The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2005-05048, Trish rescan, Vendor lrg drwgs~ ~ ORIGINAi FLD2005-05048 (~ ) 331 CLEVELAND ST Date Received: 05/26/20 ,; ~' ~~ WATERS EDGE ~~~~ ~~~~° ZONING DISTRICT: D r,. - ~ ° . ~~` LAND USE: CBD ~,~~, 112005 ATLAS PAGE: 286B PLANNER OF RECORD: R T CLW CoverSheet "' fd ~x . ~' Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-562-4865 ^ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ^ SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION including 1) collated, 2) stapled and 3) folded sets of site plans ^ SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE ~ CASE #: DATE RECEIVED: RECEIVED BY {staff initials): ATLAS PAGE #: ZONING DISTRICT: LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: SURROUNDING USES OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES: NORTH: SOUTH: WEST: EAST; ~` NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS) FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION Comprehensive Infill Project (Revised 12/30/2004) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT A. APPLICANT, PR'O,P`E-RTCY~, OW"~N,ER AND AGENT INFO/RMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME~~G(~] ~.~[JLG >` Ili t~®.(~iLi~ L7t7 MAILING 3 PHONE NUMBER: ~3 ~ ~ 7 7- ~/~'Y~ FAX NUMBER: ~/~ .. B ~ `~_ ~~Z LZ PROPERTY OWNER(S): ~iGS C 17.5 ~ ~I~LL:~GL.~,~ C~~b~~.¢~~ (Must include AL owners as listed on the deed -provide original signature(s) on page AGENT NAMEiadf~~/N ~~~ ~ ~~ - D~//~ f 1~~"L ~~ ~-~~7~1~sS ~GG MAILING ADDRESS:y ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~p S S ~ C-~~s~ ,;~~ ~ ?~~~eD PHONE NUMBER: ~/~~~ 7 .~/:/ FAX NUMBER:®/~. X77- /LL~ CELL NUMBER: E-MAIL ADDRESS:d~l~~I1-~. ~/fU~ .e ~GYI~TD~ . C'd~~~ I B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATI/ON: (Code Section/4-2U2.A) STREET ADDRESS of subject site i+ ~Cf Jfl~~ ~ , •~1~~,~ ,:,_ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ?~ V ' ~~T^';° (if not listed ere, pl se no the location of is docu nt in the submittal) ' """'""" "' PARCEL NUMBER: L ZO c3 i o ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ X05 PARCEL SIZE: ~ f O 5 ~ _ _ _ [ , >~~ JSr (acre§, square feet) PROPOSED USE(S) AND SIZE(S): ~ L~ ~ ~ ' ~ Ir~HtuNll~lCs ~ ~~~~L~ (`I~~/~tvT ~~~ (number of dwelling units, hotel rooms or square footage of nonresidential use) "' ,._ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST(S): `L ~ ~C.c.b ~~ /~ Attach sheets and be specific when identifying the request (include all requested code deviations; e.g. reduction in required number of parking spaces, specific use, a c.) DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES __ NO ('rf yes, attach a copy of the applicable ~ documents) C/PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5) (°! SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see Page 6) D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A) Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA-Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which ii is located. ,~ / 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. Lsf~ ~~T~~~`/~ c ~~~~~ 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. 4. mi nimize traffic congestion. The proposed d evelopment is designed to / n s 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. ~G~C~ ~ s`-~~4~T~~ 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory:and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. __ , ~. ~~;.. 1 :d ^ 1. Provide complete responses to the ten (10) COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PR~~G"F~`,CRh~RIA?,(as,a~plicat~l~}~-~k{plai, how each criteria is achieved in detail: 1 ~~ ,r•~,t ~ 'f 4~,,'~ti"q„'ter? ti °~~`"•'~ ~ ~; The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use, intensity and development standards. / Page 2 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater i • 2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a comprehensive infill. redevelopment project or residential infill project will not reduce the fair market value of abutting properties. (Include the existing value of the site and the proposed value of the site with the improvements.) 3. The uses within the comprehensive infill redevelopment project are otherv/l~e permitted in the City of Clearwater. 4. The uses or mix of use within the comprehensive infill redevelopment project are compatible with adjacent land uses. 5. Suitable sites for development or redevelopment of the uses or mix of uses within the comprehensive infill redevelopment project are not otherwise available in the City of Clearwater. 6. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a comprehensive infill redevelopment project will upgrade the immediate vianity of the parcel proposed for development. 7. The design of the proposed comprehensive infill redevelopment project creates a form and function that enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. 8. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. 9. Adequate off-street parking in the immediate vicinity according to the shared parking formula in Division 14 of Article 3 will be available to avoid on-street parking in the immediate vicinity of parcel proposed for development. f 10. The design of all buildings complies with the Tourist District or Downtown District design guidelines iri DivisjOn 5 ic1~3 Use separate sheets as necessary. ~ f E{ ,: ,.: ~ -_ 1/.l~i.~i / 1`_ ~ ~ ~-%`.._..._`....'~iiv ids ~: ORIGINAL Page 3 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater • C~ E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Manual and 4-202.A.21) A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that invol addition or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with I City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in .impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption this requirement. If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt. `~ At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following: r Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines; !, Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; _ All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; _ Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outle _ A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and d City manual. _ Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculation ^~\A,COPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEME CC ~~(SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable ^ Ackno~wle~dg''e'ment of stormwater plan requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): V stormwater plan as noted above is included t control structure; ata necessary to demonstrate compliance with the s. NT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT SUBMITTAL provioeo. stormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor elevations shall CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. tf you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 5624750. F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A) SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) -One original and 74 copies; TREE SURVEY .(including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by speces, size (DBH 4" or greater), and location, including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) -please design around the existing trees; ,LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY; C!~ PARKING DEMAND STUDY in conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (ie: Reduce number of spaces). Prior to the submittal of this application, the methodology of such study shall be approved by the Community Development Coordinator and shall be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether a not /deviations to the parking standards are approved; R~ GRADING PLAN, as applicable; ^ PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided); I ^ COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; i G. SN'E PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4202.A) [ _ ~ _ p'/SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): - L,~„ ~ ; ~' ' All dimensions; ~, y ~ ~ ~-'""'""'" i North arrow; , ~ Engineedng bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared; ~, ~, : ~ e~~ °~ ( 20Q~ _ Location map; y a ~ Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package; i,' i 1__' ~ Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures; ., t .."..~ .,.~.._.r-.--ter-- ; ~ t ~ V i ` ' ~; Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures; ; -. - , ~ '< Y. ~ All required setbacks; ~ I s '~~~~ ~• ~-°- All existing and proposed points of access; ~""` `" ` All required sight triangles; Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen ^ /t trees, including description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; ' ~ K 0 ~ ~ (", - Location of all public and private easements; / ~ Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site; Page 4 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater • _ Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas and water lines; _ All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas; _ Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas; Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening {per Section 3-201(D)(i) and Index#701); Location of all landscape material; Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities; Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; and Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks. ~ SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development,. in written/tabular farm: Land area in square feet and acres; Number of EXISTING dwelling units; Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; Gross floor area devoted to each use; _ Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the number of n;quired spaces; Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces and driveways, expressed in square feet and percentage of the paved vehicular area; Size and species of all landscape material; Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easement; Building and structure heights; Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and _ _ Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for ail nonresidential uses. EDUCED SITE PLAN to scale (8 %X 11) and color rendering if possible; FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan: ~,_ One-foot contours or spot elevations on site; ~ Offsite elevations 'rf required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel; _ All open space areas; Location of ail earth or water retaining walls and earth berms; Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned); Streets and drives (dimensioned); Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); Structural overhangs; Tree Inventory; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 8" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of such trees. H. LAyDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A) tY/ LANDSCAPE PLAN: All existing and proposed structures; Names of abutting streets; _ Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations; _ Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers; Sight visibility triangles; _ Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing; _ Proposed and required parking spaces; _ Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the siie, by species, size and loca4ions, including dripiines (as indicated on required tree survey); Plant schedule with a key (symbol or IabeQ indicating the size, description, specifications and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, inGuding botanical and common names; Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant schedule; Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and protective measures; Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and percentage covered; Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board); _ Irrigation notes. REDUCED LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8 '/ X 11) (color rendering if possible); IRRIGATION PLAN (required for level two and three approval); ^ COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met. ll ~'~ '' ~ ``6~ S :~ 1 r ~,%~ i'L..i ~. ,~ ~ r , ' ,.,. .. I 20Q5 ~'~ _. ~ t ~;,~, Page 5'of'.7....-,F1e~ble ORIGINAL Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23) Required in the event the application includes a development where design standards are in issue (e.g. Tourist and Downtown Districts) or as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project or a Residential Infill Project. . BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -all sides of all buildings including height dimensions, colors and materials; q/F2EDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS -four sides of building with colors and materials to scale (8 '/z X 11) (black and white and color rendering, if possible) as required. J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS /Section 3-1 ^ All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be removed or n ~ to remain. All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing; freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals) ^ Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required). ^ Reduced signage proposal (8'/Z X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application. K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.13 and 4-801.C) ^ Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager orhis/her designee or if the proposed development • Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan. • Will generate 100 or more new vehicle directional trips per hour and/or 1000 or more new vehicle trips per day. Will affect a nearby roadway segment and/or intersection with five (5) reportable accidents within the prior twelve (12) month period or that is on the City's annual list of most hazardous intersections. Trip generation shall be based on the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip General Manual. The Traffic Impact Study must be prepared in accordance with a "Scoping Meeting" held with the Traffic Operations Manager and the Planning Department's Development Review Manager or their designee (727-5fi2-4750) ~ _. _ _ ~ ~1 t.~ I ~ ~ '- ~ ~ ' d E~ Refer to Section 4801 C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement ~ .t '` r ~ `-=.-.I ~ ~ __ ~ s ~j,,,,,,, L~~ ~ ~ ~ ^ cknowledgement of traffic impact study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following) ' ,% ,. ~ ' ~ .lU~ 2 12005 I Traffic Impact Study is included. The study must include a summary table of pre- and post-development levels of service for al y legs and each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scoping Meeting. _ _ „~,~~ ,~ F ;.r ~ ~:'r::~~l~uwC~ Traffic Impact Study is not required. -,.~ „ _' _ ' __„_ ~, ,+ Y „r; k r_R ~.,.._„__......,_,_„r CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750. ORIGINAL L. SIGNATURE: 1, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this applicati are true and accurate to the best of m~~knowledge and oath a ity representatives to visit and photog/aph the property d rib In this application. ~~ STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS t and subscribed before a this ~ day of .D. 2()~ to me and/or by ~ who is personally known has produced as owner or ~Y P r• My Comm slsion expire : ~~~ ~' DOREEN A. WILLIAMS ~ MY COMMISSION # DD 15580 pr ~o EXPIflES: October 14, 2006 1.8003-NOTARY FL Notary Service & Borx!'uig, Inc. ! • AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: (Names of all property owners on deed -please PRINT full names) 1. That (1 am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location): 'a'il (lPVPlanrt ~'YPPt & '~C1 Pierce street -- Clearwater, Florida 33755 2. That this property constitutes the property for which a request fora: (describe request) y/- t '" ,v 7.4~.~r~~ /. 3. That a undersigned (has/have) appointed and (doesldo) appoint: °~Lf!_!'~ ~ (C'!t~~~l"l~.l /~)C~hC-4 +• / / ~ - ,J (J~ - - as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 4. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 5. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes Clty representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application; 6. That (I/we), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is tr and correct. Pro erly O ner Pro Owner Property Owner Property Owner - STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF P1111ELLAS fore me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by thgJaws of the State Florida, on this ~ ~~ day of c7~~ personally appeared ~CA.T1f~~F_S L who havin been first duly swum Depos ` and says that he/she fully u~ ands j~~~t~f the affidavit that he/she ned. My Commission DD29EEd8 ''~-~~` r -K_r1'3 ~~o; Kd~ Expires March 10, 200E N tary Public My Commission Expires: ~ '` S:Iplanning DeparimentlApplicatian Formsldevelopment reviewlRexible deve%pment comprehensive Infip application 2005.doG ~~ ~ ` M ~ ~ i' , 'i ~V~.. 2 ~ 20UJ ~~ ~~ ORIGIf~~L . _:t w. , ,, , ,> Page 7 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater Flexible Development Application -Comprehensive EXHIBIT "A" Water's Edge 331 Cleveland Street ORIGINAL ~~~~ ~' ~. 6 [ @ ~ ~ i5 ~ f ~. , . .{ i , . DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST r T To raze the existing Calvary Baptist Church and construct a mixed use development with a 25 floor(270'-5")tall residential tower, private parking garage for 309 cars and a 4 floor low-rise component with 3 levels of residential use over 10,022 square feet of retail space. Providing the 157 residential units proposed will require a transfer of 31 units from the density pool. This request is made in accordance with provisions of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan, where the benefits of downtown residential units, retail space, the continuation of the Wayfinding Plan and contributions to public art are recognized. It is also requested that the 41 parking spaces required for the retail portion of the project be provided for (in accordance with the Comprehensive Parking Program) in the Garden Avenue public garage two blocks away and in the adjacent City Hall lot. An attachment from Tracey Bruch tabulates the availability in the City Hall lot. It could also be noted that an additional parking structure is planned for on an adjacent parcel across Pierce Street.~~ _.1_ WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1. The proposed development is in keeping with the spirit and objectives of the Downtown Core District Guidelines and addresses all criteria for said district. The architectural style for this project creates a metropolitan feel while utilizing traditional decorative features to develop points of agreement with the historic shopping district of Downtown Clearwater. The low-rise component of the development will be a pedestrian friendly, human scale at the sidewalk. The three levels of residential units over retail will mitigate the size of the residential tower as it creates an effective screen between the residence parking and the street. The residential tower is taller than its neighbor, the Harbor View center, but is appropriate for the urban core and compliments the District Vision where the highest residential density is encouraged. The residential component will take full advantage of the Park and assure that the results of the Coachman Park Master Plan will be an actively used city amenity. The proposed development includes 157 high end condominiums with amenities (i.e. pool, pool deck, shade structure, clubroom, fitness area, and 302 private parking spaces) and will be a keystone in the revitalization of the Downtown Core District. 2. The proposed residential and commercial development will contribute to an active and vibrant downtown and will encourage pedestrian activity from Cleveland Street down Osceola Ave and to the waterfront at Coachman Park. This proposal, once complete, can only lead to positive incentives for further revitalization of the surrounding area. 3. The proposal will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons in the neighborhood, but will promote a healthy environment in which to live. The project will be built with the best of our current life safety features being fully utilized. • 4. The proposed residential project will have ingress/egress from Osceola Avenue. The single point of access, located at the Southeast part of the site, provides ample car stacking space and will also serve as fire access. The required visibility triangles will be observ maintained for vehicular and Avenue right-of way. The proposed site p ans submitted with this application reflect a total of 309 private parking spaces in the garage, plus one visitor parking spot and two loading ~ spaces on site, outside of the structure. The Traffic study provided as a part of this submittal evaluates the additional volume of traffic created by this project, along with the changing traffic patterns due to the new bridge to Clearwater Beach. 5. Of the six Downtown Character Districts established by the Redevelopment plan, the subject site is located within the Downtown Core District, located on the corner of Cleveland Street and Osceola Avenue, and is specifically singled out as a key component for the redevelopment of this district. The low-rise portion of the project facing Osceola is consistent in height and in the use of traditional architectural detailing seen along the historic Cleveland street shopping district. Though there is no residential neighbor to be compared with for consistency, it is one of the Redevelopment goals to create a residential community in this location. The proposed development adheres to this vision of the District by providing high residential density to take advantage of the views of Clearwater Harbor and Coachman Park. 6. The proposed residential and commercial project will bring a sophisticated residential community to Downtown Clearwater. Utilitarian features such as loading areas, trash removal and electrical transformers will be discretely located and screened with landscaping. The emergency generator, possibly the most egregious piece of equipment required, will be located away from the neighbors and be well isolated acoustically. Visually the proposed development will be the signature project of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. f f.. a...........~.~...,............. ~ t ` ~ d~is_ ~ i 2005 -;~ ;~ } ~.. ,.-.. ...... ,.. ~. l t. ~~.~_ .~. . .... ............... oRieiNn~_ • C~ J j ~ ,o i i I ~ r ,! ~r .. ,~ ! 20Q5 r ! ', ~ ~ ~ Exhibit "B" to Flexible Development Applicatidn ~ ' _ .. ,..~..- ....~... Mawv. ~.... ....ua.-~+ Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria: 2. 3. 4. 5 6. 7. OR161NAL The proposed development is in keeping with the goals, objectives and policies of the Redevelopment Plan, and complies with use and other development standards. However, it is impractical for this development to go forward without an increase in the residential density limits. The deviation would be for the construction of 157 living units in lieu of the 126 allowed @ the 70 unit per acre criteria. This requested increase is provided for in the Policies of the Redevelopment Plan, using the Public Amenity Pool to reward developments providing desired residential, retail and other public amenities to the Downtown. The proposed residential and commercial development will be a major contribution to the redevelopment of downtown. With residential sales of an estimated value approaching $100 million, this proposal can only contribute to positive incentives for further revitalization and increased value of the surrounding area. The residential and commercial uses in this comprehensive infill redevelopment project are permitted and encouraged in the City of Clearwater. The commercial component of the redevelopment project is compatible with the adjacent land uses and is as proscribed in the Downtown Core District Vision. Though there is little adjacent residential use, it is a major goal of the redevelopment plan to create a residential community at this location. The subject site is located within the Downtown Core District established by the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The proposed development adheres to the vision of the District by providing higher residential density along Clearwater Harbor west of Osceola while being sensitive to the low-rise historic character of the downtown district. Location of this project in any other area of Clearwater would be out of place. The 1571uxury living units and upscale shopping will have a marked impact on the immediate vicinity by bringing more people with money to spend to the commercial core of Clearwater, and would therefore be an upgrade. 'The design proposed will introduce an upscale new residential community to downtown Clearwater and add to the commercial streetscape at the future terminus of Cleveland Street. The low-rise component is similar in scale to existing buildings in the local shopping district, borrowing details from several historic sources within the milieu of downtown Clearwater. The 25 floor residential tower facing Coachman Park and Clearwater Harbor incorporates classical proportions of traditional architecture. The tower form is a direct result of the function of providing high density housing where all residents benefit from the views and the urban life style of Downtown Clearwater. Visually the proposed development will be the signature project of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. ~, i ~,_ fir r"~~, i ~ ~~ ~ iit C. ! : ~i ~, !~ d' ORIGLN~~ ,",, CC' ~l+ !~i~~ ``§§ t ._..A~~ A _~ r_ _pS ..~L {.V; 8. Flexibility in regards to the off street parking required for the commereial eorfpoh~nt'~`d~'` ==- -~-~-•_` the redevelopment project is justified by the benefits to the shopping district in the immediate vicinity. The Pedestrian friendly streetscape and the presence of local residents will certainly increase customers to these businesses without e increased 9. Adequate off-street parking in the City Hall parking lot adjacent to the project and in - other locations in accordance with the Division 14 of Article 3 will be available in the immediate vicinity to avoid on street parking. Please see the attached correspondence with Tracey Bruch who tabulated the availability of aces on the City Hall lot 10. The earwater Down own edeve opment Plan describes a vision that the City has proscribed for itself for the redevelopment of Downtown into a place that attracts people to live, work, shop and play. Clearly stating the guiding principles, the plan establishes specific goals, objectives and policies that projects must contribute to. There are also incentives to promote development that contribute to the vision of the District where the project is to be located. This proposed development falls within the Downtown Core District of the Plan on the parcel west of Osceola and south of Cleveland Street. (Currently occupied by the Calvary Baptist Church.) The District Vision refers to this as a key waterfront parcel on Clearwater Bluffs overlooking Clearwater Harbor. The Vision and the Policies of the Plan are to encourage the highest density for residential and commercial use. With 157 residential units and over l O,000sq. ft. of retail space, this development is the ideal compliment to the Plan. Another mandate of the Plan is for the development to encourage pedestrian use and to integrate with the existing historic shopping district. This issue is addressed by locating low-rise buildings along the pedestrian walks. The street corners have been opened up to provide visual relief as well as creating opportunities for outdoor seating and gathering places. The three residential floors above the ground floor retail space respect the historic height of Cleveland Street. The design of the commercial component of the development will create an inviting feeling, using a human scale at the sidewalk and will mitigate the size of the residential tower. It also creates an effective screen from the residence parking. The streetscape itself will be a continuation of the Master Streetscape and Wayfinding Plan presented in the Redevelopment Plan. The proposed low-rise residential units are designed with articulation to the facade, visually distinguishing each unit from one another with a similar rhythm of reveals and fenestration as with the tower. The garage elevation on Cleveland Street has a similar reveal pattern and cornice in keeping with the tower elements. Though this function on Cleveland Street does not encourage activity as required in the nearby shopping district, it will contribute to the setting when that part of Cleveland Street is redeveloped as an extension of Coachman Park. The roof is a series of hips and corniced flat roofs which continues the design theme of the development while complying with the Downtown Design Guidelines. The architecture of the tower cannot be specifically categorized as any one style, but incorporates the classical proportions of traditional architecture developing points of agreement with its historic neighbors, while setting the tone for a new metropolitan district. The proposed high rise condominium is designed with a distinct base, middle and cap in keeping with the Design Guidelines. The four bottom floors of the towers are distinguished by heavier rustication, a darker color and denser reveal patterns than the • • upper portions of the buildings. An accent band with a deeper profile creates shadows, further distinguishing the base of the building from the middle floors. The central portion of the towers contains a less dense reveal pattern and a lighter colors graduating upwards. The top floors of the Tower are stepped back with a reduced floor plate to distinguish the top of the building and at the same time addressing the City Downtown Design Guidelines. The roof design incorporates multiple flat roofs and other decorative features, giving the ca of the building a sculpted look and addin distin ion to the Clearwater sk lin .These architectural features are applied on all four elevations of the tower. The West view to the water is the primary view from the tower residential units, and as form follows function, fewer windows are provided on the East elevation. o t e tower, o g not ov a mmg, uses its prominent location, height and mass to denote the end of the downtown corridor and the beginning of Clearwater Harbor. Materials selected for this project are a stucco finish over concrete with EFIS banding and cornices at specific selected locations. Balcony railings consist of decorative painted aluminum. The sloped roofing material is a handsome standing seam metal roof, while flat roofs have decorative parapets. The glazing will be light gray hurricane glass in white aluminum frames. The painted stucco colors chosen for this project are understated beige tones, blending with the existing colors and character of adjacent buildings, and conforming with the design Guidelines. The proposed design utilizes both horizontal and vertical elements to articulate the building mass. Human scale features such as balconies are also articulated, where the shadows create architectural interest and helps break down the masses to recognizable units. In summary, this project represents the fruition of the vision for this prominent location in the Downtown Core. It combines the appropriate low-rise component and streetscape for an active pedestrian shopping concourse with a tower which denotes and enhances the prominence of this location at the end of Cleveland Street, the gateway to Clearwater Harbor. END .,,- ~ ~ ~ ~_ ( ~ i~ t , ~~ ( ~i 2 . 20~ , 05 ~ ~ , i - ,..~P ~`~~ .,M. ~~. 8~~ ~~~w~ .~:. `~ lS ORIGINAL. ~ *'''' LL °_~Clearwater U Planning Depa~nt 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-562~t665 ^ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ^ SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION including 1) collated, 2) stapled and 3) folded sets of site plans * NOTE: a total of 15 sets of this application and all supporting documentation is Level Two Flexible Development Application. CASE #: ~ DATE RECEIVED: RECEIVED BY (staff initials): ATLAS PAGE #: ZONING DISTRICT: LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: SURROUNDING USES OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES: NORTH: SOUTH: WEST: EAST: required to be submitted in conjunction with a complete PUBLIC AMENITIES INCENTIVE POOL USE APPLICATION (Revised 02/14/05) -~-PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME: Sov MAILING ADDRESS: ~~~ j.(JES~' ~~/~/I~-~G~7 ~~~ ~ !J ~~ PHONE NUMBER: /~' ~7/' ~ FAX NUMBER: ~3' $77 - ~ Z2Z CELL NUMBER: EMAIL~61r1 • ~(JA`/.~ Gv ZYd/.~t)T/') • Gcyj'! . PROPERTY OWNER(S): AGENT NAME: (Must include ALL~6wners as IistAd iin the deed -provide original signature(s) on page 6) MAILING ADDRESS: ~ZOd /.[~ PHONE NUMBER: ~~~ ' ~?? ' '~ FAX NUMBER: ~/3 • ~ 7 7~ ~'2Z'r~ CELL NUMBER: E-MAIL ADDRESS: ~~,~/y. GU.e~•G~@ ~(I3 SoyT'~• Co v1-i B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) STREET ADDRESS of subject site: ~3r C~V ~ ~"~A?~!b ;// • t~ ~/~'IG~{J,~'~~lr ~L LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ~~ -71~~-UFv/ (if not listed here, please note the location~of this ocument in the sJ~mittal) PARCEL NUMBER: /~o~ 29 / i ~i / 7 0 ~S~ / Dry/ ~ 00 i t1 PARCEL SIZE: ~, ~b5sr (acres, square feet) HOW MANY DWELLING UNITS ARE PROPOSED TO BE USED FROM THE PUBLIC AMENITIES INCENTIVE POOL?~_ `)-IOiW MlJ6F( SOUA~'FfC91;ST~GE IS PROPOSED TO BE USED FROM THE PUBLIC AMENITIES INCENTIVE POOL? JS A HEIGHT INCREASE RE(~lj~~TED? _~ YES NO IF YES, HEIGHT REQUESTED: ~ (D ~ J n `r ~ ~ a~l . ~ ~' ~~# ~a ~f2 ,; , PROVIDE A COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED AMENITY TO BE PROVIDED (attach photographs, drawings, etc, as applicable): ~tJ~RC[G ~!!~/~S /~ ~~oit.~cts7c~ ~~7~?L ~DE1/~ ~(s~yi ~yGC~iro~ ~rr!!r! f ~vH ~5id~iTia~- (Jhi~'~ ; ~av~~a~v~ ~~r~r« ~~ ~ CQyr~a~r.ayI m ~ r,~ It )~, r„~,~.~~_ PGA : -rx~v~ Gt 1/-~r C~-ry, ~ Y- ~u~ cL ram- ~~. C. SIGNATURE: I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this application are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and photograph the grope es ribed in this application. , Sign re of prog6rty owner or representative STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Sw m and subscribed before me this ~ay of U A.D. 20 t nd/or by o is personally known has p uce as J 14 :' • ~ SRt'RI'~ht h /~ .~- i f ~- ~ ~ V~ ~~ ,1,~ ~~ .~uE 2 ~ zoo5 ~ ~ ,~ ~~--~~ -~ f =n~ aRO~~~~~~~ S:~Planning DepartmentWpplication FormsWevelopment review~Public Amenities Incentive Pool Use Application.doc Page 2 of 2 Wade, John From: Tracey.Bruch ~ myClearwater.com Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 1:41 PM To: Wade, John Cc: Michael.Quillenf~myClearwater.com; Gina.Clayton~myClearwater.com Subject: City Hall Parking Lot Per our discussion yesterday and based on your need to provide public parking for 10,000 sq. feet of retail, I have reviewed the occupancy and usage of the subject lot and have determined the following: * 51 metered parking spaces open to the public * 3 hour time limits * $.50 / hour (current rate) * Enforced Mon - Fri 8:00 am - 6:00 pm * Current average usage 30~ - 35~ (Mon'- Fri)* * Certain weekday nights and weekends the parking is heavily used by the Church and any special events downtown and the usage increased significantly to capacity and even exceeds capacity * 3 regularly scheduled meetings per month where the lot is near or at capacity for several hours This lot is currently used by visitors of City Hall, Calvary Baptist, County Offices and some downtown businesses. *calculated based on revenue trends Tracey Bruch Parking Manager (727) 562-4771 OR161NAL 1 ~ ~ .. f .i ~ • • j~ OPUSa THE OPUS GROUP A H C H 1 T fi C 'f S C (7 ~ T R A C T Q R S D E V L L O P H R S To: File From: Bruce Johnson ~ - ~• CC: date: July i3"', 2005 Revised PM Re: Waters Edge Parking Data Parking Ramp Level B2 67 Stalls Level B1 62 Stalls (2 Accessible, 60 - 9'X19' Stalls) Level 1 58 Stalls {1 Accessible, 1 Accessible Van Accessible, 56 - 9'X19' Stalls) Level 2 61 Stalls (2 Accessible, 59 - 9'X19' Stalls) Level 3 61 Stalls (2 Accessible, 59 - 9'X19' Stalls) Ramp Total 309 Stalls (8 Accessible, 301- 9'X19' Stalls) On Site Parking Level 1 - 1 Stall 12'x24' 1 Stall 12'x35' Loading Berth 1 Stal! 12'x30' Loading Berth Site Total 3 Stalls OPUS CORPORATION A rnemhrr• u f The Upus Grump 10350 Bren Road West Minneto))ka, MN 55343 Phonc:952-65G-4444 Pax: 952-656-4529 ww~v,opuscorp.com r ~ _ ;~ E: ~~• 1(~ C; ~_ ~ ~ I .. .. v 1 •~ Project Total 310 Stalls (8 Accessible, 301 - 9'X19' Stails,1-12'x24' Steil) 2 -Loading B®tttts I irf ~ ~ S 20Q~ ~ ~ (~ I 4:~ ORIGINAi. t ~``• OPUS. Dwelling Unit Data Low Rise Unit Type 1 2 Bedroom 2 Story 1,320 SF Saleable A/C 1 Unit Thus Unit Type 2 2 Bedroom 1 Story 1,317 SF Saleable A/C 6 Units Thus Unit Type 3 2 Bedroom 2 Story 1,440 SF Saleable A/C 12 Units Thus Total 26,502 SF Saleable A/C 19 Units High Rise Unit Type A 3 Bedroom 1 Story 2,435 SF Saleable A/C 41 Units Thus Unit Type Al 2 Bedroom 1 Story 1,320 SF Saleable A/C 1 Units Thus Unit Type B 2 Bedroom 1 Story 1,770 SF Saleable A/C 34 Units Thus Unit Type 61 2 Bedroom 1 Story 1,320 SF Saleable A/C 6 Units Thus Unit Type C 2 Bedroom 1 Story 1,687 SF Saleable A/C 34 Units Thus Unit Type C1 1 Bedroom 1 Story 1,320 SF Saleable A/C 6 Units Thus Unit Type D 2 Bedroom 1 Story 2,155 SF Saleable A/C 8 Units Thus Unit Type E 3 Bedroom 1 Story 3,495 SF Saleable A/C 8 Units Thus Total 271,377 SF Saleable A/C 138 Units Project Total Total 297,879 SF Saleable AIC 157 Units f G ~ f- ... ,.. _ E F~~~ ~ 1~ 1i _~~ i ~i ~- ~~, d~l~ 2 S 20Q~ ~'~'. s y^ ~ Please note: number of parking stalls, number of units, unit types, number of unit v types, and'unit squarefo~iteges~ay vary from final documents. aR~G~~~ - Northside E~q s 9~. n ~,,; CIVIL • LAND PLANNING • ENVIRONMENTAL • TRANSPORTATION • r LETTER O F TRAN S M ITTAL Date: July 11, 2005 To: City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 S. Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33758-4748 Attn: Sherry L. Watkins, Administrative Analyst Reference: Waters Edge - 331 Cleveland St NES Project #509 We Transmit: (X) Enclosed ()Under Separate Cover ()Mail ()Courier () Pick-up (X) Hand Delivered () Per Your Request (X) For Your Review & Comment () For Your Use ()For Your Approval ()For Your Files ()For Your Information URIGINA~ (X)Originals (X) Prints ()Addendum ()Shop Drawings ()Specifications (X) Applications ()Floppy Disk Co ies Descri tion 15 Civil &Landsca a Drawin s 3 sheets , 1 set si ned & sealed 15 8'1/2x11" Civil Site Plan 15 8'1/2x11" Colored Landsca a Plan 15 Flex Develo ment (Com rehensive Infill A lication 1 Traffic Im act Stud 8~1-B4sl~e~t 15 Letters of Authorization 15 Warrant Deeds 15 Surve s 1 si ned & sealed 15 Stormwater Re ort 1 - S w S 15 8.5x11" Colored Renderin s Architectural 15 8.5x11" Buildin Elevations 15 Color Charts 15 24x36 Architectural Drawin s 15 Comprehensive Landscape Application ~ ~ ;~ ,,.; ,~ -~ Doreen A.1NYli~ms;'Proje~t Director 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NESADMIN@MINDSPRING.COM N ESTECH@MI N DS P RI NG.COM 727 • 443 • 2869 .FAX 727 • 446 • 8036 Copies To ~REC~IVED ~UL 11 2Q~5 ~LP-~NING DE~'ART~I~N~ '~~TY (~~' r~.EA~P~'~-r~~ FILE A. Haines N. Pelzer • Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-562-4865 ^ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ^ SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION including 1) collated, 2) stapled and 3) folded sets of site plans ^ SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE ~ • CASE #: DATE RECEIVED: RECEIVED BY (staff initials): ATLAS PAGE #: ZONING DISTRICT: LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: SURROUNDING USES OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES: NORTH: SOUTH: WEST: EAST: * NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS) ~, y~q FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ~~ Comprehensive Infill Project (Revised 12/30/2004) PLEASE 'TYPE OR PRINT A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OW"~N,ER AND AGENT INFORMA\TION: (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME'~l~ S LG sr /C_.~ ~~i~~iC~ ~(7 tiJ MAILING 3, ~ -/ / ~ - PHONE NUMBER:~i~~3 - ~ ~ 7- ~~/ Y~ FAX NUMBER: ~/~ _ 8 7 7- /,~7~_ PROPERTY OWNER(S): ~.~5 C ,(~~~I~LG,r~ C/,~b~~l.¢l,,¢ (Must include AL owners as listed on the deed -provide original signaiure(s) on page AGENT NAMES/f~~N ~7ifht/K~I~~.J ~,y~ - ~~J~ f ~!L`~L~ l~~Y ~~-~S ~G~ MAILING ADDRESS:~y"L~ ~ ~ . ~,~~SS .~5~~~ ,.~y~~~•.-~. .~~eD 7 PHONE NUMBER: D/. ~~? 7- .41s/~/y FAX NUMBER: CELL NUMBER: E-MAIL ADDRESS,:~iv. Ll~F1a~~ (.y ~ Jfl~ . G'D~_ B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) // STREET ADDRESS of subject site• ~ f ~ •~G~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ~ V (if not listed ere, pl se no the location of is docu nt in the submittal) PARCEL NUMBER: L Z.o E3 PARCEL SIZE: ~~OJ~ ~ :~_ _ (acres, square feet) PROPOSED USE(S) AND SIZE(S): ~~~~ ~ /i~ X~G~ L'~ LC1/j'~` ~f- '•*~ 1 C ~~~J N~` ~~~~~1~~ ~~ ('°~~e'~f';gna~ (number of dwelling units, hotel rooms or square footage of nonresidential use) bESCRIPTION OF REQUEST(S): ~L` ~ ~12.~-t ZL~ Y~L .~c.~i~~ ~~ Attach sheets and be specific when identifying the request (include all requested code deviations; e.g. reduction in required number of parking spaces, specific use, etc.) C~ • DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES ____ NO (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents) C/PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5) H SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see page 6) D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A) Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA -Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize Traffic congestion. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic o~° f pacts, on adjacent properties. -~--~~~~~^„_ . ____ JUL 11 2005-- ^ Provide complete responses to the ten (10) COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PRCt~~~Fr~~~IPP~~I~ -Explain how each criteria is achieved in detail: 1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use, intensity and development standards. Page 2 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater The development of the parcel proposed for development as a comprehensive infill redevelopment project or residential infill project will not reduce the fair market value of abutting properties. (Include the existing value of the site and the proposed value of the site with the improvements.) 3. The uses within the comprehensive infill redevelopment project are otherwise permitted in the City of Clearwater. 4. The uses or mix of use within the comprehensive infill redevelopment project are compatible with adjacent land uses. 5. Suitable sites for development or redevelopment of the uses or mix of uses within the comprehensive infill redevelopment project are not otherwise available in the Ciiy of Clearwater. 6. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a comprehensive infill redevelopment project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 7. The design of the proposed comprehensive infill redevelopment project creates a form and function that enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. B. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. 9. Adequate off-street parking in the immediate vicinity according to the shared parking formula in Division 14 of Article 3 will be available to avoid on-street parking in the immediate vicinity of parcel proposed for development. 10. The design of all buildings complies wiih the Tourist District or Downtown District design Use separate sheets as necessary. ~LANNiNG DEP~-RTMENT -- -- - - -- -- CITY U~ GLEA~~i/AdER' Page 3 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design C Manual and 4-202.A.21) A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that invol addition or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with t City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption this requirement. If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt. At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following: Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all properly lines; ___ Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; ~_ All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; _ Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with th City manual. _ Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations. ^~\t~,COPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT SUBMITTAL C (SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable e ^ Acknowledgement of stormwater plan requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): V stormwater plan as noted above is included stormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor elevations shall provided. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750. F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A) SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) -One original and 14 copies; TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and locaiion, including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) -please design around the existing trees; C~~/LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY; Q~ PARKING DEMAND STUDY in conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (ie. Reduce number of spaces). Prior to the submittal of this application, the methodology of such study shall be approved by the Community Development Coordinator and shall be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to the parking standards are approved; fY GRADING PLAN, as applicable; ^ PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided); ^ COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; G. E PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A) SITE rIAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): All dimensions; North arrow; JUL. 11 2005 _ Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared; __ Location map; Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package; '~~~lVIIV~ ~~~~7~iIV1EN~ Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures; 1V i~Yl 6 Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures; ~~ I F ~~ ~~~Aii~4! ~R _ All required setbacks; fCtB'tl All existing and proposed points of access; _ All required sight triangles; Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; _ Location of all public and private easements; __ Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site; Page 4 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater ~. ~~ ~ _ Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas and water lines; _ All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas; Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas; _ Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening {per Section 3-201(D)(i) and Index #701); Location of all landscape material; ___ Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities; _ Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; and Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks. ~ SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development,. in written/tabular form: Land area in square feet and acres; Number of EXISTING dwelling units; Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; _ Gross floor area devoted to each use; _ Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the number of required spaces; Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces and driveways, expressed in square feet and percentage of the paved vehicular area; Size and species of all landscape material; Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easement; Building and structure heights; Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and _ Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. ~UCED SITE PLAN to scale (8'/: X 11) and color rendering if possible; FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan: ~~ One-foot contours or spot elevations on site; _~ Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel; All open space areas; __ Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms; Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned); Streets and drives (dimensioned); Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); Structural overhangs; Tree Inventory; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 8" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of such trees. H. LAf~DSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A) o~/ LANDSCAPE PLAN: _ All existing and proposed structures; _ Names of abutting streets; _ Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations; Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers; Sight visibility triangles; ~_ Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing; _ Proposed and required parking spaces; __ Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including driplines (as indicated on required tree survey); Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names; Location, size, and quantities of all exisiing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant schedule; Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and protective measures; Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and percentage covered; Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board); Irrigation notes. REDUCED IANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8'/z X 11) (color rendering if possible); IRRIGATION PLAN (required for level two and three approval); ^ COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met. JUL 11 2005 ~LANNI~IG DE'~ARTMENT Page 5 of 7 -flexible Development Co; p~efiensi e~fiTf"-~pTiYation~005- City of Clearwater ~~~ ~~~ 9( # gggg p l -~ I. ,BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23) Required in the event the application includes a development where design standards are in issue (e.g. Tourist and Downtown Districts) or as part of a Comprehensive Infilt Redevelopment Project or a Residential Infill Project. BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -all sides of all buildings including height dimensions, colors and materials; q/(~EDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS -four sides of building with colors and materials to scale (8'/z X 11) (black and white and color rendering, if possible) as required. J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS / Section ~3-1 ^ All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be removed or n ~ to remain. CI All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing; freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals) ~ ~~• ^ Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required). ^ Reduced signage proposal (8 Yz X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application. K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-20Z.A.13 and 4-801.C) ~~TY CJF ~l.EA~~A~~R ^ Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager orhis/her designee or if the proposed development: Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan. • Will generate 100 or more new vehicle directional trips per hour and/or 1000 or more new vehicle trips per day. Will affect a nearby roadway segment and/or intersection with five (5) reportable accidents within the prior twelve (12) month period or that is on the City's annual list of most hazardous intersections. Trip generation shall be based on the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip General Manual. The Traffic Impact Study must be prepared in accordance with a "Scoping Meeting" held with the Traffic Operations Manager and the Planning Department's Development Review Manager or their designee (727-562-4750) Refer to Section 4-801 C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement. ^ cknowledgement of traffic impact study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): Traffic Impact Study is included. The study must include a summary table of pre- and post-development levels of service for all roadway legs and each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scoping Meeting. Traffic Impact Study is not required. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750. L. SIGNATURE: I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this applicati are true and accurate to the best of m knowledge and auth a ity representatives to visit and photo~ph the property de ribe In this aoalicafi6n. owner or STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS ln,, t and subscribed before me this ~ day of 116.0 .D. 2~ to me and/or by T- who is personally known has produced as identification. Nay public, ~µ~r~s My commission expire ; ~ ~ DOREEN A. WILLIAMS MY COMMISSION # DD 155802 ?pr ~o EXPIRES: October 14, 2006 t-8043NO7ARY FL Notary Service & Bonding, Inc. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: (Names of all property owners on deed -please PRINT full names) 1. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location): 'ill ('1PV~1. anrt. ~trPet ~ 3(Ll Pierce Street Clearwater, Florida 33755 2. That this properly constitutes the property for which a request fora: (describe request) /X-L ~~ ~ /.l S ~~.CJ~~~i; ~-~'~ '.JCS V v 7A~.~cr~e,R / ,. 3. That t e undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: °~[r1_!'' ~ N~t~?s~-v ~~~^~":~_ as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 4. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 5. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City representatives to visit and photograph-the property described in this application; 6. That (I/we), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is tr and Corr ct. Pro erty O ner Prop Owner Property Owner Property Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS '] `~tl fore me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by theJaws of the Statej~~Florida, on this `~ ~ ~ day of personally appeared .~c~ iY~+ES fCG~:L who havin been first duty sworn Depos ` and says that he/she fully u~d~~Yand~ (~~o~~t~f the affidavit that he/she ned. ~ 1 (~ ~~ My CommissionDD298848 ''~-~!1.~6~ ~~;E.>,l3"~.., ~?orr~~ Expires March 10, 2008 N tary Public My Commission Expires: REC~4Ld~D JUL 11 2005 S,-IPlanning DepartmentlAppUcation Formsldevelopment reviewlflexible development comprehensive int7//app/ication 2005.doc ~t~-,~1NING QE'~,A~TNlEIVT ~I1Y C?F ~I..~~N~i~T~ Page 7 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater • LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION This letter will serve as authorization for John Wade ORIGiN~ii with Opus Architects & Engineering to act as an agent for ~moc R9St 7 (Property Owner's Name) And to execute any and all documents related to securing permits and approvals for the construction of the property generally located at S31 Cleveland St. & 301 Pierce St. Clearwater (Property Location) PINELLAS Coun~r, State of Florida S rty Owner Address of Property Owner City/State/Zip Code Print Name of Property Owner wQ Title JUL 11 2005 ~IRNNING ®~PARTMENT ~'ITY12~r~L~~~ZER Telephone Number State of ~' ~ rr ~ ~ ~ County of ,ne-leas The foregoing instrument was acknowledge before me this ~, 20~; by `~z ~rn,~s ~.~..~ , as who is personally know to me or who has produced as identification and who did (did not) take an oath. r-~.-z~. `~lotary Public (Signature) o~7,~r-~ eresa Hubbard ,jj ; ~ My Commiasi0n DD296SA8 COmmISS10 # Ti,a je~ EMPlfne IU9rrh iQ 20~ 1 - (SEAL ABOVE) ~- ~~~ YC~Name of Notary Typed, Printed or Stamped) ~5 day of Flexible Development Application -Comprehensive Infill Project EXHIBIT "A" Water's Edge 331 Cleveland Street General Applicability Criteria: 1. p¢wh~~ " ~ ~> L ~' .3,v ~.~~`' 2. 3. 4. .~ 1 ~ ~~g~~~~L The proposed development is in keeping with the spirit and objectives of the Downtown Core District Guidelines and addresses all criteria for said district. The architectural style for this project creates a metropolitan feel while utilizing traditional decorative features to develop points of agreement with the historic shopping district of Downtown Clearwater. The low-rise component of the development will be a pedestrian friendly, human scale at the sidewalk. The three levels of residential units over retail will mitigate the size of the residential tower as it creates an effective screen between the residence parking and the street. The residential tower is taller than its neighbor, the Harbor View center, but is appropriate for the urban core and compliments the District Vision where the highest residential density is encouraged. The residential component will take full advantage of the Park and assure that the results of the Coachman Park Master Plan will be an actively used city amenity. The proposed development includes 157 high end condominiums with amenities (i.e. pool, pool deck, shade structure, clubroom, fitness area, and 302 private parking spaces) and will be a keystone in the revitalization of the Downtown Core District. The proposed residential and commercial development will contribute to an active and vibrant downtown and will encourage pedestrian activity from Cleveland Street down Osceola Ave and to the waterfront at Coachman Park. This proposal, once complete, can only lead to positive incentives for further revitalization of the surrounding area. The proposal will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons in the neighborhood, but will promote a healthy environment in which to live. The project will be built with the best of our current life safety features being fully utilized. The proposed residential project will have ingress/egress from Osceola Avenue. The single point of access, located at the Southeast part of the site, provides ample car stacking space and will also serve as fire access. The required visibility triangles will be observed and maintained for vehicular and pedestrian safety along the Osceola Avenue right-of way. The proposed site plans submitted with this application reflect a total of 302 structured parking spaces. The actual spaces constructed are projected to be 287 due to a 5% loss due to columns. The Traffic study provided as a part of this submittal evaluates the additional volume of traffac created by this project, along with the changing traffic patterns due to the new bridge to Clearwater Beach, .~ _. r ?-J ,:.., ,., -, _,.. ~ -`~ .~ 3~° ~<<<, ~ L'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..N ~ ~ ~ ~u~. 1 ~ zoa5 ~LAN~It~G ~3~'~TIVI~~I~' • ,..,,; .e..~ ,~ ~ ~~~'~~~~ 5. Of the six Downtown Character Districts established by the Redevelopment plan, the subject site is located within the Downtown Core District, located on the corner of Cleveland Street and Osceola Avenue, and is specifically singled out as a key component for the redevelopment of this district. The low-rise portion of the project facing Osceola is consistent in height and in the use of traditional architectural detailing seen along the historic Cleveland street shopping district. Though there is no residential neighbor to be compared with for consistency, it~is one of the Redevelopment goals to create a residential community in this location. The proposed development adheres to this vision of the District by providing high residential density to take advantage of the views of Clearwater Harbor and Coachman Park. 6. The proposed residential and commercial project will bring a sophisticated residential community to Downtown Clearwater. Utilitarian features such as loading areas, trash removal and electrical transformers will be discretely located and screened with landscaping. The emergency generator, possibly the most egregious piece of equipment required, will be located away from the neighbors and be well isolated acoustically. Visually the proposed development will be the signature project of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. REC~~?1~D .1UL. 11 2005 ~L~~~f~fG ~'~~TMfNT '~Il'~ ~~ ~'~. ~+~~,~T~~ ~~~~~~, ~~~~ Exhibit "B" to Flexible Development Application ,,,, ~ ~x' JUL I 1 2005 ~` ~ '~I~IG ~~~~~TIUI~N1° Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria: ~!~ cJ~ ~~~,y~'+i~,TE,~'' 1. The proposed development is in keeping with the goals, objectives and policies of the Redevelopment Plan, and complies with use and other development standards. However, it is impractical for this development to go forward without an increase in the residential density limits. The deviation would be for the construction of 1571iving units in lieu of the 126 allowed @ the 70 unit per acre criteria. This requested increase is provided for in the Policies of the Redevelopment Plan, using the Public Amenity Pool to reward developments providing desired residential, retail and other public amenities to the Downtown. 2. The proposed residential and commercial development will be a major contribution to the redevelopment of downtown.. With residential sales of an estimated value approaching $100 million, this proposal can only contribute to positive incentives for further revitalization and increased value of the surrounding area. 3. The residential and commercial uses in this comprehensive infill redevelopment project are permitted and encouraged in the City of Clearwater. 4. The commercial component of the redevelopment project is compatible with the adjacent land uses and is as proscribed in the Downtown Core District Vision. Though there is little adjacent residential use, it is a major goal of the redevelopment plan to create a residential community at this location. 5. The subject site is located within the Downtown Core District established by the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The proposed development adheres to the vision of the District by providing higher residential density along Clearwater Harbor west of Osceola while being sensitive to the low-rise historic character of the downtown district. Location of this project in any other area of Clearwater would be out of place. 6. The 1571uxury living units and upscale shopping will have a marked impact on the immediate vicinity by bringing more people with money to spend to the commercial core of Clearwater, and would therefore be an upgrade. 7. The design proposed will introduce an upscale new residential community to downtown Clearwater and add to the commercial streetscape at the future terminus of Cleveland Street. The low-rise component is similar in scale to existing buildings in the local shopping district, borrowing details from several historic sources within the milieu of downtown Clearwater. The 25 floor residential tower facing Coachman Park and Clearwater Harbor incorporates classical proportions of traditional architecture. The tower form is a direct result of the function of providing high density housing where all residents benefit from the views and the urban life style of Downtown Clearwater. Visually the proposed development will be the signature project of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. ~. , ..... . ~~~ ~ ~ ~, '~ ~ ,. ~~~~~ .1~l~ ~ l_ 2005 8. 9. 10. ~1~~~'~~ ~~:W~Y*~~K~~ENT Flexibility in regards to the off street parki~~rcqur~~i~F;~'nmercial component of the redevelopment project is justified by the benefits to the shopping district in the immediate vicinity. The Pedestrian friendly streetscape and the presence of local residents will certainly increase customers to these businesses. Adequate off-street pazking in the City Hall pazking lot adjacent to the project and in other locations in accordance with.the Division 14 of Article 3 will be available in the immediate vicinity to avoid on street parking. The Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan describes a vision that the City has proscribed for itself for the redevelopment of Downtown into a place that attracts people to live, work, shop and play. Clearly stating the guiding principles, the plan establishes specific goals, objectives and policies that projects must contribute to. There are also incentives to promote development that contribute to the vision of the District where the project is to be located. This proposed development falls within the Downtown Core District of the Plan an the parcel west of Osceola and south of Cleveland Street. (Currently occupied by the Calvary Baptist Church.) The District Vision refers to this as a key waterfront parcel on Clearwater Bluffs overlooking Clearwater Harbor. The Vision and the Policies of the Plan aze to encourage the highest density for residential and commercial use. With 157 residential units and over 10,000sq. ft. of retail space, this development is the ideal compliment to the Plan. Another mandate of the Plan is for the development to encourage pedestrian use and to integrate with the existing historic shopping district. This issue is addressed by locating low-rise buildings along the pedestrian walks. The street corners have been opened up to provide visual relief as well as creating opportunities for outdoor seating and gathering places. The three residential floors above the ground floor retail space respect the historic height of Cleveland Street. The design of the commercial component of the development will create an inviting feeling, using a human scale at the sidewalk and will mitigate the size of the residential tower. It also creates an effective screen from the residence parking. The streetscape itself will be a continuation of the Master Streetscape and Wayfinding Plan presented in the Redevelopment Plan. The proposed low-rise residential units are designed with articulation to the facade, visually distinguishing each unit from one another with a similar rhythm of reveals and fenestration as with the tower. The garage elevation on Cleveland Street has a similar reveal pattern and cornice in keeping with the tower elements. Though this function on Cleveland Street does not encourage activity as required in the nearby shopping district, it will contribute to the setting when that part of Cleveland Street is redeveloped as an extension of Coachman Park. The roof is a series of hips and corniced flat roofs which continues the design theme of the development while complying with the Downtown Design Guidelines. The architecture of the tower cannot be specifically categorized as any one style, but incorporates the classical proportions of traditional azchitecture developing points of agreement with its historic neighbors, while setting the tone for a new metropolitan district. The proposed high rise condominium is designed with a distinct base, middle and cap in keeping with the Design Guidelines. The four bottom floors of the towers are distinguished by heavier rustication, a darker color and denser reveal patterns then the upper portions of the buildings. An accent band with a deeper profile creates shadows, further distinguishing the base of the building from the middle floors. The central portion of the towers contains a less dense reveal pattern and a lighter colors graduating upwards. The top floors of the Tower are stepped back-with a reduced floor plate to distinguish the top of the building and at the same time addressing the City Downtown Design Guidelines. The roof design incorporates multiple flat roofs and other decorative features, giving the cap of the building a sculpted look and adding distinction to the Clearwater skyline. The scale of the tower, though not overwhelming, uses its prominent location, height and mass to denote. the end of the downtown corridor and the beginning of Clearwater Harbor. Materials selected for this project are a stucco finish over concrete with EFIS banding and cornices at specific selected locations. Balcony railings consist of decorative painted aluminum. The sloped roofing material is a handsome standing seam metal roof, while flat roofs have decorative parapets. The glazing will be light gray hurricane glass in white aluminum frames. The painted stucco colors chosen for this project are understated beige tones, blending with the existing colors and character of adjacent buildings, and conforming with the design Guidelines. The proposed design utilizes both horizontal and vertical elements to articulate the building mass. Human scale features such as balconies are also articulated, where the shadows create architectural interest and helps break down the masses to recognizable units. In summary, this project represents the fruition of the vision for this prominent location in the Downtown Core. It combines the appropriate low-rise component and streetscape for an active pedestrian shopping concourse with a tower which denotes and enhances the prominence of this location at the end of Cleveland Street, the gateway to Clearwater Harbor. ~• ~ a ~.. ~, ~u~ 11 zoa5 PLANNING C~E~~~~'~lEN`~ ~ITYOF ~CE~~~~~FR f: S~~ CITY OF CLEARWATER MAY 2 7 2005 .~!- a AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT y =- oQ° PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 9~ATE ~~ MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, 2"d FLOOR PHONE (727)-562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4576 First Ba tist Church of Clear rater, Inc d/b/a Calvary Baptist Church - ~~, 1. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property: 331 Cleveland Street &~0~, P;ercP ~treel- Clearwater, F1. 33755 (Addressor General Location) ~~S 2. That this property constitutes the property for which a request fora: Site Plan Application for a Mixed-IIse Development (Nature of request) 3. That the undersign d (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint, G>!~~ ~iSd~) l~ f~J as (his/ e:r) agent(s) to execute sny petitions or other documents necessary to affect such pe itton; 4. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 5. That (I/we), the undersigned authority, hereby cent g is true and correct. STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF WNELLAS t~ efore me the undersigned, an officer duly conmissioned by the laws he State of Florida, on this ~~ day of °~~_ personally appeared ~~C. ~, C'S3 ~GL~-~1( who having been first duly sworn depos and says that he/she fully understands the co ents of the affidavit tha ~ e/she signed. Notary Public My Com~~ign Eic~r sa' Hubbard ~c''~~~, EMY Commission UD29884g S: applicatiori~forrms/d-e~e~&~r~(1~~~$v~A6Rlavit to Authorize Agent 'A~r~m JUL 11 2005 ~Lpl~{~It~G ~E~~~T{~ENT *~~Il/OF ra:Ws~(~ ,~ • • Planning and Development Services 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 ~/~ Telephone:727-562-4567 .•:.. ~ ••-. - Fax:727-562-4576 ~'S .5 r.. ^ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED aNn ttlnT~ APPLICATION ^ SUBMIT 1 COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION~fnclnrJing folded site plan CASE #: ----------------------- DATE RECEIVED: _ RECEIVED BY (staff initials): _________ ATLAS PAGE #: _____________________ ZONING DISTRICT: ______.___________ LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: ZONING & LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES: NORTN: __ / _______ SOUTH: ____ / ____ WEST: ----- ~ - --- EAST: / COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM REQUIREMEN {Revised 9!1912061) D. APPLICANT, PR,O/P`ERTY OW~N~E~R AND AGENT INFAOR~M~AT1iON: (Code Section ~-1007) APPLICANT NAME:~~~~.~1G~d.~S..Q~Q.~.~Ll~!~------ ----- ---~-- --- MAILING ADDRESS; PHONE NUMBER:~~~~7=?~~~ _- FAX NUMBER: ~,~~~ T~_--- _ PROPERTY OWNER(S): f/, a. The landscaping in a Comprehensive Landscape Program shall be designed as a part of the architectural theme of the principal buildings proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for the development. AGENT NAME: (Contact Person) ~0~~~ - .__- -- .--..___-----_---_- MAILING ADDRESS: E ~i 7 ~1 ' /~ PHONE NUMBER: ~L~~~~-~~~~ --______ FAX NUMBER: ~~~~~l~.------_-~--_ The landscaping requirements of Article 3 Division 12 may be waived or modified as a part of a Level One or Level Two Approval, as the case may be, if the application for development approval includes a Comprehensive Landscape Program, which satisfies the following criteria. ~'he use ~,~ i~a:sds:~-awe=e ;;~i.~~,~:;; s,~:.iti~t:~te9~r;z~fis'os~~~, re~~deria^~~ .~::~: a.,.sasi~i G'~a yc'.a ~: 'til 'l; F, T'iw,~~ y;39"j s'i:z 7,.1}.~~ f.~. i';`- ~t; r.~. :c:n:i.::a ._ ....~ - ., _. k. k'„ ..,:a!, ~Iwttil.°•t`. >~srsideston ti`i,4~ v~rcrlg~i~ret: 1. Architectural Theme. (Must include ALL owners) ' ~r f~ ,. ~1ANNING DEPiRRTMEN ~~TY GE ~LEAR~IATE~ • • OR ~__ Lighting, Any lighting proposed as a part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program is automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed. 3. Community Character. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. _. ~~ JUL 11 7005 ~LAN~Ii~G ~E~,~~TME(VT CITY fJF GLE~~'~I,r~M~R b. The design, character, location andlor materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall be demonstrably more attractive khan landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape standards. • 4. Property Values. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will have a beneficial impact on~ the value of the property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. ~~,~.~ 5. Special Area or Scenic Corridor Plan. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program is consistent with any special area or scenic corridor plan which the City of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel proposed for development is located. Please return checklist for review and verification. Date: ~~~ - Vim? of applicant) 4 ~ ~. ~ +~ W ~ JUL 11 205 S: application forms(develapment review/comprehensive landscape program application.doc ~tANNN,}~y~6G[/~~~,~~ ~{{~~JpTM$~}pE~gN~ ~~9 F 4/~ x.P~~i'9 d~IMI~ COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS EXHIBIT "A" Water's Edge 311 Cleveland Street orzic~Na~ 1. Architectural Theme a. Not Applicable b. The creation of an attractive, viable, pedestrian streetscape along South Osceola Avenue and Cleveland Street will provide a vegetative buffer as well as a usable space for the surrounding community. 2. All lighting shall be controlled so that when the retail component is closed, only necessary security lighting shall be permitted. Street lighting and accent lighting shall have a photo cell and/or a timer to operate during appropriate hours of the night. 3. The landscape design will help actualize the city's adopted redevelopment plan. Continuity of landscape and hardscape features create the desired community character along the downtown corridors. 4. The Water's Edge project will create a large tax base through the residential living area and streetside retail shops. This will also encourage evening hours of activity, bringing life to this area of town between the hours of 5:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. The surrounding property values will increase with implementation of the Water's Edge project. This impact is paramount for a viable downtown. 5. A waiver from the City of Clearwater's landscaping requirements (Article 3 Division 12) is sought for the Water's Edge project so that the design will comply with-the design guidelines set forth by the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The project's north and east property line is adjacent to the city's Scenic Corridors namely, S. Osceola Avenue and Cleveland Street. The south property line is part of a potential larger project which incorporates a main pedestrian access to Coachman Park to the west. ,. ~ , > ~ ~~ r:. ~ JUL 11 7005 ~l~NNENG ~~-~~~TMEN~ `GI1~1(tJF ~~.~5~~'~~~~i~R Northsi~e $rcgi«ev~i~ry s~cuic~ 9~e. July ] 1, 2005 Mr. Robert Tefft Planner TTT City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 S. Myrtle Ave. Clearwater, FL 33756 Dear Mr. Tefft: . CIVIL • LAND PLANNING • ENVIRONMENTAL • TRANSPORTATION • CRIGINAi- Listed below are our responses to the June 30, 2005 Development Review Comments from the City of Clearwater Planning Department. General Engineering 1. a. Note existing easements not on survey recorded as O.R. Book 5748 Page 1433 (Sanitary Sewer Easement) and O.R. 5179 Page 299 (Utility Easement). In speaking with Steve Daugherty on Friday, July 8, 2005, he stated that the easements are not located on the proposed developments property and the comments would be removed. b. Existing easements will need to be vacated all or part thereof in order to construct building as proposed. Alt existing easements needing to be vacated will be vacated at one time prior to the issuance of C.O. c. Fire Department Connection shall be located no more than 40-feet from a Fire Hydrant. See Sheet C3.1 for fire hydrant location which is no more than 40-feet from the building. d. Fire Department Connection shall be located no closer than 15-feet from face of building. See Sheet C3.1 for fire department connection which is no closer than 15' from the face of the building. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 1. Need a copy of an approved right-of--way permit from F.D.O.T. prior to commencement of work in Cleveland Street {S.R. 60) right-of--way. Right-of way permit will be obtained prior to commencement of work on Cleveland. 2. A separate right-of--way permit will be required for all work within the right-of--way of any of the adjacent street(s) that are assigned to the City. See Don Melone (727) 562-4798 in Room #220 at the MSB (Municipal Services Building). We acknowledge that separate right-of--way permits will be required for all right-of--way of any adjacent street. ~~~~ 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 N ESADMI N@MI N DSPRI NG.COM JUG. 11 205 N ESTECH@MI N DSPRI NG.COM 727 • 443 • 2869 FAX 727 • 446 • 8036 PL~INNING DEPARTMENT "CITE OF rLEARVJA3Ef~ • ORIGWAi. Mr. Robert Tei~t July 11, 2005 Page Two 3. A separate right-of--way permit will be required for all work within the right-of--way of any of the adjacent street(s) that are assigned to the City. See Don Melone (727) 562-4798 in Room #220 at the MSB (Municipal Services Building). We acknowledge that separate right-of--way permits will be required for all right-of--way of any adjacent street. 4. Need to show all city details applicable to this project. The City's Construction Standards and Utility Information can be found on our web site: www.myclearwater.com.en ig'neer, go to "Documents and Publications", then to Engineering Construction Standards, then select the applicable details. See Sheet C4.1 for all required City of Clearwater's details. Environmental 1. a. Underground Vaults are not allowed as water quality facilities and are permittable only if specifically approved by the City Engineer. Provide justification for an underground vault. Due to the project being in the downtown zoning district, there is little room for on site retention. This also allows for the continuation of the pedestrian street-scaping which will be continued on our site following the City's theme. The vault will be designed with an outfall onto Cleveland Street. b. In the event that an underground vault is approved, an oil and grease separator or comparable treatment system to capture automobile pollutants will be required. A oil and grease separator or comparable treatment system to capture automobile pollutants will be designed. c. Details and across-section of the vault must be submitted. Details to be provided in Permit set. d. A vault maintenance schedule must be submitted to include an event following post- construction and at lease on an annual basis thereafter. The vault maintenance schedule will be submitted and made part of the condo does. Fire This DRC Review by Fire is not an approval or review of any construction plans or documents other than site work. Review and approval by the Authority having Jurisdiction shall not relieve the applicant of the responsibility of compliance with the Florida Fire Prevention Code 2004 edition. We acknowledge that DRC review by fire is not an approval or review of any construction plans or documents other than site work. RECEI4'ED JUL 11 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY QE CLEARWATER • ORIGINAL Mr. Robert Tefft July 11, 2005 Page Three Provide gated county knox box system as per Pinellas County Ord. 98-04. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. If the knox box system is required on the building, this will be coordinated with the Fire Marshall. If it is required on the gate, the gate has been removed from the site. 3. This DRC Review by Fire is not an approval or review of any construction plans or documents other than site work. Review and approval by the Authority having Jurisdiction shall not relieve the applicant of the responsibility of compliance with the Florida Fire Prevention Code 2044 edition. We acknowledge that DRC review by fire is not an approval or review of any construction plans or documents other than site work. 4. Provide 30 degree turning radii for fire apparatus. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. We intend to utilize Exception No.1 to 3-5.2 of NFPA 1, and provide for a `Y' turnaround with the required 46' leg length. The 30 degree radii has been indicated on Sheet C2.1 at the entrance at Osceola. 5. Two hydrants on the same line cannot provide an adequate supply of water for a project of this size. Fire hydrants require separate lines. Show FDC standpipe also. Proved additional hydrants. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. FDC standpipe has been indicated on Sheet C2.1. Show on the plan FDC(s) for parking garage and for retail shops. FDC(s) must be freestanding. FDC(s) must be at lease 15-feet from the building. FDC(s) must be within 40-feet of a hydrant dedicated to the fire sprinkler system. Standpipes and Sprinkler system required. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. See Sheet C2.1 for FDC for parking garage and retail shops. The FDC is freestanding and located 15' from the building and within 40' of the hydrant to a dedicated fire sprinkler system. Standpipes and sprinklers system are noted. 7. Roadway is the fire lane to the building and shall be marked with signage, and remain unobstructed at all times, as per NFPA-1, 18.2.2.5.8. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. Required Signage will be installed. 8. Provide DOT specs on road to support 80,000 lbs. fire apparatus. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. DOT specification on road to support 50,000 lbs. fire apparatus to be provided prior to issuance of building permit. 9. Provide grades, slope of roadway into the building. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. See civil drawings. RECEIVED Jug 112005 MANNING DEPARTMENT ~wTY tJF ~LEARUUATEI~ • Mr. Robert Tefft July 11, 2005 Page Four oRiciN~a~. 10. All questions regarding fire comments should be addressed to Chief of Construction: S.C. Strong, who can be reached at (727) 562-4327 ext. 3039. All questions regarding fire comments will be directed to Chief of Construction, Assistant Fire Marshall S.C. Strong. NOTE: Please cloud any/all changes on the plans before returning them for re-review. Provide a response letter listing the responses to comments, and giving the location of the correction on the plans. All changes other than complete re-issuance of drawings will be clouded. NOTE: Additional Conditions may be necessary based on the responses to conditions or to new information not on hand at time of review. It is understood that additional conditions may be forthcoming. NOTE: Resubmit corrected plans to the Planning Department. Per City of Clearwater, corrected plans to be submitted by 12:00 p.m. on Monday, July 11, 2005. Fourteen sets will be submitted with one set signed and sealed. Harbor Master No Comments Legal No Comments Land Resources 1. Reassess relocating tree #51, this is a Laurel Oak tree with some deficiencies and Laurel Oaks do not transfer well. There are other trees on site more suitable for relocating. Review your arborist's tree inventory and discuss the feasibility with your arborist prior to building permit. Relocation of tree #51 has been reassessed, this will not be relocated. Tree #47 (18" Oak rated #3 will be relocated. Landscaping No Comments Parks and Recreation 1. No issues (in CRA) ~UL 11 2005 stormwater ~I,ANNING E~EPARTMENT ~~TY `JF CLEAR~/ATER 1. Prior to CDB the storm water outfall for the retention vault is to be relocated so it does not drain across Clearwater City Hall property. The city is proposing to build a 54" RCP system outfall for Cleveland Street. This is part of the Cleveland Street Streetscape that is at the 90% stage of plan review. The vault outfall shall tie into the proposed 54" pipe system and not into the Pierce Street storm system. Presently the Calvary Baptist Church drains into the Cleveland Street system and your proposed site should continue to do the same. Outfall has been resolved and has been revised to outfall into Cleveland Street. Mr. Robert Tafft July 11, 2005 Page Five Solid Waste oRisiNnt_ 1. Too many units for roll out service. The retail space will produce much more waste than the condos. Please consider a compactor for your solid waste needs. A trash compactor has been indicated in the trash rooms and space for recycling bins has been located in the loading room. Final design resolution will require additional design and coordination with the solid waste department before final department. Traffic Engineering a. The vertical clear height of parking garage must be 8'2". Show a cross section of parking garage showing pipes and other structures that may impede in this height requirement. Van Accessible H/C parking spaces on the first floor, and that the min. height is 8'2". The minimum height in other areas is 7'-0". b. The porte-cochere canopy must meet ADA requirements of 114 inches clear vertical height. We do not have aporte-cachere. c. H/C parking spaces must be strategically placed to nearest accessible entrance i.e. elevators. See drawings for relocation of Handicapped parking spaces. d. Garage walls/columns shall be designed to prevent impeding motorists line of sight when backing out of the parking spaces. We are using bearing walls, so no columns will be used. e. Driveway radius must meet Fire Department requirements. See Response referencing a `Y' turnaround. f. Show 20'x20' sight triangles for entrance driveway. All sight triangles have been shown. g. How will vehicular gate along main entrance drive operate? How will a motorist turn around if gate if locked? Gates are to be deleted. General Note: Transportation impact fees to be determined and paid prior to a C.O. All transportation impact fees to be paid prior to issuance of C.O. RECEII~ED ~U~. 11 1005 ~LANNfNG DEPARTMENT ~pN AF GLEARINATER 1 Mr. Robert Tafft July 11, 2005 G ~ ~\r ~~ Page Six v Planning Provide all required sight visibility triangles on the site plan (they were provided on the landscape plan). All sight triangles have been noted on plans. ~~ 2. Indicate the location of all public and private easements. All easements are shown on drawings. .IUL 11 2005 3. Indicate the location of all outdoor lighting fixtures. PLANNING ~EI~ARTMENT See Sheets L-1 and C2-1 for outdoor lighting. CITY' OF ~LEAR~iIATER 4: Clarify that the proposed streetscaping (sidewalks, landscaping, signage, street furniture, etc.) will match the City's Master Streetscape and Wayfinding plan. Ou~~Intent is to match the material and design of the Wayfinding Plan. Benches will be placed at the corner of Cleveland and Osceola and S. Osceola. See Sheet Ul. ~' Provide the gross floor area dedicated to the residential component of the development. See revised Site Data Table for corrected calculations. ~~: Provide the paved vehicular use area expressed in square feet and a percentage of the site. See revised Site Data table for calculations. ~% Provide the official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easements. > All O.R. Books and page number of existing utility easements have been noted on survey. 8: Provide the Floor Area Ratio as a percentage of the site. F.A.R. has been calculated on Site Data Table. ~~ ~°~ r u~i~=1 ~ , ~'~~-~ ~ ~ mac ~~~"~~ ~ °-R 9. There are some minor discrepancies between the rendered and b/w elevations as follows: ,~' South Elevation Sheet A3.01-there are three sets of double windows on the lower portion of the building which read as three single windows on the rendered elevations. Colored elevation will be corrected to match black and white. ,Y~ South Elevation Sheet A3.01 -Ornamentation shown on railing on the west side of the building in the rendered version is missing on the b/w version. Elevations will be coordinate. c. East Elevation Sheet A3.02 -there are three sets of double windows on the lower portion of the building which read as three single windows on the rendered elevations. Colored elevations will be corrected to match black and white. ~l% East Elevation Sheet A3.02 -the top center portion of the high-rise shows two spikes where the rendered version shows one spike. Drawings will be coordinated. • • `_ : ~ Mr. Robert Tefft July 11, 2005 Page Seven ~l West Elevation Sheet A3.02 - a sloped roof is shown on the rendered version of the north side of the building. The rendered version shows the shage of the low rise structure beyond. £ West Elevations Sheet A3.02 - a low building elevation shown on the rendered version is missing on the b/w version. Black and white version ~~ North Elevation Sheet A3.03 -Ornamentation shown on railing the west side of the building in the rendered version is missing on the b/w version. ~ North Elevation Sheet A3.03 -the lower northwest corner of the facade on the b/w version is different than the with regard to window shape and placement and balconies. See architectural plans for revised elevations showing matching colors. 10.~dicate the height of the buildin on the elevations s beginning at the average grade of the site (as zero). Indicate height at each stepback, floor, roof deck, parapet and any other architectural ornamentation. See dimensions on civil drawings. There is a discrepancy regarding the size of the site between the application (77,050 square °~-' feet/1.76 acres) and the site plan data table (81,065 square feet/1.86 acres) and the Pinellas ' County Property Appraiser's Records (76,935 square feet/1.76 acres). This need to be corrected/clarified. I will assume that the site plan data table is incorrect since the application , " "_1 ~`~ acreage and the Property Appraiser's acreage are the same. This needs to be clarified right away ~ -P~'_ ~ ~ °=" as the difference is six dwelling units required from the Amenities Pool The acreage has been corrected. See Site Data Table. ~ ~., -~ ;"° 12.he site plan, data table and Exhibit A differ on the number of parking spaces. The site plan identifies the parking garage as containing 300 parking spaces, the data table indicated that 302 ~~~"''~- ~,~r. ~ _ ` ~` `` spaces will be provided and Exhibit A lists both 302 and 287 spaces. This number needs to be >^' L s'`' ~`'~' ~ nailed down. The magic number is 276 spaces which is derived from the proposed number of ~,~,~~', ~~"~` dwelling units (157 with 1.5 spaces/du required) plus the proposed amount ofnon-residential ,-~-~. ~~}d'' space (10,022 GFA with four spaces per 1,000 sq. ft of GFA). ~. ,~ ,_ :,,,;,~-.~=~ The confusion arises in the distinction between structured spaces (in the _~,~.,,~ °~ , garage) and the total which includes surface parking. The discussion in m Exhibit A became a moot poi when the structural system was designed to avoid interior columns. Pe~Attachmen~t B~}we are requesting flexibility in regards to the commercial parking due to tGe ezis~nce of adequate parking in adjacent locations. See attached parking data sheet. TEhS ~~~sur, Pa ~ ... `~13~ Clarify where the main entrance to the high-rise tower is. Consider enhancing this important ~R(~~s~-~/ /~~_ _-. feature. ~~~~ '~'! The main entrance is on the South elevation at about the center o wer Design of this r feature is on going as we agree it needs to be more prominent. '~ h~ '~~ -__'~ ~. ~ ~'~ ~~~, ~,~,~,~ ~: ~~ ~, ~ < JUL 11 2005 a _ ~v~-non-a-; -rl1-t% ~l~tv~-,'S t'1~~hh.,n `[l{~ E~-~~L-j FGI'ro,Z.v- paF4 ~"'~°~' Ur~uti ati~= e ~ow;~ 1 .nrr/• ~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~`'E ~.~~ ~~..°~«~i~ • • Mr. Robert Tefft June 11, 2005 Page Eight ORIGINAL Clarify how the 19 units of the mid-rise portion of the site are accessed. They will be accessed from the corridor facing the garage. Some intended doors from the garage to the corridor were not shown. 15. ~It is not clear from the elevations how the Design Guidelines are being met which require that ~~ground floors of parking garages accessory to a principal have at least 75% of the primary fagade occupied by the principal use(s) features or other use determined to be complementary to the principal use. The elevations seem to indicate that the north facade of the building is generally a blank wall, with the exception of the tiled mural. A parking garage in downtown St. Petersburg does this with good results. This topic was touched upon in our preliminary meetings. The intent of the ~ ~~ Guideline is to assure a vibrant and active space along the Cleveland Street ~ . commercial corridor. It was our impression that with that portion of Cleveland being integrated into Coachman Park, it was judged more tJ(J~ 1 1 ~00~ appropriate for the commercial space to face South. 16~Clarify how drop-offs for retail deliveries will occur. ~~' ~ ~~~ ~~~T~~N~ ~- ~~ The site plan has been revised to include a space for commercial loading and a'se~r'~~ ~~-E~~~~JAt~t~ 0 5 ...,mot _ loading space for residential use. `Z y -,~~ ,-~ iz=~ ~ ~~~~~~,k, ~+'~~~~ ~~ pr?u~, ~ ~~ ' t~` ~-~ 1!n,i T'-E~ r~1-~,~~~ >-.~i n.~-c w: :vG ~ ~ra bus .?. Vr"LL LL-r'. .:. ~ ~G~ . 17~larify how moving vans and delivery trucks will be accommodated 'The site plan has been revised to include a space for commercial loading and a separate loading space for residential use. --~ SF~,= ~~, Identify all amenities associated with this development. The private amenities include; covered parking, social spaces, exercise facilities. Pool deck with private plaza and private storage areas. The public amenities in accordance with the redevelopment plan include; downtown residential units, downtown commercial space, ~~ public aret and a continuation of the Wayfinding Plan. i~~ , ~~, ~1 ~.~,, , ~, ~~ c~ au ~ P,-.,.-' ~ rr ~~ ~3: Clarify the style of architecture proposed. The project does not fit into any well defined architectural style, but uses many traditional architectural details to produce a contemporary look. 20.:~Clarify the types of units proposed -include square feet, number of bedrooms and anticipated cost. We can provide a spread sheet. '~.' - - ~ ~~ -~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ Consider providing bike storage (short-term and long-term) on the site. We will indicate them on the landscape drawings and perhaps find a room for them. .Clarify the proposed non-residential uses intended to the site. We have no commitments for the space at this time. We intend to comply with the parameters established by the Planning Department. `~.~~ ~ _~ • ~' r, ~__ . Mr. Robert Tefft June 11, 2005 Page Nine Will benches be provided along Cleveland Street and/or South Osceola Avenue? The Landscape Drawing indicate four `Scarsborogh' benches that need to be confirmed as matching the Wayfinding plan. Benches will be placed on the corner of Cleveland and Osceola, along with S. Osceola. Has consideration been given to the concept of robotic parking proposed with another downtown development as a viable use for this project? A CD provided to Staff in association with the other proposal may be of interest. The cost eliminated it from consideration. ~.r. Provide a different paving pattern at the pedestrian crosswalk across the drive along South Osceola Avenue. The paver pattern has been changed for the crosswalk to a Herringbone pattern. See Sheet L-1. 2b~. Clarify how and that wireless communication facilities wilt be concealed. Most likely, it will be screened on the roof. ~~ Clarify that reflective or tinted glass (more than 22% tint) will not be used. ~ ~ ~;,~ Reflective Glass will not be used. Clarify the material of which the awnings will be constructed. jU~ 1 1 2Q~5 Canvas Clarify how signage will work on the site. ~~N~~~~ Q~~~~r~~N~ Site signage to be under a separate permit. ~~~ QF ~~~~~/R~ER 30. ,"a. )Additional consideration should be given to the level of detail on the east Fagade of the tower. Clarification is needed regarding design features of '~ ~ = . ;<:: ~ the low-rise component of the north facade such as garage screening ~'" ~ details, murals/public art etc. See revised elevations The primary facade needs additional emphasis on the retail entrances. Understood ~ P~Lt~Vr3 iif~ ru~tr ~s c.'There is a discrepancy between the black and white and colored drawings mar ..~ ~~~ ~ with regard to the Cleveland/Osceola corner. Per the Design Guidelines, r. buildings on corner lots should emphasize their prominent location ~-~ ~`" ~ ~~ -rar-- ~ ~~~ through the use of additional height, massing, distinctive architectural treatments and/or other distinguishing features. _ ~ : ty,~ir_.2 This will be one of the tallest building in Downtown Clearwater. What is on the submitted disk - I can't open any of the files on it. The submitted disc was from Gulf Coast Consulting. It contained the traffic study. ~~f Mr. Robert Tefft July 11, 2005 Page Ten 32. What is the purpose of the second gate? To assure traffic into the garage is limited to the residents. This concludes the responses to the Development Review comments. Associated drawings are included with this package. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely ~c ~~ Doreen A. Williams Project Director RECe~~~:°~~ ~u~ 112ao5 MANNING ®EP,4RTMENT' CITY ~JF ~LE~~J~-iER Northside ~s~~. • CIVIL • LAND PLANNING • ENVIRONMENTAL • TRANSPORTATION • STORMWATER REPORT FOR: WATER'S EDGE PROJECT OR161N~"u ~~~~ ~ ~~ 4_ . ^k 4 ~../ .~ Y ~~ Ram ~ ~;f~oe;, ~#,~47431 . ~ :~..~- .,,,. REC~c~t~~D II r:,~;. 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NESADMIN@MINDSPRING.COM NESTECHQMINDSPRING.COM 727 • 443 • 2869 FAX 727 • 446 • 8036 PLANNING ®EP~RTMENT ~ITt(O~ ~L~A~'~Ai EIS July 2005 Project No. 0509 c M 1 of 2 DRAINAGE NARRATIVE This project consists of 1.861 acres of land. Currently, the site contains a church building with impervious area of 66105 square feet. We are proposing to raze the building and construct a high rise, a low to mid rise and a parking garage. The total impervious after construction will be 70,577 square feet, a difference of 4472 square feet. The City of Clearwater Drainage Manual restricts us to 50% credit for the existing impervious area. We are proposing to construct a retention vault to accommodate the volume required , including the %" treatment for water quality. The point of discharge will continue to be at the south end of the property; the entire building will be connected to the vault with roof drains and inlets for proper treatment. Drainage Calculations PRECONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS Site area = 81065s.f, 1.861 Acres. Ex. Imp. Area = 66105s.f. Ex. Pervious Area = 14960s.f. 66105 X 0.475 = 31400 14960 X 0.2 = 2992 81065 34392 POST CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS Site Area = 81065s.f, 1.861 Acres. Post Imp. Area = 70577s.f. Post Pervious Area = 10488s.f. 70577 X 0.95 = 67048 10488 X 0.2 = 2098 81065 69146 C 1 = 0.424 C2 = 0.853 Volume Required = (C2-C1) X 4.0 X A X 3600 _ (0.853-0,424) X 4.0 X 1.861 X 3600 = 11496c.f. Volume Provided = 11532c.f. W.Q. Required = 81065 X % X 1/12 = 3378c.f. W.Q. Provided = 3385c.f. ~~ .ll~L 11 1005 ~~~G ~~; ~3~IENT ~1'~'1! ~~ ~~,~~'9e~"~~ER ii ~i ~ ~:~ ~ t ~ t~~.~: ~~ F:12005 AutoCAD Projects10509 - (Calvalry Baptist)IDRA/NAGE NARRATIVE. docl of 2 . s ~. . f 2of2 SLOT DESIGN Q=C1 XIXA 66105 X 0.95 = 62800 14960 0.2 = 2992 81065 65792 C1 = 0.81 Q=0.81X8.5X1.861 =12.81 CFS L = 12.81 = 1.2' 1.5 3.33 X 2.19 OR161N!', - .::~. A ~~ ~f .~~ ~~._ 11 X'005 ~tP-NN~NG D,~~'~~IIENT ~IT1lC)~~L~~aa ~~~i~R F:12005 AutoCAD Projects10509 - (Calvalry Baptist)IDRAINAGE NARRATIVEdoc2 of 2 C ~ ~ F~FiFF4 F, ii tt41'if. i_fFy :_r ';°s: PitEilA~ r~~lY. FIAt' tw, _ ... ot'.....;.3'~ ,.~;.a. 7tl.t+: 'K ` ' DE9 fiilil': I+"'" J1 '~ . I AL rrrr.nr.+wn pnpurdM ,,,~.h.,,tu hr.rwrnra m: ~1 i"h't~. ip:414"1:t$ }y;::lili :iL:~4h.: [16a+yr, I^° t! • f'E~SS Ii~i+ 3~ !11iE$ 1 1 -:IrNS Ilopa. N. a1ri~Han6 GeuW. L}am. :{'~ $F`r`i ' I4'^1" li [4,St1 Pi:IFYfE \uilhlln i Itea+~• P•4 _, _ .... SI1 S NBwwi Awour . „ 1 ~ ~,^l f4arw~rs.l'L lh~6 ~ M, 1:.) ~. j{ f.'/~ r us e's ~ ~°~: tX PJFY cm ~~Jay' of CsQ~_M11 h~ pnd iKtu~rn TI[15 {I~DE.>•Tt'Rl•:. m:uk this f , - --.._ , lit1~5'(EESC:aI.\'ARl"BAPTISTCHGR Il.:tmm-pmfupkuiducnrFaxatn+n"Gnma* n+n1FIR.~C d.~PTl51' CHI •RCH OF Cl.[:~R\~AT!•:R. [: iC..n nutrprolit Plosida cwiwration. <irantu[s a~+k brnrfioitvy_.chnce mnitiagaddress ix 331 Cleveland Sa're1(:kanwaur. al.. ~ 37 ~~ ea,80t) i ~ :et>~ \1'Il'NESSETH: rtraELlt~dk~ih~rIFIM~WI~ a That Grantor. For p»d'm considcnuinn of t[x sum of TF.~ iS10.00) Dt-LlARS, and nth~Y good and ~ nlnaMe crgrsidetalions to Grantor in hand paid by Gtnntee. Ute reetipt uhenrof is htn.~y ncl;no«1rdg.d. has granted. bargained and said to the soid Gtantee. and Grantee s lairs and pcrsrinal +tiPrecenlali)YS fort~'er. the Cnltm~ing described Innd. sittwte. l; ing and being is Pinellas County. Fh+rida, to-~cis. 'S SEC gTTAC1iSED L%HIUIT "r1" FOK LEGAL DESCRIPTION ,~{.~ IN N'll?~ESS t\'HGRIOF. Grvdor has hcrranto xi ha~nl and seal tix day' °nd flnt aMce ,~ ~}.+rincn. 5[GVED. SEALED ANH yE41t'EAEA [N THE ENCE OFs 'FRCS 5 gLVARY AAP7'IST.i`t'1tItRCH ~ J ~ ~~~~ A'1'itnnses Name: Ad ~V es Name:. . Address: ~~ •a..v.,. ?/ ~f ~s~ ft S3JLS/--- STATE OF FLORIDA COttN'I'\' OF ptKFA.[.AC • rrrwrw~'~"~" r ~ A" - 'm r'. P r. & `~ ~ tr~rrs ~~ k--'mot Deeaxiption:,Pinel2asrFL Document-gook.Page 11717.692 Page: 1 of 5 Older: f Caroment: ;Yam'<~,~~~~.~'~~ ,, .. JUL 11 2~~5 ~I.I~N~VEN~ `~Tit~~N~' r- ' AND P INF.t.t-R9 t.Ot1NTY PLtI Oif aEC tiK -1T17 P6 893 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRiPT1ON Commence at the Northeast comer afBtock A. John R Uavcy Subdivision, av recorded in Plat 8aok 1, page 87 ofthe Public Retards of Hillsborough County, Florida, ohvhich Pinellas County µas formerly aptirt of; and proceed South 1 ° 2T 45"East along the Easterly tine of acid Block A. 43.12 feat to the Point of Begfiming: From said Point of Beginning proceed North 90.00 00" West, 354.40 fad; add line being the South right~of--way tine ofCleveland Street; thence South 0° 00' 00" East, 174.82 toN; thence North 90.00' 04" Fitt, 23.ti I fert; dunce South ! • 22' 4i" Qad, 56.00 feet: thence North 90.00' 00"Tact. 335.00 feet; thence Notch 1 ° 22' 4S° Wmt, 230.88 feet; said 1'me being lha West right-of--way lira of t'heeols Avproa to the Point of Btginning. The above described description suns taken tiront a survey prcparcd by Getter tP„~n".bifl'•~~3°f~~'b~~r-o${~rt la, t9g4. AN17' Lot Two (2), Unit Four (4j, ISLAND I?STATES 4F CLEARWATt3R, acaordirrg to map or plat thereof as racocdrd in Plat Booty 51, Pages 32 and 73, Public Records of Pinellas Couary, Florida. Parcel l09-29-15-43562-000-OD'l0 TRACT A: Begin at the Northeast corner of Section !6, Township 29 5otrtlr, Range 1 S Fact and inn thence West along the North tine of asid Satioa 1,320A Feel; thence South alor-g Nye Wets line of tine EastOne~Idfof the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 16, !,526.16 feet b an iMeraeolion with as Easterly projection of the eentcrline of Fierce Street; Ntmce North i9dcg.15' West. ttatg the et:ruerliae of Picrcz Street, 418.0 Fed to aA iron crake net la a projection of the bleat Pne of Oxeota Avenue as erueaded across Pierce Strad: tbetrcc SoWb 20A Feet along this projection to tYe 5oudrwest wmar of Nu ttueraectioa of Pierce Strut dad Osceola Avenue; ttrensx 88 deg. 48' 12' West, along tht Sautlterly line of Piave Street, 45A Feet for Point of 13oginning; dterres eoatiauc sou8t 88 deg.48' 12" Weal 280A Foes thence 8oulh 0 deg.19' S5" Last. 147.96 Feel; Nteaca North E8 deg. 50'45" Fast 325.0 Fe:al; thetree Ntxlh 0 deg.19' SS" West, abagthe Westerly Uue ofOsceote Aveau~ 132 Fad; ihpwe South 88 deg 48' 12" bleat 45.0 Fact; thwx North 0 deg. 19' SS` War. parolkl to Osceola Aveaua,135A Ft:q to Pabu of Sogianing. TRACT B: Begin at the Northeast corner of Section 16, Towndtip 29 Both, Range t S Fart, snd run West 1.320.0 Feet akng North Jlrte of said Sexlion 16; thence South long the Welt line of the F.ast'thte-Half of the Northeast 114 of said Section 16, 4,526.16 Fact b an ialaracdion veldt as Easterly ptgjectionof the cmtetRnc of Plate 5trcei; thaws North 89 deg. 43' West abng the eeataliaa ofPiaea Stmd, 418.0 Feet to ors iron aWre oat iaa proJeetina of the Warn line of Osceola Avenue tit aruended across Pierce Sweet: tbena South 90.0 Feet along this projection to Parcel ! 16-29-JS-00000-130-0600 • • • 4 e _. ~ -~~ r' "' ~^,cta ~ ~ ~ ~~ ti ~r 1 1 ~~~5 ~Ll~~l°t~G ~~~~~~~~~ t*'IT1(A~ ~L~®~~~~;~~~~ _..~ :~~~ ~ .~JY r• N i°t~ 1~ .~~y . .L'. t t ._ _-~„~, _____.~ Desca^3ption: P~nellae,8>, Document-Book.?age 11727.692 Page: 2 of S Orders t t;oroments f * ~ PtNELLnS COUNTY Pt.R OCC RCC.BK 11717 P8 69~ the South~veu corner of the inteneetion of Pienx Street and Oseeole AvanuC thereto South 8B deg. 48' 12' Wqt. 325.0 Fcd nlong the Soathaty line Of Pietca Street for Point of 13egtnning: thentt South 0 dcg. l9' S9" Ees1,147.9b Feet: thanes 9outb 88"30'45" Wal. 50.0 Pat; thence North 0 deg, l9' SS" Walt 14?92 Fat; ffienee North 8$:48'12' Fast, along rite Southerly Bne of Piero Street 50.0 Fat to Paint ofBeglrtning. AND A tout of land lying in the NW i/4 of the NW 1 f4 of Seedon 22. Township 27 South, Range ] b Ea+t, Pinellas County, Florida. being more particulatiy dexribed as follows: For the pow ofgegktdpg cortnturax at tha NW coma of said NW 1k of rite NW Ito of Section 22.Ounce moth 89 deg. 39' 32" east aMnB the north tiro of said seotioa a distartoo of 626.b2 fat to a point onthe wea~tiBht•of-v»y lino of Comfy Road 1177 (also knawo a Nast Lake Road. having a l20' R!W). said Point being in a tsttve concaved southwesterly, tlrettee youad and along said aweadi right-of-watt lwviag a tadhtsof2914.79 foot. ue 699.57 Cal n chord beorirtg sad distance Booth 03 deg. 33' AO Best. 697.90 faek thereto north 89 de8.37 32" west, a tRstauce of 652.71 foot m a point on the war lino of Station 22, theytce notOt Ol dog. 25' r~ r°iz°a~i iaWi~no-eiio~ o ofb9b3z fad ro the print of begbuthtg. AND A tract of fond lying !a the northwest 1!a aCthe northwest -!4 of Section 22. Township 27 South. Range t6 F.as6 Piaetlas caanty. Florida, bainH mesa psrtiwhdy described as (bliwvx For the potM of tugiming contatencc at the northwest caryta aPUu northwest IN of the northwest 1!4 ofytid Sedan 22.'?lrcace South 89 deg. 39' 32" Ea+l long the North Brea of Gold section, A distance ofb26.b2 kei b a point on flu West rigl+t-o6wey Iina of Gounty Road N7? (Emt Lakes Road,120 R/VV) said point also Fxing iq a arve oancavad SoWhwedarly, havltyl a radius 2861.19 fen. m Ara 351.9b feet. Ounce long and atomd sold attr4eand tightmf-way line a chord booing and distances Sonilt 00 nag.10'06" Feat.33{.75 feat, thaux leaving said awe North 89 dog. 39' 32" Wen. A disttsnw of 618.87 Cad, to a point on rho Wosl lino of said section. thence NosW 01 dcg. 25' 49" blast, along said West Bite a distorK;e of 351.90 fed to the point of Leg'ttudog. . farce] r22-27-1b-000-2211-Arita Containing SA acres more or less. AND A tract oCland lying in the northwest l14 of the northwest i/4 of Section 22, roaauhip 27 SorMir. Range ib Fast, Plnallaa County. Plaids. bclag taoteporticalady desanbed rs Colbwa: . Par point ofttktenxeoaeaanca et the noethwest comer of theNwthu~est t!4 of the Notthwnt t!4 of said Section 22: thtnteo South OI deg. 29 49" East along the West Bns of said Section, A disttatca of 351.90 fact to the point of l,egtaning; thence south 89 deg. 39' 32" Bast a diatnnee of • ~j 1 .~l~L 11 2005 ~t~1N~~taS~ ~~,~~TNlENT ~ITY~F ~9.~,~~~~v~~R r J i Deserfpb3oa: P3ne22as,FL pocument-gaok.Page 11717.692 Page: 3 of 5 Order: f Cortmterit: L~ PiNELLR6 COtaJiY r'LR. ~F at:c.ax_ttvn Pa ale 61 g.87 fcet to a point on the vvestright-of-way Brie of County Road 177 (L?ast Lake Road, t2p R/W) said point being on a curve ooneaved southwesterly having a radius 2$64.79' ARC 34732', chord bearing and distance of South O? deg. Ol' 11"East, 347.3 t feN. Thrnce leaving aniJ curve Negth g4 deg. 39' 32" West n dlrtance of 652.71 feet, to a point on the weal uric of said Seetron 22, Thetta North 01 deg. 25',44' West along said west section Nne a d'utattce of 344.62 feet b the poim of hegianing. parcel MZt-27-16-001100-220-0100 Containing 5.0 oLKa more or Itss. ANO That part ofStrtion 16. Township 29 South, Aange 13 Easl, described u follows: Commence at the rwttheast comer of the aforesaid Secliat 16, Totvmhip 29 South, Range 1 S Eat, end rug thence West along Rs Nonhem boundary 1320 feet to the Notthwelat comet of the Ewt 4S of the Northeast 1/4 of~ho aforesaid SeeUon 16, Towneldp 29 5ou0y Reaga !S East, thence rue 8ottth along the West boundary of the aforesaid Eat 16of tht Nottlteast 1/4 !526.16 feet to the intersection with the F,astedy of the middle liaa of Pinrm Street; dtonee rug North i9 deg. 45' Weal along the aforesaid projextion and middle line of Place Sleet 403 feet a an hon aWte set in • peojection of the Wen boundary of Osceola Avenge; thence corn South ZQ fort along tNs projettlon to the Southwexi corner otrhe intersection o! Piercer Steael and Osstbla Avenue for dte Poim oPBeginning. From the Po[m of Begimdny thus established run thestoa South slimy the Wes boundary of Osceola Avenua (South 0 eley.l9' S5" fi)135 00 het• thence sun Wert parallel to the middle line of Pierre Suter (5 g8 deg, 4g' 12" W) 60.00 PoN; Wares !tut NnrOt pata11a1 to the ww boundary of Osceola Averate (N O dcg.19' S5' W1135.00 feu; thence rug Eeut abny the 3ouW borurdaty of Pierce Sweet (N 85 deg.4g' 12" E) 60.00 feet to the Point of Ileylnntny and LESS the East IS.00 fat of eaid Tract. Parcel s16-29-15-00000•!30.0500 AND 8cttinniog al the NE comer of Sectkn lei, Twvnship 29 S., Range t S li., pirtetlee tbwtty, Elorlda ~~'} a end run thane West tloug rho NotW Eno of iald Sextlon.1320.00 tat; Wence Sowh along the ("j ~ g~ ~j ~~~ a West lin~ofUo Eon ~s Of theNE 1/4 ofsaid 8eetsat t6, 1526-16 facto an intersation wltb an a '° ~ i ~ ~ ~, ~ _ Eeatexly peglectlon of the Lwueribte ofPierce StreaC Weme S g9 deg. 45' 00" W along the catterlitte of Piers Street, 41gA01ixt ro ea iron stab: ed is • projexriott oflhe Wtxt Uae of Osceola Avenue as extended atxws Pierce Suaet: thaice Satrlh 20A0 feu along this ptttjectl~ of the 5 W comer of the iWe:rseclion of Pierce Stroet and Oseenla Avenue; thanes 8 >iH dog. IB'. 42" W along the SouW line of Pierce Strut, 375-00 fat; thaeax S O deg. 41' 32" B 9RH0 ten to the Poinlof HsginalitH; iilurce continue S 0 deg. 41' 32" E 50.00 feel; Ihaue 8 H8 day. IH' 42" W., 100.00feet; tkemneN 0 deR.41' 32" W 50.00 feet; the:pee M 88 de3.1$'42' fi.. !00.0!1 Poet to the Point of Bt gJttniag. Togedhex with thal eatemeat of ingmss and e~ess rexorvtd in Warranty Doed from Highpoiat Corporation as tar®ttot m City erf Cleartrata a9 Onata a rtcordtxl is O.R. Book 4487 et Pe+ge 808, Public Records of P6te11as County. Florida Said eraemmt lying ovathe Southerly 10 fat ofthe property conve~rod in acid Deed. 16-29-lS-00000-130-0800 AND ~k err .It (L 11 2005 PU~1~~~iC '~~~r~~TNI~N~ ~MTY C~~ ~~.~~~"i~, ~~~R =~~ - r, ~~ ~.~ K •~~ ~ DeBaript~on: Pinellas, FL Document-Book.Paga 11717:692 Page: 4 of 5 ozdex: f Comment: - 1 , i • PIME~,6R$ COUNTY FLH. o<P aEC.e,c rt~r7 Pti ass Aacel I: East otx-half(E `h} of Ld a, EARLL AND TATS'S SUBDIVISION aecording to the plat thereof, eccotdod in Plat Hook 1, Page 2D. Public Rccwds of Hilisboroogh County, of which Pinellas Comity was foraoet}y apart. - •, Parcel rlfi-29-15-23814-000-0030 And Lot Thrse (7) and the Weal lulCof Lot Pony (4) of EARLL ANDTATb'S SUBDIVISION, according to map or phtt thereof as recorded is Flu Book 1, Page 20, Pabiic Records oP Hillsboro Coanry. Flodds, of which Pladloa County was totraeely a part. Parcel a1 -29-IS-23814-o0U-0046 Pared 1J: lots S and 6 of EARLL ANb TATE'S SUBDIVISION, weordaag to the tnspor plat thereof as retwrdod io Plat Book 1, Page 2D of the Public Rcea+ds of tiillsborotgh Coun¢ PlorWa, of which PhteQaa 2 urns 6ormcrl r part. Parcel a16-19-1s- 3814.000^050 Parcel [1[: . Lots ID and 1, Lasa rho East S feet for aWey, of EARLL AND TATB'S S118D1V1$ION of Lot 3 of BACtiMAN'S PLACE (in Section iti, Township 29 South. Rtmge 1 S East, Clearwater Harbor, Florida aceoading to plat thereof by frown A Swingtey. Tampa, Florida, AprN 27, t9g6, recorded is Plat Hook 1, Paga20, of the Pablie Reootda of FHUsboreugh Coatlty, Florida (now Pinellas Comty, Florida). Also described as .. ~ "` > ~ ~' '~ .!! I!_ 11 2q~a ~L~-~1~[~G ~3E~~~MEt~T ~,~,~, ~M~ ~~ ~~~~~~i~i~.y~ ~,..,..__ ~----.__-.,I y - •• e Ld Thsea (3) snd tiw West one-balt(W'b) of Lot Pour (4), the East oaa-tmlf (B 4S) oflw Four (4), Lots Fivo (s)and fix (~, and bts Ter-(id} and ]:leteo (11) ofEARLL AND TATB'S SU$DMS[ON, aaoording to the mayor pkt thereof ~ reeorded in PI}d book t, Page 20, of the Pubtie Records of Hillsborough County, lilortda, ofwhich Pinellas County wan tbtmady a put. Parcel f16-29-15-23814-000.0100 1 nescrtpt~oar Ptnellas,PL DoctuneAt-Book. Page 11717.692 Page: 5 of 5 Orden f Comment: Pinellas County Property Apser Information: 16 29 15 20358 001 ~0 Page 2 of 6 ' 1 ~ ~ 1 1~ 1 05~ ~ 01 ~ X010 02-Jun-2005 Jim Smith, CFR Pinellas County Property Appraiser 08:24:41 Ownership Information Hon-Residential Property Address, Use, and Sales FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF CLEARWATER OBK: 11717 OPG: 0692 331 CLEUELAHD ST CLEARWATER FL 33755-4002 EVACUATION ZONE: HOHE Comparable sales value as Prop Addr: 20 S OSCEOLA AUE of Jan 1, 2004, based on Gensus Tract: 259.01 sales from 2002 - 2003: 0 Sale Date OR Book/Page Price {Qua11UnQ} VaclImp Plat Information 0 10 O/ 0 0 { ) 1896: Book OHi Pgs 087- 0 10 0/ 0 0 { ) 0000 Book Pgs - 0 10 0/ 0 0 { } 0000: Book Pgs - 0 10 0/ 0 0 { } 2D04 Value EXEMPTIONS Just/Market: 16,133,100 Homestead: HO Ownership ~ .000 Govt Exem: HO Use ~: .000 Rssessed~Cap: 16,133,100 Institutional Exem: YES Tax Exempt ~: .000 Historic Exem: 0 Taxable: 0 Agricultural: 0 2004 Tax Information District: CWD Seawall: Frontage: Clearwater Downtown Dew Bd View: 04 Millage: 23.9694 Land Size Unit Land Land Land Front x Depth Price Units Meth 04 Taxes: .00 1) 0 x 0 14.00 76, 935.00 S Special Tax CWI .00 2) 0 x 0 .00 .00 3) 0 x o . a0 . 00 LJithout the Save-Our-Homes 4} 0 x 0 .00 .00 cap, 2004 taxes will be : 5) 0 x 0 .00 .00 .00 ~) 0 x 0 .00 .00 LJithout any exemptions, 2004 taxes will be : 386, 700.73 Short Legal DAUEY'S, JOHH R. RESUB BLK A, PART OF LOTS 1,2,3 Description & UHPLATTED PARCEL DESC AS BEG AT SW COR OF CLEUELAHD Building Information http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-scr3?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=1 &u=0&p=16+29... 6/2/2005 .~ Pinellas County Property Ap~ser Information: 16 29 15 20358 001 ~0 Page 4 of 6 10 ~ ~ ~ 1rJ ! 0~ 001 ~ 4010 :0 0?-Jun-?005 Jim Smith, CFA Pinellas County Property Appraiser 08:?4:43 Commercial Card 0? of 3 Improvement Type: Offices Property Address: 0 Prop Use: 353 Land Use: 71 ~~ruc~ur~1 E1~m~n~s Foundation Spread}Mono Footing Floor System Slab on Grade Exterior Wall Face Brick Height Factor 0 Party Wall 3090 Common Wall Structural Frame Fire Proof St Steel Roof Frame Bar Joist}Rigid Fram Roof Cover Built Up}Metal}Gyps Cabinet & Mill Average Floor Finish Carpet Interior Finish Drywall Total Units 0 Heating & Air Heating&Cooling Pckg Fixtures ?8 Bath Tile Floor + Half Wall Electric Average Shape Factor Rectangle Quality Above Average Year Built 1,988 Effective Rge 7 Other Depreciation 0 Function Depreciation 0 Economic Depreciation 0 ~11~J Aromas Description Factor Area Description Factor Area 1} Base Area i. 00 73, 041 7) . 00 0 2} .00 0 83 .00 0 3} .00 0 9} .00 0 4} .00 0 10} .00 0 ~) .00 0 11} .00 0 ~) .00 0 12) .00 0 C omm ~ r c i a1 E x t r a F s at ur ~ s Description Dimensions Price Units Value RCD Year 1) .00 0 0 0 0 2} .04 0 0 0 0 3} .00 0 0 0 0 ~) .00 0 0 0 0 5) .00 0 0 0 0 6} .00 0 0 0 0 TOTAL RECORD VALUE: 0 Building #3 http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-scr3?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=1 &u=0&p=16+29... 6/2/2005 Pinellas County Property Ap~ser Information: 16 29 15 20358 001 (~0 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ - ~ _~ ~~~,~ ~~~~~ e~ ~' ~ ~ ~_ _ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~.~ 5 . ~ ~ .,`~ 4 1 W Z W Q I~~ ~ I~ I~ ~~ ~ .~ ~~ ~ r .. ~ Page 6 of 6 ~ {~ I~ ~t Pinellas County Property Appraiser Parcel Information Back to SearchPa~e An explanation of this screen http://pao.co.pinellas.fl.us/htbin/cgi-scr3?o=1 &a=1 &b=1 &c=1 &r=.16&s=1 &u=0&p=16+29... 6/2/2005 • Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 ~..~ ~.,.~ Telephone:727-562-4567 ~_ ~ Fax:727-562-4865 !3/SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION 3 SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION including 1) collated, 2) stapled and 3) folded sets of site plans C7 SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE ~'~=~~J CASE #: t-C.Z) dCY~ ~~-f~ Sit' DATE RECEIVED: d5-Z6 -d t RECEIVED BY (staff initt!?als): SLe.- ATLAS PAGE #: ' $ ZONING DISTRICT: ~ ~~ / r . LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: G$ SURROUNDING USES OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES: NORTH: ~ C~~ SOUTH: WEST: EAST: * NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS) O n I ~ I FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION K Comprehensive Infi11 Project (Revised 12/30/2004) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT /~y APPLICANT, PR'O,PlERTCY~, OW,/N~ER AND AGENT INF/O~RMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) //APPLICANT NAME:~I~ ] ~.XJGG 1r IC.~ ~®.t!~iCi~ ~![~ MAILING cb 3. PH E NUMBER:~t'J~3 - ~ 7 7- '5/NY'~ FAX NUMBER: ~J/3 _ 8 7 `~_ ~Tr LZ // // ~, / PROPERTY OWNER(S): ~~ C f ~~jClt +~ ~~L~'~GG~~ ~~b~.l~ ~~~,~c~~7S t ~~G~!~..5~/ (Must include ALL owners as listed on the deed -provide original signature(s) on page AGENT NAME~/rJ~,/N ~~[~IKA'~,J ~,~/~ .. f~,D(/, f~lL`~1~6-awl' ~~-~'S ~GL MAILING ADDRESS: I~ L~ ~ . ~,~/~s_ ~J C ~ ~~ ,~~/~C ~/eD PHONE NUMBER: j/, ~~Z% ~S/y FAX NUMBER: I CELL NUMBER: E-MAIL ADDRESS~i~. L!)Rd~. (ry ALa(L.lJfl~ . ['D~'~~ I B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATI/ON: (Code,S/ecti~oJn/4-2/,02-.\A) / ~TREET ADDRESS of subject site ~ ~Cf [~f !~i ,t~~ ~(': ~C-=C.~'ff~'.rJ~ C' /IfEGAL DESCRIPTION: ~ (J (if not list here, ase n e the location this doc nt in the submittal) /PARCEL NUMBER: O ~A CEL SIZE: 'y7O.~ (acres, square feet) /~.~-~ _~ /, _/ l `~ / i J PROPOSED USE(S) AND SIZE(S): s~~f ~ C%t~1d '~C-G' L}~ ,tCf i' ~ f~ (number of dwelling units, hotel rooms or square footage of nonresidential use) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST(S): `'S`L ~ (i'~-r Z.L ~ TEL ~c...bi~>/ " /~ Attach sheets and be specific when identifying the request (include all requested code deviations; e.g. reduction in required number of parking spaces, specific use, etc.) Page 1 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater • • OR161NAL DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR), A~SLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES ____ NO (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents) C,,- PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5) SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see page 6) D/~{11RITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A) /G~ Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA- Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. ---------- ----- - - - -- - - ------------------------------------ --- ` ~ -~~t~F ~--~~~i~c~_-~------------------------------------------ 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. ---------------------------------------------------------- --- ------------------------- 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel propAo~sved for devel~oryp~m~ent. ---------------------------------------------------------------------f'tHt~~fttEt~.r----- 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - -- ---------------- Provide complete responses to the ten (10) COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA (as applicable) -Explain how each criteria is achieved in detail: 1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use, intensity and development standards. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 2 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater • ~ OR161NAL The development of the parcel proposed for development as a comprehensive infill redevelopment project or residential infill project will not reduce the fair market value of abutting properties. (Include the existing value of the site and the proposed value of the site with the improvements.) ---J~ ~~ --~ 3~z~e4~.c~~cY _ ~E/~ t ~ -~----------------------------------------- 3. The uses within the comprehensive infill redevelopment project are otherwise permitted in the City of Clearwater. -- sf~s ~_4_~~.~1~~! __~~ ~----~~----------------------------------------- 4. The uses or mix of use within the comprehensive infill redevelopment project are compatible with adjacent land uses. 5. Suitable sites for development or redevelopment of the uses or mix of uses within the comprehensive infill redevelopment project are not otherwise available in the City of Clearwater. _ ~ --------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- 6. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a comprehensive infill redevelopment project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7. The design of the proposed comprehensive infill redevelopment project creates a form and function that enhances the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. 8. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. 9. Adequate off-street parking in the immediate vicinity according to the shared parking formula in Division 14 of Article 3 will be available to avoid on-street parking in the immediate vicinity of parcel proposed for development. --------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- ---~~ _~~~~~ __~~~s~~ --~-------------------------------------------- 10. The design of all buildings complies with the Tourist District or Downtown District design guidelines in Division 5 of Article 3 (as applicable). Use separate sheets as necessary. -~~--- ~~'~'~,~ --~-~~1_lf Lam- ~--------------------------=----------------= . Page 3 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater • ~ ORIGINAL E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design C Manual and 4-202.A.21) A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that invol addition or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with 1 City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption this requirement. If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt. At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following: Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines; ___ Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; ___ All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; ___ Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; __ A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with the City manual. ___ Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations. ^~\hCOPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT SUBMITTAL Y~(SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable ^ Acknowledg~ement of stormwater plan requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): _V ___ stormwater plan as noted above is included stormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor elevations shall provided. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750. F..SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A) SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) -One original and 14 copies; TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and location, including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) -please design around the existing trees; _ /LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY; ~ PARKING DEMAND STUDY in conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (ie. Reduce number of spaces). Prior to the submittal of this application, the methodology of such study shall be approved by the Community Development Coordinator and shall b in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not ~viations to the parking standards are approved; . lY GRADING PLAN, as applicable; ^ PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided); ^ COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; ~E PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A) ~8'~TE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): __~_/ All dimensions; _ North arrow; ___ Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared; Location map; _ Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package; Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures; Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures; All required setbacks; All existing and proposed points of access; All required sight triangles; ' Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; Location of all public and private easements; Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site; ~~~ 2 6 2005 Page 4 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater • • ORIGINAL _~ Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas and water lines; __ All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas; Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas; _ ~ Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening {per Section 3-201(D)(i) and Index #701}; _ Location of all landscape material; Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities; _(,~ Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; and ___ Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks. ~~SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development,. inwritten/tabular form: Land area in square feet and acres; `_1 Number of EXISTING dwelling units; .~// Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; Gross floor area devoted to each use; Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the number of required spaces; Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces and driveways, expressed in square feet and percentage of the paved vehicular area; Size and species of all landscape material; Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easement; Building and structure heights; _ permeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. UCED SITE PLAN to scale (8 %Z X 11) and color rendering if possible; FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan: ~___ One-foot contours or spot elevations on site; _~_ Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel; _ All open space areas; ___ Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms; _ Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned); _ Streets and drives (dimensioned); _ Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); _ Structural overhangs; ___ Tree Inventory; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 8" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of such trees. PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A) LANDSCAPE PLAN: All existing and proposed structures; Names of abutting streets; Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations; Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers; ___ Sight visibility triangles; __ Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing; __ Proposed and required parking spaces; ___ Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including driplines (as indicated on required tree survey); __ Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names; _ _ Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant schedule; _ Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and protective measures; __ Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and percentage covered; nditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board); ___ Irrigation notes. %/ REDUCED LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8'/: X 11) (color rendering if possible); ~j/~/IRRIGATION PLAN (required for level two and three approval); -~---^"' COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met. MAY 2 6 2005 Page 5 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of)Cleatvaater I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23) Required in the event the application includes a development where design standards are in issue (e.g. Tourist and Downtown Districts) or as part 9t a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project or a Residential Infill Project. •/~/ ILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -all sides of all buildings including height dimensions, colors and materials; "DUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS -four sides of building with colors and materials to scale (8 '/z X 11) (black and white and color rendering, if possible) as required. J.~NAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS /Section 3-1 ^ All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be removed or n ~ to remain. All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing; freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals) ^ Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required). ^ Reduced signage proposal (8'/~ X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application. K. T FFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.13 and 4-801.C) Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or his/her designee or if the proposed development: • Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan. • Will generate 100 or more new vehicle directional trips per hour and/or 1000 or more new vehicle trips per day. • Will affect a nearby roadway segment and/or intersection with five (5) reportable accidents within the prior twelve (12) month period or that is on the City's annual list of most hazardous intersections. Trip generation shall be based on the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip General Manual. The Traffic Impact Study must be prepared in accordance with a "Scoping Meeting' held with the Traffic Operations Manager and the Planning De rtment's Development Review Manager or their designee (727-562-4750) Refer to Section 4-801 C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement. cknowledgement of traffic impact study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): Traffic Impact Study is included. The study must include a summary table of pre- and post-development levels of service for all roadway legs and each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scoping Meeting. Traffic Impact Study is not required. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineerinc,~,DeportmenE at (727) 562-4750. L. SIGNATURE: I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this applicati are true and accurate to the best of m~~knowledge and auth a ity representatives to visit and photog/aph the property de ribe In this applica?i6n. ~~ STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS ~yvp n t and subscribed before a this •S day of / I .D. 2t~ to me and/or by T who is personally known has produced as owner or dtnTy p rr My comm ssion expire : ~,~ ~' DOREEN A. WILLIAMS ~ MY COMMISSION ~ DD 155802 ~`OF1~~ EXPIRES: October 14, 2006 t-B043NO7ARY FL Notary Service & Bonding, InG Page 6 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Clearwater • • ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: (Names of all property owners on deed -please PRINT full names) 1. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location): '~'~1 ('1PVPlanrf Srraar ~ 4f11 Pierce Street Clearwater, Florida 33755 2.Tjhat this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request) / ~~ 1(r~ ~,~ S~ V7_ t~ L~ / ~,~ LT C7 I~L ~~~~~ /~ \ 3. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: ~ ~c,~N ~~ ~~~ / ~~~ 9 ~ ~~ _ - as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 4. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 5. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application; 6. That (I/we), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is tr and corr ct. Pro erty O ner Pro Owner Property Owner Property Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS ~(or~e me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by thelaws of the State Florida, on this ~ ~~ day of r -~EU, ~ personally appeared ~c~,~fY~~f'S who havin been first duly sworn Depos and says that he/she fully u~d~g and~~~~oA~#~f the affidavit that he/she ned. My Commission 1~29E848 '~-t-~~ ~ ~ N to Public ~'?off,,d~ Expires March 10, 200a ry My Commission Expires: S:IP/arming DepartmentlApplication Formsldevelopment reviewlflexible development comprehensive infi/l application 2005.doc Mt~-Y 2 ~ 205 Page 7 of 7 -Flexible Development Comprehensive Infill Application 2005- City of Ctearrtiater • LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION ORIGINq~ This letter will serve as authorization for John Wade with Opus Architects & Engineering to act as an agent for J sure a: 8 a3 ~ (Property Owner's Name) And to execute any and all documents related to securing permits and approvals for the construction of the property generally located at 331 Cleveland St_ & 301 Pierce St. Clearwater (Property Location) PINELLAS County, State of Florida S Owner .~~~ r ~C~v~ ~~~ Address of Property Owner ~~~~~~ ~ ~33~ 3s City/State/Zip Code Print Name of roperty Owner Title Telephone Number State of F~l~ri ~a The foregoing instrument was acknowledge before me this d5 day of County of ,r~2-1~as ~10.c~, 2Q ~, by~tY~,,es~ ~u , as who is personally know to me or who has produced as identification and who did (did not) take an oath. (Signature) :Public =ate+-~ Teresa Hubbard A~~~~` ~ ,J ~~~~ My Commission DD2s~/a I''3 CommlSSlo # ~~ei i~' Eyp~es.lAan'n,0 2001 (SEAL ABOVE) ~ ll~ ~ YC~(Name of Notary Typed, Printed or Stamped)' • Flezible Development Application -Comprehensive Infill Project EXHIBIT KA" Water's Edge 331 Cleveland Street General Applicability Criteria: ORIGINAL 1. The proposed development is in keeping with the spirit and objectives of the Downtown Core District Guidelines and addresses all criteria for said district. The architectural style for this project creates a metropolitan feel while utilizing traditional decorative features to develop points of agreement with the historic shopping district of Downtown Clearwater. The low-rise component of the development will be a pedestrian friendly, human scale at the si ewa c. The three levels of residential units over retail will mitigate the size of the residential tower as rt creates an effective screen etween the residence parking and the street. The residential tower is taller than its neighbor, the Harbor View center, but is appropriate for the urban core and compliments the District Vision where the highest residential density is encouraged. The residential component will take full advantage of the Park and assure that the results of the Coachman Park Master Plan will be an actively used city amenity. The proposed development includes 157 high end condominiums with amenities (i.e. pool, pool deck, shade structure, clubroom, fitness area, and 302 private parking spaces) and will be a keystone in the revitalization of the Downtown Core District. 2. The proposed residential and commercial development will contribute to an active and vibxant downtown and will encourage pedestrian activity from Cleveland Street down Osceola Ave and to the waterfront at Coachman Park. This proposal, once complete, can only lead to positive incentives for further revitalization of the surrounding area. 3. The proposal will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons in the neighborhood, but will promote a healthy environment in which to live. The project will. be built with the best of our current life safety features. being fully utilized. 4. The proposed residential project will have ingress/egress from Osceola Avenue. The single point of access, located at the Southeast-part of the site, provides ample car stacking space and will also serve as fire access. The required visibility triangles will be observed and maintained for vehicular and pedestrian safety along the Osceola Avenue right-afway. The proposed site plans submitted with this application reflect a total of ,~ 302 structured pazking spaces. The actual spaces constructed are projected to be 287 due ~` to a 5% loss due to columns. The Traffic study provided as a part of this submittal evaluates. the additional volume of traffic created by this project, along with the changing traffic patterns due to the new bridge to Clearwater Beach. ~ ~ €~ ` , e~~ _ _ ~- • • ORIGINAL 5. Of the six Downtown Character Districts established by the Redevelopment plan, the subject site is located within the Downtown Core District, located on the corner of Cleveland Street and Osceola Avenue, and is specifically singled out as a key component for the redevelopment of this district. The low-rise portion of the project facing Osceola is consistent in height and in the use of traditional architectural detailing seen along the historic Cleveland street shopping district. Though there is no residential neighbor to be compared with for consistency, it is one of the Redevelopment goals to create a residential community in this location. The proposed development adheres to this vision of the District by providing high residential density to take advantage of the views of Clearwater Harbor and Coachman Park. 6, The proposed residential and commercial project will bring a sophisticated residential community to Downtown Clearwater. Utilitarian features such as loading areas, trash removal and electrical transformers will be discretely located and screened with landscaping. The emergency generator, possibly the most egregious piece of equipment required, will be located away from the neighbors and be well isolated acoustically. Visually the proposed development will be the signature project of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. • • Exhibit "B" to Flexible Development Application (~ ~.f ~ ~~ Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria: 1. The proposed development is in keeping with the goals, objectives and policies of the Redevelopment Plan, and complies with use and other development standards. However, it is impractical for this development to go forward without an increase in the residential density limits. The deviation would be for the construction of_1571iving units in lieu of the 126 allowed the 70 utut acre criteria. This requested increase is provided for in t e Policies of the Redevelopment Plan, using the Public Amenity Pool to reward developments providing desired residential, retail and other public amenities to the Downtown. 2. The proposed residential and commercial development will be a major contribution to the redevelopment of downtown. With residential sales of an estimated value approaching $100 million, this proposal can only contribute to positive incentives for further revitalization and increased value of the surrounding area. 3. The residential and commercial uses in this comprehensive infill redevelopment project are permitted and encouraged in the City of Clearwater. 4. The commercial component of the redevelopment project is compatible with the adjacent land uses and is as proscribed in the Downtown Core District Vision. Though there is little adjacent residential use, it is a major goal of the redevelopment plan to create a residential community at this location. 5. The subject site is located within the Downtown Care District established by the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The proposed development adheres to the vision of the District by providing higher residential density along Clearwater Harbor west of Osceola while being sensitive to the low-rise historic character of the downtown district. Location of this project in any other area of Clearwater would be out of place. 6. The 1571uxury living units and upscale shopping will have a marked impact on the immediate vicinity by bringing more people with money to spend to the commercial core of Clearwater, and would therefore be an upgrade. 7. The design. proposed will introduce an upscale new residential community to downtown Clearwater and add to the commercial streetscape at the future terminus of Cleveland Street. The low-rise component is similar in scale to existing buildings in the local shopping district, borrowing details from several historic sources within the milieu of downtown Clearwater. The 25 floor residential tower facing Coachman Park and Clearwater Harbor incorporates classical proportions of traditional architecture. The tower form is a direct result of the function of providing high density housing where all residents benefit from the views and the urban life style of Downtown Clearwater. Visually the proposed development will be the signature project of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan.. R ~; • ~ ?RIGIN/~i. 8. Flexibility in regards to the off street parking required for the commercial component of the redevelopment project is justified by the benefits to the shopping district in the immediate vicinity. The Pedestrian friendly streetscape and the presence of local residents will certainly increase customers to these businesses. 9. Adequate off-street parking in the City Ha11 parking lot adjacent to the project and in other locations in accordance with the Division 14 of Article 3 will be available in the immediate vicinity to avoid on street parking. 10. The Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan describes a vision that the City has proscribed for itself for the redevelopment of Downtown into a place that attracts people to live, work, shop and play. Cleaxly stating the guiding principles, the plan establishes specific goals, objectives and policies that projects must contribute to. There are also incentives to promote development that contribute to the vision of the District where the project is to be located. This proposed development falls within the Downtown Core District of the Plan an the parcel west of Osceola and south of Cleveland Street. (Currently occupied by the Calvary Baptist Church.) The District Vision refers to this as a key waterfront parcel on Clearwater Bluffs overlooking Clearwater Harbor. The Vision and the Policies of the Plan are to encourage the highest density for residential and commercial use. With 157 residential units and over 10,000sq. ft. of retail space, this development is the ideal compliment to the Plan. Another mandate of the Plan is for the development to encourage pedestrian use and to integrate with the existing historic shopping district. This issue is addressed by locating low-rise buildings along the pedestrian walks. The street corners have been opened up to provide visual relief as well as creating opportunities for outdoor seating and gathering places. The three residential floors above the ground floor retail s_paee respect the historic height of Cleveland Street. The design of the commercial component of the development will create an inviting feeling, using a human scale at the sidewalk and will mitigate the size of the residential tower. It also creates an effective screen from the residence parking. The streetscape itself will_be a continuation of the Master Streetscape _._._.____ _..~--______a .__ .._.,a..r .._ _.__ ..__._~. and Wayfindi~Planpresented in the Redevelopment Plan. The proposed low-rise residential units are designed with articulation to the facade, visually distinguishing each unit from one another with. a similar rhythm of reveals and fenestration as with the tower. The garage elevation on Cleveland Street has a similar reveal pattern and cornice in keeping with the tower elements. Though this function on Cleveland Street does not encourage activity as required in the nearby shopping district, it will contribute to the setting when that part of Cleveland Street is redeveloped as an extension of Coachman Park. The roof is a series of hips and corniced flat roofs which continues the design theme of the development while complying with the Downtown Design Guidelines. The architecture of the tower cannot be specifically categorized as any one style, but incorporates the classical proportions of traditional architecture developing points of agreement with its historic neighbors, while setting the tone for a new metropolitan district. The proposed high rise condominium is designed with a distinct base, middle and cap in keeping with the Design Guidelines. The four bottom floors of the towers are distinguished by heavier rustication, a darker color and denser reveal patterns then the upper portions of the buildings. An accent band with a deeper profile creates shadows, further distinguishing the base of the building from the middle floors. The central ~ ,, ~1 portion of the towers contains a less dense reveal pattern and a lighter colors graduating ~° upwards. The top floors of the Tower are stepped back. with a reduced floor plate to distinguish the top of the building and at the same time addressing the City Downtown Design Guidelines. The roof design incorporates multiple flat roofs and other decorative features, giving the cap of the building a sculpted look and adding distinction to the Clearwater skyline. The scale of the tower, though not overwhelming, uses its prominent location, height and mass to denote the end of the downtown corridor and the beginning of Clearwater Harbor. Materials selected for this project are a stucco finish over concrete with EFIS banding and cornices at specific selected locations. Balcony railings consist of decorative painted aluminum. The sloped roofing material is a handsome standing seam metal roof, while flat roofs have decorative parapets. The glazing will be light gray hurricane glass in white aluminum frames. The painted. stucco colors chosen for this project are understated beige tones, blending with the existing colors and character of adjacent buildings, and conforming with the design Guidelines. The proposed design utilizes both horizontal and vertical elements to articulate the building mass. Human scale features such as balconies are also articulated, where the shadows create architectural interest and helps break down the masses to recognizable units. In summary, this project represents the fruition of the vision for this prominent location in the Downtown Core. It combines the appropriate low-rise component and. streetscape for an active pedestrian shopping concourse with a tower which denotes and enhances the prominence of this location at the end of Cleveland Street, the gateway to Clearwater Harbor. • ~~~61NA F r Planning and Development Services 100 South Myrtle Avenue ~~ ~ Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-456 7 Fax: 727-562-4576 ^ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ^ SUBMIT 7 COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION including folded site plan M CASE #: ------------------- DATE RECEIVED: - --- RECEIVED BY (staff initials): ____ ATLAS PAGE #: ___ _ ZONING DISTRICT __ __ __ LAND USE CLASS{FICATION: ZONING & LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES: NORTH: 1 SOUTH: / WEST: --_ ---- EAST: / COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS (Revised 9ft9l2lil)t) D. APPLICANT, PR,O,P`ERTYCOWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-1001} APPLICANT NA~.1E:~hc,J __VQ,~_- ~Q/~~~~ - _ - _ -_ MAILING ADDRESS:'~~QQ ~[1=- ~i~~/LLS.S- V C.- ~~"'Y 7f - ~~ _ _ ~~ ~~Ll1L~? --_ PHONE NUMBER:~~J -~ ~ ~ - !~.'Y'7~-_- - - FAX NUMBER: ~~ ~ ~ ?7-~_ LCtlt ~ _ PROPERTY OWNER(S): ~/i`K~GJr~?f-'1CJ.S~ r~i"iF!GL~~ - __- - {Must include ALL owners} AGENT NAME: {Contact Person) °c~~~~__~~~e,/ ,/ - MAILING ADDRESS:~~~_ lN.~-Lrt~~t'~%~5.~ _ V C. ~h'-2'~~ -~t~~7~___/~_V __~cl~!!~-- -_ PHONE NUMBER:t~l~~_,877- 7~'Y ~ _ _ FAX NUMBER: ~~~-~~' _~Z~~---- - _-_ _ - The landscaping requirements of Article 3 Division 12 may be waived or modified as a part of a Level One or Level Two Approval, as the case may be, if the application for development approval includes a Comprehensive Landscape Program, which satisfies the following criteria. 1. Architectural Theme. a. The landscaping in a Comprehensive Landscape Program shall be designed as a part of the architectural theme of the principal buildings proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for the development. ~, .; s_~rtm~ ~ oR ~ ORIGINAL 3. b. The design, character, location andlor materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall be demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape standards. Lighting. Any lighting proposed as a part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program is automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed. Community Character. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. ~~~~' , `_ M Property Values. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will have a beneficial impact on the value of the property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. ~rt~~~, 5. Special Area or Scenic Corridor Plan. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program is consistent with any special area or scenic corridor plan which the City of Cleanrvater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel proposed for development is located. Please return checklist for review and verification. ~., ~"" .~ t+ Date: ~_=--~ ~ ~_~~ _ S: application forms/development reviewlcomprehensive landscape program application.doc M COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS EXHIBIT "A" Water's Edge 311 Cleveland Street ORIGINAL Architectural Theme a. Not Applicable b. The creation of an attractive, viable, pedestrian streetscape along South Osceola Avenue and Cleveland Street will provide a vegetative buffer as well as a usable space for the surrounding community, 2. All lighting shall be controlled so that when the retail component is closed, only necessary security lighting shall be permitted. Street lighting and accent lighting shall have a photo cell and/or a timer to operate during appropriate hours of the night. 3. The landscape design will help actualize the city's adopted redevelopment plan. Continuity of landscape and hardseape features create the desired community character along the downtown corridors. 4. The Water's Edge project will create a large tax base through the residential living area and streetside retail shops. This will also encourage evening hours of activity, bringing life to this area of town between the hours of 5:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. The surrounding property values will increase with implementation of the Water's Edge project. This impact is paramount for a viable downtown. 5. A waiver from the City of Clearwater's landscaping requirements (Article 3 Division 12) is sought for the Water's Edge project so that the design will comply with the design guidelines set forth by the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The project's north and east property line is adjacent to the city's Scenic Corridors namely, S. Osceola Avenue and Cleveland Street. The south property line is part of a potential larger project which incorporates a main pedestrian access to Coachman Park to the west. Northside • ~~ i 9 ~ ~~.2- LETTER O F TRANSMITTAL Date: May 26, 2005 To: City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 S. Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33758-4748 ~ ja,jJ.. ~°- ~. Attn: Sherry L. Watkins, Administrative Analyst Reference: Waters Edge - 331 Cleveland St NES Project #509 We Transmit: (X) Enclosed ()Under Separate Cover (X)Originals ()Mail ()Courier (X) Prints Q Pick-up (X) Hand Delivered ()Addendum ()Shop Drawings Q Per Your Request (X) For Your Review & Comment ()Specifications () For Your Use ()For Your Approval (X) Applications ()For Your Files ()For Your Information ()Floppy Disk COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION 15 5/26/05 Civil & Landscape Drawings (3 sheets) (3) sets signed & sealed 15 5/26/05 8'1/2x11" Civil Site Plan 15 5/26/05 8'112x11" Colored Landsca a Plan 15 5/26/05 Flex Development (Comprehensive Infill Application) 3 5/26/05 Traffic Impact Study & 1 Diskett 15 5/26/05 Letters of Authorization 15 5/26/05 Warrant Deeds 15 5/26/05 Surveys (1 signed & sealed) 15 5/26/05 Stormwater Report (3 si ned & sealed) 15 5/26/05 8.5x11" Colored Renderings (Architectural) 15 5/26/05 8.5x11" Building Elevations 15 5/26/05 Color Charts 15 5/26/05 24x36 Architectural Drawings 1 5/26/05 Ck #089772 in the amount of $1,205.00 2 5/26/05 Comprehensive Landscape Application Comments: Design Review Committee for May 26, 2005 deadline Copies To: File ~ " -, ', ~~ ~~l ~ ~.~ ~~~z~ Doreen A. Williams, Project Director 727 • 443 • 2869 FAX 727 • 446 • 8036 • • P1NElt.iK+ CtRMt1'Y FLR. OFF REC ttK 1 t7 t7 PG 643 EXHB[T "A" LGGAL DESCRIPTION Commence at the Northeast eorrter of 81ock A. John R. Uavay Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Hook 1, page 87 of the Public Records of Hillsborough County, Florida, of which Pinellas County +cas fomtcrly a part of; and procad Sottth I ° 2T 45" East along the Easterly line of said Hlock A. 43.12 Ceet to the Point of Beginning: From said Yoint of);cginning prnctxd North 90° 00' 00"Writ, 354.40 feet; said line being the South night-of-way Itne of Ctet~eland 5tret:t; thence South 0°00' 00" East, 174.82 feel; thence North 90° OD' 00" East, 23.61 fccr, tttentcc South t ° 22' 45"East. 56.00 feet; thence North 90° ~' 00" East, 335.!10 feet; thence NotUs I ° 22' 45" West, 230.86 feet; said tine being the V4'es! right-of--way lino of Osceola Avenne to the Point of pBeginninrg. Tfie above destxibed description was taken !east! a wrvey prepared try Getter P:icae~Yr~~9~~-'21~fB~a~ 0~~1 18.1984. AND Lot Two (2A Unit Four (4),15LAND [iSTATES OF CLEARWATF.R, according fo map or plat thereof as eecorded in Plat [look 5 t, Pages 32 earl 33, Public Records of Pinellss Cottnty, Ftotida. Parcel r04-2~-15-433G2-nn0-nom AND TRACE A: Begin at the Northeast comer of Section 16, Township 29 South, Range I S East and mn thence West along the North ]irx of said Secdon 1,32011 Feet; thence South along Nee West tine of the FastOne-Neff of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section Ib, 1,526.16 feeel to an ietterseclion with an Easterly projeYtion of eke centerline of Pierce Street thence Ntath 89 deg. 45' West, elottg the eetaedina of Pierce Stmt, 41 E.0 Feq to u iron stake set is a projection oPthe west Iinc of Osceola Avenue u erctrnded aaass Pierce Street; thence South 20.0 Feat along this projection to the Southvwest comer of the intersection of Pierce Street and Oacaola Avenue; thence 88 deg. 48' 12" West, along the Sentdxrly line of P'Krce Sheet. 45.0 Feet for Point of $oginning; the;nen continue south 88 deg. AB' 12" West 28D.0 Feet; thence South 0 de:g.19' S5" East, !47.96 Feet; theetee Notch 88 deg. 50'45• East 325,0 Feet; thence North 0 deg. 17 SS" West. ebng the Wcctaly ciao of Osceola Avcauc, 13.2 Fed; thcnte South ti8 deg. 48' 12" Wert 45.0 Fat; theare Month 0 dtg. 19' SS" West, psralkl to Osceola Avenue, 115.0 Feet to Point of Haginning. TRACT B: Begin at the Northeast trorner of 5ea;tion 16, Township 29 South, tlautg! I S tact, and tun West 1,320.0 Feet along North Ilse otsaid Salton 16; Uteeece South along the West lux of the CastOne-Half of the Northeast 114 of said Section 16, 1,526.16 Fact to an iittt.pcclion +vith on Easterly projection of the centerline of Pierce Stmt; dance North 89 deg. 45' West along the «nteTliae of Pierce Street, 41 B.0 Fat to tR iron stake xt in a projation of the Weal line of Osceola Avenue as extended across Pierce Street; tbcnro South 20.0 Fat abng thin projection to Pnrccl r IG-29-15-OOt10D-130-OGt~O l ' - , , 4 s Descz3pt3on: Fine2Zas,1rL Documeant-Book. Page 21717-692 Page: 2 of 5 Ordesr: f Comment: / • I M1h 4+~rrwYeN M,r prepvM In oral rAouW Lr returned Io: ,Iri,Hamt t:auW, L}ern, ~unh,n & Ibe,,. P..~. +i 1 S ?)br~uri Ai+rwr ~ leuw or.r. 1'L ].t7cy • a• ~~ I?F(EE4 F, [ Ficr;c. ~;:;ct r ~s' rl $? fiiPas" h' ., . . ih L(. il:;114_^7't3 PX:'liti:+t:n !.~.: [fG•!i9r TQU~TI' D F 1 .TE :: 4'~ ^~J taYG~: S.) TiIIS tI~DE?vTL'RF.. m:uk this ~di, ol- &Qi?ItUI. h+ and I>tA«yn 17+(=SfEE5C:4L\'AR)'BAI'TlSTC11C'R H.alms-pmfitFloridocory>,natiun"Gnnd+x"andPIR~T' BAPTIST' CTII'RCH OF Cl.li:-R\\':1TElL ItiC.. a Harr-profit Florida corporrtiurt. Grantors wtle henefici~tn. cshnsr mailing address is :t31 Cleecland Stmet, CkarnAter. FL. 3;7$(r. Gmm~": Ol-42'72 3 OGC- 6-2001 3:9 U' 17 N E S S E T F 1: P trEeu,gS Co &t 11? tT Ptt 69~ I11pW~WtINtgW~~ That Grantor. for and in cottsidenttion of the atm of TF.N (S 10.00) DC111ARS, and athsY guexl and ~ alnahle cortsidt'ratims to Grantor in hand paid bJ• Gmnttx. the receipt altcrst+f ix hen~h} acknotr kcl~tid, has terrmed. bargairu'ct and sold tu ttte said GrdNer. and Granteds lairs and prrsnn:ll raprt'scntatisas fort+cr. flu fnltnccirtg described lend. situate. Icing and being in pinellu Cauttl?_ Florida, to-crir 'S SEis ATTACHED E:(HIBIT':~" FOR LEGAL DP5CRIPTltk1 " `i IN WIT?~ESS \CI9ERI'OF. Grantor has haennto set hand and seal the dac and first ahncr ,~ V~criUCn. SIG\ED, SEALED AND UI:LIYEAED tN THE~it ENCE OF: TRL'S 5 ~LVARY AAPI'IST.~l1ITRCN ~~ H'itltcsses Nawtt: <- Addreu: L ~~ / _._. _- ..~.- ----rt-- (J STATE OF FI.ORIUA COIINT><' OF Pt!\FX.LAS forcgoiog instru t ores acknonied ed I+etore me this~J da± n1i~Q20UL h5 ,~,~0(ty~tgt TiirF~f TRUSTEbiS CALVARY HAPTIST Cll :kCH.fA'C..cchpj~,g~rsonaB.Eno,.y~pt rt/r ~ ,ysr+t~ N: L tveran runlu: a'te' ~ : * i \1~ comroissiat expires: fCCBM1t7r7 !o 1'~ t~wwrrr~^ "---- ~~ r Deacxiptioa: J?inel.tas,FL Doct~tent-Baok.Page 11717.692 Page: 1 of 5 Order: f Cwnmeat: i • PINELLRS COUNTY rLfl. Off REE ,BX 11717 PO 999 618.87 fat to a point on the [seu right-of-wm tine of County Road N77 (Fast Lake Road, 120' RlWj said point being oa a curve eottcaved southvmstuly havieg a radius 286419' ARC 347.52', chord bearing and distance of South 07 deg. 0{' I S"East, 347.31 fact. 1ltettce leaving said ettrve North 89 deg. 39' 32" West n distta>ce of 652.71 fee4 to a point on the tvcst Iinc of said Section 22, Tirana North 01 deg. 25 49' West along said west seetien Bac a d'utatrce of 344.62 feet ro the paint of hegiening. Parecl 122-27- IG-U00011-220-0100 Containing SA Hera more or less. ANp That part of Station 16, Township 29 South, Range TS East, described az fellows: Commence at the rtottfieast comer of the aforesaid Section 16, TovRrship 29 South, Range IS East, and run theta West along ib Nonhem bottodery 1320 feet to rho Northwest comer of the East'b of the Northeast 1 /4 of the aforesaid Seedon 16, Township 29 Scutt, Range 1 S Fast, thence rtal South el~g the West boundary of the aforesaid East Ya of the Northeast 1/41 S26.Ib feet to the interseMion with the Easterly of the middle line of Pierce Street theutce ntn North 89 deg. 45' West along the aforesaid projection and middle Iim of Pierce Street 403 feet to an licit stake set In a projection of the Weu Itoundery of Osceola Avenue; fbrnce run South 20 feet along this projection to tltc Seudtweat corns of the intersection of Pierce SUaI tied (hceolt- Avenue for the Point of Beginning. From the Point of Hegittning dtus established tun theirs South along the West boundary of Osceola Avenue (Sau1h 0 deg. 19' S5` E)135.00 feet; thence nut Weal paralkt to the middle line of Pierce Street (S 88 deg, 48' 12" W) 60.00 feet; Otenoa roar North paralkl to the West boundary of 1Jsceola Avenue (N 0 deg. 19' SS" W) 135.00 feu; thtatce not Past abng the South boundary of Pierce Street fN 88 deg. 48' 12" E? 60.00 feet to the Paint of DegiMing and LESS the East 15.00 fat of raid Tract Parcel 116-29.15-00000-130.0500 AND Begintda8 at the NE comer of Section 16, Township 29 5., Range i 5 i~, Pinellas Cotudy, Flor[da and run thence West along the Noah line of said Section,1320.00 feet; thence Soth along the West line of the East !/, of the NE 1!4 of said Section l6, 1526.16 fat to an inursectiat with an Easterly projection of the centerline of Pierce Street; thence S 89 deg. 45' 00" W along the centerline of Pierce Street, 418.00 fat ro an iron stake sot in o projection oflhe West line of Osceola Avenue as extended across Pierce Suat;thence South 20.00 feet along this projection of the SW comer of the intersection of Pierce Street and Osceola Avenue; thence $ 88 deg. 18' 42" W along the SouOt lute of Pierce Street, 375.00 feet; thence S 0 deg. 41' 32" E 99 80 fact to the Point of Beginning; thence continue S 0 deg. 41' 32" E 50.00 feel; Iberia $ 88 deg. I H' 42" W., 100.00 feu; titans N 0 deg. 41' 32" W 50.00 fat; ihcacc N 88 deg. 18' 42" &,100.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. Together with that caunxat of ingress end egrets reserved in Waaenty Decd From Highpoiat Corporation u C>rattor ro City of Clearvrater as t3tantee as recorded in OJt. Book 4487 at Page 608. Public Records of Pimellu County, Florida. Said easement lying over the Southerly 10 feet of the properly conveyed in said Deed. 16-I9-IS-00000-130-0800 AND - --~"'"'~~a~ .:.;! ,t Description: Pine32as,PL Document-aook.Page 22717:692 Page: 4 of 5 Ozdez: f Comment: • • ~_ PltuEllpS COUNTY t'l.R OFr' R[C .$K 1 t i i7 PG 694 the SoutMvest corner of the intersection of Pierce Street and Osceola Avenue; thettee South 88 deg. d8' 12° West, 323.0 Fat along Ute Southerly line of pierce StreN for Point of Beginning; thrnce South 0 dcg. 19' S9" Fast, 147.96 Feet; thence Booth 68"30'43" Weal. 30.0 Feet; thence North 0 dcg. l9' 33" West 147.92 Feet; thence North 88:48'1 2` Gash along ilia Southerly Ihae of Piers Street 30.0 Eeet to Point of Beginning. AND A trace of land lying in the NW I/4 of the N W 114 of Secllon 22, Township 27 South, Range I6 F..ast, Pinellas County, Florida, being more particularly described as foUovrs: For the point of Beginning cvtrotteaoe at the N W coma otseid N W 114 of the NW t!4 of Section 22, thence toad! 89 deg. 39' 32" east along the north line of said section a distanca of 626.62 feet to a point on the west right-of--way line of County Raerl lE77 (also known as Fast Lake Road, having a l20' R1W); said point being in a turn concaved southwesterly, thrnce around and abag said taavo mid right-of--way having a radius of 292!.79 feet, arc b99.37 feN n chord bearing and distance south 03 dcg. 33' AO Best, 697.90 feet, thence north 69 deg. 39' 32" west, a distance of b32.71 fat m a point on the west line of Scdiaa 22, thanes north Ot deg. 23' 49" !vest, aloa said west line a distance of696.32 feet to the point of begimiog. tutee! tzz-~i7-ie;-oooao-2za•oloo AND A tract of imd lying in the northwest 114 ofthc northwest 114 of Section 22, Township 27 South, Rengc t6 [last, Pinellas Coaaty, Florida, bring more padiculmly dtstrihed as follows: For the point of beginning coatmencc at the rwrthwest corner of the notthwrxt 114 of the northwest i/4 of said Section 22, Thence South 89 dcg. 39' 32" East along ilia North tine of sold section, A distance of 626.62 feet to a point oa the West rightrrf--way fine of County Road #77 iEost Leka Road, 120 R/Wj said point also being in aturvr concaved Southxreuerly, having a radius 2B61.79 feel, m Arc 35196 feet, Oa•nce along sod around said curve and righMOf-way line n chord lx;ariag and distanc+c South 00 deg. Iff OG' Fast, 731.73 feet, thence leeviog said curve !North 89 deg. 39' 32" Wtst, A distance of 618.8T fat, to a point on the West liaa of said section, !hint! NorW 01 deg. 25' d9" West, long said West line n distnnae of 351.90 feet to the point of beginning, tutee] r22-2~-Ib-D0000-220-0100 Containing 3.0 acres stare or less AND A tract of Gtnd lying in the northwest t/4 of the northwest t/4 of Sr:etion 22, Township 27 South, Range 16 Fast, Pinellas County. Florida, bciag more pariculary described as Coilows; Far point ofrckrenre commence at the northwest comer ofthe Northwpt {lA of the Northweer 1/4 of said Section 22; dtenoa South OI deg. 25 49" East along the Wtsi line of said Suction, A distance of 33 t.90 feet to the point of hegianing; thence South 89 deg. 39' 32" Fast a dlst3tnea of F j r •. ~'~7 '1~~iYi1'~'I~ i Descrfpt.fon: PinelIas,FL Document-BOOk.Page 12717.692 Page: 3 of 5 Order: f Comment: r ~ . I , i i P lrrElLAS COUNTY f~R. err kEC.ax tt~t~ PG sss Parcel !: East ooe-half (E'rS) of La 4, P.ARLL AND TATE'S SUBDIVISION eccordinQ to Uu plat thereof, rtroocded in Piat Hook I, Pege 20, Public Records of Hillsborough County, of which Pinellas Comuy was formerly a part. Parcel Mlri-24-15-23814-000-0030 And Lot Three (3) aad the West half of La Four (4) of EARLL AND TATB'S SUBDIVISION, according to map or plat thereof az recorded h Plat Book 1, Page 20, Public Records of Hillsborouult County, Florida, of which Pinellas County was fornrerfy a part. Parcel M1 29-15-23814-OU6-0040 Parcel II: Lots 5 and 6 of FARI.L AND TATE'3 SUBDIVISION, according to the tnapor plat theroof as recorded in Plat !Book I, Page ZO of the Public Records of Hillsborough County, FkNida, of which Pinellas C~ttWy was fonncrty a part. Parcel ~t16-24-15-23814-000-0050 Parcel lIL• Lou 10 end 1, Less the Feat S feet for atley, of EARLL ANA TATB'S SITBDIViS10N of Lot 3 of SACHMAN'S PLACE (in Section !6, Township Z9 South, Retrge 15 East, Clearwater Harbor, Florida aetordiD¢ to plat tharcoE by Brown It Swingtey, Tirnpe~ Florida, Apri123, t9g6, recorded In Plat Book ],Page 20, of ehe Pubic Records of Hillsborough County, Florida (rtow Pinellas Comfy. FWrida). Also described as Lor Three (3) anti the West one-half (W h) of t.ot Pow (4), the East anc-tmlf (E Y^) oti,ot Four (4~ Lou Fivo {5) atd Six{6L and Icu Ten (10} nerd Elereo (t 1) of EARLL AND TATB'S SllSINV1S[ON, aooording to the map or plat thereof o recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 20, of the Pu61ie Records of Hillsborough Couety, }'brida, of whick Pinellas County wan fomretly a part. Parcel f1G-29-15-23814-OOD-0100 i'1e~i `.~r ~. L~ '.t w,wriw ~.-~.~_ •~I~~ Fescr~pt3on: Ptne2las,PL Aoctuaent-Book. Page 33717,692 Paga: 5 oP 5 Order: f Comment: I i 1 f I -~ CIVIL • LAND PLANNING • ~jy~l~(,~~ ~e~ /K~i. T AN S POO RTATI O N • ORIGiIVii~ Stormwater Calculation & Narrative WATER'S EDGE ~~ . A~. Jy~n ~.. i `~.~~~.. ~';. ~ • j ~ ~ e Y • ~ ~'" ~~„ :~' 6~ d y ~ ~ . °. 1 !!~~ .._. Ram A~.~oe~, ~.D 'PE x#74? . • r ,~ ~~~~'' May, 2005 NES #509 601 CLEVELAND STREET, SUITE 930 CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33755 NESADMIN@MINDSPRING.COM NESTECH@MINDSPRING.COM 727 • 443 • 2869 FAX 727 • 446 • 8036 ~ ' 1 of 2 V~~~~~ DRAINAGE NARRATIVE This project consists of 1.861 acres of land. Currently, the site contains a church building with impervious area of 66105 square feet. We are proposing to raze the building and construct a high rise, a low to mid rise and a parking garage. The total impervious after construction will be 70,577 square feet, a difference of 4472 square feet. The City of Clearwater Drainage Manual restricts us to 50% credit for the existing impervious area. We are proposing to construct a retention vault to accommodate the volume required , including the'/z" treatment for water quality. The point of discharge will continue to be at the south end of the property; the entire building will be connected to the vault with roof drains and inlets for proper treatment. Drainage Calculations PRECONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS Site area = 81065s.f, 1.861 Acres. Ex. Imp. Area = 66105s.f. Ex. Pervious Area = 14960s.f. 66105 X 0.475 = 31400 14960 X 0.2 = 2992 81065 34392 C1 = 0.424 POST CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS Site Area = 81065s.f, 1.861 Acres. Post Imp. Area = 70577s.f. Post Pervious Area = 10488s.f. 70577 X 0.95 = 67048 10488 X 0.2 = 2098 81065 69146 C2 = 0.853 Volume Required = (C2-C1) X 4.0 X A X 3600 _ (0.853-0.424) X 4.0 X 1.861 X 3600 = 11496c.f. Volume Provided = 11532c.f. W.Q. Required = 81065 X %2 X 1/12 = 3378c.f. W.Q. Provided = 3385c.f. h~AY 2 6 20Q5 F:12005 AutoCAD Projects10509 - (Calvalry Baptist)IDRAINAGE NARRATIVE.doc1 of 2 SLOT DESIGN Q=C1 XIXA 66105 X 0.95 = 62800 14960 0.2 = 2992 81065 65792 Q=0.81 X8.5X 1.861 = 12.81 CFS L = 12.81 = 1.2' 1.5 3.33 X 2.19 w 2 of 2 ORIGINAL C1 = 0.81 h~AY 2 6 20Q~ • F:12005 AutoCAD Projects10509 - (Calvalry Baptist)IDRAINAGE NARRATIVE. doc2 of 2 NEW 25 FLOOR TOW 138 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ~,~ ~~ afuou¢ a ~, _ r~ P ~: f,:: ..,v... . ~~ to5rl~~~ NEW S-LEVEL PARKING GARAGE TOTAL SPACES = 300 (INCLUDES 8 H.C. SPACES) CLEVELAND STREET t~ a~ N 0 a NEW MIXED USE 1st FLOOR RETAIL (10,022 S.F.) 2nd, 3rd & 4th FLOOR RESIDENTIA (19 LIMITS) . a.. (~ `.;; ~. ~ r y V 0 - - A~ t"z J ~ /l~ j-...." i a laElESMO 57. ~ VrV.7r wrwr~ri^w~r ~wwrafs _ ~~ - ~ - -- - - - waf ~- 1~ - _ ~ Opus NclNeds 8 Engineers, In< iwY ~~ fl^{TwaRlr R~~w fwawa f^^fa aamso R AR1Cw•I^a~rl Yf w1YK ~ ~ ,... I ' wn^~ ^IRM ~ _ 'S"' -1^aY~A•Ia a ~» ~, Y!J\!`^ ,1^G: ~` M ^^IRrA~^11a/1lwlwl. RYaAw f .~i ~ i1~I~wM01ALwRIgO.Rwa IKR 1/iIYAI R1~AAla^^rr~\111R1a ^11^ ^• '~k'.. f ~rA ~ wwrw^alrl^wstaiwarwrA >b f•A^lwa-w f ^K•MAtla ~~R~R~~•^~M •w ~ MIN^1^r!1^YNA/IaON r atwa a ^Awwn ^wlaarw~^lanw•n. wa aawaLIYYRAwamlwristrw^wrm d7 fwawa af^^w R' ^' Ana^^~ar•~ara^Arwn wawa fa~wa~ra afaaw i les~rwa ^w» a~ ra~~•rwm ~ u^rws of ~:A.e.A.a.. frwwr, .~ ~ ~i i rower WATER' S af^^ ar.. ^A.^A.^a.. ~ ~, .. ^wr~.leR.^.nr^ ~~ ° eows~twu~a•w•IR^rwaa•wrar r wsrAr^ia~a^= r~rw . swu^^w~wwr ~w ~~ . wae^aaar^rlea •aa ^+ew^^alsrwereaawar~atlelwa wa ATNrM1a0aRr~CY^11~M A^~aO ~ Mrw!•^ORwC•r CL N ORl -~ aIYMMLI^^MKA*IYYMIM^aRIMw^r wWlfAa^fw7Oa/a/MrMR aN ~ s avr~aAAla^r~ra~s••^Ar+a wa m . ~ i~ afraw ... ~~ wAewm~rirrrwuw a~fww^ Rr ',. n ^~w~R^^ °~ r ~:~'` .,>,a sa~ii ^mRtNwwwrarrnrAalrr i r iw J ` .v. " ~'? ff , "/`' r ~r.• ra^rs~ awvaa • .r...r~~ • w~ wsaw^w ~ f ° rarAa~t ~ ~ !~ ~ .M~ n~o MAa - --~.. _ - ~~ L~ ~lara^rw^a ~ *a F~ Iswraw.w~r __ t- 111A~~ ~ • ll wrrlowmar~wrewlw~a^• . yf "~ warrr~wrmanw~ . r~ ^ ~ I~r ^~~^newrw~mu •rrZ~'r •. ter. ~ r wren. ~'t }_ wes~~ ~aiirw~ w• Trr'L~.~r`r."rirr MNf MATEIOAL BQiFDULE r. ~ rwxw srrwr ^oo~si `r'~~r"Z~~± A AwMY/ AAA I~IYf•L^\Or r~~ ~r~ r ~ ry A'• Awa ~~ n•,••caL . ar~i~rie .• r r r . • ~IA^rl ilf 7•LwM^a .•r rra'r .r. ~A • rar^^^s wir /w.fa.fafAe^re • • yr ~ MOIY ^ f ~~ ~^ iM.l^1R11SIAG^\r Alrlwaia u x ara^raawrt Ara ^aa^aw^a rr. M Y a~aw^~ ~1^a11Y wuu^rawsaar A I~MrNR~ N~1~7^^R /IILW^{ • ~ 1 M~Ii17Cr- a11O1r7 AIaN/L O . u~u•^errlal _riury ..a.•^.arss owl sam, cono-e~,. u.c. ~ ~ Irwrawlf wa.. ua,fa.fa • . . a err .ar..>• ..a......~a~ ~. °- ~- w I.wsr.r,..f ta.as^ ~^s.^^wa~. -~ ,~ 1 K 11^Mwa~ 11YAN ~A7R • t ^ ^w^OY UMlwll •7iM~lr as ~ M ~IIMA/rAMra 11~~IA0^M •^6alial • • ^ wwn^wsw! M^r/ ~lal fl^~f^arIIAG Y wlrKYlll^Olr/IIRa1MA1^R 1M.MRfK^\^U ~ I ~ w w~r~ Aw•wwtwar wvaar,w ~ • a rRtww rear ~nwlaaw:ter ~,~q rt • a wrw~ ^wraaw Rtu^ta•^^wara • ~ Phil Graham `~ wawrM \ & Company, P.A. ~ ~.s~.wim~~uAm~ ~i/Y.E ~^rfV'V ..~~ irra"isiss t ORIGINAL ~yATER~s EncE :ECERb~~ MAY 2 ~ 2005 "r1~4~~;~~ ~~~~'~~n~~!~ll~ SAMPLE COLOR CHIPS w o Aesthetic White 3 Accessible Beige w o 3 E48 SW 7037 Q Q n (D fD f .._ ~ '' g- ~~, ~~ ~~ D m -z ORIGINq~ z D ~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~ a o ° 8€S+ m+a +mia+++o 88S$$m R8R+ ~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~ ~ Z ~~~ ooo~~o ~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~ o g ~~s ~~~~is ~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ 000 00 ~~+m ~WN+ sym sym sym y$m sym sym pCW 22ZZZZ ~m NN r N> ssC ~~~~~~ N~ NY ~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~d ~~' I i ~ a o ~ ~~ 0 n :b Vl ~N i~ ~Y~ ifeia ~ G+~ ~ i~ L MAY 2 6 2005 ''~` J ~ '~;t+,~ .~ ~ .~._ i. ---I' ~.~ L .~_ _ _. ~~ OPUS PROPOSED DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT NORTH ELEVATION Clearwater, florida ~,,~ _i~ 2 6 Z~~~ r N H Z W a O J W W W d' (V Z ~ N O H ~v Z ~ O O w O a 0 a ~ ~ ORIGINAL :~ r . , O ~ Q ~ ~~ 4 ® ~ i ® n ~i I' n w ~ o ~ n n o A u ,~y u a u ®'~ ~~ n ~~T~ ~~ ~~ u t ' ~ ~t r o- ~~ v o ye p ~~ A ~® ~~ ~ ® ~ ' ~ r -- -- n o u l' ~ ~Y 1B ~ it ~~ ~ Q ' ~ -- ~- ri 1 ~ .. m_ 7 ~~ ~~ 4 ® .._ -- a. ~~~; ~. ~: ~ ~~ ~~ n _ ~ ~ ~ r- _ -v sm : ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ®'~ ~~ at II? .. .. c~ -, __ o- o~ ®t ~,_ ~ ' _ _~ n Qi ~ ~ :. r ~~ .. it .. ~;,~, - ~ ~ _ -~ -__ ~~ ~~ Bi ~r ~ .e ®® ~i r-- ~ • ~ ~ k== n ~ n ~ ~ .A s ~ I -- -- -- - `_ -- -- -- ~~-_ -- __ ~ -_ _. N~ r ~ ~ r ~. 9 ~ _ -'!q P R O P O S E D D O W N T O W N R E D E V E L O P M E N T Clearwater, florida MAY 2 6 1~ ti-- SOUTH ELEVATION • ORIGINAL ~i OP1J5 EAST ELEVATION P R O P O S E D D O W N T O W N R E D E V E L O P M E N T Clearwater, florida i i i~ i i iI i i~ i iI i i _ ~ ~~ 1 ~ ~i1 ~~ ~„ L, Ji MAY 2 ~i 2~~5 g CLEVELAND STREET ORIGINAL i~ I ~ W I ~ I Z W Q I W I y I Q I I I I OPUS. ~.,d,,~. ~~~ M OOOtlli ~~ WATER'S EDGE n~szm as-zags s Ywm ..,.. L IM1Z ~Z..ir 4~~~..w "~.ri.~i r r.~° rTi ~ T.wwr .... ~ ..w. d tlw • IeN, i~iY~ ~ Mlr • M ~! re°Y iR mNY .IMF MM w111Y1 OM..V. • s np w.r n,.r.. ~~ OPUS. ~.®..~~r..~.,u.~ ssr*--r ~~. weer CLEARWATER BLUFFS REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL GtFMIA7ER, FL FLOOR PLAN LEVEL 1 s ~ ~~A2.01 J ~ ~ooR PuN • LEVEL ~ rs.c r - r'3 • r: ORIGINAL BOOR PUN -LEVEL 2 i..L 11Y-B' 1/16' ~ 1'-0' Iq~RM -, J ORIGINAL 8 ~ ~ _ _ ~ i ~ ~ i ~ ~, FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 3 F. .E t21-1- 1/t6- ~ t'-0 flNl MAY 2 ~ 2~~5 ~' J ORIGIN~IL ~~ opus. ~~~ ~~~ M f-0Otlli ~_`r~W M~ r I4N~ M.tN.m VYATER'S EDGE nazio ~-zras S YILLFR L NLZ • Lw p M twiiln J ...t~.ir q. a~.+. w r TVY•~V% 1~~ a ~. r.~.r. wrra • ae.e ...~ sie su r~7wi r..~w ..~..r w v mp.e .M.t rv wMn m..v. • a Syr ~r L_ FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL4 F.F.E 1]1-0' 1/16' ~ 1'-0' ~w ~ ~~ opus. QprBMiCOnYWt1 LLG ay~wr ~w m ~m (b CLEARWATER BLUFFS REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CIFARMAIEIL R FLOOR PLAN $ LEVEL4 all A2.04 II J ORIGINAL L- ~~ OPUS. ~~r~ ,~, ~,,,.o... M~ M mYll] ~w q}a.r ~~ s/ YN.Y WATER'S EDGE n~srm os-x+-m S NLLFA L NIZ r°~r r~ai.4. w+~ w.i ~s ~ ..Y.1 ~ rr ira ~.~.ry~Yr4w. r a ~.r~r~..r..~i .r.~ .T- ra..t rI M Y ~W r AYE ali.. Ar• gar art • r Syr err ~~M1 OPUS. ~~~~ aar*--r ~.,.~.,. ~~ CLEARWATER BLUFFS REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL .r. CIEARIMRR, R ~ _ j TOWER PLAN LEVEL B1 ~ .era A2.B1 J ~- t~ it L ORfGIN~L -, ~--- ---- --- ------ ---- -- --- ~ ------- ~ opus. ~~~ I ~ ~ i ~~~ M O.T1S I TERftACE•1%S.F. ~ ii W~ '~ ~ I i ~ I Wu~.A~NOKI1/ Aq • S,BH S.F. • 7988.F. 7ERPACE • 7888.F. i WATER PUYP i1RE PUW uYx9 oP.n sort : ~iR vAIE a I II II II __ II I OY1 MRAN6 RMIP YECIE I I ~ ,,,~, II VYATER'S EDGE RIIOIEY I L I _ ____~ Sld! I I I I ~~ ®O II POWOG ED'rFR _ I I m'1 9tvx1 e EYSIEII I IYSIm smc 9vx ~ as ~ ~ ° ELLV I I ~,~ I~ I I I I I I I A/C COMAM77AREA.0.6%AF. I I I I ~ as e ' IYSIEIe sRlc mix Em cou~R I, I °`~° '"A91 vcsnvESn.nc nASx~ r9WOU rove - ---- ~ L fROxr DESK ~~~ os-: r I RnoWn I SERWCE 1FR.Ift MFMFASf ~ I oma I roc 5.1111 YECIt Nw L .lZ I __ I __~~_____ ' W ` ~ ~rE a•F wFaYr~r ~.rY14w ea~o~ ~. ~~ c~q.t r w, r.Ya ~ Ip9t r s rrrw sMiia ~ iO•Y I ors or.'e sulE s &TM Y ' w~9rr ~.~~r.°'aS "~.. ~...r.y a r r. r r Iw~4 YMwY• ri ar~.TY' \ ~ eYFyrY~Y~~ A•usa F~Ir •MiRI•ri qtr \ AREA•788 F. OiFICE IGDNO • a nyr ~r UNIT'A7' BOUiII \ r cA/C •27198F. lEBRACE • 1888F. - - - r~ r ' - - ~ OPUS. I \ / covE~SF~ i I ~ Rar I i \ _ _ - ~ ~ CLEARWATER BLUFFS - - _ REDEVELOPMENT _ ~~ ~~ SUBMITTAL 1 i ~ ~ CLFAR9AIFR, R ,I~ III ~ `~ ~ .m WM TOWER PLAN I ~ ~ LEVEL 1 II iFE 100'-0" 1/!' t-0' ~ Mrs/ ~•O~ MAY 2 ~i 2~~5 ~ MAY 2 6 ZQp5 ORIGINAL . ,~~ ORIGINAL ~R~~ BAIFABLEMC•1,8168F. iEeRACE • 1B68F. Ui7C BOUM BNE~BIENC•1,8168F. IERR~CE • 1Y58F. I' • \TOVYEf~PIAN-L~/EL8 ~~~ ,n• - i•b• nlw w~ J L- PB1f110118E 1EV<3]3 UNR 4 NORI11 &4E~BlEAIC•1,61l8F. 7BIMCE•2268F. ~ TovuErtPUN-~va.zz ,ro~-Ib ORIGINAL OPUS. OgsAldiMCie 6 E~gYben, bee n.r m.aiw2 wn~ow .MB! M fdR112 Y W q~ rl .~ WATER'S EDGE n4sro as-z+-os S MLLFR L 1172 ~r~s l~°ur 4+a+~ Www ~n.+i. w w are rn.. ~~rtirrr ~rr~ a W V•.ae Wr F YYn. .a • 6ar1 w.-~a II ~N~i .+.+4 r tle r a ~.ac~~.m•ra wi w.~•fr.i ~r...ara ~ : w~ ~i .aM. ~r ~1 r OPUS. OpsBM CaMOn.LLe a~gn~rr .u~8ira~e ~ ®1.0 CLEARWATER BLUFFS REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL ~... aumam n >Q," TOWER PLANS PENTHOUSE ~ LEVEL 22 ~~A2.08 L- ~ rmvQtww-LEVELSZS-zs ,~ _ rx ORIGINAL ~~ 2 r 2~~5 OPUS. ~a~ ~»~ M 010!112 ~~ ~~A WATER'S EDGE n+szio R 05-2 ww S WFR as L 0122 ~.Yil .4i~ ~r ~~ T........1......... • . qlr ~. .,... OPUS. Opi.8a1/I~n. LLC. a0~q.~Y w~~..Y. a .m A.i CIEARWATER BLUFFS REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CtFA1NAlFl6 M1 TOWER PLANS ~ PENTHOUSE ~ LEVELS 23-25 ~~A2.09 J L ~ GARAGE %AN - LEVEL B2 ORIGINAL I I 1 I I I I i i i i i i I~,~Y 2 ~ 2~~5 OPUS. qq. Narede a rqM.., lne ~~..~..~ M CBOtllt w~µ r~~ ~~A EATER'S EDGE n~sxroo as-z~-os S WfR L .e2 ~b l~1b A~~~~~t ~~~M.ii r~i~ fir: `r.r .war w rr r.~.r ~srr~i ~ w .~ ~~~. ..w~.r •~. e. OPUS. ~~~~ a~-.. ~~,_ ~e,~ CLEARWATER BLUFFS REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL € awnMm, n ~ LOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN ~ LEVEL BZ ~ ~~A2.10 L- ORIGINAL ~~_~ ______________l 1 1 ~ 1 ti ~~ ~I ~~ ~I I -J MAY 2 ;~ 2~~5 -I OPUS. oq.aarsa.aE~.,n~ ~~ M ILR11S YW 4~Y VPATER'S EDGE nuzio os-x4-as s: uu~x L W4Z w~ r w +M+ r.... . n. r~. r ~ r wrrr ~ V r hlw.bn aY.1 F MsY 11~ •9y~ ~-!YU 11 Y W ~~.Oy V r Y ~rf~ ~ WSW ~w.Y. .V rr rMi ~wN .ILr~~~L Ir wW~~t • ~ [pY ~r titer OPUS. asr~-- ~~. CLEARWATER BLUFFS REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CLFA~AIER, iL r GARAGE PLAN ~ LEVEL B1 ~~A2.11 ORIGINAL OPUS. oa.a8r.,m~ ~~~ M fOftllf S«Y"'~" ~~.~ ~PATER'S EDGE n~srno m-z~-os ~~ L MIZ ~r~i.k~an.y ~i.r ~~.r .°irr..~~ emu. w..~r rrr . ne.. '~'°~biirir .ii aar w~i •M Ywti grytb rls ap.1 ..sl f1W w\.. mnw1. • 1 iyY ~~ ti~ N %\ OPUS. oP.awncM+.m~uc aar~--~ ~~ ~~ CLEARWATER BLUFFS REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL ar/uw~m ti LOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN ~ LEVEL 1 ~~A2.12 J ORIGINAL ~ LGWRI9EAND GARAGE PLAN-LEVE12 rr.E 1Ir-s• s/u- . 1-0 MAY 2 6 20x5 -~ OPUS. o~.b~ ~~»~ M mOL11S ~SY 4~.+ ~~ 9. II;N.1~ WATER'S EDGE nlszm ~-21-05 ~r S M1EA ®• L .l2 ~Ile~rlZbq. ~.~~~ ~~wy w°9i r ~.r.°~ir i M 0. YIa.On bbl Y ~br .L ~w .ter ~sr.a`~i -w ~r~.iti ai war r~u •TY 1Mnrl in. M M i.Y M sSY1 MIw1 Srbr .AVw ~t • 1 h1Y ~w1 I.nS N OPUS. OpusSallCa...YS.LLQ ~4~r ~~ M.0.1 CLEARWATER BLUFFS REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CIFAIIMATFR, R IOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN ~ LEVEL 2 ~ ~~A2.13 L- ~ LOWRISE AND 64RAGE PLAN-LEVEL3 F.F.E 2H' l/JY ~ 1'-0- ~: OR161NAL MAY 2 6 2005 OPUS. op.A~sE~.,~ M .@113 _~~ q.~.r ~.avA® WATER'S EDGE ..® n~szio m-z+-os s: worn L NIIZ °"':-'7~ai. q~ war w w a r. r.nr .+.r n w.. .or~~ a a~.i. ~n~u. ~.Mw+:.rw ~~i •. M+.~ •~.+.. OPUS. ~~~ aar*--• ~..^-- .vnm M CLEARWATER BLUFFS REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL pFAlM7ER, R " LOWRISEAND ~ OARAOE PLAN a LEVEL 3 ~~A2.14 J L_ ~ ~owrasErc~nACeruw-~+ ~j E .E 1]N ~ 1-0 ~11JJ PINT OR161NAL SAY 2 a 2005 %\ OPUS. opuA¢Jlbcu-Ery-~ese, hc. ,~, W.P.II NIlEI~9W IPP!! • mmu tom~. ~w,,~~,p,rr ~y PUer.N.-' VYATER'S EDGE norm os-z~ s uuFx L ^lZ . r.. • r rr~rlw r ~~ ~¢.r.~s,~ ~i~~nr.~s •wr ra spr~Mr b ^ les- ~n..Y. ~1 Nr .uY d~a ~.I i.trrr ..PUP rlns. Mr .nlPn • r ryP. ~r ..... w OPUS. ~~~~ aar~---• ~.^~- «,.~,b CLEARWATER BLUFFS REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL pFA~gE~, M1 d .vn[ LOWRISEAND ~ GARAGE PLAN ~ LEVEL4 a ~ ~~A2.15 ~ wW ~ m 0 b ~ ~ Y ~ ~ ` ~ ` ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ t ~ ~~~( ~~ ~~ ;=~ d t ~ Z ~ y ~. t:r~ ~~~~. ~' ~ ~ J _...- _ e .__. ~ ._... _ r._.. ..u. ..~.._ ¢ __._ - _ ~ ;~ , - CLEVELAND STREET ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T^ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I _-__ _ ~ _ ~ _ _ _-___-_-_-____ I ~ ~ ~ I ~ / / wi ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~\\ i~ ~, r.n , ran u I I ~ __ - ~ ~~ v~se~y ~ ROORa LAN-LEVELt n 1 I~ I I I W I ~ I Z I j I Q Ig .W I N I ~ /~ OPUS Opus Mchileda 6 Engirbxs, Inc WATER'S EDGE QQ DRC ftEV15~ON 0~-11-OS T]452T0 D7-ti-o5 5. IAILLER L~WILZ im~m~e~ m~ta~.e ~ ~n~o .s. ~.N ~iM1'~ tlo~ rrol e ,. oil v nr r.lll.n con.. 0 a nqM~ ,meA As OPUS Oqu SaM CaMrtttlan, LLC. ~uM~ WATER'S EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CLEARWAiER, Fl FLOOR PLAN LEVEL t o~'~'~u~~~A2.01 ~.: .,.~ ~ m _ u~ me ~~ ~a ~ ~ $~~~ax~ a~~~~~a~~C~~F~4~4~<~> ~ ~ ~ ~~ > ~ s ~~ ~ ~ ~ v 3 D C~ D ~~ ~D r n 2 m v c ~ ~ ~ CAa a5~ ra ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ap~~aa- m ~$~~~~M~a~Q~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~$~~~~~~~~q ~ ~~q~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~ RR ama~~'g~'S~$ablma~a ~~~i~~~~~~`~3C~~~~ ~F~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ €€.~ ~~~~~~~asa~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~R~~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ ~_ ~~ ~~ N~~~ ~~N s~ ~~ ~~ N = ~ ~ ~' ~ c~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ Tg ~ ~~~~~ oy ~~ ~mam ~~ {1p~~ ~ ~ ~~N ISO 3N ~~~ ~~ ~v vN~ ~3 v~ ~~~ mg g~ ~ x~~ v ~~ az ~i3 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~'~~ ~~ ~~ ego s~ ~N N ~ . o ~~a ~~ =z ~ ~a -~ ~~ ~' P8g ~~ CC$ _ °_'' v ~ ~o G~ Z Ng Qyh~ Y~ '~' ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~.. ~~ ~ ~ 1 I `x ~£S -v ~_ Z Z ~ _ OZ ~ m~ r ~ ~~ m In A ~ f-+ m Z ~~ ~ o ~D D rn Z fQ~3 00,00.01?S _ _.,_ ~~ ~..- i 3~ t-'r ~~~ ~$ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ / b ~ J~' x ~~~ ~ ~ ~'~ ~ /~ ~ __ ~ ~ ~t 3 z ,p ~~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~, ~ { -~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ a~ ~---- ~ a» ~a '~~ ~ ~ rr-, r~ ~° ~~ n . s;- ~ - ~ a ~ = a ,~ ~ ~ ~ t y ~ N fly `~ ~ ~ ~i U y ~_ ~,~ ~'~ s u ~~ ~iNi ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ y~~ ~~ q ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 3 - qq ~ } ~ k ~~~ ~?~~ a ~ U ~~ ~ ~ }:t~..:.;::: i 4 ~'~_.~_'.~ ----- ~\ ~a a -- I ~ /~~;`\~' C> ~~ ~_,5 `" z ~ gapes ~ ~ ~~~ ~N~~eV rn >~~ N~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ o ~~ ~^~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ p ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ > ~~ ~ ~N ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~y~{ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 70 ~~O coo 2 ~' ',} € i `~ ~' `' kk~11~ R obi ~~' ~ ~ ~~~' ~'~~~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ s a N N N ~~ ~~ ~' b~ g ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~e y~ ~ ~ ~ S. ~~ A ~~ ~_ _ ~-` ~ -~ _- 4 bl ~ ~ ~V ~4F $~xxT% ~~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ 'k ~~~~ ~~ 8~ ~ ~ ~ a ~~ ,l ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ s ~ ,i ~ ~: >~i ~ ~~_ s s, A A== r r r oAyQ...QNGN~~ rn ~~~~~==~~g~ o ~~~~~~~ a ~~~~~~~~$~ N ~~ GGG~ n ~~ ~~ ~ Z~~ ~ D Z ~~ ~~ Nss ~T ~~~ ~~~~ _~ ~ ~g gs ^~m T ~+. >~~ ~oo N T ~~ ~~~ $~ ~°~ ~ ~~ >~ ~>° ~~~ ~>~ ~~ ~~_ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~Q ~ ~ Q~~cc ~~ 8mf~ J ~~ ~} N ~~ J ~~ ~,~ J~ '~T' gg~ a ~~~5 ~ C ~~ ~v7 n ~]p~~ ""--~ A N ~~ f ~~ q~~ 3 _ ~. ~. ~~ R e °`, i p ~ l"f .C i C /(T~~ F ~ ' O ~ v ~ v ~~~ ~ a S ¶p 9 ~ ==7i ==77N ~ yy ~ y'' s ~Z ~ ~ A ~ ~O~ _~ °~`~~ ~~.Rr ~~ o ~ r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~°a~ ~~g~~ ~ ~~ Q, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N =~ ~°'~ a~~~~ .a ~~ t~ vs ~ C g ~/~ }~ LONG RANGE PLANNING DFVEI.OPMEN'T REVIEW September 6, 2005 Mr. John Franklin Wade __, ~~. 1=k,A1N~i11~~i~~ ~1;~Ar~~MFI~iT 1~OST ~FFICE ~OX ~7~t~, CLFARWATEF., FLORIDA 33758-~f74H MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, ZOO SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 5<2-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 Opus South Contractors, LLC 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 444 Tampa, FL 33607 Re: Development Order - FLD2005-05048 - 331 Cleveland Street Dear Mr. Wade: This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-206.D.6. of the Community Development Code. On August 16, 2005, the Community Development Board (CDB) reviewed your Flexible Development application to allow amixed-use development of 157 attached dwelling units (which includes an increase in density of 31 dwelling units from the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan Public Amenities Incentive Pool) and 10,022 square feet ofnon-residential use, with an increase to the permitted height from 30 feet to 271 feet (to roof deck) and an additional 22 feet for architectural embellishments and mechanical equipment (from roof deck), to reduce the non-residential parking requirement from 41 parking spaces to 0 parking spaces, and to allow a building within the required sight visibility triangle at the intersection of Cleveland Street and North Osceola Avenue, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-903.C., and to eliminate the required foundation landscaping along North Osceola Avenue, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. The CDB APPROVED the application based upon the following finding of fact and conclusions of law with the following condition of approval: Findings of Fact: 1. The subject property totals 81,065 square feet (1.86 acres) and is approximately 230 feet wide; 2. The subject property is located within the Downtown (D) District and the Central Business District (CBD) future land use plan classification; 3. The development proposal is subject to the requirements of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and the Design Guidelines contained therein as it is located within the Downtown Core character district; 4. The relief from the maximum height limit sought by the development proposal is permissible by and consistent with the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan; 5. The relief from the non-residential parking requirement sought by the development proposal and the establishment of the mixed-use project within the Downtown (D) District is permissible as a Comprehensive Infill Development Project under the Code provisions of Section 2-903.C.; 6. The relief from the landscape requirements sought by the development proposal is permissible under the Code provisions of Section 3-1202.G. as a Comprehensive Landscape Program; and 7. The proposed use of 31 dwelling units from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool is consistent with the provisions of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. F[~t~!SC' iBL3ARP., I\~,+,`(OR Bi1.L ?oNSCn~, VtCr-lvtnvoa j«yv ?~oFZnN, Couhclt~isan3r.R i~G7T ~AVIll:CON, COU^1CII_~.1EIvi1#iR ~ARLEii us,. PIiTER:ifi\, COUKCII:~iGJ1L3EiR :;~ ~~EQUAI. F''MPLOYbIEi~'"I' AND f4I'I'IRt~iAfYVt? ~~C'I'IO! i61PLOt;?.R~~ Conclusions of Law: 1. The development proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-903.C; 2. The development proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; 3. The development proposal is in compliance with the Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and the Downtown Core character district; 4. The development proposal is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts; and 5. The development proposal is consistent with the Downtown Design Guidelines. Conditions of Ap rp oval: 1. That the non-residential uses proposed to be located on the site are consistent with the permitted uses listed within the Community Development Code and the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan; 2. That the landscape plan is revised so that the materials depicted in the plan are consistent with those materials listed in the plant material schedule prior to the issuance of any permits; 3. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to (or as modified by) the CDB, and be approved by Staff; 4. That a Transportation Impact Fee be paid, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; 5. That all proposed utilities (from the right-of--way to the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting right(s)-of--way shall be installed along the entire site's street frontages prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior to the commencement of work; 6. That all Fire Department requirements be met, prior to the issuance of any permits; 7. That all Traffic Department requirements be met, prior to the issuance of any permits; 8. That all signage meet the requirements of Code and be limited to attached signs on the canopies or attached directly to the building and be architecturally integrated with the design of the building with regard to proportion, color, material and finish as part of a final sign package submitted to and approved by Staff prior to the issuance of any permits which includes: a. All signs fully dimensioned and coordinated in terms of including the same color and font style and size; and b. All signs be constructed of the highest quality materials which are coordinated with the colors, materials and architectural style of the building; 9. That aright-of--way permit be secured prior to any work performed in the public right-of--way; 10. That the first building permit be applied for within one year (by August 16, 2006) of Community Development Board approval; 11. That the final Certificate of Occupancy be obtained within two years of issuance of the first building permit; 12. That all utility equipment including but not limited to wireless communication facilities, electrical and water meters, etc. be screened from view and/or painted to match the building to which they are attached, as applicable prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; and 13. That all streetscaping along South Osceola Avenue be installed to the satisfaction of Staff prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit shall be made within one (1) year of Flexible Development approval (by August 16, 2006). All required Certificates of Occupancy shall be obtained within two (2) years of the date of issuance of the initial building permit. Please be advised that time frames do not change with successive owners. The Community Development Coordinator may grant an extension of time for a i period not to exceed one (1) year and only within the original period of validity. The CDB may approve one (1) additional extension of time after the Conununity Development Coordinator's extension to initiate a building permit application. The issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval. Additionally, an appeal of a Level Two approval (Flexible Development) may be initiated pursuant to Section 4- 502.B. by the applicant or by any person granted party status within 14 days of the date of the CDB decision. The fling of an application/notice of appeal shall stay the effect of the decision pending the final determination of the case. The appeal period for your case expires on August 30, 2005 (14 days from the date of the CDB decision). Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Robert G. Tefft, Planner III at (727) 562-4539 or via e-mail at robert.tefft(c~myclearwater.com. Sincerely, ~ ,. MichaeTDelk, AICP Planning Director TefFt, Robert From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 3:10 PM To: Planning Subject: FW: Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: FYI -----Original Message----- From: Blackburn, Anne Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 2:56 PM To: Watkins, Sherry Subject: RE: Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: Hi Sherry Fire's conditions on: FLD2005-05045, and FLD2OO5-05047, and FLD2005-05048, have been met. Thanks for all your help, Anne -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Monday, July li, 2005 3:39 PM To: Planning; DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Herman, Sandra; Hufford, Diane; Jeffries, Teresa A.; Pulizotto, Lynne; Reid, Debbie; Strong, Steve Subject: FW: Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: Importance: High Good Afternoon, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-05045 - 405 Island Way 2. FLD2005-05047 - 430 Gulfview Blvd 3. FLD2005-05048 - 331 Cleveland Street I have placed one copy of the case resubmittal package on the cabinets outside of Room 216 in our office for your review (please do not take it, as we need it for the CDB mail out). Please review your comments/conditions for this case in Permit Plan and determine if they are met. Whether the conditions are "met" or still "not met," please affirm to me via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possible by 12:00 pm on Tuesday, July 13, 2004. Thank you and have a great day Sherry Watkins -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 12:45 PM To: Planning; DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Herman, Sandra; Hufford, Diane; Jeffries, Teresa A.; Pulizotto, Lynne; Reid, Debbie; Strong, Steve Subject: FW: Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: Importance: High Good Afternoon, Case- FLD2005-05051- 445 Hamden Drive has arrived it is also in the same location Thank you Sherry Watkins -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 7:56 AM To: Planning; DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Herman, Sandra; Hufford, Diane; Jeffries, Teresa A.; Pulizotto, Lynne; Reid, Debbie; Strong, Steve Subject: Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: Importance: High DRC Members, Tefft, Robert From: Clayton, Gina Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2005 1:38 PM To: 'Wade, John ; Tefft, Robert Cc: Watkins, Sherry; Delk, Michael Subject: RE: Water's Edge (Clearwater Bluffs) Importance: High Page 1 of 1 The legal ad has probably been sent to the newspaper already. We will contact them and see if the legal notice has been printed or if we can change. If we can't revise the height in the legal ad and CDB agenda, this will cause your project to be delayed because your are requesting a height increase and it must be advertised properly. If we can make the change, your plans and application need to reflect the specific height. You will need to come in and change out all of the packages. John - we will try to salvage this, however, if any other changes need to be made, we won't be able to keep you on the same time frame because we don't have time to revise legal notices, the staff report or package to the CDB members. We are getting too late in the process. Gina -----Original Message----- From: Wade, John [mailto:John.Wade@opus-ae.com] Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 12:40 PM To: Clayton, Gina Subject: Water's Edge (Clearwaer Bluffs) Gina, Our design team is concerned about the structural depth we have allowed for the floor to floor height in the parking garage and is asking for another 8" to assure we have adequate clearance. Since the floor levels need to align, the end results would be a 24" (two feet) increase in the overall height of the tower. Do you think this is a problem? If you do, what action should we take to mitigate the problem? I appreciate your help on all this stuff. Thank you John Wade Opus A & E 4200 West Cypress St Tampa, Florida 33607 (813) 877-4444 fx 877-1222 7/18/2005 • TefFt, Robert From: Rice, Scott Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 2:55 PM To: Tefft, Robert Subject: FLD2005-05048 - 331 Cleveland Rob, Engineering has completed review of resubmittal for the subject and updated Permit Plan. Approval conditions: Prior to building permit the plans shall be revised to connect the site drainage system to the proposed 54-inch culvert under Cleveland Street. Transportation impact fees to be determined and paid prior to a C.O. D. Scott Rice Land Devel. Engr. Manager 727-562-4781 scott.rice@MyC/earwater.com • TefFt, Robert From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:50 AM To: Planning Subject: FW: Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: fyi -----Original Message----- From: Reid, Debbie Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:35 AM To: Watkins, Sherry Subject: RE: Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: Sherry, P&R has reviewed and we are okay! Thanks! Debbie O -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Monday, July il, 2005 3:39 PM To: Planning; DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Herman, Sandra; Hufford, Diane; Jeffries, Teresa A.; Pulizotto, Lynne; Reid, Debbie; Strong, Steve Subject: FW: Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: Importance: High Good Afternoon, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: 1. FLD2005-05045 - 405 Island Way 2. FLD2005-05047 - 430 Gulfview Blvd 3. FLD2005-05048 - 331 Cleveland Street ave p ace one copy of the case resu mittal package on the cabinets outside of Room 216 in our office for your review (please do not take it, as we need it for the CDB mail out). Please review your comments/conditions for this case in Permit Plan and determine if they are met. Whether the conditions are "met" or still "not met," please affirm to me via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possible by 12:00 pm on Tuesday, July 13, 2004. Thank you and have a great day Sherry Watkins -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 12:45 PM To: Planning; DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Herman, Sandra; Hufford, Diane; Jeffries, Teresa A.; Pulizotto, Lynne; Reid, Debbie; Strong, Steve Subject: FW: Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: Importance: High Good Afternoon, Case- FLD2005-05051- 445 Hamden Drive has arrived it is also in the same location Thank you Sherry Watkins -----Original Message----- From: Watkins, Sherry Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 7:56 AM To: Planning; DRC Members; Gluski, Roberta; Herman, Sandra; Hufford, Diane; Jeffries, Teresa A.; Pulizotto, Lynne; Reid, Debbie; Strong, Steve Subject: Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: Importance: High DRC Members, Plans for the following cases have been resubmitted for the August 16, 2005, CDB meeting: ~ ~ 1. FLD2005-05037 -1105 Druid Road Planner Wayne Wells 2. FLD2005-05046 - 700 Druid Road Planner Wayne Wells 3. FLD2005-05044 - 629 Bay Esplanade Planner Robert Tefft 4. FLD2005-05043 - 651 Bay Esplanade Planner Robert Tefft 5. FLD2005-05042 - 1254 Grove Street Planner Robert Tefft 6. FLD2005-06052 -1415 San Juan Court Planner John Schodlter 7. FLD2005-05038 -1520 Saturn Avenue Planner Robert Tefft 8. LUZ2005-05009 -1532 S Highland Avenue Planner Mike Reynolds I have placed one copy of the case resubmittal package on the cabinets outside of Room 216 in our office for your review (please do not take it, as we need it for the CDB mail out). Please review your comments/conditions for this case in Permit Plan and determine if they are met. Whether the conditions are "met" or still "not met," please affirm to me via email. Please have these cases reviewed, if possible by 12:00 pm on Tuesday, July 13, 2004. We also have 2 cases coming by noon today and Adams Mark 8~ Opus due by Monday, July 11,2005 by Noon I will keep you up to date as those other 4 cases come in. Thank you and Have a great day, Sherry Watkins ` • ~ Page 1 of 3 Tefft, Robert From: Clayton, Gina Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 10:12 AM To: Tefft, Robert Subject: FW: Calvary site(Water's Edge) FYI -----Original Message----- From: Rice, Scott Sent: Monday, July il, 2005 10:12 AM To: Clayton, Gina Subject: RE: Calvary site(Water's Edge) Yes D. Scott Rice Land Devel. Engr. Manager 727-562-4781 sco>tt.rice@MyClearwater,com -----Original Message----- From: Clayton, Gina Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 10:09 AM To: Rice, Scott Subject: FW: Calvary site(Water's Edge) Please see below - is this your understanding? -----Original Message----- From: Wade, John [mailto:John.Wade@opus-ae.com] Sent: Monday, July il, 2005 10:03 AM To: Clayton, Gina Subject: RE: Calvary site(Water's Edge) There has been confusion about the easements, but evidently they are not on our property and so it is a moot point. Thanks for your help John Wade Opus A & E 4200 West Cypress St Tampa, Florida 33607 (813) 877-4444 fx 877-1222 From: Gina.Clayton@myClearwater.com [mailto:Gina.Clayton@myClearwater.com] Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 9:33 AM To: Wade, John Subject: RE: Calvary site(Water's Edge) 7/11 /2005 • Page 2 of 3 John - I was out of the office. Did you get the information needed? I thought that Scott provided the information to Housh at the DRC meeting. -----Original Message----- From: Wade, John [mailto:John.Wade@opussouth.com] Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 3:45 PM To: Clayton, Gina Subject: FW: Calvary site(Water's Edge) From: Wade, John Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 3:32 PM To: 'gina.claton@myclearwater.com' Subject: FW: Calvary site(Water's Edge) Gina, thought maybe you could help me get to the bottom of this. From: Wade, John Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 2:32 PM To: 'srice@clearwater-fl.com' Subject: FW: Calvary site(Water's Edge) From: Wade, John Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 2:29 PM To: 'srice@clewarwater-fl.com' Subject: Calvary site(Water's Edge) Scott, Maybe you can help us since I think it was you who had the question about the easements. Please see below where our lawyers are trying to determine the OR book and page number. If you cannot help us, do you know who can? Thanks John Wade From: Christine L. Luce [mailto:clluce@hwhlaw.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Frazier Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 4:49 PM To: West, Bill Cc: Katherine Frazier; Susan Berry Subject: FW: Opus/Calvary Baptist Church Importance: High Bill, I know you followed up with Chris and said that everything looked okay but I wanted to make sure you noted that we do need your help in having the DRC verify the OR book and page numbers or 7/11/2005 Page 3 of 3 provide us with a copy of the instruments because we are unable to locate them. I know you are trying to get an answer from us this week but we needed this done. Thanks. Katherine -----Original Message----- From: Susan Berry Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 10:34 AM To: 'William West (bill.west@opussouth.com)' Cc: Katherine Frazier Subject: RE: Opus/Calvary Baptist Church Importance: High Bill, We tried to obtain copies of the 2 easements referenced in your attachment from the DRC, but there appears to be an error in the OR Book and page numbers. The instruments we received from the title company was a Mortgage for the instrument recorded under OR book 5748, 1433 and an Agreement Not to Encumber for the instrument recorded under OR book 5179, 299. Would you please have DRC verify the OR book and page numbers or provide us with a copy of these instruments. Thank you. 7/11/2005 • Tefft, Robert From: Clayton, Gina Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 8:52 AM To: Tefft, Robert Subject: FW: City Hall Parking Lot FYI re: Calvary Site -----Original Message----- From: Bruch, Tracey Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 1:41 PM To: 'john.wade@opussouth.com' Cc: Quillen, Michael; Clayton, Gina Subject: City Hall Parking Lot Per our discussion yesterday and based on your need to provide public parking for 10,000 sq. feet of retail, I have reviewed the occupancy and usage of the subject lot and have determined the following: • 51 metered parking spaces open to the public • 3 hour time limits • $.50 /hour (current rate) • Enforced Mon -Fri 8:00 am - 6:00 pm • Current average usage 30% - 35% (Mon - Fri)* • Certain weekday nights and weekends the parking is heavily used by the Church and any special events downtown and the usage increased significantly to capacity and even exceeds capacity • 3 regularly scheduled meetings per month where the lot is near or at capacity for several hours This lot is currently used by visitors of City Hall, Calvary Baptist, County Offices and some downtown businesses. *calculated based on revenue trends Tracey Bruch Parking Manager (727)562-4771 ! • TefFt, Robert From: Clayton, Gina Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 12:48 PM To: 'Wade, John' Cc: Tefft, Robert Subject: Amenities Hi John -just to cover all basis, why don't you talk about the private amenities provided and then also indicate, the public amenity being provided for the amenity pool (unless that's addressed elsewhere) Gina L. Clayton Assistant Planning Director City of Clearwater gina.clayton@myclearwnter.com 727-562-4587 ` F` . • Case Number: FLD2005-05048 -- 33 1 CLEVELAND ST ~`` ' Owner(s): First Baptist Church Of Clearw 331 Cleveland St Clearwater, FI 33755 TELEPHONE: No Phone, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email Applicant Opus South Corporation 4200 W Cypress St 444 Tampa, Fl 33607 TELEPHONE: 813-877-4444, FAX: 813-877-1222, E-MAIL: No Email Representative: Opus South Contractors 4200 W Cypress St 444 Tampa, Fl 33607 TELEPHONE: 813-877-4444, FAX: 813-877-1222, E-MAIL: john.wade@opussouth.com Location: 1.76 acres located at the southwest corner of Cleveland Street and South Osceola Avenue. Atlas Page: 286B Zoning District: D, Downtown Request: Flexible Development approval to permit amixed-use development with 157 attached dwelling units and 10,022 square feet ofnon-residential use, a building within the required sight visibility triangle at the intersection of Cleveland Street and North Osceola Avenue, an increase in the permitted height from 30 feet to 264 feet to the roof and up to 174 feet for architectural embellishments and an increase of the permitted density from 126 dwelling units to 157 dwelling units by using 31 dwelling units from the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan Public Amenities Incentive Pool, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-903.C. Proposed Use: Mixed use Neighborhood Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition Association(s): Clearwater, Fl 33761 2544 Frisco Drive TELEPHONE: 727-725-3345, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: Djw@gte.net Presenter: Mark Parry, Consulting Planner Attendees Included: The DRC reviewed this application with the following comments: General Engineering: 1 . 1. Note existing easements not on survey recorded as O.R. Book 5748 Page 1433 (Sanitary sewer easement) and O.R. 5179 Page 299 (Utility Easement). 2. Existing easements will need to be vacated all or part thereof in order to construct building as proposed. 3. Fire Department Connection shall be located no more that 40-feet from a Fire Hydrant. 4. Fire Department Connection shall be located no closer than 15-feet from face of building. All of the above to be addressed prior to CDB. The following to be addressed prior to building permit: 1. Need a copy of an approved right-of--way permit from F.D.O.T. prior to commencement of work in Cleveland Street (S.R. 60) right-of--way. 2. A separate right-of--way permit will be required for all work within the right-of--way of any of the adjacent street(s) that are assigned to the city. See Don Melone (727)562-4798 in Room #220 at the MSB (Municipal Services Building). 3. Need to show all city details applicable to this project. The City's Construction Standards and Utility Information can be found on our web site: www.myclearwater.com/engineer, go to "Documents and Publications", then to Engineering Construction Standards, then select the applicable details. Environmental: 1 . 1. Underground Vaults are not allowed as water quality facilities and are permittable only if specifically approved by the City Engineer. Provide justification for an underground vault. 2. In the event that an underground vault is approved, an oil and grease separator or comparable treatment system to capture automobile pollutants will be required. 3. Details and across-section of the vault must be submitted. 4. A vault maintenance schedule must be submitted to include an event following post-construction and at least on an annual basis thereafter. Development Review Agenda -Thursday, June 30, 2005 -Page 22 i • • Fire: 1 . This DRC Review by Fire is not and approval or review of any construction plans or documents other than site work. Review and approval by the Authority having Jurisdiction shall not relieve the applicant of the responsibility of compliance with the Florida Fire Prevention Code 2004 edition. 2 . Provide gated county knox box system as per Pinellas County Ord. 98-04. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. 3 . Provide 30 degree turning radii for fire apparatus. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. 4 , Water supply insufficient. Fire hydrants require separate lines. Show FDC standpipe also. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. 5 . Show on the plan FDC for parking/shops. Standpipe and Sprinkler. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. 6 , Roadway is the fire lane to the building and shall be marked and clear at all time, as per NFPA-1, 18.2.2.5.8. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. ~ . Provide DOT spec's on road to support 80,000 lbs. fire apparatus. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. g . Provide grades, slope of roadway into the building. Please respond to this comment PRIOR TO CDB. Harbor Master: No Comments Legal: No Comments Land Resources: No Comments Landscaping: No Comments Parks and Recreation: 1 . No issues (in CRA) Stormwater: 1 . Prior to CDB the storm water outfall for the retention vault is to be relocated so it does not drain across Clearwater City Hall property. The city is proposing to build a 54" RCP system outfall for Cleveland Street. This is part of the Cleveland Street Streetscape that is at the 90% stage of plan review. The vault outfall shall tie into the proposed 54" pipe system and not into the Pierce St. storm system. Presently the Calvary Baptist Church drainage system drains into the Cleveland Street system and your proposed site should continue to do the same. Solid Waste: I . To many units for roll out service The retail space will produce much more waste then the condos please consider a compactor for your solid waste needs. Traffic Engineering: 1 . 1. The vertical clear height of parking garage must be 8' 2". Show a cross section of parking garage showing pipes and other structures that may impede in this height requirement. 2. The porte-cochere canopy must meet ADA requirements of I I4 inches clear vertical height. 3. H/C parking spaces must be strategically placed to nearest accessible entrance i.e. elevators. 4. Remove walls that impede motorists line of sight when backing out of parking spaces. 5. Driveway radius must meet Fire Departments requirements. 6. Need a copy of the Traffic Impact Study and provide necessary improvements to bring affected roadway network to the City's acceptable level of service (LOS) per Traffic Impact Study or as determined by Traffic Operation's Manager or designee. (Development Code Section: 4-802 & 4-803). All of the above to be addressed prior to CDB. Planning: General note: Transportation impact fees to be determined and paid prior to a C.O.. Development Review Agenda -Thursday, June 30, 2005 -Page 23 y• • 1 . Provide all required sight visibility triangles on the site plan (they were provided on the landscape plan). 2 . Indicate the location of all public and private easements. 3 . Indicate the location of all outdoor lighting fixtures. 4 . Clarify that the proposed streetscaping (sidewalks, landscaping, signage, street furniture, etc.) will match the City's Master Streetscape and Wayfinding Plan. 5 . Provide the gross floor area dedicated to the residential component of the development. 6 . Provide the paved vehicular use area expressed in square feet and a percentage of the site. 7 . Provide the official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easements. 8 . Provide the Floor Area Ratio as a percentage of the site. 9 . There are some minor discrepancies between the rendered and b/w elevations as follows a. south elevation Sheet A3.01 -there are three sets of double windows on the lower portion of the building which read as three single windows on the rendered elevations. b. south elevation Sheet A3.01 -Ornamentation shown on railing the west side of the building in the rendered version is missing on the b/w version. c. east elevation Sheet A3.02 -there are three sets of double windows on the lower portion of the building which read as three single windows on the rendered elevations. d. east elevation Sheet A3.02 -the top center portion of the high-rise shows two spikes where the rendered version shows one spike. e. west elevation Sheet A3.02 - a sloped roof is shown on the rendered version on the north side of the building. f. west elevation Sheet A3.02 - a low building elevation shown on the rendered version is missing on the b/w version. g. north elevation Sheet A3.03 -Ornamentation shown on railing the west side of the building in the rendered version is missing on the b/w version. h. north elevation Sheet A3.03 -the lower northwest corner of the facade on the b/w version is different than the rendered version with regard to window shape and placement and balconies. 10 . Indicate the height of the building on the elevations as beginning at the average grade of the site (as zero). Indicate height at each stepback, floor, roof deck, parapet and any other architectural ornamentation. 11 . There is a discrepancy regarding the size of the site between the application (77,050 square feet/1.76 acres) and the site plan data table (81,065 square feet/1.86 acres) and the Pinellas County Property Appraisor's Records (76,935 square feet/1.76 square feet. This needs to be corrected/clarified. I will assume that the site plan data table is incorrect since the application acreage and the Property Appraisor's acreage are the same. This needs to be clarified right away as the difference is six dwelling units required from the Amenities Pool. 12 . The site plan, data table and Exhibit A differ on the number of parking spaces. The site plan identifies the parking garge as containing 300 parking spaces, the data table indicates that 302 spaces will be provided and Exhibit A lists both 302 and 287 spaces. This number needs to be nailed down. The magic number is 276 spaces which is derived from the proposed number of dwelling units (157 with 1.5 spaces /du requried) plus the proposed amount ofnon-residential space (10,022 GFA with four spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. of GFA). 13 . Clarify where the main entrance to the high-rise tower is. Consider enhancing this important feature. 14 . Clarify how the 19 units of the mid-rise portion of the site are accessed. 15 . It is not clear from the elevations how the Design Guidelines are being met which require that ground floors of parking garages accessory to a principal have at least 75 percent of the primary facade occupied by the principal use(s)/features or other use determined to be complementary to the principal use. The elevations seem to indicate that 1 1 aL_ IT„ t 1~.,...a,.... 4., t the north facade o the ui mg is genera ly blank wall -°` --~ ~erbl'r. Perhaps consideration should be given to addressing the north facade with fa~,>~n~vars, ~~ ~ ~ ~ •- r~ display cases, etc. A parking garage in downtown St. Pete does this with good results. 16 . Clarify how drop-offs for retail deliveries will occur. 17 . Clarify how moving vans and delivery trucks will be accommodated. 18 . Identify all amenities associated with this development. 19 . Clarify the style of architecture proposed. It appears to have Mediterranean- and/or Mission-influenced style. Is this correct? 20 . Clarify the types of units proposed -include sq.ft., number of bedrooms and anticipated cost. 21 . Consider providing bike storage (short-term and long-term) on the site. 22 . Clarify the proposed non-residential uses intended for the site. 23 . Will benches be provided along Cleveland Street and/or South Osceola Avenue? Development Review Agenda -Thursday, June 30, 2005 -Page 24 • 24 . Has consideration been given to the concept of robotic parking proposed with another downtown development as a viable use for this project. A spiffy CD provided to Staff in association with the other proposal may be of interest. 25 . Provide a different paving pattern at the pedestrian crosswalk across the drive along South Osceola Avenue 26 . Clarify how and that wireless communication facilities will be concealed. 27 . Clarify that reflective or tinted glass (more than 22 percent tint) will not be used. 28 . ~a ify the material of which the awnings will be constructed. 29 . Clarify how signage will work on the site. 30 . The following, from the Design Guidelines, do not appear to be adequately addressed: a. The primary facade (east) does not appear to be the most highly designed facade utilizing the following elements: > A change in plane, building wall projection or recess; > Architectural details; > Variety in color, material, texture; > Doors and/or windows; > Storefront display windows for retail uses; and > Other details as appropriate to the building style b. The primary facade does not a pear to have an architecturally prominent entrance with door. c. The building is on a corner lot but does not appear to satisfy this requirement of the Design Guidelines: Buildings on corner lots that emphasize their prominent location through the use of additional height, massing, distinctive architectural treatments and/or other distinguishing features. 31 . The secondary facade (north) does not appear to fully meet the requirements of the Design Guidelines including: a. An overall design of the secondary facade(s) of the building consistent with that of the primary facade with regard to architectural style, materials, finish, color and detail. b. Locating an entrance along a secondary facade. 32 . What is on the submitted disk - I can't open any of the files on it. Other: y ~ + 9 1~ 7 No Comments ~ ~ ~ ~ `'!~"' Notes: Development Review Agenda -Thursday, June 30, 2005 -Page 25 • ~ s g k B Two-inch by Two-inch Map Owner. ;: First Baptist Church -Calvary Baptist Church !; Case: FLD2005-05048 Site: ' 331 Cleveland Street Pr°p~Y 1 76 '! Size~Acres): . PIN: 16-29-15-20358-001-0010 Atlas Page: 2866 P P i ~~ r-~ `wn_ ~ T 778 278A .,,~ xo~ , I ,,~ _. ~_. Cleanv .~ -- ~ f ~ `,N~ ~ - 't ' ~~ ~ I z_ Ater . , " _-_ __.__-__ ____ PREPARED 8 .---- ---- " ATION ~~ " - _.._ r - PUBLICENGI EER NGING SR h . _ ~ ~ : r• f'~ 100 S. Myrtle Ave., Clearwater, FL 53788 ~ ti. ~ h.: (7 )882-4780, Fax: 727 8284768 .~ ~ . ~~ ~- FLI~2Q~~ 548 P ( ) t ~~ I - -.. ' ~ 1< .~. ~ / r-~ .. ~- .., ..... i:a ( : Nv+w.MyClearwater.com J ' ~ -- r': 111, - - ~ I ~ , I •.'~:. j ~ I (~ T Pugh; 'MxniCantl in hq Sy Ai _INd_Ya/wW; ~" I r'J - 1 . ,~ ~ - - ~ r~ I i' -. '-i - ~. !J. S -- -- ~ I ~ RuA lri aa-a aaC EghNn^G MMT4tf Dn nCppW -~ -=- J ne aneev.rn nrh neernaentl*gvw me o.ro r-a= J ~~ ~,e° ~ I I i ~ veeau e^u ro s,naa a °n __ pcq^r I I I' I I ~-, mnx o.ro ~vn rn,c~ c .:waE ~_ - i'----- - - --_ ~ i`~` 6 „I, I ~ -64rn .n ~YNn !ea rack ..~, ~' -J r" ~ - - I • .. I ~10. ' ~ hY ~ a4plits h~. aiwm dni°ws~.Ry I ~ L _a ~ ~ -i 61 I I ' I ' ,~.n»°~" um .x.~- ~F~c.b H°r",`rn` w`.n~a ~° w. 11 I I I T _ I , I I, I. I, I I _ N ~I ~~ I ~~~ I ~' I' I' I` ~ I.I~ I r I r - .-.- .---_ ~-~__ - XN ET - -.---- -- J F - I L .-.__ _- _ L_u_ J ' ~ i L._ -t ~~ _ I I -t-~~ i i ~9 DE T C TRI:TS ~'I ~~ ~ _~ I !-~ r -i i ' _ - - Y ~„ ., I „ j ,. I . i -- ~oR ...-.a R..r.,,x ~~_ --, i_ '~ ..~ Lzle , a r'_~ :~ ~. I ; i ~ y ~ ~ qR4 .la.ewm D.rrt; R.::.ra.~ u. ' ~ ~ ~ 1.MDR ''*,Olun Nlyn J.roNY 1ixMt a •'q ~ :B.0. ql ~ - 6T. NCR 'M [arrp RwiLrtx iN> -,a~pl. rime ~M1. ~ --'..: - ~ \_.{ CPNCOD CoxMViPotlG.l.x6~nwlwnxrrra0_- ,' / ` ~ N - ~ 'I ~- ~ I:~ - \~ I I I i IENCOD -.~fa -~x.clX~aol.aa tawrv.tlen _._.-. I~ I I , ~ , I ~ .,. > Pw eY ]W1e --~ __ :9hM1aIDXDI6T~CT8 9P6GK '64 DI9TR 6 `~ I ..xh + 'ri•,~rn - - _- - _ -J J ~ O.CMk. I4T w R na TxnMOpy I.-__-._ ~ i 11 , I - I . aWm 4n x ~.' 1' - r~ ~-~r I I' C.C-in. ax USR-Up.n4pa-aRxa.etimx 4 ~ ~ ~' ..I D.D:~,.,sT P-F~ww+ne+ani ~- ._- ~ i 6- -: 1a +. '~; P r-~ L:'_ J r--I L ~ a ~ CDB Meeting Date: August 16, 2005 Case Number: FLD2005-05048 Agenda Item: F-4 Owner: First Calvary B~tist Church Applicant: Opus South Corporation Representative: John Franklin Wade; Opus South Contractor's, LLC Address: 331 Cleveland Street CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to allow amixed-use development of 157 attached dwelling units (which includes an increase in density of 31 dwelling units from the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan Public Amenities Incentive Pool) and 10,022 square feet of non- residential use, with an increase to the permitted height from 30 feet to 271 feet (to roof deck) and an additional 22 feet for architectural embellishments and mechanical equipment (from roof deck), to reduce the non-residential parking requirement from 41 parking spaces to 0 parking spaces, and to allow a building within the required sight visibility triangle at the intersection of Cleveland Street and North Osceola Avenue, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-903.C., and to eliminate the required foundation landscaping along North Osceola Avenue, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3- 1202.G. EXISTING ZONING / Downtown (D) District LAND USE: Central Business District (CBD) Classification CLEARWATER Downtown Core DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PLAN CHARACTER DISTRICT: PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Place of worship. Proposed Use: Mixed-use (157 attached dwellings and 10,022 square feet ofnon-residential use). ADJACENT ZONING / North: LAND USE: South: East: West: Staff Report -Community Developm Downtown (D) District -Retail sales and service, restaurant and convention center. Downtown (D) District -Governmental use. Downtown (D) District -Retail sales and service. Downtown (D) District -Park / Clearwater Harbor. ent Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 1 ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 1.87-acre subject property is located at the southwest corner of Cleveland Street and South Osceola Avenue. The subject property consists of a 177,277 square foot, four-story building that is currently occupied by Calvary Baptist Church. The Church is in the process of constructing a new facility at the southwest corner of McMullen Booth Road and Drew Street to which it will move upon its completion. The development proposal includes the demolition of the existing building as well as all other improvements on the subject property. It is noted that the subject property slopes to the west and north with over 16 feet of grade change between the southeast and northwest corners of the site. Development Proposal: The development proposal consists of a mixed-use building with 157 attached dwellings and 10,022 square feet of non-residential uses within a building 271 feet in height. The building will be comprised of two distinct components: a four-story mixed-use component and ahigh-rise residential only component. Mixed-Use Component: The mixed-use component of the building will be approximately 53 feet in height (to roof deck) and will contain 10,022 square feet of non-residential space on the ground floor and 19 dwelling units on the second, third and fourth floors. These two uses wrap around the east and south facades of a five-story, 309 space parking garage. The entrance to the parking garage will be centrally located along the south facade of the building and accessed via a looped, two-way drive aisle along the south perimeter of the property, which intersects with South Osceola Avenue. The majority of the mixed-use component of the building will be set back between two and five feet from the front (east) property line adjacent to South Osceola Avenue; one foot from the front (north) property line along Cleveland Street; and 38 feet from the side (south) property line. Accordingly, the proposed building will encroach approximately five feet into the required sight visibility triangle at the intersection of Cleveland Street and South Osceola Avenue. However, the building will be situated approximately 26 feet from the edge of pavement of Cleveland Street and 13 from the edge of pavement of South Osceola Avenue; thus adequate sight distance will be provided for pedestrian and vehicular safety. In addition, the encroachment into the sight visibility triangle is necessary to create and maintain the desired build-to line along Cleveland Street and South Osceola Avenue. It is further noted that the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan ultimately calls for the abandonment of Cleveland Street west of South Osceola Avenue, upon which the subject sight visibility triangle will cease to exist. High-Rise /Residential Only Component: The balance of the proposed building consists of a high-rise tower .271 feet in height (to roof deck) with an additional 22 feet in height (as measured from roof deck) for architectural embellishments and mechanical equipment. The tower will consist of 138 dwelling units on 25 floors. The main entrance to the tower is located beneath a portico along the south side of the proposed building adjacent to the looped entrance drive. The tower has been designed with a distinct base, middle and cap with the lower floors distinguished by heavier rustication and denser reveal patterns than the upper portions of the building. The central portion of the tower consists of a less dense reveal pattern and lighter colors graduating upwards. The upper floors of the tower will be stepped back in order to distinguish the top of the building. The elevations will also incorporate numerous windows and decorative balconies throughout. As discussed in further detail below (Design Guidelines analysis), the tower will be set back approximately 210 feet from South Osceola Avenue and buffered by the 53-foot high mixed-use component, which will act as the primary facade of the development. Staff Report -Community Development Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 2 A solid waste staging and recycling area will be located on the ground floor of the tower with access out to the looped two-way drive aisle abutting the south property line. In addition, a trash compactor will be provided for the commercial uses within the mixed-use building. The compactor will also be accessed via the aforementioned looped two-way drive aisle. Off-Street Parkin: Pursuant to Section 2-903, attached dwellings are required to provide off-street parking at a rate of 1.5 parking spaces per unit, and retail sales and service is required to provide parking at a rate of 4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Accordingly, the proposed 157 dwelling units (235.5 parking spaces) and 10,022 square feet of non-residential floor area (40.08 parking spaces) requires a total of 276 parking spaces. The development proposal includes the provision of 310 parking spaces (309 parking spaces within the parking garage and 1 additional surface parking space), which would be sufficient to meet the requirements of code; however the applicant has also proposed that the parking garage will be for the private use of the. residents. Therefore, the development proposal has not provided any of the required parking for the non-residential uses. The applicant has requested that the non-residential parking requirement be reduced to zero, based upon the availability of public parking within the adjacent City Hall surface parking lot as well as in the Garden Avenue parking garage. The applicant has also provided data from the City's Parking Facilities Manager, which states that only 30% - 35% of the City Hall surface parking lot (51 parking space capacity) is utilized between 8:00 AM and 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Based upon the above, it would appear that sufficient public parking is available within close proximity to the development proposal that will exceed the amount required to be provided for the proposed non-residential uses. In addition, the development proposal includes the provision of two on-site loading zones for the use of the residential dwelling units and non-residential businesses. It is noted, however, that the landscape plan does not depict the easternmost of these loading zones and will need to be revised to be consistent with the site plan prior to the issuance of a development order. Landscaping; The development proposal includes the provision of landscaping around the perimeter of the site consistent with the intent of the Code as well as the Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding Plan included in the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. These landscape materials include: Medjool Date Palms surrounded by steel bar landscape fences, Montgomery Palms (identified on the plan, but not listed in the plant material schedule), Lady Palms, Pygmy Date Palms, Day Lily, and a relocated Live Oak tree that will be located at the southeast corner of the building within a custom tree grate surrounded by a the mosaic. The development proposal also consists of details to match the Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding Plan including: a historic pillar, benches, solid waste containers, paving material/patterns, light standards, etc. Based upon the above, compliance with the Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding Plan has been achieved. Comprehensive Landscape Program: Pursuant to Section 3-1202.E.2, foundation plantings shall be provided for 100% of a building faFade with frontage along a street right-of--way, excluding space necessary for building ingress/egress, within a five foot (5') wide landscaped area composed of at least two accent trees or three palms for every 40 linear feet of building facade and one shrub for every 20 square feet of required landscaped area. The development proposal includes a request to eliminate the required foundation landscaping along North Osceola Avenue as discussed above as a Comprehensive Landscape Program. The justification provided by the applicant is that if they were to provide the standard foundation plantings along South Osceola Avenue they would not be able to provide an appropriate streetscape consistent with the Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding Plan. The development proposal does include the provision of several landscape materials along the streetscape that will provide an adequate buffer to the building and accomplish the intent of the standard foundation plantings. Staff Report -Community Development Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 3 Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with this site. Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan: The site is located within the Downtown Core character district of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan recommends that this area be developed/redeveloped with the highest density for residential and hotel uses and the highest intensity for retail, commercial, and office uses of all the character districts within the Downtown Plan. It is expected that the most intense development within the Downtown Core will occur in the center of the District defined as from Osceola Avenue east to Myrtle Avenue and from Drew Street south to Court Street. The Downtown Core shall be redeveloped as apedestrian-friendly place achieved through a diversity of land uses, urban design and streetscape improvements. This strategy has been identified as a way to stimulate the redevelopment of property in the area and to reposition the Downtown as a viable economic entity in the region. Public Amenities Incentive Pool: To assist in the transformation of downtown Clearwater into a quality place in which to live, work and play, the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan establishes a Public Amenities Incentive Pool of 2,296 dwelling units and 2,119,667 square feet of floor area for non- residential uses. The applicant is proposing the use of 31 dwelling units from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool. The amenities provided by this development in order to justify the request from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool include the provision of 126 residential units in the Downtown Core and a streetscape consistent with the City's Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding Plan (valued at roughly $250,000). Based upon the provision of these amenities, which are consistent with the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan, the request for 31 dwelling units from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool can be supported. Design Guidelines: As previously stated, the mixed-use component of the building will be approximately 53 feet in height (to roof deck), which is respectful to the historic building heights along Cleveland Street. The elevations of this component of the building contain variations in the roof line through the use of both pitched and flat roof elements, as well as variations in the building facade through the use of slight step backs, faux balconies, and awnings. The design of the building is consistent with the intent and direction of the Design Guidelines contained within the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. Non-residential ground floor uses and three floors of dwelling units on the south and east facades will camouflage the five-story parking garage. The north facade of the parking garage will be camouflaged through building design and hidden from view by tiled murals and decorative grillwork. In addition to the above, there exists a provision within the Design Guidelines stating that it is appropriate that buildings on corner lots emphasize their prominent location through the use of additional height, massing, distinctive architectural treatments, and/or other distinguishing features. The proposed elevations do not take advantage of this provision for that portion of the building situated at the corner of South Osceola Avenue and Cleveland Street. However, the design of the project has consistently taken into consideration the intent of the Plan that the portion of Cleveland Street abutting the project (west of Osceola Avenue) be abandoned and assimilated into Coachman Park. Once this segment of Cleveland Street is abandoned, the subject property will no longer be a corner lot and therefore the above referenced provision would no longer be appropriate. The increase in height above 30 feet is consistent with the criteria for a Flexible Development proposal as well as consistent with the Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan as height within the Downtown Core is unlimited. The Design Guidelines contained in the Plan include the following techniques with regard to appropriate high-rise buildings: Staff Report - Conununity Development Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 4 • • s ^ Building stories or step backs differentiated by architectural features including but not limited to coping, balustrades, cornice lines, change in materials, etc; and ^ A proportional relationship between the height of a building and the number and dimensions of step backs used to mitigate the height of the building. The development proposal is consistent with the above techniques as the various levels of the tower are differentiated by decorative stringcourses, variation in the color scheme, and a step back of the upper levels from the central portion of the building. Also, the height of the tower is mitigated as it is set back approximately 210 feet from South Osceola Avenue and buffered by the 53-foot high mixed-use component. The mixed-use component will provide the desired primary fagade for the development along South Osceola Avenue as required by the Design Guidelines. Specifically, the facade consists of projections and recesses, has storefront display windows for retail uses, and the major architectural treatments are continued around the sides of the building and will be visible from the public realm. The surrounding area is characterized by several taller buildings ranging in height between nine and eleven stories, and include the Amsouth, Atrium (SunTrust) and Bank of America buildings located at 400, 601 and 600 Cleveland Street, respectively, and the MuniMae building located at 33 North Garden Avenue. It is further noted that the Community Development Board has approved several other, but as yet un-built, projects within the Downtown Plan area including the Beck Development at 628 Cleveland Street (158 feet), the Island View / Harrison Village Development at 400 Jones Street (150 feet), and the Antigua Bay Condominiums at 900 South Osceola Avenue (100 feet). Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies: The development proposal is consistent with the Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan including: ^ Vision: Downtown Clearwater is a major center of activity, business and governments. The development proposal will result in the provision of 157 additional dwelling units and 10,022 square feet of non-residential floor area within the Downtown Core, thereby furthering this Vision statement. ^ Vision: Downtown will be an integrated community with a mix of retail, residential, office and recreational opportunities. The development of a variety of residential projects to attract new residents to Downtown is critical to the success of a revitalized Downtown. The development proposal will provide neighborhood-scale retail uses, urban residential dwelling units, a streetscape consistent with the City's Master Streetscape and Wayfinding Plan, as well as buildings located along and oriented towards the abutting streets. As such, the development proposal will further this Vision statement. ^ Vision: Fort Harrison and Osceola Avenues should be redeveloped as pedestrian oriented streets and in conjunction with Cleveland Street form the major retail core Downtown. The subject property abuts both South Osceola Avenue and Cleveland Street, and through this development proposal will provide neighborhood-scale retail uses along South Osceola Avenue and will install streetscaping consistent with the City's Master Streetscape and Wayfinding Plan. The development proposal also includes the provision of 157 dwelling units, the residents of which will patronize these new retail uses as well as others within the downtown. With regard to Cleveland Street, the development proposal will provide some streetscape elements; however as the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan ultimately calls for the abandonment of Cleveland Street west of South Osceola Avenue, the provision of substantial streetscape elements has not been provided. Based upon the. above, this Vision statement will be furthered by the development proposal. Staff Report -Community Development Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 5 • ^ Vision: Downtown's unique waterfront location should be a focal point for revitalization efforts and an orientation for all of Downtown. Views of and access to the water must be preserved. The development proposal takes advantage of its position overlooking Clearwater Harbor and will not prevent any existing access to the water. Further, the bulk of the development will be contained within a relatively small footprint (approximately 100 feet by 140 feet or 14,000 square feet). Based upon the above, the development proposal will be consistent with this Vision statement. ^ Vision: Quality urban design is critical to new construction and renovated buildings. The development proposal incorporates classical. proportions of traditional architecture. The mixed-use component, which represents the primary facade of the development, consists of storefronts designed at a human scale and residential dwellings with articulation to the fagade, visually distinguishing each unit from one another with a similar rhythm of reveals as with the tower component. The exposed north elevation of the parking garage has been designed with a similar reveal pattern and cornice in keeping with the tower elements. The tower has been designed with a distinct base, middle and cap in keeping with the Design Guidelines, and the top floors have been stepped back to set the top apart from the balance of the building. The roof design incorporates multiple flat roofs and other decorative features giving the cap a sculpted appearance. Based upon the above, the development proposal will be consistent with the Vision statement. ^ Vision: An adequate parking supply must be available coterminous with new uses. The development proposal includes the provision of a 309 space parking garage for the use of the residential component of the development. The proposal also includes a request to reduce the non-residential parking requirement from 41 parking spaces to 0 parking spaces. The applicant has included in their "Description of Request" the request that the parking for the retail component be provided for in the adjacent City Hall surface parking lot and in the Garden Avenue parking garage. Further analysis of this request has been provided under the discussion of the Mixed-Use Component of this project; however the request can be supported and thus compliance with this Vision statement has been achieved. ^ Goal 1: Downtown shall be a place that attracts people for living, employment and recreation. The City shall encourage redevelopment that will attract residents and visitors to Downtown as a recreation, entertainment and shopping destination. The development proposal includes the provision of 10,022 square feet ofnon-residential floor area as well as the provision of an additional 157 dwelling units within the Downtown Core. Thus, the development proposal is consistent with this Goal. ^ Objective lA: All development within Downtown shall further the goals, objectives and policies of this Plan and shall be consistent with the character districts, the design guidelines and the Downtown zoning district. The development proposal will provide for 157 attached dwellings and 10,022 square feet of non-residential floor area as part of an attractive mixed-use development. As such, the development proposal is consistent with this Objective. ^ Objective lE: A variety of businesses are encouraged to relocate and expand in Downtown to provide a stable employment center, as well as employment opportunities for Downtown residents. The development proposal will provide 10,022 square feet of new non-residential floor area within the Downtown Core, thereby providing additional employment opportunities identified by this Objective. ^ Objective 1H: The City shall use all existing incentives to encourage Downtown housing and shall evaluate other incentives to encourage residential uses to locate Downtown. The Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan provides for a Public Amenities Incentive Pool from which Staff Report -Community Development Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 6 • • development proposals may acquire additional dwelling units above their standard maximum density. This development proposal includes a request to utilize 31 dwelling units from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool in order to achieve the desired density for the site; thus increasing the viability and vibrancy of the project. Accordingly, the development proposal is consistent with this Objective. ^ Objective 2A: The Downtown street grid should be maintained to provide multiple access points in and through Downtown, to assist in dispersing traffic on various routes and contribute to improved traffic operations. Vacation of streets shall be evaluated based on redevelopment potential provided alternative access exists or can be provided. The existing street grid system will. not be affected by the development proposal and will take advantage of a relatively low traffic volume along South Osceola Avenue by locating the access point to the project from South Osceola Avenue. ^ Objective 2I: Redevelopment and public improvements shall create and contribute to pedestrian linkages throughout the Downtown. The development proposal includes the provision of streetscaping along South Osceola Avenue consistent with the City's Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding Plan. With regard to Cleveland Street, the development proposal will provide some streetscape elements; however as the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan ultimately calls for the abandonment of Cleveland Street west of South Osceola Avenue, the provision of substantial streetscape elements has not been provided. Nonetheless, the development proposal is consistent with this Objective. ^ Goal 3: Create Downtown as a memorable place to be enjoyed by residents and visitors that capitalizes on Clearwater's waterfront location, natural resources, built environment and history. The development proposal will effectively increase density within the Downtown Core character district while providing for an attractive streetscape through non-residential use, building architecture, paver brick sidewalks, and landscaping. Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with this Goal. ^ Objective 3D: Redevelopment is encouraged to create a vibrant Downtown environment containing a variety of building forms and styles that respect Downtown's character and heritage. The mixed-use component of the development proposal respects the historic building heights along Cleveland Street with its proposed three (3) residential floors above the non-residential ground floor and a building height of approximately 53 feet (to roof deck). Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with this Objective. ^ Policy 1: The design guidelines establish the quality and design features expected for renovation, redevelopment and new construction in Downtown with which all projects must be consistent. The development proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines as it incorporates a stucco finish over concrete with EFIS banding and cornices. The pitched roofs will be standing seam metal, while the flat roofs will be accented with decorative parapets. The building design incorporates both vertical and horizontal architectural elements to provide relief throughout the elevations. Some of the architectural elements included in the building design include: balconies with decorative railings, canvas awnings, and decorative stringcourses. Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with this Policy. ^ Policy 2: The character of each district shall be reinforced through the site plan and design review process. Projects shall be consistent with and contribute positively to the vision of the character district in which it is located. The development proposal is consistent with the vision of the Downtown Core character district as a mixed-use project that will support the Downtown employment base with an additional 157 dwelling units as well as 10,022 square feet of non- residential floor area for limited neighborhood commercial and office uses. The tower located on Staff Report -Community Development Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 7 • • the western portion of the site is consistent with the intent of the character district vision, which provides for an opportunity for higher-density residential uses. Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with this Policy. ^ Policy 3: The design of all projects in Downtown shall make meaningful contributions to the pedestrian environment through site and building design. The development proposal incorporates classical proportions of traditional architecture with the mixed-use component of the development consisting of storefronts designed at a human scale. Numerous other elements have been proposed that will further the pedestrian environment adjacent to the site, such as: a historic pillar, benches, solid waste containers, paving material/patters, light standards, etc. Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with this Policy. ^ Policy 6: The City shall establish a Public Amenities Incentive Pool that provides density and intensity increases for projects located in all character districts, except as limited in Old Bay, in excess of the allowable maximum development potential based on a provision of selected amenities. To overcome the numerous constraints affecting redevelopment, the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan establishes the Public Amenities Incentive Pool, consisting of 2,296 dwelling units and 2,119,667 square feet of floor area for non-residential uses, available to all property within the Plan area. This provides an opportunity for the private sector to gain additional development potential while assisting the public to achieve its redevelopment goals for Downtown Clearwater. This development proposal will utilize 31 dwelling units from the Pool. The amenities provided by this development to justify the request include the provision of 126 residential units in the Downtown Plan area and a streetscape consistent with the City's Master Streetscaping and Wayfinding Plan. Based upon the above, compliance with this Policy has been achieved. ^ Polic~19: Residential development shall provide appropriate on-site recreation facilities based on the scale of the project. The development proposal will provide several amenities for the residents, including: a swimming pool with spa, social rooms, fitness room, resident storage facilities, billiards room, and a card room. Based upon the above, the development proposal has provided sufficient amenities for the scale of the project. The development proposal is also consistent with Downtown Core character district Policies including: ^ Policy 2: Redevelopment on all property west of Osceola Avenue and south of Cleveland Street should consider the natural Bluff features, the views of Clearwater Harbor and be integrated with the Coachman Park Master Plan. The subject property is located at the southwest corner of South Osceola Avenue and Cleveland Street. The redevelopment of this parcel as a mixed-use development is specifically envisioned within the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The Coachman Park Master Plan also designates the subject property for redevelopment. The proposed high-rise tower will afford considerable views of Clearwater Harbor and is consolidated within a 14,000 square foot footprint. Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with this Policy. ^ Policy 8: Redevelopment and new construction along Cleveland Street shall be compatible with and contribute to pedestrian vitality, human scale and historic fabric. The mixed-use component of the development proposal respects the historic building heights along Cleveland Street with its proposed three (3) residential floors above the non-residential ground floor and a building height of approximately 53 feet (to roof deck). It is noted that the development proposal does not include the provision of non-residential floor area /storefronts along Cleveland Street as the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan envisions the abandonment of Cleveland Street west of South Osceola Avenue; thus the provision of these storefronts would be inappropriate. Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with this Policy. Staff Report -Community Development Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 8 • ^ Polic~9: Urban and architectural design are equally important for the street side and waterside of buildings. The development proposal incorporates classical proportions of traditional architecture. The mixed-use component of the development along South Osceola Avenue is pedestrian oriented with regard to building location, design and proposed uses. The storefronts and residential dwellings have been designed at a human scale with articulation to the facade, visually distinguishing each unit from one another with a similar rhythm of reveals as with the tower component. The exposed north elevation of the parking garage has been designed with a similar reveal pattern and cornice in keeping with the tower elements. The tower has been designed with a distinct base, middle and cap in keeping with the Design Guidelines and the top floors have been stepped back to set the top apart from the balance of the building. Additionally, a highly finished/articulated west elevation will face the water. The roof design incorporates multiple flat roofs and other decorative features giving the cap a sculpted appearance. Based upon the above, the development proposal is consistent with the Policy. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA (Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and Section 2-903 Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent Density 70 dwelling unit per acre (126 157 dwelling units X* dwelling units) (84.4 du/ac) Floor Area 4.0 0.12 X Ratio Impervious 1.0 0.87 X Surface Ratio Lot Area N/A 81,065 square feet X Lot Width N/A 230 feet X Height 50 feet 271 feet X Parking Spaces Attached 1.5 spaces per unit 310 parking spaces X** Dwellings (235.5) (309 garage + 1 surface) Retail 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area (40,08) * It is noted that the development proposal includes a request for 31 dwelling units from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool; therefore the project exceeds the maximum permissible density -See Staff analysis above. ** It is noted that while sufficient parking is provided with the development proposal to satisfy the requirements of code, that the applicant has requested a reduction to the non-residential parking requirement from 41 parking spaces to zero (O) parking spaces -See Staff analysis above. Consistent Inconsistent 1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use, intensity and X development standards. 2. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project will not reduce the fair market X value of abutting properties. 3. The uses within the Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project are X otherwise permitted in the City of Clearwater. 4. The use or mix of uses within the Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment X Project is compatible with ad~acent land uses. Staff Report -Community Development Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 9 • Consistent Inconsistent 5. The development of the parcel proposed for development as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project will upgrade the immediate X vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 6. The design of the proposed Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project creates a form and function which enhances the community character of the X immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. 7. Flexibility in regard to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified by the benefits to community character and the X immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. 8. Adequate off-street parking in the immediate vicinity according to the shared parking formula in Division 14 of Article 3 will be available to avoid X on-street parking in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 9. The design of all buildings complies with the Downtown District design X guidelines in Division 5 of Article 3. CO ~'1' Consistent Inconsistent 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is X located. 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and X use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of X persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of X the immediate vicinity. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on X C;UMYLlA1VC;>N: Wl'1'H1]UW1V'1'UWIV llL+S1C~1V (iU1llL+L11V1:~: Consistent Inconsistent 1. Site Design: Blocks and Lot Characteristics X 2. Site Design: Access, Circulation and Parking X 3. Site Design: Site Elements X 4. Building Placement: Location X 5. Building Placement: Orientation X 6. Building Placement: Separation X 7. Building Placement: Building Coverage X 8. Building Placement: Additional Requirements for Character Districts and X Special Areas 9. Building Design: Form X 10. Building Design: Architecture X 11. Signs N/A N/A 12. Lighting N/A N/A 13. Property Maintenance N/A N/A 14. Pinellas Trail N/A N/A 15. Utility/Infrastructure Facilities N/A N/A 16. Corporate Design N/A N/A Staff Report -Community Development Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 10 • r SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials on June 30, 2005. The applicant has worked with Staff over the past several months to provide an attractive, well-designed development that will enhance the local area and City as a whole. The development will further the City's goals of improving the character of the area and promoting private sector investment within the Downtown. Further, the development proposal is in compliance with the standards and criteria for Flexible Development approval for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, General Applicability Standards, as well as the Downtown Design Guidelines. The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development approval to allow a mixed-use development of 157 attached dwelling units (which includes an increase in density of 31 dwelling units from the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan Public Amenities Incentive Pool) and 10,022 square feet ofnon-residential use, with an increase to the permitted height from 30 feet to 271 feet (to roof deck) and an additional 22 feet for architectural embellishments and mechanical equipment (from roof deck), to reduce the non-residential parking requirement from 41 parking spaces to 0 parking spaces, and to allow a building within the required sight visibility triangle at the intersection of Cleveland Street and North Osceola Avenue, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-903.C., and to eliminate the required foundation landscaping along North Osceola Avenue, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. with the following recommended findings of fact, recommended conclusions of law and conditions of approval: Recommended Findings of Fact: 1. The subject property totals 81,065 square feet (1.86 acres) and is approximately 230 feet wide; 2. The subject property is located within the Downtown (D) District and the Central Business District (CBD) future land use plan classification; 3. The development proposal is subject to the requirements of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and the Design Guidelines contained therein as it is located within the Downtown Core character district; 4. The relief from the maximum height limit sought by the development proposal is permissible by and consistent with the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan; 5. The relief from the non-residential parking requirement sought by the development proposal and the establishment of the mixed-use project within the Downtown (D) District is permissible as a Comprehensive Infill Development Project under the Code provisions of Section 2-903.C.; 6. The relief from the landscape requirements sought by the development proposal is permissible under the Code provisions of Section 3-1202.G. as a Comprehensive Landscape Program; and 7. The proposed use of 31 dwelling units from the Public Amenities Incentive Pool is consistent with the provisions of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan. Recommended Conclusions of Law: 1. The development proposal complies with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-903.C; 2. The development proposal is in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913; 3. The development proposal is in compliance with the Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan and the Downtown Core character district; 4. The development proposal is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other redevelopment efforts; and 5. The development proposal is consistent with the Downtown Design Guidelines. Staff Report -Community Development Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 11 r Conditions of Approval: 1. That the non-residential uses proposed to be located on the site are consistent with the permitted uses listed within the Community Development Code and the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan; 2. That the landscape plan is revised to depict the easternmost loading zone prior to the issuance of a development order; 3. That the landscape plan is revised so that the materials depicted in the plan are consistent with those materials listed in the plant material schedule prior to the issuance of any permits; 4. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations submitted to (or as modified by) the CDB, and be approved by Staff; 5. That a Transportation Impact Fee be paid, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; 6. That all proposed utilities (from the right-of--way to the proposed building) be placed underground. Conduits for the future undergrounding of existing utilities within the abutting right(s)-of--way shall be installed along the entire site's street frontages prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant's representative shall coordinate the size and number of conduits with all affected utility providers (electric, phone, cable, etc.), with the exact location, size and number of conduits to be approved by the applicant's engineer and the City's Engineering Department prior to the commencement of work; 7. That all Fire Department requirements be met, prior to the issuance of any permits; 8. That all Traffic Department requirements be met, prior to the issuance of any permits; 9. That all signage meet the requirements of Code and be limited to attached signs on the canopies or attached directly to the building and be architecturally integrated with the design of the building with regard to proportion, color, material and finish as part of a final sign package submitted to and approved by Staff prior to the issuance of any permits which includes: a. All signs fully dimensioned and coordinated in terms of including the same color and font style and size; and b. All signs be constructed of the highest quality materials which are coordinated with the colors, materials and architectural style of the building; 10. That aright-of--way permit be secured prior to any work performed in the public right-of--way; 11. That the first building permit be applied for within one year (by August 16, 2006) of Community Development Board approval; 12. That the final Certificate of Occupancy be obtained within two years of issuance of the first building permit; 13. That all utility equipment including but not limited to wireless communication facilities, electrical and water meters, etc. be screened from view and/or painted to match the building to which they are attached, as applicable prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; and 14. That all streetscaping along South Osceola Avenue be installed to the satisfaction of Staff prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. ~~~~ ' Prepared by Planning Department Staff: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Aerial Photograph of Site and Vicinity Location Map Future Land Use Map Zoning Atlas Map Application S: (Planning Department) C D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cased Up for the next CDBI Cleveland 331 Waters Edge (D) - 08-16-OS - RTICleveland 331 StaffReport.doc Staff Report -Community Development Board -August 16, 2005 -Case FLD2005-05048 -Page 12 • RM,. ~ Sf > SRpp 31RGBd® _ CEaW ~ 8~ O c~ D ~7T0 ~ ~o ^ D ~ ~~ oo W ~ ~ c~ fl~o~^oa< ~r o ~ 6~®~~ o _ p ~~~ o ~ a PIAD~ ~~A PROJECT ~~ ~ ~ °" ~ SITE .ZONES ^S~ ^ _ ~ ~ ^c~®oo~or~^ ~ [] °~ Diu ~ ~~ =~ N.E. Q o~~Ob a ^ ~ S ^ sr m PIERCE ST s~ ~ ^ ~~ ~~ D~ Sr ~Rr sra®^^ ~ ~ o~~ ~~^oc~^a~~ ~o couRr sr ~~oo~<~R~Rg ~^0 Qy ~ ^ TUR~ ~~ ~~~ D n = ~ ,~ ~ tld ~~ PINE PINE Sf PME Sf a N @ r~ m S cr ~~d ~~ ~ PxE ~c 9 oAUO Ra w oauro Ro 3 ~~ ^ ^ ^ z WAY JASMNE WAY 9 ^ ^ ^ O ~ ~~~ ~ MAGIIOLIA ~ //~`- W`""--~ ~ ^ ^ a ^ oo a~~ P~ ^ ^^ .EFFOR06 Sr Location Map Owner. First Baptist Church -Calvary Baptist Church 'Case: FLD2005-05048 Property Site: 331 Cleveland Street Size f Acres 1.76 PIN: 16-29- l 5-20358-001-0010 Atlas Page: 2868 • ' a ~f ~ F ~ °k ~ ~1 ~`: . ' !- .ice ~ ~ _ ~_ /- ~ " A ~; a ~a' ;~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1i , ~ IV i , ~r~ , . r - ~ .., .~~ . ~ ~ ~ - ~ r ~ ` R ~ ~ ~- s w _ l '.. .. .. ~ 1 ~ ~ a -- ~~ a 9-" : ' '~ - "~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~ ~ J ~ y ~ A ~~ ; ~ -r . ~ ~ ~ t J ~. ~, , t 11 ~ ~ __ .A ,,,~ °" ~i l' < r ~ i ?~ y ~.. ~~ Aerial Map Owner: First Baptist Church -Calvary Baptist Church Case: FLD2005-05048 Property Site: 331 Cleveland Street Size(Acres) 1.76 PIN: 16-29-15-20358-001-0010 Atlas Page: 2868 • N •--' 1 I 1 ~---------, ~ --------- ---------- ~ ~i9 48 1 ,_-r ~ N ~ D Q Ill ~ ~ y 93 LAU RA ST ---- -- ~ r-------------------------~ W V S ~ ~1 R ~ +~ a 1 v ~ ; o ~ 221 ti 2+ r- I I 1 '' ' 2 I 1 ' ~ ' _ - r ------ "'~ ~ 1 j ~ j ~ 11_ g ~ `} ~ D v a v v ~ s QQ 1 ~ ~ g STS 1 1 I - D 1------------------------- ~ 1 ----------------- ~ ~ CLEVELAND ST ---- " ------- ---- j O O - - O M -~-y'~~YS' -p- S N N s3 ~-- ---- O F O W ~ 1 `~ - D W ;---- s---J - ---~ ---- -14 ~ 4 r ~_ -------- ~ 1 1 rr---- 105 1 - - ~ Q ' ~ 1 ~ ~ `--------- -' - _- Q 0 ~ ----- 1 i rr~ O W f----------, i ~ _ r r------1 y ~ ~ ~ trz ( j y ---- =----- i 1 -- Q ~ 0 ~o~ _r r~,~ _ 1 1 ~ ~ r 1 y ~ K ~_-___I --- tte ~ ~ --' vs ~ PIERCE ST _ ---~ 202 ~------------1 ~ ~ 1 1 ~ 1 201 1 1 I i ~ I Zoning M ap Owner. First Baptist Church -Calvary Bapfist Church 'Case: FLD2005-05048 Site: '331 Cleveland Street Property 1 76 Size(Acres): PIN: 16-29-15-20358-001-0010 Atlas Page: 2866 N ---------I ~ ------ CBD X59 ~i/ CBD - ' -- , - ~, ; ~ ~ ~ ' i Q I ~ o ~ y a ~ ~, ~" ~ - I ~ 2~ a5 ~ o ~ BD I ~ Zf ~- z o ~ '~ _, I I ~ I L ---' - ------- _ Q ~. 15 7 ; L N P I ~ Pp I ~y. NN N N 5 I ~ I -------------------------- ~ I I -----_-_------ --- i l CLEVELAND ST ~ ~ ' -------- ----- ~ ~ I ~ .. ~ -a g t o `r -- O - V V ~ ~~ ~ w-- ~ ____ m i 1 ~ w l I \t-- ~ I W I j---- ~r---~ _ I a j -------- , -~ --- - - ~B ~ I f5 10.5 _ I I 1 Q i I I I ~ ''_------- ' 0 -- - ~- ____ J r_-------_ I y ~ iCBD W i i----- ff _ _ I i r--i I O CB1~ _ ~ CBL~ ~ y - a ; 1 f19 ~ - 4. i.~ CQD -- ~ _ J ~ ~ ~ i `__~ ; BD BD ` _ I ~ ~2 ~ I ~-----------_I I , I I I ! CBD , ~ zof CB Fufure Land Use Map Owner. First Baptist Church -Calvary Baptist Church Case: FLD2005-05048 Site: 331 Cleveland Street Property 1 76 Size(Acres) PIN: 16-29-15-20358-001-0010 Atlas Page: 2866 ., ~. - l t ~ _________~ ni~n a 25D a ~ ,a I ' I __ ~ ~ ~` ~ a " a .,I a o LAURA ST - -- O _ Park ~. ~ ~ ~, ~a i 1 Q 25 , ' }. Of ice 221 ~ 27~ ~ ~ ;i 'Convention r ' ~tial , o ~, Center ~ r _ ~ -~ ~ -r - ------ ~° Ij, z ~;~ , . I ° Retail ~ ° ~ 8 , ~ ~ R~ ~l c~ 3 ~ I I I--------------------------~ I ---------------- I 1 CLEVELAND ST _____ .. • ~ r `~,- ; e a- ~- I O ice I---- ~~_ I _ a ; - I ------_-~ r - ---~ -- Gove --- ment ~---- ; Park ~ , Usk ~ I -I ~ J ~ Q I ' I -------- _~ - O _- 1 ---' r ~ ~---------- ~ Ala - ~------I y Q Governmental 1,2 vs - . I_~--~„ _ ~°br ~ ip ; ~ Ube ; --- -----~ „D ; -- ~ tq __ ~ P/ERCE ST --- ~ R ~ c `-- I -, , _, ~__~ ~ Pl f I ool S ace o ~ 2~, 202 ~------------I I ~ . ~ Worshi ~ , I Existing Surrounding Uses Map Owner. ,First Baptist Church -Calvary Baptist Church :Case: FLD2005-05048 Site: ' 331 Cleveland Street PrOp~' Size(Acres): 1.76 PIN: 16-29-15-20358-001-0010 Atlas Page: 286B • ,~. a .r ~. ~ ~ ~. ~ Y J~ ~ t ~` ^1 ~~+g'A e ~ 1 t l A~~ '~.- y r Y •~. ~ I e {l+ -~ .- . , `~' J. ~~ View looking west from South Osceola Avenue. F ry+ Y ~i ~bay'T ~;' r , ~'v,. _.. ~- ._-.. _ ;.,u '~ .-~E ;~.~ t~ ~ __ T v~ :iy-~ View looking southwest from Cleveland. w View looking southeast from Cleveland and Drew. View looking east Pierce Blvd. Waters Edge FLD2005-05048 331 Cleveland Street View looking northwest from south side of the site. View looking southeast from Cleveland • • Case: FLD2005-05048 Address: 331 Cleveland Street DRC: 06-30.05 CDB: 08-16-05 Yes I I No ! I N/A C. Site Elements: 1.Open Space lr r r Appropriate: r r r Open spaces which function as transitions between the public sidewalks and streets and the use of the property (residences, offices, stores, etc.). r r r Clearly defined entrances into open spaces with direct access from adjacent streets and adequate buffering from vehicular traffic. r r r Open spaces that are visible and inviting to the pedestrian. r r r Open spaces which utilize an aesthetically coordinated marriage between hazdscape (buildings, planters, lighting, walls, fences, paving, etc.) and landscape (trees, shrubs, annuals, perennials, etc.) elements. r r r Large open spaces broken into smaller, human-scale spaces through the use of changes of grade, planters, pots, landscaping, sculpture, fences, walls, etc. f r r • Open spaces designed to relate and connect to adjacent properties. r r r Formal or informal seating appropriate to the scale and function of the open space. Seating may include pazk benches, the tops ofgarden/planter walls, monumental stairs, etc. r r f • The location of public art in accessible open spaces designed and located so as to enrich the pedestrian e~erience and create a stronger sense of place. r ~ r Inappropriate: r r r Open spaces not easily accessible from public streets or that become unsafe "dead" spots r r r Lack of seating, shade and clearly defined perimeters. r r'- f • Open space that does not relate with the uses and buildings surrounding it. 4 C • Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-16-05 Yes No N/A r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r R r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r Address: 331 Cleveland Street • Pazking gazages with clearly marked points of ingress and egress. Inappropriate: • Curb cuts at every site. • Pazking lots or garages as the most prominent feature of any development. • Parking gazages difficult to enter and/or with poorly defined entrances. • The appeazance of a "sea of asphalt" from the rights-of--way. • Parking lotslgazages which create an unsafe environment. 2. Pedestrian Circulation/Access Appropriate: • Cleazly defined, safe, direct, convenient and landscaped pedestrian pathways provided between streets, parking areas and buildings. • Pedestrian scaled lighting such as lighted bollards; • Vertical elements such as bollards, markers, arches or architectural details. • Alleys and courtyards that match or complement either the building or the primary street to which the alley connects with regard to materials, architecture, color and street furniture (waste receptacles, benches, lighting, etc.). • Specialized paving design especially where pedestrian and vehicular paths intersect. • Pedestrian passageways which go through buildings such as an arcade. Inappropriate: • Developments which do not include direct access from surrounding streets and pazking azeas. • Large developments which do not provide pedestrian walkways through the block on which the development is located. • Pedestrian passageways too narrow to be useable or not designed at a human scale. • Pedestrian passageways that create an unsafe environment. 3 F~ Case: FLD2045-OSO48 DRC: 06-30-OS CDB: 0&16-05 Yes No NIA r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r w r r r r r r r r r r r r r r 1 r r • L SITE DESIGN A. Block and lot characteristics • Address: 331 Cleveland Street Appropriate • Retention of the existing street grid pattern where it contributes to an active pedestrian environment. • Blocks which promote easy pedestrian access and encourage cross-use. • Redevelopments that reopen previously vacated rights--of--way or create new rights-of--way. • Provision of new vehiculaz and pedestrian access/circulation that effectively serves the proposed development and vicinity if a vacation of aright-of--way is requested. • Lots which maintain a consistent size, scale, pattern and rhythm of the surrounding blocks}. Inappropriate: • Vacating existing rights-of-way to form consolidated blocks without providing alternative pedestrian and vehiculaz access to serve the proposed development and vicinity. • Large blocks which prohibit pedestrian access through the block and/or prohibit access within and azound the development. B. Access, Circulation and Parldn~: 1. Vehicular Circulation/Access and Parlung Appropriate: • The location, number and design of driveways which maintain the urban fabric ofthe downtown. • Vehiculaz access from secondary street frontage or alley. • Interior lot access limited to the minimum number of curb cuts to adequately serve the site. • Pazking areas for townhouse developments located within the interior of the development that maintains the integrity of the primary facade as the preferred design. For townhouse projects located on low traffic-volume streets with site characteristics that prevent internal parking, parking may be directly accessed from the street provided it is co-located with shazed driveways. • Detached garages and carports serving single-family uses located in line with or behind the rear of the principal building. • • Case: FLD2005-05048 Address: 33i Cleveland Street DRC: 06-30-OS CDB: 08-16-OS Yes ~ ~ No ~ ~ N/A f r r • Residential uses along Clearwater Harbor designed with parking garages or with parking areas internal to the site/ building and screened from Clearwater Harbor and any abutting right-of--way. r r r Attached garages in residential developments architecturally , integrated with the design of the principal structure. r r r • Driveways functionally integrated into the design of the development. r r r • Joint/common access driveways between sites. r r r Shared parking where a mix of uses creates staggered peak periods of parking demand. r r r • Parking lots located behind the primary facade of the principal building. r r r • Parking lot design that minimizes negative impacts such as light glare, exhaust fumes, noise and undesirable views. r r r • Parking lots adjacent to rights-of--way that are screened with either a landscaped buffer or a solid wall or fence three feet in height. ~- ~- l- • Large parking lots visually and functionally segmented into smaller lots with landscaped islands and canopy. r r r The use of interlocking pavers, brick or other similarly textured materials for parking lot surfacing and/or accents. r r r Parking garages as the principal uses that are architecturally integrated with surrounding developments and/or the envisioned character of the area. r ~- l- • Parking garages as the principal use within the Downtown Core located on Cleveland Street, Fort Harrison and Osceola Avenues with at least 75 percent of the ground floor of each facade on all adjacent street frontages occupied by active uses. Active uses inch~de restaurant, retail, entertainment or other uses/features determined to be pedestrian-oriented. r ~ r • Parking garages accessory to a principal use that are ~`. architecturally integrated with the design, materials, finish f and color of the principal structure(s) on the lot. r r r • Ground floors of parking garages accessory to a principal use with at least 75 percent of the primary facade occupied by the principal use/features or other use determined to be complementary to the principal use. ~-- ~, l- • Upper floors of all parking garages designed to visually screen vehicles from view from rights-of--way and public open spaces. Screening includes landscaping, walls, architectural elements or other decorative features. 2 • Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-16-05 Yes II No II N/A • Address: 331 Cleveland Street 2. Buffering and Sc_gr ~ninE a. Mechanical Eauinment, Concealed Wireless Communication Facilities, Loading and Service Areas. •+ (- r Appropriate: r r r • When located at grade, mechanical and utility equipment that is placed in the least obtrusive location possible and screened from adjacent properties and rights-of--way with fences, walls and/or landscaping. r r r When located on the roof of a building, mechanical equipment that is integrated into the design of the building through the use of pazapet walls, towers or other azchitectural elements. r r r Concealed wireless communication facilities (antennas, satellite dishes, etc.) attached to buildings and not visible from any public right-of--way. Appropriate concealing methods include painting the facility to match the color of the building, concealing the facility by an azchitecturally-integrated features, such as the use of faux windows, dormers, chimneys, pazapets, etc. or other similaz methods. r r r Service and loading azeas accessed from secondary streets, screened from adjacent properties and rights-of--way and placed in visually unobtrusive locations. r r ~- • Solid waste containers placed in the most unobtrusive location possible and screened from adjacent properties and rights-of- way. r- F r Inappropriate: r r r • Solid waste containers and service and loading azeas located adjacent to residentially used lots when an alternative location is feasible. ~" r r • Mechanical and utility equipment that visually dominates a site. r r r Freestanding wireless communication facilities. b. Landscaain~ ~i l- r- Appropriate: r r r Landscaping compatible with the climatic conditions of West Central Florida that includes the use of native plant species and Xeriscape landscape techniques. r r r Plant spies that are appropriate to the space in which they will occupy with regard to water needs, growth rates, size, etc. in order to conserve water, reduce maurtenance and promote plant health 5 Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-16-05 Yes No N/A r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r • Address: 331 Cleveland Street • Landscape design which augments and supports architectural features of the building/site where located. • Landscape design that visually screens unsightly views, aesthetically supports important vistas and reinforces the chazacter district in which it is located. • Plantings in landscape beds, planters or pots that soften the edges between buildings and pedestrian azeas. • Trees planted in paved azeas provided with adequate room to grow (landscape beds, tree grates or other protective techniques). • Landscape design and maintenance that engenders a sense of personal safety. Inappropriate: • Landscaping used in lieu of appropriate architectural details and good building design. • Landscaping planted without an adequate irrigation system • The use ofnon-hazdy plant species. • Use of the wrong plant in the wrong space such as plantings with inadequate room to grow and/or plantings inappropriate for an active pedestrian azea, etc. • Landscaping allowed to become overgrown decreasing aesthetics and safety. c. Fences and Walls Appropriate: Fences and walls that complement and are consistent with the principal structure with regard to materials, texture, size, shape and color. • The location, height and design of fences and walls compatible with the intended use, design of the site and azchitectur of the building. • Solid fences and walls along rights-of--way no higher than three feet. Any portion of a fence or wall above three feet in height that is at least 50 percent open. • Posts or columns that include decorative caps which extend up to 12 inches above the otherwise allowable fence height. • Vertical elements such as posts, columns, etc. incorporated into the design of the fence or wall spaced at appropriate intervals in relation to the materials used and overall length. 6 Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-1b-O5 Yes No N/A r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r • Town Lake Residential • Address: 331 Cleveland Street Appropriate: • Buildings or portions of buildings 30 feet or less in height that are setback a minimum of 10 feet from the southern Plan Area boundary. • Buildings or portions of buildings taller than 30 feet in height that provide a setback of a minimum of 10 feet plus an additional one foot for each two feet of height above 30 feet from the southern Plan Area boundary. III. BUILDING DESIGN A. Form: 1. Mass/Scale: a. Hei 6~t~. . Width: c. Depth: d. Rhvthm/Suacingi Appropriate: • Building form which visually relates to surrounding buildings and the, desired character of the azea with regazd to mass, scale, height, width and depth. • Buildings that have a distinct "base," "middle" and "cap." • Low rise buildings and/or those with long facade widths that accentuate vertical elements such as entrances and columns, or by breaking up the facade plane into a greater number of smaller vertical masses. • Mid- and high-rise buildings that utilize horizontal elements that minimize the apparent height of a building such as balconies, banding, cornice and pazapet lines, etc. • High-rise buildings that use one or more of the following depending on overall building height and the existing or desired chazacter of the surrounding azea: - Building stories or/stepbacks differentiated by architectural features including but not limited to coping, balustrades, cornice lines, change in materials, etc. - A proportional relationship between the height of a building and the number and dimensions of stepbacks used to mitigate the height of the building. Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 0$-16-05 Yes II No II N/A Address: 331 Cleveland Street r f r • Buildings that terminate views emphasize their prominent location through the use of additional height, massing, distinctive azchitectural treatments and/or other distinguishing features. r r r Maintaining a consistent building depth when feasible to allow the location of shazed parking lots and/or secondary entrances. r r r Buildings which correspond to the existing and/or desired rhythm and spacing of surrounding buildings through the use of common points of agreement such as windows, doors, recesses, reliefs and other architectural elements. r r r Buildings which maintain the existing and/or desired pattern of the placement and size of windows, doors, shutters, and other architectural elements on adjacent buildings with regard to both the ground floor and upper stories. r r r • Finished floor heights a minimum of two feet above the sidewalk grade for residential buildings within predominantly mixed use or commercial areas. r +~ r Inappropriate: r r r Buildings which do not relate to the surrounding or desired and envisioned context and fabric of the neighborhood with regazd to size, scale, height, width and depth. r r r Buildings that visually overpower adjacent buildings. r r r • Buildings that do not maintain a common building depth based on the predominant lot pattern. r r r Buildings that do not maintain the existing and/or desired pattern of windows and doors along a block face. r r r Facades on multi-story structures which do not incorporate meaningful architectural details such as cornice lines, banding, string courses, columns, recesses, relief, etc. 3. Additional Requirements for Downtown Core along Cleveland Street - ,~ ~- 1- Appropriate: r r r Buildings along Cleveland Street taller than the predominant height of other buildings on the project's block that stepback at that predominant height. r r r The use of multiple stepbacks when a building exceeds the predominant height of other buildings on the projects block. io Case: FLD2005-U5048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 0&16-05 Yes No N/A r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r~ r r r r r r r Address: 331 Cleveland Street • Property lines and private areas defined through the use of fences where feasible. Inappropriate: • The portion of walls and/or fences along aright-of--way greater than three feet in height above grade that are more than fifty percern solid. • Chain link or barbed wire fences. • Unpainted or unfinished walls and fences. IL BUILDING PLACEMENT A. Location• B, prientation: C. Separation• D? Covera~e• Appropriate: • Buildings that maintain the build-to line or the setback of the development's block and the blocks} across the street. Corner lots that maintain the location pattern for a distance of two blocks including both sides of the street. • Buildings located farther from the build-to line that provide a courtyard, steps, entryway, arcade, plaza or other pedestrian- oriented design features which maintains the build-to line. • Buildings with reduced setbacks that reflect the predominant surrounding or desired development pattern. • Buildings oriented to face public rights-of--way. • Separation between buildings that provide adequate useable space such as an alley or open space compliant with the requirements of these Guidelines. • Developments which provide coverage similar to surrounding properties and/or that meet the desired vision of the character district. Inappropriate: • Buildings that break up the common build-to line by locating farther back or forward than the predominant block patterns on the subject's site and the opposite side of the street. • Corner lots that do not maintain the location pattern far a distance of two blocks including both sides of the street. Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-16-OS Yes 11 Na II N/A Address: 331 Cleveland Street r r r Buildings separated at a distance which precludes the provision of Guideline-compliant alleys and open space. r r r • Separations between buildings that are out of scale and proportion with the district's existing or desired development pattern r r r Buildings which do not address the primary street. E. Additional Requirements for Character Districts and Special Areas Transition Areas Old Bav r r Fr Appropriate: r r r For development located eastward of a line drawn due south from the intersection of the mean highwater line and the northern Plan Area Boundary: Buildings or portions of buildings 15 feet or less in height that are setback a minimum of 20 feet from the northern Plan Area boundary. Buildings or portions of buildings exceeding 15 feet in height that provide a minimum setback (from the northern Plan Area Boundary) of 75 feet plus one additional foot of horizontal distance as measured from that boundary for each 2.25 feet of height above 15 feet except along public rights-of--way where buildings may be located a nunimum of 10 feet from the boundary line. 1- 1- f- • For development located westward of a line drawn due south from the intersection of the mean highwater line and the northern Plan Area Boundary: - Buildings or portions of buildings 30 feet or less in height that are setback a minimum of 20 feet from the northern Plan Area boundary. - Buildings or portions of buildings exceeding 30 feet in height that provide a minimum setback (from the northern Plan Area Boundary) of 20 feet plus one additional foot for each three feet of height above 30 feet. ,~- (-- j- • Buildings or portions of buildings exceeding 50 feet in height that maintain a horizontal separation between such buildings equal to or greater than 1.5 times the height of the larger of the two buildings. Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-16-05 Yes ~ No N/A r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r • Address: 331 Cleveland Street Inappropriate: • Building widths that visually overpower adjacent buildings. B. Architecture• Appropriate: • New development that incorporates an azchitectural style or azchitectural elements consistent with the existing and/or desired style of development in the surrounding neighborhood. • New development that complements the architectural heritage of the district in which it is located. • Multiple buildings within a single project which relate architecturally with each other and the surrounding neighborhood. Inappropriate: • Use of an azchitectural style which does not complement the fabric of the surrounding neighborhood. • Use of multiple and/or conflicting architectural styles within a single building or between several buildings within a single project. Facade DesiQn• a. Primary and Corner Facades Appropriate: • The primacy facades as the most highly designed facade utilizing the following elements: - A change in plane, building wall projection or recess; - Architectural details; - Variety in color, material, texture; - Doors and/or windows; - Storefront display windows for retail uses; and - Other details as appropriate to the building style. • An architecturally prominent entrance with door located on the primary facade. it Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-16-05 Yes No N/A r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r Ir r r r r ~ r r ~ r r r r r r r r ~ r r r ~z r r • Address: 331 Cleveland Street • Primary entrances emphasized through the use of a ~ combination of: ~ A protruding front gable or stoop; Projection or recession in the building footprint ~ Variation in building height; ~ Canopy or portico; ~ Raised cornice or parapet over door; ~ Arches; Columns; ~ Ornamental and structural architectural details other than cornices over or on the sides of the building; Towers; and/or / ~ Other treatment that emphasizes the primary entrance. ,,/ • Primary facade which include three articulated architectural parts: a hale, middle and cap. The proportion of these three elements will vary depending on the scale of the building. • Major architectural treatments on the principal building facade that are continued around all sides of the building that are visible from the public realm. • Covered drop-off areas. • Open porches. • Buildings on corner lots that emphasize their prominent location through the use of additional height, massing, distinctive architectural treatments and/or other distinguishing features. • Entrances provided along each street facade or a single entrance prominently located on the corner. Inappropriate: • Facades without articulation or other architectural detail to provide visual interest and variety on the facade. • Primary facades with an undefined entrance. • Entrances not architecturally integrated into the design of the facade. • Buildings on corners that do not treat each adjacent designated street equally. • An unfinished facade along a street. Case: FLD200S-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: OS-I6-OS Yes No r ~ r ~ r r r r ~ r ~ r ~ r ~ r r r r r r a r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r 13 N/A r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r Address: 331 Cleveland Street b. Secondarv Facades Appropriate: • An overall design of the secondary fagade(s) of the building consistent with that of the primary facade with regard to architectural style, materials, finish, color and detail. • Architectural embellishments, awnings, landscaping and signs used to identify the secondary entrance. • Entrances facing parking lots, plazas and waterfronts. Inappropriate: • Buildings that do not provide an entrance along a secondary facade. • A secondary facade which does not enhance or support the architectural style of the building. c. Side Facades Appropriate: • An overall design of the side facades of the building consistent with that of the primary facade with regazd to azchitectural style, materials, finish, color and detail. • Architectural embellishments, awnings, landscaping and signs used to identify secondary entrances if provided. Inappropriate: • A side facade which does not enhance or support the architectural style of the building. d. Windows and Doors Appropriate*: • Windows that are appropriately sized for the scale and style of the building on which they are located. • Windows along all streets. • Windows within a building/development that creates a consistent and cohesive fenestration pattern. • Windows that are similaz in proportion to windows on adjacent buildings or with established and/or desired patterns along the adjoining block faces. The degree of similarity of the window pattern increases in importance the closer the buildings aze to each other. • Windows in commercial areas that are appropriately sized and located to allow for display and/or view into the interior of the building. • Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: Ob-30-05 CDB: 08-16-05 Yes II No II N/A Address: 331 Cleveland Street r r r Bulkheads below and transoms above display windows when appropriate for the architectural style of the building. r r r Clear glass (88 percent light transmission or the maximum permitted by ,any applicable Building Codes) installed on ground floor windows except for stained or art glass provided the stained or art glass is in chazacter with the style of the building (churches, craftsman buildings, etc.). r r r Glass block used as an accent. r r r Screen doors provided the design is compatible with the azchitecture and materials of the building. r r r Doors which enhance and support the azchitectural style of the building. r r r Doors appropriately sized for the scale of the building facade on which they are located. r r r Doors with transoms and fan lights when appropriate for the architectural style of the building. *Utility/Infrastructure and Public Facilities are exempted from the requirements of windows and doors below and are fully addressed in the Signs and Miscellaneous section of these Guidelines. r ~ r Inappropriate: r r r The use of incompatible window types and shapes on the same structure. r r r Mirrored glass and glass curtain walls. r-- ~- 1- • Storefront windows that extend to the ground without a traditional bulkhead. r r r Tinted or reflective glass with less than 88 percent light transmission. ~- ~- (- • Blackened out windows or any other use of material that achieves that effect. r r r Boarded up windows (except during construction or during a reasonable repair period or subsequent to a weather advisory}. r r r Walls without windows along street frontages. ~-- 1- ~- • Doors which are out of scale and/or chazacter with the rest of the building. r r r Doors which do not enhance the architectural style of the building. r r r More than one style of door per building. 14 Case: FLD2005-05048 Address: 331 Cleveland Street DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: OS-16-05 Yes r r r r r r r r r r r r No r r r r r r r r r r r r N/A t' I • Poorly attached elements that may fall and injure people 1-' • Applying paint to fabric awnings. D. Rnellas Trail r Appropriate: r • Providing safe, convenient pedestrian connections between the site and the Pinellas Trail. f • Providing amenities such as seating and/or bike racks. r Inappropriate: t- • Properties located adjacent to the Pinellas Trail that do not acknowledge it through the use of connecting pedestrian paths, doors, windows, art, etc. E. Utilitv/Infrastructure Facilities 1r Appropriate: ~- • UtilitylInfrastructure facilities which visually relate to surrounding buildings and the desired chazacter of the azea with regazd to mass, scale, height, width and depth consistent with the New Construction chapter of these guidelines. ~- • Utility/Infrastructure facilities that incorporate an architectural style or architectural elements consistent with the existing and/ or desired style of development in the surrounding neighborhood consistent with the New Construction chapter of these guidelines. r- • Utility/Infrastructure facilities that maintain the existing and/or desired window pattern and proportions through the use of windows or window-like azchitectural details (faux windows, .recesses, glass block, tile, shutters, trompe 1'oeil or other azchitectural techniques) and/or other azchitectural elements. r • The use of awnings, canopies and sunscreens. r- Doors that enhance and support the architectural style of the building and aze appropriately sized for the scale of the building fagade. 23 Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-16-OS Yes I I No i l N/A Address: 331 Cleveland Street r r +r Inappropriate: r r r Utility/Infrastructure facilities which do not relate to the surrounding or desired and envisioned context and fabric of the neighborhood with regard to size, scale, height, width and depth. r r r Facades on Utility/Infrastructure facilities that do not incorporate meaningful architectural details such as cornice lines, banding, string courses, columns, recesses, relief, etc. r r r Wa11s without windows or window-like azchitecturai details along street frontages or pazking areas. r r r 'The use of conflicting window types or window-like architectural details on the same structure. r r r Reflective glass and/or glass curtain walls. r r r Blackened out/painted windows. r r r • Boarded up windows (except during construction or during a reasonable repair period or subsequent to a weather advisory). r r r Doors which are out of scale and/or chazacter with the rest of the building. r r r • Doors which do not enhance the architectural style of the building. ~- r r • More than one style of door per building. F. Coraorate Design r r r Appropriate: r r r Buildings which meet all the requirements of these Guidelines as outlined in New Construction, Rehabilitation of Designated Historic Structures and this chapter, as applicable. r r r Corporate design which visually relates to surrounding buildings and the desired character of the azea with regard to mass, scale, height, width and depth consistent with the New Construction chapter of these guidelines. ~- r 1'- • Corporate design that incorporates an architectural style or azchitectural elements consistent with the existing and/or desired style of development in the surrounding neighborhood consistent with the New Construction chapter of these guidelines. 24 ~, Case: F DRC: 0 CDB: 0 LD20 6-30-0 8.15-0 0S-050 5 5 48 Address: 331 Cleveland Street Yes No N/A r r r • Window signs which aze affixed by tape or other non- permanent methods. r r r Monument signs on sites where the primary building is located within 20 feet of a front property line. (Note: distance subject to final determination of setback/build-to line of the vazious chazacter districts.) r r ~- • Changeable copy azea greater than 25 percent of the sign azea (with the exception of theater marquees). r 1- ("' • Sandwich boazd signs. B. Lighting: r ~' ~- Appropriate: r r r Light fixtures that are designed to respect, enhance and contribute to the azchitectural style, detailing and elements of a building. r 1! r • Light fixtures that reinforce the overall composition of the facade with regard to color, material, size, scale and shape. r r r Light poles located adjacent to a public right-of--way that incorporates the same or similaz design of light poles as in the chazacter district or complements the design of the building. ~- ~- r • Attached light fixtures flush mounted on a wall or soffit. r r r Light fixtures that are recessed in ceilings or otherwise concealed. r r r Lighting located in bollazds. r r r Existing, historic light fixtures preserved in place whenever feasible. r r r Historically accurate reproduced lighting fixtures documented by physical, documentary and/or pictorial evidence. r r ~ r Lighting which illuminates without glaze. r r r Utility meters, service locations, wires, piping, boxes, conduits, etc. placed in the most visually unobtrusive location possible. r r r Electrical wiring to all site lighting provided underground. r r r Accent lighting illuminating signage, landscaping and trees, water amenities and other special features. r r r ~ adequate number of light fixtures installed to effectively and safely illuminate pedestrian azeas. r .~ r Inappropriate: r r r • Exposed spot and floodlight fixtures used on non-residential properties. 2 1 ~J Case: FLDZ005-05048 DRC: 06-30-OS CDB: 08-16-05 Yes No N/A r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r 22 • Address: 331 Cleveland Street • Light fixtures placed in a position where existing or future tree canopy will reduce the illumination levels or otherwise interfere with the light fixture. • Lighting which illuminates adjacent properties. • Light fixtures that do not relate to the structure/site with regazd to materials, color, size, scale and style. • Lighting which is too bright, glazing and overpowering for a space or that is too dim to effectively illuminate. • Neon used to light a building or as a decorative element except where appropriate to the architectural style of the building. • Lighting which results in color distortions within pedestrian and vehiculaz azeas. C. Prouerty Maintenance: Appropriate: • Regular visual inspections of all portions of a building such as the foundation, walls, weather-striping, roofs, etc. • Regulaz maintenance and repair using quality materials. • Enlisting the services of professionals. • Using the gentlest possible procedures for cleaning. • Consulting a structural engineer prior to commencing any work when structural systems are affected. • Stabilizing/repairing deteriorated or inadequate foundations as soon as physically possible. • Replacing weather-stripping as needed prior to failure. • Replacing loose or missing roof tiles/shingles as soon as damage is observed. • Regulaz exterior painting and touch-ups as needed. • Inspection and replacing of awnings that show signs of weaz, teaz, fading, etc. • Regulaz cleaning and sweeping or adjacent public property. • Keeping windows clean. Inappropriate: • Allowing routine maintenance and repairs to lapse. • The use of harsh chemicals/procedures for cleaning. • Failing to test acleaning/restoration product/technique on a discreet location first. • Harsh methods of cleaning that would damage or otherwise compromise the building. Case: FLD2005-OSO48 DRC: 06-30-OS CDB: 08-16-OS Y~I No r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r N/A r r r r r r r r r r 19 Address: 331 Cleveland Street 4. Development along Cleveland Street between Myrtle and Osceola Avenues and along Fort Harrison Avenue between Drew and Chestnut Streets. Appropriate: • Development incorporating an acchitectural style indicative of those found in Downtown Clearwater between 1900 and 1950* and includes: A 20`~ Century Commercial Vernaculaz: One-story or One- Part; - 20`~ Century Commercial Vernacular: Two-Part; - Art Deco; - Art Moderne; - Chicago School; - Mediterranean or Mission Influence; - Mediterranean Revival; - Neo-Classical. *See Appendix A Architectural Styles for additional details. • Buildings which utilize chazacter defining features from any one of the approved acchitectural styles listed above through the use of contemporary materials. Inappropriate: • Use of multiple and/or conflicting architectural styles within a single building or between several buildings within a single project. Y SIGNS AND MISCELLANEOUS A• Signs: Appropriate: • Signs on a building and/or site designed as part of an overall theme that respect, enhance and contribute to the architectural style, detailing and elements of a building. • Signs whose design, colors, materials, size, shape and methods of illumination reinforce the overall design of the fagade. • Letter size, letter and word spacing, font style and other design elements of a sign that create an overall high quality aesthetic appeazance. • Attached signs proportional to the space to which they aze attached. Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-16-05 Yes No N!A r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r l~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r 20 ~.J CJ Address: 331 Cleveland Street • Attached signs installed so the method of installation is concealed or made an integral part of the design of the sign. • Where individual buildings are located with limited side yard setbacks, attached signs that demonstrate a general alignment with the signs on adjacent storefronts/buildings; • Wall signs located on flat, unadorned parts of a facade such as the horizontal band between the storefront and second floor or on windows, awning flaps, fascia, etc. • Wall signs located immediately adjacent to secondazy entraces. • Projecting signs located adjacent to the building entrances or tenant space(s) which they serve. • Hanging signs positioned perpendiculaz to the facade of the building and located adjacent to the building entrances or tenant space(s) which they serve. • Awning signs which aze permanently affixed (sewn to or screened on) to the valance of the awning as part of the overall awning design. • Window signs consisting of paint or decals, etchings/ engravings, neon and/or three-dimensional lighted signs. • Buildings with multiple tenants accessed from the interior of the building which include a directory sign immediately adjacent to that entrance. • Existing, historic signs that aze preserved or restored. • Historically accurate reproduced signage documented by physical, documentary and/or pictorial evidence. • Changeable copy which matches the sign to which it is attached with regazd to style, size and color. Inappropriate: • Box/cabinet style signs. • Signs utilizing LED or any other electronic changeable copy. • Signs painted directly on the facade of a building unless documented by physicaUhistorical, documentary and/or pictorial evidence. • Attached signs that cover windows or other architectural features. • Projecting signs higher than the top of second story windows. • More than one hanging or projecting sign per business. • Awning signs which aze affixed to the awning material by adhesive backed-letters or other non-permanent methods. Case: FI.D2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-16-05 Yes r r r r r r r No r -r r r r r NiA r r r r- r r r Address: 331 Cleveland Street Storefront level and upper levels that use visually compatible materials. Use of the following durable materials within the first three floors of all buildings and recommended for all other floors: - Wood, stucco and/or or masonry exteriors. - Masonry exteriors finished in rusticated block. - Stucco, brick, stone, etc. - Storefront side piers, when provided, constructed of the same material as the upper facade or covered with stucco. - Pre-cast, cast-in-place or architectural concrete . - Tile; and - Any other material found acceptable by the Community Development Coordinator and/or the Community Development Boazd, as applicable. Inappropriate: • Exterior walls and skins of buildings designed and/or constructed of materials with a limited life expectancy. • Materials incompatible with the azchitectural style of the building. • The use of the following materials on building exteriors: - Poorly crafted or "rustic" woodworking and finishing techniques; - Cedar shakes; - Plywood ('I'1-11 siding, etc.); - Corrugated, mill finish or reflective metal wall panels; - Expanded metal (except for limited decorative applications); - Mill fmish aluminum extrusions for windows and doorways; - Unfinished Concrete Masonry Units (CMU or cinder block); and - Any other material found unacceptable by the Community Development Coordinator and/or the Community Development Boazd, as applicable. • The use of the following materials on the first three floors of building exteriors: - Foam except for architectural details and ornamentation ; - Exterior insulated finish system (EIFS) except for azchitectwal details and ornamentation; - Hardboazd siding; - Plastic, metal and or vinyl siding except for single-family 17 Address: 331 Cleveland Street dwellings ; - Fiberglass panels; - Exposed aggregate (rough finish) concrete wall panels; - Indoor-outdoor carpeting or astro-turf; and - Any other material found unacceptable by the Community Developmern Coordinator and/or the Community Development Board, as applicable. Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CrDB: 0&i~6-OS~ I Y~i No II iV/A I r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r is b. Color Appropriate: • T'he number and type of building colors appropriate for and consistent with the architectural style. • Low reflectance exterior colors. • Gutters, downspouts, utility boxes, meters, etc. painted as part of the overall color scheme. Inappropriate: • Colors that are garish, gaudy, loud, excessive and ostentatious or that constitute a glaring and unattractive contrast to surrounding buildings. • Main body color that is from the deepest tones of the color wheel. • More than three different colors or color shades used on a single building unless appropriate to the architectural style of the building. • The use of fluorescent or day glow colors. • Black as the predominant exterior building color. • Single color schemes. For example using one color on every surface. • Clashing trim colors that are not complementary to the main body color and serve only to attract attention through their dissonance. As an example, yellow and red aze clashing colors and not complementary and only serve to attract attention through their dissonance. • A solid line or band of color or group of stripes used in lieu of architectural detail. • Color used to obscure important architectural features. 3. Additional Requirements for development within the Old Bay District east of Garden Avenue. Appropriate: • Offices that are residential in size, scale and design. Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-16-OS Yes No N/A ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r Address: 331 Cleveland Street e. Roof Design Appropriate: • A roof consistent with the style of the building utilizing azchitectural elements such as cornice treatments, roof overhangs with brackets, steeped pazapets, richly textured materials and/or differently colored materials. • Multiple rooftops on varying levels on lazge buildings that help break up the vertical mass of a building. • High-rise buildings which utilize sculpted roofs in order to establish an interesting and enhanced skyline unique to Downtown Clearwater. • The portions of building stepbacks that aze fully finished and complement the azchitectural style of the building and the main roof structure. Inappropriate: • Colored stripes/bands on flat roofs. • Mansazd roofs that aze out of scale with the building. • Flat roofs within public view from grade not hidden by a pazapet or other architectural feature. • Roofs inconsistent with the architectural style of the building. f. Other Architectural Features Appropriate: • Shutters and canvas awnings sized to match the corresponding window openings. • Shutters and awnings the shapes, materials, proportions, design, color, lettering and hazdwaze of which are in chazacter with the style of the building. • Awnings made of high quality fire-rated/retazdant fabric to protect pedestrians from inclement weather. • First floor awnings placed no higher than the midpoint between the top of the first story window and the bottom of the second story windowsill. • Hurricane shutters, if provided, fitted as an integral part of the storefront design, not visible when not in use and only to be used during the timeframe in which a formally issued hurricane warning is in effect. 15 1.. J Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-OS CDB: 08-16-05 Yes No N/A ~1 U Address: 331 Cleveland Street • Electronic security systems utilized as an alternative to security bars. • Fire staus/egress designed as unobtrusive as possible by matching the primary structure with Xegazd to materials, design and color of the structure. Where feasible, they should not be visible from the street. • Devices which discourage the congregation of animals (pigeons, squirrels, etc.) placed in the least visually obtrusive locations possible and/or designed to blend in with the overall architectural style of the building. • The inclusion of other azchitectural details and elements (clocks, railings, flower boxes, etc.) as appropriate to the style and function of the building and azchitecturally integrated with the design of the building. • Gutters, downspouts, utility boxes, meters, etc. located as visually unobtrusively as possible. Where feasible, they should not be visible from the street. r 1r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r 16 Inappropriate: • Visible, permanent or roll-down security bars/gates. • Solaz collectors visible from the street. • Awnings made of high-gloss or fabrics which appeaz to be plastic. • Backlit awnings. 2. Materials and Color: a. Materials Appropriate: • Materials compatible with the existing and/or desired context of the surrounding area and that are common to the area's historic construction methods/style. • The use of high-quality materials which result in buildings that will be as maintenance free as possible and long-term components of the urban fabric. • Building materials consistent with and relating to the architectural style of the building. • Building materials appropriate to the scale of the building. • The use of contemporary materials adapted to historic design elements. n Case: FLD2005-05048 DRC: 06-30-05 CDB: 08-16-05 Yes No N/A r r 25 • Address: 331 Cleveland Street ~- Inappropriate: t' • Buildings which house corporate franchises or businesses which do not relate to the existing and/or desired character of the surrounding neighborhood with regard to mass, scale, height, width and depth and/or are otherwise inconsistent with the New Construction chapter of these guidelines. Page 1 of 1 Tefft, Robert From: Wade, John [John.Wade@opus-ae.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 3:22 PM To: Tefft, Robert Cc: West, Bill; Wilz, Larry Subject: Water's Edge data Mr. Tefft, The attached data sheets tabulate the type and size of residential units provided at Water's Edge, along with the private parking facilities. Other data that describes the project include: . The residential tower is 25 floors (above Osceola street level) plus the 61 or basement level. We calculate 24.25 feet above sea level to be the mean elevation, above which the tower will rise 270'-5" to the top of the flat roof slab. The roof of the stair and equipment room will rise less than 16 ft above that elevation. Mechanical equipment screens will be provided as required, not to exceed a vertical dimension of 294'-0". . The development will include 10,022 sq ft of commercial space at the street level along Osceola with three levels of residential units above that. From the mean elevation (which is actually more than 8 ft below the sidewalk along Osceola) the flat roof of the uppermost living unit raises 53'-9". • The parking structure will rise three levels above the street at Osceola, and drop two levels down for a total of 5 parking levels. A swimming pool and other private outdoor space is located on the roof of the parking garage. Robert, if you need any other data that I may have omitted, please do call me at the number indicated below. I will be seeing you tomorrow with the revised drawings as requested. Thank you for your help, John Wade Opus A & E 4200 West Cypress St Tampa, Florida 33607 (813) 877-4444 fx 877-1222 7/20/2005 • • FAX MESSAGE CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING PLANNING DEPARTMENT 100 S MYRTLE AVE. P O BOX 4748 CLEARWATER, FL 33758-4748 OFFICE PHONE - (727) 562-4567 FAX PHONE - (727) 562-4576 TO: John Franklin Wade Opus South Contractor's, LLC FAX #: 813.877.1222 FROM: Mark T. Parry, Plannin;; Department, City of Clearwater DATE: Thursday, June 02, 2005 MESSAGE: RE: 331 Cleveland Street; FLD2005-05048; Flexible Development Application John, The application is complete as outlined in the following letter. I've also emailed and mailed this letter to you. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate in contacting me directly at 727.562.4558. NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING THIS PAGE): Three {3) S:IPlanning Department) C D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cased Up for the next DRCIBelcher N 1822 Pappas Office - (C) - MTPIBelcher N 1822 fax cover sheet for complete letter.doc ., , ~' ~~~= CITY OF CLEARWATER *,a-~ } ~~~ '°'~ PL~INNING DEPARTMENT `R~+~~j°,r,'~8~ POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 ~~~ ~ ~ r e MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, lOO SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4576 LONG RANGE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW June 2, 2005 Mr. John Franklin Wade Opus South Contractor's, LLC 4200 West Cypress Street Suite 444 Tampa, FL 33607 RE: Application for Flexible Development approval (FLD2005-05048). Dear Mr. Wade: The Planning staff has reviewed your applications Flexible Development approval at 331 Cleveland Street. After a preliminary review of the submitted documents, Staff has determined that the application is complete. The following items/data are required to be submitted/clarified. Most of them can be addressed at or subsequent to the DRC meeting. Please contact me to discuss these points should you have any questions. These comments are provide as a courtesy and additional comments may be generated prior to and/or at the DRC meeting: 1. Provide all required sight visibility triangles on the site plan (they were provided on the landscape plan); 2. Indicate the location of all public and private easements; 3. Indicate the location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; 4. Clarify that the proposed streetscaping (sidewalks, landscaping, signage, street furniture, etc.) will match the City's Master Streetscape and Wayfinding Plan; 5. Provide the gross floor area dedicated to the residential component of the development; 6. Provide the paved vehicular use area expressed in square feet and a percentage of the site; 7. Provide the official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easements; 8. Provide the Floor Area Ratio as a percentage of the site. BRIAN J. AUNGS"C, MAYOR FRM'K HIRF3ARD, VICE MAYOR HOYC HANtIL'I'ON, COUNCII'~fEMHCR BILL JONSON, COUNCIL.MEMBER ® CAREEN A. PE'I'GRSEN, COUNCIL.'~IEMBCR ~~EQUAL EMPLOYMEN"1' AND AFFIRMA"I'IVE ACCION EMPLOYER~~ r • June 2, 2005 Wade -Page Two The Development Review Committee (DRC) will review the application for sufficiency on June 30, 2005 in the Planning Department conference room -Room 216 - on the second floor of the Municipal Services Building. The building is located at 100 South Myrtle Avenue in downtown Clearwater. Please call Sherrie Watkins, Administrative Analyst at 727.562.4582 no earlier than one week prior to the meeting date for, the approximate time that your case will be reviewed. You or your client must be present to answer any questions that the DRC may have regarding your application. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 727-562-4558. You can access zoning information for parcels within the City through our website: http://www.myclearwater.com/. Sincerely, Mark T. Parry Consulting Planner S:IPlanningDepartmentlCDBIFLEX(FLD)IPendingcaseslUpforthenextDRClCleveland331 Waters Edge (D)-MTPICIeveland331 Complete Letter.doc g :~ QPUS~ Opus Ardrtecb 8 ErlpirleeN, Inc. Ea'ir"~.~.~ wnT>:>s~s e Q DRC AENSION 07-II-05 ~~~~5; ~~~`a 0]-11-OS $. MILLER x ~~ • EkM~onlc !I'a may ne %\ OPUT Opuf 9aM Caibfdan, llC. cP~. WATERS EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CLEARWATER. FL " COVER SHEET 3 C~ o (~ J WATER'S ~D GE DOWNTOWN C L E A R W A T E R Y~ °~ C .a^-' F~ 58'~,aa o ~~ -~ +f,!' VICINITY MAP CLEARWATER N GyP cuMEno VU \ t DRAWING INDEX CS COVER SHEET R A2.01 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 1 A2.02 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 2 A2.03 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 3 - A2.d1 FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 4 ,_ A2.B7 TOWER PLAN-LEVEL BI A2.06 TOWER PLAN-LEVELi A2.08 TOWER PLAN-LEVEL32-4 _-,__ A2.07 TOVYER PLAN -LEVELS 5 - 21 A2.OB TOWER PLAN-PENf}pUSE LEVEL 22 A2.OB TOWER PUN-PENTHOUSE LEVELS 23-26 A2.10 LOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN -LEVEL B2 A2.11 LOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN -LEVEL 81 A2.12 LOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN -LEVEL 1 A2.13 LOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN -LEVEL 2 A2.14 LOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN-LEVEL3 ---- A2.16 LOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN -LEVEL 4 A3.01 EMERIOR ELEVATIONS - 30tl~H - A3.02 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -EAST AND WEST A3.03 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS-NORTH - M.01 BUILDING SECTION __~-_ z<w- ..-- ~y ~-i~~: Z ar" m t',~ r°`~~, ~ ~ -°Y~~' NEW S-LEVEL PARKING GARAGE ~ ~ (INCLUDES 8 H. C. SPACES) ` ~ ~:~ .-~ ~~ ~w~ ~` CLEVELAND STREET -~~ '-' ~ -~' ~- :~ ~ ~` ~ • o ~, 1 ~ --~ • •• ~ ~ ~ 1 NEW MIXED USE ~- /st FLOOR RETAIL (10, 022 S.F.) I • ~~ 1 s~ BOTTOM FLOOR ~ 2nd, 3rd & 4th FLOOR RESIDENTIAL 1 1 ~ I (/9 UNITS) ~ ~ '° ~' W ~ ~ NEW 25 FLOOR TOWER ~ e e * ~ UP '~"*~"~ 1 l38 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ' ,~ ~ m~ .» W `1 "-` ' ® ~ ~~ ~-- ~ ~, ~ _ ~ 1 ~~ --- ----- ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 • • ~ / 1 ' 1 I wnso~er 1 ^ rwq ^ /` ^ ^ -- - ~ O W 1 ~ 1 1 - ~ t I tit ~~ ~ .~ 1 ~ Q N°~' ~ ( ..... V ~, ~ .. • • . ~ ~, ~ ~ .~ ~ 7 ~- ~- "".~ ..._° ,. m~ ApOtlalDOEib) ..._ I ~ ~ NEW RETENT/ON VAULT (24k i55') ~ ~ ~ 1 '~ I.l4x •OR DI G~ ~ . ._. a _ t ~ ~~ ~ ~.:, I~ ~ ~ - ,_ i ~L ,,~ 'a n OPUS ~ ~ ,, z8 "~- ' ` + ~ F I~Pf ~ ~ ~ .~ I ~ ,• ~__' ~ ~ J~ Opus Arclilecb 8 Engineero, Nw. n~rR ~D,~ ,. LDD:II: rM ~ -- -. .- ... - .. ..c..nen..,~, ° B 'R ~ ~, ' ` ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ WATER'S EDGE ,-- ~~ , ,~ ~a~ ~E~ar T - .~D p oRC RLVisioe m-il-os c~`ieia~ -~`is3 -. ~`~ra-. n s ~ EL EI.13'3-r a z o n xuav ~25Z7'- }, LLV[' ~ 07-n lvx.D a ouxri er Y ~' ~[ Eioa-I ~ ILyE J- 5- NiI LCR l cWILZ ne Drv~M Y a as-, ~ of tAe~ lormatron amloxnE n Uedron~ ,~< T . ~ ~ ~, °r'-, ~ ~~ ~ ~°~ ~`~~-, .~ .b,.~l wa 9 ~,~.a m ~ M, E~. D, 9 Mme. ~. _ __ _ _ ~~ i~ OPUS® .FIr _ J, - - - -~~~s-I OpwBOW CaMntlm, LLG rc„"u.~ ~ J. 3 _ i~ -D E - - _ - _ ""~ -5 M..w.>~x ~" ~ 'a Iml oK~oxo L~EL . / " ° - - --- ---- - -- - ~ LL o'-9 ~ ~ , . - - ' - - WATER'S EDGE EL e-g~ ~~. ~,, ~~a -g ~-~ - ,,~ ----? --°---- ii- a1 ~ L. a r• _ - _ - T --- REDEVELOPMENT g _ _ _ _ - __ - ;.. __ D-. 4 ----- --- ------ ---- _ - - - _ - - - - ~~ ~_"„~ - m - --- - - ~~ UEIMITTAL - $ _ L ~ a .w. I CLEAAWAiCR, CL _ - - ..~L Bl - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - " ' " nvExACE G DE 'D ' S L i d' - ~ 1 BUILDING SECTION M CxIiECNRAt EL D' 0 ~' g ~ BUR DINO SECTION Ins -I -° ~.x A4.01 Eo~~d - es~„ NOILdA313 H1HON tl SNOIldN3l3 U 2lOR~31X3 ; xo ,: ~d ~ ~ , no 3~0~ No o~an,: ~ ~a u •a~3rMw33~ A ~ , lv' 3,~3a 3,d~s~~~.w s~o~ .s i;~~~ 39 ~r4~, ~":3,~ ,a '~"~ s-'! ;a=ds ', ~dltlwens 1N3WdOl3/~303~J ~si~-- i ~ ~ 3~ a31dM 3~43 S , ~`~;"-- - ~A3~" L ~w„a I ~ wu,.. r ~ ~rc..~ w,~. ~ I I "Jll'~4pJ 4Va8 ~0 ~illY~i.3r3- o __ - -~~i3~ ® ' sndo ~;~ ~~3 _ _. - ~siaoe~ ., 3 ~ m ~ w~ ~ ;3~ m ;~ ~~~ a3b~~~tl,~.3dd 3L r~rv a3~~~,3ad ~tl. ~~a~ 03~.,~~.~3d~ ,o , ~~o ~~,3 - -- ~w ~~ ~9 ~ a~~~.~~ ~~ m a3tl~~.~,~.~3da ~ ~, ~o a~,~~= ~~d w ti. >i . u owaF+y y D+uquw uoi~~lu~4~N I~C6~13_- m _~»~. ~3~ ~~ a3:s ~w~ Jliyia5 4Lxrvd ,Y tU 31UJ NO 03 ~ swdcv ~ snm Hl v~ u w iow~vou3 $EC iS3T~- .. u auM 3n ~~-~~33 m a3an~n~nmx3a a t13l~IW 'S ~ii twl~- m e»m.~ ,~3me SAt-II-LO i-cci l3 i ~ - m tl~[ZS ~~~ ~- m eo~ raaw o3 ~~n i oaiwnd wsn ~~` .{5 ~3_ 1W1 m __ ~ I I .3~~ 3'ASS33]v. 9f tlo JNJ3 No cJ]nis aLNpa ~/9 m m ~~ ~I` ~l3 m 1N01553y 3Ntl}'tltlI1N ~`-'~~ 3_ SO-LI-CO NOISIA3M Ja0 ~' ~~ t~~~ m -yoim s m N W a s oxnna ~. irvu dd 3 tl " M L ~Z ~~ a s a ~ s e a ivM m , ~-_-~ 3- n - ~~~~ 3~~ ~~a ~ ~N I ~ ! ~ 0 c 3~ 13 ~ SIN SS~VD l3WNVd5 ~~ tl_,FGZ BSI 13 /3 1 y ~_~ M 0G 2 '13 ___ ~M~ tl0 JMO NO WNII S ~~ ~ wn~ l ~` ~ 03tl ~ 1 NtlrYltl~d tl t 3 ll38nW N]uVd1gW~Y lliN0etl0] 1VWOli ~~ aL l3 ab:d Ol _ ~ .. ~ rotl tlll 03 5 W33fld ~" ~_ t ~ ~n ~' s ~~1~34~0~ a ~ ~~.a~sx~3na ~t. ..___. _. _ .. ..~ _. , : • ®sndo ~~ , ......_. t ... N ~ ~ f ; ~ 5ooz ~ ~ -~r~~ ,z ~ I .0-.e-..BI/1 / ~ ~ NO11VA3131S3M ~ ~vNieiao .O-.I-..91/~ NOI1VA3q 1Stl3 ~ _ ~„ swrw.v .w nro uo oNOO No aa~ms a3txl ~'~ ~ ; ~ eaw~ zr~ urvis sae 3rvd~le > ,, -., ~ ""' T ~nie ui~xne nro u~ ~NO~ •~ i i ~i~ ~ No o ® 'v 3a~3e nn " " neas3a~r. vcous w~ as -eow~ " _ i n ~~, s~ ~ ...... (o3mwsl N a amxl 3raee wnn view, - NI A3M9tl0100 -. q ~~~~ ~:~', _'~ ON SSVIN 13fI0Nle5 uINM :aOUJ gY'bV 03NSNI9ed ~' ~ ;~;~ a~~,u3.. ~ ~~~ n~ ~ ~o~ ~~~ a3~NlYd N J' ~ 11rvJ tl0 JNOJ 1p o0]nis OLx1Ie .. ~ ~e_~,~,~- ~N a„~,~~N~N~,ee J`~~'~` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,'~ J~,I t131~ '- ?i WMb3N5 ~e0 y ~,~ nw0 1q ]f!o] M 0?3n15 031HIYe '. ~~ IIH] e0 JNOJ NJ Oa3n15 aLNIYd ~~ ;~ ,, ~N~,~.N ,..3rva3NSNl~e a ;~,~ J, ~~ N«~1~3e ,N.~Iew,N ., ~2 ,;;,,$ __ ~~'+$ ~ > z N~uls3e 3~.~~~,N nn~ ~ i+a~ (n3a«sI ,2~ ~3 ~ NI A3M9 tlOIO ~~~5 ~eC1L„3I~ ia o~nis auxne 3mroe w J -SSV19 l3LnM'd5 nro uo 3rv03 NJ OaNnis O~Hlvd 5 3N ,,.~~. , tl0 ~~.r. _.. - e a ~ y~ ~~ /wy~//~~~~~ / { ~ ~yOV { j '(jam' ~ F ~ ° .~~ t [ ~ ~ [ t~ j ~ P e ~ 3 ~ ~..._ ~ ~ L ~' Ff i S~ d I V ~ ~ ~Y r.. i 1f...: i 1 ~ e'7., R I_ __ ni .o-.o ~~ mnunwom - pu~ 3as)wvu~ ~ ~wn~~ ~'. ~ ~ YA~1st no x rv n ~e- 1 J -`i 'ryii~ ® ® ® ® ~ _ J ~ -- ~ 2 ~~3,3 .~~~ ® ® ® ® f L ~ ~1 ~ ,Y ® ~ ® ~ f ~ -± Q - ^ - 9 3n3~ 0 0 ^ ^ ~~~3a; - ~ 3 3~ ~a ~ ^ ^ ^ o - „~N 3 -- ~ e~ ~w Nn a~n,~ a3~Npa '$ 00 00 ~y~10 ._6~11i~ oo oa f ~ n;~'$ ^^ - oo -- J' ^^ 00 ~,'~;~ ^^ ^^ ~F =fCL~3.~ ^^ ^^ ~F ~~~3 ~_ Y ^^ 00 I ~~~ ^^ - ^o ~ J' 00 00 e „~ 00 00 J' ^0 00 J' ^^ o^ _~~ 3v,$ ^^ ^^ ~~;~;;~ ii~ a Si 13 SZ ^O~ 3w~ exmv`d 'b i~ s~/~ NO11tlA3~3 HLf108 .~~W~ 335) FZK 3a 3]N3 M [~,N, all 3N'vl 3.lvaJ/.Y ~' rIJ NO OJJfLLS OLHIIa nrvJ MO OJJnK OLNnE IxMV S'N.~YJ lY.]N a3H5Mif3btl IuIJ M oJ~NS alWnd ~ n11J No oJxu a ~n g ~ l3~n $LSl'v3T~_ 03ti~~ ~nxm3ud }~ ® -~j~' -~j-Y l I ICIC~I I I l I ~~~_'Sr T3n3i~ m m 'nmv l1~ ~c~l'D3r~~ - ~ llF1Y5]tl 3M]ItlMN ~ ® ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ' ~~ ~~~OO~u 1- 3YNSN~3b~~~J 03HSirvu3ee -~~ ~,aj~T' x 1 ao ~ixx. -ao A ao ~ 31HM nowW m •~~ni~ y rlln mHSnu~m oo~nls a3lxna a3anurem~vn3ua rr3n mxsinu3ae merurenxrmee m -, ~~~ aa~e neis~~~r, sca~xs m -.~~ j1b ' rvv No o»nss u3une m ~~ ~ J! ~n~i meru~vmenw3ea m i wi~i~ m JI ~~, 1 ~ " _ ___. _ _ _ m . } ~i~ nw~ w ovn s 3lxiv m ~~~ rvo No o~~nls n3une m i-~~ }., m J~ a~~ m ~f t`i~n~31 ~" Ixvlvs3e 3rr.~awx - - m m _ _ ~ ~ ~ -,1~~ }~_ ~Y _'! 61131 ONnrytl llurv3ain9NUitla m -OZ wa~ ~x~tnaw o e s xm ea lens 53u 3m'JiNtlmiN m J ~ ~~, ' s 9'xow~ 3wvtlf W~N~~~sswo~.vds .3LNM ~13x153v, SCO[.x5 M~ rvo o»<Iis 031Hne YH - 6-GSZ 'll yµ ~~~]x 'f 03tlNNf11N 3tld 9N 1IYa 1Y1 31V 0 3N§NIf3m _.. _._.__ 13iYtrod V CLEVELAND STREET ' ...+.. .-t ' ~ i ;.3 3 F 4 ~ ~ f ~ ~ / 1 . ~ t ~ ' :s:_ ~ ~ " ~ : - i :_ , . ~ ""s ~ s ; Y,~ci . ,t ~L--. T f ~ a~ - - 's ' I ,, ~------------------------T----------------------------------- f __ -- I I w l I I o~p i i /~~j -.oa.< men ~~M_~,~ I i~ ~ i~ W ~ rioo ~a~w - ~~~ ~ I~ I I ~ W I ~ I Z I j I Q I g I W I N I ~ I I I I I ~~ ® t~~ ~, ~ ~~~ • 1V ~,;~~. ,~a ~ ~ ~~ ~i -..~ t7-~- ~I I I i I I I I I I I I~ U 1 ~, ~ FLOORzPU1N-LEVEL2 0 ~ --- .. - vas -' .aaTM ~d~~ 9 ~,~-~ :~. !:~ OPUS® Opus Mtfi~da d Enpineen, Inc ~, ila ~ :~Un,.~ WATER'S E p ox a~nsioe m-n-os n<szio m-n-o5 s. nnucR wi¢ . o,e.o~~~ n _o~'~ "o ~;~m; a,. ,.o~, ore «n~ ,~~o~. ~~ OP OpuBgM COnYIM0.tLC I - -_e~ien uz~l~s) - _ _ J WATER'S EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CLfARWAiEA, R E FLOOR PLAN LEVEL 2 8 ~, ~A_2.02~ :~ OPUS® w ~' WA'f E R'S ~q~ow~ c QQ DRC REVU'ION DI II-OS TJd52)0 ~ m-~ i -os 5. MILLER L WILZ • ^e~tron Sao u owe. ..~n~`o~..~~. :~ OPI~ Opus 9wtli CdMOda0. LLC X19 ^ L. 1'~ P V ~ ~g I"'~ ~? N ~~ ~ FLOOR FLAN-LEVELS u o,~ `~./ ~. ,, _, WATER'S EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CIEARWATER, fL I FLOOR PLAN LEVEL 3 ~E~ ~ A2.03 ~~ ~~ ~ ,~ ~ C i"" ~ i-+ !/ ~ V~ ~ ~a ~ ~7' ~ FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL4 a .t J J .~: ;~ _-_ ~~ OPUS® Opus AEddecb 8 ErginceN, Inc, tw'.i;~; wnTER°s E p~ oac nEUlsioN o~-n-os navo~ of-n-os 5. MILLER L WILZ • Ckn,ml~ n ~~ QP opussamcaeuvauc ,. I WATERS EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CIEARWATEA. FL ~ _ FLOOR PLAN s LEVEL 4 ~~A2.04 C ~~ >- ~z .~ OPUS® ~ ~ ~~~, ~~~ >sn~ ', WATER'S E Di DRC REVISION 07-11-OS i1a5270 x 01-11-OS S- MILLER L WIIZ n~ry ~ rM..e ~~ OP ORa 8qh Ca1nlGa4 LLC. `v cb~ WATER'S EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CLEPRWA*EA, fL TOWERPLAN ~ LEVEL B1 ~~A2. B 1 g i~ ~° ~ '~~ ~ ~ ~@ ~ I..~- F-+ {;~ ,~ tv C~J ~~.~.. ~ - " i E wa ~a ~ ;. _ . , _o~ _ ; :' :~ OPUS® 1 Opw Arclrtecia 8 Erpireas, Ina ,i'«• ' Ikd e,~..a~~ WATER'S E Q, DRC REVISION 07-I I-OS T7A5270p 07-II-CS S.NILI ER L N1 LZ ~. h nm ~ I,ly ~. ~w+++n. 1 ~~ OP i Opw 8a1~ CairWan, LLC. mw.. rwm sew. uxen.~u. s,xm.im (rm) WATER'S EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CLEARWATEA, FL a TOWER PLAN LEVEL 1 ~~A2.05 ~i S a :-~ ~~ ~~ ~") ~'- ,~"~ r ~. 0 rast TOwex PLRN. LEVELS ~.. o ,~e ,- ^'' ^' ^', ~' n', ';~- ~~ ~ ~~ i ~ ~ < i i I ~? i ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ :: ~ '':~ l- ~; f - ~Cl C _~ii ii~~ f t~ ~ ~ ~. ~® I"'~~ ~.- p= ~,„~ ~ N _ /'r~ ~'aB,.6' @, ! ./ nss~ ,~. __ 1 TOWER PUW -LEVELS ~Y1 .„~.,-o :~ OPUS® Opus Prchilecla d EngaEers, Inc. M m... m.. WATER'S ~E Q DRC REVISION 07-11-OS 1]4520 ~ 0]-11-05 5. HILLER L~WILZ ®o .. oe~o. ~~ OP Cpu~9gMCdMnrln0. LLC. =.n. ,,.+n, mm eiam.w~ .um.,u~c,m~ WATERS EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CLEAPWAiER, iL a TOWER PLAN a LEVELS 5-21 ~~~A2.07 ;~ ~' ~ ~ ~ r ~ V' I-'` F--+ *k~ ;~~ IV C7 ~ ~.,~ -~ '~ Z °"a ~.~ ~ TOWER PLAN -LEVEL 2Z a a ~aTM e. OPUS® Opsa An3Necb 8 Eigireers, Inc.' mi~,,;'n..veoi WATER'S E o~ oar A~~~~oH o7-~ ~-os 1145270 x 07-11-OS MILLER L WIIZ a rca1 n~, aaumtny ~mvat ny~ne x ~~ OP oa» sow cw.cm, uc. WATER'S EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL GIEAAWAtEA, fL TOWER PLANS a PENTHOUSE ~ LEVEL 22 3 sxnuum,~L.OV a TERRACE BREAKFAST rl E i / O M0.Sf ER TERRCE ~ ~ b O (" ~ SunE 2 I I I NI 1CMfH ~\ IL ~' SUITE EMNC I 9nT ~l- 1 Lam! - WALK IN LMNC TERRACE r4i - SVITE 2 _ RLO. DINING MASTER 9tiH ~ ~ c'S'll ~ L. W.I.C. GAIN n ~ - ~ L W-E MASTER c SUITE O I o wSTER O W I.C. ~ ~O T.-.-... ON Uv t~1 ] COP9~p0 o. El£1' i o EIEV 1 / o ELEV ] __-- FOKR .1 ~~ BRTH ufCH. ^ ~ SV11F ] lE1WACC _ ~', _____._. IAA./) OO ~ _ Q~I I I RL~R I I ~ II II / I I ~~ II ~ o ' I,~~ I I~~, _.._......., LMNG PO'xpER fVKR FOTER ~' - - - R. SVRF. J TERRACE sVR. Ei I I •. - E 1. 94TH Q ~~ TERRACE BREAKFAST ~IIII~ I uccN. olwrvU W64TE coo. d cLC. ---- _ _ _ msET Q uvlNC - suITE z ~ I Kncxcn TERRACE pM~H6 SVIiE 2 RAM SUITE 3 I I ~ uSUIIE ASTER TERRACE BREAKFAST ...... ___. ~ ~ .. ...i ® ~'~- ~~ ~~ F~-+ ~ ~ °f. . ., ~ ~ ~7E ~,,,T`~-~ _ ~ Z ® ~ TOWER PUW-LEVELS 23-25 0 pia NoA<R ~°`,,~ l :~ OPUS® ~ Opus nlddmcm 8 Enpinseo, Inc T,~,.,,.n,,~ WATER'S E QQ DRC REVISION 07-11-OS nw~zT«~c,RCA ai-~ 1-os 5. MILLER L WILZ . nom o~eA ,. ®Ra ~ ,.,...a, .~~n<~«~,.~T Opus®ConYWon,LLC. ~w1 WATER'S EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL ctFaxwaTER, r~ € __ "TOWER PLANS a PENTHOUSE o LEVELS 23-25 A2 09 o ~ .~ f I -~ i i i i / !ewi v~:b _ ~z 1 F-- 1-+ 4 ^ ~'~w"I ~'~~'~4. ~~ ~ GARAGE PLAN-LEVEL B2 ... - Liar - r_o i i i i i i r- J ~I I I I I I i ___J ~~ OPUS® Opue ArdFilecb 8 Enpincen, Inc. c.=a :~...n.,:a WdTEE'S E p oRC REVisioe m-i i-os nas2io a~-n-as s-~~~~cR ~M vn! z • Fwa ova nw m o~~~ ,~i~a era m i ~~ w.p~ ~. !.~ UP ~ ~ Opue 9nMM CaibsM~. LLC. uil~) WATER'S EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CLGRWATER, Fl LOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN ~ LEVEL 82 ~A2 10 s 1.1 a . I c ° ~ ~I i~. JJ q~q~ ~ ~Y ~q ~° ~~ ~ '+~- ~h 1 q ~ . . 1ti~ ~:; ~ ~ +~: .~~ ~~,~ ~~ ~~ ~~ i i ii i 5 iii ii i it i I~ ~I 5 i I i i uncxaw.eo ~ i i i i i ~ i i i i i i I JI I I I ~ I I I i i J I ~~~ I ~ unsxuw~o I ~ ~ ~ II L _____i______s ---z ~~ GARAGE PLAN - LEVEL Bt .. - 3/3r - , -o :~ OPUS Opus Ndilecb 8 Engineers, Inc ::i°n""• u.a .~,...,.~,~ WATER'S E Q DRC REVISION 07-I1-OS nw~nz~pw a~~i~sp 5. HILLER L WILZ . ~kd o„~ m ~o~ a~ ; °7 '~ oP OpnepM Cont~tlan, LLC. WATER'S EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CLEARWA~EA, FL GARAGE PLAN LEVEL B1 W~~~A2.11 :, ,, g ~ ~'~ r F "1 ~`~ ~~ ' ~ . ... .. .,. _..~ h $ 5 ~ _ ~~ ~~ P~"y9 ~~ y ~`: ._ ..Y I-+ ~~ B t :. ,a a-i t~ ~~~,~ IV O CSI ~ ~- ~.~6 J ~~ .~.,:,~ ~ LOWRISE AND GMAGE PLAN - LEVEL Z F.r.e. r-e- iar - , -o ~. OPUS® Opua Ardilatla 6 Engineer, inc ~.Sn~ ' ICI . y~~„~ WATER'S E Q DRC REV510N D7-II-OS ne5z7~~. oi-il~o~s 5. MILLER L W1LZ •Eedronlc Poceu°tl co ro~k~t ~~ ~P opw saml coRaaaas, I.LC. µ;,@~ WATER'S EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CLEARWAiER, FL LOWRISE AND s GARAGE PLAN o LEVEL 2 A2.13 -- ~_ ~ ~ r... '~ = d + r . h--- : 3 ~ '~ t.J~l ~~$ '~' ~ ~ ~i ? ~~ g z ~, ,~-~ ~ LOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN -LEVEL 3 ~~ OPUS® Opus AnAileLia d Engincen, Inc WATER'S E Q DRC REYSION 07-11-05 i1a5270' of-n-os s. uxLee ~. vn¢ .ec~o-~m Mar° "°iC;: m o .~ ,~ o.. ~ „ _a~,<~ ~~ UP Opus9aM CUAMOrs,LLG m c~i s... WATERS EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL GLEARWAiEN. FL LOWRISE AND g GARAGE PLAN ~ LEVEL 3 L +A2.14 al _. € ~ ' .., ± ` ,, i ,"` 0 ' -,: _ ::. n.:; .... ~~~' ~ ~ ... .. _~ ___ i ./ E ~~ g~.~y ~;~ yq~~~ ~i'+a ~_d (~ i""~ ~J N O O GJ1 a Y' _, ~"~~~~ 4 a ~"" ~ .,d A~-FFr..,~@g @~ d S ~~ ,. =~•... ~ s= - LONRi~8ElGARAGE PLAN-LEVEL! ~~ QP115® ~' Opus AIdM9cla A Elgnalers, Inc. WATER'S E QQ DRC REVISION 07-I I-05 i145110~ oMnirv¢Se S. MILLER L WItZ ~nro mo un. '~°~' °ne dine. ~eia~ ~~ OPU Opw 9x01 CMn1lm, LLC. a pN , WATER'S EDGE REDEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL CLEARWAiER. FL LOWRISE AND GARAGE PLAN LEVEL 4 02.15 ~9Q~ 5,~3,L~M .~ a ,~ ~, ~r ,. -~ _r ', d WATER'S EDGE D O W N T O W N C L E A R W A T E R • ":7 X7::7 ~7 C7 :7 ~7 C7 .7::7 .7::7 :7 C7 :7 C7 C7 ' " ' " ' ~ :7 ~ C7 C7 C7 , ;;'';. ~~ L :an '~ b~ ^ ~ ,A ~'°~- 4'~ _ l , Ci~ ~ 4 ~ 1 _ ~ (LA~g .... ~ i/~ i • ..~ ~.f ~7 :7 :7 07 C7 ~7 :7 :7 :7 C7 ~7 :7 C7 :7 C7 C7 :7 :7 :7 C7 C7 C7 :7 C7 C7 C7 C7 :7 :7 :7 :7 C7 C7 -. ~;, _~. ~, r~ .A...,.. ,. ""~:. ~. ~~ ~~~ tl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ ~i ~~ ~~ _ .,~ e~~ E Y3e +5 "~ . '7G iT r ~ ,. ;,:. ~~ ~~ CZ ~ -_ `V rs~ ~ 'a O te ~.. ~ ~.QT1 ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~£ f? ll~ ~~' ~~~'~~~ :~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ Wiz. o L-~ c•'~.. ~ ~~ ~--~ ~ c.a ~~°- ~ ~ ~~ ~ ( '~ ~S $..x.;.. ~;> * .:~. ..- , CITY OF CLEARWATER NOTICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD PUBLIC HEARINGS The Community Development Board of the City of Clearwater, Florida, will hold public hearings on Tuesday, August 16, 2005, beginning at 1:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, in City Hall, 3rd floor, 112 South Osceola Ave, Clearwater, Florida, to consider the following requests: NOTE• All persons wishinE to address an item need to be present at the BEGINNING of the meeting Those cases that are not contested by the applicant, staff, neighboring property owners etc will be placed on a consent agenda and approved by a single vote at the beginning of the meetinE. 1. (Cont from 07-19-OS) Home Energy, LLC. is requesting a Flexible Development approval to permit 20 attached dwellings with a reduction to the minimum lot width from 150 ft to 144.63 ft, reductions to the front (west) setback from 25 ft to 12 ft (to pavement) and from 25 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area), reductions to the side (north) setback from 10 ft to 5 feet (to patios) and from 10 ft to 8 feet (to pavement), reductions to the side (south) setback from 10 ft to 5 ft (to patios) and from 10 ft to 7.6 ft (to pavement), a reduction to the rear (east) setback from 15 ft to zero ft (to pool deck), an increase to building ht from 30 ft to 43.17 ft (to roof deck) with perimeter parapets of 5.5 ft (from roof deck) and an additional 13.67 ft for an open rooftop pavilion (from roof deck), as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-404.F, with reductions to the landscape buffer along Island Way from 15 ft to 12 ft (to pavement) and from 15 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area), reductions to the landscape buffer along the north side from 10 ft to 5 ft (to patios) and from 10 ft to 8 feet (to pavement) and reductions to the landscape . buffer along the south side from 10 ft to 5 ft (to patios) and from 10 ft to 7.6 ft (to pavement), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Sec 3-1202.G. (Proposed Use: Attached dwellings [4 townhomes and 16 condominiums]) at 415 Island Way, Island Estates of Clearwater, Unit 2, Lot 17 and part of Lot 16. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005-04035 2. (Cont from 07-19-OS) Beach & Gulf Sands, Inc., & North Clearwater Beach Development (Anthony Menna) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to permit 13 attached dwellings in the Tourist District and an increase in ht from 35 ft to 64 ft (as measured from base flood elevation to the roof deck), an increase in the ht of a parapet wall from 30 inches to 42 inches, permit 2 parking spaces within the required sight visibility triangles along Bay Esplanade, a reduction in the front (north) setback from 15 ft to 5 ft (to pavement) and 3 ft (to trash staging area), reduction in the side (east) setback from 10 ft to zero ft (to pool deck), 10 ft (to pool) and 7 ft (to building), reduction in the side (west) setback from 10 ft to 3 feet (to trash staging area) and a reduction the rear (south) setback from 20 ft to zero ft to pool deck, 8 ft (to pool) and 10 ft (to building), as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Sec 2-803.C., Transfer of Development Rights (TDR2005-03019) of 2 dwelling units from 116 Brightwater Dr (donor site) to 657 Bay Esplanade (receiver site) under the provisions of Sec's 4- 1402 and 4-1403 and a request for Termination of Status of Nonconformity under the provisions of Sec 6-109. (Proposed Use: Attached dwellings [13 condominium units]) at 657 & 663 Bay Esplanade, Mandalay Unit No 5 Replat Blk 77, Lots 4 & 5. Assigned Planner: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III. FLD2005-03032/TDR2005-03019 3. Religious Community Services, Inc. (The Haven of RCS) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to permit a white PVC fence 6 ft in ht within the front (east) setback along . North Saturn Ave without substantial grill work and masonry columns and without a 3 foot wide • landscape strip on the street side of the fence as otherwise required by Sec's 3-804.A.1 and 3 on a property within the Medium Density Residential (MDR) district, as part of a Residential Inlill Project under the provisions of Sec 2-30-~1.G. (Proposed Use: Community Residential Icomes) at 1520 N Saturn Ave, Sec OZ-29-15, M&B 44.01. Assigned Planner: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III. FLD2005-05038 4. Ardent International Ltd Liability Co, Panayiotis Vasiloudes, and Helen Vasiloudes (M3I3 Development, LLC/Robert Szasz) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to permit 14 attached dwellings in the Tourist District, an increase in ht from 35 ft to 59 ft (as measured from base flood elevation to the roof deck), an increase in the ht of a parapet wall from 30 inches to 42 inches and a reduction the rear (south) setback from 20 ft to 7 ft to pool deck and 11 ft (to pool), as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Sec 2-803.C. (Proposed Use: Attached Dwellings) at 651 & 655 Bay Esplanade and 50 Royal Way, Mandalay Unit No. 5 Replat Blk 77, Lots 1-3. Assigned Planner: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III. FLD2005-05043 5. TSE TSE, LLC (M3B Development, LLC/Robert Szasz) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to permit 20 attached dwellings in the "tourist District, an increase in ht from 35 ft to 58 ft (as measured from base flood elevation to the roof deck), an increase in the ht of a parapet wall from 30 inches to 42 inches and a reduction the rear (north) setback from 20 ft to 3.33 ft to pool deck and 6 ft (to pool), as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Sec 2-803.C. (Proposed Use: Attached Dwellings) at 629, 635 & 637 Bay Esplanade, Mandalay Unit No. 5 Replat Blk 78, Lots 8-I 1 & Rip Rts. Assigned Planner: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III. FLD2005-05044 6. First Baptist Church of Clearwater (Opus South Corporation, Opus South Contractor's LLGJohn Franklin Wade) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to allow amixed-use development of 157 attached dwelling units (which includes an increase in density of 31 dwelling units from the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan Public Amenities Incentive Pool) and 10,022 sq ft of non-residential use, with an increase to the permitted ht from 30 ft to 271 ft (to roof deck) and an additional 22 ft for architectural embellishments and mechanical equipment (from roof deck), to reduce the non-residential parking requirement from 41 parking spaces to zero (0) parking spaces, and to allow a building within the required sight visibility triangle at the intersection of Cleveland St and North Osceola Ave, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-903.0., and to eliminate the required foundation landscaping along N Osceola Ave, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Sec 3-1202.G. (Proposed Use: Mixed-use [ 169 attached dwellings and 10,022 sq ft non- residential floor areaj) at 331 Cleveland St, John R Davey's Resub Blk A, Part of Lots 1-3 & unplatted parcel. Assigned Planner: Robert G. Tefft, Planner III. FLD2005-05048 7. Clearwater Land Ltd (Druid Courtyard Clearwater, LLC/Nicholas F Ferraioli) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to permit 47 attached dwellings with reductions to the front (north) setback from 25 ft to 10 ft (to entry feature columns) and from 25 ft to 18.5 ft (to pavement), reductions to the front (west) setback from 25 ft to 4 ft (to entry feature columns) and from 25 ft to 15 ft (to pavement and pool deck), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 ft to 2 ft (to entry feature column), a reduction to the side (south) setback From 10 ft to 19 It (to entry Feature column) and an increase to building ht from 30 ft to 55 ft (to roof deck) with an additional 6 ft for perimeter parapets, under the provisions of Sec 2-504.A. (Proposed Use: Attached dwellings [47 condominiums]) at 1105 Druid Rd, Sec 15-29-15, M&I3 34.03. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP. FLD2005-05037 • • • 8. Religious Community Services, Inc. is requesting a Flexible Development approval to permit the expansion and renovation of floor area of an existing social/public service agency with a reduction to lot width from 100 ft to 58 ft (along Myrtle Ave), a reduction to the front (south along Druid Rd) setback from 25 ft to 5 ft (to existing pavement), a reduction to the front (east along Myrtle Ave) setback from 25 ft to 15 ft (to existing pavement), a reduction to the side (east) setback from 10 ft to zero ft (to existing pavement) and a reduction to the side (west) setback from 10 ft to zero ft (to existing pavement), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-704.C, with a reduction to the landscape buffer along Druid Rd (south) from 10 ft to 5 ft (to existing pavement), a reduction to the landscape buffer along the east from 5 ft to zero ft (to existing pavement), a reduction to the landscape buffer along the west from 5 ft to zero ft (to existing pavement), a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north from 10 ft to 5 ft (to existing pavement) and a reduction to interior landscape area from 10 percent to 7.4 percent, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Sec 3-1202.G. (Proposed Use: Expansion and renovation of the RCS food bank) at 700 Druid Rd, Magnolia Park, Blk 26, Lots 9 & 10 & parts of Lots 1-5 & 8. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005-05046 9. Ronald and Karen Kozan (Newkirk Ventures, Inc.) are requesting (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (26 existing and proposed attached dwelling units; 20 dwelling units maximum under land use category), under the provisions of Sec 6-109; (2) Flexible Development approval to permit 26 attached dwelling units with a reduction to the minimum lot width from 150 ft to 144.65 ft, reductions to the front (west) setback from 25 ft to 23 ft (to building) from 25 ft to 20 ft (to balcony), from 25 ft to 10 ft (to pavement) and from 25 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area), reductions to the side (north) setback from 10 ft to 6.1 ft (to balconies) and from 10 ft to 5.4 ft (to sidewalk), reductions to the side (south) setback from 10 ft to 6.1 ft (to balconies) and from 10 ft to 5 ft (to sidewalk} and an increase to building height from 30 ft to 46 ft (to roof deck) with perimeter parapets of 6 ft (from roof deck), as a Residential Infill Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-404.F, and reductions to the landscape buffer along Island Way from 15 ft to 10 ft (to pavement) and from 15 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area), a reduction to the landscape buffer along the north side from 10 ft to 5.4 ft (to sidewalk) and a reduction to the landscape buffer along the south side from 10 ft to 5 ft (to sidewalk), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Sec 3-1202.G. (Proposed Use: Attached dwellings [26 condominiums]) at 405 Island Way, Island Estates of Clearwater, Unit 2, Lot 15 and part of Lot 16. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005-05045 10. Camille Courtney & Elina Honicky (Henry C. Kyle, III & Robert Elder) are requesting a Flexible Development approval to allow an addition to an existing single-family residence with a reduction to the front setback from 25 ft to 20.3 ft (to building), under the provisions of Sec 2- 304.G. (Proposed Use: Detached Dwelling) at 1415 San Juan Court, Blvd Heights, Blk K, Lot 17 and part of Lot 18. Assigned Planner: John Schodtler, Planner I. FLD2005-05052 11. DiVello Land Trust, Fulvio DiVello Trustee (Maddalina DiVello & Housh Ghovaee, Northside Engineering Services, Inc.) are requesting (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (111 overnight accommodation units existing to be converted to 83 dwelling units), under the provisions of Sec 6-109; (2) Flexible Development approval to permit 83 attached dwellings with reductions to the front (south along S. Gulfview Blvd.) setback from 15 ft to 10 ft (to pavement) and from 15 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area), reductions to the front (west along Hamden Dr) from 15 ft to 12.5 ft (to building and proposed pavement), from 15 ft to 5 ft (to existing pavement) and from 15 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area), reductions to the side (north) from 10 ft to 3 ft (to existing pavement) and from 10 ft to zero ft (to existing pool deck), an increase to building height from 35 ft to 100 ft (to roof deck) with an additional 7 ft for perimeter • • parapets (from roof deck) and an additional 22.5 It for elevator and stair towers (from roof deck) and a deviation to allow direct access to an arterial street, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-803.C. (Proposed Use: Attached dwellings [83 condominiums]) at 445 Hamden Dr and 504 S Gulfview Blvd, Columbia Sub No. 5, Lots 4-11, and RIP its and land adj to Lot 11. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005-05051 12. TW/Beach Residences -Clearwater, LLC (E. D. Armstrong III, Esq., Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP) are requesting (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density (217 overnight accommodation units existing to be converted to 112 dwelling units; where 56 dwelling units are permitted today), under the provisions of Sec 6-109; (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a mixed use of 112 attached dwelling units, 78 overnight accommodation rooms/units and 2,910 sq ft of retail sales with reductions to the front (east) setback from 15 ft to 6 ft (to patios/seating areas) and from 15 ft to zero ft (to trash staging area), reductions to the side (north) setback from 10 ft to 5 ft from the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) (to building) and from 10 ft to 4 ft (to pavement), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 ft to 2 ft (to trash staging area), a reduction to the rear (west) setback from 20 ft to 8 ft from the CCCL (to building), increases to building height from 35 ft 100 ft for the overnight accommodation building tower and from 35 ft to 150 ft for the residential tower (to roof deck) with an additional 6 ft for perimeter parapets (from roof deck) and an additional 24 ft for architectural embellishments (from roof deck), a reduction to driveway spacing from 125 ft to 90 ft and a deviation to allow direct access to a arterial street, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Sec 2-803.C; and (3) Transfer of Development Rights (TDR2005-05022) of 4 dwelling units from 557 and 579 Cyprus Ave, 2 dwelling units from 625-627 Bay Esplanade, 2 dwelling units from 665 Bay Esplanade and 3 dwelling units • from 667 Bay Esplanade, under the provisions of Sec 4-1402. (Proposed Use: Mixed use of 112 attached dwellings [condominiums], 78 overnight accommodation rooms/units and 2,910 sq ft of retail sales) at 430 South Gulfview Blvd, Lloyd-White-Skinner Sub, Lots 33-35, part of Lot 36 and subm land on W. Assigned Planner: Wayne M. Wells, AICP, Planner III. FLD2005- 05047/TDR2005-05022 Interested parties may appear and be heard at the hearings or file written notice of approval or objection with the Planning Interested parties may appear and be heard at the hearing or file written notice of approval or objection with the Planning Director or City Clerk prior to the hearing. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by the Board or Council, with respect to any matter considered at such hearings, will need to request a record of the proceedings and, for such purpose, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based per Florida Statute 286.0105. Community Development Code Sec 4-206 states that party status shall be granted by the Board in quasi judicial cases if the person requesting such status demonstrates that s/he is substantially affected. Party status entitles parties to personally testify, present evidence, argument and witnesses, cross-examine witnesses, appeal the decision and speak on reconsideration requests, and needs to be requested and obtained during the case discussion before the CDB. An oath will be administered swearing in all persons giving testimony in quasi judicial public hearing cases. If you wish to speak at the meeting, please wait to be recognized, then state and spell your name and provide your address. Persons without party status speaking before the CDB shall be limited to three minutes unless an individual is representing a group in which case the Chairperson may authorize a reasonable amount of time up to 10 minutes. • Five days prior to the meeting, staff reports and recommendations on the above requests will be available for review by interested parties between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., weekdays, at the City of Clearwater, Planning Department, 100 S. Myrtle Ave., Clearwater, FL 33756. Please contact the case presenter, at 562-4567 to discuss any questions or concerns about the project and/or to better understand the proposal and review the site plan. Michael Delk Planning Director Cynthia E. Goudeau, CMC City Clerk City of Clearwater P.O. Box 4748, Clearwater, FL 33758-4748 NOTE: Applicant or representative must be present at the hearing. A COPY OF THIS AD IN LARGE PRINT IS AVAILABLE IN OFFICIAL RECORDS AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES. ANY PERSON WITH A DISABILITY REQUIRING REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING SHOULD CALL (727) 562-4093 WITH THEIR REQUEST. Ad: 07/31 /OS • • FLD2005-05048 = 25 400 CLEVELAND 406 S BRAND BLVD GLENDALE CA 91204 - 1704 CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SVC 503 CLEVELAND ST CLEARWATER FL 33755 - 4007 FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST SCIENTI 210 TURNER ST CLEARWATER FL 33756 - 5213 JANNELLI, GILBERT G 909 S FORT HARRISON AVE CLEARWATER FL 33756 - 3903 MATRIX LODGING 8 S FORT HARRISON AVE CLEARWATER FL 33756 - 5105 PEACE MEMORIAL PRESBYTERIAN CH 110 S FORT HARRISON AVE CLEARWATER FL 33756 - 5107 REAL ESTATE EXCHANGE SERV INC 995 MONTE CRISTO BLVD TIERRA VERDE FL 33715 - WHTBUFF INC 6901 22ND AVE N ST PETERSBURG FL 33710 - 3943 CAFE CONCERTO INC 800 S GULFVIEW BLVD # 903 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 3002 CLEARWATER NEIGHBORHOODS COALITION DOUG WILLIAMS, PRESIDENT 2544 FRISCO DRIVE CLEARWATER, FL 33761 FL SPORT DANCE FEDERATION OF A 483 MANDALAY AVE STE 206 CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 2035 LOKEY, PAT 409 CLEVELAND ST CLEARWATER FL 33755 - 4004 ONE STOPPE SHOPPE INC 411 CLEVELAND ST CLEARWATER FL 33755 - 4004 PIERCE 100 CONDO ASSOCIATION TERRY SUE 100 PIERCE STREET CLEARWATER, FL 33756 TSAFATINOS, ANNA 667 SNUG IS CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1830 CHETKIN, LEONARD CHETKIN, MARY E 701 WASHINGTON ST KEY WEST FL 33040 - 4732 FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF CLEARW 331 CLEVELAND ST CLEARWATER FL 33755 - 4002 GOUDREAULT, JOSEE 24-28 N FT HARRISON CLEARWATER FL 33755 - MAINSTREET CLEARWATER DEV 206 S BRAND BLVD GLENDALE CA 91204 - 1310 OSCEOLA CLEVELAND LLC 413 CLEVELAND ST CLEARWATER FL 33755 - PINELLAS COUNTY 315 COURT ST CLEARWATER FL 33756 - 5165 TSAFATINOS, TERRY 667 SNUG IS CLEARWATER FL 33767 - 1830 0 %~~\~. ~' ~ Gidf Co:-st Considtin~, Inc. ~~ ., ~:~ JUL 11 2005 ~~~2°~~ ~µr~~~~l~ C TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ' FOR CLEARWATER BLUFFS CLEARWATER, FLORIDA PREPARED FOR: OPUS SOUTH CONTRACTORS,LLC PREPARED BY: ' GULF COAST CONSULTING, INC. MAY 2005 PROJECT # OS-012 ~~ ~~. `j ,~: ~.- ~~,.f Robert Pergoliz t, { i AICP #9023 ~ .. ~ ... INTRODUCTION OPUS South Contractors, LLC is proposing to develop a mixed use project on the west side of Osceola Avenue south of Cleveland Street which is the subject of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment in the CBD district. This application requires an assessment of the traffic impacts of development. Prior to completing this analysis a methodology was established with the City of Clearwater staff. EXISTING BASE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The property has frontage on Osceola Avenue south of Cleveland Street and north of Court Street. (See Figure 1) Osceola Avenue is a four lane undivided collector roadway north of Cleveland Street and a three lane roadway south of Cleveland Street. Court Street and Chestnut Street are one-way pair in downtown and Cleveland Street is a two- lane roadway with a center turn lane. Existing base conditions were established by obtaining traffic counts from the City of Clearwater as published in the Memorial Causeway Bridge Feasibility Study Report. These volumes were adjusted to consider the affects of the 1Vlyrtle Avenue improvements and the designation of Myrtle Avenue as Alternate US 19 and the re-striping of Fort Harrison Avenue to three lanes. This study also assumes the modification of Osceola Avenue to three lanes as depicted in the City of Clearwater Master Streetsca ep Plan. It also assumes Osceola Avenue north of Cleveland Street will be configured to three lanes and the traffic impacts of Station Square are included. Base traffic volumes are shown in Figure 2. The adjacent intersections were analyzed using the HCS software. The HCS printouts are included in Appendix A and the base conditions are shown in Table 1. Roadway base conditions are shown in Table 2. TABLE 1 EXISTING INTERSECTION OPERATIONS WITH NEW BRIDGE TRAFFIC PATTERN --~ . -- -.- ~- r -:---- 1 Inlerscction LQS Ft. Harrison /Chestnut Street C ri r~.ra~~:;~s~~~zr~~ °- SeC /~'t~e~l 23.7 Ft. Harrison /Court Street D 49.8 Ft. Harrison /Pierce Street A 7.7 Ft. Harrison /Cleveland Street B 13.8 Ft. Harrison /Drew Street B 18.2 Osceola /Cleveland B 17.8 ~ Osceola /Pierce (4-way sto) C 16.6 Upon completion of the Memorial Causeway Bridge, Myrtle Avenue, and the resulting change in traffic patterns, all intersections would operate at LOS D or better under base PM peak hour traffic conditions. 1 PROJECT LOCATION - CLEARWATER BLUFFS PRO.~cTrro: 05-01~ Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. DATE: FIGS: Land Development Consulting 42005 DRAWN BY: G.J.S. -~- 377 364 --~ o J N ~1 m I ~ o ~ ~ 100 ~ N ~ -~- 20 172 ~- 292 1 ,D ~ --~ t r 39G -•- 30 -~ o ~n N !~ 50 ~ ` ` N ~1 O 1 ~ ; ~ O 30 CS•1 ~ o -~- 60 ~n n n ~- 1 q5 _~ _J ~ ~_ ~ 55 ' 2G ---+ ~ i } r 95 -' 5 ---- ~n o 0 N N 30 ~ "~ N ' N d I ~ O O ° ~ 2053 161 2402 ~--- 1892 ONE-WAY WB 0 ~. w ` M Q s~ ONE-WAY EB 1849 --- Y ~ TRAFFIC VOLUMES REFLECT AFFECTS pF MEMORIAL CAUSEWAY BRIDGE, AND RECONSTRUCTION pF MYRTLE AVENUE AS ALT. US 19, AND MODIFICATIONS T^ FORT HARRISON. E~ -" BASE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS (With Bridge 2005 8 %~., Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. m~ ,/~1 Land Development Consulting 3~ _ ~,. ,~ } N 94 `~ ~ m ~- 187 N i ~ 62 ~- 343 DREW ST 192 ~ ~ ~ I 32a ---- 149 -~- ~ ~ o 23~ ~ - z ° o i x ~ o ro ° F; „2 ~ - a2 104 -~--258 CLEVELAND ST 140 ~ ~ r 200-~ o e M O ~- O 50 ~ v N `n .,' o n m 1 1 N ~ N ~ 30 .n ~ o +- 30 50 PIERCE ST ,5~ Mfr 30 -~'- °o ~n N Oi 50~ N N O ` ` 1 I M O~ 7S v ~ -~-- 1347 - 276 COURT ST ~r ~~ N O ~ I~ L ~ n CHESTN ~ UT ST 295 ~ } r 1223 --- d < 331 ~ c° ` O N os-o~z DALE: FIGORE: 4/2005 DRAWN BY: 2 G.J.S. TABLE 2 EXISTING ROADWAY SEGMENT OPERATIONS WITH NEW BRIDGE TRAFFIC PATTERN 1 1 1 1 1 Roacl~tiay Se~~nent Lane!T~pe E P~a~ ~, Ft. Harrison (Chestnut -Court) 3 lane 2,284 , C`a~at .yrg ARTPLAN «. ~ ;.r ~ ~i ~ D Ft. Harrison (Court -Pierce) 3 lane 2,223 ARTPLAN D * Ft. Harrison (Pierce -Cleveland) 3 lane 1,993 ARTPLAN D Ft. Harrison (Cleveland -Drew) 3 lane 1,466 ARTPLAN D * Ft. Harrison (N. of Drew) 3 lane 1,566 1,950 C Chestnut St. (W. of Ft. Harrison) 4 lane one-way 1,849 4,000 C Court Street (Osceola - Ft. Harrison) 3 lane one-way 2,053 3,080 C Cleveland Street (Osceola - Ft. Harrison) 3 lane 682 1,460 C Drew Street (Osceola - Ft. Harrison) 3 lane 741 1,460 C Osceola Avenue Court -Pierce) 3 lane 797 1,460 C Osceola Avenue (Pierce -Cleveland) 3 lane 812 1,460 C Osceola Avenue (Cleveland -Drew) 3 lane 705 1,460 C III. ' Pl~a~c 1 * Ft. Harrison LOS based on ARTPLAN All roadways are expected to operate at LOS D or better. Overall, Fort Harrison Avenue between Chestnut Street and Drew Street would operate at LOS D, according to ARTPLAN analysis. It should be noted that the short segment between Chestnut Street and Court Street will be congested due to intersection congestion at Court Street. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Using Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 7~' Edition rates, the amount of new trips was calculated and estimates are shown below in Table 3: TABLE 3 TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES -- - _ _ _ __ _- ~lmount 1 I E I l)aily~ :1 W Peak (enter ~ P1-I,I'ca>< ~I Land C-.ve ~~ LL~C ~: 7: rips ~ ~~/ exit) ~ (etiter..'1 eaitl`` Phase I Hi h-Rise Condo 138 DU 232 577 47 9 / 38) 52 (32 / 20) Condo /Townhouse 19 DU 230 111 8 (1 / 7) 10 (7 / 3) S ecialt Retail 10,250 s.f. 814 454 28 16 / 12) 28 12 / 16) Sub-?'otal 1,142 83 (26 / 57 90 (51 / 39) Phase II High-Rise Condo 138 DU 232 577 47 (9 / 38) 52 (32 / 20) Condo /Townhouse 19 DU 230 111 8 (1 / 7) 10 (7 / 3) S ecialty Retail 10,250 s.f. 814 454 28 12 / 16 28 (12 / 16) Sub-Total 1,142 83 (26 / 57) 90 (51 / 39) GRAND TOTAL j 2,284 166 (52 / 114) 180 (102 / 78) 2 0 N 41 N _ 40~ _ ~ 20~ '~ DREW ST - 20 N r ~ 16 ~ 20 _ 20% - 20 CLEVELAND ST - PM PEAK 180 TRIPS ~ r 15 20% - ~ C 102 IN / 78 ^UT ) o ~ N ~ ~~ r ~ ' 47 - 31 ~ r> 00 N 0 ~ ~ PIERCE ST ~ 23 r W a o z ~ os w ~ d o ~ N - ~ ~ 41 ~ ~-- 10 8 COURT ST ~ d o ~ '~ ~~ "~ CHESTNUT ST 3 v 10~ ~ f __; z O 1 p ~-- N O N U '.". ~ LL _ C PM PEAK HOUR rRO.>ECTNO: 3~ ~~ O ~ PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION - PHASE I & II os-oi 2 ~' DATE o Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. : FIGURE_ m ~ Land Development Consulting 4 2005 ~ Y "ma DRAWN BY: ~a g= :.. L G.J.S. 2 m Y O~ The project would generate 2,284 daily trips and 180 PM peak hour trips. The vehicular access will be taken from Osceola Avenue via public promenade serving the bluff. The expected distribution is shown in Figure 3, and adjacent street impact is shown in Table ' 3. TABLE 4 PROJECT IMPACT CALCULATIONS ~ ~ l~~taci Setinrcnt Lanes Osceola Avenue (Court -Pierce) 3 lanes ~ ['rojecC ~ Tries ~49 C + ;l~ri>~ect ~ C~apacit~ ~Nent 1,460 3.36% Osceola Avenue (Pierce -Project) 3 lanes 72 1,460 4.93% Osceola Avenue (Project -Cleveland) 3 lanes 108 1,460 7.40% Osceola Avenue (Cleveland -Drew) 3 lanes 73 1,460 5.00% The roadway segments primarily impacted by the project are shown above. Traffic. impact will also occur on portions of Fort Harrison Avenue, Chestnut Street, Court Street, Cleveland Street, and Drew Street, which are the main gateways to the downtown bluff area. Project traffic was added to background traffic to show future traffic conditions and the intersections were reanalyzed using HCS. The HCS printouts are included in Appendix B and the expected future intersection operations are shown below in Table 5. TABLE 5 FUTURE INTERSECTION OPERATIONS __ _ - -- F ~~v~rage Delay ~~ Intcrsectiorr LpS Ft. Harrison /Chestnut Street C 24.6 Ft. Harrison /Court Street D 54.7 Ft. Harrison /Pierce Street A 8.7 Ft. Harrison /Cleveland Street B 14.5 Ft. Harrison /Drew Street B 19.4 Osceola /Cleveland B 19.5 Osceola /Pierce (4-way sto) C 18.15 Osceola /Public Promenade A / C * 9.3 / 19.5 * LOS for NB left turn /eastbound approach. As shown, all intersections would operate at LOS D or better segment operations are shown in Table 6. Expected roadway `° } 94 ~-- 418 n ~ ~ ~n ~ ~' 207 ~62 396 -~- ~ 208 ~ i I 165-~ ~ m o T1 I 23 ~ ~ h_ O 1 1 M ~ Q c0 ` N " 100 ~ 712 ~n cNO m -~-- 20 o m ° E; ~-- 62 192 -t- 372 ~ ~ ~ ~ 104 10 ~ ~ ~ i 4p5 -~ , 4p ~ I 30 --~~ ° o °rn 215 -~ o e n o o SO ~ "' _ SO ~ ~ a O a M cD V U w ~ ~ n O PUBLIC ~ ~ O PROMENADE ~ ~ f ~ f 47 a ° ~ ~ ~ 3~ ~ n ~ 30 ~ ~ a' l~ 30 n n --J 1 L~ ~-- 60 ~ 55 ~ t 45 `~ `n rn ° f' 30 ~50 20~ ifr „e~ 15~ ~~r 5 --y 30 'n ~ oN `~ 30 _~ o ~ o o ~ cv ~ 73 ~ ~ o ~ i I ~ m n 1 1 ,~ N 75 ~ 2410 --J 1 ~ ?892 ~-- 2094 Q ~ ~ 1 ~- t 357 ~ 276 ~~~-- o ONE-WAY WB "' ~"' [z7 '- m ~ , a~ n o n ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 ~ ~ l 1 L~ ONE-WAY EB 305 ~ r 1859 -- t223 -- N ~ 331 ~ ° c:i x TRAFFIC VOLUMES REFLECT AFFECTS ^E MEMORIAL CAUSEWAY BRIDGE, AND RECONSTRUC TION OF MYRTL E AVENUE 4S ALT, US 19, AND MODIFICATIONS TO FOR7 HARRIS(JN. PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS (With PHASE I & II) ~w, Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. °^~ / Land Development Consulting 42005 }~ DRAWN BY: G.J.S. N -~-- 343 DREW ST 324 --- ~--278 CLEVELAND ST PIERCE ST COURT ST CHESTNUT ST 05-012 FIGURE: 4 TABLE 6 FUTURE ROADWAY SEGMENT OPERATIONS F~ ~~ Road~r~a~~ Segment E Lane Ty~ie `_ - ~~ Peatf~ ~' ~ ~~ _--__ -~ ~" PST; Peak? ~ ~~~~' ~.~rCap~ ~ ~,iw,~ ~jri ~ OS ', .y ~, ' ; J 4 a. , f ~ - Ft. Hamson (Chestnut -Court) 3 lane 2,338 ARTPLAN D * Ft. Harrison Court -Pierce) 3 lane 2,246 ARTPLAN D Ft. Hamson (Pierce -Cleveland) 3 lane 1,993 ARTPLAN D * Ft. Harrison (Cleveland -Drew) 3 lane 1,466 ARTPLAN D * Ft. Harrison (N. of Drew) 3 lane 1,603 1,950 C Chestnut St. (W. of Ft. Harrison) 4 lane one-way 1,859 4,000 C Court Street (Osceola - Ft. Harrison) 3 lane one-way 2,094 3,080 C Cleveland Street (Osceola - Ft. Harrison) 3 lane 717 1,460 C Drew Street (Osceola - Ft. Harrison) 3 lane 814 1,460 C Osceola Avenue (Court -Pierce) 3 lane 846 1,460- C Osceola Avenue (Pierce -Cleveland) 3 lane 884 1,460 D Osceola Avenue (Cleveland -Drew) 3 lane 778 1,460 C * Ft. Harrison LOS based on ARTPLAN As shown in Table 6, all roadways are expected to operate at LOS D or better with the project impact. Overall, Fort Hamson Avenue would continue to operate at LOS D between Chestnut Street and Drew Street. The short segment between Chestnut Street and Court Street would continue to be congested due to congestion at the Court Street intersection. IV. CONCLUSION The completion of the Memorial Causeway Bridge, combined with improvements to Myrtle Avenue, and modification of downtown roads in accordance with the Master Streetscape Plan will shift traffic patterns dramatically. Base conditions analysis demonstrates acceptable intersection and roadway segment operations. Traffic impacts would be minimal on major downtown roadways with the exception of Osceola Avenue adjacent to the site. Future intersection and roadway operations would be at LOS D or better. 4 ~ ~ a.a~~ I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 4/29/05 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection Area Type Jurisdiction Analysis Year Project ID FT. HARRISON / CHESTNUT CBD or Similar CLEARWATER BASE CONDITIONS Volume and Timin Input EB WB NB S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 ~ 1 1 0 Lane group L TR TR L T Volume, V (vph) 295 1223 331 1084 214 97 808 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I~ 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT ~ 3 5 5 5 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR volumes 0 75 0 0 50 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, GP 3.2 3.2 3 2 Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 33.0 G= G= G= G= 47.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Con"trot Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 311 1556 1314 102 851 Lane group capacity, c 584 1631 1634 155 875 v/c ratio, X 0.53 0.95 0.80 0.66 0.97 Total green ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.52 0.52 0.52 Uniform delay, d~ 22.4 27.8 17.7 15.7 20.9 f-.lo•//r`•\Tl.,...,.„0„+o0%7n~.,.io~7nco*+;,,,.~\,..,o..,.,,1;.~.,; (1(~(~\T .,~..,lo~7nco+ti.,..~,\To,,,,.\a7L1'2 n/'~~/7nnG Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 0.271 0.271 0.271 Delay calibration, k 0.14 0.46 0.35 0.23 0.48 Incremental delay, d2 0.9 13.0 1.5 5.0 15.5 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 23.4 40.8 6.3 9.3 21.1 Lane group LOS C p A A C Approach delay 37. g 6.3 19.9 Approach LOS p A B intersection delay 23.7 X = 0.96 c Intersection LOS ~ C HCS2000~"" Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e r.~,..iin.~r~,..........,.~....ni~n....ani~no,..,.:_~,.t._..,...,r,.~:~...: rrr~r ,.,.,.~ni~no..~:...~,.~-r,..._,._t,.~i.i~ ~»ni~nnc ' Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000TM DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 4/29/2005 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection FT. HARK/SON /COURT Area Type CBD or Similar Jurisdiction CLEARWATER Analysis Year BASE CONDITIONS Project ID Volume and Timin Input EB WB NB S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 Lane group L TR L T TR Volume, V (vph) 276 1347 75 283 1096 629 423 Heavy vehicles, %HV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 5 5 5 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 ~ 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 Initial unmet demand, Qb D.D 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 20 0 100 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, GP 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only 0 2 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Ti i G= 28.0 G= G= G= G= 52.0 G= G= G= m ng Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 291 1476 298 1154 1002 Lane group capacity, c 505 1441 283 988 1785 v/c ratio, X 0.58 1.02 1.05 1.17 0.56 Total green ratio, g/C 0.31 0.31 0.58 0.58 0.58 Uniform delay, dl 26.0 31.0 19.0 19.0 11.9 ~f;lo•~~(~•\Tlnm„v,n.,f00%7non.-10%7nCn4ti,,,RO\~-..o.-~~l:.~-~; !~!-'('\T ~i..,10%7nCn44;~n~.\To~-...~\07112 ~1~7~~7nn~S _ __ _ _ _ Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 0.231 0.442 0.118 Delay calibration, k 0.17 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.16 Incremental delay, d2 0.8 23.3 52.5 81.5 0.2 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 26.8 54.3 56.9 89.9 1.6 Lane group LOS C D E F A Approach delay 49.8 83.1 1.6 Approach LOS D F A Intersection delay 49,8 X = 1.12 Intersection LOS D HCS2000T`~'t Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e r fi1P•II(''•\T1~nnman~e0/7(lane/7(lCn+finrro\rnPrrtnliv~i (:(`f\T nral~/7/1Ca4+inrre\Tamn\e71rlZ d/7Q/7l111S Detailed Report ~. Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 4/29/2005 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection FT. HARRISON/PIERCE Area Type CBD or Similar Jurisdiction CLEARWATER Analysis Year BASE CONDITIONS Project ID Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LTR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 15 30 50 50 30 30 100 951 120 30 952 15 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 5 3 5 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR volumes 100 0 100 0 100 0 100 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G P 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Ti i G= 12.0 G= G= G= G= 70.0 G= G= G= m ng Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 101 117 105 1127 32 1018 Lane group capacity, c 198 166 386 1282 348 1301 v/c ratio, X 0.51 0.70 0.27 '0.88 0.09 0.78 0.13 0.13 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C Unifiorm delay, di 36.3 37.3 2.8 7.0 2.4 5.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.225 1.000 0.225 Delay calibration, k 0.12 0.27 0.11 0.41 0.11 0.33 Incremental delay, d2 2.2 12.7 0.2 3.9 0.1 1.6 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 38.5 50.1 3.0 5.4 2.5 2.9 Lane group LOS p D A A A A Approach delay 38.5 50.1 5.2 2.9 Approach LOS p p A A Intersection delay 7,7 - X = 0.85 Intersection LOS A HCS2000T'~'t Copyright ©2000 University of Flotida, All Rights Reserved 1 t Version 4.1 e _. Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 4/29/2005 Time Period PM PEAK FT. HARRISON / Intersection CLEVELAND Area Type CBD or Similar Jurisdiction CLEARWATER Analysis Year BASE CONDITIONS Project ID Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Nt 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 140 200 50 104 42 112 200 514 303 170 480 50 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I~ 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 100 0 100 0 100 100 100 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G P 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 23.0 G= G= G= G= 7.0 G= 48.0 G= G= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= 4 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length; C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination ES WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 147 264 109 162 211 755 179 558 Lane group capacity, c 248 416 172 382 511 856 393 882 v/c ratio, X 0.59 0.63 0.63 0.42 0.41 0.88 0.46 0.63 ~1o.//r.\Tl,,,,,,..,.,o„+poi-tn„~aoL~nc~~~:.,,~.,~..,,,,..,.,,l:r...: r_rr~T ,.,,,,toi~nr.,+~:~.....~T.,..,...,.~..7t~1r n + cini~nnc Detailed Report _ Pa e 2 _ g of 2 Total green ratio, g/C 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.66 0.53 0.66 0.53 Uniform delay, dl 29.4 29.8 29.8 28.0 6.5 18.5 7.5 14.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.145 0.238 0.145 0.238 Delay calibration, k 0.18 0.21 0.21 0.11 0.11 0.41 0.11 0.21 Incremental delay, d2 3.8 3.2 7.4 0.8 0.3 5.8 0.4 0.7 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 33.2 32.9 37.2 28.7 1.2 10.2 1.5 4.3 Lane group LOS C C D C A 8 A A Approach delay 33.0 32.1 8.2 3.6 Approach LOS C C A A Intersection delay 13,8 X = 0.82 c Intersection LOS B HCS2000"n Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e ~lo•//!`•\Tl,,,,,,,,,o„+~oi~n.,„,aoi~nco4+i„n~,1«„n.-~nl~.>-» !~!~(r\T .~...,10%7nCo1+i,~,na\Ta.„~,\o7LT.' A 4 c/o/`7nnc ' Detailed Report Pa e 1 of 2 g r~ [1 t ~i 0 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 4/29/05 Time Period PM PEAK HOUR Intersection FT. HARRISON/DREW Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction FDOT Analysis Year BASE CONDITIONS Project ID Volume and Timin Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group Deft TR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 192 149 23 162 187 94 78 585 107 68 515 112 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, -, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 5 3 5 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 10 0 20 0 50 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 4 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G P 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB. Only EW Perm 03 04 NB On ly NS Perm 07 08 Timing G= 10.0 G= 25.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= 35.0 G= G= Y= 0 Y=:S Y= Y= Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 202 181 456 82 708 72 607 Lane group capacity, c 342 696 739 293 913 270 713 v/c ratio, X 0.59 0.26 0.62 0.28 0.78 0.27 0.85 0.39 0.39 0.28 0.50 0.50 0.39 0.39 filo•//!'~•\Tl.,...,,v,o„+~0%'ono„.ao%7nCo~;„.,~\,-„a..,.,~1;.>.>; !-!f'~/'~\T ~....,to~7ncat~;„.ram\Ta.,,,-.\~7L1 G n/~o/~nn~ Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, di 19.7 18.7 28.3 15.5 98.4 18.8 25.1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.333 1.000 0.576 Delay calibration, k 0.18 0.11 0.20 0.11 0.32 0.11 0.38 Incremental delay, d2 2.7 0.2 1.6 0.3 2.2 0.3 5.2 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 22,4 18.9 29.9 15.7 8.3 19.0 19.6 Lane group LOS C g C 8 A 8 8 Approach delay 20.8 29.9 9.1 19.6 Approach LOS C C A g Intersection delay 18.2 X = 0.80 c Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000TM Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e r f,1P'I/("'~Tll1(`llmPlltC~~7nATf~~~7nQPttln(TC~IIIPY'Q(1~1771 (;(~(`\T n~alo/7(1CPttinae\TPmn\c71r1 5 d/~9/~fl(15 Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT Genera/ Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 4/13/2005 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection CLEVELAND / OSCEOLA Area Type CBD or Similar Jurisdiction CLEARWATER Analysis Year BASE CONDITIONS ProjectlD Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 10 30 50 172 20 100 20 175 175 185 220 15 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2. D 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 100 0 100 0 100 0 100 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G P 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 41.0 G= G= G= G= 41.0 G= G= G= Y= 4 Y=' Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 11 33 56 191 133 22 388 206 261 Lane group capacity, c 513 764 649 562 668 409 707 313 756 v/c ratio, X 0.02 0.04 0.09 0.34 0.20 0.05 0.55 0.66 0.35 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 ^ Detailed Re ort p Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C Uniform delay, d~ 13.5 13.6 13.9 15.8 14.7 13.7 17.8 19.1 15.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.15 0.23 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.9 5.0 0.3 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 13.5 13.6 13.9 16.1 14.8 13.7 18.7 24.1 16.1 Lane group LOS 8 8 8 B 8 B B C B Approach delay 13.g 15 6 18 4 19 6 Approach LOS B B B B Intersection delay 17.8 X = 0.50 c Intersection LOS B ~' HCS2000TI''t Copyright ~ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e r All-Wa Sto Control Y P Page 1 of 2 ' ~ ~~ r %Thrus Left Lane 50 ~~ 50 bU 30 pproach Movement Northbound L T R Southbound L T R olume 5 320 20 70 367 5 %Tnn,s Left Lane 50 50 Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Configuration LTR LTR L TR L TR PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Fiow Rate 60 160 5 377 77 412 Heavy Vehicles 2 3 2 2 2 2 No. Lanes 1 1 2 2 Geometry Group 2 2 5 5 Duration, T 0.25 Saturation Headway Ad"ustment Worksheet Prop. Left-rums 0.4 0.4 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Prop. Right-Turns 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 D.0 Prop. Heavy Vehicle hLT-adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 hRT-adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.7 -0.7 -0.7 -0.7 hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 hadj, computed 6.34 6.34 6.34 6.34 6.34 6.34 Departure Headwa and Service Time hd, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 initial 0.05 0.14 0.00 0.34 0.07 0.37 hd, final value 6.34 6.34 6.34 6.34 6.34 6.34 ,final value 0.11 0.28 0.01 0.61 0.13 0.66 Move-up time, m 2.0 Z, Q 2.3 2.3 Service Time 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 Ca aci and Leve! of Service Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Capacity 310 410 255 599 327 614 Delay 10.09 11.64 9.17 17.44 9.94 18.88 Los B B A C A C pproach: Delay 10. py 11.64 17.34 17.47 Los B B C C Intersection Delay 16.1 6 Intersection LOS C Page 1 of 5 ~ ARTPLAN 2002 Conceptual Planning Analysis Description/File Information Y: \PIN E LLAS\Clea rwater Filename Bluffs (05-012) Date Prepared 5/9/2005 \AP_ftharx.xml Program ARTPLAN -1 Version ~ 5.1.1 Analyst RP Agency GCC District Arterial Name Ft. Harrison Avenue Begin Intersection Chestnut Int rsection Drew Study Period K100 Peak Direction Northbound User Notes Ft. Harrison (Chestnut -Drew) Facility Data Roadway Variables Traffic Variables Control Variables Multimodal Variables Paved Area Type Urbanized AADT 24000 Arrival Type 4 Shoulder/Bike No Lane Outside Lane ypical Class 4 K ~ 0.095 SignaisJMile 8.00 Width Posted Speed 30 D 0.55 Cycle Length 90 pavement Typical Condition # Thru Lanes ~-~ pHF 0.925 Through g/C 0.5 Sidewalk Yes Median Type None % Turns Exci, 12 Control Type Semiactuated Sidewalk/Roadway Typical Lanes Separation Left Turn Yes % Heavy 1 5 Sidewalk/Roadway No Lanes Vehicles Protective Barrier Base Sat Flow 1900 Obstacle to Bus No Rate Stop Facto Add 0'92 Bus Freq Adjusted Sat 1636 Bus Span Of 15 Flow Rate Service r T1~P•~I~•~1 Inl~11tY1 P19~Q~~ /I l~n.a ~/7(1Cn++in rro~rns>rrtnliwi (:(~'(~'~T nnal~/')(1C afi~in ne~Tamn~nraviaw si4i~nn~ ' Automobile Se ment Data 9 Page 2 of 5 C cle Arr. /o # Dir. Hourl Segment # Length g/C Type Turns Lanes Length AADT Vol.y FFS Median Type 1 (to Court) 90 0.61 ~ ZO C~ 0.10985 26392 1379 35 Non-Restrictive 2 (to Pierce) 90 0.78 ~~~ 0.10985 22411 1171 35 ~- Non-Restrictive 3 (to Cleveland) 90 0.53 ~5 20 ~ 0.10985 19464 1017 35 ~ Non-Restrictive 4 (to Drew) 90 0.5 ~ 10 ~ 0.17992 14660 766 35 ~ Non-Restrictive ' Automobile LOS Thru Mvmt Control Int. Approach Speed Segment Segment # Flow Rate v/c Delay LOS (mph) LOS 1 (to Court) 1193 1.14 63.58 E 5.1 F 2 (to Pierce) ~ 115e 0.86 0.73 A 26.7 ~-~ 3 (to Cleveland) ~ 880 0.97 17.4 B 12.6 D 4 (to Drew) 74e 0.87 8.87 ~- A 21.5 Arterial Length 0.5 Auto Speed *** Auto LOSS D ~ Automobile Service Volume Tables A B C D E Lanes Hourly Volume In Peak Direction 1 460 ~ 800 '910 i ~ *** *** 2 -~ 1150 ~-1690 1820 *** *** ~- 3 1870 ~ 2580 2730 *** *** 4 2610 3460 3640 *** ~~ *** * 460 800 910 *** *** Lanes Hourly Volume In Both Directions 2 840 ~ 1450 ~ ,1650 *** *** 4 ~ 2090 3080 ~r 3310 ~- *** *** -1 6 3400 4690 ~ 4960 ~- *** *** 8 ~ 4740 ~ 6290 r 6610 *** *** * -~~ 840 1450 1650 *** ~ **~ Lanes Annual Average Daily Traffic 2 8800 15300 17400 *** *** -~ 4 22000 -~ 32400 34800 *** *** 6-~ 35800 49300 52200 ~ *** *** 8 -1 49900 ~ 66200 ~ 69600 ~ *** ~ ~-*** * ~ 8800 15300 ~ 17400 ***-~ *** r.~,..iin.~r~,.,.._..........~,.oi~n....ani~no,.++:...~,.~....,,,..,~..i:~..: !~/"''!"'~1T ,.,.,.~ai~nr~+~:..,,...~•ro.,...,~.,.«~..:o.t, c/n/~nnc TABLE 4 - 4 GENERALIZED PEAK HOUR TWO-WAY VOLUMES FOR FLORIDA'S URBANIZED AREAS* UNINTERRUPTED FLOW HIGHWAYS FREEWAYS Level of Service Interchange spacing> 2 mi. apart Lanes Divided A B C D E Level of Service 2 Undivided 180 620 1,210 1,720 2,370 Lanes A B C D E 4 Divided 1,940 3,140 4,540 5,870 6,670 4 2,310 3,840 5,350 6,510 7 240 6 Divided 2,900 4,700 6,800 8,810 10,010 , 6 3,580 5,930 8,270 10,050 11,180 STATE TWO-WAY ARTERIALS 8 4,840 8,020 11,180 13,600 ]5 130 Class I (>0.00 to 1.99 signalized intersections per mile) , 10 6,110 IO,I10 14,110 17,160 19,050 Leve! of Service L Di id d 12 7,360 12,200 17,020 20,710 23,000 anes v e A B C D E 2 Undivided ** 400 1,310 1,560 1,6 (0 Interchange spacing < 2 mi. apart 4 Divided 460 2,780 3,300 3,390 *** Level of Service ' 6 Divided 700 4,240 4,950 5,080 *** Lanes A B C D E 8 Divided 890 5,510 6,280 6,440 *** 4 2,050 3,350 4,840 6,250 7,110 Class [I (Z.00 to 4.50 signalized intersections per mile) 6 3,240 5,250 7,600 9,840 11,180 8 4,420 7,160 1Q,360 13,420 15,240 Level of Service Lanes Divided A B 10 5,600 9,070 13,130 16,980 19,310 C D E 2 Undivided ** 180 1,070 1,460 1,550 12 6,780 IQ,980 15,890 20,560 23,360 4 Divided ** 390 2,470 3,110 3,270 6 Divided ** 620 3,830 4,680 4,920 BICYCLE MODE ' 8 Divided ** 800 5,060 6,060 6,360 (Note: Level of service for the bicycle mode in this table is based on roadway Class III (more than 4.5 signalized intersections er mile and not geometries at 40 mph posted speed and traffic conditions, not number of bicyclists i th f ili p i hi us ng e ac ty.) (Multiply motorized vehicle volumes shown below by number w t n primary city central business district of an of directional roadway lanes to determine two-way maximum service volumes.) urbanized area over 75Q,000) ' Paved Shoulder Level of Service Bicycle Lane Leve! of Service Lanes Divided A B C D E Coverage A B C D E 2 Undivided ** ** 500 1,200 1,470 4 ** * 0-49% ** ** 310 1,310 >1 310 Divided * 1,180 2,750 3,120 6 Divided ** ** 1,850 4,240 4 690 , 50-84% ** 240 390 >390 *** 85-100% 300 680 > *** , 8 Divided ** ** 2,450 5,580 6,060 680 *** Class I V (more than 4.5 signalized intersections per mile and within PEDESTRIAN MODE (Note: Level of service for the pedestrian mode in this table is based on roadway primary city central business district of an tubanized area geometries at 40 mph posted speed and traffic conditions not number of edestrians over 750,000) , p using the facility.) (Multiply motorized vehicle volumes shown below by number Level of Service of directional roadway lanes to determine two-way maximum service volumes.) Lanes Divided A B C D E Level of Service 2 Undivided ** ** 490 1,310 1,420 Sidewalk Coverage A B C D E 4 Divided ** ** 1,170 2,880 3,010 0-49% ** ** ** 600 1 480 6 Divided ** ** 1,810 4,350 4,520 , 50-84% ** ** ** 940 1 800 8 Divided ** ** 2,460 5,690 5,910 , 85-100% ** 210 1,080 >1,080 *** NON~TATE ROADWAYS BUS MODE (Scheduled Fixed Route) Major City/County Roadways (Buses per hour) Level of SeIV1Ce Lanes Divided A B (Note: Buse per hour shown arc only for the pcaR hour io the single direction ofldgher traffic now.) C r~ D~ E 2 Undivided ** ** 870 ,~„ ~ 1,480 Level of Service Sidewalk Coverage A B C D 4 Divided ** ** 2,030 2,950 3,120 E 0-84% ** >5 >4 >3 >2 6 Divided ** ** 3,170 4,450 4,690 85-100% >6 >4 >3 >2 >I r S °/3 = ~ l.~(&,'~ ARTERIAL/NON-STATE ROADWAY ADJUSTMENTS Other Signalized Roadways DIVIDED/[INDIVIDED _ (signalized intersection analysis) (alter corresponding volume by the indicated percent) Level of Service Lanes Divided A B C D Lanes Median Left Turns Lanes Adjustme Factors E 2 Undivided ** ** 450 950 1,200 2 Divided Yes +5% 2 Undivided No _20% 4 Divided ** ** 1,050 2,070 2,400 Multi Undivided Yes _5% Source: Florida Department of Transportation 02/22/02 Multi Undivided No _25% Systems Planing Office 605 Suwanee Street, MS 19 ONE-WAY FACILITIES Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 h Decrease corresponding two-directional volumes in this table by 40% to ttp:/lwwwl l.myflorida.com/planning/systems/sm/los/defaulthtm ' ' obtain the equivalent one directional volume for one-way facilities. This table does not constinrte a statdard and should be used only for general planning applications. The comptntr models from which this table is derived should be used for mote specific planning applications. The table and deriving compmer models should not be used for wnido i i d r or nterse service and are for the automobildtruck modes udess specifically stated Level of service letter ct on esign, where more refitted techniques exist Valrtrs shown are hourly two-way volumes for levels of grade thresholds are probably not wmpanble across modes and the ef d l made with caution. Furthermore, combining levels of service of differem modes imo one overal olumes must be divided by an appropriate K factor The tabl ' i l f , r ore, cross nm a comparisons shouLl be l roadway level of service is not recommended. To convert to annual average daily traffic volutrtes, these v . e s nput va ue de aults and level of service criteria appear ou the following page. Calculations arc based on plattoing applications of the Highway Capacity Manual, Bicycle LOS Model, Pedestrian LOS Model and Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manua4 respectively for the automobiiHt k bi d le ••Camot be achieved using table inpm value defaults. ruc , cyc Pe astrian and bus modes. •'Not applicable for that level of service letter grade. For automobile/tmck modes, volumes greater than level of service D become F because intersection capacities have been rearJted. For birycle std pedestrian modes, the level of service letter grade (including F) is not achievable because tb i i i , ere s no max mum veh cle vdume threshold using table input value defaults. ' 91 TABLE 4 - 7 GENERALIZED PEAK HOUR DIRECTIONAL VOLUMES FOR FLORIDA'S URBANIZED AREAS* . UNINTERRUPTED FLOW HIGHWAYS FREEWAXS Level of Service Interchange spacing > 2 mi. apart Lanes Divided A B C D E Level of Service 1 Undivided 100 340 670 950 1,300 Lanes A B C D E 2 Divided 1,060 1,720 2,500 3,230 3,670 2 1,270 2,110 2,940 3,580 3 980 3 Divided 1,600 2,590 3,740 4,840 5,500 , 3 1,970 3,260 4,550 5,530 6,150 STATE TWO-WAY ARTERIALS 4 2,b60 4,410 6,150 7,480 8 320 Class I (>0.00 to 1.99 signalized intersections per mile) , 5 3,360 5,560 7,760 9,440 10,480 Level of Service 6 4,050 6,710 9,360 11,390 12 650 Lanes Divided A B C D E , I Undivided ** 220 720 860 890 Interchange spacing < 2 mi. apart 2 Divided 250 1,530 1,810 1,860 *** Level of Service 3 Divided 380 2,330 2,720 2,790 *** Lanes A B C D E 4 Divided 490 3,030 3,460 3,540 *** 2 1,130 1,840 2,660 3,440 3,910 3 1,780 2,890 4,180 5,410 6 150 Class II (2.00 to 4.50 signalized intersections per mile) , 4 2,340 3,940 5,700 7,380 8,380 Level of Service 5 3,080 4,990 7,220 9,340 10 620 Lanes Divided A B C D E , 6 3,730 6,040 8,740 11,310 12,850 1 Undivided ** 100 590 810 850 2 Divided ** 220 1,360 1,71.0 _ 1,800 BICYCLE MODE 3 Divided ** 340 2,110 2,570 ~ 2,710 4 Divided ** 440 2,7903;3"30 3,500 (Note: Level of service for the bicycie mode in this table is based on roadwa ;l,t~''~ ~? '^ y~t;,~ Class III (more than 4.5 signalized intersections er mile and n t y geometries at 40 mph posted speed and traffic conditions, not number of bi li i p o cyc sts us ng the facility.) (Multiply motorized vehicle volumes shown below within primary city central business district of an by number of directional roadway lanes to determine maximum service volumes.) urbanized area over 750,000) Paved Shoulder/ Level of Service Level of Service Bicycle Lane Lanes Divided A B C D E Coverage A B C D E 1 Undivided ** ** 280 660 810 0-49% ** ** 170 720 >720 2 Divided ** ** 650 1,510 1,720 50-84% ** 130 210 >210 *** 3 Divided ** ** 1,020 2,330 2,580 85-100% 160 380 >380 *** *** 4 Divided ** ** 1,350 3,070 3,330 PEDESTRIAN MODE Class IV (more than 4.5 signalized intersections per mile and within (Note: Level of service for the pedestrian mode in this table is based on roadwa primary city central business district of an urbanized area y geometries at 40 mph posted speed and traffic conditions, not the number of over 750,000) pedestrians using the facility.) (Multiply motorized vehicle volumes shown below Level of Service by number of directional roadway lanes to determine maximum service volumes.) Lanes Divided A B C D E 1 Undivided ** ** 270 720 780 Level of Service 2 Divided ** ** 650 1,580 1,660 Sidewalk Coverage A B C D E 3 Divided ** ** 1,000 2,390 2,490 0-49% ** ** ** 330 8L0 4 Divided ** ** 1,350 3,130 3,250 50-84% ** ** ** 520 990 85-100% ** 120 590 >590 *** NON-STATE ROADWAXS Major City/Cotmty Roadways BUS MODE (Scheduled Fixed Route) Level of Service (Buses per hour) Lanes Divided A B C D E Level of Service I Undivided ** ** 480 760 810 Sidewalk Coverage A B C D E 2 Divided ** ** 1,120 1,620 1,720 0-84% ** >5 >4 >3 >2 3 Divided ** ** 1,740 2,450 2,580 _ 85-100% >6 >4 >3 >2 >I Other Signalized Roadways ARTERIAL/NON-STATE ROADWAY ADJUSTMENTS (signalized intersection analysis) DIVIDED/UNDIVIDED Level of Service (alter corresponding volumes by the indicated percent) Lanes Divided A B- C D E I Undivided ** ** 250 530 660 Lanes Median Left Trrms Lanes Adjustment Factors 2 Divided ** *.* 580 1,140 1,320 1 Divided Yes +5% Source: Florida Department of Transportation 02/22/02 1 Undivided No -20% Systems Planning Office Multi Undivided Yes -5% 605 Suwannee Street, MS 19 Multi Undivided No -25% Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 http://wwwl 1.myf7orida.com/p(arming/systems/sm/los/defauit.htm ONE WAY FACILITIES Increase corresponding volume 20% "This table does not constitute a stanched and should be used only for general planning applicat ap lications The table and derivi d ions, The computer models from which this table is derived should be used for more specific planning p . ng wmpmer mo els should not be used for corridor oc intersection design, where more refined technique exist. Values shown are hourly direczional voltrmes for levels of service and are for the automobile/truck modes unless specifically stated. Level of service letter glade thresholds are probably not oompatable across modes and drerofore cross awdal com arisons should he , , p made with caution. Furthemtore, rnmbining levels of service of different modes imo ane overall roadway level of service is not recommended To convert ro annual average daily traffic volumes, these. volumes must be divided by appropriate D and K factors. The table's input value defaults and laves of service criteria appear oo the following a e Cal l ti b d l i p g . cu a ons am ase on p ann ng applications of the Highway Capacity Manual, Bicycle LOS Model, Pedestrian LOS Model acrd Transit Capacity and Quality of Semce Manual, respectively for the automobi Wtruck bicycie, pedtshian and bus modes. ••Cannot be achieved using table input value defaults. `•"Not applicable for that level of service letter grade. For au[omobile/tmck modes, volumes greater than level of service D become F because i°rersection wpacitie have been trashed. For bicycle and pedestrian urodcs, the level of setvim letter ade (includin F) i hi b f g s not ac eva le, because there is no maximum vehicle volume threshold ttsiog table input value defaults. 97 a i i Residen#ial CondominiumlTownhouse (230) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 54 Avg..Number of Dwelling Units: 183 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 5.86 1.83 - 11.79 3.09 Data Plot and Equation a,ooo 7,000 s,ooo w a s,ooo a~ U L ~ 4,000 c~ m Q 3,000 H 2,000 1,000 0 i x. X - - - - : - X ~ - - X .. - .... ~ .... - - - - - - - - - X Xj~ ~X X~ --X; -= - ' ~- '-- - - - - -' -•- -'-~ -' --- '--- --- X , X 0 100 200 300 400 .500 600 700 S00 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ------ Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) .0.85 Ln(X) + 2.55 R2.0.83 Trip Generation, 7th Edition 367 Institute of Transportation Engineers ' Residential Condominium/Townhouse (230) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, ' Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. n 0 soo y c W d a~ U t fLS N Q 1 II f- Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.44 0.15 - 1.61 0.69 Data Plot and Equation 400 300 200 100 n Number of Studies: 59 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 213 Directional Distribution: 17% entering, 83% exiting X X X. : X .X , .X XX ,~ .X X ~X X. ~ .'~ , - ---...X._~- ----•-- -- X ... X X - ~- -~---- ~ ---•-- ~~---- X X ~ : X X ~u X 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: Ln('T) .0.80 Ln(X) + 0.26 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 -""- Average Rate' R2 = 0.76 s 368 Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 7th Edition 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 so Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.52 0.18 - 1.24 0.75 Data Plot and Equation 70 w a a~ U L m N N Q F-- so ao 300 200 100 0 Residential Condominium/Townhouse (230) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Number of Studies: 62 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 205 Directional Distribution: 67% entering, 33% exiting o ~ -- :~ -.1. --;- X. - -; -~ - ~ -- -- - ~- -~--X- X X 7C ;XX X :'~ X ~ x~ :X x -- - -- --' ~ ~ X ~ iuv evu 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 X =Number of Dwelling Units X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ------ Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(7) .0.82 Ln(X) + 0.32 R2 = 0.80 Trip Generation, 7th Edition 369 institute of Transportation Engineers High-Rise Residential Condominium/Townhouse (232) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 4 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 543 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 4.18 3.91 - 4.93 2.08 uata riot and equation 7,0 5,000 c W n m 4,000 U L d N N 3,D00 Q F- 2,000 1,000 n Caution -Use Carefully -Small Sample Size s,ooc 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 X =Number of Dwelling Units X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ------ Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 3.77(X) + 223.66 R2 = 1.00 Trip.Generation, 7th Edition 400 Institute of Transportation Engineers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 High-Rise Residential Condominium/Townhouse (232) 400 Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.34 0.31 - 0.48 0.59 Data Plot and Equation Caution -Use Carefully -Small Sample Size 500 w a C W Q h a~ U L N m (O Q f- 300 200 100 Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Number of Studies: 4 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 543 Directional Distribution: 19% entering, 81 % exiting i 0 I-'~'-f ~TT.r_T ~T'_r_T-T_~T'_T-'-I-' t '-r__.T 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 X =Number of Dwelling Units X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ------ Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.29(X) + 28.86 R2 = 0.98 Trip Generation, 7th Edition X x'~ ~~ , x~ 401 Institute of Transportation Engineers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 High-Rise Residential Condominium/'Townhouse (232) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m, Number of Studies: 5 . Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 444 Directional Distribution: 62% entering, 38% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.38 0.34 - 0.49 0.62 Data Plot and Equation soc 50C W 400 a. F- U t 300 a~ c~ a~ Q ~~ 200 H 100 n Caution -Use Carefully -Small Sample Size 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 X =Number of Dwelling Units X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ------ Average"Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.34(X) + 15.47 R2 = 0.99 Trip Generation, 7th Edition 402 Institute of Transportation Engineers ' Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area ®n a: Weekday Number of Studies: 4 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 25 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 44.32 21.30 - 64.21 15.52 Data PIOt and EgUatlOn Caution -Use Care#ully -Small Sample she { '.. .. /~~ j. ,. ~I 50 ------ Average Rate R2 = 0.69 ' Trip Generation, 7th Edition 1338 Institute of Transportation Engineers ~~ ~J Specialty Re#ail Center (814) ' Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Trafi~ic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Number of Studies: 5 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 69 Directional Distribution: 44% entering, 56% exiting ' Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 2.71 2.03 - 5.16 1.83 Data Plot and Equation t Caution -Use Carefully -Small Sample Sizi x 0 100 200 300 X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area X Actual Data Points Ftted Curve ------ Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 2.40(X) + 21.48 RZ = 0.98 0 ~' ' Trip Generation, 7th Edition 1339 Institute of Transportation Engineers Land Use: 730 Government Gffice Building Independent Variables With One Observation The following trip generation data are for independent variables with only one observation. This information is shown in this table only; there are no related plots for these data. Users are cautioned to use data with care because of the small sample size. Trip Size of Number Generation Independent of Independent Variable Rate Variable Studies Directional Distribution Emolovees Weekda 11.95 102 1 50% enterin , 50% exitin Weekday a.m. Peak 1.02 102 1 84% entering, 16% exiting Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic Weekday a.m. Peak 1.02 102 1 84% entering, 16% exiting Hour of Generator Weekday p.m. Peak 1.91 102 1 74% entering, 26% exiting Hour of Generator 1.000 Square Feet Gross Fleer Area Weekda 68.93 18 1 50% enterin , 50% exitin Weekday a.m. Peak 5.88 18 1 84% entering, 16% exiting Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic Weekday a.m. Peak 5.88 18 1 84% entering, 16% exiting Hour of Generator Weekday p.m. Peak 11.03 18 1 74% entering, 26% exiting Hour of Generator Trip Generation, 7th Edition 1200 institute of Transportation Engineers 1 Government Office Building (730) Number of Studies: 2 ' Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 52 Directional Distribution: 31 % entering, 69% exiting 1 Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 1.21 1.17 - 1.22 " Data Plot and Equation Caution -Use Carefully -Small Sample Size r N a ~ w a F- U r L N N N Q II F-- 80 70 60 50 40 30 Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. x X ~, 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Fioor Area X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Equation: Not given -----~ Average Rate R2 = "*ri` ~~ ' Trip Generation, 7th Edition 1201 Institute of Transportation Engineers Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 5/9/05 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection Area Type Jurisdiction Analysis Year Pro'ect ID FT. HARRISON / CHESTNUT CBD or Similar CLEARWATER FUTURE WITH PHASE 1 &2 Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR TR L T Volume, V (vph) 305 1223 331 1105 214 104 824 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95. 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrivaltype, AT 3 3 5 5 5 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR volumes p 75 0 0 50 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, GP 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timin G= 33.0 G= G= G= G= 47.0 G= G= G= g Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 321 1556 1336 109 867 Lane group capacity, c 584 1631 1635 149 875 v/c ratio, X 0.55 0.95 0.82 0.73 0.99 Total green ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.52 0.52 0.52 Uniform delay, d~ 22.6 27.8 17.9 16.6 21.3 Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 0.271 0.271 0.271 Delay calibration, k 0.15 0.46 0.36 0.29 0.49 Incremental delay, d2 1.1 13.0 1.7 8.9 19.3 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 23.7 40.8 6.6 13.4 25.1 Lane group LOS C D A B C Approach delay 37,9 6.6 23.8 Approach LOS D A C Intersection delay 24.6 X~ = 0.98 Intersection LOS C HCS2000T~ Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1e Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 5/9/05 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection FT. HARR/SON /COURT Area Type CBD or Similar Jurisdiction CLEARWATER Analysis Year FUTURE WITH PHASES 1&2 Pro'ect ID Volume and Timin Input EB WB NB S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 Lane group L TR L T TR Volume, V (vph) 276 1357 75 314 1096 652 423 Heavy vehicles, %HV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, li 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 5 5 5 Unit extensiori, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 20 0 100 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, GP 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timin G= 28.0 G= G= G= G= 52.0 G= G= G= g Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 291 1486 331 1154 1026 Lane group capacity, c 505 1441 277 988 1788 v/c ratio, X 0.58 1.03 1.19 1.17 0.57 Total green ratio, g/C 0.31 0.31 0.58 0.58 0.58 Uniform delay, d~ 26.0 31.0 19.0 19.0 12.0 ~ ~ ~ 1 Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 9.000 0.487 0.442 0.118 Delay calibration, k 0.17 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.17 Incremental delay, d2 0.8 25.4 104.5 81.5 0.2 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 26.8 56.4 113.7 89.9 1.6 Lane group LOS C E F F A Approach delay 51.6 95.2 1.6 Approach LOS D F A Intersection delay 54.7 X~ = 1.14 Intersection LOS D HCS2000TM Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, Al] Rights Reserved Version 4.1e 1 1 Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DET AILED REPORT General Information Sife Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 5/9/05 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection FT. HARK/SON/PIERCE Area Type CBD or Similar Jurisdiction CLEARWATER Analysis Year FUTURE W1TH PHASES 1&2 Pro~ect ID Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, Ni 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LTR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 15 30 73 50 30 30 100 951 120 30 952 15 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (p~) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 5 3 5 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR volumes 100 0 100 0 100 0 100 0 Lane width 12.0. 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G P 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timin G= 12.0 G=. G= G= G= 70.0 G= G= G= g Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control De/ay, and L OS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 125 117 105 1127 32 1018 Lane group capacity, c 197 150 386 1282 348 1301 v/c ratio, X 0.63 0.78 0.27 0.88 0.09 0.78 _ _ _ ' Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C 0.13 0.13 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 Uniform delay, di 36.9 37.7 2.8 7.0 2.4 5.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 9.000 0.225 1.000 0.225. Delay calibration, k 0.21 0.33 0.11 0.41 0.11 0.33 Incremental delay, d2 6.6 22.7 0.2 3.9 0.1 1.6 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 43.5 60.4 3.0 5.4 2.5 2.9 Lane group LOS D E A A A A Approach delay 43.5 60.4 5.2 2.9 Approach LOS D E A A Intersection delay g, 7 X = 0.86 c Intersection LOS A ,~.... Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e ' Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 r HCS2000~' DET AILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 5/9/05 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection FT. HARRISON/ CLEVELAND Area Type CBD or Similar Jurisdiction CLEARWATER Analysis Year FUTURE WITH PHASESI &2 Project ID Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L TR L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 140 215 50 104 62 112 200 514 303 170 480 50 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 100 0 100 0 100 100 100 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N$ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G P 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 Excl. Left NS Perm 07 08 Timin G= 23.0 G= G= G= G= 7.0 G= 48.0 G= G= g Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= 4 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycfe Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 147 279 109 183 211 755 179 558 Lane group capacity, c 232 416 161 387 511 856 393 882 0.63 0.67 0.68 0.47 0.41 0.88 0.46 0.63 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 v/c ratio, X Total green ratio, g/C 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.66 0.53 0.66 0.53 Uniform delay, di 29.8 30.1 30.2 28.4 6.5 18.5 7.5 14.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.145 0.238 0.145 0.238 Delay calibration, k 0.21 0.24 0.25 0.11 0.11 0.41 0.11 0.21 Incremental delay, d2 5.6 4.2 1'0.8 0.9 0.3 5.8 0.4 0.7 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 35.3 34.3 41.0 29.3 1.2 10.2 1.5 4.3 Lane group LOS D C D C A 8 A A Approach delay 34.6 33.6 8.2 3.6 Approach LOS C C A A Intersection delay 14.5 X = 0.83 c Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000T Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e ~i,,. nr.~r~,. ~.. n i ~ n --- ~ n i l+ n n _.~. -- - -~ .... . i Detailed Re ort Pa e 1 of 2 P g C 1 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 5/9/05 Time Period PM PEAK HOUR Intersection FT. HARRISON /DREW. Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction FDOT Analysis Year FUTURE WITH PHASES 1&2 Pro~ect ID Volume and Timing Inpuf EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group Deft TR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 208 165 23 162 207 94 78 585 107 68 515 133 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 5 3 5 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 Initial unmet demand, Ob 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 10 0 20 0 50 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 4 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, Ne 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G P 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only EW Perm 03 04 NB On ly NS Perm 07 08 Ti i G= 10.0 G= 25.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= 35.0 G= G= m ng Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 0 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 219 198 477 82 708 72 629 Lane group capacity, c 334 697 740 280 913 270 709 v/c ratio, X 0.66 0.28 0.64 0.29 0.78 0.27 0.89 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C 0.39 0.39 0.28 0.50 0.50 0.39 0.39 Uniform delay, d~ 20.1 18.9 28.6 16.1 18.4 18.8 25.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.333 1.000 0.576 Delay calibration, k 0.23 0.11 0.22 0.11 0.32 0.11 0.41 Incremental delay, d2 4.6 0.2 1.9 0.3 2.2 0.3 7.2 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 24.7 19.1 30.5 16.4 8.3 19.0 22.0 Lane group LOS C 8 C 8 A B C Approach delay 22,0 30.5 9.1 21.7 Approach LOS C C A C Intersection delay 19.4 X = 0.88 c Intersection LOS 8 HCS2000~ Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e ! Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HCS2000T" DET AILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 5/9/05 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection CLEVELAND / OSCEOLA Area Type CBD or Similar Jurisdiction CLEARWATER Analysis Year FUTURE WITH PHASE'S 1&2 Project ID Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N~ 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group L T R L TR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 10 30 50 192 20 100 20 207 190 185 261 15 Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective teen, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike / RTOR olumes 100 0 100 0 100 0 100 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G P 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timin G= 41.0 G=. G= G= G= 41.0 G= G= G= g Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB S8 LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 11 33 56 213 133 22 441 206 307 Lane group capacity, c 513 764 649 562 668 373 709 275 758 v/c ratio, X 0.02 0.04 0.09 0.38 0.20 0.06 0.62 0.75 0.41 ri iirr ~ ' Detailed Report 1 t Page 2 of 2 Total green ratio, g/C 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Uniform delay, d~ 13.5 13.6 13.9 16.1 14.7 13.7 18.6 20.2 16.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.21 0.30 0.11 Incremental delay, d2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 1.7 10.8 0.4 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 13.5 13.6 13.9 16.6 14.8 13.8 20.3 31.1 16.7 Lane group LOS 8 B B B B B C C 8 Approach delay 13.8 15.9 20.0 22.5 Approach LOS 8 8 8 C Intersection delay 19,5 X = 0.56 c Intersection LOS B HCS2000rM Copyright ©2000 University of Florida, Al] Rights Reserved Version 4.1 e ' All-Way Stop Control ' ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL ANALY SIS General Information Site Information Page 1 of 2 nal st RP Intersection OSCEOLA/PIERCE gency/Co. GCC urisdiction CLEARWATER Date Performed 5/9/05 nalysis Year FUTURE W1TH PHASES 1 &2 nalysis Time Period PM PEAK ~ trroiect iu I East/West Street: PIERCE STREET North/South Street: OSCEOLA AVENUE ' olume Adjustments and Site Characteristics pproach Eastbound Westbound Movement L T R L T R plume 20 5 30 55 60 30 ' %Thrus Left Lane 50 50 pproach Northbound Southbound Movement L T R L T. R plume 5 361 20 93 375 5 %Thrus Left Lane 5Q 50 Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound ' L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Configuration LTR LTR L TR L TR PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ' Flow Rate 60 160 5 423 103 421 Heavy Vehicles 2 3 2 2 2 2 No. Lanes 1 1 2 2 Geometry Group 2 2 5 5 ' Duration, T 0.25 Saturation Headway Ad'ustment Worksheet ' Prop. Left-Turns 0.4 0.4 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Prop. Right-Turns 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Prop. Heavy Vehicle ' hLT-adj 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 hRT-adj -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.7 -0.7 -0.7 -0.7 hHV-adj 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 ' hadj, computed 6.57 6.57 6.57 6.57 6.57 6.57 Departure Headwa and Service Time hd, initial value 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 ' ,initial 0.05 0.14 0.00 0.38 0.09 0.37 hd, final value 6.57 6.57 6.57 6.57 6.57 6.57 ,final value 0.11 0.29 0.01 0.70 0.18 0.68 Move-up time, m 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.3 ' Service Time 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 Capaci and Leve! o f Service ' Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Capacity 310 410 255 593 353 604 ' Delay 10.37 12.02 9.26 21.37 10.49 20.32 L os 8 B A C 8 C pproach: Delay 10 .37 12.02 21.23 18.38 ' LOS B B C C I ntersection Delay 18.15 I ntersection LOS C ' r~ i i.-. ~ .-. ..... ,. ...... .. ... ~ .. - _. _.. _ .. _. 1 1 1 1 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst gency/Co. Date Performed nalysis Time Period RP GCC 5/9/2005 PM PEAK Intersection urisdiction nalysis Year OSCEOLA /PROMENADE CLEARWATER FUTURE WITH PHASES 1 &2 Project Description East/West Street: PROMENADE ACCESS North/South Stree#: OSCEOLA AVENUE Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes a nd Ad'ustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 41 370 0 0 442 61 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 43 389 0 0 465 64 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 - -- 0 _ __ Median Type Two Way Left Tum Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR Upstream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 0 0 0 47 0 31 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 49 0 32 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 2 0 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service pproach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LR (vph) 43 81 C (m) (vph) 874 328 lc 0.05 0.25 95% queue length 0.16 0.95 Control Delay 9.3 19.5 LOS A C pproach Delay - - 19.5 pproach LOS - - C Ktghts lZeserved r~ iii. ~~-. ..... .. ,.. ... .... ... ~ .. ~.~-..,_ ~_.___ _ _. -- Page 1 of 5 ARTPLAN 2002 Conceptual Planning Analysis Description/File Information Y: \PINELLAS\Clearwater Filename Bluffs (05-012) Date Prepared 5/9/2005 \AP_ftharwp.xmi Program ~ ARTPLAN ~ Version 5.1.1 Analyst RP Agency ~ GCC ~ District -1 Arterial Name Ft. Harrison Avenue Begin Intersection Chestnut -~ Int rsection Drew Study Period K100 Peak Direction Northbound User Notes Ft. Harrison (Chestnut -Drew) Future Conditions Facility Data Roadway Variables Traffic Variables Control Variables Multimodal Variables Paved Area Type Urbanized AADT 24000 Arrival Type 4 Shoulder/Bike No Lane Class 4 K 0.095 Signals/Mile 8.00 Outside Lane Typical Width Posted Speed 30 D 0.55 Cycle Length 90 Pavement Typical Condition ~Thru Lanes 2 PHF % Turns Excl. Median Type None Lanes Left Turn Yes % Heavy Lanes Vehicles 0.925 Through g/C 0.5 12 Control Type Semiactuated ~ ~~ 1 5 Sidewalk Yes Sidewalk/Roadwa y Typical Separation Sidewalk/Roadway No Protective Barrier Base Sat Flow Rate 1900 Obstacle to Bus No Stop FactorAd~ 0.92 Bus Freq Adjusted Sat Flow Rate 1636 Bus Span Of Service 15 ~1,..//!-+.\Tl,.,.,,....,.....a,.ni~n„_ani~nc+..u.----~---------~:-- r, r,r~T ,~.~~,~, ,. ~.,, ~ ,. ,.,,......~ Page 2 of 5 Cycgle ^ yrpr. % # Dir. ~^ Hourly ^ Segment # Len th g/C T e Turns Lanes Length AADT Voi. FFS Median Type 1 (to Court) 90 0.61 ~5 20 ~1 0.10985 26986 1410 35 Non-Restrictive 2 (to Pierce) 90 0.78 ~~9 ~l 0.10985 22411 1171 35 Non-Restrictive 3 (to Cleveland) 90 0.53 ~ 20 ~1 0.10985 19464 1017 35 Non-Restrictive 4 (to Drew) 90 0.5 0 10 0 0.17992 14660 766 35 Non-Restrictive ' Automobile LOS 1 Thru Mvmt Control Int. Approach Speed Segment Segment # Fiow Rate v/c Delay LOS (mph) LOS 1 (to Court) ~ 1219 1.16 74.58 E1 T~ 4.5 F 2 (to Pierce) ~~ 1152 0.86 0.73 26.7 A ~ A 3 (to Cleveland) ~ 880 0.97 17.4 B 12.6 ~ D1 4 (to Drew) ~ 745 0.87 8.87 A 21.5 t4"`~,-~ Arterial Length 0.5 Auto Speed *** Auto LOS ~ D``. ' Automobile Service Volume Tables A B ~ C ~ D E r .Lanes ~ Hourly Volume In Peak Direction 1 460 800 ~ 910 ~ *** *** 2 ~ 1150 ~ 1690 ~ 1820 ***-~ *** 3 1870 ~ 2580 2730 ~ *** *** 4 2610 ~ 3460 ~ 3640 ~I *** ~_*** * 460 800 ~ 910 *** *** -1 ~anes ~ Hourly Volume In Both Directions 2 ~4~ 1450 1650 *** *** 4 ~ 2090 3080 3310 *** *** 6 3400 4690 ~ 4960 ~ *** *** 8 4740 ~~ 6290 6610 ~- *** *** * 840~I 1450 1650 *** *** Lanes Annual Average Daily Traffic ~- 2 8800 ~ 15300~~ 17400 *** *** 4 22000 32400 34800 *** ~ *** 6 ~~ 35800 49300 52200 *** *** 8 ~ 49900 6200 69600 *** ~ *** * ~ 8800 15300 ~~7400 ~ ***-~ *** 1 1 1 -.~ i <. • ~ ~' Communit Response Team ~ y Planning Dept. Cases - DRC cos t~.s-a y~ ~ ~d /~s- Case No. ,~"~ Meeting Date: location: .~~~ C~cv~L~~~s7 4 ~rrent Use: C ~ v rG h. motive Code Enforcement Cas no yes: dress number es no) (vacant land) ~'Candscaping es (no) .e~Overgrown (yes) no ~6ebris (yes) no) operative vehicle(s) (yes (no ~uilding(s) ood (fair) (poor) (vacant land) ~Fencin (non ) (good) (dilapidated) (broken and/or missing pieces) aint goo (fair) (poor) (garish) ~rass Parki (yes) (no 5.~~`'~~";Ys so''''~Tiw•c Residential Parking Violations (yes) no Signage (none) ok~ (not ok) (billboard) p~ Parking (n/a stripe (handicapped) (needs repaving) Dumpster nc d) (not enclosed) ~utdoor storage (ye no) Comments/Status Report (attach any pertinent documents): Date: Reviewed by: Telephone: Revised 03-29-01; 02-04-03 FLD2005-05048 331 CLEVELAND ST WATERS EDGE