11/20/2007
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES
CITY OF CLEARWATER
November 20, 2007
Present: Nicholas C. Fritsch Chair
Thomas Coates Board Member
Dana K. Tallman Board Member
Jordan Behar Board Member
Frank L. Dame Board Member
Absent: Kathy Milam Vice-Chair
Doreen DiPolito Board Member
Norma R. Carlough Alternate Board Member
Also Present: Gina Grimes Attorney for the Board
Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney
Michael L. Delk Planning Director
Neil Thompson Planning Manager
Patricia O. Sullivan Board Reporter
The Chair called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Invocation
and Pledge of Allegiance.
To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not
necessarily discussed in that order
.
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: October 16, 2007
Member Coates moved to approve the minutes of the regular Community Development
Board meeting of October 16, 2007, as recorded and submitted in written summation to each
board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Community Development 2007-11-20 1
D. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE: (Item 1)
1. Case: FLD2007-03007 – 685, 689, 693 and 699 Bay Esplanade Level Two Application
(Request for continuance to November 20, 2007)
Owner/Applicant: Peter Pan Developments, LLC, Petrit Meroli, Panayiotis Vasiloudes,
Epic Holdings South, LLC, and Somerset Place, Inc.
Representative: Sherry Bagley and/or Bill Woods, Woods Consulting (1714 County
Road 1, Suite 22, Dunedin, FL 34698; phone: 727-786-5747; fax 727-786-7479; e-mail:
sbagley@woodsconsulting.org).
Location: 0.618 acre located at the northeast and southeast corner of the intersection of
Bay Esplanade and Somerset Street.
Atlas Page: 258A.
Zoning District: Tourist (T) District – Old Florida.
Request: Flexible Development approval to construct a 4,062 square-foot multi-use dock facility
to provide 16 slips as an amenity to a proposed 16 unit attached dwelling (two buildings with
eight dwelling units in each) in the Tourist (T) District with an increase to the length of the
southern dock from 75% of the lot width (93.75 feet) to 111% of the lot width (139 feet) under
the provisions of Section 3-601.C.3.
Proposed Use: Multi-use dock of 4,062 square-feet for 16 slips, in conjunction with a 16-unit
attached dwelling (condominium).
Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Beach Association (Jay Keyes, 100 Devon Drive,
Clearwater, FL 33767; phone: 727-443-2168; email: papamurphy@aol.com); Clearwater
Neighborhoods Coalition (Joe Evich, President, P.O. Box 8204, Clearwater, FL 33758).
Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner II.
Attorney for the Board Gina Grimes said due to a noticing error, Case: FLD2007-03007
needed to be rescheduled to December 18, 2007.
Member Coates moved to reschedule Case: FLD2007-03007 for December 18, 2007.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
E. CONSENT AGENDA: The following cases are not contested by the applicant, staff,
neighboring property owners, etc. and will be approved by a single vote at the beginning of the
meeting: (Items 1 – 5)
1. Case: FLD2006-03015 – 657-663 Bay Esplanade
Owner: Anthony Menna, North Clearwater Beach Development, LLC.
Representative: Northside Engineering Services, Inc.
Location: 0.348-acre subject property is located on the south side of Bay Esplanade,
approximately 200 feet east of Poinsettia Avenue
Atlas Page: 258A.
Zoning District: Tourist (T) District.
Request: Extend the timeframe of the Development Order.
Proposed Use: Attached dwellings (13 condominium units).
Presenter: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III.
Northside Engineering Services, Inc., on behalf of Anthony Menna, North Clearwater
Beach Development, LLC, has requested an extension of time relative to Case: FLD2006-
Community Development 2007-11-20 2
03015, a project located at 657-663 Bay Esplanade. The one-year extension requested would
expire on February 15, 2009.
Pursuant to Section 4-407 of the Community Development Code, extensions of time
“shall be for good cause shown and documented in writing.” The Code further delineates that
good cause “may include but are not limited to an unexpected national crisis (acts of war,
significant downturn in the national economy, etc.), excessive weather-related delays, and the
like.” In this particular case, the applicant indicated that the project is delayed for economic
reasons as it relates to deteriorating market conditions. It should be noted that, pursuant to
Section 4-407, the Planning Director previously has granted a six-month extension of time.
See page 14 for motion of approval.
2. Case: FLD2007-10031 – 2710 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Level Two Application
Owner: Clant, Inc.
Applicant/Representative: Monica Pomroy, Interplan, LLC (933 Lee Road, Orlando, FL
32810; phone: 407-645-5008; fax: 407-629-9124; email:
mpomroy@interplanorlando.com).
Location: 1.57 acre parcel at the northeast corner of Gulf-to-Bay and Park Place
boulevards.
Atlas Page: 291A.
Zoning District: Commercial (C) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval for a Retail Sales and Service use (Bank) within the
Commercial (C) District and the Park Place Development of Regional Impact (DRI) with a
reduction from the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to pavement) and a reduction
from the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement) as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project pursuant to Section 2-704.C of the Community Development Code.
Proposed Use: Retail Sales and Services (Bank).
Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Joe Evich, President, P.O.
Box 8204, Clearwater, FL 33758).
Presenter: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III.
The 1.57-acre subject property is located at the northeast corner of Gulf-to-Bay and Park
Place boulevards. The property is zoned Commercial (C) and consists of an abandoned
restaurant use (formerly Ruby Tuesday). The subject property is located within the boundaries
of the Park Place Development of Regional Impact (DRI) as a part of the larger Parcel 11. The
Park Place DRI was established on September 1, 1983, via Ordinance 3205-83, but has been
amended several times since its creation. According to the most recent Ordinance regarding
the DRI (Ordinance 7215-03), uses associated with subject property shall be Commercial
(Retail).
The applicant has submitted a Flexible Development (FLD) application for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment project for the construction of a 4,200 square-foot bank
with 49 off-street parking spaces. The proposed building will be constructed in place of the
current building, while the site will not be modified substantially from its present configuration. It
is noted, however, that the existing parking spaces along the south property line will be shifted
five feet toward the north and reduced in number from 18 to 10 spaces. The parking spaces
along the west property line also will be reduced in number from 15 to 13 spaces. The
Community Development 2007-11-20 3
development proposal’s compliance with the various development standards of the Community
Development Code (CDC) is discussed below.
Impervious Surface Ratio (I.S.R.): Pursuant to Section 2-401.1 of the CDC, the
maximum I.S.R. permitted within the Commercial General (CG) Future Land Use category is
0.95. As proposed, the development will have an I.S.R. of 0.56 and therefore meets the above
requirement.
Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.): Pursuant to Section 2-701.1 of the CDC, the maximum F.A.R.
permitted within the CG Future Land Use category is 0.55. As proposed, the development will
have an F.A.R. of 0.06 and therefore meets the above requirement.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to Section 2-704 of the CDC, there are no established
setbacks for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment projects within the C zoning district; however
there are established setbacks for retail sales and service uses of 15-25 feet (front), 0-10 feet
(side), and 10-20 feet (rear). It is noted that the subject property is bordered on two sides by
rights-of-way: Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard on the south and Park Place Boulevard on the west. As
such, the subject property has two fronts and two sides for the purpose of determining setbacks.
The proposed building will exceed all required setbacks for retail sales and service uses.
The proposed parking area (i.e. pavement) will either meet or exceed the required setback
along the north and east sides of the property; however setbacks of only 15 feet and 10 feet are
proposed along the south and west property lines, respectively. With regard to the south (front)
property line, the existing 18 parking spaces are set back at 10 feet, but will be reduced in
number to 10 parking spaces and shifted northward to provide for a 15-foot setback. While
these modifications upon the existing situation do not result in a site plan that meets all
requirements, they do result in a substantial improvement upon what presently exists. With
regard to the west (front) property line, the existing 10-foot setback will be retained; however the
number of parking spaces will be reduced from 15 to 13 parking spaces.
Given the existing improvements that have been made to the subject property and the
required cross-access between the subject property and its neighboring parcels, redevelopment
of the parcel in a manner that would meet all required setbacks would be impractical.
Therefore, the requested reductions in setbacks are justifiable and supportable.
Maximum Height: Pursuant to Section 2-704 of the CDC, there is no established
maximum height for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment projects within the C zoning district;
however there is an established maximum height for retail sales and service uses of 25 feet
(minimum standard). The proposed building has a height of 18.66 feet, which meets the above
referenced maximum allowable height.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to Section 2-704 of the CDC, retail sales and
service uses shall provide off-street parking at a rate of five spaces per 1,000 square-feet of
gross floor area. Therefore, the proposed 4,200 square-foot bank requires 21 off-street parking
spaces. As proposed, the development exceeds this requirement with 49 off-street parking
spaces.
Landscaping: Pursuant to Section 3-1202.E.1 of the CDC, interior landscape islands
shall be designed so that in most cases no more than ten parking spaces are provided in a row
Community Development 2007-11-20 4
(staff may permit flexibility up to 15 spaces in a row). As proposed, the existing northernmost
parking tier consists of 16 consecutive parking spaces, which exceeds the maximum approvable
range for consecutive parking spaces without an intermittent interior landscape island.
Therefore, it is attached as a condition of approval that prior to the issuance of any building
permits, the development plans shall be revised to depict the replacement of a parking space
within the northernmost parking tier with a landscape island consistent with the requirements of
Division 12 of the CDC.
Development of Regional Impact (DRI): As stated previously, the subject property is a
part of the Park Place DRI, which was established on September 1, 1983, via Ordinance 3205-
83. The original DRI has been amended several times since its creation and according to the
most recent Ordinance (Ord. 7215-03), the subject property is for Commercial (Retail) use. As
such, the proposed use retail sales and services (bank) is consistent with the allowable use as
per the Master Development Plan for the Park Place DRI.
There is no outstanding Code Enforcement issue associated with the subject property.
The DRC (Development Review Committee) reviewed the application and supporting
materials at its meeting of October 4, 2007, and deemed the development proposal to be
sufficient to move forward to the CDB (Community Development Board), based upon the
following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact: 1) That the 1.57-acre subject property is located at the northeast corner
of Gulf-to-Bay and Park Place boulevards; 2) That the subject property is located within the
Commercial (C) District; 3) That the subject property is located within the Commercial General
(CG) Future Land Use category; 4) That the subject property is located within the Park Place
Development of Regional Impact (DRI); 5) That the development proposal is compatible with the
surrounding area; and 6) That there are no active Code Enforcement issues associated with the
subject property.
Conclusions of Law: 1) That the development proposal is consistent with the Master
Development Plan for the Park Place DRI; 2) That the development proposal is consistent with
the Standards and Criteria as per Section 2-701.1 of the CDC; 3) That the development
proposal is consistent with the Standards and Criteria as per Section 2-704 of the CDC; 4) That
the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility Criteria as per Section 2-704.C of the
CDC; and 5) That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level
Two Approvals as per Section 3-913.A of the CDC.
Based upon the above and subject to the attached conditions, the Planning Department
recommends approval of the Flexible Development application for a bank (retail sales and
services) within the Commercial (C) District and the Park Place Development of Regional
Impact (DRI) with a reduction from the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 15 feet (to
pavement) and a reduction from the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement)
as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project pursuant to Section 2-704.C of the
Community Development Code.
Conditions of Approval: 1) That prior to the issuance of any building permits, all
outstanding comments of the Engineering Department shall be addressed; 2) That prior to the
issuance of any building permits, the development plans shall be revised to depict the
Community Development 2007-11-20 5
replacement of a parking space within the northernmost parking tier with a landscape island
consistent with the requirements of Division 12 of the CDC; 3) That all future signage associated
with the development and/or tenant spaces be designed as a part of the architectural theme of
the building and be consistent with the materials and colors of the building; and 4) That the final
design and color of the building shall be consistent with the architectural elevations submitted to
(or as modified by) the CDB, and be approved by staff.
See page 14 for motion of approval.
3. Adopt Public Participation Policy – Resolution 07-14
Public Participation Plan
Request: Pass Resolution Pursuant to State Statutes and Florida Administrative Code,
Approving Public Participation Plan to meet requirements of Chapter 163 of the Florida State
Statutes, and Chapter 9J-5 F.A.C.
Presenter: Catherine W. Porter, AICP
Several months ago, the CDB recommended to City Council the adoption of a Public
Participation Policy. Procedurally, once the City Council has adopted the Policy, it is necessary
for the CDB to also adopt the policy in order that the City will be in compliance with Chapter 163
of the Florida State Statutes, and Chapter 9J-5 of the Florida Administrative Code. Chapters
163 and 9J-5 provide that the local governing body and the local planning agency adopt written
procedures to provide for and encourage public participation in the planning process, including
consideration of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Evaluation and Appraisal
Reports. The City of Clearwater has designated the CDB as the local planning agency. As
such, staff is requesting that the CDB establish a Public Participation Policy that will make the
City compliant with the statutes and the administrative rules.
The proposed procedures contained in the policy are based upon the requirements of
Section 9J-5.004 of the Florida Administrative Code. These procedures are in addition to those
required by Section 4-603 of the Community Development Code. Specifically, Section 9J-5.004
requires: 1) the establishment of procedures for keeping the public informed; 2) procedures for
giving an opportunity for public participation and comment during the planning process; and 3)
using these procedures while considering amendments to the comprehensive plan and
evaluation and appraisal reports.
The Planning Department is in the process of writing the EAR-based amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan and needs to adopt written procedures for public participation as part of
this process in order to be in compliance with Florida Statutes and the Florida Adminsitrative
Code. The proposed procedures are typical for public participation in planning and are
designed to meet the needs of the City of Clearwater and it’s citizens.
Planning Department Staff recommends adoption of the Public Participation Policy.
See page 14 for motion to recommend approval.
Community Development 2007-11-20 6
4. Pulled from Consent Agenda
Level Three Application
Case: TA2007-01001 Amendments to the Community Development Code
(Continued from October 16, 2007)
Applicant: City of Clearwater, Planning Department.
Request: Amendments to the Community Development Code regarding numerous provisions
including revising and updating permitted and accessory uses, amending the height
specifications for walls and fences in certain locations, providing fences to be permitted on
vacant lots and lots without a primary use in certain locations, amending the setback
requirement exceptions to allow certain site features, revising tree protection requirements and
the tree removal permit process, revising the property maintenance requirements, amending the
sign code to address signs on City property, providing for the layout of streets to be in a grid
system, improving site plan review submittal requirements, making the Code consistent with
Federal, State, and County law or rules, establishing a process for the Comprehensive Sign
Program, strengthening the implementation requirements for Level One and Level Two
development approvals, clarifying procedures for the neighborhood conservation overlay district
designation process, revising code provisions to improve enforcement of the code, amending
the definitions section, and updating the schedule of fees, rates, and charges.
Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Joe Evich, President, P.O.
Box 8204, Clearwater, FL 33758).
Presenter: Michael H. Reynolds, AICP, Planner III.
Since passage of the Community Development Code in 1999, the Planning Department
has reviewed the Code as it applies to certain proposed development and the City process of
development review applications. City of Clearwater staff has provided input aimed at
improving the Code based on how staff has experienced the Code’s performance in various
circumstances. City staff developed a list of existing Community Development Code provisions
that should be amended to better reflect City development patterns and improve internal
processes. As part of the code update process, suggested amendments have been collected
from the Planning Department and Development & Neighborhood Services Department.
Discussions occurred to make certain that the amendments are workable and not conflicting
with other City codes and processes.
The Planning Department is recommending a total of 31 amendments to the Community
Development Code. Some amendments present a change in current policy or a new policy.
Other amendments are editorial in nature or are refinements to existing Community
Development Code sections.
Below is a summary of the most noteworthy proposed amendments organized by Code
Article. A brief summary of other amendments is also provided here. Within the ordinance
document, text that is underlined indicates proposed language and text containing
strikethroughs indicate deletions.
Article 2 – Zoning Districts
Permitted Uses Location (Chart 2-100 of Ordinance, Pages 28, 32, 34, 35, 36, and 37)
??
Community Development 2007-11-20 7
Ordinance 7835-07 provides an updated summary use chart, which correctly indicates
where land uses are permitted within zoning districts. This chart provides an at-a-glance
understanding of what use can be proposed and where in the City of Clearwater.
The land uses of Veterinary Offices, and or Animal Grooming, with Boarding as an
accessory use is proposed to be permitted through the Flexible Development or Level Two
Process within the Downtown zoning district. Indoor Recreation/Entertainment and Publications
and Printing are proposed as permitted land uses within the Industrial, Research, and
Technology zoning district.
Marinas and Marina Facilities (Pages 28 and 39 of Ordinance)
??
These amendments change the parking requirement for proposed Marinas and Marina
Facility projects within certain zoning districts. The amendments will ensure that marinas and
marina facilities will provide adequate parking, even though the number of required parking
spaces is decreased.
Mixed Use as a Permitted Use (Pages 9, 10, 11, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 28 of Ordinance)
??
This ordinance adds mixed-use within the Tourist and Downtown zoning districts. The
introduction of this use to these districts provides an incentive toward the reduction of
automobile dependence and promotes residential uses within walking distances of shopping,
dining, recreation, and employment. Mixed-use already is permitted within the Commercial and
Office zoning districts.
Article 3 – Development Standards
Sign Code Amendments (Pages 44 and 45 of Ordinance)
??
This amendment provides criteria for signage within City parks or recreational facilities.
This is new to the sign code. The amendment allows one sign at each park to identify a specific
program operated at the facility. It allows signage for programs operating with long-term leases
and requires the Department of Parks and Recreation to approve the sign design to ensure
consistency with Department of Parks and Recreation signage.
Article 4 – Development Review and Other Procedures
Implementation of Levels One and Two Approvals (Pages 47 – 52 of Ordinance)
??
The ordinance includes amendments to improve the implementation requirements for
Level One and Level Two approvals, establishing a clear timeframe of 24 months, unless
otherwise specified, for building permit issuance, completion of work, and certificate of
occupancy issuance. The amendments also provide a performance measure with specific tests
to determine substantial development completeness toward maintaining an approval. The
amendments prevent projects from becoming vested yet not being built or completed, and
remaining in an inactive status.
Comprehensive Sign Program Process (Pages 53 – 57 of Ordinance)
??
Community Development 2007-11-20 8
The ordinance establishes a formal process for the submittal, review, and action on
Comprehensive Sign Program applications. This process is designed to allow for the City’s
Comprehensive Sign Program to be consistent in process and to be efficient. Application
reviews and staff decisions will occur within specific timeframes.
Other Amendments:
Proposed Ordinance 7835-07 includes a significant number of amendments that the
Planning Department believes will assist residents and staff but do not have major policy
implications. These amendments include: 1) Providing language to enable greater wall and
fence height allowances in limited circumstances; 2) Making the Code consistent with other law
or rules; 3) Amending the definitions section; and 4) Improving tree replacement provisions and
the tree removal permit process.
Code Section 4-601 specifies the procedures and criteria for reviewing text
amendments. Any code amendment must comply with the following: The proposed amendment
is consistent with and furthers the goals, policies, objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
Below is a selected list of goals, policies, objectives from the Clearwater Comprehensive
Plan that are furthered by the proposed amendments to the Community Development Code: 1)
Goal 4 – The City of Clearwater shall ensure that all development or redevelopment initiatives
meet the safety, environmental, and aesthetic needs of the City through consistent
implementation of the Community Development Code. The proposed amendments provide for
reduced parking requirements for marinas and marina facilities; 2) Objective 4.1 – All signage
within the City of Clearwater shall be consistent with the Clearwater sign code, as found within
the Community Development Code, and all proposed signs shall be evaluated to determine their
effectiveness in reducing visual clutter and in enhancing the safety and attractiveness of the
streetscape; 3) Policy 4.1.1 – Commercial signs in Clearwater shall be restricted to discourage
the proliferation of visual clutter, promote community aesthetics, provide for highway safety, and
to allow the identification of business locations; 4) Policy 4.1.3 – Sign identification of City parks
and buildings shall be used as a positive example of aesthetic and legible site identification.
The proposed amendments include a single consistent process for City staff review of
Comprehensive Sign Program application submittals; 5) Objective 4.2 – All development or
redevelopment initiatives within the City of Clearwater shall meet the minimum landscaping/tree
protection standards of the Community Development Code in order to promote the preservation
of existing tree canopies, the expansion of that canopy, and the overall quality of development
within the City; and 6) Policy 4.2.1 – All new development or redevelopment of property within
the City of Clearwater shall meet all landscape requirements of the Community Development
Code. The ordinance improves City tree protection requirements and the tree removal permit
process. The ordinance also strengthens the standards for the preparation of landscape plans.
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, standards,
procedures, and definitions. The proposed amendments are consistent with the provisions of
Section 1-103 that lists the purposes of the Code. The proposed amendments to the
Community Development Code are consistent with the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan and the
purposes of the Community Development Code. These amendments further the development
goals that established the Code. Existing Community Development Code provisions are
amended to better reflect City development patterns and improve internal processes.
Community Development 2007-11-20 9
The Planning Department Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 7835-07, which
makes revisions to the Community Development Code.
Regarding Section 7, Article 2, Zoning Districts, Section 2-903, (Table 2-903. “D” District
Flexible Development Standards), concern was expressed that reducing parking to one space
per two boat slips would result in inadequate parking, especially at the downtown boat slips,
where dock boxes will not be provided. It was noted that guest parking for larger boats also
must be considered. It was recommended that the design for downtown boat docks feature an
adjacent drop-off area for boaters to unload gear. It was noted that parking is a problem at
Dunedin’s marina. It was stated that data on recommended parking to boat slip ratio should be
provided. At least 1.5 parking spaces per 2 boat slips was recommended. Concern was
expressed that reduced parking requirements will make it more difficult for boaters to find
parking and launch boats from north beach.
Concern was expressed that parking problems currently exist at the beach marina. It
was requested that the City Council verify that a study supported staff’s recommendation. It
was recommended that the number of spaces be based on data rather than by arbitrary
decision. It was requested that staff restudy the issue and provide evidence of acceptable
parking requirements for boat slips. It was felt it would be difficult for boaters to park up to 1,000
feet from the entrance docks that lack dock boxes.
Planning Director Michael Delk said staff had significant conversations with consultants
and performed an internal study of acceptable standards. The change is intended to bring
consistency to the Code.
In response to a concern regarding proposed changes to expirations of approval in
Section 23. Article 4, Development Review and Other Procedures, Section 4-303 and Section
24. Article 4, Development Review and Other Procedures, Section 4-407, Mr. Delk said the
change is intended to interject performance requirements that oblige developers to do more
than apply for permits.
Clarification of Section 14, Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-903 was
requested as it was felt the language is confusing. Mr. Delk said the change was intended to
allow a walkway to a side entrance. Discussion ensued regarding the section. It was
recommended that language “paving material allowing for pedestrian” be struck to read “. . .
walkways leading to building entrances, driveway access to garages, . . .”
In response to a question regarding Public Transportation Facilities, Senior Planner Mike
Reynolds said no changes were proposed. Mr. Delk said lettering was changed to regroup the
sections for codification. Assistant City Attorney Leslie Dougall-Sides said in the near future,
the City may review proposed language dealing with multi modal and concurrency issues.
In response to a concern regarding the intent of language related to the height of Places
of Worship, Mr. Reynolds said no changes were proposed. Ms. Grimes indicated that the same
criteria are throughout the Code. It was felt the criteria should be reviewed.
In response to a question, Mr. Delk said no changes are proposed regarding the
maximum height for nightclubs.
Community Development 2007-11-20 10
Member Coates moved to recommend approval of Case: TA2007-01001 based on the
evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today’s hearing
and recommend that language in Section 14, Article 3, Development Standards, Section 3-903,
be modified to read ”. . . walkways leading to building entrances and driveway access to
garages, . . .” The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Member Coates moved to recommend approval of Case: TA2007-01001 based on the
evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today’s hearing
and recommend that staff study the matter regarding the correct number of boat slips per
parking space and provide evidence to substantiate their recommendation for one parking
space for two slips. The motion was duly seconded.
In response to a recommendation that the downtown boat slips be required to feature a
drop-off area, Mr. Delk said the CDB could address that issue upon its review of the site plan.
Upon the vote being taken, the motion carried unanimously.
5. Case: FLD2007-06024 – 1200 Rogers Street Level Two Application
Owner/Applicant: John H. Meek Jr.
Representative: Renee Ruggiero, Northside Engineering Services, Inc. (300 South
Belcher Road, Clearwater, FL 33765; phone: 727-443-2869; fax 727-446-8036; e-mail:
renee@northsideengineering.com).
Location: 0.154 acre located at the northeast corner of Rogers Street and South
Missouri Avenue.
Atlas Page: 296B.
Zoning District: Commercial (C) District.
Request: Flexible Development approval for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project to
permit an off-street parking lot in the Commercial (C) District with a reduction to the lot width
along Missouri Avenue from 100 feet to 67 feet, a reduction to the lot width along Rogers Street
from 100 feet to 84 feet, a reduction to the minimum lot area from 10,000 square-feet to 6,728
square-feet, a reduction to the front (west) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement), a
reduction to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the
side (north) setback from 10 feet to five feet (to pavement) and a reduction to the side (east)
setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to pavement) under the provisions of Section 2-704.C. and a
reduction to the front (west) landscape buffer from 15 feet to 10 feet, a reduction to the side
(east) landscape buffer from five feet to zero feet, and a reduction to the required interior
landscaping from 10% to 4.39% under the provisions of a Comprehensive Landscape Program
per Section 3-1202.G.
Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition (Joe Evich, President, P.O.
Box 8204, Clearwater, FL 33758).
Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner II.
The 0.154 acre is located on the east side of Missouri Avenue at the northeast corner of
Rogers Street and Missouri Avenue. The site is an irregularly shaped corner lot with
approximate dimensions of 90 feet by 75 feet. The site is currently a vacant lot.
The proposal includes constructing a surface parking area for 13 vehicles. This off-
street parking area will be used by the neighboring site to the east, which has business hours of
Community Development 2007-11-20 11
8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. All ingress and egress to the parking lot will be from
Rogers Street.
Flexibility Criteria: Pursuant to Section 2-704.I. of the Community Development Code
access to and from the parking lot shall be based on the size and design of the lot and approved
by the Community Development Coordinator. Staff has determined that the requirement to have
the two properties joined with a Unity of Title satisfies the criteria. Section 2-704.I. additionally
requires that all outdoor lighting be designed and located so that no light fixtures cast light
directly onto adjacent land and that the parking lot is screened with a wall or fence if it is
adjacent to residentially used or zoned property. The proposed parking lot has no lighting
associated with it nor is it adjacent to residentially used or zoned property.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: The proposal includes a request for a reduction to the
minimum lot area from 10,000 square-feet to 6,728 square-feet, a reduction to the lot width
along Missouri Avenue from 100 feet to 67 feet and a reduction to the lot width along Rogers
Street from 100 feet to 84 feet. As the property is currently three small vacant lots combined
into one with a structure on the adjacent property to the east, there is limited opportunity to gain
additional property to meet the criteria; thus the request.
Setbacks: The Community Development Code requires front setbacks of 25 feet and
side setbacks of 10 feet as this is a corner lot. The proposal includes a reduction to the front
(west) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet, a reduction to the front (south) setback from 25 feet to 10
feet, a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to five feet and a reduction to the side
(east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet. The proposed parking lot locates the pavement of the
parking lot 10 feet to 14 feet from the front (west) property line, 10 feet from the front (south)
property line and five feet from the side (north) property line. There will be a zero setback on
the side (east) property line. These proposed front and side setbacks exceed or are consistent
with the setbacks of most uses on adjacent and surrounding properties. The adjacent property
to the east will be removing two non-conforming back-out parking spaces with this development
proposal. The proposed parking lot is compatible with the surrounding development and will
provide needed parking.
With the removal of two non-conforming parking spaces that back into the rights-of-way,
coupled with the proposed front setbacks, the site will have an enhanced streetscape. A
retention pond is proposed in the southwest corner of the parking lot adjacent to the rights-of-
way.
Landscaping: Pursuant to Section 3-1202.D.1 of the Community Development Code, this
site is required a 15-foot wide landscape buffer along Missouri Avenue, a 10-foot wide
landscape buffer along Rogers Street, a five-foot landscape buffer on the north side and a five-
foot landscape buffer on the east side. Buffers are to be planted with one tree every 35 feet and
100% shrub coverage is required. The proposal includes a reduction to the perimeter
landscape buffer along Missouri Avenue from 15 feet to 10 feet for approximately half the length
with the remainder at 14 feet and a reduction to east landscape buffer from five feet to zero feet
(adjacent to the applicant owned structure). All other buffers meet code requirements.
Section 3-1202.E.1 of the Code requires the provision of 10% of the vehicular use area
in interior landscaping. The proposal includes a reduction to the interior landscape
requirements from 10% (456 square-feet) to 4.39% (206 square-feet) of the vehicular use area.
Community Development 2007-11-20 12
The landscape proposal includes a generous tiered landscape buffer on Missouri
Avenue including magnolias and over 100 shrubs. Additionally, two non-conforming parking
spaces are being removed on the adjacent property and converted to landscape islands. Four
species of trees are being incorporated including bald cypress, elm, magnolia and holly. The
proposed landscaping will soften the parking lot appearance.
Comprehensive Landscape Program: Pursuant to Section 3-1202.G of the Community
Development Code, the landscaping requirements contained within the Code can be waived or
modified if the application contains a Comprehensive Landscape Program satisfying certain
criteria.
There are no outstanding enforcement issues associated with this site.
Findings of Fact: 1) The subject 0.154 acre is located within the Commercial (C) District;
2) The site is currently vacant; 3) The proposal includes reductions to setbacks to pavement; 4)
The proposal is to construct a 13-space parking lot; 5) The lot area is 6,728 square-feet, which
requires a reduction from the 10,000 square-feet required; 6) The proposal is compatible with
the surrounding development and will provide needed public parking on the beach; and 7) There
are no active code enforcement cases for the parcel.
Conclusions of Law: 1) Staff concludes that the proposal is consistent with the
Standards as per Tables 2-701.1 and 2-704 for the Commercial District of the Community
Development Code; 2) Staff further concludes that the proposal is in compliance with the
General Applicability criteria per Section 3-913 and the other standards of the Code; and 3) That
the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-704.C. and I
and the Comprehensive Landscape Program per Section 3-1202.G.
The DRC reviewed the application and supporting materials on October 4, 2007. The
Planning Department recommends approval for the Flexible Development application for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project to permit an off-street parking lot in the
Commercial (C) District with a reduction to the lot width along Missouri Avenue from 100 feet to
67 feet, a reduction to the lot width along Rogers Street from 100 feet to 84 feet, a reduction to
the minimum lot area from 10,000 square-feet to 6,728 square-feet, a reduction to the front
(west) setback from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the front (south) setback
from 25 feet to 10 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (north) setback from 10 feet to five
feet (to pavement) and a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to
pavement) under the provisions of Section 2-704.C. and a reduction to the front (west)
landscape buffer from 15 feet to 10 feet, a reduction to the side (east) landscape buffer from five
feet to zero feet, and a reduction to the required interior landscaping from 10% to 4.39% under
the provisions of a Comprehensive Landscape Program per Section 3-1202.G. with Conditions
of Approval: 1) That a Unity of Title be completed and recorded for 1200 and 1204 Rogers
Street prior to the issuance any permits; 2) That landscaping at both 1200 Rogers and 1204
Rogers Street be installed per the proposal submitted; and 3) That Planning Staff conduct a final
inspection prior to the Certificate of Completion.
Community Development 2007-11-20 13
Member Coates moved to approve Cases FLD2006-03015, FLD2007 -10031, and
FLD2007 -06024 and recommend approval of Item 3, Public Participation Policy on today's
Consent Agenda based on evidence in the record, including the applications and the Staff
Reports, and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff
Reports, with conditions of approval as listed. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
F. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 1 :49 p.m.
~~
Board Reporter
Community Development 2007-11-20
~~~
Community Development Board
14
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: November 20, 2007
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties.
CONTINUED ITEMS (Items 1-2):
1. Case: FLD2007-03...Q67 - 685,689,693 and 699 Bay Esplanade (Level Two)
Yes V" no
2. Case: TA2007-01001 Amendments to the Community Development Code (Level Three)
Yes no f\/ ~
level Two Application (Items 1-2)
1. C,se: FLD2007-1 0031 - 2710 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard
~Yes no
2. Case: FLD2007-06024 - 1200 Rogers Street
t/yes
no
Signatu'e:~ta ~
Date: I I - I !.... (j'7
lOt c4J~ r-:~'t.c",_L
PRINT NAME .....
S:\Planning Department\C D B\CDB, property investigation check list.doc
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: November 20, 2007
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties.
CONTINUED ITEMS (Items 1-2):
1. Case: FLD2007-03007 - 685,689,693 and 699 Bay Esplanade (Level Two)
/" Yes no
2. Case: TA2007-QI00l Amendments to the Community Development Code (Level Three)
Yes ,:"^-- no
level Two Application (Items 1-2)
1.
yse: FLD2007-10031- 2710 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard
Yes no
2.
Case: FLD2007-06024 - 1200 Rogers Street
/ Yes
no
r~~
Signat.,", - . _ ~ _~ -' ~
Dat.. Ill'i /e,)
~{z....4-rl/~ L. ~..1:' _
PRINT NAME
S:\Planning Department\C D B\CDB, property investigation check Iist.doc
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Meeting Date: November 20, 2007
I have conducted a personal investigation on the personal site visit to the following properties.
CONTINUED ITEMS (Items 1-2):
1. Cas~: FLD2007-03007 - 685,689,693 and 699 Bay Esplanade (Level Two)
./'/ Yes no
2. Case: TA2007-0100l Amendments to the Community Development Code (Level Three)
Yo< no JfI1-
Level Two Application (Items 1- 2)
1.
Ca~ FLD2007 -1003 1 - 2710 Gulf-to- Bay Boulevard
/ Yes no
2.
Case: FLD2007-06024 - 1200 Rogers Street
~ no
Signature:
'- CI"~'
Date:
( l / / t /u1-
I
"................"
." \ ~O. c'\.c'-.
(
c: I (Hi\ ( \....._.
PRINT NAME
S:\Planning Department\C D B\CDB, property investigation check list.doc