Under construction and selling in Mirror Lake, St. Petersburg, FL
The Cade
749 Burlington Avenue North, Mirror Lake, downtown St. Petersburg
Fifteen residences on the highest ground downtown, about 36 feet up and roughly 26 feet above the nearest base flood elevation. Nothing was demolished to build it, and at fifteen homes you are owed no prospectus. The whole record is below.
- Address
- 749 Burlington Ave N
- Size
- 15 residences, 7 storeys
- Ground
- About 36 feet
- Tax rate
- 19.9197 mills
At a glance
The Cade fast facts
Every figure below is read from the recorded plat name as it appears in the appraiser's own legal description, the city's permit records including the detail view that carries declared value and floor area, both published views of the county's certified roll printed separately, the tax collector's rate table reconciled authority by authority until it summed to the appraiser's certified figure exactly, the federal flood records queried by whole parcel and then controlled at 300 and 1,000 metres, or federal elevation sampled at 33 points across the site. This is the first page in this series in this county, so the method behind it was built from scratch and every quirk is written down.
- Record address
- 749 Burlington Avenue North, St. Petersburg, FL 33701
- Recorded plat
- Cade on Mirror Lake
- Superseded plat
- Chadwick's Resub, which every city permit still keys to
- Size
- Seven storeys. Fifteen residences marketed, eighteen approved
- Status
- Permit approved, site work under way, sales live
- Prospectus owed to you
- No. Fifteen homes misses that threshold by six
- Association website required
- No, and it never will be
- What was torn down
- Nothing. No permit of any kind here before 2025
- Permit value on file
- $12,960,000 declared, across 64,072 square feet
- Tax rate
- 19.9197 mills, the highest in this series so far
- District assessments
- None. One parcel in 108,870 in this city carries any
- Ground
- About 36 feet, on the ridge. Roughly 26 feet above the nearest base flood
- Flood
- Mapped as minimal hazard, outside the special flood hazard area
- Evacuation
- Non-evacuation, confirmed three independent ways
- Current asking prices on the residences still available
- Not published yet
Not published yet
Location: see 749 Burlington Avenue North on the map. Get pricing on the residences still available. Figures carry the dates shown and are subject to change.
Who is building it, and what was here
A plat named for the building, a 1937 house that twice escaped demolition, and nothing torn down
This project passes the identification test more cleanly than anything else in this series, which is worth explaining because we killed a page a month ago for failing it. The recorded plat here is literally named Cade on Mirror Lake, and that name appears verbatim in the county appraiser's legal description on all four plat parcels and in the county parcel fabric's own subdivision field. The city's building permit names the owning company at this street address. Three independent government locks, none of them a lien.
One search warning that will save you an hour. The city's permit system still keys every permit on this site to the SUPERSEDED plat, Chadwick's Resub, because the new plat was recorded after the applications went in. Search by street address rather than by the current parcel identifier, or a busy site looks permit free. The approval itself was docketed against the neighbouring address for the same reason.
Now the fact that is unusual for downtown and is very well evidenced. Nothing was demolished to build this. The city's permit index reaches back to 1988 on this block and returns zero permits of any kind at this address before September 2025, the county carries the parcel at zero improvement value, and the planning record calls it a vacant lot. It was the side yard and parking apron of the house next door.
That house is the other half of the story, and it is the reason the building has its name. A 1937 stone house stands on the adjoining lot, still on the roll at about $395,000 of improvements and roughly 3,400 square feet of living area. It spent years in office use, took a change of use and a certificate of occupancy in late 2024, and is now being restored as a residence by a sibling company. The project is named for the 1930s builder who built it, credited with more than forty stone-clad houses across this city.
It nearly did not survive to be restored. A previous owner applied in 2022 to demolish structures on the site and applied in 2023 to build a duplex there. Both applications went void. The permit file records the whole abandoned attempt, which is the kind of thing that never makes it into a brochure and tells you a great deal about the block.
The plat is doing three jobs at once and you should understand the shape of it. Four parcels totalling about 20,500 square feet: the condominium on one lot, the restored 1937 house on another, a new two storey house of about 2,800 square feet going up on a third, and a small common access tract. The condominium lot is the only one the condominium company owns. A sibling company owns the rest.
On the building itself, the permit file is unusually forthcoming for this stage. The application is recorded as a new multi family residence of five units and over, with a declared construction value of $12,960,000 across 64,072 square feet, and it is approved for permit. Separate applications cover parking, paving and landscaping, and tree removal. That is a real number on a real government record, not a press figure.
The one thing the record does not settle is how many homes there are. Fifteen are marketed and selling. Eighteen were approved by the city's development review commission in late 2024, unanimously, on a setback variance for the part of the building above 62 feet. The permit records only the category. The scheme shrank between approval and sale, and the public record does not say why.
Take these four to the sales gallery: why the count moved from eighteen to fifteen and what that did to the floor plans; the condominium documents and budget, none of which anyone here has to publish; what the association's share of the shared plat access tract will be; and which residences remain and at what price.
What this actually costs
The highest rate in this series, and absolutely nothing layered on top
Start with the headline, because it is the highest number this series has published. The total on the 2025 final roll is 19.9197 mills. For comparison, the two Naples projects in this same batch carry 9.0201, and the highest Sarasota code, a downtown improvement district, carries 16.8815. This city is a different tax world from the Gulf Coast pages in this series.
We reconciled it rather than quoting it, because the county publishes a figure that will mislead you. The components are city, county, schools across two lines, a juvenile welfare board, emergency medical services, a transit authority, a water management district and a planning council, and they sum to the certified figure exactly. A county health line that appears on the published table is not part of this city's total and overshoots it precisely. That is how we know the breakdown is right.
Two figures you may be quoted that do not describe this address. The county publishes a typical city taxpayer total of 21.7097 for the coming year. It is an illustrative composite, it was still pending board action when we checked, and its water management line bears no relation to the water management millage actually levied here. Use the certified per-parcel figure, not the chart.
Now the genuinely favourable half, and we proved it rather than assuming it. There is no community development district, no municipal services taxing unit and no special assessment on this land. Across all 108,870 parcels in this city exactly ONE carries a non-zero special assessment, while 167,413 parcels county-wide do. The field is live and populated. This city is simply outside it.
The mechanism is different from every other county in this series and worth writing down. This county's district burden is an unincorporated area taxing unit plus flat fire and community service charges, and being inside a city is what switches it off. The county publishes that unit at 2.0857 mills for unincorporated taxpayers and zero for city taxpayers. Sarasota reaches the same answer by having no districts at all; a Lee County parcel reached the opposite one through an independent fire levy.
The parcel record confirms it a second way, which is the kind of corroboration we like. All four plat parcels carry the plain city millage code with no suffix. This county uses 53 codes and several are compound, bolting a fire district or a water management sub-district onto a city. The unsuffixed code is direct evidence that nothing attaches here.
On value, do not accept an estimated tax bill for this address from anyone. These parcels did not exist until the plat was recorded, so they have never run a tax cycle. Their tax and millage fields are empty, and there is no sale price, no sale date and no prior year record on any of them. The acquisition history sits on the superseded parcels. The condominium lot is carried at about $810,900 of land and nothing built.
One roll quirk to know before you read the record yourself. This county publishes only one roll, certified, and its two published views agree to the dollar on every parcel, which is not something this series can usually say. But the condominium lot is classified commercial on it while its use code and its permit are both residential. That is an artefact of a vacant entitled site awaiting a building, and it should flip once the building is added.
The practical version: the rate is high and it is the whole bill, which is a better position than a lower rate with a district bolted on. Ask for a real tax estimate on a real residence once the building is on the roll, and ignore any figure derived from the land value.
Where the leverage is
Fifteen homes, no prospectus owed, and a permit file that tells you what it costs to build
This is the sharpest thing on the page and it cuts against you, so it belongs near the top rather than buried.
Here is the arithmetic that nobody puts in a brochure. Florida owes a buyer a prospectus above twenty residential units, and requires an association to maintain a website publishing its budget, contracts, insurance and inspection reports only at twenty-five or more. At fifteen homes this building clears neither, and misses the first by six. Nothing is being withheld improperly. Everything a larger building must hand over, you have to request.
The structural obligations are the opposite way round, and they do apply. Those count habitable storeys rather than units, and at seven this building clears both the structural integrity reserve study requirement and the milestone inspection regime outright, with no small building exemption. The same roof, structure, waterproofing and lift line items a two hundred home tower spreads across two hundred owners are spread here across fifteen. Ask what the developer's reserve assumptions are.
Where you do have real information is the permit file, and it is better than most. The city's permit detail view publishes the declared construction value and the declared floor area: $12,960,000 across 64,072 square feet. That is roughly $202 a square foot of declared construction cost on a public record, before land, before soft costs and before profit. Very few buyers ever see that number for the building they are buying into.
And there is a second piece of information the seller will not volunteer. The approved scheme was eighteen residences and the marketed scheme is fifteen. Knowing that three approved homes went away, and whether that means larger floor plans or a changed mix, is negotiating information. The public record shows the gap without explaining it.
That is precisely where representation earns its keep. An agent who has the permit file's declared cost and area, the approval record and its variance, the eighteen to fifteen gap, and the live listing history for the residences already on the market can price one of the remaining homes against real evidence rather than a price sheet, without leaving money on the table. Nobody selling you the unit is going to assemble that for you.
What to get in writing before you make an offer: which residences remain and at what price; the condominium documents, budget and reserve schedule, none of which anyone here must publish; whether a structural integrity reserve study has been commissioned and on what assumptions; why the count moved from eighteen to fifteen; the expected recording date for the declaration and the expected turnover date; and the shared plat arrangement with the two neighbouring lots.
Fifteen homes, and a public record that tells you what it costs to build one
Ask what is available, and ask for the documents nobody here is required to publish.
The area
Dry in a modelled category five, in a postcode that took two storms in one season
This address produces the most favourable hazard profile this series has published, and the most unfavourable postcode behind it. Both belong on the page.
Start with the ground, because everything else follows from it. Sampled at 33 points across all four plat parcels, the site runs 34.5 to 37.1 feet, and the building footprint alone 35.3 to 37.1, averaging about 36. The spread across the building site is under two feet, so unusually a single figure is defensible here. Elsewhere in this series a downtown parcel ran nearly eight feet across its own boundary and no single figure was.
Against the flood maps that elevation is decisive. A whole parcel query returns a single designation of minimal flood hazard, outside the special flood hazard area, with no base flood elevation at all. The same answer comes back for all four parcels queried together. There is no mandatory federal flood insurance purchase requirement attached to this ground.
We proved that negative harder than anywhere else in this series. A 300 metre buffer still returns the single minimal hazard designation. Only at 1,000 metres does the expected complexity appear, and then it appears in full: five distinct zones including coastal floodplain designations at base flood elevations of nine and ten feet. The nearest of those sits about 26 feet below this site.
The evacuation answer agrees, and this county's layer actually discriminates. Three independent county products return a non-evacuation designation here. We tested the layer against control points across the county and got three different values at four points, including the most exposed designation out on the barrier island. That matters because in a county further south the equivalent layer returns the same answer everywhere, including inland, and is useless.
Then there is the storm surge result, which is the most striking single finding here. The county publishes five separate surge depth models, one per hurricane category, and at this site all five return a negative value. Negative means the modelled surge surface sits below the ground surface. The site is modelled dry in a category five. For a downtown address a mile and a half from open water, that is the ridge doing its job.
Now the honest counterweight, because the postcode's record is severe. This postcode has recorded about 219 federal flood insurance claims and roughly $8.16 million paid across the life of the programme. September 2024 alone accounts for 30.6 per cent of every claim ever filed and 72.5 per cent of every dollar ever paid, while calendar 2024 accounts for 40.6 and 89.6 per cent. Those are two different measures and we keep them separate deliberately.
The gap between those two figures is the widest this series has measured, and it has a cause. A second storm the following month added another 15.7 per cent of lifetime dollars across 19 claims. Two distinct events in one season, not one. The contrast with the 1980s is instructive: one month in 1985 produced 23 claims and under $200,000, so events then were frequent and cheap and 2024 was the reverse.
One limit on that data nobody should pretend past. Of those 219 claim records, 171 carry no flood zone field at all. Nobody can compute a zone weighted claim rate from this file, and the honest conclusion is simply that the postcode's losses are concentrated in its waterfront and low-lying parts and this site is not one of them. Since 2024 the record is empty: no claims in 2025, and none recorded through the data freeze in 2026.
On schools this district is a choice district rather than a boundary district, so the answer is zoned rather than guaranteed. The zoned assignments verified three independent ways are North Shore Elementary, John Hopkins Middle and St. Petersburg High. Confirm with the district before you contract, because a controlled choice district can place a child elsewhere.
What you need to know
Buying from a developer with someone on your side
Representation costs you nothing and the timing is the catch: in a developer sales gallery your agent generally has to be with you or named at your very first contact for the registration to stand. Sort it out before you call.
The case for it here is a small building with an unusually informative public file. The permit file publishes the declared construction cost and floor area, the approval record publishes the variance and the original home count, and the plat publishes the shared arrangement with the two neighbouring lots. None of that will be handed to you across a sales desk, and at fifteen homes nothing else has to be.
Know what the statute still gives you. On a developer sale you are entitled to the condominium documents, and you have a rescission right measured in days from the later of signing or delivery of those documents. At this size you are not entitled to a prospectus, which makes that delivery date the moment your clock starts. Have someone read the declaration, the budget and the reserve schedule inside it.
On deposits the protection is narrower than most buyers assume. The first ten per cent is held in escrow. Above ten per cent the statute permits the developer to use the money for construction once work has begun, and here site work is under way. We did not search Florida regulatory enforcement records or civil dockets for any builder, developer, contractor or land-holding entity, so read the absence of any such note as unchecked, not clean. Get an independent inspection of the specific residence before closing, use the warranty window while it lasts, and read the limited warranty before you sign.
Subdiview is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by BSC Cade, Backstreets Capital, any homebuilder, any developer of The Cade, the City of St. Petersburg, or Pinellas County. The developer is identified here because it is the owner of record in the county property records and the named owner on the city's building permit, which is a statement of fact and not a representation of any relationship. Community names and marks are the property of their respective owners and are used for identification only. Subdiview is operated by a real estate broker licensed in Illinois. We are not your agent, we do not represent you, and we perform no real estate brokerage services in this state. No one at Subdiview is licensed in this state. If you join an interest list, your information is referred to a real estate professional licensed in the state where the property is located, who will contact you directly. We are compensated by that professional's brokerage, not by you. Pricing, plans, inventory, district, tax, flood and approval details on this page carry the dates shown, are as published, proposed or reported rather than committed, and are subject to change without notice.
Questions and answers
The Cade FAQ
How high is this site, and does it matter?
It matters more than anything else on this page. We sampled federal bare-earth elevation at 33 points, every corner of all four plat parcels plus each centroid, and the whole site runs 34.5 to 37.1 feet with the building footprint itself between 35.3 and 37.1. The defensible single figure is about 36 feet, and unusually for this series a single figure is defensible, because the spread across the building site is under two feet. The nearest base flood elevation to this address is nine to ten feet, which puts the site roughly 26 feet above it. That one measurement explains everything else: it is why the parcel is mapped as minimal flood hazard rather than inside the special flood hazard area, why it carries a non-evacuation designation, and why all five of the county's storm surge depth models return a negative value here, meaning the modelled surge surface sits below the ground surface even in a category five. This is the Mirror Lake ridge, the high spine of downtown.
The postcode flooded badly in 2024. Is that a problem here?
Both halves of that need saying. The postcode's claim record is real and it is severe: about 219 federal flood insurance claims and roughly $8.16 million paid across the life of the programme, with September 2024 alone accounting for 30.6 per cent of every claim ever filed and 72.5 per cent of every dollar ever paid, and calendar 2024 as a whole accounting for 40.6 and 89.6 per cent. Those are two different measures and we keep them apart deliberately; the gap between them here is the widest this series has measured, because a second storm the following month added another 15.7 per cent of lifetime dollars. But the claims are not at this address. They are in the waterfront and low-lying parts of the postcode that sit inside the mapped special flood hazard area. This site does not, and stands about 26 feet above the nearest base flood elevation. One honest caveat: 171 of those 219 claim records carry no flood zone field at all, so nobody can compute a zone-weighted claim rate from this data, and anyone who quotes you one has made it up.
How many homes are there?
Fifteen as marketed and as currently selling. Eighteen as approved by the city's development review commission in late 2024. The building permit itself records only the category, multi family residence of five units and over, so it does not settle the question. The scheme shrank between approval and sale, which is common and usually means larger homes, but it is not something the public record explains and you should ask. What the permit does carry, and this is unusually good disclosure for a building at this stage, is a declared construction value of $12,960,000 across 64,072 square feet. The approval itself was a setback variance for reduced west and north setbacks on the part of the building above 62 feet, granted unanimously, and it was docketed against the neighbouring address because the historic house was the anchor parcel at the time.
What was demolished to build it?
Nothing, and in downtown St. Petersburg that is worth a sentence. The city's permit index reaches back to 1988 on this block and returns zero permits of any kind at this address before September 2025. The county carries the parcel at zero improvement value and classifies it as vacant, and the planning record describes it as a vacant lot. This was open ground, most recently the side yard and parking apron of the house next door. The wider story on the plat is the opposite and it is a good one: the 1937 stone house on the adjoining lot still stands, is on the roll at about $395,000 of improvements and roughly 3,400 square feet, and is being restored as a residence by a sibling company. A previous owner applied to demolish structures on that site in 2022 and to build a duplex in 2023, and both applications went void. The house survived that.
What does it cost to own here, beyond the price?
The rate is the highest this series has published anywhere: 19.9197 mills on the 2025 final roll. We reconciled that authority by authority against the tax collector's own table until the components summed to the certified figure exactly, and the breakdown is city, county, schools, a juvenile welfare board, emergency medical services, a transit authority, a water management district and a planning council. What is genuinely favourable is that nothing is layered on top. The parcels carry the plain city millage code with no district suffix, and there is no community development district, no municipal services taxing unit and no special assessment. We proved that rather than asserting it: across all 108,870 parcels in this city exactly one carries a non-zero special assessment, while 167,413 parcels county-wide do, so the field is live and this city is simply outside it. Two warnings. Do not accept the county's published typical taxpayer figure of 21.7097; it is an illustrative composite that was still pending board action when we checked. And do not accept an estimated tax bill for this address at all, because these parcels are new and have never run a tax cycle.
What should I be most careful about here?
Four things. First, at fifteen homes this building owes you no prospectus and its association will never have to publish a budget, an insurance policy or an inspection report, so everything you learn you have to ask for. Second, if you go looking at city permits yourself, search by street address rather than by the parcel identifier: the city's system still keys every permit on this site to the superseded plat, so a search on the current identifier makes a busy site look permit-free. Third, ownership rests on county property records rather than a deed, because this county's clerk index blocks automated requests, so read it as per county records. Fourth, one county field is demonstrably wrong here: the parcel record marks the 1937 house as not in a historic district while the planning record describes it as a contributing structure. Do not rely on that field.
Before you make an offer
Get your inside track on The Cade
We will connect you with a real estate professional licensed in Florida who represents you rather than the seller, who can register you before your first contact with the sales gallery, and who will get you what this page could not: current asking prices on the residences still available, the condominium documents and budget nobody here has to publish, why the home count moved from eighteen to fifteen, the reserve assumptions on a fifteen owner building, and the expected recording and turnover dates.
It costs nothing, creates no brokerage relationship by itself, and does not obligate you to anything.