FLD2011-05019; 355 PARK PLACE BLVD; LAKESIDE @ PARK PLACE APTSFLD2O1 1-05019
355 PARK PLACE BLVD
Date Received: 5/2/2011 10:05:38 AM
Lakeside @ Park Place Apartments
ZONING DISTRICT: Commercial
LAND USE: Residential/Office /Retail
ATLAS PAGE: 291A
PLANNER OF RECORD:
PLANNER: Kevin Nurnberger, Planner III
CDB Meeting Date:
Case Number:
Agenda Item:
Owners /Applicant:
Representative:
Address:
July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019
D. 4.
Mid - Pinellas Office park, Inc.
Sean P. Cashen, P.E., LEED AP
355 Park Place Boulevard
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit 108 attached dwelling units in
the Commercial (C) District as a part of the Park Place Development of
Regional Impact (DRI), with a lot area of 268,330 square feet (6.16
acres), a lot width of 200 feet, front (east) setbacks of 16.3 feet (to
pavement) and 98.9 feet (to building), side (east) setbacks of 37.1 feet
(to pavement) and 111.8 feet (to building), rear (south) setbacks of 10
feet (to pavement) and 108.6 feet (to building), rear (southwest)
setbacks of 10 feet (to pavement) and 91 feet (to building), rear (south)
setbacks of 10 feet (to pavement) and 10 feet (to building), rear (west)
setback of 15 feet (to garage) and 19 feet (to pavement), a rear
(southwest) setback of 10 feet (to proposed building), a rear (west)
setback of 10 feet (to building), rear (northwest) setbacks of 14.9 feet
(to pavement) and 27.2 feet (to building), a rear (northwest) setback of
10 feet (to proposed building), and side (north) setbacks of 10 feet (to
pavement) and 23.3 feet (to structure), a building height of 37 feet (to
midpoint of pitched roof), and 219 off -street parking spaces, as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment project, under the Provisions of
the Community Development Code Section 2 -704, as well as a
reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer along Hampton Road from
15 feet to 10 feet as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the
provisions of Community Development Code Section 3- 1202.G.
CURRENT ZONING: Commercial (C) District
CURRENT LAND
USE CATEGORY: Residential /Office/Retail (R/O /R)
PROPERTY USE: Current: Vacant land
Proposed: Attached Dw ellings
EXISTING
SURROUNDING
ZONING AND
USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
C District
C District
Office (0) District
C District
Attached Dwellings
Office and Retail Sales and Services
Office
Office
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 1
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The subject property is 6.16 acres of vacant land located along the west side of Hampton Road
approximately 725 feet north of Gulf to Bay Boulevard. The property is known as Parcel 6 and
is a part of the Park Place Development of Regional Impact (DRI). The DRI's development
order was adopted by the Clearwater City Commission on September 1, 1983. An amendment
was adopted by the City Commission on February 1, 2001 reducing the approved office and
retail square footage for the subject property; adding a land use conversion factor for Parcel 6 for
the conversion of approved office development to multi- family and/or hotel development. This
development proposes the creation of 108 attached dwelling units.
The property is surrounded by a mix of uses. To the immediate north is a multi - family
residential development. The abutting property to the west consists of an office building. To the
south are properties which consist of retail sales and service uses that front onto Gulf to Bay
Boulevard. To the east, across Hampton Road, is another office building.
Development Proposal:
The proposal is to develop the site with a total of five buildings. Four buildings will be
residential with a total of 108 attached dwellings; the fifth building is a clubhouse. The
residential buildings will consist of two building types, Type III and Type XXVI. Three of the
five buildings will be Type III buildings which will be three -story structures with 10,425 square
feet of floor area. This building type will have a total of 24 attached dwellings (eight units per
floor). A fourth building will be a Type XXVI three -story structure that will have
14,317 square feet of floor area and a total of 36 attached dwellings (12 units per floor). The
final proposed building will function as a club house with an outdoor pool for residents to utilize
as a social center. Furthermore, a total of 219 off - street parking spaces will be provided on site.
The entire property will be landscaped to meet code and to soften the development on
surrounding properties.
Although Building Type III and Type XXVI are dissimilar in floor area, each building will be
architecturally similar in structural design. These buildings are basically rectangular in shape and
will feature architectural elements such as balconies, eaves and roof hangs. The individual units
in any building are identical to units built in the other buildings. The standard unit is
approximately 1,900 square foot and consists of two bedrooms and two baths. Each building
will be thirty -seven feet in height to the midpoint of the pitched roof.
Density: Pursuant to Ordinance 6678 -01, Parcel 6 was approved for a conversion rate of 1,000
square feet of office development to 2.40 multi - family units with a maximum development
potential of 240 units. Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2- 701.1, the
maximum allowable density is 18 dwelling units per acre. The property has a lot area of 268,330
square feet which allows for a maximum of 110 dwelling units. The proposal is for a total of 108
dwelling units which is below the maximum development potential for the subject property.
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-
701.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.85. The overall proposed ISR is 0.63, which is
consistent with the Code provisions.
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 2
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2 -704, there is no minimum required lot
area or lot width for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of
comparison, typically the CDC requires a minimum lot area of 10,000 — 15,000 square feet for
attached dwelling units. The subject property is 268,330 square feet in area which exceeds the
lot area requirement. The minimum lot width for attached dwellings is between 100 - 150 square
feet. The lot width of this site is 200 feet along Hampton Road. The proposal is consistent with
the lot width provision.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2 -704, there are no minimum required setbacks for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to
CDC, the minimum setbacks for attached dwelling units are 15 -25 feet (front), 0 -10 feet (side)
and 10 -15 feet (rear). The proposal has front (east) setbacks of 16.3 feet (to proposed pavement)
and 98.9 feet (to proposed building) along Hampton Road. While the front setback is within the
allowable range, the location of the existing retention pond which a portion of is a part of the
subject property, will allow the front and side (east) setbacks to appear greater in width, giving
the development a more visually appealing view from Hampton Road. The remaining proposed
structures will be setback 10 feet from the side and rear property lines. This proposed building
setback will be landscaped to meet perimeter landscape requirements, as well as to soften the
view of the project on adjoining properties. In addition, the setbacks will allow for off - street
parking lots that meet the required number of off - street parking spaces and are compliant with
the design standards for parking lots in CDC Section 3 -1402.
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Table 2 -704, there is no maximum required height
for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison,
pursuant to CDC, typically the maximum allowable height for attached dwelling units can range
between 30 and 130 feet. The highest of the point of the proposed structures, from existing
grade to the midpoint of the pitched roof is 37 feet, which within in the range of acceptable
building height.
Minimum Off - Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC, the minimum required number of required off -
street parking spaces for attached dwelling units is two spaces per dwelling unit. A total of 216
off - street parking spaces are required by code for this development. The site plan shows that a
total of 219 parking spaces will be provided on site; therefore, the number of parking spaces is
compliant with these Code provisions. In addition, seven ADA compliant parking spaces are
required by code CDC Section 3 -1409. The plan shows that nine ADA compliant parking spaces
will be provided on site.
Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3- 201.D.1, all outside mechanical equipment
must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. Based
upon the plans submitted, the mechanical equipment will be located to the immediate side or rear
of the individual buildings. The location and screening of such mechanical equipment will be
reviewed at time of building permit submission, should this application be approved by the CDB.
Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3- 904.A, to minimize hazards at the
driveway of Hampton Road; as well as at each internal shared entrance to the site from the
adjoining property, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will obstruct views at a
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 3
level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within twenty -foot sight
visibility triangles. As shown on the submitted landscape plan, any proposed landscaping within
the sight triangles meets this criterion.
Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3 -912, all utilities including individual distribution lines must
be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. Should this application
be approved by the CDB, all utilities serving this development must be relocated underground
on -site in compliance with this requirement.
Landscaping: Pursuant to CDC Section 3- 1202.D.1, this site is required a 15 -foot wide landscape
buffer along Hampton Road and a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer along all side and rear property
boundaries. Along Hampton Road, the landscape buffer width ranges froml 1 feet to 18 feet; it
cannot be altered without impacting a drive aisle designed by constraints caused by the retention
pond. In addition, the required number of trees per feet cannot be achieved in the perimeter
buffer behind Building No. 4 due to concerns by the Fire Department. Rescue ladders could
potentially be obstructed by the vegetation creating safety concerns for rescue of persons
residing on the third floor.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3- 1202.E.2, foundation plantings shall be provided for 100 percent of a
building facade with frontage along a street right -of -way. The foundation plantings must be
within an area that is a minimum of five feet wide and consist of at least two accent trees or three
palm trees for every 40 linear feet of building facade and one shrub for every 20 square feet of
required landscape area. A minimum of 50 percent of the area shall contain shrubs with the
remainder to be ground cover. The foundation plantings for Building No. 1 that fronts onto
Hampton Road, is shown to meet and exceed this criteria in regards to number of trees, shrubs,
and groundcover within a five foot buffer on the landscape plan.
Pursuant to CDC Section 3- 1202.E.1, ten percent of the gross vehicular use area shall be
provided as landscape islands a minimum of eight feet wide and 150 square feet in size. The site
proposes 10.5 percent of the vehicular use areas to be landscape islands.
To mitigate for the deviations to the landscape buffer requirements along the front, the applicant
has proposed additional accent and shade trees within the required perimeter landscape buffers as
well as designed a pattern of planting that is wider in areas to make up for the deficiency in the
width of the buffer. More landscaping will be installed within the buffers and foundation
planting than is typically required by CDC Section 3 -1202. Over 100 trees and a large number
of shrubs /groundcover plants are proposed to be installed. Due to existing site constraints staff
supports the requested landscape reductions.
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 4
Comprehensive Landscape Program: Pursuant to Section 3- 1202.G of the Community
Development Code, the landscaping requirements contained within the Code can be waived or
modified if the application contains a Comprehensive Landscape Program satisfying certain
criteria. The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with those
criteria.
Solid Waste: The proposal includes the provision of an adequate solid waste enclosures and trash
receptacles located on site. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid
Waste Department.
Signage: All signage must meet Code requirements or the applicant will need to submit their
sign request for review and approval in the Comprehensive Sign Program.
Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated
with the subject property.
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 5
Consistent
Inconsistent
1. Architectural theme:
a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program shall be designed as a
part of the architectural theme of the principle buildings proposed or developed on
the parcel proposed for development; or
b. The design, character, location and /or 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.
N/A
X
N/A
2. 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.
X
3. Community character: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive
landscape program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater.
X
4. Property values: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape
program will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate
vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
X
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.
N/A
N/A
Solid Waste: The proposal includes the provision of an adequate solid waste enclosures and trash
receptacles located on site. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid
Waste Department.
Signage: All signage must meet Code requirements or the applicant will need to submit their
sign request for review and approval in the Comprehensive Sign Program.
Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated
with the subject property.
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 5
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Section 2 -701.1 and
Table 2 -704:
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 6
Standard
Proposed
Consistent
Inconsistent
FAR
0.40
0.19
X
ISR
0.85
0.63
X
Minimum Lot Area
N/A
268,330 square feet (6.16 acres)
X
Minimum Lot Width
N/A
200 feet
X
Minimum Setbacks
Front: N/A
East: 16.3 feet (to pavement)
X
98.9 feet (to building)
Side: N/A
East: 37.1 feet (to pavement)
X
111.8 feet (to building)
North: 10 feet (to pavement)
X
23.3 feet (to building)
Rear: N/A
South: 10 feet (to pavement)
X
108.6 (to building)
10 feet (to pavement)
10 feet (to building)
6 feet (to pavement)
10 feet (to building)
Northwest: 14.9 feet (to pavement)
X
27.2 (to building)
10 feet (to building)
Southwest: 10 feet (to pavement)
X
91 feet (to building)
West: 15 feet (to garage)
X
19 feet (pavement)
10 feet (building)
Maximum Height
N/A
37 feet (to midpoint of existing roof)
X
Minimum
Determined by the
219 parking spaces
X
Off - Street Parking
Community Development
(Attached Dwelling 2 spaces per unit)
Coordinator based on the
specific use and /or ITE
Manual standards
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 6
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA: The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-
1204.A (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 7
Consistent
Inconsistent
1.
The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from
the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
X
2.
The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
X
3.
The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
X
4.
Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed
development.
X
5.
The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
X
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of
an existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is
characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation;
or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and /or preservation of
a working waterfront use.
6.
Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off - street
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
X
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted
in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted
by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the
proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following
design elements:
❑ Changes in horizontal building planes;
❑ Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
❑ Variety in materials, colors and textures;
❑ Distinctive fenestration patterns;
❑ Building step backs; and
❑ Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 7
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS: The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards
for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3- 914.A:
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of June 2, 2011, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient to
move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following:
Findings of Fact. The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence
submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that
there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:
1. The 6.16 acres is vacant land located along the west side of Hampton Road approximately
725 feet north of Gulf to Bay Boulevard;
2. That the subject property is located within the Commercial (C) District and the
Residential /Office/Retail (R/O/R) Future Land Use Plan category;
3. The subject parcel is a part of the Park Place Development of Regional Impact (DRI);
4. Based on the underlying future land use, attached dwelling units are permitted uses in the
Commercial District;
5. Based on the maximum development potential, the subject property has a lot area of
268,330 square feet that allows for an attached dwelling unit development of 108 dwelling
units;
6. The proposal is to develop the site with four, three -story buildings and a clubhouse;
7. 219 off - street parking spaces will be provided which is above the number of required parking
spaces for 108 attached dwelling units;
8. The overall proposed I.S.R. is 0.63, which is consistent with the Code provisions;
9. The proposal includes front (east along Hampton Road) setbacks of 16.3 feet (to pavement)
and 98.9 feet (to building), side (east) setbacks of 37.1 feet (to pavement) and 111.8 feet (to
building), rear (south) setbacks of 10 feet (to pavement) and 108.6 feet (to building), rear
(southwest) setbacks of 10 feet (to pavement) and 91 feet (to building), rear (south) setbacks
of 10 feet (to pavement) and 10 feet (to building), rear (west) setback of 15 feet (to garage)
and 19 feet (to pavement), rear (southwest) setbacks of 6 feet (to slab) and 10 feet (to
building), a rear (west) setback of 10 feet (to building), rear (northwest) setbacks of 14.9
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 8
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 located.
X
2.
The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
X
3.
The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons
residing or working in the neighborhood.
X
4.
The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
X
5.
The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the
immediate vicinity.
X
6.
The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties.
X
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of June 2, 2011, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient to
move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following:
Findings of Fact. The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence
submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that
there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:
1. The 6.16 acres is vacant land located along the west side of Hampton Road approximately
725 feet north of Gulf to Bay Boulevard;
2. That the subject property is located within the Commercial (C) District and the
Residential /Office/Retail (R/O/R) Future Land Use Plan category;
3. The subject parcel is a part of the Park Place Development of Regional Impact (DRI);
4. Based on the underlying future land use, attached dwelling units are permitted uses in the
Commercial District;
5. Based on the maximum development potential, the subject property has a lot area of
268,330 square feet that allows for an attached dwelling unit development of 108 dwelling
units;
6. The proposal is to develop the site with four, three -story buildings and a clubhouse;
7. 219 off - street parking spaces will be provided which is above the number of required parking
spaces for 108 attached dwelling units;
8. The overall proposed I.S.R. is 0.63, which is consistent with the Code provisions;
9. The proposal includes front (east along Hampton Road) setbacks of 16.3 feet (to pavement)
and 98.9 feet (to building), side (east) setbacks of 37.1 feet (to pavement) and 111.8 feet (to
building), rear (south) setbacks of 10 feet (to pavement) and 108.6 feet (to building), rear
(southwest) setbacks of 10 feet (to pavement) and 91 feet (to building), rear (south) setbacks
of 10 feet (to pavement) and 10 feet (to building), rear (west) setback of 15 feet (to garage)
and 19 feet (to pavement), rear (southwest) setbacks of 6 feet (to slab) and 10 feet (to
building), a rear (west) setback of 10 feet (to building), rear (northwest) setbacks of 14.9
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 8
feet (to pavement) and 27.2 feet (to building), a rear (northwest) setback of 10 feet (to
building), and side (north) setbacks of 10 feet (to pavement) and 23.3 feet (to structure);
10. The highest proposed building from existing grade to the midpoint of the roofline to be 37
feet, which is within the allowable range for maximum height;
11. The landscape plan complies with the landscape code requirements for foundation and
interior parking lot standards of the CDC;
12. The proposal is compatible with the adjacent properties; and
13. There are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
Conclusions of Law. The Planning and Development Department, having made the above
findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law:
1. That the proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Community Development Code
Sections 2 -701.1 and 2 -704 of the Community Development Code;
2. That the proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Section 2.3.3.7 of the Countywide
Plan Rules;
3. That the proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project as per Community Development Code Section 2- 704.A;
4. That the proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as a Comprehensive Landscape
Program as per Community Development Code Section 2- 1202.G.;
5. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two
Approvals as per Section 3- 914.A. of the Community Development Code; and
6. That, the development proposal is consistent with the Park Place DRI.
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of
the Flexible Development application to permit 108 attached dwelling units in the Commercial
(C) District as a part of the Park Place Development of Regional Impact (DRI), with a lot area of
268,330 square feet (6.16 acres), a lot width of 200 feet, front (east) setbacks of 16.3 feet (to
pavement) and 98.9 feet (to building), side (east) setbacks of 37.1 feet (to pavement) and 111.8
feet (to building), rear (south) setbacks of 10 feet (to pavement) and 108.6 feet (to building), rear
(southwest) setbacks of 10 feet (to pavement) and 91 feet (to building), rear (south) setbacks of
10 feet (to pavement) and 10 feet (to building), rear (west) setback of 15 feet (to garage) and 19
feet (to pavement), rear (southwest) setbacks of 6 feet (to slab) and 10 feet (to building), a rear
(west) setback of 10 feet (to building), rear (northwest) setbacks of 14.9 feet (to pavement) and
27.2 feet (to building), a rear (northwest) setback of 10 feet (to building), and side (north)
setbacks of 10 feet (to pavement) and 23.3 feet (to structure), a building height of 37 feet (to
midpoint of pitched roof), and 219 off - street parking spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment project, under the Provisions of the Community Development Code Section 2-
704, as well as a reduction to the perimeter landscape buffer along Hampton Road from 15 feet
to 10 feet as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Community
Development Code Section 3- 1202.G., subject to the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That the final design, color, and elevations of the proposed attached dwelling unit buildings
be consistent with the design, color, and elevations approved by the CDB;
2. That, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all utilities including individual
distribution lines must be installed underground, as set forth in CDC Section 3 -912;
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 9
3. That, prior to the issuance of a building permit, the site plan must show that all outdoor
mechanical equipment shall be completely screened on four sides by a fence, gate, wall,
mounds of earth, or vegetation from view from public streets and abutting properties. If such
screening is provided by means of a fence, gate, or wall, materials shall be consistent with
those used in the construction of and the architectural style of the principal buildings as set
forth in CDC Section 3- 201.D;and
4. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, the applicant shall comply with all requirements of
the Engineering Department.
Prepared by Planning & Development Dept. Staff:
Kevin W. Nurnberger, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map; and Photographs
S: (Planning Department\C D BIFLEX (FLD) (Pending cases) Up for the next CDBIPark Place 355 (DRI) - Lakeside Apartments (C) 2011.xx -
KWMLakeside at Park Place 355 Staff Report. docx
Community Development Board — July 19, 2011
FLD2011 -05019 — Page 10
Kevin Nurnberger
100 S Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33756
727 -562 -4567
kevin.numberger@myclearwater.com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Planner III March 2011 to present
Planner II
City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida October 2010 to March 2011
Duties include performing the technical review and preparation of staff reports for various land
development applications, the organization of data and its display in order to track information and
provide status reports. Assist public customers at the Zoning Counter. Review Building permits Business
tax receipts and Landscape plans.
Planner I
County of York, Yorktown, Virginia 2007 to 2009
Reviewed residential, commercial and mixed use development plans to ensure compliance with planning,
zoning, subdivision and environmental standards as well as design criteria, specifications, regulations,
codes and ordinances. Manage case load of planning applications and conduct site visits. I met with
residents and neighborhood organizations regarding new existing residential development projects as
directed. I led pre- application meetings with residents, contractors and developers regarding future
projects which included state and local government agencies.
Site Assistant
Gahan and Long Ltd, Belfast, Northern Ireland 2006 to 2007
I helped to enforce Article 3 of the Planning Order (NI) with land owners, developers and district councils
on procedures relating to archaeological and built heritage remains on proposed development sites. I
assisted on site during the archeological process though out the pre - development stage.
Development Planner
Versar Inc, Fort Story /Fort Eustis, Virginia 2005 to 2006
Assisted the Cultural Resources Manager in the predevelopment stages of new development and building
expansion projects. Reviewed site plans to ensure protection of historic properties. Supervised and
participated in historical surveys and research in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, the secretary
of the Interior's Standards for Preservation planning and the Federal installations and the Virginia
Department of Historic Resources. I developed survey strategies for the Cultural Resource Manager by
reviewing local and state planning documents, comprehensive plans. The Virginia Department of
Transportation plan and Virginia Power's public utility plan. I acted as a resource to the community to
educate them on the matter of historic preservation.
City Planner
City Planning Commission, New Orleans, Louisiana 2000 to 2005
Primary subdivision planner assisting applicants throughout the subdivision process in accordance with
the zoning and subdivision regulations of the City of New Orleans. Evaluated zoning and subdivision
applications prepared and presented preliminary staff reports to the City Planning Commission and Board
of Zoning Adjustments. I participated in the community and neighbourhood workshops that focused on
remapping and rezoning portions of the city in support of the proposed new Comprehensive zoning
ordinance.
EDUCATION
University of New Orleans, LA
MA Urban and Regional Planning (2004)
State University of New York at Buffalo, NY
BA Anthropology (1999)
r)._;
a
,
.
a
z,
DREW ST
-
a
0
Q
,
U
�
t1�
J
L
,_
n
71
II Cambncige Ctr.
0
0
,z 4,,,,.......„
=
PROJECT
SITE
—
U/
L-----
�Y[
Q
q. Res
/o
Elizabep3 1 Avel
l`
1 1
trsaa
SR -60 . a)u
i
a
Po- f
e
z
z
SEVILLE BLVD L------ °
LOCATION
Owner: Mid - Pinellas Office Park, Inc.
Case: FLD201 1 -0501 9
Site: 355 Park Place
Property Size: 6.16 acres /268,330 s.f.
PIN: 17- 29 -16- 00000 - 240 -0400
Atlas Page: 291A
A
•
•
IN
■
•
•
•
•
111
700 ,Q l
v 2)OS
t
707 ^^R'
1 �L
N N'13
N,
•,.>0). ny
7
C
-Not to Scale-
0
5
375
a
z
LMDR
375
,n
N
ul
N
n.
N N N
n N
0
a
Z
vc
2810
°o
N
/
GULF -TO -BAY BLVD
T
ZONING
Owner: Mid - Pinellas Office Park, Inc.
Case: FLD201 1 -0501 9
Site: 355 Park Place
Property Size: 6.16 acres /268,330 s.f.
PIN: 17- 29 -16- 00000 - 240 -0400
Atlas Page: 291 A
700 ,) Ne ?fps
707 ryry
PVQVP 2
' Q�
. 0^ ^0
ry ry^
7 9 232.2
?��� ^h
ry
ASS
X77
40 0
6.16 Ac(c)
9.43 A c (c)
Z
0
g2.59
Q
I
g
(c)
375
Q
Cr
G
375
237 32 I
D
0
248.7
0
10
n
45.8 283.9 N
BLVD 8
®
1.59 A c (c)
0 CO n
OD CI
N N 1
—1...
24/011
.. 1.65 A c (c) =
Q Q
0
CO
2810
1.67 A c (c)
00
N
- n
205
N N
GULF -TO -BAY
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Owner: Mid - Pinellas Office Park, Inc.
Case: FLD201 1 -0501 9
Site: 355 Park Place
Property Size: 6.16 acres /268,330 s.f.
PIN: 17- 29 -16- 00000 - 240 -0400
Atlas Page: 291 A
AERIAL
Owner: Mid - Pinellas Office Park, Inc.
Case: FLD2011 -05019
Site: 355 Park Place
Property Size: 6.16 acres /268,330 s.f.
PIN: 17- 29 -16- 00000 - 240 -0400
Atlas Page: 291A
Looking W at subject property from across Hampton Road
Looking E from Hampton Road at adjacent land uses
Looking W at subject property from across Hampton Road
Looking E at subject property entrance from adjoining
office park
Looking N at subject property from adjoining office park.
Looking S along Hampton Road towards Gulf to Bay
Boulevard
355 Park Place
FLD2011 -05019
Kevin Nurnberger
100 S Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33756
727 - 562 -4567
kevin.nurnbergerna myclearwater.com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Planner III March 2011 to present
Planner II
City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida October 2010 to March 2011
Duties include performing the technical review and preparation of staff reports for various land
development applications, the organization of data and its display in order to track information and
provide status reports. Assist public customers at the Zoning Counter. Review Building permits Business
tax receipts and Landscape plans.
Planner I
County of York, Yorktown, Virginia 2007 to 2009
Reviewed residential, commercial and mixed use development plans to ensure compliance with planning,
zoning, subdivision and environmental standards as well as design criteria, specifications, regulations,
codes and ordinances. Manage case load of planning applications and conduct site visits. I met with
residents and neighborhood organizations regarding new existing residential development projects as
directed. I led pre - application meetings with residents, contractors and developers regarding future
projects which included state and local government agencies.
Site Assistant
Gahan and Long Ltd, Belfast, Northern Ireland 2006 to 2007
I helped to enforce Article 3 of the Planning Order (NI) with land owners, developers and district councils
on procedures relating to archaeological and built heritage remains on proposed development sites. I
assisted on site during the archeological process though out the pre - development stage.
Development Planner
Versar Inc, Fort Story /Fort Eustis, Virginia 2005 to 2006
Assisted the Cultural Resources Manager in the predevelopment stages of new development and building
expansion projects. Reviewed site plans to ensure protection of historic properties. Supervised and
participated in historical surveys and research in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, the secretary
of the Interior's Standards for Preservation planning and the Federal installations and the Virginia
Department of Historic Resources. I developed survey strategies for the Cultural Resource Manager by
reviewing local and state planning documents, comprehensive plans. The Virginia Department of
Transportation plan and Virginia Power's public utility plan. I acted as a resource to the community to
educate them on the matter of historic preservation.
City Planner
City Planning Commission, New Orleans, Louisiana 2000 to 2005
Primary subdivision planner assisting applicants throughout the subdivision process in accordance with
the zoning and subdivision regulations of the City of New Orleans. Evaluated zoning and subdivision
applications prepared and presented preliminary staff reports to the City Planning Commission and Board
of Zoning Adjustments. I participated in the community and neighbourhood workshops that focused on
remapping and rezoning portions of the city in support of the proposed new Comprehensive zoning
ordinance.
EDUCATION
University of New Orleans, LA
MA Urban and Regional Planning (2004)
State University of New York at Buffalo, NY
BA Anthropology (1999)
Clearwater
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 - Plans and
application are required to be collated, stapled, and folded into sets
❑ SUBMIT FIRE PRELIMARY SITE PLAN: $200.00
❑ SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $
CASE #:
RECEIVED BY (staff initials):
DATE RECEIVED:
❑ NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS)
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Comprehensive 1:nfi11 Redevelopment Project
(Revised 07/11/2008)
—PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT-
A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4- 202.A)
APPLICANT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER
The Richman Group of Florida, Inc. Attn: Damon Kolb
477 South Rosemary Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33401
FAX NUMBER: (561) 832 -1104
EMAIL: kolbd @richmancapital.com
(561) 832 -1114
PROPERTY OWNER(S): Mid- Pinellas Office Park, Inc. c/o Hallmark Development
List ALL ovmers on the deed
AGENT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER:
4500 - 140th Avenue North, Suite 101 Clearwater, FL 33762
Mr. Sean P. Cashen, P.E., LEED AP
13825 Icot Boulevard, Suite 605, Clearwater, Florida 33760
(727) 524 -1818 FAX NUMBER: (727) 524 -6090
(727) 432 -0365 EMAIL: scashen @gulfcoastconsultinginc.com
B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4- 202.A)
PROJECT NAME:
STREET ADDRESS
PARCEL NUMBER(S):
PARCEL SIZE (acres):
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSED USE(S):
Lakeside @ Park Place Apartments
355 Park Place Boulevard
17/29/16/00000/240 /0400
6.16 acres
See attached legal description.
Apartments
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
Specifically identify the request
(include number of units or square
footage of non- residential use and all
requested code deviations; e.g.
reduction in required number of
parking spaces, specific use, etc.)
PROJECT VALUATION: $ 8.1 Million
PARCEL SIZE (square feet): 268,330 s.f.
Implement DRI conversion to modify prior approval from office space to 108 apartments.
Utilize Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment project process for establishing heights &
setbacks to parking and building.
C:Documents and Settingsl derek.ferguson \Desktoplplanning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc
Page 1 of 8
DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TnR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES J NO ✓ (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents)
C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4- 202.A.5)
XSUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see
page 7)
D.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
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:
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.
See attached narrative summary.
The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent and and buildings or significantly
impair the value thereof.
See attached narrative summary.
The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
See attached narrative summary.
The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
See attached narrative summary.
The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
See attached narrative summary.
The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on
adjacent properties.
See attached narrative summary.
C: \Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson \Desktop \planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive 'all Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc
Page 2 of 8
WRITTEN
❑
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria)
Provide complete responses to the six (6) COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA — Explain how each criteria is
achieved, in detail:
The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and /or development standards set forth in this
zoning district.
See attached narrative summary.
The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general
purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning district
See attached narrative summary.
The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties.
See attached narrative summary.
Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development.
See attached narrative summary.
The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not
substantially alter the essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance with one or more of the fallowing
objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating
jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is characterized by other similar development and where a
land use plan amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation; or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and /or preservation of a working waterfront use.
See attached narrative summary.
Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off - street parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of
the following design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses
permitted in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of
the following design elements:
❑ Changes in horizontal building planes;
❑ Use of Architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
❑ Variety in materials, colors and textures;
❑ Distinctive fenestration patterns;
❑ Building stepbacks; and
❑ Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
See attached narrative summary.
C:\Documente and Settingslderek.ferguson \Desktop \planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive 'Mill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc
Page 3 of 8
E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria
Manual and 4- 202.A,21)
A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that involve addition
or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with the City of
Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption to 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.
❑ Proposed stormwater detention /retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
❑ Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations.
x
❑ COPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT
SUBMITTAL (SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF STORMWATER PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Applicant must Initial one of the following):
Sto water plan as noted above is included
mwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor
ations shall be 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;
TREE INVENTORY; prepared by a "certified arborist ", of all trees 4" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of
such trees;
t' 11 LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY;
Li 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; N/A
[I GRADING PLAN, as applicable;
❑ PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided); N/A
• COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; N/A
C:1Documents and Settingslderek .fergusonI Desktop \planning dept forms 07081Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc
Page4of8
G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4- 202.A)
0
SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36'):
�l Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package;
/ North arrow;
„/ Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared;
✓ All dimensions;
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;
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;
tiJ Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures;
• Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks; and
Floor plan typicals of buildings for all Level Two approvals. A floor plan of each floor is required for any parking garage requiring a
✓ Level Two approval.
SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in writtenftabular form:
• Land area in square feet and acres;
Number of EXISTING dwelling units;
rJ 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 & driveways,
expressed in square feet & percentage of the paved vehicular area;
Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility
easement;
1 Building and structure heights;
Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and
Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses.
EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED
268,330 s.f. (6.16 acres) 268,330 s.f. (6.16 acres
240 max '........ 108
N/A N/A N/A
0 216 219
N/A 89.718 s.f. VUA
N/A N/A N/A
Vacant N/A 37 ft.
Vacant .85 max ROR 0.63
N/A N/A N/A
REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale (8 '4 X 11);
❑ FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information an site plan:* Maximum 240 multi- family
• One -foot contours or spot elevations on site; units per DRI approval
Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel;
t/ 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;
C:\Documents and Setlings\derek.ferguson\Desktop \planning dept forms 0708tComprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc
Page 5 of 8
H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4- 1102.A)
13 `I LANDSCAPE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36°):
1 All existing and proposed structures;
1 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;
✓ Existing trees on -site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including driplines (as indicated on required
tree survey);
Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant
✓ schedule;
Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all
✓ existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names;
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;
7 Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board);
/ Irrigation notes.
REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8'' X 11);
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.
I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4- 2Q2.A.23)
CBUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS — with the following information:
• All sides of all buildings
1 Dimensioned
I Colors (provide one full sized set of colored elevations)
✓ Materials
I� `I REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS — same as above to scale on 8'A X 11
SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS / Section 3 -1806)
All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be
removed or to remain.
Imo` - 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'V X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application.
C:\Documents and Settingslderek .ferguson\Desktoplplanning dept forms 07081Cornprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc
Page 6 of 8
K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202,A.13 and 4- 801.C)
to Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or hlsfher designee or If the proposed development:
• Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan.
• Wilt 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 out the most recant edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip General Manual,
The Traffic Impact Study must be prepared In accordance with a "Seeping Meeting" held wlth the Traffic Operations Manager and the
Planning Department's Development Review Manager or ihelr designee (727 -562 -4750)
Refer to Section 4 -801 C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement,
Ii Acknowledgement 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) 582-
4750.
L. FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS/ WATER STUDY:
Provide Fire Flow Calculations. Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply Is available and to determine if
any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this project, The water supply must be able to support the needs of any required fire
sprinkler, stanilpipe and /or fire pump. If a fire pump Is required the water supply must be able to supply 150% of its rated capacity. Compliance with
the 2004 Florida Fire Prevention Code to include NFPA 13, MFPA 14, NFPA 20, NFPA 291, and MFPA 1142 (Annex 14) Is required.
fire flow calculations/water study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following):
Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is included.
Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study Is not required.
CAUTION — IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A FIRE FLOW
CALCULATIONS/ WATER 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 Fire Prevention Department at (727) 562 -4334.
M. SIGNATURE:
1, 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 property described In this application.
i
b
Signature of properly own6j(or repfe9enlativet
1» 17; %//1v GE
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINEI,1. S
Sworn to and subscribed before me this — day of
A.O, 20 t t to me and/or by
who Is personally known has
produced f-L-. )�
as identification,
Notary public,
My commission expires:
C:1Doouments and Selltngslderek .fergusontDesktoptplenning dept forms 07081Comprohensive lnfill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.don
Page 7 of 8
N.
1.
2,
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
R
AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT:
Provide names of all properly owners on deed — PRINT full names:
Mid - Pinellas Office Park, Inc.
That (I amlwe are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described properly (address or general Location):
Parcel ID #17/28/16/00000 /240 /0400
That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request)
Flexible Development Application
That the undersigned (has /have) appointed and (does/do) appoint:
Mr. Sean P, Goshen, P.E„ LEED AP, Robert C. Pergollzzi, AICP /PTP
as (his /their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition;
That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property;
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;
I i
(IA,( T), e unnder ' / ority, herb certify that the foregoing Is true and correct
/( Property�Owne`r Property Owner
Property Owner Property Owner
STATE OF FLORIDA,
COUNTY OF PINELLAS
Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this day of
t � "' I l personally appeared -�c.- (,- 1,443,c.,- ,,t42,v if' who having been first duly sworn
,a • - . rd sha a /she ruby understands the contents of the affidavit that e(,ehe signed.
0,,,i n1? LINDA D. FIECHTNERf 3,
0
,l j,
o °`� Notary Public - State of Florida i /
.t. r � ,-L�r { t # : � p ` Commission # DD 790899 ) � Vl /
° nu Bonded Through Nagonal Notary p sue, �: '-'' � Notary Ppbtfc Signature
Notary Ssal /S m "" °' "�'` My Commission Expires: t, /.1/4. /-7 1 "/
/ f
... ..
C:\Documents and Setlings\ derek.forguson \Dosktoplptanntng dept forms 07081Comprehensive in011 Project (RD) 2008 07- 11.doo
Page 8 of 8
is (06- 013:01) \D
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (PROVIDED)
A TRACT OF LAND LYING WITHIN THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF
SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE 16 EAST, PINELLAS
COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE CENTER OF SAID SECTION 17, ALSO BEING
THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINES OF
GULF -TO -BAY BLVD (S,R. 60) AND HAMPTON ROAD (C.R. 144);
THENCE S 89 °46'01" W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID
NORTHWEST 1/4 AND THE CENTERLINE OF GULF -TO -BAY BLVD
660.00 FEET; THENCE N 00 °19'21" W, 50 FEET TO A POINT ON
THE NORTH RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF SAID GULF -TO -BAY BLVD.;
THENCE CONTINUE N 00°19'21" W, 280.02 FEET; THENCE N
89'46'01" E, 627.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST
RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF SAID HAMPTON ROAD (C.R. 144);
THENCE N 0019'21" W ALONG SAID RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE 460.32
FEET ALONG A LINE 33 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE
EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 17 TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S 30 °01'50" W, 502.08 FEET;
THENCE S 87'39'10" W, 222.06 FEET; THENCE S 89 °40'39" W,
25.82 FEET; THENCE N 0019'21" W, 181.61 FEET; THENCE S
89 °40'39" W, 145.54 FEET; THENCE N 0019'21" W, 31.35 FEET;
THENCE N 29°46'01" E, 63.90 FEET; THENCE N 3013'59" W,
76.78 FEET; THENCE N 30'01'50" E, 211.83 FEET; THENCE S
59`58'10" E, 190.00 FEET; THENCE N 30 °01'50" E, 278.85 FEET;
THENCE S 8519'21" E, 242.27 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID WEST
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT -OF -WAY
ALONG A LINE 33 WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH EAST LINE OF
NORTHWEST f OF SECTION 17, S 00°19'21" E, 200.00 FEET TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 6.16 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc.
Land Development Consulting
Engineering • Planning • Transportation • Permitting
13825 ICOT Blvd., Suite 605
Clearwater, Florida 33760
Phone: (727) 524 -1818
Fax: (727) 524 -6090
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LAKESIDE @ PARK PLACE
APARTMENTS SITE
LAKESIDE AT PARK PLACE APARMENTS
NARRATIVE
General Applicability Criteria
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.
The 6.16 acre site is located within the Park Place DRI. The DRI is a mixed use development
containing, light industrial, office, multi-family residential and retail conunercial uses in a park-
like setting. The subject parcel has an underlying land use of Residential Office Retail (R/O /R)
which allows a maximum residential density of 18 units per acre. The proposed density is 17.53
units per acre, which is not out of character for the Park Place DRI, and in harmony with the
surrounding uses in scale, bulk, coverage and density.
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.
The site has frontage along Hampton Road (East). Adjacent lands to the west are already
developed with multi- family uses. An office building, parking area and other commercial uses
exist to the south and west. The project will not hinder or discourage the appropriate use of
adjacent land since this is one of the last remaining undeveloped site is the area.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing
or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
The proposed residential development will provide housing opportunities in close proximity to
major employers in Park Place. The site is surrounded by 3 -story residential uses and a 6 -story
office building which are compatible, and by Hampton Road on the east
The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
The proposed apartment complex would contain 108 units and will generate 718 daily trips and
67 trips during the PM peak hour per the ITE Trip Generation, 8th Edition Land Use Code 220
(Apartments).
The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate
vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
The community character is mixed -use and includes retail, residential, industrial and office uses.
The proposed development containing 108 apartments is consistent with the 3 -story multi- family
Page 1 of 5
residential buildings to thc west and is below the permitted density for a property with an RIO/R
land use designation and below the density allowed per the DRI.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual,
acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties.
The buildings are situated with sufficient setbacks from adjoining uses to minimize visual,
acoustic and olfactory impacts. The site is surrounded by 3-story multi-family buildings on the
west and by a 6-story office building and a parking lot on the south. Parking for 219 vehicles is
provided as surface spaces. There is a cross-access and parking easement with the office building
adjacent to the west which can provide overflow (visitor) parking if at all necessary.
Page 2 of 5
COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT
Project Criteria
1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is otherwise
impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards.
The DRI allows up to 240 multi- family units as a trade -off from the approved office. The R/O /R
Iand use would permit 110 dwelling units. The proposal is to construct 108 dwelling units, which
is within the allowable density. For office uses the previous approval (FLS 2007- 01003) reduced
the side setbacks to 5 -feet and approved an increased height to 45 -feet. The proposed apartments
are lower in height (3- story, 37 feet) and the requested setbacks (10 -feet side and rear) are
greater than previously approved 5- feet. These minor deviations are necessary to achieve a
reasonable density for a viable apartment project and to provide the code required parking.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic planning
objectives of this code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning district.
The site is presently vacant and development is essential to provide more affordable housing
particularly in close proximity to employment centers and retail centers (Clearwater Mall). Upon
completion, the project will be valued at $8.1 million and will be an integral part of the mixed -
use Park Place DRI. The development of this site is consistent with the goals of the
Residential/Office /Retail land use category of the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development
and improvement of surrounding properties.
The redevelopment of the site will not impede development or redevelopment of surrounding
property. All surrounding property is presently developed with residential, office, or retail uses.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed
development.
The development of the site as apartments is compatible with adjacent land uses. All
surrounding property is presently developed with residential, office, or retail uses.
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use category,
be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the essential use
characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance with one or more of
the following objectives:
Page 3 of 5
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an
existing economic contributor
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is
characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan amendment
and rezoning would result in spot land use or zoning designation;
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and /or preservation of a
working waterfront use
The proposed apartment use is permitted in the RIO /R land use category and is a permitted use
per the approved DRI master Plan for Park Place DRI. The DRI allows up to 240 multi- family
units.
The proposed use would contribute to the local economy and create jobs on a site that is vacant.
The proposed use is a development of a non - economically contributing vacant site.
The proposed apartment complex will provide 20% of the units as affordable housing.
The area is characterized by existing mixed uses including multi- family residential, office and
retail commercial uses and a land use plan amendment or rezoning are not necessary.
The project does not involve waterfront uses.
Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height, and off - street parking
are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development
and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning
district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by
the City;
c. The design, scale, and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the
proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design
elements:
Changes in Horizontal building planes
Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters,
porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.
Page 4 of
Variety of materials and colors
Distinctive fenestration patterns
Building stepbacks; and
Distinctive roof forms
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhances landscape design
and appropriate distances between buildings.
The development of 108 apartments will not impede the development of surrounding properties
as they are already developed with uses allowed in their respective zoning districts.
The proposed buildings are architecturally interesting and provide unique design features.
The design, scale and intensity are consistent with that already established within the Park Place
DRI. The proposed building heights are consistent with the adjoining properties and the density
is consistent with that allowed in the R/OIR land use category and the DRI as a whole.
The proposed buildings are architecturally interesting and provide unique design features such as
building stepbacks, pitched roofs, and fenestration patterns.
Page 5 of 5
TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT
The site is located within the Park Place DRI. The DRI development Order vests the
developments impacts against concurrency regulations. The area is approved for 100,000
square feet of office space, with potential trade -off to hotel or multi - family per the DRI
Development Order. The site was previously approved for an 85,000 square foot office
building (FLS 2007- 01003) which had traffic impacts of 935 daily trips and 127 PM peak
hour trips. The site is currently vacant and the proposed development on the subject
property consists of a 108 unit apartment complex. Per ITE Trip Generation, 8th Edition
Land Use Code 220 (Apartments) the expected trip generation of the project is only 718
daily trips and 67 PM peak hour trips. This represents a significant reduction in expected
traffic as compared to the prior approvals. As such a traffic impact study is not required.
STORMWATER NARRATIVE
The subject property consists of 6.16 acres and was previously approved by the City of
Clearwater (Park Place Phase IIA). The existing detention pond to the east of the site
was constructed in the late 1980's as part of a Master Drainage Plan for all of Park Place.
At the time of initial site plan approval for Lakeside at Park Place, the previous engineer
(Florida Design Consultants, Inc.) confirmed with SWFWMD and the City of Clearwater
that the existing pond (Pond E -4) was designed to accommodate the stormwater
quantity /quality needs of the site. The City of Clearwater issued a letter (June 17, 1997)
indicating "the City of Clearwater will not require any additional stormwater treatment or
attenuation on the subject site ". The City of Clearwater also indicated that evidence of
SWFWMD approval by letter, exemption or new permit would be required. Please see
letters dated June 16, 1997 (Florida Design Consultants), August 6, 1997 (SWFWMD),
August 4, 1986 (King Engineering) & September 4, 1986 (SWFWMD). Stonnwater
quality is provided by an existing underdrain system, the evidence of which is the
underdrain discharge pipe connected into and currently flowing water into the existing
Stormwater discharge control structure at the south end of the pond.
Subsequently Final Site Plans (as prepared by FDC) were approved July 23, 2002 for an
85,000 s.f. office building having a total impervious area of 189,070 square feet (ISR =
0.70) and Final Site Plans (as prepared by Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc.) were also
approved on March 29, 2007 (See attached FLS2007 -01003 Approval) for an 85,000 s.f.
office building having a total impervious area of 177,046 square feet (ISR = 0.66). The
current requested revisions show a reduced amount of impervious surface of 168,432
square feet (ISR = 0,63). Therefore, considering this proposed reduction in impervious
area coverage from previously approved Plans, a stormwater plan is not required for this
development and the existing pond can acconunodate stormwater from this proposed
development,
£ Fe�su�
Y GA oFLy,
Qa
�r.17#70-drLOI
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT
June 17, 1997
ATTACHMENT "D"
C I T Y O F CLEARWATER
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 Soum MYRTLE AVENUE
Posr OFFICE BOX 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 34618-4748
TELEPHONE (813) 562-1747 FAX (813) 562-1755
Mr. Gregory Singleton, P.E.
Florida Design Consultants, Inc.
2639 McCormick Drive
Clearwater, FL 34619
Re: Park Place Tract IIA
Dear Gregg:
This letter is in response to your correspondence of June 16, 1997 on the subject site. It
is apparent from the information in our files that the subject site was originally designed
to discharge directly to Park Place Pond E-4. The plans I have seen for the proposed
office development appear similar in intensity to the development as originally planned.
As such, the City of Clearwater will not require any additional stormwater treatment or
attenuation on the subject site.
Please note that you will need to provide evidence of SWFWNID approval (letter,
exemption or new permit) prior to issuance of City building permits for the proposed
project. If you have any questions or need additionalinfoiination, please call me at 562-
.4743.
Sincerely.:
Michael D. Quillen, P.E.
\Water Resource Engineer
cc: Bob Perkins
'`EQUAL E ate1 .IE iT,t'£I) AFr'11i:.i 1.`811 AcT oi; E'd£ I..Ol'E2i••
FLORIDA DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC.
ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS, SURVEYORS& PLANNERS
June 16, 1997
Ms. Alba Mas, P.E.
Surface Water Regulatory Manager
Tampa Regulation Department
Southwest Florida Water Management District
7601 Highway 301 North
Tampa, FL 33637
Re: Park Place Tract IIA of Phase 1
Dear Alba:
The intent of this Ietter is to verify our understandings for the permitting requirements for Tract IIA. of Park
Place (Tract IIA) Located in Pinellas County. On May 9, 1997 I rnet with Robin McGill, reviewer for the
most recent Park Place projects, to discuss Tract IIA. At the meeting I informed her of the following:
1. Park Place is an exempt DRI project.
Tract IIA received. an Exemption Notice of New Stour water Discharge Facility (SW V1 E04117)
on September 4, 1986 (copy attached).
3. The stormwater runoff from Tract IIA discharges to Pond F -4 that was constructed in a previous
phase.
The internal store sewer system; water, sewer and building pads were constructed in 1986 prior to
construction ceasing.
5. The proposed development will be an office building that is consistent with the use in 1986.
Robin and I discussed the past history of peiuutting requirements within Park Place. I have attempted to
summarize our conversation below:
I was the project manager for the Storz Ophthalmics Development (Permit #489844.00). Storz was
located in the northern portion of Park Place and lies on a major drainage basin divide. The
northern portion of the Storz project is located in the Alligator Creek Basin and the southern portion
is located in the Tampa Bay Basin. Since Tract IIA is located within the Tampa Bay drainage
_2639 McCORMICK DRIVE n CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 34619
(813) 724 -8422 • FAX (813) 724 -8606
•
Ms. Alba Mas, P.E.
June 16, 1997
Page 2
basin, only that part of the Storz permitting requirements were discussed in detail. No stoiniwater
quality facilities were required on the Storz property since it discharged its runoff to Pond E -4.
Pond E-4 was permitted to treat the stormwater runoff from the entire portion of Park Place lying
in the Tampa Bay Basin.
1 was also the project manager for the. Hampton Road widening project. A portion of the existing
Hampton Road appeared to drain to Pond E-4. I met with you in 1992/1993 to discuss the
possibilities of utilizing Pond E-4 for the stormwater treatment for Hampton Road. 1 was informed
that we would need to prove that Pond E-4 was functioning as designed and it was capable of
accepting the additional runoff. Since the ownership of Pond E-4 was in question at the time, we
chose not to investigate that option and decided to construct a separate facility.
0 KEA received a permit for the Grand Reserve (Permit 4489844.03) on December 20, 1996. The
Grand Reserve stormwater management system provided stormwater and attenuation treatment for
both itself and for the Storz project. We understand that the stormwater treatment was provided
because "they could not verify that the downstream permitted pond (Pond E -4) was built and
functioning as designed ". The above quote was obtained from the Pre - Application Meeting Notes.
for Park Place - The Grand Reserve dated April 26, 1996 (copy attached). Since the Master
Drainage Plans. both the PBS&J and the KEA. (copies attached) called for stormwater attenuation
ponds in these areas, it is understandable why KEA chose this option.
We then discussed Tract ILA. specifically. The Master Drainage Plans show Tract IIA discharging directly
into Pond E-4, i.e., no treatment or attenuation ponds were planned.. Based upon the information provided
to Ms. McGill, she stated that we had the following options:
1. Prove that Pond E -4 is functioning as designed.
2. Construct a stoic twater treatment facility on Tract HA.
I told. Ms. McGill that I would monitor Pond E-4 after rains to see if it was bleeding down the treatment
volume in an acceptable time. However, I inquired about the possibility of either fixing the existing system
or constructing a new filter system should we fmd that Pond E-4 is not functioning properly. Ms. McGill
stated that my inquiry seemed logical and acceptable, however, she would need to verify with her supervisor
(Alba Mas). Her main question was how the new filter drain system would be permitted. She was not sure
whether it would need a new permit or could it be handled asya maintenance to the existing permit.
Ms. Alba Mas, P.E.
June 16, 1997
Page 3
Alba. I have attempted to be as thorough as possible in this letter, however, I realize that a meeting may be
required before you can make a decision. I am available to meet with you and/or Ms. McGill at your earliest
convenience in order to receive confirmation of our alternatives.
S incerely,
P. Gregory Singleton, P.E.
Vice President of Engineering
:es
Att.
cc: Nick Shackleton
Ed Mazur
File 172 -01
3u 61na1 Onjvarrrrim Esnpkru
Roy G. Harrell, Jr.
Chairman. St. Petersburg
Joe L. Davis, Jr.
Vice Chairman. Wauchula
Curtis L Law
Secretary. Land 0. Lakes
Sally Thompson
Treasurer. Tampa
James L. Allen
Bushnell
Ramon F. Campo
Brandon
Rebecca M. Eger
Sarasota
John P. Hart lee, IV
Bradenton
Ronald C. Johnson
Lake Wales
James E. Martin
St. Petersburg
Virginia S. Roo
Tampa
E. D. "Sonny" Vergara
Executive Director
Edward B. Helvenston
• General Counsel
'E.Cc llence
/7irr'ltgIt
Quality
Sert'ice
Southwest Ploricia
Water Management District
2379 Broad Street Brooksville, Florida 34609 -6899 1- 800 - 423 -1476 (Florida Only) or
(352) 796 -7211 o SUNCOM 628 -4150 Y T.D.D. Number Only (Florida Only): 1- 800 - 231 -6103
7401 tfghway 301 Norlh
Tampa. Florida 33637 -6759
1- 803. 836-0797 or (813) 935.7481
SUNCOM 578.2070
August 6, 1997
170 Century 8ouevord
Bartow, Florida 33830.7703
1— K0.492 -7852 or (941) 534.1448
SUNCOM 572-6203
Mr. P Gregory Singleton, P.E.
Florida Design Consultants, Inc.
2639 McCormick Drive
Clearwater, Florida 34619
115 Corporation Way
Verce, Rorid° 34292 -3524
1- 5C0- 320.3503 or (941)485.1212
SUNCOM 526.590) -
2303 HIgtswoy 44 West
Inverness, Florida 34453 -3807
(352)537-13613 .
Subject: Project Name: Park Place Tract IIA of Phase I
Application No.: S9Th E04117
County: Pinellas
Sec /Twp /Rge: 17/29S/16E
Reference: Rule 40D- 4.051(6), Florida Administrative Code
Dear Mr. Singleton:
Pursuant to your letter of June 16, 1997 and meeting of May 9, 1997,
regarding the above mentioned project, Tract IIA received an Exemption
Notice of New stormwater Discharge Facility (SWM E04117) on September 4,
1986. Apparently, Pond E -4, the internal storm sewer system, water, sewer
and building pads were constructed in 1986. However, the surface water
management system was not certified and a Statement of Completion was not
received by the District. The property owner is ready to finish the site
as an office development, consistent with the use proposed in 1986.
You would need to prove Pond E -4 is functioning as designed and provide
required certification and as -built information in order to complete the
site development. Another option would be to construct a new stormwater
treatment facility on Tract IIA. You inquired about the possibility and
the permitting -requirements of either fixing the existing system or
constructing a new filter system should you find that Pond E -4 is not
functioning properly. Either of these activities could be done under the
existing permit as part of the standard maintenance reguirernents of filter
systems. A modification of the permit would be required, however, if the
water quality treatment method were proposed to be altered (e.g. wet
detention).
If you have questions ar if I may be of assistance, please contact me et
the Tampa Service Office, extension 2072.
Sincerely,.
-Robin L. McGill, P.E.
Tampa Regulation Department
RLld: mv1370
cc: File of Record
Alba Was, P.E.
rt •
eit'oorri
•
': • ••••••
, •-g:atig(31.,
. ______-,......................wAtnonimvaatingatd=1.. + kV ei \ •
laiRkiti • gi: ; p I-s.: . :- ' ;
. ' "rhr: .° l' '.L_,,:.‘ •
...I''."11r:,... 1 :,: • : 1.. ,T. tzl'il,7, 1:t• r- - • ..'. ' r -.: r''. ..I... . r ;',.: ' . ..: .-. ' - ,,, ‘ , I.. /..7. '''' ' %,"kr.,:.t.:-: .•
• .. .
lil: A.1 C9 144 • 0:‘:. ;id -.33 IV •
,. • ...-, .1.41., 0 w
a ' 11019 (5: 1.-1.51. ; .l'i!-1117.,'1:1'.. '4;4.4 : 'atl4:: 4641;1:";)...e.-k. -.4.
Aeay 4.3, as . ... • .:,..,,..r .r..,'... . 14 .;.; a .:• •-,,,,,,: .
31 R u Li ... • 41:i., —. !.. ....,....,A741,.,,,
lit 4-P I In 1:3 .7: • RI ' 14 fd 4, .... 141 (j
•re ta Is4 1, , 0..V'V 4 ;PP di 4-I m ,•,;7-:.:',..:".
.?,.,..t4DI:.),,,,Q,),Ti -4;:i .?r. 43 0 • o ::..-:
E; 811::(41.i..01:,,,9:-4 : '114' "Hill a .:-4i'•'. ;''' P-'....i
.a... 1...4 a a ...i.
43,..;;;...'... 64'. .4) 11444,. •I'
• ,t.1 ° ' go '.:. al
,,.... a • 6.11-1
.,.E0 . .1" .4.A
w V t .,..:.''..*: • 0 "t•)''' \-..',1' - •
.:All 4.
zg-- .-f ,-.1? . trb.itclo iz lit
fi, ,s, 44 .• ,. t9 •ri::‘.. ',a-4
•-•':)2;-...;C:1:46 1741 •r:°5- 651:4‘13 .rail'..\...;,:....,.:11::.. "1-3",irld•-tj. .
8Q-"1"...:-...:‘.iii211
1,- r1:1 f-14 4'4 • -; -0 ' 4 14 ra
'4.i: " "r • . ,, ' LI •
i
: tit 44;11 Pt Vs-1 • 4 '• ;.'' ...• . /
0 0
. _ ';',.
i.
,g 0.1 a) 0 ,•-',:i; ''"I'
° ..q ','-:',.4....q •
. it) Ng':;'''': ., 64 • Id ..:',. . '..,
4-1 1Zrg...1
.r, fai il 0
,I
In : f
!'.,
l ?: Ati 6i Cli Li ..9 ....q
-.....1,N,04 ....e.,
-.......-.1 , Ctl 4.3
t,
, .., .
0 ,
N
4.1 " R A '' • ; .;. . ;1 14 .y) E11 ta.1.10 . 10 ea . 0 cl
4 f ol
. 0 6 4 ,
it.;
a 6 -' ,...• : cli -r-g 0 w 9•, m o • )..411.1 0.1
f.,.. >I tt .4-1 ',I". '• al 1.4 a)
4., 0 fa .. 1.4 ' rl
11311 g .-. a Di el ,1 '"'"I ' *rli al
.1: „ fd u :::.... tIll 8
-..... • 'IV V Li '
.4.3 tj °1,'
.,..... i 134
. .
. . L..;1 aw 0 .,.,,. rs 1c. 1,3 ricii ,._i
: Li 1241 t ... r) ID if • t:; ris' ,g c4 4-9
8
4 ,l. ...4:', :,..' ..;'.-• go 4 gt ''''. 4, ..?‘ f_gs.4 ail. INJ fcl . iri , - 0••• .
,-; ,• „ti...,,,,i. ... •...,•...f.....,, /.?.., •,,,?.... ,.. : .... .. :...-,.-Jg.::,,
-.,.....q,e,
/-,... i Oa gLi •.• • : Li,.11 -.1...,..,4.,, ;1.44, • 0,■,- .1 . ....iilL,
i■ iY,,,..1 ,•-■,`, 1-1-s- ,1,- ....A., 4 IN ....7-4 .-- .1 ,".1r.,■•• ,ft.r.F,P.,.:,;, ',.71
1„,110;44,r olcivi,t,'?i,itt.0.:•:',,:...','P',It'■'-.-11I, q i.i. ' ''• I
Alggt,91
•
' •
Pj1.71'1.'
1
t:
$
IZRATPT
;43witrgai'f,e1.11:0 SW1 9iPh 1 i:.:-0.114iii-AiVOPP.i0.t.1?...:.:g 'c3Xgt.VCiI.aird.)M1...!
ret. .•• .
-; . _ •
•
. 1;1-
..ti :..•
I1 fTh/jt
alL1)."-,‘
rezi=7:3 riiv
- C f1(
2379 BROAD STREET, BROOKSVILLE, FLORIDA 33512-9712
PHONE (904) 796-7211 SUNCOM 684-0111
MICHAEL 2AGORAC. JR., Chairman, Belleair Wm, 0. STUBBS, JR., Vice Chairman, Dade City
MARY A. KUMPE, Secretary, Sarasota WALTER H. HARKALA, Treagrrer, Plant City
HORACE F. HERNDON, Lake Wales ROY G. HARRELL, JR., St. Petersburg
ROBERT T. BRAMSON, RD., Tampa WILLIAM H. WI LCOX, Ph.D., Port Charlotte
GARY W. KUHL, Executive Director DANIEL P. FERNANDEZ, General Counsel'
WILLIAM K. HENNESSEY, Deputy Executive Director PETER G. HUBBELL. Deputy Executive Director
September 4, 1986
Metro Development Corporation
c/o Mr. Richard D. Harris, P.E.
King Engineering Assoc., Inc.
2145 U.S. 19, North
Clearwater, FL 33575
I (...
, 11
ri.-- ... -: ,---- • . ''
jj.1 --•-. -• -. 1
I3.; Project Name: Park Place Tract IIA of Phase I
File No(s): SWM E04117
County: Pinellas
Dear Sir:
Your Exemption Notice for New Stormwater Discharge Facility Constructior
was received on June 11, 1986 and appears sufficient to meet minimum pre-
construction notice and certification requirements of Section 17-25.03(2),
F.A.C. However, please be advised that the receipt of your notice does not
constitute a deteLmination by the District that the proposed facility
exempt from the permit requirements of Chapter 17-25, Florid
Administrative Code.
All practicable and necessary effort should be taken during construction tc
control and prevent erosion and transport of sediment to surface drains,
surface waters, or onto property other than that which you own,
Revegetation and stabilization of disturbed ground surfaces should be
accomplished as rapidly as possible to prevent erosion from occurring anc
reduce the sediment load in the discharge water.
Please be reminded that Section 17-25.03(2), F.A.C., requires_ that ar
engineer registered in Florida shall certify, on the form herewitl
provided, within. 30 days after construction is completed, that the ne
stoilliwater discharge facility, as constructed, aualifies for exernptior
under this section.
Sincerely,
DAVID A, TALHOUK
Surface Water Management
Resource Regulation Department
DAT:jg
Enclosure: As-Built Certification Sy Professional Engineer (Exemptior
Notice)
CONSERVE WATER TODAY FOR
TOMORROW-
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TY OF CLEARWATER
POST OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756
TELEPHONE (727) 562 -4567 FAx (727) 562 -4865
v 5 ,°3' E
March 29, 2007
Mr. Robert Pergolizzi
13825 ICOT Boulevard, Suite 605
Clearwater, Florida 33760
Re: FLS2007 -01003 (355 Park Place Boulevard)
Dear Mr. Pergolizzi:
This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4- 206.D.6 of the Community Development
Code. On March 8, 2007, the Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed your Flexible Standard
Development to allow an 85,000 square foot office within the Commercial (C) District and an Office parcel of
the Park Place Development of Regional Impact (DRI) with an increase from the minimum standard building
height of 25 feet to 45 feet and a reduction of the minimum standard side (north/south) setbacks from ten feet to
five feet (to pavement) pursuant to Section 2 -703 of the Community Development Code. The DRC
APPROVED these applications based upon the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and subject
to the attached conditions of approval:
Findings of Fact:
1. That the 6.16 -acre subject property is located along the west side of Hampton Road approximately 725 feet
north of Gulf to Bay Boulevard;
2. That the subject property is located within the Commercial (C) District and the Residential /Office/Retail
(R/O/R) Future Land Use Plan category;
3. That the subject property is located within the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) known as Park Place
and the parcel is designated as Office;
4. That the development proposal is compatible with the surrounding area and will enhance other development
and redevelopment efforts; and
5. That there are no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property.
Conclusions of Law:
1. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards and Criteria as per Section 2 -703 of tlaz_
Community Development Code;
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2- 7031 of ti:e
Community Development Code;
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level One and I:.r'i l '17.,,v0
Approvals as per Section 3 -913 of the Community Development Code;
4. That the development proposal is consistent with the approved Park Place DRI.
FRANK HIBBARD, \LAYOR
JOHN DORAN, COUNCJLdEMSER t J.B. jui.NSON, COUNCILr!6MBER
BILL JO ISON, COUNCIL !EMBER
i'.
.,RLEN A. PETERSEN, CouNCI1.MEAiB1:R
"EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRAlATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER"
March 28, 2007
355 Park Place — FLS2007-01003
Page 2 of 2
Conditions of Approval:
1. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the plans shall be revised to include a detail of a solid
waste enclosure. The enclosure shall screen the proposed compactor on four sides so as not to be visible
from rights -of -way and abutting properties with materials used in said screening to be consistent with those
used in the construction and architectural style of the principle building;
2. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, all plans shall be revised to be consistent with regard to
those trees to be preserved and /or removed (i.e. trees #97, 104, 133, 138, 139 and 190);
3. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the "D" dimension in the tree barricade detail shall be
changed to 1"x4";
4. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the preservation plan shall be revised to indicate all root
prune locations;
5. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the Public Art and Design Impact Fee shall be paid;
6. That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, any required Transportation Impact Fees are paid;
7. That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all utilities including individual distribution lines
will be installed and /or relocated underground; and
8. That the final design and colors of the buildings are consistent with the architectural elevations approved by
Staff.
I concur with the findings of the Development Review Committee and, through this letter, APPROVE your
application for Flexible Standard Development with the above conditions. This approval is based upon, and
must adhere to, the application and development plans date stamped received March 16, 2007.
Pursuant to Section 4 -303 of the Community Development Code, an application for a building permit shall be
made within one year of Flexible Standard Development approval (by March 8, 2008) with all required
certificates of occupancy being obtained within two years of the date of issuance of the building permit.
Please be advised that time frames do not change with successive owners. An extension may be granted by the
Community Development Coordinator for a period not to exceed one year and may be done only within the
original period of validity. The Community Development Coordinator may approve one further extension not to
exceed one year for good cause shown and documented in writing. The coordinator must receive the request for
extension within the period of validity following the first extension.
The issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity to obtain building permits or pay
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.
Should you have any questions, please clo not hesitate to contact Robert G. Tefft, Planner ITT at (727) 562 -4539
or via e -mail at robert.tefft@myclearwater.com.
Sincerely,
Michael
Planning Director
S:'Planning DepartmenOOC D B!Flev Standard ( LS)llnactit•e or Finished Cases &Park Place Blvd 355 Lakeside Office (C) Approved 03- 08 -07V ark Place
355 - Development Order 03- 29- 07.doc
DERSON LESNIAK LIMITED, INC.
dscape architects 1 land planners
S Westshore Blvd. Tampa, FL 33611
p 813.831.9595 f 813.831.5485
June 9, 2011
Mr. Damon Kolb
The Richmond Group of Florida, Inc.
580 Village Boulevard, S -120
West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 -1953
Dear Mr. Kolb,
Re: Existing Tree Inventory and Ratings
Lakeside @ Park Place Apartments
355 Park Place Boulevard
The existing trees on the site have been assessed according to The City of Clearwater's Tree
Rating System. All of the existing trees on the site have been marked with a number that
corresponds with the numbers shown on the Table on page two, so they can be identified in the
field. These trees are shown on the Tree Preservation Plan along with their number, size, rating
and status. The City of Clearwater rating system numbers are explained below:
0 = Dead - require removal
1 = Poor (nearly dead, hazardous) - require removal
2 = below Average (declining, diseased, poor structure, potential hazard) - Require Removal
3 = Average (worthy of preservation but has some minor problems, minor decline, tip die -back,
minor inclusion) - Problems can be corrected
4 = Above Average (rather healthy tree with very minor problems)
5 = Outstanding (very healthy)
6 = Specimen (unique in size, age, exceptional quality)
Trees rated 0 -2 should be removed because they pose a hazard - no replacement required, trees
rated 3 are worthy of preservation but could be sacrificed to allow additional preservation of trees
rated 4 -6 and trees rated 6 (very rarely used) are trees that cannot be removed.
In general, the existing trees on this site are in moderate to poor condition and appear to have
been adversely impacted by previous site clearing activities. See page two for tree table with
conditions.
Sincerely,
(33_7,4410
L. Alyson Utter
Anderson Lesniak Limited, Inc.
ISA Certified Arborist FL -6158A
Tree Inventory for 355 Park Place Boulevard - Page 1
Existing Tree Table with City of Clearwater Condition Ratings
Tag No.
Species
DBH
Rating
1
Live Oak
14"
3
2
Live Oak
11"
3
3
Live Oak
n/a
Dead
4
Live Oak
27"
3
5
Cabbage Palm
10"
4
6
Live Oak
7"
3
7
Live Oak
10"
4
8
Live Oak
19"
4
9
Live Oak
6',5"
3
10
Live Oak
22"
3
11
Laurel Oak
12"
3
12
Live Oak
15 ",8"
3
13
Live Oak
14"
4
14
Live Oak
11"
2
15
Live Oak
8 ",5"
3
16
Live Oak
8"
3
17
Live Oak
15"
4
18
Live Oak
12"
3
19
Live Oak
10"
3
20
Live Oak
8"
3
21
Live Oak
10"
3
22
Live Oak
6"
3
23
Live Oak
14"
3
24
Live Oak
10"
3
25
Live Oak
10"
3
26
Live Oak
6"
3
27
Live Oak
5"
3
28
Live Oak
4"
3
29
Live Oak
9"
3
30
Live Oak
7"
3
31
Live Oak
10"
3
Tree Inventory for 355 Park Place Boulevard - Page 2
1111111 111111111111
Lakeside ® Park Place, Ltd
477 Rosemary Avenue
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
LAKESIDE Q PARK PLACE APARTMENTS
��l
le arwater
Clearwater Fire & Rescue
610 Franklin Street— Clearwater, Florida 33756
Public Works Administration — Engineering Department
100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Suite 200 — Clearwater, Florida 33756
FIRE FLOW & HYDRANT WORKSHEET
(Revised 03/29/2006)
This worksheet is required to be submitted to and approved by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) prior to DRC
meeting for any project that is more than 3 stories or more than 30 feet in height above the lowest Fire Dept vehicle
access point or for any other project that will require an Automatic Wet Standpipe System and /or Fire Pump before
any permits for new building construction, building expansion or fire hydrants will be issued by the City of Clearwater.
Information and design must comply with Florida Building Code, Chapter 9 - Fire Protection Systems, Florida Fire
Prevention Code to indude applicable NFPA Code (NFPA 1, 13, 13D, 13E, 13R, 14, 15, 20, 291 and 1142 Annex H)
and AWWA M -17 - Installation, Field Testing and Maintenance of Fire Hydrants.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Name: L a kk 54.1e
Project Address:
id, r K P 1 e / I 7 7 4 ; / 71 -rhe.l f5
f t t
cc' F'c',, le v if'c.1
I GENERAL WATER SYSTEM INFORMATION
Location of Nearest Fire Hydrant 2 71 5 L
Size of Water Main Supplying Fire Row: 6-7
Static: 75 psi Residual:
r l "' .c:•(- u e (.': Hydrant #:
Looped System or Dead End WaterMain?
psi Pitot: 5 psi Flow: /07 SG' gpm
Distance of Test Gauges Relative to the Base of the Riser: Horizontal
Hydrant Test Conducted by: (;' —v
(Include /Attach Copy of Actual Test Sheet)
Ft. Vertical Elevation Ft.
NFPA HAZARD CLASSIFICATION
Area#
Classification
ml. NFP.4 i3it
Attach Additional Sheets if Necessary
Description of Hazard Protected
(Commodity 0 escription, Store e Height and Arrangement, if applicable):
Page 1 of 3
DESIGN PARAMETERS
Area #
Systemiype Area (sq. ft.)
tire' SI, 0 0(.1
Attach Additional Sheets if Necessary
Density (gpinift) Inside Hose (gpm) Outside Hose (gpm)
0, 0 5 dv ef f cpi ?,
Total Needed Fire Row (N.F.F.)
Is Existing System Supply Sufficient to Meet N.F.F. Above?
I co CrPpi
No X Yes
CODES AND STANDARDS
System Conponent
F-/e:
Applicable NFPA Standard / Year Edition and OtherApplicable Codes or Statutes
N Pit /2/? co) 4?,),-4.‘, .) 4 (Iv die 10 7
Attach Additional Sheets if Necessary
If Project Includes Fire Pump, Supplythe Following: N
Fire Pump Information: Pump Capacity:
Rated Pressure:
On-Site Storage Tank Capacity (?):
gpm Churn Pressure:
psi Pressure @ 150% Flow:
psi
psi
PREPA RER /
SP ECI Fl ER I NFORMATION
Preparer Name:
Company Nbme:
gobo.t /2.71,-ve, p z.)-1
2 'L.)! it ■;/.
Mailing Address: /v!
City: CI(
in c neer ..1.9
State: F Zip:
"tP1.
_) f / ;
Phone: /./07 - 77 3' 7e Fax: 7
Page 2 of 3
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED
Fire Prevention Items to be Addressed Prior to DRC Approval:
1. Provide Fire Flow Calculation / Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply is
available and to determine it any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this project. The water supply
must be able to support the needs d any required fire sprinkler, standpipe and /orf ire pt.mp. If a fire pump is required, the water
supply must be able to soppy 150% of its rated capacity. Compliance with the 2004 Florida Fire Prevention Code to include
NFPA 13, NFPA 14, NFPA 20, NFPA291, and NFPA 1142 (Annex H) is required.
2. When an FDC s required, it shall be a minimum of 15 feet rom building and shall have a fire hydrant within 40 feet. This hydrant
shall not be located on the sane main as the Fire Sprinkler and must be on the supply side cf a double detector check valve.
This hydrant is in addition to the hydrant that b required for firefighting purposes that is to be within 300f eet of building, as the
hose lays, and on the sane side of the street as the project.
3. Provide and show on the plan a minimum 30 -foot turning radius for emergency vehicle ingress and egress at all entrances and
exits.
4. Provide and show on the site plan 24 f eet of width at driveway s / drive aisles for emergency vehicle ingress and egress for front
and rear parking lots. Where driveways are split by an island with one -way traffic, each side of the island shall provide and show
on the site plan 20f eet of width at the driveways on each side of the island.
5. Provide a Fire Department access roadway (with turn - around, Y, T or cul- de-sac) in accordance with NFPA 1. A Fire Department
access roadway must have 24400t clear width and 14 -foot vertical clearance, and be capable cf supporting the weight of Fire
Department vehicles (80,000Ibs).
Page 3
04/11/2011 08 :39 7275624551 PUBLIC UTILITIES
Apr. c. 2011 10:33AM gulf coast colsultin$
1 06/07/2010 11 :03 7275624629
ayi�� +. y ..rn•- . -{'�7, 'fit
•
Cos -owls Ssrnrca
To Whom ft witty Concern:
rlr
��yy f'AGE 1)?
TO P. 1
PAGiy, 01/01
CITY O F CLEARWATER
Pnsi OWE Box 4748, CutAnansz, F ;onna 33758 -4748
MurircmAr. SgriVras ntnurnto, 100 5Ou t MYan.& Avpoun, Surat 220, cLKArnenralte, rt.0110453156
Trr.F.wtiQNIi (727) 5624(00 rAx (727) 5614624
Please complete the following information below to schedule a hydrant flow test. The flow t
550.00 for each hydrant tested:
Company Name: Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc.
Date of hydrant test: As soon as possible
Mailing adclress:13825 ICOT Blvd Suite 605, Clearwater, FL 33760
Contact person: Tim Neisinger
Telephone number: (727) 524 -1818
Fax number: (727) 524 -6090
Hydrant #1 !Oration information.
Map 291A, Hydrant #39 (near 2715 East Grand Reserve Circle)
Hydrant #2 location information:
Map 291A, Hydrant #28 (near 311 Park Place Blvd)
Hydrant #3 location information.
Hydrant #4 location information:
Sincerely,
Customer Representatiue
T :CWY AN At'P 10.14, 5U1! AC hu rho V.4 '11 vtrs"
04/14/2011 39:39
7275624961
PUBLIC UTILITIES
FLOW TEST
CITY OF CLEARWATER
WATER DEPARTMENT
FLI1ON
7 15 R&E&VE
DATE OF TEST
/a 1)
STATIC:
psI Rq -A H
,4 3
RESIDUAL 6416 PSI
29/ - /yfj.
3g
PITOT PSI zi A
#37
PITT 5G P.0
T31-4 k tr 27
FLOW /18-0 GPM
FLO DJ /
HYDRANT # 37
(2q I -A /-tlyb
aqt- A
GRID # -A
Bose: CoE FT 1 c I
CUSTOMER REQUESTING TEST
J
04!14!2011 08 :39 7275624961
PUBLIC UTILITIES PAGE 04
FLOW TEST
CITY OF CLEARWATER
WATER DEPARTMENT
FLOW 1210 0 GPM
FAO VU
HYDRANT # 2.8
�MISC: CdEf 1C1 EMT
CUSTOMER REQUESTING TEST
• Clearwater
U
Planning & Development
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 - Plans and
application are required to be collated, stapled and folded into sets
* NOTE: A TOTAL OF 15 SETS OF THIS APPLICATION AND ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED IN
CONJUNCTION WITH A COMPLETE LEVEL ONE OR LEVEL TWO APPLICATION.
COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM
(Revised 11/29/2010)
CASE NUMBER:
RECEIVED BY (Staff Initials):
DATE RECEIVED:
—PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT—
APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4- 202.A)
APPLICANT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
E -MAIL ADDRESS:
PROPERTY OWNER(S):
List ALL owners on the deed
AGENT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER:
The Richman Group Attn. Damon Kolb 0
477 —Si:81th Ras emaxy_Ayenuewest Pa) m_B_er' e 1, FL 33401
(561) 832 -1114 CELL NUMBER: (561) 832 -1104
kolbdOrichmarlcapital.com
Mid- Pinellas Office Park, Inc. c/o Hallmark Development
4500 - 140th Avenue North, Suite 101 Clearwater, Florida 33762
Mr. gpan P r'aghpn, P F , LFF.P AP
13825 Icot Boulevard, Suite 605, Clearwater, Florida 33760
(727) 524 -181
(727) 432 -0365
(727) 524 -6090
FAX NUMBERcashen Cgulfcoastconsultinginc. com
E -MAIL ADDRESS:
The landscaping requirements of Article 3, Division 12, may be modified or waived as part of a Level One (Flexible Standard) or Level Two
(Flexible Development) application, as the case may be if the application for development approval includes a Comprehensive Landscape
Program, which satisfies the following criteria. The use of landscape plans, sections /elevations, renderings and perspectives may be
necessary to supplement the information provided on this worksheet. Landscaping associated with the Comprehensive Landscape Program
shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met.
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.
The Landscape Plan proposes perimeter landscape buffers of 10', with native, evergreen trees
specified between 15' and 30' on center to provide a dense screen. Foundation landscape
with several layers of plants have been shown along the facades of all of the buildings.
A variety of shrubs, ornamental grasses and ground cover complement the building architecture,
OR
b. The design, character, location and/or 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.
The total number of Tree and Palms specified on the Landscape Plan exceeds the typical code
requirements. The specified perimeter tree spacing is less than the typical 35' on center.
Every interior landscape island has a tree and small trees and palms have been specified
along the facades of the buildings. Tree sizes have been upgraded from 2.5" to 4" caliper.
Page 1 of 2
2. 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.
The Landscape lighting will be controlled by a timer that will turn the lights out at a set
time to save energy.
3. COMMUNITY CHARACTER:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater.
The proposed Landscape design contains native and drought tolerant plant materials that are
well adapted to the project site's environmental characteristics, therefore the plant materials
will thrive in the native soils with only minimal additions of water and fertilizer. A variety_of
• - .• - .e -
ate
tan s toil • .v'.e col._ and e.sonal 'n ere to h- project.
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,
The property will be transformed from a vacant lot to a lushly landscaped community with
attractive buildings and amenities such as a pool /clubhouse and a tot lot for children.
The formally open field will be landscaped with large trees to provide shade and small trees
and palms will provide color and texture along the building facades.
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.
The proposed plant palette includes tree and shrub species that have been used in the surrounding
developments and along nearby State Road 60; such as Live Oaks, Bald Cypress, Muhly Grass and
Several palm spe
e,_ar_ornsal flavor to the development.
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 representative • visit and
photograph the groper 4 -.t :+, I. sire': tion.
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS
SIgren .to and subscribed before me this 2.9 day of
C r 6 , A.D. 20 11 to me and/or by
Soot Pt C I-1)1 wh isMpersonally known has
prod e
a d- fi ;tion
otary public,
My commission expires:
zs,
Notary Public State of Florida
Chantal Vachon
My Commission 00050596
Expires 01/1112013
C:IDocuments and Settingstderek.fergusonlLoce! Settings!Tempora,y Internet FileslContent .Outlook \KPMVX8FllComprehensive Landscape Program
11 2010.docx
Page 2 of 2
pepis epnoO
99vu _C -.0
M3IA 301$
1.92uwn9o3 992
'411 91S
aseq ppump .4l
lalatuulp .9E
9619 -El
EOE8 S1
1MO0 ANVOSRL
M3IA 3OIS
tez anopwe
Lit anon.,"
1a¢ip
Pp:) ss,sussn OHMS F - -1
9181M da'[N 9E19M9 F-1
spelt aA0 It _p x ,z
ea190819 Jo (Dollop
181e3. 100/900114
iy -- - .ul•nvdm D at0oao Mvwlt.>ta v
i I 1 I
plop Apno0 „9
I 1o3 -bs ,.e - .l I I
111111111111111•0 • IN
utunlou 01 000103 Zl
Rued 0619.9 .1
—I Iwo bs.°-,'
�.— .eveca•s —
9991 ..t 91 palunool u618
11 91 00 1 ) 5 . 1 ..el V ..09, lo04
0601 @ appal papddy
t'iupunoi palaaouoq Bupano3
Bu1PIn iv pwo] ouegle+n poem] oetek y
P 01154 9111 pane16u3
0919,1 o louMf of p9199019
'01)..4-.L x _9•,S
(oil 9'66) Aoiy ltlnupllnly 1111 nos • U6iS ulnuluInly 01e4 WBU1S
9149 03
0p010