not exceed two times the total
area of sign faces permitted under the minimum sign standards on the
parcel proposed for development.
Append the following to the last sentence
except as follows: The Community Development Board may at its sole
discretion allow architecturally pleasing and proportioned building signs
in excess of twice the permitted area for buildings with deep setbacks
provided the visual weight of the building sign is no greater than the
visual weight of a 24 square foot building sign at a minimum road setback
(measured from the road center median) and provided the sign is no more
than one square foot per lineal foot of building frontage.
Clearwater needs a mechanism to handle large buildings that are deeply set back
from the road. The above language gives an understandable, precise, .
enforceable and equitable approach to handling such requests while maintaining
the goals, spirit and integrity of the new building sign code.
As the code currently reads, large properties with deep setbacks have no means
to request a hearing for legible building signage. The above proposed language
would merely give large property developers, tenants and owners an
opportunity to be heard. This way the city can evaluate large suitors rather
than turn them all away before they knock on the door.
.
.
/
RICHARD E.
NICHOLS
ASSOCIATES, INC.
REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL AND CONSULTING
6B20 Ruckcr Road - Suitc D
Indianapolis, IN 46220-4898
(317) 257-6255
FAX (317) 252-5275
www.ridlardnicllols.cOlIl
March 11, 2000
Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. ,Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, FL 33756-5502
Dear Mr. Stone and Community Development Board Members,
This letter is in support of the Policy Issue/Article 2-Zoning Districts # 11, which would prohibit the renting
of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown Districts.
We are owners of Unit #402 in Lighthouse Towers. Prior to purchasing our unit last year we had rented
other units for 10 years, 8 years in the Lighthouse Towers building. We are familiar with the Sand Key
area.
Regardless of the current motivations of purchasers of units at Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach
Towers I and II, these buildings were not designed for transient use. There are many hotels on Clearwater
Beach and Sand Key which were, and these buildings can adequately accommodate the needs of short-term
renters.
Furthermore, because of the uniqueness and desirability of the Sand Key area and the popularity of these 3
buildings, it is unlikely that changing the rental policy to require a 30-day minimum would adversely affect
investor-owners.
There are many advantages to be gained by all of us who reside on Sand Key from changing the policy as
your Board has proposed and we support and applaud you in this effort.
----.
'1--0 R.
~ "I fh\ :it
\..'fV'1J ~ 210 0
Sinmely, , tJ:~~;; (~
'~J<< I ~ ~)H-r::' r~ U W ffI {f)1 J
! .,'~ ./1
PLAt"NtN------- / .,~ Ii
G&Of\;E~
SEF'V ,', LOPtv1[:NT I
_ C/'il 1 ICES I
~- ',,' /1'-,'1'\.'-41-'
'__,~__--' f:q
-.---.---.-......
~
.
.FIlE COpy
/
ORIGINAL
Donald R. Antonelli
1290 Gulf Boulevard. #208
Clearwater, Florida 33767 '
; :s ~ ~'~ 'i# ~--~,:: .
r"',' \ ,r -----,! .i
! l! ~
I i
U l". N4R 16am
I. 0'.
L_~ .,,"....,....,.,/
PLANNING & DEVElOt"-'-;\jT
I SERVICES
L_____ CITY nr (" ~ '\IlWA F q
~----
March 10, 2000
Community Development Board Members
C/O Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33576
Re: Proposal to amend definitions of overnight
accommodations and residential use in
Community Development Code
Dear Board Members:
I am a unit owner and full-time resident of Lighthouse Towers on Sand Key, and, for
some time, I have been distressed by the thought that I own an expensive unit in a condominium
building that may be classified by the City of Clearwater as a hotel as a result ofthe two week
minimum rental policy which we now have. Thus, I fully support the recommendation of the
Community Development Board to amend the definition of overnight accommodations and
residential use to set a minimum lease/rental period of thirty days.
I support this proposed amendment because it will bring our condominium into harmony
with the policies already in place in the other condominiums on Sand Key, all but two others of
which now require a minimum rental of thirty days or longer. I believe that this will also protect
the property values in our building by discouraging the pure investor and attracting permanent
residents who are willing to pay a fair market value for property and spend the money necessary
to properly maintain the property, because they do not have a bottom line to protect.
Furthermore, to require those unit owners who do not lease their units to bear the expense of
maintaining our building under hotel conditions simply to facilitate the businesses of a few non-
resident owners is patently unfair.
Only three of the more than twenty-five condominium associations on Sand Key
(Lighthouse Towers, Crescent Beach Club I and Crescent Beach Club II) permit rental ofless
than thirty days. Thus, the amendment to the code which is currently being considered by the
Board would affect only an extremely small minority ofthe buildings on Sand Key. A corollary to
this observation is that the vast majority of the condominiums on Sand Key already recognize the
desirability of limiting rentals to a minimum of thirty days, providing a clear directive to the Board
I
.
.
of the need to effect harmonization of the lease regulations in this residential area. The support for
the proposed amendment by the Sand Key Civic Association confirms this need to provide a
uniform rental policy on Sand Key.
Letters have been sent to the unit owners of Lighthouse towers by a few owners who
oppose the action which the Board proposes, urging all unit owners to write to you to voice
similar opposition. The Board may have received one or more of these letters, which contain
arguments that I believe are unsupported, fallacious and fraught with innuendos and inferences.!
would like to take this opportunity to respond to some of these arguments.
In a letter directed to the Board by Earl & Lynn Michaels (owners of unit 1202 in
Lighthouse towers), dated Feb. 24, 2000, it is argued:
"This modification, ifpassed would violate the covenants of the Declaration of
Condominium for Lighthouse Towers, as recorded in Official Records Book 5475,
page 189, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. Specifically the
proviso permitting a minimum rental of 14 days is in direct contrast to the
modification under consideration. Accordingly, we feel that the City should
exclude the Lighthouse Towers Condominium from consideration of this
modification. "
From this argument, it appears that Mr. Michaels is under the mistaken belief that the Community
Development Code of the City of Clearwater is subservient to the Articles of Condominium of all
condominiums in the City of Clearwater. It would be a sorry situation if the City of Clearwater
had to check the condominium documents of all condos in the City before they could enact any
laws or ordinances and be required to make exceptions in all cases of conflict. In fact, the general
purpose of the Community Development Code is just the opposite. I would direct Mr. Michaels
attention to Section 1-103, Paragraph E3, of the Code, which states the following general
purpose:
"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" (emphasis added).
There is no doubt that there is a conflict among the uses ofland and buildings on Sand Key in
respect to the minimum rental period of condominium units. What Mr. Michaels is asking the
Board to do is sanction and maintain that conflict in the face ofthe opposite requirement of the
Community Development Code itself.
In a Feb. 14,2000, letter from Mr. Lynn J. Nellenbach (non-resident owner of unit 1105 in
Lighthouse Towers} to the Clearwater Gazette & Beach News, it Wi 'r _
"At Lighthouse Towers the 'transient' issue caused by less t
2
\ i U
:;uUO
L
j
P~iNG & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
perceived and not supported by facts. During January and February 2000, only 2
of the 85 rented units are for less than 30 days. I assume the same is true of
Crescent Beach Club I & II." (Emphasis added)
First of all, the cited statistics relate only to a two month period, and those two months (January
and February), unlike the summer months, do not see many short term rentals, for the simple
reason that more people wanting long term rentals come to Florida in the Winter, and it is to the
advantage of the unit owner to lease for the longer period. However, to the extent that the
statistics offered by Mr. Nellenbach show that short term rentals are rare even in those buildings
that permit them, it becomes clear that the change in the minimum rental period as proposed by
the Board would impose little or no inconvenience on present unit owners. It should be
remembered that the purpose of the Community Development Code is not to protect the financial
interests of a few unit owners, but to "establish permitted uses corresponding with the purpose
and character of the respective zoning districts and limit uses within each district to those uses
specifically authorized". (Sec. 1-103, Paragraph E9)
In the same letter to the Clearwater Gazette & Beach News, Mr. Nellenbach argues:
"The Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) and its members were not elected and
do not have legal authority to represent individual owners or condominium
associations on the proposed code revision."
However, the proposed code revision is not directed to individual unit owners or individual
condominium associations, but is directed to the residential district of Sand Key as a whole, and
its purpose is to harmonize the rental policies in the entire residential district. In supporting the
pending proposal ofthe Board, the Sand Key Civic Association is expressing the opinion ofthe
majority of the condominium associations on Sand Key. In this regard, all condominium
associations on Sand Key are members of SKCA.
In the letters you have received which oppose the action proposed by the Board on this
issue, you are hearing from a small minority of unit owners from only three buildings on Sand
Key. Since the general purpose of the Community Development Code is to serve the interests of
the community as a whole, I suggest that the objections raised by a few unit owners for reasons of
personal gain should not deter the Board from appropriately amending the definition related to
rental property as presently proposed.
Sincerely Yours~..
~u
,
i
Donald R, Antonelli
[E(Ct~%7LE ri
+ ~ t
:1 .,lmIl
3
~E&IITEVELCJi't'.\'l:NT
$IDICESc
CCf'P(CIDf cn,r::f\p\WMIER
.
.
February 18,2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Fr: Concerned Sand Key Owners
Cc: Ralph Stone
Re: Revised Code, Revision Schedule
Sand Key
Dear Board Members,
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However, without the support of the Community Development Board and their
revision of current code, the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead, we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents, they just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
and condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
vote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simpie act on your part
will dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
vote is appreciated.
Sincerely,
ConcArm~d Sand KAv OWnAr!;
~ - - - - - - - - - -- - --- - -- - - -.I - - - - - - - -
a.1 ^ lUll::
.~r'\'.IL..
^nnDC~~
1"''''"' IJ I '.I~.vv
.
.
February 18.2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Fr: Concerned Sand Key Owners
l.c: Ralph Stone
H". RAvlMd Cod... RAvlAlon SchadulA
Sana Key
Dear Board Members.
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear dlsUnctlon between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condomimums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However. without the support of the Community Development Board and their
revision of current code. the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead, we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents. they just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Oaytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
:1nd condominiums are not.
'Ne trust that this letter WIll serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
'Iote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
\.~II dramatically improve the quality at life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
'.:ryte is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Concerned Sand Key OWners
,
1.)
./
NAME ADDRESS
13rO ~
~.'
. .,
~.~. '.- .-;;.-.,:;....:;..: [f~-.-, -;.;....
",_:;",..,~: ............"".~.:....,.. :i.;:::-:.'u ~;;.- ..!,'.
. ~ /1
.
.
February 18.2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater. Florida
Fr: Concerned Sand Key Owners
l.c: Ralph Stone
I~.... RAvlMd Cod... RAvlAlon SchadulA
Sand Key
Dear Board Members.
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmosoheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residentia~ community living.
However. without the support of the Community Development Board and their
revision of current code. the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead. we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although 'lie appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents. ~hey just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. 'Ne do not want the distinction of being
the "Oaytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
Clnd condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
lJote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
'viII dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
':ote is appreciated.
Sincarely,
Concerned Sand Key Owners
NAME
ADDRESS
\ oj
'77G7
,.
/3/0 4uotL$4.-J- ~/S'r f7b-lf.u._ ~I~- ?/
l' ., If
~
. ,- .. -,
......"";- .,..;.~-;..:(f~-.. I :.;.. ~
.,-:;..~'.&'\. .....~......-.\.~.;". ",. ._t..:.~-:-: -- ~-:- J.',
" ,
.H- C J(
.
.
February 18.2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Fr: Concerned Sand Key OwntIrs
l.c: Ralph Stone
r ~". RAvlMd Cod.., RAvlAlon SchadulA
Sand Key
Dear Board Members.
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condomimums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However. without the support of the Community Development Board and their
revIsion of current code. the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead. we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents. they just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
:1nd condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
lJote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
'.~II dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
':ote is appreciated.
Sincarely I
Concerned Sand Key Owners
I)
(".
'-t /
. "
........- "....;;,-.,;:.-;..:cf,,-.-, :- _
.._jt'Wl....~: ........_......-:<.:.. 'or "..:i..:~.~.. -. ~';'- ..!.".
-- .j,
.
.
February 18.2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Fr: Concerned Sand Key Owners
l.c: Ralph Stone
r ~f" RAVIIl@d Cod... R~wlAlon SchadulA
Sand Key
Dear Board Members,
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condomIniums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However. without the support of the Community Development Board and their
revision of current code. the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead. we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature at the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents. they just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach. of Sand Key. \Ne want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
clnd condominiums are not.
'Ne trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
lJote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
'.v~11 dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
':ote is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Concerned Sand Key OWners
NAME
ADDRESS
! \
_ i'1)
. ,. ... ~.,.
.. &.- ."';'- ~.-.,;;.-;;:.: rr~-.' , .;~ ".
....:r.""...~: v.~~'""~'.;'..... :,L:;~::-:'''' .';'- ..1,',
" I
p:. 5'" ~(
.
.
February 18,2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Fr: Concerned Sand Key awners
l,c: Ralph Stone
I~~' RAVIRed Cod... RAVIAlon SchadulA
Sand Key
Dear Board Members.
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between resldenttat and hotel resort atmoscneres on
Sand Key. The fa~ is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residentia1 community living.
However. without the support of the Community Development Soard and their
revision of current cede. the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same Quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead. we will
be farced to endure the noise and transient nature of the h~t environment.
Although we appreciate the c::mcsms of real estate rental agents. :hey just don't
have our community's best imerests at heart. We do not want tt1e distinc1ion of being
the "Oaytona Beach~ of Sand Key. \Ne want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
:]nd condominiums are not.
'Ne trust that this letter wiil serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
'Jote :n favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on 'four part
'\fill dramatically improve the quality at life for Sand Key condominium reSIdents. Your
. :0te is appreciated.
Sinc8rely t
Concerned Sand Key Owners
ADDRESS
f .~ / J 6~~{/1
F
.. '" .....
~,._."_ ,....;.~~:.f~-.~, ,:~
.;..J.i.....'-r. "~~~"""~.:'...,. ....L:~.:-:.- .':'- ...t",
.
.
February 18,2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Fr: Concerned Sand Key Owners
l.c: Ralph Stone
r ~p' RAvlRed Cod.., RAvlAlon SchadulA
Sand Key
Dear Board Members.
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However. without the support of the Community Development Board and their
revision of current code. the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead. we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents, they just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
and condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
vote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
"^I111 dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
'.:ote is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Concerned Sand Key OWners
NAME.
ADDRESS
.,
..... -.....
,,-~.4"_ ~'~"";:'-";":(f~.'; .:~
.-i..:;,..{,.:"\: ;.......,.""',.~.,;". -"':..j):~~"" ...,;.,.... 2,',
I I
:ffl1oo ~
.
.
February 18,2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
F r: Concerned Sand Key Owners
Cc: Ralph Stone
n".- nl"!vi~pc1 r.orll"!. Rl"!vir.ion ~kh~rtllll"!
Sand Key
Dear Boarrl Members,
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
Ilnw.,vo'. wlthuUllh" nll!'"O' I or Illn Con 1I11U1.ily LtC'lVnlopll.t'llll nortl1l "lid 'hr.i1
revision of current code. the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead. we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents, they just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
and condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
vote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
will dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
vote is appreciated.
Sincerely.
Concerned Sand Key Owners
NAME
ADDRESS
v
, ( I I
I I
d .,~. "..r-,',,;':. *~": fr.;> ~ .;.,~- -,'
..,i,;;'Vf;.t,t,~, 'to".,.' "'~~"~"~_ .'l";t-:-~;:r..' :'" }.,r. 0-:1",
j' j
.
.
r f'tll"~IY 1 n./ooo
I rll Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, r Imida
I r Concerned Sand Key Owners
Cr' Rnlph Stone
p...., n~vir.ed Code, Hovlr.ion Schedule
SC1nd Key
I )l'~r Bmmi M~mb~rs,
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
e~tatllishing a clear dlstfnctlon between residential and hotel resort atmosphems on
~-~~Hld Key. , he fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiurn~ r:urrently
01 ,joy the many benefits of residential community living.
tlowcvCl. wittlQut the support of the Community Development BQmtl and their
I pvisvm of ClIrlellt code, the remaining 3 condominium properties will nevr;I enjoy the
~~mlP quality ~t~ndards associated with quite residential communities. Ins'~ad. we will
I,n fnrcf'd to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environrm:'Ilt
^'1hough we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents. they just don't
11;Wf) our cornrnunity's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinctioJl of bning
'hr> "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotel~ am hotels
;-,n(f comh)tn;"ium~ ~r(illl not.
We hust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for U,[':;
\/ole in fAvor of changing the code to a one..month status. This simple act on your part
'Nill dmmatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium reskfpJlls. YOIlI
vot'? IS ~ppreociated.
<: il H 'PI ely.
(,f"'H~~n,qd S,;md Key Own.,m
NAME ADDRESS
.!j!~i~<f_~7"CZ~~-"~;:~
~ c ~> =-...c__' '. ( r--/-t <:y', G- [, - -'-1>L, \,,1 "cu
/'h. .2<-." ,.4~~"Jlf:<:-l;.'-A-l7f?i~'---75t,-6--t:-~V' -ff}-~\7//aJj . i~~ /
'7 (t., . I ..... i --.--. 11-.,-_.. - .----- ___.n_.~_.. ;r.;z ".-/ -uft?IR.... D2.
t. ,.. .. " /CTv'"
" /~P~~~.----- ~~___li..-1~. A.....~~t. .... ~#~-(]/
/,~~~~ 'A_/~~~_~~ //?~,,~d6f;~~iJ-H' .!/J!jl~
[l~~. USA Ii C. ---T 0 &OL{:'-- L'j' -D - --
. I ,,'L..u_. .. .. ._.),j..______BvQ__._lb._3
. -, ~ ,,' ~: 7".:: C ~ ~_ 1, :.
c" TOW'" . ,";,,-~-, . ;:_' : d" .i~ \ :
..& ... ~
"I. ," f't ,t, I 1, ,"
'I ." tT " I '"
, I
.
.
I ('hru9ry 16, 2000
To:
Community Development Board
City ofClc,arwnter. Florida
Fr:
Concerned Sand Key Owners
(L J \{!a.!l_~ C; +~..{l
Revised Code, Revision Schedule
Sand Key
He:
f '('~r Board Members,
\'1./ e repllo'Sp.nl a group of concerned owners who support the need for esfllhli<;hing II clCllt
distinction ht>(wccn re;idential and hotelll.':Sort atmospheres on Sand Key. The fact i~ thAt 22 of
.2 5 exi'lting Sllnd Key condominiums currently enjoy the many benefits of re;identilll community
Iii vinv,
However, ~itt~out the support of the Community Development Board and their revision
cf current code, the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the same quality
~t~nd!-!rds ~ssociated with quiet residential communities. Instead.. we will be forced to cndl1re the
noi<;c and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appTedllte th(~ concerns of real estate rental agents, they just doo't have Qur
l.:oH1I'mnily's hest intcrcsL'i at heart. We do not want the distinction of belnp, the "Day~ma
Hench" of S'lnd Key. We want uniformity on S:lfld Key. Hotels are hotels and condnminiljrns
t1!t:~ npt ~, /
We trust tlll'll this letter will serve liS (1m appeal to every Board Member for tln'if vote in
(:eniOf of cl!!1nging the code to a om>:. month sllltllS. This simple act on your part will drl!malically
improve the qUlllity of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your v9te is appreeinled.
v /
~~l'!f~crely.,
~j)"~rJ'f'<< Slu,d Key Ownenl .
I ~~~__i4t~~~_~L" J_$-lHo;;L
J<lftt:;iJJlltJdM__~_._~_~qD _&u.kf It/!) ~l:Jf J~~ttft;;( PL
.{itiEtt-1W 7J)1%I1fjfG5tiz~f~ ;7~O~
jJ~ (1, J~___ L0L)J.Af jJj;;,.~'J/ltf_..
~~1tt1j ikK&- ?;_~ti:b'_~~~~j; :Oo~
!d-bfd'}1r-$. /v{eJJ~~~~_jtLrr~ ~WIIO?-'
, 7h~ t!~r/{_n ~ / U L I"Z ~ () . ~~ l-(11-~ ~__-'z_9"
/l;fhtfZ1!Er~_~'q~-'!..~--~~--j~j.P--~ (1 ,!:j~ kYb ----I.to 3
. .,,~. ,. r ''f:~' :~'.; ~f .,:~ ~ :
'ri ~:n'-.t"'- 'i.'II!!- ",~~_" .,.', :~\'
";.... ,'I
.
.
February'18,2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
rr: Concerned Sand Key Owners
Cc: Ralph Stone
He: Revised Code, Revision Schedule
Sand Key
Dear Board Members,
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
Pr'ljQV the many benefrts of residential community living.
However. withQut the support of the Community Development Board and their
Ii'vlsion of current code. the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead, we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents, th19Y just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hCitels
and condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
vote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This sjmple act on your part
will dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
vote is appreciated.
(V I
,,)InCere y,
Concerned Sand Key Owners
ADDRESS
...~ :I~~~ y..F,.....;:. ~": ef.~', .:.,' "
Q,.iriw.,r:"':, '#>"~'-1-.~ "~'~' "t '~~'\~:.C_'~' . H ::~ 1:
! I
.
.
February 18,2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
F r: Concerned Sand Key Owners
Cc: Ralph Stone
He: Revised Code, Rnvlsion Schedule
Sand Key
Dear Board Memben:;,
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However. wltbm.l1 the support of the Community Development Board and their
revision of current code, the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead, we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents, they just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want unifonnity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
and condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Membelfor their
vote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
will dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
vote is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Concerned Sand Key Owners
... ;" ,-.. or'.~-' '.~ ,.,;:, ..+J'.: ~ f ,,;~ 1. :.- .
IIfj,:;.it';:,t,"': "'''o("-l'~;~\.<,'.J ':'_i~<::- . - ;.~. ,F
, I
.
.
February 18,2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Fr: Concerned Sand Key Owners
Cc: Ralph Stone
Re: Revised Code, Revision Schedule
Sand Key
Dear Board Members.
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However, without the support of the Community Development Board and their
revision of current code, the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead, we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents, they just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beachn of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
and condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
vote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
will dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
vote is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Concerned Sand Key Owners
ADDRESS
.
.
f f'I)fIl~~lyll3.;;fJOO
I I) Cornrmmity Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
I r. Concerned Sand Key Owners
('f~ Hnlph Stone
I I" Hf"vir,f\d Cod~. HilVIr.iol! Scho{fulo
S::lno .{ay
1 \rV'~, Oomd Mf'1l1bers,
We Iq)l(;sent a group of concerned owners who support the need fm
D~t::'blishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmosrhercq on
~;::tnd Key. I he fact is that 22 of the 25 exi~,ting Sand Key condominiums currently
"Iljoy the many benefrts of residential community living.
I Inwover, withQut the support of the Community Development Boord ()nd t.heir
I! 'vir:llm of current code. the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy UW
(~;HW' qU8lity ~t~Uldards associated with quite residential communities. InstemJ, we will
! ,p fn'r:~d to endure the noise and tr;:m!.ient nature of the hot.el environment.
Altholl9h we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents, tl1f1vjust don't .
t I;WH r" If community's best interf~sts at heart. We do not want the distindiml of heinp
lit"? "f)nyfonn Bench" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hott;:>lc; are hotels
~! 1(1 condorniniums are not.
Vve IrUgt that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member (or their
"('.0 in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
vvill dmmalically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium res:d~rlts. Yom
'mle IS ~ppreci(,lted.
~.~ I' lCPl ely,
Cnncoprn@d Stlnd Key Ownem
.-'-:
.'
NAME
ADDRESS
_ iJ1-!'~ /d2fD~~;~ff /9'/
~UL~ ~p ~~... ~ J i6~~ ~..___.~d:'~_'__-:-f:ij:..P-!;;;; ~'6~ n
~. ...~ r;;r<Jl~... ~~---..~..;;...:__.~-. 14F~-h'~&-~~l{o
L~.~v:s.t}._..... lLJ... .. ~~~., a 06
I ,'. ' (' _ ! r 0 /' .. . .. I')! I "'-I ',' ," ./
~I LA..! . J.--U..,/!'. .. '..- . '. <<. (v. ,- v... L 1;> ~7V~.., ". ~ "., ,
.... ...... .. .... ~/~r~.. ~_,/Pt:'J~
f..J. COI'\, II IE (I 1/
.:- ...' ~ l' ," ~;. \
.. ~::-.,. {' ..:~'~':rf,~; \ ,.;-
"t ,: 1'11'- . -i \'.,
.
.
February 18,2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Fr: Concerned Sand Key Owners
Cc: Ralph Stone
He: Revised Code, Revision Schedule
Sand Key
Dear Board Members,
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However, w.ithout the support of the Community Development Board and their
revision of current code, the remaining ~minium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead, we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents, they just don't
h~ve our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key, Hotels are hotels
and condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
vote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
will dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
vote is appreciated.
NAME
~4j-j&:tO~4-d
1 ~ 7 0 ~~/~ tdI~
~g-~
ADDRESS {Qf~(. ~ f 7' b 7
Sincerely,
Concerned Sand Key Owners
~ !Oc~.' ,~\ ~"
~,v'> \~. o('\E '. i" .~'
__._____.~_,._.,_ __-::_.~__._..__........:..-.1.__._~____~__..__.._~_
. l k () """...s {r'\ Cl d.~""", 'f:L (, 0 \
-...~I'1-) (',..k~.,--/-:_.________fS:~~.~.
.._. ..\~.6.'~""" ~~_... .____..___.__..__~<~~-,
, ',' . '2D ~
~::yJ.;/~---~-;-.~-~~~,\ ,/f ". (---:;l-,__~ (.'r' -
~ . .
---.-.------..----------
-.__.___.__,_:L~:_ _.,' .' q ;:/ (
-- il~~
:~"~rlr
II Ejr! J3 5t-j~1r q5;( 'L) c;: ~ l~ I
...~,... ,,-- l",':!,,!,.,,-,..t -"'1\" t.f.~} ,~1 ..c , r \
-z,<E~t&.)) .
v ~r~
/001
~/
WI
\ lj, (~'f~~~~:"~' 1;",1(' '1' '" >.J.... .'7~;(;":_~':~'~
- ~," g',
7 ij~
....
.
.
February 18,2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Fr: Concerned Sand Key Owners
Cc: Ralph Stone
Re: Revised Code, Revision Schedule
Sand Key
Dear Board Members,
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However, without the support of the Community Development Board and their
revision of current code, the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead, we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents, they just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
and condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
vote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
will dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
vote is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Concerned Sand Key Owners
ADDRESS
~
~-Avp ~i.(
II
#-70Z
?7
\41 lJl'-4/ . ;
I ,-:\i ) I vFI. 3376 7
), 13'- ",, ,l. Ffr/ I d 7 ~"l" "'- d~r .> "3.3 -., (j, ("
.A2,-,-,~ ~ \ ;71 ~ ~tJ.-u...>~:'3:z" 7 f..., (
.
.
FebnJary 18,2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
F r: Concerned Sand Key Owners
c~. Ralph Stone
He: Revised Code, R~vl5ion Schodule
Sand Key
Dear BORrd Members,
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However, wRl1ou1 the support of the Community Development Board and their
revision of current code, the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
SHme quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead, 'th'e will
be fon"..ed to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents, they just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. "'Ie want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are holels
?nd condominiums are not.
VVe trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Me'nber for their
vote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple ~ct ;;n '1CUi' jxut
will dram.'ltically impro'.'6 the quaiity of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
vote is apprecioted.
Sincerely,
Concerned Sand Key Owners
" " e" ;,..,.~ ... ';:': -ir'';""' -=-tII'.; t ~ ~ - :..
.,~'';' 1;\""": i.-.... ''f ";,
',J . -. ;.~. it:.
~
.
.
.
~
.
.
February 18,2000
To'
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Concerned Sand Key Owners
Ralph Stone
Revised Code, R~vision Schedule
Sand Key
Fr:
Cc:
He:
Dear Board Members,
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However, wjlb..o.ul the support of the Community Development Board and their
revir.ion of current code, the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead, we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concerns of real estate rental agents, they just don't
h;we our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. We \lvant uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
and condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for lheir
vote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
will dramatically improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
vote is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Concerned Sand Key Owners
NAME ADDRESS
iJ 0 ,ll ~ dtJ. if Q #/1--- /1/1
~j ll' t2'!~}JLk.vv Ic??/) ~ ~- #SOo ~~-I d~___'"
- --------- ----------------------~---------------- -------~- .",,,--- --------------------...----------------------
/V)t t- M rs -- W'i1I'~rYI L.rJ/'1e./{o JJ.-~&lJ!'~.j:J/v'J, iF/tf..!!J_________d .'_________
I [j',9 L (<:f. L~ V[<<-:::.------1-~4:.~!--tif;;;.!i J <;J r/- / ,;h?.J::::..______________.______
__~. _ r 1___~----j--<:J0-...if..(..'('.:- ~(/C1 t:fr//o 7 -- ------------7---
- _ _ l - L" ~ .lJ.uJzLI}j 271 L. I' /
-(1oe~t:~ T 6, <'--- JtA) A ~ --l~~- G-Ul.-l~ rf[vtc;'~ ------.-------------..
---~--__;_.-+fJ7------------ -- m - - - --- -~------ -----.--~-----Qd~-----------. -
R<:Lrn~L S_L_Q\QJ1___________I~(to G ur...r-- P:; Iv ()_~3
....~.~.,-.~. 'r-.r''':~''::--JIi'':tf.;;'~':'
"l,;~..~:,t~'": i-,~.-~';" ,"', ,t"' "'~',.' ~7
.
.
February 18,2000
To: Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Fr: Concerned Sand Key Owners
Cc: Ralph Stone
Re: Revised Code, Revision Schedule
Sand Key
Dear Board Members,
We represent a group of concerned owners who support the need for
establishing a clear distinction between residential and hotel resort atmospheres on
Sand Key. The fact is that 22 of the 25 existing Sand Key condominiums currently
enjoy the many benefits of residential community living.
However, witba.u.t the support of the Community Development Board and their
revision of current code, the remaining 3 condominium properties will never enjoy the
same quality standards associated with quite residential communities. Instead, we will
be forced to endure the noise and transient nature of the hotel environment.
Although we appreciate the concarns of real estate rental agents, they just don't
have our community's best interests at heart. We do not want the distinction of being
the "Daytona Beach" of Sand Key. We want uniformity on Sand Key. Hotels are hotels
and condominiums are not.
We trust that this letter will serve as our appeal to every Board Member for their
vote in favor of changing the code to a one-month status. This simple act on your part
will dramatiCt'1l1y improve the quality of life for Sand Key condominium residents. Your
vote is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Concerned Sand Key Owners
NAME
ADDRESS
1 1 "n
........ ;~~- r';:I~;~' ...;~..: ,f.~: .; .;,; .
,.j..:;'.rrr,t~. 'I>..I('."f''';''''':<O, .., ~::~(T' ~ ~ ,;.' ~;"
I- i
.
.
March 8, 2000
Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Fl. 33756-5502
Dear Mr. Stone,
Being a resident of Lighthouse Towers since 1983, it is indeed welcome that the attempt
to curtail the destructive effect of 2 week renters on our building, in fact, in larger part,
the whole of Sand Key, is long overdue.
An example: A person rented an apartment for 2 weeks - within that period there were
anywhere from 6 to 10 "friends" residing there. I was told that one so called friend
complained about the exorbitant sum he paid for sleeping on the floor and that another
paid for a two-hour romantic liaison with a girl friend.
During the summer and spring, when rentals are least expensive, the 2-week renters
really run amok. The resultant effect can be seen in littering on the beach and Gulf
Boulevard - empty bottles, cans, etc.,etc.
There is a small but extremely aggressive group using unsavory tactics to perpetuate this
manner of earning a higher return on their investments. The rumor goes, ''These are the
Slum Lords of Sand Key."
Please change the code to minimum one-month rental.
~~~
Bernice Silver and Melvin Silver
1290 Gulf Blvd. Unit 608
.
.
RICHARD E.
NICHOLS
ASSOCIATES, INC.
REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL AND CONSULTING
6320 Rucker Road - Suite D
Indiana,polis, IN 46220-4898
(317) 257-6255
FAX (317) 252-5275
www.richardnichols.com
March 11, 2000
Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, FL 33756-5502
Dear Mr. Stone and Community Development Board Members,
This letter is in support of the Policy Issue/Article 2-Zoning Districts # 11, which would prohibit the renting
of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist, Commercial, or Downtown Districts.
We are owners of Unit #402 in Lighthouse Towers. Prior to purchasing our unit last year we had rented
other units for 10 years, 8 years in the Lighthouse Towers building. We are familiar with the Sand Key
area.
Regardless of the current motivations of purchasers of units at Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach
Towers I and II, these buildings were not designed for transient use. There are many hotels on Clearwater
Beach and Sand Key which were, and these buildings can adequately accommodate the needs of short-tenn
renters.
Furtbennore, because of the uniqueness and desirability of the Sand Key area and the popularity of these 3
buildings, it is unlikely that changing the rental policy to require a 30-day minimum would adversely affect
investor -owners.
There are many advantages to be gained by all of us who reside on Sand Key from changing the policy as
your Board has proposed and we support and applaud you in this effort.
Sincerely,
~~I t ~
Richard E, Nichols
.
.
Ella Kedan
2354 Haddon Hall Place
Clearwater, FL 33746
February 26,2000
Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33756-5502
Dear Mr. Stone:
I am the owner of3 units in the Crescent Beach Condo (CBI unit 19-E, CBII unit 16-A
and 3-D) and of2 units in the LightHouse Towers (17Q,2 and 170810y.Sand Ke~ ~ '\ /U.P
l Sl1J.. I f/D7 C~1.Jk--f ~ 'j '\r
I wish to express my utmost support to the Community Development Board to prohibit
rental in these two condos for less than 30 days. I know that this rental period restriction
is in fact the strong desire of the majority of the owners of these two condos. It is
unfortunate that because it requires a vote of75% of the total owners to change the condo
By-Laws, the rent period restriction has not been yet adopted. Using this factor has
allowed a small group of only a few owners to succeed in imposing their will on the
majority of these two condos. Consequently these two condos, the only ones on Sand
Key, sutTer the abuse of wear and tear, serving as hotels with high turnover and high
traffic, disturbing the comfort and the privacy of the majority of the owners who
purchased their units with intention to have a family oriented environment.
In respect to the other owners and their desires, I rent all of my five units for long term
periods to family oriented tenants, I believe that Sand Key was designed and approved
for a high quality residential community and not as a commercial tourist community with
high traffic and hotel like environment.
I wish to support your etTort in helping these two condos to implement the desire of the
majority of their owners in limiting the rental period to 30 days minimum.
Sincerely yours,
~~
Ella Kedan
Cc: Joe Calio, President Sand Key Civic Association
. 0\
~c*'
~O~
/
.
.
1290 Gulf Blvd., #901
Clearwater FL 33767
February 22, 2000
Mr. Ralph Stone, Dir. of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Ave
Clearwater FL 33756-5502
Dear Mr. Stone:
We are owners at Lighthouse Towers on Sand Key . We would like to add our 2 cents to
the pending controversy over your proposed code changes. We understand the intent is
to reclassify property in residential areas so as to force a minimum rental period of 30
days for those facilities which choose not to meet transient code requirements.
My wife and I own two condos in LHT... .one for seasonal personal use and one for
rental and family use. So we can see both sides of the issue.
We wholeheartedly support the code change as a matter of public safety. In addition, we
purchased here partly because of the tight zoning and quality of environment on Sand
Key. It is indeed, an exceptional area. Lets keep it that way.
We urge you to stress this in the debate that is ongoing. Folks staying for short periods
do not familiarize themselves with various aspects of safety for staying in a high-rise nor
in a hurricane area.
While I do not believe it should matter in your deliberations, I would also address the
various votes against document changes that have been taken in recent years. Yes, the
issues failed. However, if all of the owners had voted, the result might have been
different. Seems the last vote here at LHT failed by only a few votes and some 40
owners didn't even vote!
We urge you to do what's best for public safety.
Respectfully,
Frank and Karen SenseI
.
.
To:
From:
Subject:
RON CARAMAGNO
fsi>>...
JJ;4~~ -
~~a"'/~~ /CW:,,, ~;td,
~,-;t; tA./~ ;-fv- /J~"-'-'~--'-
~ ~~. 0')-. ~~' ;7Qy ~~ /y_~ 36
. ---L' J? //-
~. cYu/-Vt- CL-- !~#k-L~....:. c:hj~{...::::r ~~~~ /C7-<--<:-_L
U-.tZd.L'''''23 ~J,L. t'.':"-<L~:J:' .Li'~. 11.7
t2-u -c.&. ~.. h,j ~~ -d,r r~r
;;;:tot~~:;;-=:~~ ~::. '
/~ ~ ~ Ik:-~ ~ /Le.~:Z
p- A4J~ ~- .'d?J-~2~~ pfW..
~~ .~~iA-~_ 0~~-::cL. L~-
{::'~. /~ '7k~ "L.-L=- /k~~~cL~__~c-
C~/~ ('_C'L-~I c1-..L -t~ ~ '
~~ Cf>-- 2c- -t-i-.z- 67~~. ~#..--L ;;;C~
~~ ~~ p-<-<.:ro'p~r
/70 t- 71y-. -;C. e~~'--;rcr-'
dIf !,::I /i-c,~ ---z~ ,/
/. . . -rF- I ,""' v _ // .....;- r
1.-{.~- J U.j r7A:..-,~~---r[.,.
-- _~;>3 7;... l
.
~
"J
.
.
Mr. Edward L. Amsel
1310 Gulf Boulevard #19-D
Clearwater, Rorida 34630
"'" .t\(? (" \. \ "7 ,
"")...oco
(()V- CA.", -\. ~ \" - ~
a.. . ~ \) ...,,- ~ c1r') ~ "" \
"' _\ otJ, (? ~
C,\~ cr d",.~""^~a. /}(l
--. PAl \~ ~CI~ "C-
AU
~.<>Q ~ a As? ::J \..y. ~ -- r>~ ~
d (\ U i '" '\ ~ .,..... '" A ?2...-<:. , ;\.-~ "C
(' \-<M '-<JA \..v- LSA "\~ ~<",,- ')
~.,. L ,f)f,\ { ~ '-\.,,(,).(1 i i (.1", l
of
(h
l'~U\-\
\>",,/1 '>c> v-p-/ \ ".....~ "- 1'" ~
'----""'
\ v- ,A"Z \.. '" ~\ \..",p..... P'"~ \/\ ~
t,~\.~ 0"'- --vzrlf,<., If(Jj<;.=-
A v-'t- qu t" l- \ "- c.t:' L I h::;
L......,. CO",,"", I... \.7 \" lU Y \~
T\-= C:\tt ';, An:'- ""'~ \ ~ l'o
f) va--It. -7
----
. . .
.,_! I:
()~Ui~ \~"1:: - cc)d ~
(' v .(2.fJ~" \
To ~o ~~S
?)~~
rr \ \ c:'. --, ~
v, ....'-c~"r" \
(' \.:) '-""' ~ , \ <' I " \.0..
~
\u
fA \,)'yt?av-z::-
H 'T"~ J ,&:' ~
\k\s ~vC'~
c ~\~ ~'1 ~
~..< ~ '^"
C~J
. \ "C, A~ J~ l..,-
e: c c.......40-....J
... '..
.
,
f
.
~)JW~~~
..J
W.s>.. ~ ~'\- ~
~~~~~
~Jl:..J ~ A.u.sL ~ ~~
~ ~~~ ~1:.q.n.
./
~ cd ~ ~~ '^--
~ \'K\~ ~
~~~.~~"
Ov-.~ \o~~ ~ ~ ~ .
L~)
.
"
.
.
Q... ~ ~ 30 2\~ loJ1.
k~~i:tr~%
a.. ~ ~ ~ ~_
L().~ ~ ~ ~
~~~.
~~~~~~
~~(t~
~~~~
~ \~-l;
. I
.
~
~ ~;!-7- ;;;:9'3'- /~9:5/
.
.
1340 Gulf Blvd., Unit 5B
Clearwater, FL 33767
March 10,2000
City Manager Roberto
Clearwater, Florida
Subject: Support for the Revision in the City Land Use Code to Defme Transient as Less than
30 days
Dear Sir:
I am the owner of a condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater, and a registered voter.
I am in total support ofthe City of Clearwater's revision of the Land Use Code to define Transient
as Less than 30 Days.
This code revision truly reflects more than 80% of the property on Sand Key, which has a 90 day
minimwn rental period in their leases. Right now my condominium building has a 14 day
minimum rental period.
This 14 day minimum rental period substantially decreases the security of my condominium
building in comparison to the buildings that have 90 day minimum rental periods. The heavy
turnover in renters per unit in a 90 day period in our condominium building, (6 possible renters
in our condominium building as compared to 1 possible renter in all but two other condominium
buildings every 90 days), has resulted in many more keys not returned by renters to the real estate
agents or the owners in our condominium building as compared with all but two other
condominium buildings on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater. So security of my condominium
building will continue to be at risk as long as the 14 day minimum rental period remains in effect.
A 30 day minimum rental period will therefore cut in half the insecurity I am presently confronted
with.
~~ f'2J~
Beverly E. Davis t
.
.
1340 Gulf Blvd., Unit l7G
Clearwater, FL 33767
March 10, 2000
The Honorable Mayor Angst and Honorable City Commissioners: Johnson, Hooper, Clark and Hart
Clearwater, Florida
Subject: Support for the Revision in the City Land Use Code to Defme Transient as Less than
30 days
Dear Sir:
We are the owners ofa condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater, and registered voters.
Weare in total support of the City of Clearwater's revision of the Land Use Code to define Transient as Less
than 30 Days.
This code revision truly reflects more than 80% of the property on Sand Key, which has a 90 day minimum
rental period in their leases. Right now our condominium building has a 14 day minimum rental period, and
has serious problems as a result.
A majority of these owners who rent, live out of town and do not have to live with sometimes daily problems or
disrespect of condominum rules and regulations around poolside and elsewhere in common areas, such as
observed by us in the past ten years of: (1) slippery andlor sand covered floors in the lobbies and elevators
caused by some renters not observing rules and regulations when the weather is to their liking, (2) including
loud and other very unhealthy behavior around poolside as well; and when the weather is not to their liking, (3)
destruction of ceilings and defacement of walls and floors inside elevators, doors and door moldings into
common areas, and (4) even theft of common property such as lamps and small statues from the 1 st and 2nd
floor lobbies, which some 14 day or less renters impose on all of the non renting as well as renting owners in
our condominium building, because their stay is so short and for which they believe they paid for too dearly and
thus entities them to engage in such destructive behavior.
Our two condominium buildings 1310 and 1340 Gulf Blvd., are completing almost $3,000,0000 of restoration
and redecoration of the common areas. From our observations it is an established fact that the deterioration of
the common areas is most frequently the result of more than some abuse and destructive behavior of some of the
renters, especially the shorter tenn ones. The longer tenn renters have more respect for other peoples property.
An over 30 day minimum rental period can substantially increase the quality of potential renters, because the
longer the tenn of the rent, usually the more suitable persons are to living in hannony with the owners who do
not rent out their units in a high-density community environment. Destruction, theft and defacement will go
down substantially in all common areas of our condominium building, as the minimum daily rental period is
increased.
Sincerely yours
~.~~
~Eugene H. Koziara
~tt~~
Laura A. Koziara
.
.
March g. 2000
The Honorable City Commissioner Johnson
Clearwater. Florida, 33765
REGARDING: Revision of City Land Use Code
Dear Honorable City Commissioner Johnson,
As the owner of property located at Crescent Beach Club on Sand Key, I would
like to take this opporttmlty to give you my opinion of the Revision of City Land Use
Code pertaining to the lease options of short-term renters.
I take pride in the way my buildings and amenities are taken care of by the other
owners. You may say there is an 'wspoken" agreement that we have to keeping our
vacation/retirement homes in such beautiful condition.
Having short-term renters is very common and in some cases a major nescience to
owners. like me, who see on a regular basis the carelessness of those who do not own the
property where they stay.
Please take into consideration that a 30 or 90 day lease' to shon.term renters
would. very possibly, eliminate many concerns that property owners in the Clearwater
area may have to short-term renLerS.
Thank you for giving me this chance to tell you ho~ .
Sincerely, ( #~
t'~
Denise Athanasion
Crescent Beach Club I
1340 Gulf Blvd, Unit lS;(J
Clearwater, FL 33765
.
.
03.09.2000
FROM' RUDY & MADELIN SABEL OWNERS AT
CRESCENT BEACH CLUB L
TO: THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BOARD..
SUBJECT: SUPPORT FOR THE REVISION IN THE CITY LAND
USE CODE TO DEFINE TRANSIENT AS LESS
THAN ...30....DAYS.
A MAJORITY OF OWNERS WHO RENT LIVE OUT OF TOWN
AND DO NOT HA VE TO LIVE WITH SOMETIMES DAILY
PROBLEMS OF DISRESPECT, POOR BEHA VIOR,
DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY WHICH SOME RENTERS
IMPOSE ON OTHER RESIDENTS. OWNERS OF CONDOS
WHO LIVE OUT OF TOWN DO NOT VOTE IN CITY
ELECTIONS.
OUR TWO CONDOMINIUM BUILDINGS 1310 AND 1340
GULF BLVD.ARE COMPLETING ALMOST $ 3.000.000 OF
RESTORATION AND REDECORATION OF THE COMMON
AREAS. THE DETERIORATION OF THE COMMON AREAS IS
MOST FREQUENTLY THE RESULT OF SOME ABUSE AND
DESTRUCTIVE BEHA VIOR OF RENTERS AND GUESTS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
the sabels
\j,~~~
~ 5cJve~
.
.
March 13, 2000
THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
THE HONORABLE MAYOR ANGST AND HONORABLE CITY COMMISSONERS:
JOHNSON, HOOPER, CLARK AND HART AND CITY MANAGER ROBERTO.
SUBJECT: SUPPORT FOR THE REVISION IN THE CITY LAND USE
CODE TO DEFINE TRANSIENT AS LESS THAN 30 DAYS.
We are the owners of a condominum on Sand Key in the City
of Clearwater and a registered voter. We are in total
support of the City of Clearwater's revision in the Land
Use Code to define Transient as Less than 30 days.
Our Concerns:
A majority of owners who rent, live out of town and do not
have to live with sometimes daily problems of disrespect,
poor behavior, destruction of property which some renters
lmpose on other residents.
The longer term of the rent, usually the more suitable
persons are living in harmony in a highdensity community
environment.
Our two condominium buildings, 1310 and 1340 Gulf Blvd. are
completing almost $3,000,000 of restoration of the common
areas. The deterioration of the common areas is most
frequently the result of some abuse and destructive behavior
of renters and quests.
We do not believe that you would want these problems in
your homes when you have out of town guests or visitors.
Sincerely,
9Jnj" T~
~~::~. Northway
,____l~~ )h, tf~d
L ~
Tamara M. Vyskocil
Owners of 20-A 1340 GUlf Blvd. Clearwater, FLorida 33767
~_~~~anr Ro~~h On~
L.E. Lewis
1310 Gulf Blvd., 9-G
Clearwater, FL 33767
.
727-5.376
condo gulf @ aol.com
fax 727-596-7376
Mr. Ralph Stone & the
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Clearwater FL 33758
March 8, 2000
Re: Proposed change in the City Code to define "Transient of Hotel" occupancy to 30 days as
opposed to the present 14 days.
PLEASE VOTE IN FAVOR OF TIllS CHANGE.
We have been residents of 1310 Gulf Boulevard for the past ten years. It was purchased as a
private residence and has never been rented. We do not wish to experience short term rentals
and the problems associated with that.
This is one of the most beautiful residential areas in Clearwater and should not be adapted to
transient occupancies. There are plentiful hotels, motel, private rental offerings, etc. to
accommodate the visitors to our area. In our complex, we have taken substantial steps in
establishing suitable House Rules to insure a quiet, residential lifestyle. Please help us in that
effort by adapting the 30 day proposal. Short-term rentals do no belong within this
predominately residential complex.
This and one other condominium association are the only establishments on Sand Key with a
14 day rental minimum. Please help us preserve this beautiful island of quiet, residential
lifestyles, as you would so require, in any other residential neighborhood. Stop the potential
for commercialization of this unique area by amending the City code to provide for a
minimum rental occupancy of 30 days.
Respectfully submitted,
Leonard E. Lewis
L- -11 'l/, /,.l"L f'-Z ~. Iv
(c: ~
.
.
727-596-7376
condo gulf @ aol.com
fax 727-596-7376
, L.E. Lewis
1310 Gulf Blvd., 9-G
Clearwater, FL 33767
Mr. J. B. Johnson, Commissioner
City of Clearwater, Florida
P.O. Box 4748, City Hall
Clearwater, FL 33758
March 8, 2000
Re: Proposed change in the City Code to define "Transient or Hotel" occupancy to 30 days as
opposed to the present 14 days.
PLEASE VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS CHANGE.
We have been residents of 1310 Gulf Boulevard for the past ten years. It was purchased as a
private residence and has never been rented. We do not wish to experience short term
rentals and the problems associated with that.
This is one of the most beautiful residential areas in Clearwater and should not be adapted to
transient occupancies. There are plentiful hotels, motels, private rental offerings, etc to
accommodate the visitors to our area. In our complex, we have taken substantial steps in
establishing suitable House Rules to insure a quiet, residential lifestyle. Please help us in that
effort by adapting the 30 day proposal. Short term rentals do not belong within this
predominately residential complex
This and one other condominium association are the only establishments on Sand Key with a
14 day rental minimum. Please help us preserve this beautiful island of quiet, residential
lifestyles, as you would so require, in any other residential neighborhood. Stop the potential
for commercialization of this unique area by amending the City code to provide for a
minimum rental occupancy of 30 days.
Respectfully submitted,
Leonard E. Lewis
.
.
March 8, 2000
The Honorable City Commissioner Clark
Clearwater, Florida, 33765
SUBJECT: Revision of City Land Use Code
Dear Honorable City Commissioner Clark,
I am pleased to have the opportunity to address you regarding the Revision Land Use
Code currently under consideration by the City of Clearwater.
I believe it would be best to require shon-tenn renters to have at least a 30 day lease
when 'Vacationing in the Clearwater area.
I have a condo located at the Crescent Beach Club on Sand Key and love the fact that the
owners that are there a majority of the time keep our buildings and grounds in pristine
condition. When at the pool or the beach area owners and long-term renters always clean
up after themselves.
However, when 1 have had the opportunity to observe some short-term renters at the pool
or on the beach they seem to have no regard for the property around them.
As a property owner I would strongly recommend a 30 or 90 day lease for any short-term
renters.
Thank you for letting me give you my opinion on this very important matter.
Sincerely,
rf) d~~~
~
Delores Alfano
Crescent Beach Club I
1340 Gulf Blvd, Unit 7-A
Clearwater, FL 33765
,..JtIIIII1..
" .'
.
.
\r~~~ r
.'-, ""7\~
':V U
__u
~ f-v ~ - ~elmJary22' 2000
Mr. Bill Smith, Manager
Board of Directors
Crescent Beach Club
1340 Gulf Boulevard
Clearwater, FL 33767
Dear Mr. Smith,
We read with interest the January 21,2000 notice placed in the elevat~r regarding
minimum lease periods.
My husband and I spend approximately two (2) weeks out of every month at our
condo with the exception of June, July and August. As a result of the large amount of
time we spend there, we know with a strong degree of certainty who are the regular long-
term renters versus short-term renters. .As such, we have personally observed various
short-term renters and have witnessed first hand these same renters wrecking our building
and it's surrounding amenities.
They rip down notices in the elevators, throw open trash down the chute, leave the
grocery carts anywhere they choose, hold loud parties where security needs to be
summoned (at times more than once to the same party), jump in the pool and hot tub with
sand all over them, allow their loud, unattended children to run rampant, jump off the
furniture, climb onto anything possible and the list goes on.
Who pays for this? We all do as owners.
Who should pay for this? The investment owners, who are simply interested in
earning a buck with no regard to other people's property.
Is it fair the way it currently is regulated? No, not at all!
Solution: Change the by-laws to a minimum of 90 days for a rental, or !!..!h!
verv least 30 days.
,.
.
.
As Crescent Beach Club Buildings I and II conclude our expensive renovation
project, I can only hope the final vote will reflect a minimwn of 90 days for a rental.
Thank you for allowing us to express out thoughts. Please feel comfortable in
sharing this letter with any concerned party.
Sincerely, -A' 0 /J
~-bfJ~~
Sherry and Thomas Shumaker
Crescent Beach Club
1340 Gulf Blvd. Unit 11~
Clearwater, FL 33765
.
.
. .
~. ~ q ~t!Jf5'(.
~. ~ ~fk"J
iJc" ~ ~
c41 c.-~~~
...J.~ :; ~~. . ~ I
Jd~~'.~ ~~ I
~~~~
d2 . .~ 30 dtv~~
#- An_~~..~~~-g-&
~~~
.~ ~~~~~
~~J~/ituTl~
~~~~.~~.~
/3i~
/J/O&dl~ ~6-
-
-
March 8, 2000
The Honorable City Commissioner Jolmson
Clearwater, Florida. 33765
RE: Revision of City Land Use Code
Dear Honorable City Commissioner Johnson,
We strongLy support the City of Clearwater's revision in the Land Use Code to
define Transient as any period oftime less than 30 days.
My husband and I are owners of a condo located in Crescent Beach Club on Sand
Key. Having recently undergone a $3,000,000.00 restoration and redecoration of oW"
buildings. we wish to keep them beautiful.
Over the years we have personally witnessed the destruction of our properties by
short-tenn renters who simply do not care.
A 30 to 90 day minimum lease will assure a higher caliber renter who takes pride
in their SW'l'OWldings, thus lending itself to a higher property value.
Thank you fOT allowing us the opportunity to express our thoughts.
Sincerely,
~;1/~
Tom & sit/rry Shumaker
Crescent Beach Club I
1340 Gulf Blvd, Unit 11-B
Clearwater, FL 33765
.
.
Herbert W. and Mary A. McLachlan
1310 Gulf Blvd-IS G, Crescent Beach Club
Clearwater. Florida 33767
March 3, 2000
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Re: Revised Code-Definition of Overnight Accommodations
Dear Members of the CDB:
As members of our DCA Board, you are put in the middle of many difficult code matters; however, this
current controversy that is beginning to develop between real estate personnel and residents of Sand Key over
the proposed 30 day minimum rental period, should be an easier one for you and the DCA Board who
represent the vital interests of its property owners.
In October, 1998, we became proud Florida residents after owning our Crescent Beach condo since 1989. We
have never rented our unit as we have always felt that we live in one of the most beautiful residential areas of
Clearwater. Our area has 2 or 3 beautiful hotels/motels that serve the overnight accommodations for the many
tourists who visit Clearwater's Sand Key beaches. Our residential community should not be for transient
people, but for the true benefits of residential ownership.
We have tried several times to change our condo documents from the 14-day minimum rental provision to at
least a 30-day provision. We were unsuccessful by just 3 votes in the last election. We need a 75%
affirmative vote to make any such change and the realtors know that is just about impossible as a non-returned
ballot is a no vote. There are only 2 association's on Sand Key that have a 14 day minimum and a code
revision to 30 days would force all condos on Sand Key to have at least a 30 day minimum rental period.
I am requesting your support to protect the beauty, safety, and financial value of owners and residents on Sand
Key. The last 6 high-rise developments on Sand Key have a 90 day minimum and the 2 condos currently
planned for Clearwater's Beach will have at least 30 days as the realtors and developers know what is selling
the best.... as the new buyers want a residential like community. Buyers now realize the positive impact on
their investment and residential lifestyle if the development has a minimum rental of30 days.
As an owner, a full time resident, and a member of our Association Board of Directors, I can assure you that
we will definitely police ourselves with a new code revision. In addition, I am confident that our beaches on
Sand Key will be cleaner and the new vegetation recently planted on our restored beach with not be stomped
upon as is currently the case by "overnight type renters". In spite of what the realtors and absentee investors
say, our community could have less security, safer & healthier pool & spa water, minimal fire alarms, better
parking conditions for emergency vehicles, and safer and quieter living conditions.
I am positive that the investor's property values will go up and not down as they have previously stated. Also,
our motels and hotels can handle the tourism needs, as our residential community was never intended to satisfy
transient tourism short term needs.
Please use your position for the support and protection of Clearwater residential owners. Please support the
planned 30-day Revised Code provision. Thanks for listening. And, your vote is greatly appreciated.
Respe:::; ~~
.
.
March 8,2000
The Honorable City Commissioner Clark
Clearwater, Florida, 33765
RE: Revision of City Land Use Code
Dear Honorable City Commissioner Clark,
We strongly support the City of Clearwater's revision in the Land Use Code to
define Transient as any period oftime less than 30 days.
My husband and I are owners of a condo located in Crescent Beach Club on Sand
Key. Having recendy undergone a $3,000,000.00 restoration and redecoration of our
buildings, we wish to keep them beautiful.
Over the years we have personally witnessed the destruction of our properties by
short-term renters who simply do not care.
A 30 to 90 day minirnwlllease will assure a higher caliber renter who takes pride
in their surroundings, thus lending itself to a higher property value.
Thank you for allowing us the opporn.mity to express our thoughts.
Sincerely,
~,~a~
Tom & She~humaker
Crescent Beach Club I
1340 OulfBlvd, Unit 11-B
Clearwater, FL 33765
.
.
nllll. D'.I' SlID
crescent Beach Club I, 9-D
1340 Gulf Boulevard
Clearwater, Florida 33767-2811
Home Phone: 727.517.8217
Email: CTSmith111@aol.com
r~ l.~ ,'U)o C)
Mal=Cl1 QQ, 2000
Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Dear Sir:
Please ask your board members to HELP us!!
Transients visting the Clearwater Beach area belong in a hotel or motel, not in a residential
condominium facility.
Get the Lighthouse Towers and The Crescent Beach Club I and II at Sand Key out of the
hotel/motel business.
Redifine the city code by defining transient accommodations "at intervals of ninety (90) days of
less",
Watch the property values increase. Watch the tax revenue increase.
Don't worry. Investors of condominium units. who do not personally use their condominiums but
rent them to transients. are not residents or registered voters in Clearwater.
Respectfully requested.
Charles Thomas Smith
Phyllis A. Weaver-Smith
.
rv'ivian 13i{{ingS{ey.
131 0 ~ (.{
':J u:J 'Bou{evara, 4'B
C{earwater, 1L 33767
(813) 593 - 9697
~~ S"- 0 CJ
to ~ \.-
~
'-- .
~:s:... ~
~ <--c~~~v<--~....-:-.- Co/'- ~~
\~.. ~ .
,~ ~ ->---~ ~\
,A4~ u~~,.
<.:.H'
\
(\~ 1.. ~
'--' ~(...,~ .o..;.--\i::..........
0.....,
,\
~~ L~ --"-'-~ >si--'-- "-'<-." =-\
~
C" ~. '
____/ J. \. ~~._. ~~ -
..........-,q#"~
- -
. ..
/{0L'..<-A.-'C...A--"-'-' _,-./.- J...-<::)......,..;X .I..L--<J-J'.
..6 JJ1-<.--<---:L........ '5 (.) &~, C.y
~
./.~~-A-
~'-"-
~ _1. \'.
'=",^-,'~ '\
~~
/}"\"..Lr'--i'
~ ~L\ eXl .~
w"f-d~ ~ ~~
~~~.~
r~
-;~
\._~ 1.-
~l...:-</- 0--- --4--YV<--' ----~"--'
.-Y ~ )cc
,'\, ~ ~ "
)vv~.u....,~ ~L_"'U'o...-' c-v--d
\
:j
\J<<:-~~ -
\
r~~
, I
J
, ...
I I ..-/
VPF~
(i.Ll) ~1 9--"
\ J - l
.
.
MEMO
To: The Honorable Mayor Brian Aungst
Subject: SUPPORT FOR THE REVISIONIN THE CITY LAND USE CODE TO
DEFINE TRANSIENT AS LESS THAN THIRTY DAYS.
From: Mr. & Mrs. Frank Dusina, 1340 Gulf Blvd. Unit 18F, Clearwater, FI.
We are the owners of a condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater and a
registered voter. We are in total support of the City of Clearwater's revision in the Land
Use Code to define Transient as Less than Thirty days.
More than 60% of the leases in the last year of the three affected condominiums on Sand
Key had minimum rental periods of thirty days or more. Therefore, the impact of the
proposed code change will not affect the majority of owners that rent.
The longer the term of the rent, usually the more suitable persons are to live in harmony
in a high-density community environment.
Thirty to ninety day minimum leases define more exclusive properties than short-term
rental units. This leads to higher market and property valuations.
Increasing minimum rental periods has been the trend on Sand Key. Most recently 1520
and 1540, Ultimar I and I1, voted to increase their minimum rental period from thirty to
ninety days.
Thank you very much for your consideration, your support will be appreciated.
~4~
feu"," a (j),-<1U4~
.
.
. ----
Honorable Mayor Brian 1. Aungst Sr.,
City of Clearwater, Florida
P.O. Box 4748, City Hall
Clearwater, FL 33758
March 8, 2000
Re: Proposed change in the City Code to define "Transient or Hotel" occupancy as 30 days as
opposed to the present 14 days.
PLEASE VOTE IN FAVOR OF TIllS CHANGE.
We have been residents of 1310 Gulf Boulevard for the past ten years. It was purchased as a
private residence and has never been rented. We do not wish to experience short tenn
rentals and the problems associated with that.
This is one of the most beautiful residential areas in Clearwater and should not be adapted to
transient occupancies. There are plentiful hotels, motels, private rental offerings, etc to
accommodate the visitors to our area In our complex, we have taken substantial steps in
establishing suitable House Rules to insure a quiet, residential lifestyle. Please help us in that
effort by adapting the 30 day proposal. Short tenn rentals do not belong within this
predominately residential complex
This and one other condominium association are the only establishments on Sand Key with a
14 day rental minimum. Please help us preserve this beautiful island of quiet, residential
lifestyles, as you would so require, in any other residential neighborhood. Stop the potential
for commercialization of this unique area by amending the City code to provide for a
minimum rental occupancy of 30 days.
~ ,L, G
, /6:dI., Y
f"b e,q cil . c I v b :,,;c,.I 0
.
.
Mr. Ed Hart, Commissioner
City of Clearwater, Florida
P.O. Box 4748, City Hall
Clearwater, FL 33758
March 8, 2000
Re: Proposed change in the City Code to define "Transient or Hotel" occupancy to 30 days as
opposed to the present 14 days.
PLEASE VOlE IN FAVOR OF THIS CHANGE.
We have been residents of 1310 Gulf Boulevard for the past ten years. It was purchased as a
private residence and has never been rented. We do not wish to experience short tenn
rentals and the problems associated with that.
This is one of the most beautiful residential areas in Clearwater and should not be adapted to
transient occupancies. There are plentiful hotels, motels, private rental offerings, etc to
accommodate the visitors to our area In our complex, we have taken substantial steps in
establishing suitable House Rules to insure a quiet, residential lifestyle. Please help us in that
effort by adapting the 30 day proposal. Short tenn rentals do not belong within this
predominately residential complex
This and one other condominium association are the only establishments on Sand Key with a
14 day rental minimum. Please help us preserve this beautiful island of quiet, residential
lifestyles, as you would so require, in any other residential neighborhood. Stop the potential
for commercialization of this unique area by amending the City code to provide for a
minimum rental occupancy of 30 days.
Respectfully submitted,
I
'I
lu~
1& C-
.
.
Honorable Mayor Brian 1. Aungst Sr.,
City of Clearwater, Florida
P.O. Box 4748, City Hall
Clearwater, FL 33758
March 8, 2000
Re: Proposed change in the City Code to define "Transient or Hotel" occupancy as 30 days as
opposed to the present 14 days.
PLEASE VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS CHANGE.
We have been residents of 1310 Gulf Boulevard for the past ten years. It was purchased as a
private residence and has never been rented. We do not wish to experience short tenn
rentals and the problems associated with that.
This is one of the most beautiful residential areas in Clearwater and should not be adapted to
transient occupancies. There are plentiful hotels, motels, private rental offerings, etc to
accommodate the visitors to our area. In our complex, we have taken substantial steps in
establishing suitable House Rules to insure a quiet, residential lifestyle. Please help us in that
effort by adapting the 30 day proposal. Short tenn rentals do not belong within this
predominately residential complex
This and one other condominium association are the only establishments on Sand Key with a
14 day rental minimum. Please help us preserve this beautiful island of quiet, residential
lifestyles, as you would so require, in any other residential neighborhood. Stop the potential
for commercialization of this unique area by amending the City code to provide for a
minimum rental occupancy of 30 days.
Respectfully submitted,
~ ;9-~
o
~7I
L 9..4 f2.,~ ~
1-/1
J}//!c It
17~/1 Cf-Eft~/1r
~--S
.
.
3!i/
Jane Ewing I H
~./~~lJt-;.~ ~--/~ ~~,~l1 ~
~J ~I (lW. :dd "'tf'j:;Z;;;:;JJk
. 7;/
',/) .. , .
~. i:~. :r A. it-. /U.n,v,~r-;t:.,~.t4/7k- / tk.i.k
U .~ ~tf/t-~"z ~~'.~ ,&J. .
.;Vi. ;;
. . r'/
./~. ~., h~1-1.u t!~i--n.J~~~
/~ ~1~f!&~l~/~~2~~.
~::~~~,~~
av ~/4-~.:kJ 7 .
~. d 71tj!j/ui/f ~~ ~~/'~/..~. Hd f/~
hL. d.J . ~. /t,::;~/t~w- ~.- .~' ~~~ . /~.
;}/ d:..d~J~ L ~J ~ ./ /: . " l -.
~~-.-~~ ~~~ic,' "
J~~ ~~~~-nf-~MU ~~.
o? ~~/4/<-~1.'z&. //~~.d
~,~~~tVcL,~/l - ~';t.i
~,u7~~y~z:. ·
Sh;i7
!'
It'
.
.
March 13,2000
City Commissioners Johnson, Hooper, Clark and Hart
City of Clearwater
City Hall
Clearwater, Florida
Gentlemen,
I purchased my first ever condominium at 1340 Gulf Boulevard, Clearwater in November
1997 and became a Registered Voter that same month. It was the beginning of a
continuing education program on condominium life, something I had assumed was no
different than my many years of individual home ownership.
I have since learned that I gave up many privileges I formerly enjoyed, especially having
the right to decide who was going to enter my residential areas and disturb my peace at
their convenience, not mine. It didn't occur to me to solicit information on the number of
absentee owners who were renting their units to families, often unknown to them,
through Real Estate sales people who were indifferent to concerns of the residents of the
building. All of us who live here, regardless of the amount of time, have been subjected
to the abuses and disrespect for our property by those temporary occupants, mostly in the
category of 14 day rentals, who ignore rules and regulations and create destruction of our
property.
I regret some of my fellow owners feel the need to rent their units for the most obvious
excuse of paying their taxes and other expenses because they contribute to this problem
we have been feeling. Seasonally the worst time is ahead with the summer rentals to the
people who embody these problems more than the winter renters apparently.
I support your efforts to amend the Land Use Code to minimum 30 day period as I
testified at a hearing of the Community Development Board February 2000. Thank you
for your consideration.
Sincerely yours,
~ ;l1b-~ r.
If,,~
.
.
March 13,2000
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater
City Hall
Clearwater, Florida
Gentlemen,
I purchased my first ever condominium at 1340 Gulf Boulevard, Clearwater in November
1997 and became a Registered Voter that same month. It was the beginning of a
continuing education program on condominium life, something I had assumed was no
different than my many years of individual home ownership.
I have since learned that I gave up many privileges I formerly enjoyed, especially having
the right to decide who was going to enter my residential areas and disturb my peace at
their convenience, not mine. It didn't occur to me to solicit information on the number of
absentee owners who were renting their units to families, often unknown to them,
through Real Estate sales people who were indifferent to concerns of the residents of the
building. All of us who live here, regardless of the amount of time, have been subjected
to the abuses and disrespect for our property by those temporary occupants, mostly in the
category of 14 day rentals, who ignore rules and regulations and create destruction of our
property.
I regret some of my fellow owners feel the need to rent their units for the most obvious
excuse of paying their taxes and other expenses because they contribute to this problem
we have been feeling. Seasonally the worst time is ahead with the summer rentals to the
people who embody these problems more than the winter renters apparently.
I support your efforts to amend the Land Use Code to minimum 30 day period as I
testified at a hearing of the Community Development Board February 2000. Thank you
for your consideration.
Sincerely yours,
&.-t ;/ 2.:. ~. ~. f-&
.
.
1340 Gulf Blvd., Unit 12D
Clearwater, FL 33767
March 11,2000
Honorable Mayor Angst and Honorable City Commissioners: Johnson, Hooper, Clark and Hart
Clearwater, Florida
Subject Support for the Revision in the City Land Use Code to Define Transient as Less than
30 days
Dear Sirs:
I am the owner of a condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater, and a registered voter.
I am in total support ofthe City of Clearwater's revision of the Land Use Code to define Transient
as Less than 30 Days.
This code revision truly reflects more than 80% of the property on Sand Key, which has a 90 day
minimum rental period in their leases. Right now my condominium building has a 14 day
minimum rental period.
This 14 day minimum rental period substantially decreases the security of my condominium
building in comparison to the buildings that have 90 day minimum rental periods. The heavy
turnover in renters per unit in a 90 day period in our condominium building, (6 possible renters
in our condominium building as compared to 1 possible renter in all but two other condominium
buildings every 90 days), has resulted in many more keys not returned by renters to the real estate
agents or the owners in our condominium building as compared with all but two other
condominium buildings on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater. So security of my condominium
building will continue to be at risk as long as the 14 day minimum rental period remains in effect.
A 30 day minimum rental period will therefore cut in half the insecurity I am presently confronted
with.
Sincerely yours
/i I) 4 '
J;/ ~I fI ;j ,,/
/ ~!1~/ 1/11f-/
John Apel j ,
.
.
Beaumont@
cYt\
William Beaumont Hospital
Royal Oak
March 9, 2000
Ralph Stone
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater Florida
Dear Mr. Stone:
I am a 17 year owner of a condominium in Lighthouse Towers at 1290 Gulf Blvd., Sand Key. It is my
understanding that the local condominium code is being considered for revision. Specifically, the issue
of two-week rentals in the only two condominium buildings on prestigious Sand Key is on the agenda
for immediate consideration. I vigorously support extending the minimum rental period to 30 days for
the following reasons. No transient occupant evidences the pride and proprietary attitudes of the
'occupying' owners in Lighthouse Towers; the shorter the renting period the more this holds true.
Understandably, the former arrive in a holiday spirit with the intent of maximizing the facilities (bang
for the buck) without the same attention to preservation, sanitation, or maintenance. This visibly
contributes to the deterioration of the permanent owners' investment and is a source of continuing
dismay and demoralization to us all. We do not have the economic wherewithal to sustain the burden
incurred by the Radisson Hotel or Sheraton Sand Key which are required to expend enormous sums for
continuous renewal. And yet the renters staying for less than 30 days at Sheraton Sand Key evidence
the same pursuits at reverie and enjoyment afforded by a hotel. Lighthouse Towers is not a hotel.
A few permanent owners support the two week rentals because they are in the "business" of renting.
Accordingly, they lack the pride of possession characteristic of the more permanent people at Lighthouse
Towers. This subverts the best irtterest of those of us who make this our home (or home away from
home). What the absentee owners fail to understand is that their practices importantly decapitalize our
collective investment. This is evident throughout the building and grounds in spite of our continuing
attempts to maintain it at a higher level of perfection than is possible with two week rentals.
By this communication I fervently plead the case for longer rentals for all the reasons stated above which
are obviously not shared by those who would seek to maintain the "hotel status" of Lighthouse Towers.
R~~~/2s'
f
Gerald C. Timmis, M.D.
3601 West Thirteen Mile RO.Jd Roy,]1 Oak, Michigan 4B071-67b,)
(248) 551-5000
-=::a Unlfed 10 Improve Ameflca's Healfh -
.
.
lAW OFFICES
Admitted in
Florid. - Miuouri - lIIinoi.
And Feder.1 Courts
EDWARD T. WRIGHT
260 N. Indian Rocks Road
Belleair Bluffs, Florida 33770
(727) 586-1931
Tri.l. . Willi
Gener.1 Pr.ctice
March 9, 2000
Ralph Stone
Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle
Clearwater FL 33756
Re: Revision of Condo Rental Law
Dear Mr. Stone:
During my twenty-five years in Florida I have found
that condo owners are better off, as landlords or
sellers of a condo, if the minimum rental period
is at least thirty days. This keeps the condo from
adopting a hotel atmosphere.
I hope the city ordinance will provide for a
limitation of thirty day rentals in a residential
.-'--
neighborhood.
".-;
.
.
. .
March 14, 2000
FIL [ COpy
Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL. 33756
Dear Mr. Stone,
This cover letter is written for the express purpose to indicate that most of the residents of
Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II whole-heartedly support the code change
to a ONE MONTH minimum rental in a residential community. Attached are a
collection of signatures and letters from Sand Key residents directly impacted by this
code change.
All of the reasons for the change have been debated. We urge you and your staff to
strongly support the change in the code to a minimum of one month in order to insure
the highest quality of life that 22 of the 25 condos on Sand Key already enjoy.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfull y,
Joe Calio, President
Lighthouse Towers Condo. Assoc.
CC. City Manager
Mayor
Clearwater City Commissioners
.
.
Jane Ewing
Jfq to
f'k ~:ld. L"=~7~~dk;
~.~rA~-"^,o/~~
t~ I- ~).><A.<-<.2 ...u/<<.->W ~& 7.
{t0K/~ ~ Y If/ t!,..-~. ~;,,/.i.L~
#"'~Ay:t ~(/~d/~~L~.
J.~ hJ;td, l~.y :z4 47 .-i tf:.~
~hv~~2~[~~~I~
41~.~..:1.c cLj, P
I d ?n-~'q-u'~ :P ~~ i1/;t.~./,_~_;:(, .~ ~ '7 ~~
a.".,L,L .~ -i..." Ii ~~ ~ ~~ 5!?"-,
~~~~f~
J4-m<-~t-o~~ht/~~ .
:i. .7)i.hAO V /b /z.-.. ~:zL.. ,ud, ~ -;<h
~~ ~ /. '_' J~I
. .' <Vt-V ~ /-?_ ~
/4f./~L~A;~ . ~.~'Lt.-/..
~7 ~~~K-~.
~I-.
. J
F
,it
.
.
LAW OFFICES
Admitted in
Florida. Missouri. Illinois
And Federal Courts
EDWARD T. WRIGHT
260 N. Indian Rocks Road
Belleair Bluffs, Florida 33770
(727) 586-1931
Trials. Wills
General Practice
March 9, 2000
Ralph Stone
Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle
Clearwater FL 33756
Re: Revision of Condo Rental Law
Dear Mr. Stone:
During my twenty-five years In Florida I have found
that condo owners are better off, as landlords or
sellers of a condo, if the minimum rental period
is at least thirty days. This keeps the condo from
adopting a hotel atmosphere.
I hope the city ordinance will provide for a
limitation of thirty day rentals in a residential
neig~~orhood.
. r.
Herbert W. and Mary A. McLachl
1310 Gulf Blvd-IS G, Crescent Beach CI
Clearwater, Florida 33767
--...,
n ~ cc~' r'''' .~'\ '
~r~U\~"'~ '\'.';\\ \\\
~~ . \'1
" I'
r I'. j I I
\ ,: \ j \
I ,. \ .t. \
i.I4m "j\
I ......,-'"' \
L j . I
PLANNING & DEVElOPM'-.:;'
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER ____..1
March 3, 2000
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Re: Revised Code-Definition of Overnight Acco
Dear Members of the CDB:
As members of our DCA Board, you are put in the middle of many difficult code matters; however, this
current controversy that is beginning to develop between real estate personnel and residents of Sand Key over
the proposed 30 day minimum rental period, should be an easier one for you and the DCA Board who
represent the vital interests of its property owners.
In October, 1998, we became proud Florida residents after owning our Crescent Beach condo since 1989. We
have never rented our unit as we have always felt that we live in one of the most beautiful residential areas of
Clearwater. Our area has 2 or 3 beautiful hotels/motels that serve the overnight accommodations for the many
tourists who visit Clearwater's Sand Key beaches. Our residential community should not be for transient
people, but for the true benefits of residential ownership.
We have tried several times to change our condo documents from the 14-day minimum rental provision to at
least a 30-day provision. We were unsuccessful by just 3 votes in the last election. We need a 75%
affirmative vote to make any such change and the realtors know that is just about impossible as a non-returned
ballot is a no vote. There are only 2 association's on Sand Key that have a 14 day minimum and a code
revision to 30 days would force all condos on Sand Key to have at least a 30 day minimum rental period.
I am requesting your support to protect the beauty, safety, and financial value of owners and residents on Sand
Key. The last 6 high-rise developments on Sand Key have a 90 day minimum and the 2 condos currently
planned for Clearwater's Beach will have at least 30 days as the realtors and developers know what is selling
the best.... as the new buyers want a residential like community. Buyers now realize the positive impact on
their investment and residential lifestyle if the development has a minimum rental of 30 days.
As an owner, a full time resident, and a member of our Association Board of Directors, I can assure you that
we will definitely police ourselves with a new code revision. In addition, I am confident that our beaches on
Sand Key will be cleaner and the new vegetation recently planted on our restored beach with not be stomped
upon as is currently the case by "overnight type renters". In spite of what the realtors and absentee investors
say, our community could have less security, safer & healthier pool & spa water, minimal fire alarms, better
parking conditions for emergency vehicles, and safer and quieter living conditions.
I am positive that the investor's property values will go up and not down as they have previously stated. Also,
our motels and hotels can handle the tourism needs, as our residential community was never intended to satisfy
transient tourism short term needs.
Please use your position for the support and protection of Clearwater residential owners. Please support the
planned 30-day Revised Code provision. Thanks for listening. And, your vote is greatly appreciated.
p~~
c... c...
~~~
.
.
727-596-7376
condo gulf @ aol.com
fax 727-596-7376
L.E. Lewis
1310 Gulf Blvd., 9-G
Clearwater, FL 33767
Mr. Ralph Stone & the
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Clearwater FL 33758
March 8, 2000
Re: Proposed change in the City Code to define "Transient of Hotel" occupancy to 30 days as
opposed to the present 14 days.
PLEASE VOTE IN FAVOR OF TillS CHANGE.
We have been residents of 1310 Gulf Boulevard for the past ten years. It was purchased as a
private residence and has never been rented. We do not wish to experience short term rentals
and the problems associated with that.
This is one of the most beautiful residential areas in Clearwater and should not be adapted to
transient occupancies. There are plentiful hotels, motel, private rental offerings, etc. to
accommodate the visitors to our area. In our complex, we have taken substantial steps in
establishing suitable House Rules to insure a quiet, residential lifestyle. Please help us in that
effort by adapting the 30 day proposal. Short-term rentals do no belong within this
predominately residential complex.
This and one other condominium association are the only establishments on Sand Key with a
14 day rental minimum. Please help us preserve this beautiful island of quiet, residential
lifestyles, as you would so require, in any other residential neighborhood. Stop the potential
for commercialization of this unique area by amending the City code to provide for a
minimum rental occupancy of 30 days.
Respectfully submitted,
j
"
. /0/'1/[1
LC
,~
Leonard E. Lewis
Remo and Gail Sinibaldi.40 Gulf Boulevard Unit 6 G~ aea.!ler. Florida 33767
March 8, 2000
Community Development Board
Clearwater City Hall
Clearwater, FL
Dear Honorable Commissioners,
This is a short note to let you know that WE support the city's effort to extend the
definition of 'transient resident' to 30 days or less. We feel that the redevelopment of
Clearwater Beach and the beach area along Sand Key will bring more seasonal rentals
because of the beautiful surroundings. Local residents will continue to make their 'day
trips' and enjoy this wonderful area.
Realtors will find they have fewer commissions but they will be larger due to the longer
rental period. On Sand Key, 80% of all rentals are seasonal (30+days) and there will be
minimal impact here on either owners or realtors.
Changing the definition of 'transient' to 30 days or less is a win-win situation for all who
enJ-oy Clearwater's wonderful beaches and warm weather.
;t;
.R0mo&~
, B. Gail
/
'",//
02/14/2000 11:44
1973-3441.
THE AURILYTE PR.S,__
. . ._.J
i
j -.------...----
PAGE 01
_____u.-.__.. _._.__~_
<'
'C....-...'..",.'''"
l'r--u. I <.
~ r-\\
---.-----1 l )
. I'
FES 2 2 2000 1 ,_./
"~I ,j
I: {
U
Connnunity Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater / P.O. BOX 4748 .
Clearwater, Florida 33750-4748
,L
PLANNINl, & U[VELOf'MENT
ebruary 14. 2()(}fj.HVICES
. . CITY OF CLEN1WATER
.Re: POLICY ISSUEI ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICl'S #li
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling fol: less than 30 days. unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts,) .'.
EXEMYl10N FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that members of Sand Key Civic Association (SKCA) have requestCdthe Code
Revi$ion. They do not have legal authority to represent indiVidual ooodominium develOpments
on Sand Key. TIwy are not elected or authorized by condominium owners to. represent their'
corporate or individual interests.
Some Sand Key Condominium Articles of Declaration permit re:n.talllease penod& of less than 30
daY$. Assuming Sand Key CondoIniniums are not in the Tourist, COD11IK':l'cial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed Policy Issue Article 2 # 11 will inipair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted by condominium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as residential rental property in the mid 1980' s and CQIltinue to be
used as such today. .
To change condominium documentS in LighthoUse Towers, Crescent Beach Club 1 & II approval
of7S% of the l)Wl).ers must be obtained. NU1t'lel'QUs attempts to change the raul..iod have
fitiled. Some SKCA members from these three cOndominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the owner's majority voted Outcome. Thus. they are attempting to change the code
thru the Community Development Board to achieve their personal agenda and override the
ownef'S coUective decisions. They cannot speak for us. Therefore. please dismiss .tbcic Rquest
for the Code Revision. .
Please amend the proposed Article 2 # 11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY 'wndomiDium developments.
or at least the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and n. with Declarations.and
Documents which permit less than 30 day rental periods. .
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrietions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease T outism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, wbich I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and P,ineUas cmmtry.
Thank You. and Sincerely
Yours;
1:290 GutfBlvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#
GllDl~ 1340 GUlf Blvd.
Crescentlkacb Club OWner
UNIT# / ~,;::
02/14/00 11 : 47
TX/RX NO.5135
P.002
.
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater / 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February 14,2000
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
~S7j1rYf ~ Ut{)t/€ cV ~
SI<CA- tV !;u-~-/I ~ /'evthuj?
fflfl'od ~ C2 ~~t9/
zo 017 s ,
Thank You and Sincerely
litdll~~
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT# cJ2.. 0'1
.
.
1340 Gulf Blvd., Unit 5B
Clearwater, FL 33767
March 10,2000
Members of the Community Development Board
Clearwater, Florida
Subject Support for the Revision in the City Land Use Code to Define Transient as Less than
30 days
Dear Sirs:
I am the owner of a condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater, and a registered voter.
I am in total support of the City of Clearwater' s revision of the Land Use Code to define Transient
as Less than 30 Days.
This code revision truly reflects more than 80% of the property on Sand Key, which has a 90 day
minimum rental period in their leases. Right now my condominium building has a 14 day
minimum rental period.
This 14 day minimum rental period substantially decreases the security of my condominium
building in comparison to the buildings that have 90 day minimum rental periods. The heavy
turnover in renters per unit in a 90 day period in our condominium building, (6 possible renters
in our condominium building as compared to 1 possible renter in all but two other condominium
buildings every 90 days), has resulted in many more keys not returned by renters to the real estate
agents or the owners in our condominium building as compared with all but two other
condominium buildings on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater. So security of my condominium
building will continue to be at risk as long as the 14 day minimum rental period remains in effect.
A 30 day minimum rental period will therefore cut in half the insecurity I am presently confronted
with.
Sincerely yours
~~ ~.&~
Beverly E. DaVIS
.
.
Donald and Valverdine Bagnuolo
1310 Gulf Blvd. #IIA
Sand Key
Clearwater, FL 33767-2860
The Members of the Community
Development Board
March 12,2000
Subject: Support for Revision in the City Land Use
Code to Define Transient as Less than 30 days
To Whom It May Concern:
I am an owner of a condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater. My wife and I
are in total support of the City of Clearwater's revision in the Land Use Code to define
Transient as Less than 30 days.
The reasons for our support is a majority of owners who rent, live out of town and do not
have to live with some of the daily problems of disrespect, poor behavior, destruction of
property, which some renters impose on other residents. The longer the term of the rent,
usually the more suitable persons are to living in harmony in a high-density community
environment.
We would like to thank you in advance for your consideration for revising the City Land
Use Code.
.__ Respectfully SUbmitted,.. n.
-~r?d~
Donald Bagnuolo
~~
Valverdine Bagnuolo
.
.
Richard F. Schindler
1340 Gulf Blvd. 10A
Clearwater FL 33167
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Dir. of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 MyrtleAve.
Clearwater FL 33156-5502
Dear Sir,
I am delighted that you have taken action to revise ttle code concerning condo's on Sand
Key which will define those which allow renters for short terms as transient hotels. As I live in
one of those transient hotels (after having paid $350,000.00) I whole heartedly support this
revision.
Renters treat our building as a hotel and have no respect for year round occupants and the
property itself. They are here on vacation and seem to think that they can do what ever
pleases them selves with out regard or concern for anyone except themselves. It is the
year round occupants who buy every thing they have here and pay all the taxes
associated with having this as their primary or only residence
It is the realators who make big money renting these units that oppose the revision, not the
year round residents. I was particularly disturbed by Jim Warner presuming to speak for all
the owners and for implying that he lived at this address. He doesn't speak for us, nor does
he live here.
Please revise the code and require a minimum of 30 days for rentals. This is the ony
community I know of which allows less than 30 day rentals. St Petersburg requires 90 days,
Pine lias county 30 days! Why are we the only exception??
Jdcc
B/~D
. .
~L \\ 't)c)
\...
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Dir. of Planning
City of Clearwater / 100 MyrtleAve.
Clearwater FL 33756-5502
Dear Sir,
I am delighted that you have taken action to revise tile code concerning condo's on Sand
Key which will define tl10se which allow renters for short terms as transient hotels. As I live in
one of those transient hotels (after having paid $350,000.00) I whole heartedly support this
revision.
Renters treat our building as a hotel and have no respect for year round occupants and the
property itself. They are here on vacation and seem to think ttlat they can do what ever
pleases them selves with out regard or concern for anyone except themselves. It is the
year round occupants who buy every thing they t1ave here and pay all the taxes
associated with having this as their primary or only residence
It is the realators who make big money renting these units that oppose the revision, not the
year round residents. I was particularly disturbed by Jim Warner presuming to speak for all
the owners and for implying that he lived at this address. He doesn't speak for us, nor does
he live here.
Please revise the code and require a minimum of 30 days for rentals. Tt1is is the ony
community I know of which allows less than 30 day rentals. St Petersburg requires 90 days,
Pine lias county 30 days! Why are we the only exception??
Sincerely Yours,
JnJ \ .j -1'I'r~
- flA.,. I ~ 'UJ...U~ Wtz
~G-\- ~~~-:t~
t7<{O ,h "'^\ ~ \v~~ \ Ii' E
~. +t. ~~I~J
.
.
TnOJ) JI 0 iJ
)
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Dir. of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 MyrtleAve.
Clearwater FL 33756-5502
Dear Sir,
! am delighted that you have taken action to revise the code concerning condo's on Sand
Key which will define those which allow renters for short terms as transient hotels. As I live in
one of those transient hotels (after having paid $350,000.00) I whole heartedly support this
revision.
Renters treat our building as a hotel and have no respect for year round occupants and the
property itself. They are here on vacation and seem to think that they can do what ever
pleases them selves with out regard or concern for anyone except themselves. It is the
year round occupants who buy every thing they have here and pay all the taxes
associated Wittl having this as their primary or only residence
It is the realators who make big money renting these units that oppose the revision, not the
year round residents. I was particularly disturbed by Jim Warner presuming to speak for all
the owners and for implying that he lived at this address. He doesn't speak for us, nor does
he live here.
Please revise the code and require a minimum of 30 days for rentals. This is the ony
community I know of which allows less than 30 day rentals. St Petersburg requires 90 days.
Pine lias county 30 days! Why are we the only exception??
Sincerely Yours,
vt~cu..d ~ ."~tL:v,-
, af/) kLuLo fU4~ ~ ~ "15 '
() ~ In ~:a.vrfQ ^1
~tLa.A.{.A..'kll' ~.
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Dir. of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 MyrtleAve.
Clearwater FL 33756-5502
Dear Sir,
i am delighted that you have taken action to revise the code concerning condo's on Sand
Key which will define those which allow renters for short terms as transient hotels. As I live in
one of those transient hotels (after having paid $350,000.00) I whole heartedly support this
revision.
Renters treat our building as a hotel and have no respect for year round occupants and the
property itself. They are here on vacation and seem to think that they can do what ever
pleases them selves with out regard or concern for anyone except themselves. It is the
year round occupants who buy every thing they have here and pay all the taxes
associated with having this as their primary or only residence
It is the realators who make big money renting these units that oppose the revision, not the
year round residents. I was particularly disturbed by Jim Warner presuming to speak for all
the owners and for implying ttlat he lived at this address. He doesn't speak for us, nor does
he live here.
Please revise the code and require a minimum of 30 days for rentals. This is the ony
community I know of which allows less than 30 day rentals. St Petersburg requires 90 days.
Pinellas county 30 days! Why are we the only exception??
Sincerely Yours,
.~ ~ ~tl~~,~'-~
\ ~ '\c) ~l~\ ~\'-I~ "- \ 'C ~
~uu0~ ~.
~ ":-::l \\0"\
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Dir. of Planning
City of Clearwater / 100 MyrtleAve,
Clearwater FL 33756-5502
Dear Sir,
I am delighted that you have taken action to revise the code concerning condo's on Sand
Key which will define those which allow renters for short terms as transient hotels. As I live in
one of those transient hotels (after having paid $350,000.00) I whole heartedly support this
revision.
Renters treat our building as a hotel and have no respect for year round occupants and the
property itself. They are here on vacation and seem to think that they can do what ever
pleases them selves Witll out regard or concern for anyone except themselves. It is the
year round occupants who buy every thing they have here and pay all the taxes
associated Wittl having this as their primary or only residence
It is the realators who make big money renting these units that oppose the revision, not the
year round residents. I was particularly disturbed by Jim Warner presuming to speak for all
the owners and for implying that he lived at this address. He doesn't speak for us, nor does
he live here.
Please revise the code and require a minimum of 30 days for rentals. This is the ony
community I know of which allows less than 30 day rentals. St Petersburg requires 90 days.
Pinel/as county 30 days! Why are we the only exception??
Sincerely Yours,
/"/1 ~y /1 /) I
U/I[tY.JCA..J V~~ Uj{tt~7~
;;[; Jt- r! /i1-L ~ () ~~
~ '.;1.510/
.
.
Catherine M. Schindler
1340 Gulf Blvd. 10A
Clearwater FL 33767
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Oil'. of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 MyrtleAve.
Clearwater FL 33756-5502
Dear Sir,
I am delighted that you have taken action to revise the code concerning condo's on Sand
Key which will define those which allow renters for short terms as transient hotels. As I live in
one of those transient hotels (after having paid $350,000.00) I whole heartedly support this
revision.
Renters treat our building as a hotel and have no respect for year round occupants and the
property itself. They are here on vacation and seem to think that they can do what ever
pleases them selves with out regard or concern for anyone except themselves. It is the
year round occupants who buy every thing they have here and pay all the taxes
associated with having this as their primary or only residence
It is the realators who make big money renting these units that oppose the revision, not the
year round residents. I was particularly disturbed by Jim Warner presuming to speak for all
the owners and for implying that he lived at this address. He doesn't speak for us, nor does
he live he re.
Please revise the code and require a minimum of 30 days for rentals. This is the ony
community I know of which allows less than 30 day rentals. Sf Petersburg requires 90 days,
Pine lias county 30 days! Why are we the only exception??
Sincerely YOllrs,
&<KG..-':A' fi' ~--'--<~~
Catherine M. Schindler
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Dir. of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 MyrtleAve.
Clearwater FL 33756-5502
Dear Sir,
I am delighted that you have taken action to revise the code concerning condo's on Sand
Key which will define those which allow renters for short terms as transient hotels. As I live in
one of those transient hotels (after having paid $350,000.00) I whole heartedly support this
revision.
Renters treat our building as a hotel and have no respect for year round occupants and the
property itself. They are here on vacation and seem to think that they can do what ever
pleases them selves with out regard or concern for anyone except themselves. It is the
year round occupants who buy every thing they have here and pay all the taxes
associated with tlaving this as their primary or only residence
it is the realators who make big money renting these units that oppose the revision, not the
year round residents. I was particularly disturbed by Jim Warner presuming to speak for all
the owners and for implying that he lived at this address. He doesn't speak for us, nor does
he live here.
Please revise the code and require a minimum of 30 days for rentals. This is the ony
community I know of which allows less than 30 day rentals, St Petersburg requires 90 days,
Pine lias county 30 days! Why are we the only exception??
Sincerely Yours,
n
~l~~ t~ Ck C-'CYt"'~C~
! "'::> '1 0 f1 ~ "t2r(v d if &' c:
n , , J7) . 4( . :;7:) ~; -1 U ,/
Ll~. (Grl llv' J~'//
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Dir. of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 MyrtleAve.
Clearwater FL 33756-5502
Dear Sir,
I am delighted that you have taken action to revise the code concerning condo's on Sand
Key which will define those which allow renters for short terms as transient hotels. As I live in
one of those transient hotels (after having paid $350,000.00) I whole heartedly support this
revision.
Renters treat our building as a hotel and have no respect for year round occupants and the
property itself. They are here on vacation and seem to think that they can do what ever
pleases them selves with out regard or concern for anyone except themselves. It is the
year round occupants who buy every thing they have here and pay all the taxes
associated with having this as their primary or only residence
It is the realators who make big money renting these units that oppose the revision, not the
year round residents. I was particularly disturbed by Jim Warner presuming to speak for all
the owners and for implying that he lived at this address. He doesn't speak for us, nor does
he live here.
Please revise the code and require a minimum of 30 days for rentals. This is the ony
community I know of which allows less than 30 day rentals. St Petersburg requires 90 days,
Pine lias county 30 days! Why are we the only exception??
Sincerely Yours,
~~~
b9--'U, ~ o---rK G--~
(I/~ ~Q~Q ')
-.
.
.
MEMO
To: The Members of the Community Development Board
Subject: SUPPORT FOR THE REVISIONIN THE CITY LAND USE CODE TO
DEFINE TRANSIENT AS LESS THAN THIRTY DAYS.
From: Mr. & Mrs. Frank Dusina, 1340 Gulf Blvd. Unit 18F, Clearwater, Fl.
Weare the owners of a condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater and a
registered voter. We are in total support of the City of Clearwater's revision in the Land
Use Code to define Transient as Less than Thirty days.
More than 60% of the leases in the last year of the three affected condominiums on Sand
Key had minimum rental periods of thirty days or more. Therefore, the impact of the
proposed code change will not affect the majority of owners that rent.
The longer the term of the rent, usually the more suitable persons are to live in harmony
in a high-density community environment.
Thirty to ninety day minimum leases define more exclusive properties than short-term
rental units. This leads to higher market and property valuations.
Increasing minimum rental periods has been the trend on Sand Key. Most recently 1520
and 1540, Ultimar I and II, voted to increase their minimum rental period from thirty to
ninety days.
Thank you very much for your consideration, your support will be appreciated.
Ma~
lCLMe a (fJ u~~
.
'"
March 8,2000
Members of the Community Development Board
Clearwater, Florida, 33765
SUBJECT: Revision of City Land Use Code
Attention: Members
I am pleased to have the opportunity to address you regarding the Revision Land Use
Code currently WIder consideration by the City of Clearwater.
I believe it would be best to require short-term renters to have at least a 30 day lease
when vacationing in the Clearwater area.
I have a condo located at the Crescent Beach Club on Sand Key and love the fact that the
owners that are there a majority of the time keep our buildings and groWlds in pristine
condition. When at the pool or the beach area owners and long-term renters always clean
up after themselves.
However, when 1 have had the opportunity to observe some short-term renters at the pool
or on the beach they seem to have no regard for the property around them.
As a property owner I would strongly recommend a 30 or 90 day lease for any short-term
renters.
Thank you for letting me give you my opinion on this very important matter.
Sincerely,
rfJcbL6~
Delores Alfano
Crescent Beach Club I
1340 Gulf Blvd, Unit 7-A
Clearwater, FL 33765
.
.
1340 Gulf Blvd., Unit 12D
Clearwater, FL 33767
March 11, 2000
Members of the Community Development Board
Clearwater, Florida
Subject: Support for the Revision in the City Land Use Code to Define Transient as Less than
30 days
Dear Sirs:
I am the owner of a condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater, and a registered voter.
I am in total support of the City of Clearwater's revision of the Land Use Code to define Transient
as Less than 30 Days.
This code revision truly reflects more than 80% of the property on Sand Key, which has a 90 day
minimum rental period in their leases. Right now my condominium building has a 14 day
minimum rental period.
This 14 day minimum rental period substantially decreases the security of my condominium
building in comparison to the buildings that have 90 day minimum rental periods. The heavy
turnover in renters per unit in a 90 day period in our condominium building, (6 possible renters
in our condominium building as compared to 1 possible renter in all but two other condominium
buildings every 90 days), has resulted in many more keys not returned by renters to the real estate
agents or the owners in our condominium building as compared with all but two other
condominium buildings on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater. So security of my condominium
building will continue to be at risk as long as the 14 day minimum rental period remains in effect.
A 30 day minimum rental period will therefore cut in half the insecurity I am presently confronted
w~ .
I.. Sinc. erely yours /
~ I . '/Ii ,r
/ +1/1/ ;/ijzYv(
i John Apel
.
.
03.09.2000
FROM' RUDY & MADELIN SABEL OWNERS AT
CRESCENT BEACH CLUB L
TO: THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BOARD..
SUBJECT: SUPPORT FOR THE REVISION IN THE CITY LAND
USE CODE TO DEFINE TRANSIENT AS LESS
THAN ...30....DAYS.
A MAJORITY OF OWNERS WHO RENT LIVE OUT OF TOWN
AND DO NOT HA VE TO LIVE WITH SOMETIMES DAILY
PROBLEMS OF DISRESPECT, POOR BEHA VIOR,
DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY WHICH SOME RENTERS
IMPOSE ON OTHER RESIDENTS. OWNERS OF CONDOS
WHO LIVE OUT OF TOWN DO NOT VOTE IN CITY
ELECTIONS.
OUR TWO CONDOMINIUM BUILDINGS 1310 AND 1340
GULF BLVD.ARE COMPLETING ALMOST $ 3.000.000 OF
RESTORATION AND REDECORATION OF THE COMMON
AREAS. THE DETERIORATION OF THE COMMON AREAS IS
MOST FREQUENTLY THE RESULT OF SOME ABUSE AND
DESTRUCTIVE BEHA VIOR OF RENTERS AND GUESTS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
the sabe/s
~.~~
~ 5u~eZ
.
\0'"
.
" }',
'\'
.
.
March 13,2000
Comnllmity Development Board
City of Clearwater
City Hall
Clearwater, Florida
Gentlemen,
I purchased my first ever condominiwn at 1340 Gulf Boulevard, Clearwater in November
1997 and became a Registered Voter that same month. It was the beginning of a
continuing education program on condominiwn life, something I had assumed was no
different than my many years of individual home ownership.
I have since learned that I gave up many privileges I fonnerly enjoyed, especially having
the right to decide who was going to enter my residential areas and disturb my peace at
their convenience, not mine. It didn't occur to me to solicit information on the number of
absentee owners who were renting their lUlits to families, often unknown to them,
through Real Estate sales people who were indifferent to concerns of the residents of the
building. All of us who live here, regardless of the amolUlt of time, have been subjected
to the abuses and disrespect for our property by those temporary occupants, mostly in the
category of 14 day rentals, who ignore rules and regulations and create destruction of our
property.
I regret some of my fellow owners feel the need to rent their lUlits for the most obvious
excuse of paying their taxes and other expenses because they contribute to this problem
we have been feeling. Seasonally the worst time is ahead with the summer rentals to the
people who embody these problems more than the winter renters apparently.
I support your efforts to amend the Land Use Code to minimum 30 day period as I
testified at a hearing of the CommlUlity Development Board February 2000. Thank you
for your consideration.
Sincerely yours,
~;;Tk~. ~.f-&
.
.
1340 Gulf Blvd., Unit 17G
Clearwater, FL 33767
March 10,2000
Members of the Community Development Board
Clearwater, Florida
Subject: Support for the Revision in the City Land Use Code to Define Transient as Less than
30 days
Dear Sirs:
We are the owners of a condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater, and registered voters.
We are in total support of the City of Clearwater's revision of the Land Use Code to defme Transient as Less
than 30 Days.
This code revision truly reflects more than 80% of the property on Sand Key, which has a 90 day minimum
rental period in their leases. Right now our condominium building has a 14 day minimum rental period, and
has serious problems as a result.
A majority of these owners who rent, live out oftown and do not have to live with sometimes daily problems or
disrespect of condomimnn rules and regulations around poolside and elsewhere in common areas, such as
observed by us in the past ten years of: (l) slippery and/or sand covered floors in the lobbies and elevators
caused by some renters not observing rules and regulations when the weather is to their liking, (2) including
loud and other very unhealthy behavior around poolside as well; and when the weather is not to their liking, (3)
destruction of ceilings and defacement of walls and floors inside elevators, doors and door moldings into
common areas, and (4) even theft of common property such as lamps and small statues from the 1 st and 2nd
floor lobbies, which some 14 day or less renters impose on all of the non renting as well as renting owners in
our condominium building, because their stay is so short and for which they believe they paid for too dearly and
thus entitles them to engage in such destructive behavior.
Our two condominium buildings 1310 and 1340 Gulf Blvd., are completing almost $3,000,0000 of restoration
and redecoration of the common areas. From our observations it is an established fact that the deterioration of
the common areas is most frequently the result of more than some abuse and destructive behavior of some of the
renters, especially the shorter term ones. The longer term renters have more respect for other peoples property.
An over 30 day minimum rental period can substantially increase the quality of potential renters, because the
longer the term of the rent, usually the more suitable persons are to living in harmony with the owners who do
not rent out their units in a high-density community environment. Destruction, theft and defacement will go
down substantially in all common areas of our condominium building, as the minimum daily rental period is
increased.
Sincerely yours
~.' c~- &...J-~-
,_ :;< ??A ,
'= . - ~-
Eugene H. Koziara
/
c5CL4.-VuC d ~r~
Laura A. Koziara
.
.
03.09.2000
FROM' RUDY & MADELIN SABEL OWNERS AT
CRESCENT BEACH CLUB L
TO: THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BOARD..
SUBJECT: SUPPORT FOR THE REVISION IN THE CITY LAND
USE CODE TO DEFINE TRANSIENT AS LESS
THAN ...30....DAYS.
A MAJORITY OF OWNERS WHO RENT LIVE OUT OF TOWN
AND DO NOT HA VE TO liVE WITH SOMETIMES DAILY
PROBLEMS OF DISRESPECT, POOR BEHA VIOR,
DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY WHICH SOME RENTERS
IMPOSE ON OTHER RESIDENTS. OWNERS OF CONDOS
WHO LIVE OUT OF TOWN DO NOT VOTE IN CITY
ELECTIONS.
OUR TWO CONDOMINIUM BUILDINGS 1310 AND 1340
GULF BLVD.ARE COMPLETING ALMOST $ 3.000.000 OF
RESTORATION AND REDECORATION OF THE COMMON
AREAS. THE DETERIORATION OF THE COMMON AREAS IS
MOST FREQUENTLY THE RESULT OF SOME ABUSE AND
DESTRUCTIVE BEHA VIOR OF RENTERS AND GUESTS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
the sabels
~.~~
~ 5cJJ;eR..
r---------
.
.
Donald and Valverdine Bagnuolo
1310 Gulf Blvd. #llA
Sand Key
Clearwater, FL 33767-2860
The Members of the Community
Development Board
May 12,2000
Subject: Support for Revision in the City Land Use
Code to Define Transient as Less than 30 days
To Whom It May Concern:
I am an owner of a condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater. My wife and I
are in total support of the City of Clearwater's revision in the Land Use Code to define
Transient as Less than 30 days.
The reasons for our support is a majority of owners who rent, live out of town and do not
have to live with some of the daily problems of disrespect, poor behavior, destruction of
property, which some renters impose on other residents. The longer the term of the rent,
usually the more suitable persons are to living in harmony in a high-density community
environment.
We would like to thank you in advance for your consideration for revising the City Land
Use Code.
Respectfully Submitted,
~
Donald Bagnuolo
~#'~-r
Valverdine Bagnuolo
.
.
MEMO
To: The Members of the Community Development Board
Subject: SUPPORT FOR THE REVISION IN THE CITY LAND USE CODE TO
DEFINE TRANSIENT AS LESS THAN THIRTY DAYS.
From: Mr. & Mrs. JoeDe Biasi, 1340 Gulf Blvd. Unit 2F, Clearwater, Fl.
Weare the owners of a condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater We are in
total support of the City of Clearwater's revision in the Land Use Code to define
Transient as Less than Thirty days.
More than 60% of the leases in the last year of the three affected condominiums on Sand
Key had minimum rental periods of thirty days or more. Therefore, the impact of the
proposed code change will not affect the majority of owners that rent.
The longer the term ofthe rent, usually the more suitable persons are to live in harmony
in a high-density community environment.
Thirty to ninety day minimum leases define more exclusive properties than short-term
rental units. This leads to higher market and property valuations.
Increasing minimum rental periods has been the trend on Sand Key. Most recently 1520
and 1540, Ultimar I and II, voted to increase their minimum rental period from thirty to
ninety days.
Thank you very much for your consideration, your support will be appreciated.
A, , (,)4
f.'.....
,,----'
0.)~ 7-~-
:--- 'l L_j...tol'}-'>
[
/.~';~"",~
'.-_..:.....' .'~.
.....~
:1~~~
/
/
.
.
1340 Gulf Boulevard: #8G
Clearwater
FL 33767
March 15,2000
The Members of the Community Development Board
City Hal1
Clearwater
Re:Support for the Revision in the City Land Use Code to Define Transient as less than 30
Days
We are the owners ofa condominium on Sand Key in the City of Clearwater.
We are in total support of the City of Clearwater's revision in the land use code to define
transient as less than 30 days.
Out of town owners do not have to deal with the problems of short term renters as we do in terms
of disrespect, poor behaviour, destruction of property. The longer the term of the rent, usually
the more suitable persons are to living in harmony in a high density community. Short term
renter problems have resulted in a destruction of value of our property and higher costs for us.
Increasingly longer minimum rental periods are the norm on Sand Key and we hope you wil1
enhance our community with the revision to 30 days.
Sincerely
~~ l~\
Henry and Margaret Lund
. 'I
.
.
I
l
3)3/00
_76: fhmavJoLe 0L~ A ~~ +- (}../J.
~.~/tf;;r:~
Cd- rr:::~o/O -~. r<~
O-f( '^- I 'l"..V, ~ ~ .
tf;,o~
((e~ ~I-hsv ~;~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (h~
~ ~ 7:HLm {~tIvo ~
~ ~()U;])~
~::~fg- / . -~
U~ rP . ~/
ell ~.t:k 1-0 V~c.t. ~
~~~~~~~
(;O~.~~~~
~ /t ~
~Ict>~(~ , ~ ~
~-~~.~
~ 11-e~d) ~h~
~ a/hft2 _\0 r JA A .~-
~ ~~.~ I
Jt>3I060/a,o ~~~~c:-
~ 7th~~/-7
Dr. Glynda R. Smith
1310 Gulf Blvd. 19C
Clearwater, FL 33767
.
.
l
I
I
1290 Gulf Blvd., #901
Clearwater FL 33767
February 22, 2000
Mr. Ralph Stone, Dir. of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Ave
Clearwater FL 33756-5502
Dear Mr. Stone:
We are owners at Lighthouse Towers on Sand Key. We would like to add our 2 cents to
the pending controversy over your proposed code changes. We understand the intent is
to reclassify property in residential areas so as to force a minimum rental period of 30
days for those facilities which choose not to meet transient code requirements.
My wife and I own two condos in LHT... .one for seasonal personal use and one for
rental and family use. So we can see both sides of the issue.
We wholeheartedly support the code change as a matter of public safety. In addition, we
purchased here partly because of the tight zoning and quality of environment on Sand
Key. It is indeed, an exceptional area. Lets keep it that way.
We urge you to stress this in the debate that is ongoing. Folks staying for short periods
do not familiarize themselves with various aspects of safety for staying in a high-rise nor
in a hurricane area.
While I do not believe it should matter in your deliberations, I would also address the
various votes against document changes that have been taken in recent years. Yes, the
issues failed. However, if all of the owners had voted, the result might have been
different. Seems the last vote here at LHT failed by only a few votes and some 40
owners didn't even vote!
We urge you to do what's best for public safety.
Mlf~M
\0 ~t~~~~ 0.. ")..
I FEB 2 9 2(Xl) :
I
j
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
Frank and Karen SenseI
.
"--.
FE~ 2 5 2000
Mr. Ralph Stone,
My wife and I are, 100% behind the movement to increase the minimum
rental period on Sand Key from 14 to 30 days. I own a unit in Lighthouse
Towers that along with Crescent Beach Club 1 & 2 are the only buildings that
permit rentals ofless then 30 days. Because of this our building is suffering
from transient rentals that have no respect for rules and regulations of the
association. I have witnessed this in the last year and see the damage that is
caused and the expense passed on to the owners. Thank you for your
support.
Mr. & Mrs. Frank Gizzi
Lighthouse Tower
Unit 1006
Clearwater, Fl. 33767
~/~
// "",~,'" ~
~74~L/
.
.
Clllrlls TIIIDlIS SmD
Crescent Beach Club I, 9-D
1340 Gulf Boulevard
Clearwater, Florida 33767-2811
Home Phone: 727.517.8217
Email: CTSmith111@aol.com
FE8 2 5 2000
February 23, 2000
L,::.~~==-=-'.-
Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Dear Sir:
Please ask your board members to HELP us!!
Transients visting the Clearwater Beach area belong in a hotel or motel, not in a residential
condominium facility.
Get the Lighthouse Towers and The Crescent Beach Club I and II at Sand Key out of the
hotel/motel business.
Redifine the city code by defining transient accommodations "at intervals of ninety (90) days of
less",
Watch the property values increase. Watch the tax revenue increase.
Don't worry. Investors of condominium units who do not personally use their condominiums but
rent them to transients are not residents or registered voters in Clearwater.
Respectfully requested,
C~~\'~-fu-
Charles Thomas Smith
&/4: t/ cY6<--.dJL
Ph~tfTs A. ~eaver-Smith
.
.
Ella Kedan
2354 Haddon Hall Place
Clearwater, FL 33746
February 26,2000
Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater
100 S. Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33756-5502
Dear Mr. Stone:
I am the owner of 3 units in the Crescent Beach Condo (CBI unit 19-E, CBn unit 16-A
and 3-D) and of2 units in the LightHouse Towers (1702 and 1708) on Sand Key.
I wish to express my utmost support to the Community Development Board to prohibit
rental in these two condos for less than 30 days. 1 know that this rental period restriction
is in fact the strong desire of the majority of the owners of these two condos. It is
unfortunate that because it requires a vote of75% of the total owners to change the condo
By-Laws, the rent period restriction has not been yet adopted. Using this factor has
allowed a small group of only a few owners to succeed in imposing their will on the
majority of these two condos. Consequently these two condos, the only ones on Sand
Key, suffer the abuse of wear and tear, serving as hotels with high turnover and high
traffic, disturbing the comfort and the privacy of the majority of the owners who
purchased their units with intention to have a family oriented environment.
In respect to the other owners and their desires, 1 rent all of my five units for long term
periods to family oriented tenants. I believe that Sand Key was designed and approved
for a high quality residential community and not as a commercial tourist community with
high traffic and hotel like environment.
I wish to support your effort in helping these two condos to implement the desire of the
majority oftheir owners in limiting the rental period to 30 days minimum.
Cc: Joe Calio, President Sand Key Civic Association
MARlml
Sincerely yours,
f14 /~/d~~--
Ella Kedan
o lEtlE~~lE
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
.
.
Community Development Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater /100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
February] 4. 2Q00
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZONING DISTRICTS #11
(Pro 'bit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days. unless located i
Comm rciaL or Downtown Districts.)
EXE ON FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We underst d that members of Sand Key Civic Association (S CA) have requested the Code
Revision. The do not have legal authority to represent indiv' ual condominium developments
on Sand Key. TH are not elected or authorized by condo mium owners to represent their
I:.0i pOlitte 0i iUi.ilv';J : ;...I,;(I;S(S.
Some Sand Key Condom. . m Articles of Declaraf n permit rental! lease periods of less than 30
days. Assuming Sand Key dominiums are n in the Tourist. Commercial, or Downtown
zoning districts, the proposed P icy Issue Art' e 2 #11 will impair the owner's right to use their
investment property as permitted condo nium documents. Many Sand Key Condominiums
were marketed and purchased as resi . I rental property in the mid 1980's and continue to be
used as such today.
To change condominium docu nts in Light use Towers, Crescent Beach Club 1 & II approval
of75% of the owners must obtained. Nume us attempts to change the rental period have
failed. Some SKCA me ers from these three co dominiums with personal interests may not
have accepted the own s majority voted outcome. hus. they are attempting to change the code
thru the Communi evelopment Board to achieve tli "r personal agenda and override the
owner's collectiv aecisions. They cannot speak for us. J'hereforc, please dismiss their request
for the Code R is ion.
Please am d the proposed Article 2 #1 I to EXEMPT SAND EY condominium developments.
or at lea the three (3): Lighthouse Towers and Crescent Beach and II. with Declarations and
Docu nts which permit less than 30 day rental periods.
I h 'ity of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on nd Key Condominiums.
It ould decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condo 'niums, which I
derstand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City an inellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours: ~. ,h 'it:;
11 tf) - - .~
1310 & 1340 Gulf Blvd.
Crescent Beach Clulfwner
UNIT#JLJ: / . ~
r~~tJ~
.'
.
Sonia E. Grimm
P. 0. Box 471, Be/pre, OH 45714-0471
March 2, 2000
Mr. Robert Stone, Director of Planning
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, FL 33756-5502
Dear Mr. Stone
Re: Article 2, Zoning District Two
Thank you for the courtesy extended to our small band of
two-week rental minimum supporters at a meeting earlier
in February. I hope that you and the other members of
your committee have a clearer picture of the situation
that has obviously been blown out of proportion. I'm
equally certain that you have much to think about with
regard to upper Clearwater Beach controversy. I have
followed with some interest and dismay the press articles
regarding small business owners making way (?) for big
developers. In 1984 my family and I visited Clearwater
Beach and gazed out toward Sand Key with a dream of owning
a place in which we could retire. In 1985 we purchased a
unit in Lighthouse Towers and have on occasion leased it
while fully complying with taxes on TRANSIENT rentals of
less than six months. The word TRANSIENT has been tossed
around in such a derogatory fashion spurred by personal
selfish interest or ignorance, whichever.
Now I hear that there is a petition in circulation in the
hope that you will be bombarded by folks who have been mis-led
by some of the individuals who have worked and used their
FIDUCIARY positions to their own interests without regard
to the fairness of looking at ALL sides of the issue.
home, but I am prepared
meetings
to be heard.
~ '--.-/
, ~--~..._---
PUji :N'/ 'r- -.. "'---.,
,: ..~ p --.
., (.f
.~'. I -
C'.. '".
I
,../' I
f,
j'
:... ,r l
.. I
("",\. I
__'r, '! '7 J'
----...- :
-"-----..J
Unit 1003
4.~)J
~~
cr1 ;j /p. /) < fi
J-/'lL<l ~ ~~v'
18 --Jz;e ~ ->.
3&J ~~U:ry 14~j L. j
UK/JI ~rv-
~M~~
/:2 C;p LYvt?~
44
Community Deve ment Board Members
C/o Mr. Ralph Stone, Director of Planning
City of Clearwater / 100 S. Myrtle Ave.
Clearwater, Florida 33756-5502
Re: POLICY ISSUE/ ARTICLE 2 - ZO G DISTRICTS #11
(Prohibit the renting of any dwelling for less than 30 days, unless located in the Tourist,
Commercial, or Downtown Districts.)
EXEMPTION FOR SAND KEY CONDOMINIUMS:
We understand that melJ1bers of Sand Key Civic Association (SKC ~ have requested the Code
Revision. They do not h ye legal authority to represent individual ondominium developments
on Sand Key. They are no elected or authorized y condominiu owners to represent their
corporate or individual inter sts.
rous attempts to change the rental period have
ee ndominiums with personal interests may not
tcom Thus, they are attempting to change the code
. Therefore, please dismiss their request
Please amend the proposed A icle 2 #11 to EXEMPT SAND KEY condominium developments,
or at least the three (3): Li thouse Towers and Crescent Beach I and II, with Declarations and
Documents which permit ess than 30 day rental periods.
./
The City of Clearwater should not impose rental period restrictions on Sand Key Condominiums.
It would decrease Tourism and lower property values of Sand Key condominiums, which I
understand it generates substantial property and rental taxes for the City and Pinellas Country.
Thank You and Sincerely
Yours;
1290 Gulf Blvd
Lighthouse Towers Owner
UNIT#?---t? f) l
~'~~~<);IS~ ~~ ~V! fe-'
1310 & 1340 Gulf-Blvd) U; L-, . '0 U; ,-
Crescent Beach Club Ow~e
UNIT#, ~J I I MAR 8 2000
L
f'i,!Vi,'iG & DE\/E-LO'-.. .
. 'HI, '-jT
, SERVICES ' . .
i__ ____ T', ex CLEARWATUl
.
. .
Herbert W. and Mary A. McLachlan
1310 Gulf Blvd-IS G, Crescent Beach Club
Clearwater, Florida 33767
March 3, 2000
Community Development Board
City of Clearwater, Florida
Re: Revised Code-Definition of Overnight Accommodations
Dear Members of the CDB:
As members of our DCA Board, you are put in the middle of many difficult code matters; however, this
current controversy that is beginning to develop between real estate personnel and residents of Sand Key over
the proposed 30 day minimum rental period, should be an easier one for you and the DCA Board who
represent the vital interests of its property owners.
In October, 1998, we became proud Florida residents after owning our Crescent Beach condo since 1989. We
have never rented our unit as we have always felt that we live in one of the most beautiful residential areas of
Clearwater. Our area has 2 or 3 beautiful hotels/motels that serve the overnight accommodations for the many
tourists who visit Clearwater's Sand Key beaches. Our residential community should not be for transient
people, but for the true benefits of residential ownership.
We have tried several times to change our condo documents from the 14-day minimum rental provision to at
least a 30-day provision. We were unsuccessful by just 3 votes in the last election. We need a 75%
affirmative vote to make any such change and the realtors know that is just about impossible as a non-returned
ballot is a no vote. There are only 2 association's on Sand Key that have a 14 day minimum and a code
revision to 30 days would force all condos on Sand Key to have at least a 30 day minimum rental period.
I am requesting your support to protect the beauty, safety, and financial value of owners and residents on Sand
Key. The last 6 high-rise developments on Sand Key have a 90 day minimum and the 2 condos currently
planned for Clearwater's Beach will have at least 30 days as the realtors and developers know what is selling
the best.... as the new buyers want a residential like community. Buyers now realize the positive impact on
their investment and residential lifestyle if the development has a minimum rental of 30 days.
As an owner, a full time resident, and a member of our Association Board of Directors, I can assure you that
we will definitely police ourselves with a new code revision. In addition, I am confident that our beaches on
Sand Key will be cleaner and the new vegetation recently planted on our restored beach with not be stomped
upon as is currently the case by "overnight type renters". In spite of what the realtors and absentee investors
say, our community could have less security, safer & healthier pool & spa water, minimal fire alarms, better
parking conditions for emergency vehicles, and safer and quieter living conditions.
I am positive that the investor's property values will go up and not down as they have previously stated. Also,
our motels and hotels can handle the tourism needs, as our residential community was never intended to satisfy
transient tourism short term needs.
Please use your position for the support and protection of Clearwater residentiaLo.wners.---Elease..support the
planned 30-day Revised Code provision. Thanks for listening. And, J:o~.1f Y;O~'l~r - 'tUi1~rrrn'~' eel.
, !'L_ \"-"') ~ D;
I ) .__=:1 _/
-~\ iLl i
\ \ i I I I
: ! MAR 8 2Wl ,; -. ,.I;
~. L.l i I ,~,_..
i ,
I'LN'J~~ING & DEVELOPMFr-JT
SERVICES
CITY OF CLEARWATEf1
Respectfully yours, ~,
~J~~
fO.vl ~ . I. i /) I~,~/
L . <.' vUkt... l1J.l-b-,!..-L-'L t'(1 ,
(: c
.
.
Mr. and Mrs. NICHOLAS C. FRITSCH
1310 Gulf Boulevard # 8-D
Clearwater, FL 33767 -2860
(727) 595-6528
March 22,2000
City of Clearwater
Mr. Ralph Stone
Director of Planning.
Dear Ralph and Gina,
On behalf of the 40 or so citizens who attended yesterday's Community
Development Board meeting and the dozens who wrote letters, I express our
sincerest appreciation for your efforts in support of the re-definition of the
"Transient" portion of the New City Code.
Ms Gi na Clayton
Senior Planner
Your cooperation and hard work have been vital in moving the City forward
on this issue. As I stated, my wife and I chose Clearwater after seeing the
effects in Treasure Island and Indian Rocks of very short-term rentals. The
City of Clearwater with Sand Key is uniquely positioned along the west coast of
the county with one of the premier cluster of properties. Previous good planning
made this residential neighborhood an economic success for the City. Your
efforts are protecting and ensuring the quality of life for the citizens.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
~~~r~
Nicholas and Jena Fritsch
cf: Mike Roberto, City Manager
.
..
~~~~~
.J
\..0.5l.. ~ ~ '\- ~
~~~~~
~:n:.J ~ A..w<.. ~ ~ ~
~ ~~ ~ ~)::. q.:tt
~ oj; ~ ~~ ~./
~~~~
~~~~~
~~\o~~ ~~~
L~)
r--
.
.
0... ~ ~ 3t> (\~ LoJ1.
~~~ \r~ %
a. ~ ~ ~ ~..
L()SL ~ ~ ~
~~~.
~~G.A~~/
~~(~~
~ ~~~-n.
~ \~- {;
_>.11.
~. ~t!JtlO
~.~~~
~~~
~ ""'~~~
r/~ :J P-~~~
L:7k ~. ~~
~CJAJt-4~30~
~,~~kk~Je.
dP ~ .~ 30~.#J1
I- /I,,-JZ_IZ.cL~~-rq-&
~~~
~ ~,ntf-~~. '
.?o~ . .4elPo-~
~~
I.]/f)&d! ~ (;6-