The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2014-110320 � �lear�a�� _ _ :.`_f � ,� ; Y _ _ _ ,.__ �` . � 1- _ MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: CASE: REQUEST: GENERAL DATA: Agent... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. Applicant/ Owner... ........ Location ... ... ... ... ............ Property Size ... ............ Future Land Use Plan. Zoning. .. . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . .. . . . Special Area Plan ............. Adjacent Zoning.... North. South: East: West: Existing Land Use ............. Proposed Land Use ... ... ... COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT January 20, 2015 D.3. FLD2014-11032 Flexible Development application to permit a restaurant with a height of 15 feet to roof structure (23 feet to highest architectural feature), a front (south) setback of 89 feet (to building) and 15 feet (to paving), a front (west) setback of 51 feet (to building) and 10 feet (to paving), a front (east) setback of 51 feet (to building and 10 feet (to paving) a side (north) setback of 88 feet (to building) and 10 feet (to paving), and 50 parking spaces (11.79 spaces per 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area) in the Commercial (C) District as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-704.C; to reduce the number of required perimeter trees from 23 trees to 20 trees, increase the number of parking spaces in a row from 10 spaces to 13 spaces and eliminate the required foundation plantings along the front (west) fa�ade of the proposed building as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3-1202.G; and approval of a two-year Development Order. Katherine E. Cole and E.D. Armstrong, III; Hill Ward Henderson Trinity Presbyterian Church, a Florida non-profit corporation 2008 Gulf to Bay Boulevard; northeast corner of Gulf to Bay Boulevard and South Hercules Avenue. 1.16 acres Commercial General (CG) Commercial (C) District None Institutional (I) District Commercial (C) District Commercial (C) District Commercial (C) District Retail Plaza (vacant) Restaurant (fast food) '_ �,riV[il n'aLel Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review . �.,» . . .. . . ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 1.16 acre site is located at the northeast corner of Gulf to Bay Boulevard and South Hercules Avenue. The subject site is also the subject of a minor lot line adjustment application (MIS2014-11001) dependent upon the approval of this Flexible Development application. Minor lot line adjustments are processed administratively without a formal public review. The minor lot line adjustment will create two properties; a north property (2001 Rainbow Drive) which currently contains a place of worship and a south property which is the subject of this Flexible Development application. No requests for flexibility from the CDC are requested for the north property. The proposed subject property will be comprised of three parcels or portions thereof with approximately 220 feet of frontage along Gulf to Bay Boulevard, and 230 feet of frontage along both North Hercules and Cirus Avenues. A retail plaza approximately 22,500 square feet in area exists at the southeast corner of the site and is currently vacant. The site is accessed from Gulf to Bay Boulevard via a series of four curb cuts, a drop curb along the entire length of the site along Cirus Avenue and a driveway along South Hercules Avenue. Please note that existing uses and building square footages, based on site visits and City and Pinellas County Property Appraiser records, are made to the best of Staff ability. The property is within the Commercial (C) District the intent and purpose of which is to provide the citizens of the City of Clearwater with convenient access to goods and services throughout the city without adversely impacting the integrity of residential neighborhoods, diminishing the scenic quality of the city or negatively impacting the safe and efficient movement of people and things within the City of Clearwater. The immediate vicinity is characterized by a R�INBOW DR W W > Q a � w � O O � V 7 ii N N � PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION > < � � W � � �I T N > > m U � � � � N GULF-TO-BAY BLVp PROJECT SITE � � < W � � w � U _ � LOCATION MAP ►3�R I ' �, j ' 405 ¢ �� q �os 0 � � a � � �i A _� �, � �,. w - t j��',.��v ' �,.-07. . � , • : � ao� vosN. :S � = a+' a±o '; m '. : . � . ; Z : ., o • � � � o :.. � u • tcR � R � ...........r � GULF-TO-BAY BIVp � . _ .. _ .__ � os o� �,�� Q RR iZR RR R R R R 2 W 1 �<rraf: � � U I � � W T � � � � Rl!VIHDR ..� 525 �j 5a5 ZONING MAP -ao� 403 j , 405 ' a '!07 o �rrcE � � ¢ � � �ACANT 776 W 401 ' 400 ' 401 CHURCH a rn . 403 � � .492 . � ... 40� � 11 j��ni�n��: V' 407-i � M s` � • � � 409� Q 40d ; �'� .- : 4t�" Lz. 410_j m , _ . • �. • � Z , , . g� + G� �n o ' R� �s��saasd S1t1TlON "' GULF-TO-BAY BLVp - ----- -ip�- - ---- a � 4 �O�hh R._ . N N .. _yy�. W � Tl3h'�`Il'`„ N '"' � Xi SCHOOL � ' � �ETAiL � � y ��, � �. �.. {y . . . ROGERS ST _ 'N 5�Q �5 � j�i EXISTING SURROUNDING USES MAP Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 1 Y i�1�.N1 Y►aLel Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPMENTREVIEW DIV¢ISiox J. . . . .r� .. ... .. . ... . . . .. . variety of non-residential uses including Clearwater High School across Gulf to Bay Boulevard to the south, a gas station to the east and a vacant parcel to the west. A variety of other fast food restaurants, offices, automotive service stations and other retail sales and service establishments are located farther to the east and west along Gulf to Bay Boulevard. The neighborhood to the north is within the High Density Residential (HDR) district a.nd consists primarily of attached dwellings (mostly duplex and triplex units). Farther to the north, across Rainbow Drive, the zoning changes to Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) district where the neighborhood consists primarily of detached dwellings. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property. Development Proposal: The proposal is to complete the submitted minor lot line adjustment as referenced above upon approval of this Flexible Development application and remove the retail building at the southeast corner of the site. A 4,240 square foot, single-story restaurant is proposed to be constructed generally in the center of the site. A drive-through component is proposed along the east and north sides of the building and 50 parking spaces will be provided along the north, west and south sides of the site. Access to the site will be provided via a two-way driveway along Cirus Avenue at the northeast corner of the site and a two-way driveway near the northwest corner of the Site along Hercules Avenue. A one-way, right-out only driveway at the southeast corner of the site is located along Cirus Avenue. No direct access is proposed along Gulf to Bay Boulevard. Walkways will connect the sidewalks along Gulf to Bay Boulevard and Cirus Avenue to the site. A bike rack is proposed at the southeast corner of the building. An outdoor eating area is proposed at the southwest side of the building. One freestanding monument sign is proposed at the southwest corner of the site in addition to a preview menu board and an order menu board along the east side of the building in conjunction with the drive-through lane. The latter two signs should not be readily visible from off-site and do not count against the permitted number of signs for the site. In addition, drawings of the signs which would otherwise provide such details as dimensions, area, materials color(s) and height are not included with the submittal nor are they required to be at this point. While attached signs are shown on all elevations none of the attached signs shown on the elevations are dimensioned allowing their areas to be determined. In short, a formal sign package has not been submitted with this application and signage whether indicated or not should not be considered as part of the request nor would any approval of this proposal in any way imply approval of any given sign. While landscaping is proposed along all property lines of the site the number of required perimeter trees is three less than otherwise required. In addition, the proposal does not include foundation landscaping along the west side of the building. The applicant has mitigated these deficiencies through the provision of landscaping along all street frontages in excess of the intent of the CDC. The CDC simply requires a hedge and one shade tree (or its equivalent of two accent trees or three palms equaling one shade tree) per 35 feet of perimeter length less driveway widths. The applicant has provided a lush landscape with a tiered effect along all three streets consisting of groundcovers, low- and mid-sized shrubs as well as an overall creative and attractive landscape design. Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 2 � Cl�.ittl !'!'a`�1 Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION ' _.��;�•� Special Area Plan: None Comprehensive Plan: The proposal is in support of the following Goals, Objectives andlor Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan as follows: Future Land Use Plan Element: Policy A.2.2.3 Commercial land uses shall be located at the intersection of arterial or collector streets and should be sited in such a way as to minimize the intrusion of off-site impacts into residential neighborhoods. New plats and site plans shall discourage the creation of "strip commercial" zones by insuring that adequate Zot depths are maintained and by zoning for commercial development at major intersections. The proposal includes a commercial use located at the intersection of an arterial street and should have no impact the residential neighborhood to the north because a church is located between this residential neighborhood and the proposed restaurant. The proposal is largely consistent with this Policy. Objective A.3.2 — All development or redevelopment initiatives within the City of Clearwater shall meet the minimum landscaping / tree protection standards of the Community Development Code in order to promote the preservation of existing tree canopies, the expansion of that canopy, and the overall qualiry of development within the City; and Policy A.3.2.1 All new development or redevelopment of property within the City of Clearwater shall meet all landscape requirements of the Community Development Code. Gulf to Bay Boulevard is designated as a Primary Scenic Corridor within Section 3-1203 of the CDC and within the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Primary scenic corridors are those roadways expected to have enhanced landscape standards applied to properties along them. Furthermore, Gulf to Bay Boulevard is specifically listed as a "Corridor to Redevelop" within the Linkages section of the FLUE of the Comprehensive Plan. While the proposal does not provide the required foundation landscaping along the west fa�ade of the building facing South Hercules Avenue, the requisite buffer width along all sides of the site is demonstrably better than that as required by the minimum standards of Article 3 Division 12 of the CDC. The minimum buffer landscaping consists of a hedge and one shade tree every 35 feet. As mentioned previously, the proposed landscape plan provides for a tiered effect along all street frontages consisting of a mix of groundcovers, low- to medium-sized shrubs as well as shade, palm and ornamental trees. Therefore, the submittal supports this Objective and Policy. Policy A. S. S.1 Development should be designed to maintain and support the existing or envisioned character of the neighborhood. The proposal provides for a use permitted as a minimum development standard within the C District and a site design generally consistent with other development in the area along Gulf to Bay Boulevard. Specifically, the proposal with regard to landscaping is consistent with other properties which have been subject of Level I and Level II site plan approvals. In addition the site design is consistent with the intent of the development parameters set by the Community Development Code with regard to setbacks and landscaping. These development parameters Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 3 � C��.itil ►T �lel Level II Plexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT p pP DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION � �.��.�_. were specifically created because many areas of the City were inconsistent with the appearance and character desired by the citizens of Clearwater as evidenced by the creation and subsequent adoption of the City's current Community Development Code. Therefore, the proposal supports this Policy. Goal A. 6- The City of Clearwater shall utilize innovative and flexible Planning and engineering practices, and urban design standards in Order to protect historic resources, ensure neighborhood Preservation, redevelop blighted areas, and encourage infill Development; and Objective A.6.4 — Due to the built-out character of the ciry of Clearwater, compact urban development within the urban service area shall be promoted through application of the Cleanvater Community Development Code; and Community Development Code: The proposal supports the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code as follows: Section 1-103.B.1. Allowing property owners to enhance the value of their property through innovative and creative redevelopment. The size, location and shape of the parcel are similar to other parcels in the area. The proposed restaurant is consistent with the character of the area along Gulf to Bay Boulevard with regard to use and the proposal will result in a project consistent with elements of the Comprehensive Plan, as provided above. The proposed development is similar to the treatment other sites have received in the area vis-a-vis landscaping and other site improvements as mitigation to justify flexibility from certain the CDC requirements such as buffer width, setbacks and the permitted number of parking spaces in a row. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 1-103.B.2. Ensuring that development and redevelopment will not have a negative impact on the value of surrounding properties and wherever practicable promoting development and redevelopment which will enhance the value of surrounding propet�ties. Surrounding properties to the north include detached and attached dwellings and a place of worship. Uses to the east and west include fast-food restaurants, offices and retail sales and service. Clearwater High School is located farther to the south and west across Gulf to Bay Boulevard. The proposed development provides not only for a much greater amount of landscaping than exists but a landscape plan which provides for an appearance which will be demonstrably better than the minimum otherwise required by the CDC. It is likely that surrounding properties will have their values enhanced. It should be noted that several other properties in the area along Gulf to Bay Boulevard have incorporated upgrades to their sites such as new facades and landscaping, including sites located at 2094, 1996, 1928, 1916, 1960 and 1765 Gulf to Bay Boulevard. The proposal is consistent with the level of design (both site and building) as applied to the aforementioned properties and others throughout the City. It is anticipated that the proposal will result in a positive impact on those surrounding properties. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 1-103. B. 3. Strengthening the ciry's economy and increasing its tcrc base as a whole. The proposal includes the redevelopment of a vacated and partially vacant site with a new restaurant. The proposal will be consistent with the character of the area with regard to size, scope and scale as compared with other properties in the neighborhood. The proposal is Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 4 r C�et�l 1'�aL�l Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P PP DEVELOPMENT REV�W DIVISION "�..a�� expected to have a net increase in the t� base as a whole through the demolition of an unused, dated and obsolete building and the construction of a new more attractive building and the provision of landscaping in excess of the intent of the minimum standards of the CDC. It is largely beyond dispute that the City of Clearwater is largely built-out where the primary option for improvement is the redevelopment and/or refurbishing of existing sites and buildings. Improving a property typically results in an increase in its value thereby positively contributing to the City's tax base and overall economy. The net result of the proposal will be another attractive redevelopment in the community which can only further interest in the improvement of surrounding properties. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 1-103. D. It is the further purpose of this Development Code to make the beautifacation of the city a matter of the highest priority and to require that existing and future uses and structures in the city are attractive and well-maintained to the ma�cimum extent permitted by law. The proposal includes a new restaurant with landscape buffers that meet the minimum required widths and also exceed the intent of the Code with regard to the amount of plant material. The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed building and site plan are more attractive than what is currently on the site and that the site and landscape plans are better that what would otherwise be required by the CDC. The proposal with regard to site, landscape and building design is consistent with other beautification efforts undertaken, encouraged and installed by the City and private property owners in the City as a whole and along Gulf to Bay Boulevard specifically. As discussed above, Gulf to Bay Boulevard is a designated Primary Scenic Corridor. While a specific Corridor Plan has not been adopted the intent is clear in that properties along designated Scenic Corridors such as Gulf to Bay Boulevard are expected to provide landscaping at least consistent with the minimum standards set forth by the CDC if not more. The proposal includes a landscape design which is more attractive that that as required by the minimum standards of the CDC with regard to the numbers and arrangements of plant material. As mentioned previously, the proposed landscape plan provides for a tiered effect along the south and west sides of the site consisting of a mix of groundcovers, low- to medium-sized shrubs as well as shade, palm and ornamental trees. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 2-701.1 Intent of the C District and CG FL UP classification. The CDC provides that it is the intent of the C District to provide the citizens of the City of Clearwater with convenient access to goods and services throughout the City without adversely impacting the integrity of residential neighborhoods, diminishing the scenic quality of the City or negatively impacting the safe and efficient movement of people and things within the City of Clearwater. Furthermore, it is the intent of the C District that development be consistent with the Countywide Future Land Use Plan as required by state law. The uses and development potential of a parcel of land within the C District shall be determined by the standards found in this Development Code as well as the Countywide Future Land Use Designation of the property, including any acreage or floor area restrictions set forth in the Countywide Land Use Rules concerning the Administration of the Countywide Future Land Use Plan, as amended from time to time. For those parcels within the C District that have an area within the boundaries of and governed by a special area plan approved by the City Council and the Countywide Planning Authority, maximum development potential shall be as set forth for each classification of use and location in the approved plan. Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 5 Y C��.Rl 1'1�Le1 Level II Flexible Develo ment lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P �p DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION � �,�.�� . . :.... ��n-., .. ��.,,r .r� . ... .. � Section 2.3.3.5.4 of the Rules provides that the purpose of the CG FLUP classification is to depict those areas of the county that are now developed, or appropriate to be developed, in a manner designed to provide community and countywide commercial goods and services; and to recognize such areas as primarily consistent with the need, relationship to adjoining uses and with the objective of encouraging a consolidated, concentrated commercial center providing for the full spectrum of commercial uses. Permitted Primary Uses include retail commercial. Article 7 of the Rules provides that retail commercial uses include restaurants. The site has been developed as a Retail Plaza. The proposal is to redevelop the site with a restaurant which is a use permitted by the CG FLUP classification. Development Parameters: Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-701.1, the maximum FAR for properties with a Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) designation of Commercial General (CG) is 0.55. The proposed FAR is 0.08, which is consistent with Code provisions. Im,�ervious Surface Ratio (ISR� Pursuant to CDC Section 2-701.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.90. The overall proposed ISR is 0.72, which is consistent with Code provisions. 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, pursuant to CDC Table 2-702, Minimum Standard Development Standards, the required lot area and lot width are to be a minimum of 10,000 square feet and 100 feet, respectively. The lot area is 50,622 square feet and the lot width is 220 feet exceeding and/or meeting the otherwise minimum area and width required by Code. 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 Table 2- 702, front and side setbacks to primary structures are 25 and 10 feet, respectively. Pursuant to CDC Section 3-903.F parking lots shall be set back from front property lines a distance of 15 feet, and shall be set back from all other property lines a distance that is consistent with the required perimeter landscape buffer width. The required landscape buffer for the side (north) side of the site is five feet. Rear setbacks do not apply to the subject site as it is a corner lot with three front setbacks and one side setback under the provisions of CDC Section 3-903.D. The proposal includes a front (south) setback of 89 feet (to building) and 15 feet (to paving), a front (west) setback of 51 feet (to building) and 10 feet (to paving), a front (east) setback of 51 feet (to building and 10 feet (to paving) a side (north) setback of 88 feet (to building) and 10 feet (to paving). The proposal does not meet the minimum standards for setbacks to paving on the front (east and west). Maximum Buildin� h�t�. Pursuant to CDC Table 2-703, there is no maximum height for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to the aforementioned CDC Table 2-702, the m�imum allowable height for restaurant uses is 25 feet. The proposed Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 6 r l�i�(�L�1 Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT P pP DEVELOPIvIENT REVIEW DIV[SION - �� . . building height of 15 feet to roof structure (23 feet to highest architectural feature) is less than this allowable height and is therefore consistent with the CDC. Minimum Off-Street Parkin�: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-703, there is no minimum off-street parking requirement for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-702, the minimum required parking for restaurants is 12 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. This results in a requirement of 51 parking spaces for a 4,242 square foot restaurant. The proposal provides 50 parking spaces or 11.79 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. The difference is considered by Staff to be de minimus in nature and the proposed number of parking spaces is expected to more than adequately serve the redevelopment. Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-201.D.1 and 3-903.I, all outside mechanical equipment must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. Mechanical equipment will be located on the roof of the proposed building and will be concealed with parapet walls on all sides. Si�ht Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the proposed driveways on Gulf to Bay Boulevard and South Belcher Road and at the intersection of Gulf to Bay Boulevard and South Belcher Road, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20-foot sight visibility triangles. This proposal has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineering Department and been found to be acceptable. Shrubbery planted within the sight visibility triangles will need to be maintained to meet the Code requirements. Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-912, for development that does not involve a subdivision, all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. Overhead utilities existing along the west side of the site along South Hercules Avenue. These utilities will remain as they are. The applicant has contacted the controlling utility (Duke Energy) which has said that they would not approve of undergrounding these wires. In addition, the undergrounding of these utilities would necessitate the removal of two mature live oaks which the applicant and the City mutually agree should be retained. Landscapin� As noted in the request, the proposal does not meet three components of the landscape portion of the CDC including the provision of more than 10 parking spaces in row, the provision of the required number of perimeter buffer trees and the provision of foundation landscaping on the west side of the building. The applicant has opted to utilize the Comprehensive Landscape Program pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.G. The criteria for a Comprehensive Landscape Program are provided below: 1. Architectural theme. Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 7 ' Vil.tti ��l��l Level II Flexible Develo ment A �ication Review FLANNING & DEVELOPMENT P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION " ��. �,.�. .. � a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program shall be desi�ned as a part of the architectural theme of the principal buildings proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for develo�ment; or b. The desiQn, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape pro,gram shall be demonstrably more attractive than landscapin� otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape standards. Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, required perimeter buffers are based on adjacent uses andJor street types. The required landscape buffers are 15 feet (south — arterial street), 10 feet (west and east — local streets) and five feet (north — non-residential). In addition, Section 3-1202.E provides that interior landscaping must be provided which is equal to or greater than 10 percent of the vehicular use area. The proposed vehicular use area is 28,839 square feet requiring 2,884 square feet of interior landscaped area. Section 3-1202.E also provides that no more than 10 parking spaces may be in a row. The landscape section also provides requirements for quantities of plant material to be provided; one tree per 35 feet of perimeter (less driveways). Finally, Section 3-1202.E requires that all facades facing a street must include a foundation planting area of at least five feet of depth along the entire fa�ade excluding areas necessary for ingress/egress. This proposal provides buffer widths along the south (15 feet) and north, west and east (10 feet) which meet or exceed the requirements of Section 3-1202.D. The proposal also includes 3,876 square feet of interior landscape area which exceeds the otherwise required amount of landscaped area. The proposal does not meet the requirements of Section 3-1202.E in that 13 parking spaces in row are proposed and foundation plantings along the west fa�ade are not provided. The proposal is required to include 23 perimeter trees where 20 are provided (where two accent trees or three palm trees equal one shade tree). The proposal otherwise meets the remaining requirements of Article 3 Division 12 of the CDC. The applicant has mitigated the dimensional deficiency with regard to buffer width through the provision of landscape material in excess of the minimum otherwise required by the CDC. The landscape plan includes a variety of shade, ornamental and palm trees (live oak, winged elm, bald cypress and ribbon palm), as well as shrubs and ground covers (viburnum, schefflera, bougainvillea, firecracker plant and flax lily). The buffers will be planted in such a manner as to create a tiered effect providing adequate buffers between the subject property and adjacent rights-of-way and properties. Therefore, the proposal meets the intent of this CDC section. 2. Lightin�. An �Llighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is automatically controlled so that the li�� is turned off when the business is closed. The applicant will ensure that all lighting meets the requirements of CDC Article 3 Division 13. Outdoor Lighting and is automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed. Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 8 � C�ear 1'►a�er Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT P pP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION ' _.. ��,�:� � . � 3. Community character. The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape program will enhance the communitv character o the Cit�of Clearwater. The proposed landscape plan incorporates a tiered effect along all street frontages with groundcover and low- and mid-sized shrubs rather than just a hedge and one shade tree every 35 feet. The overall site plan is expected to be more attractive than as otherwise required by the thereby enhancing the community character. 4. Property values. The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape pro�ram will have a beneficial impact on the value o�,propertv in the immediate vicinitX of the parcel proposed for development. The provided landscaping around and within the site will improve the aesthetics of the site, effectively screen surface parking and should have a beneficial impact on surrounding properties. 5. Special area or scenic corridor plan. The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape program is consistent with anv special area or scenic corridor plan which the Cit�of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel propose�or development is located. As noted elsewhere in this report, Gulf to Bay Boulevard is designated as a Primary Scenic Corridor within Section 3-1203 of the CDC and within the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the City's Comprehensive Plan. While the proposal does not provide the required foundation landscaping along the west fa�ade of the building facing South Hercules Avenue, the requisite buffer width along all sides of the site is demonstrably better than that as required by the minimum standards of Article 3 Division 12 of the CDC. Solid Waste: A dumpster is proposed at the northeast quadrant of the site. The dumpster area will be screened by a solid wall with a stucco finish to match the primary exterior color of the subject building. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste and Fire Departments. Signa�e: A sign package has not yet been submitted. All signage for the site will have to be reviewed as part of a comprehensive sign program pursuant to CDC Section 3-1807.B. While attached signs are shown on the elevations none of the attached signs shown on the elevations are dimensioned allowing their areas to be determined. In short, a sign package has not been submitted with this application and signage whether indicated or not should not be considered as part of the request nor would any approval of this proposal in any way imply approval of any sign. Compliance with General Applicability Standards: The proposal supports the General Applicability requirements of this Code as follows: Section 3-914.A.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 proposal includes a 4,242 square foot restaurant. The proposed building replaces a vacant retail plaza. The subject site is surrounded by a myriad of uses indicative of an intensely developed commercial corridor including such uses as retail sales and service, restaurant, Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 9 � Clea�alel Level II Flexible Develo ment lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT p �p DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIV[SION . _ .�.;� s . � . , . . . . . automotive service stations, vehicle sales and display and office. The proposed restaurant will constitute an appropriate use for the neighborhood. The proposal includes lush landscaping which exceeds the intent of the CDC, and will complement and enhance surrounding properties. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. Section 3-914.A.2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. The proposal is, as discussed in relation to CDC Section 3-914.A.1, above, consistent with the character of adj acent properties and with the overall approved site plan. The applicant has shown through substantial competent evidence that the proposal is similar in nature vis-a-vis form and fiznction to adjacent and nearby properties and the whole of the approved site plan. The proposal is not expected to impair the value of adjacent properties. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A.3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health o� safety of peNSOns �esiding or working in the neighborhood. The proposal will likely have no effect, negative or otherwise, on the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A.4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. Issues relating to traffic congestion have been mitigated with the previous approval of the overall site plan. The replacement of a retail plaza with a restaurant will have a minimal if any effect on traffic congestion. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A. S. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity. As previously discussed, the community character consists primarily of a variety of uses indicative of an intensely developed commercial corridor. The proposal is for a modest, one- story restaurant. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A.6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent propertzes. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse visual and acoustic impacts on adjacent properties. The use to the north, a place of worship, will be separated from the restaurant site with a masonry wall six feet in height and landscaping. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Compliance with Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria: The proposal supports the specific Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria pursuant to CDC Section 2-704.E as follows: 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. The proposal includes a modest building centrally located on the site. In order to provide a viably-sized building, adequate parking, stormwater and on-site circulation the applicant is requesting flexibility from the CDC. The bulk of the request essentially includes a reduction the required parking by one space and approval to provide setbacks to parking along the east Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 10 � LI�.Nl 1'1aLe1 Level II Flexible Develo ment lication Review PLAr�xG&nsvsLOrMENT P �p DEVELOPMENT REVTEW DIVISION . . °.� . a<.� �. , . . . and west sides of the site equal to the otherwise required landscape buffer width of 10 feet. The only way to meet the required 15 foot setbacks along the east and west would be to provide a drastically smaller building and/or the elimination of approximately 15 parking spaces which would not result in a viable product. Deviating from the setback for parking only standards of the C District is required in order to establish the proposed restaurant on the site. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. 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 redevelopment of the site will be consistent with a variety of Goals, Objectives and Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of the CDC as examined in detail elsewhere in this document. Therefore, the proposal will be found to be consistent with this CDC Section. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. As mentioned, all surrounding properties are developed with a variety of uses indicative of a dense commercial corridor. The proposal includes a 4,242 square foot restaurant. The proposal should have no impact on the ability of adjacent properties to redevelop or otherwise be improved. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. As discussed in detail, the proposal is similar to surrounding uses vis-a-vis use along Gulf to Bay Boulevard. Adjoining properties should not be affected by the proposal. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. S. 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 six objectives: a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standa�d or flexible development use; and c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic contributor. As mentioned previously, the CG FLUP permits restaurants per the Countywide Land Use Rules. The proposal will provide for a viable commercial use on a largely vacant lot which is anticipated to create approximately 55 new jobs. The proposed restaurant will be similar in form and function to other uses in the area and as approved as part of the overall site plan. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. 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: 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. Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 11 � Clettl �Al�l Levei II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PL^rrxlNG � DEV�LOrMExT P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION - ��a..,, _� As mentioned, surrounding properties are developed with a variety of uses typical of an intensely developed commercial corridor. The proposed restaurant will support and complement surrounding uses with regard to form and function. The proposal will have no effect on the ability of surrounding properties to be redeveloped or otherwise improved. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the city. There are no formal design guidelines adopted by the City applicable to the site or area Therefore, this criterion is not applicable to the proposal. c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area. The proposal provides for a use similar in scale and scope with other uses in the area. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design eletnents: ■ 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. The architecture of the building provides for substantial articulation of the fenestration through the use of farade offsets, canopies, windows and change of material and color. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. The proposal provides for a building, the form of which is consistent with or more attractive than that as already exists in the area. The proposed landscape also exceeds the intent as otherwise required by the CDC. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 4-206.D.4: Burden of proof The burden o�proof is upon the ap�licant to show bv substantial competent evidence that he is entitled to the ap.proval rec�uested. The applicant has adequately demonstrated through the submittal of substantial competent evidence that the request is entitled to the approval requested as required by CDC Section 4- 206.D.4. Compliance with Standards and Criteria: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects as per CDC Tables 2-701.1 and 2-704. Additional standards are added, as appropriate, from the Development Agreement, as amended and the approved site plan: Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 12 � l��l �►aLel Level II Flexible Development Application Review � , . �ro: ,::?�# . . . ., � � . PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION Standard Proposed Consistentt Inconsistent Floor Area Ratio 0.55 0.80 X Impervious Surface 0.90 0.72 X Ratio Minimum Lot Area NA 50,622 square feet (1.161 acres) X Minimum Lot Width NA 220 feet X Minimum Setbacks (feet) Front: South: NA 89 feet (to building) / 15 feet (to X pavement) West: NA 51 feet (to building) / 10 feet (to X pavement) East: NA 51 feet (to building) / 10 feet (to X pavement) Side: North: NA 88 feet (to building) /10 feet (to X pavement) Maximum Height (feet) 25 per approved site 15 feet to roof structure (23 feet to X plan highest architectural feature) Minimum Determined by the 50 spaces X Off-Street Parking community development coordinator based on th specific use and/or ITE Manual standards See analysis in Staff Repart Compliance with General Applicability Standards: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level One and Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A: 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, inciuding visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adiacent nronerties. See analysis in Staff Report Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 13 Consistent� I Inconsistent X X X X X ' V�l.��L�l Level II Fiexible Development Application Review — �'�x �s. ,.;...g °. , . PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION Compliance with Flexibility Criteria: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-704.C. (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project): 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. 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 pianning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning district. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a resuit of the proposed development. 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: 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: 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 landscane desi�n and anoronriate distances between buildines. � See analysis in Staff Report Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 14 Consistentl I Incons istent X X X X X X ' C�Q��(�Lt,l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNTNG & DEVELOPIvIENT P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISiON � �� ._ � Compliance with Comprehensive Landscape Program Standards: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Comprehensive Landscape Program as per CDC Section 3-1202.G: Consistent� � Inconsistent l. Architectural theme. a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program sha11 be designed as a part of the azchitectural theme of the principal buildings proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for development; or b. The design, chazacter, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment X 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 2. Lighting. Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is X automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed. 3. Community character. The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive X landscape program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. 4. Properry values. The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape X program will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 5. Special area or scenic corridor plan. The landscape treatment proposed in the NA NA comprehensive landscape program is consistent with any special area or scenic conidor plan which the City of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the narcel proposed for development is located. � See analysis in Staff'Report SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of December 4, 2014, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient, based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 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. That the 1.16 acre site is located at the northeast corner of Gulf to Bay Boulevard and South Hercules Avenue; 2. That the subject property is located within the Commercial (C) District and the Commercial General (CG) Future Land Use Plan category; 3. That the subject property is not located in a special plan area; 4. That the proposal is to construct a restaurant and is subject to the requisite development parameters per Article 2 Division 7 of the CDC; 5. That the site is currently developed with a vacant retail plaza; 6. The subject property is comprised of three parcels or portions thereof with approximately 220 feet of frontage along Gulf to Bay Boulevard and 230 feet of frontage along South Hercules and Cirus Avenues; 7. The proposal includes a restaurant with a height of 15 feet to roof structure (23 feet to highest architectural feature), a front (south) setback of 89 feet (to building) and 15 feet (to paving), a front (west) setback of 51 feet (to building) and 10 feet (to paving), a front (east) setback of Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 15 � CiLti� 1'T �tL�l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION L . .. . ..F`d.a%F�. .. . .. . .. � 51 feet (to building and 10 feet (to paving) a side (north) setback of 88 feet (to building) and 10 feet (to paving), and 50 parking spaces (11.79 spaces per 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area); 8. A reduction in the number of required perimeter trees from 23 trees to 20 trees, increase the number of parking spaces in a row from 10 spaces to 13 spaces and eliminate the required foundation plantings along the front (west) fa�ade of the proposed building; and 9. There are no active Code Compliance cases for 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 development proposal is consistent with the pattern of development of the surrounding neighborhood; 2. That the proposal consistent with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of the CDC pursuant to CDC Section 1-103; 3. That the proposal is consistent with the intent of the C District and CG FLUP classification; 4. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards pursuant to CDC Table 2- 704; 5. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level One and Two Approvals pursuant to CDC Section 3-914.A; 6. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria pursuant to CDC Section 2-704.E; 7. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria for a Comprehensive Landscape Program CDC Section 3-1202.G; and 8. That the proposal is consistent with certain applicable portions of the Comprehensive Plan as outlined in this report. Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development application to permit a restaurant with a height of 15 feet to roof structure (23 feet to highest architectural feature), a front (south) setback of 89 feet (to building) and 15 feet (to paving), a front (west) setback of 51 feet (to building) and 10 feet (to paving), a front (east) setback of 51 feet (to building and 10 feet (to paving) a side (north) setback of 88 feet (to building) and 10 feet (to paving), and 50 parking spaces (11.79 spaces per 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area) in the Commercial (C) District as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-704.C; to reduce the number of required perimeter trees from 23 trees to 20 trees, increase the number of parking spaces in a row from 10 spaces to 13 spaces and eliminate the required foundation plantings along the front (west) farade of the proposed building as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3-1202.G; and approval of a two-year Development Order subject to the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: Timing Conditions: 1. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the Fire Department may require the provision of a Water Study performed by a Fire Protection Engineer in order to ensure that an adequate water supply is available and to determine if any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of the project. The water supply must be able to support the Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 16 : Vl�l ��l��l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT p pP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � ,a*�.�� ,. •. . , needs of any required fire sprinkler, standpipe and/or fire pump. If a fire pump is required, then the water supply must be able to supply 150 percent of its rated capacity; 2. That prior to the issuance of any building permits the location and visibility of electric equipment (electric panels, boxes and meters) be reviewed and, if located exterior to the building where visible from any street frontage, be shown to be painted the same color as the portion of the building to which such features are attached; 3. That prior to the issuance of any permits all sub-standard sidewalks and sidewalk ramps adjacent to or a part of the project shall be shown on plans to be improved to meet the requirement of Local, State and/or Federal standards including A.D.A. requirements (truncated domes per FDOT Index #304); 4. That, prior to the issuance of any building permits except for clearing and grubbing or the provision of fill, the details for sub-surface detention and treatment system shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Department; and 5. That, prior to the issuance of any building permits except for clearing and grubbing or the provision of fill, the maintenance and operations plan for the stormwater system shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Department. , `� "- -°-°°-_ ;.7' Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: /�''�'` ,.-''f Mark T. Parry, AICP, Planner III Community Development Board January 20, 2014 FLD2013-11039 - Page 17 '�� r . a!>7:::s,. G� . "'"��'�` ��„ .; �`�„,,.... - . �, �.. , : `^-4,..�'; ' . ` �-i I ,�,,, � . � �.�i�.,�n��.; :iv:n i1�'�' l'OCllet'UIS11C. , ' �, \_Y i � �-^^- � . -"y�:� �< '� � 4 ' .j•'�Li. ' �'�" .r,-.' z� �:' `+r-•s„e�:, � ..i::" �;� ,:j� : ;,. ;'�.:. � � J � y:�� . L16�ii1�.... . �� Mb x.^ ,Y,� Luukin� �� h�um 51� corner oY site. �y . , � � c: - � � �'> ' � Y .' r d �� ! rG ' � Looking SE from the N W corer of site. Lookine SW from the NE: corner of site. 2008 Gulf to Bay Boulevard FLD2014-11032 MARK T. PARRY 1655 Linwood Drive Tel: (727) 742.2461 Clearwater, FL 33755 E-mail: mparry@tampabay.rr.com SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS A dedicated, AICP certified professional Planner focused on contributing to the field of Urban Planning experienced in public and private sector planning. An excellent communicator, able to effectively interact with clients, local government officials and business professionals at all levels. Experienced in various aspects of urban design and planning, zoning regulations and permitting. OBJECTIVE To secure a Planning position which will allow me to continue improving the built environment and my community through sound and innovative planning and design principals. EDUCATION COOK COLLEGE, RUTGERS UNIVERSITY, New Brunswick, NJ B.S. Landscape Architecture Major, Urban Planning Certification B.S. Environmental Planning and Design Certificate Urban Planning Golden Key National Honor Society; Sigma Lambda A/pha American Planning Association (Florida Chapter); member AICP #020597 40-hour OSHA (Hazwoper) Training PLANNER III PLANNING DEPARTMENT, CITY OF CLEARWATER 04/12 - Present 08/98 — 04/05 • Responsible for nonresidential and single/multi-family site plan review and permitting. • Assist in the implementation and subsequent review of the Community Development Code. • Responsible for assessing and writing Community Development Code amendments. • Land Development Code development, interpretation and application. • Provide, inspect and direct landscape review/design. • Acting Development Review Manager 9/99 —11/99 and 01/05 — 03/05. • Manage and direct Associate Planners. • Review, process and present variance/conditional use, land use/zoning atlas amendment and annexation applications at in-house and public review meetings. • Principal Planner in creating and implementing Clearwater's Downtown Design Guidelines. Assisted in the implementation and application of the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan. SENIOR PLANNER DEVELOPMENT 8� ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, CARDNO TBE 04/05 — 04/12 • Planner of record for Cities of Indian Rocks Beach, Seminole and Clearwater and Town of Belleair. • Responsible for nonresidential and single/multi-family site plan review and permitting. • Perform site design and inspections. • Provide technical planning support for engineering department. • Provide support for Zoning Code, Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Land Use Plan amendments. • Research and write Evaluation and Appraisal Reports. • Create and update Special Area Plans/Form-based Codes. • Provide CADD support. • Assist with creating redevelopment marketing material. • Perform technical environmental services including soil and groundwater sampling. Designer/Owner GREENSCAPES-GLD, MARLBORO, NJ 9/92 - 6/98 • Founded and established a local garden and landscape business. � Plan and oversee installation of commercial and residential landscaping projects utilizing a variety of CADD and photo-manipulation programs. • Develop and implement advertising programs, brochures and graphics. • Estimate, bid and negotiate jobs. • Source and negotiate purchase of materials and equipment. • Manage, train and schedule installation crews. Program Supervisor LONGSTREET FARM, MONMOUTH COUNTY PARK SYSTEM, HOLMDEL, NJ • Assisted in formulating and running children's summer program ("Hayseed"). • Created and coordinated daily programs and schedules for 6-9 year old groups. • Supervised several other programs throughout the year. • Created a demand which was twice the program's capacity after the first year. COMPUTER SKILLS 6/87 - 8/93 Access, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Works, ClarisWorks, MS Word, Land Designer Pro, Permit Plan, Excel, Cornerstone, AutoCADD, PowerPoint, Publisher Pu Fa�" _ o��s>«,s,< <a�e o ;S�oaoo"m.. o�, o, oo,°° �.o�tt �°f�. omo�� o� o e., `�� _ <��e �os�,� m�,� ( �: �asa e � �a ��e�� aRw �se A�S�N�.o� �� , � x�� Y ms a, am„o�, � µoefa A� � �ti.�m o�a� ��o��a �� E oa�.� � us�EU�s .aEE II LEGfllP eevo.�. p<. oN�RON aw • W.« r aP E �� . ��, . ``M �._��^ Eo�ceE� uo��.a. �. P„a�E P�LL ao. ,�� o� aoo a. ,�e a�.�� a�, p:s :o.�� a O.�a. r+ECOroseoor � u� M �� oEErN , .5P1 � � __ HILLSBOROUGH AVENUE ��E-.��. � -• �. � ..� �r �� wA» ____ __--- ��' "�x —��__- i �r-- � � � �!� e e � v° , ,= -��M;�xi ii �, �� °'�r` �°�== =-�, - '_______�?'�- ---- � , ;; ' -"""_______ "°° �,r. i Ado� �u�e�x -^,- _`a - � _ _ _� � w-- � cx s. ,.., , — s", , - _�r,�- � , .... \��__' -L:` % `..\ .. vv .arE= �Ne � � s ��..r,�E.�soE.w: _ ,�, =ts �.. q: �� `�8zd �'' . ._-� / . M� l� � ! �o�, m,� �a.s= � T �� C , ,,� � eursc�i°Ki �� - � ( / �.�, .=F��. g.� � I I ,E� �i , ��o„�E _ � � = aE� ��-,' _ � � ,<,�� I I .,i i p �� I�II sb� I✓ . a . m.m'�l..weri ,� S � � �� .., `� / ` � �'� - -= �s _: _ � �, � Y � �'_ � � � ��:, . �_ � � � � ��„ � :�r y � i � �� , . �� u } J � � . �? ��T � � � � \ �. 'y � A � �� __ .., ___ _ � ___ _ . .�%m��m� , �' I 1 .�* �� e ""� , ,.� a `'' ,�� ' c .� .� �,. � s* _ si� mv_E=_i-J6 I N � � o�� b =� n,N. � ,•�• _ wwnc sac sww.�>,.swm xi pY'm,ry �E � „ �� x � 6. , �x �x :: � __3 �� y y ;y � � ., — s u =_ — �, � sE c � ,o e-a -- --- � �� I��Y R _��a � i �i: , �� u � � . � ur Y—Y 1�"� lltlf=l�?II �i� FI: =ia � � �� 0• O ~ • • +�'�?e � :??a �:�`m �� r� s4rt, i� ui .., �� __ secn«r cc Z Q a .,— asau�nce oEierrwr� J - _ -- nra rnEnn.err srara Q a,' � �— ...K �.�u� (�j�7'°zp ,^ Z rc� ..s�. sc r s v w��r�m V� W� WLET BAFFLE DEiAIL "'°'°°°°'�°'°3B Z Q Q S xa..osr.� 4 .. �.E�.s.µ a� m� No �569a x E" �6.. ��P �m� noE o �aa ,...� �.e z. =o �o a� ° /�� a � " � =�1� ��I. � rtE A Jseznn �F� (� v ic.-s3.so 6 w/p .�s�' suuv eorro�in �P SY i6�snn�EO 20 (s�) � 5fE roo* irvOEx rvo. 2oi SUB-SUfFACE OEBlIIOfJ nw rnean,e�r ersis.� dK D B' FYK J1DOB.QS r C-5 ° 1 ter � C earwa U Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application Attached Dwellings, Mixed-Uses or Non-Residential Uses IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT COMPLETE AND CORRECT INFORMATION. ANY MISLEADING, DECEPTIVE, INCOMPLETE OR INCORRECT INFORMATION MAY INVALIDATE YOUR APPLICATION. ALL APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE FILLED OUT COMPLETELY AND CORRECTLY, AND SUBMITTED IN PERSON (NO FAX OR DELIVERIES) TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY NOON ON THE SCHEDULED DEADLINE DATE. A TOTAL OF 11 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 10 COPIES) AS REQUIRED WITHIN ARE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. SUBSEQUENT SUBMITTAL FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD WILL REQUIRE 15 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 14 COPIES). PLANS AND APPLICATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE COLLATED, STAPLED AND FOLDED INTO SETS. THE APPLICANT, BY FILING THIS APPLICATION, AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. FIRE DEPT PRELIMARY SITE PLAN REVIEW FEE: $200 APPLICATION FEE: $1,205 PROPERTY OWNER (PER DEED): Trinity Presbyterian Church, a Florida non-profit corporation MAILING ADDRESS: 2001 Rainbow Drive, Clearwater, FL 33765 PHONE NUMBER: 727-446-6210 EMai�: info@trinityclearwater.com AGENT OR REPRESENTATIVE: K8t1@ E. COI@, Esq., Hill Ward Henderson, P.A. MAILING ADDRESS: 311 Pafk PIBC@, Suite 240, Clearwater, FL 33759 PHONE NUMBER: 727-724-3900 Ennai�: katie.cole@hwhlaw.com ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2008 GUIf t0 Bay BIVd., Clearwater, FL PARCEL NUMBER(S): POI'f1011 Of 13-29-15-00000-1 13-29-15-82530-001-0010 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S@8 attaCh@CI EXhlblt ��A�� PROPOSED USE(5): R@StaU�aflt Wlth OUtdOOC CBfe DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: S@2 attaCh2d EXhlblt ��B�� Specifically identify the request (include all requested code flexibility,� e.g., reduction in required number of parking spaces, height setbacks, lot size, lot width, specific use, etc.): 13-29-15-00000-130-0200 and Planning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 1 of 8 Revised 07/12 0 � C earwater U Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application Data Sheet PLEASE ENSURE THAT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS FILLED OUT, IN ITS ENTIRETY. FAILURE TO COMPLETE THIS FORM WILL RESULT IN YOUR APPLICATION BEING FOUND INCOMPLETE AND POSSIBLY DEFERRED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION CYCLE. ZONING DISTRICT: FUTURE IAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING USE (currently existing on site): Commercial Commercial General Vacant PROPOSED USE (new use, if any; plus existing, �f to rema�n�: Restaurant with outdoor cafe �� SITE AREA: sq. ft. 1.16 acres GRO55 FLOOR AREA (total square footage of all buildings): Existing: 32,477 sq. ft. Proposed: 4,242 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable: 27,842 sq. ft. GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage devoted to each use, if there will be multiple uses) First use: 4,242 sq. ft. Second use: sq. ft. Third use: sq. ft. FLOOR AREA RATIO (total square footage of all buildings divided by the total square footage of entire site): Existing: .64 Proposed: •�$ Maximum Allowable: .55 BUILDING COVERAGE/FOOTPRINT (15` floor square footage of all buildings): Existing: 32,477 sq. ft. ( 64.1 % of site) Proposed: 4,242 sq. ft. ( 8•4 % of site) Maximum Permitted: 27,842 sq. ft. ( 55 % of site) GREEN $PACE WITHIN VEHICULAR USE AREA (green space within the parking lot and interior of site; not perimeter buffer): Existing: 10,967 sq. ft. ( 21.7 % of site) Proposed: 3,876 sq. ft. ( � % of site) VEHICULAR USE AREA (parking spaces, drive aisles, loading area): Existing: 6,113 sq. ft. ( 12.1 Proposed: 28,839 sq. ft. ( 57.0 % of site) % of site) Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 2 of 8 Revised 01/12 IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO (total square footage of impervious areas divided by the total square footage of entire site): Existing: 78.3% Proposed: 71,7a/o Maximum Permitted: QQ% DENSITY (units, rooms or beds per acre): Existing: N/A Proposed: N/A Maximum Permitted: N/A OFF-STREET PARKING: Existing: 7 SpaC@S Proposed: 50 SpBCeS Minimum Required: 51 SpBC@S BUILDING HEIGHT: Existing: Proposed: Maximum Permitted: approx 20 ft. Top of roof: 14'-3"; Highest parapet: 22'-8"; Main Parapet: 19'4" 25 ft. WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED TOTAL VALUE OF THE PROJECT UPON COMPLETION? $ 4,000,000.00 ZONING DISTRICTS FOR ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY: North: LMDR South: C, I East: HDR, I West: HDR. C STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS //� I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all S orn to and subscribed before me this I O(•� day of representations made in this application are true and , �� J�� , to me and/or by accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and photograph the �•�h'� � who is personally known has property described in this ap c tion. pro c d as identification. - 1 9�..� _ Signature of property owner or representative Notary publi � My commission expires: ..^''!S,a!Qh� � � f=U69717 , �:.5 '�.avem er :c, �aA Thru Notary PuWic Undervrtiten Planning 8� Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 3 of 8 Revised 01112 o � er Planning & Development Department � C earwat Flexible Develo ment A lication P PP � Site Plan Submittal Package Check list IN ADDITION TO THE COMPLETED FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT (FLD) APPLICATION, ALL FLD APPLICATIONS SHALL INCLUDE A SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL PACKAGE THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION AND/OR PLANS: � Responses to the flexibility criteria for the specific use(s) being requested as set forth in the Zoning District(s) in which the subject property is located. The attached Flexible Development Application Flexibility Criteria sheet shall be used to provide these responses. � Responses to the General Applicability criteria set forth in Section 3-914.A. The attached Flexible Development Application General Applicability Criteria sheet shall be used to provide these responses. � A signed and sealed survey of the property prepared by a registered land surveyor including the location of the property, dimensions, acreage, location of all current structures/improvements, location of all public and private easements including official records book and page numbers and street right(s)-of-way within and adjacent to the site. � If the application would result in the removal or relocation of mobile home owners residing in a mobile home park as provided in F.S. § 723.083, the application must provide that information required by Section 4-202.A.5. L�9 If this application is being submitted for the purpose of a boatlift, catwalk, davit, dock, marina, pier, seawall or other si milar marine structure, then the application must provide detailed plans and specifications prepared by a Florida professional engineer, bearing the seal and signature of the engineer, except signed and sealed plans shall not be required for the repair or replacement of decking, stringers, railing, lower landings, tie piles, or the patching or reinforcing of existing piling on private and commercial docks. B A site plan prepared by a professional architect, engineer or landscape architect drawn to a minimum scale of one inch equals 50 feet on a sheet size not to exceed 24 inches by 36 inches that includes the following information: � Index sheet ofthe same size shall be included with individual sheet numbers referenced thereon. B North arrow, scale, location map and date prepared. � Identification of the boundaries of phases, if development is proposed to be constructed in phases. � Location of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), whether the property is located within a Special Flood Hazard Area, and the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of the property, as applicable. � Location, footprint and size of all existing and proposed buildings and structures on the site. � Location and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems, both on-site and off-site, with proposed points of access. � Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks, curbs, water lines, sanitary sewer lines, storm drains, fire hydrants and seawalls and any proposed utility easements. � location of onsite and offsite stormwater management facilities as well as a narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including calculations. Additional data necessary to demonstrate compliance with the City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual may be required at time of building construction permit. � Location of solid waste collection facilities, required screening and provisions for accessibility for collection. L�1 Location of off-street loading area, if required by Section 3-1406. C9 All adjacent right(s)-of-way, with indication of centerline and width, paved width, existing median cuts and intersections and bus shelters. � Dimensions of existing and proposed lot lines, streets, drives, building lines, setbacks, structural overhangs and building separations. � Building or structure elevation drawings that depict the proposed building height and building materials. Planning 8� Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 4 of 8 Revised 07/12 � Typical floor plans, including floor plans for each floor of any parking garage. � Demolition plan. � Identification and description of watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, specimen trees, and other environmentally sensitive areas. � If a deviation from the parking standards is requested that is greater than 50% (excluding those standards where the difference between the top and bottom of the range is one parking space), then a parking demand study will need to be provided. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to the parking standards are approved. Please see the adopted Parking Demand Study Guidelines for further information. � A tree survey showing the location, DBH and species of all existing trees with a DBH of four inches or more, and identifying those trees proposed to be removed, if any. � A tree inventory, prepared by a certified arborist, of all trees four inches DBH or more that reflects the size, canopy, and condition of such trees may be required if deemed applicable by staff. Check with staff. � A Traffic Impact Study shall be required for all proposed developments if the total generated net new trips meet one or more of the following conditions: ■ Proposal is expected to generate 100 or more new trips in any given hour (directional trips, inbound or outbound on the abutting streets) and/or 1,000 or more new trips per day; or ■ Anticipated new trip generation degrades the level of service as adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan to unacceptable levels; or ■ The study area contains a segment of roadway and/or intersection with five reportable accidents within a prior twelve month period, or the segment and/or intersection exists on the City's annual list of most hazardous locations, provided by the City of Clearwater Police Department; or ■ The Traffic Operations Manager or their designee deems it necessary to require such assessment in the plan review process. Examples include developments that are expected to negatively impact a constrained roadway or developments with unknown trip generation and/or other unknown factors. � A landscape plan shall be provided for any project where there is a new use or a change of use; or an existing use is improved or remodeled in a value of 25% or more of the valuation of the principal structure as reflected on the property appraiser's current records, or if an amendment is required to an existing approved site plan; or a parking lot requires additional landscaping pursuant to the provisions of Article 3, Division 14. The landscape plan shall include the following information, if not otherwise required in conjunction with the application for development approval: � Location, size, description, specifications and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names. � Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and location, including drip line. B Interior landscape areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressed both in square feet, exclusive of perimeter landscaped strips, and as a percentage of the paved area coverage of the parking lot and vehicular use areas. � Location of existing and proposed structures and improvements, including but not limited to sidewalks, walls, fences, pools, patios, dumpster pads, pad mounted transformers, fire hydrants, overhead obstructions, curbs, water lines, sanitary sewer lines, storm drains, seawalls, utility easements, treatment of all ground surfaces, and any other features that may influence the proposed landscape. � Location of parking areas and other vehicular use areas, including parking spaces, circulation aisles, interior landscape islands and curbing. � Drainage and retention areas, including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations. � Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscaped buffers including sight triangles, if any. Planning � Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 5 of 8 Revised 07/12 0 � C earwater Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application � General Applicability Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE SIX (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA EXPLAINING HOW, IN DETAIL, THE CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. 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. See attached Exhibit "B" for responses 1-6 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 6 of 8 Revised 07/72 ° learwater Planning & Development Department � li Flexible Develo ment A lication P PP � Flexibility Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO THE APPLICABLE FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA FOR THE SPECIFIC USE(S) BEING REQUESTED AS SET FORTH IN THE ZONING DISTRICT(S) IN WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED. EXPLAIN HOW, IN DETAIL, EACH CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL (USE SEPARATE SHEETS AS NECESSARY). 1 See attached Exhibit "B" for responses 1-8 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 8. Planning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562�865 Page 7 of 8 Revised 07/72 � � ° rw ter �� a Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application � Affidavit to Authorize Agent/Representative 1. Provide names of all property owners on deed - PRINT full names: Trinity Presbyterian Church, a Florida non-profit corporation 2. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property: See at#ached Exhibit "A" 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for (describe request): Flexible Development Application 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: Katie E. Cole, Esq., Hill Ward Henderson, P.A. as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 5. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 6. 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; 7.� That (I%j�ie), the undersigned autl�rity,�heyeby certify erty Property Owner is true and correct. STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Property Owner Property Owner BEFORE ME THE UNDERSIGNED, AN OFFICER DULY COMMISSIONED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ON THIS DAYOF �V �1J'�'__�/y"', �!,�� V � �"I , PERSONALLYAPPEARED �� VY� �'� ��; V Yi�/1/` � i V � WHO HAVING BEEN FIRST DULY SWORN DEPOSED AND SAYS THAT HE/SHE FULLY UNDERSTANDS THE CONTENTS OF THE AFFIDAVIT THAT HE/SHE SIGNED. � � o ry u 1 ae f a' � JIEfi'P �2(vi. J� �.l u� t � t� Commissia� FF 1� 89 i S -__ _- ------- — �Yp�rce�osrosrto,s v' 1I' �r. .+...a.. �.,;�. Notary Seal/Stamp L�'� � 1 Notary Public Si natur r j � My Commission Expires: � `� � � Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 8 of 8 Revised 01/12 OLD REPUBLIG NATIONAL TITLE INSURANC'E CCIMPANY GOMMI TMENT � f�und f=ite iVumber. AgenCs Eile Re(�rence: q4-2014-003(l28 t4-026 EXfIIBIT A Being a parcel of land that is lying within the southwest quarter (SW 'l.� of the nartheast quarter (NE'/.j of Section l3, Township 29 South, Range 15 East, Pinellas County, Fiorida and which is more particu(arly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the north right-af-way line of Gulf to Bay Bouleva�d (having a 100-foot wide right-of-way, a.k.a. State Road 6U) and the east right-of-way line of Hercules Avenue, said east right-of-way line is 30.00 feet east and parallel to the west lien of said southwest quarter (SW'/,); thence North 00°39'47" West along last said east right-of-way line a distance of 230.00 feet; thence South 89°28'S1" East 220.11 feet to the intersectian of the west right-of-way line of Sauth Cirus Avenue (having a 6q-foot wide right-of-wayj; thence snuth 00°40`52" East 230.00 feet along last said west right of way line to the intersectian of said �orth right-af-way line of said Gulf to 6ay Boulevard (a.k.a. State Road 60j; thence North 89°28`51° West along last said north right of way line a distance of 220.18 feet to the Point of Beginning. form CF6 Exhibit A�rev. 12l1�) PaKe4of4 �� ) , � 4: � �: �:., i �,a��: �.:�: ,�: �r. � . � �� + ', � :, �°: F?� .�_. �, . �.. . {. : µ _ ? �• �; ��- ..� .. � �:.. ,�.: ��-: �.. h ` i., :'_' � < �`v r;• �i � 'r: ::. .. !1Mi'�l;s;�� !AlI�IA�.11� N �rl1�.A1.� IA� • lrp•ar,+l � � � )�� i �t� �� ,�t! �r�� u ��r �r��sit�, /A.t �a�� ►i��. R��i,w .�a tn�r Aaw•utE�� e/ 11t.1•+��++o�.��. s eM�s►r� w� �M Iw� �►� �Irw�t iJei+�. �tl�� a� � taki� rs�+t�o �i�� Lr v�� o. Y�rn .r+e ��xst,c* +��x, a. �ro b i��e� rru��.� !►�►trw� aM� lna+� Aw�+u�K� �1�r. I'�t��w��a.1yw ir��A. �bth l.�. l�iA +.ral+�/ 1� �«�t• i�+l A•�.iMiO � � �f � � � �r/n�I �} �s��« Ai�t �r., t��1 M �+ aJl k� �� . «4 y Ko 3' A�� :�e! � f'! M3 tM �i�at�� .1i�N r�/ t+�+li� �� K NMMr 1� ��w r� 1'11 Tllf�i� /'t�TT • � • • • • • • s + • •ih11a�. w I�MR+*1 �� «�r �awM +�•. A�� .+r-i+�«t �il M�iwMf �� i1 K�.i�lAiwr�s. � 1«1 �•v�b� �r��a�.Mlt. w�ej«� �j �1 ww�y�+. �I �ty a �iMae� 1�. ��•r� �j i�. i.�d r,atiw r..a�1 i� �.+v.t 1�. r.+�. ./ �«+r�, f'� ' � � � r � � � j , � • � . ' / • ! � ��/i� 1:1/ i�/�If � Myi N� N� fM�I«IiMI� �' M/ :1 M�� lli ' ' ' � "' � , ' � i1,M /e� �/ A�w� • a, a, ll�6! �' MrI iMll�•vi In !'•r �i I�NM� il,��1� M�ww M�ir tAYr � • � ry`jr': ''� Aratl�irM� �J �t. MRtAl�M� ....K........�............ ., ..�,.�. . - . . .. �._ :..�.....,., � .. �� r�� -�'■!'!�.��'�"� '' . �.� a.�A.e►..�.t.� .,.��.,.,.,w..._.. ir.�:, � . o�.. .r._.�►�w...... . � �.e.��.r..�, w � �. . � ..��',. � .w ..� -,��+ � � �� r,�► �t r�.• �� ., ........,, � ,. _ ,,... A . . � � 1lFrnlr� �:r�tjlj►, f�.e .. � �.r r»*w+u� ��e �* .w � .,Iti�•► �.+r .wAar+� 1� .�� ..rA� .�ee �.�. sr�«�t�rw.�w, 4. T. �i#�t31�, �II,, �l�r �MA�M oj l��rr i`��. �r� Mw t�n A�MrI�M�MM� 1� �S •�'iM�#MNM:�, s tr►�*Mr1k M A�+ w� �M�rY+� Mr � i� /iMN11 �M'�►!� �II 1� i�1��«�1�M �F�IA �MNM% � Mr ��1M��IMi�Y+�% �IAi � � �M� 1� . � ��i w�� ,l �ra �e�ir rr wer �f w�t �� y � +� a1 �1, /�irrM�►�. �rif G�r�tf MI �M�+� �AM SleiM � ;� l,,,�,,. � A� l�, hM . � .r-. � ��. , ��1'M • ..., . .�r . � •a.�r.,.i...: �..... ,_ . �, ,. � +�' M �s r....�w�. o�..s � " �� Y�� '�i � �r�� • �r.�_, �li � �. ers ;t 1l�+1 !� � � ` � � �d Order: 3245783 Doc: FLPINE:1503-00479 Paye i of 1 Created By: Deanna Kearns Pri■ted: 11/3/2014 11:00:37 AM EST � ��..��. � � w►"o�� +r. e�n° Nr Y 8t Bur Iai Tob _.ii� .� � � � ��x �� .•. 8 � � � • ��$ . . �e z o. ��M'Y.' • 9� � �*:..,. _':. ■�uneo rana � l'_ 7 . '780840�5 O.R. � 7 0 3 ps� 4 0.'7, � �S ��l'iill� �ttd Made �d� 31 d�s o� MAY A. D. io 78 br ,� . '± NOR1�A V. CULLER� a widow � � 6e.arna(eer o.Ued�rhe �►an�or. 10 ' . ''� �TBINI`�Y PRBSBY'PEItIAN CHURCH, a non-profit Corporatlon, 3°� eer,sy:,:.r:� :a�ar the laKS of the State of Florida wh�� ,ra/Jrae «Id.a„ s, 20�1 RainbuH Drive - C1eaz�rater, Florida 6srrinaJbr caUed t6e onmee: ' � :� 33 515 � 1L MN, k�.l �ne•�wlra�� et�� me wa�ea�an�i�i � �i�ru� �111RiL�lti 77��t 16� praeto►. (ar anel tn oonild�ralloa o( I►N su�n o/ i 10.00 ' and ollwr wluaLb ou�ulde�allo��, rsalpl. urlisr�oJ b I�slry. acArnomledptd. /�erel►�r .yront�. bargatns. r�Ui. nlien�. ra- mltts. ro�teua, cen►�rya and ose►�hnu unfe Ih� fleant��. all Ibaf ceelaln lan¢�U�c�1ii��pQ��'� 0 Coun�r. Flwtda. ws: ' 40 ' 7.0� . . . . . .. . . ' p� .. ....j�186.�Q Thati palrt of ths southwest Quarter (sw�) of the� .i•e4a.eD 'Northeset Quarter (N$�) of 9SCTION 13, TOi�13HIP � 29 SOUTH, RANQB 15 BAST, deacribed as folloxss � 0 � �. ...; � Begin at a point 50.0 feat North and 1tr0.0 Yeet East of the SouthNest corner of the 3outhMeat one-quartier .of the Northeast .one-quarter• of' 9ecttan 13, To�ship•29 9outh, Range 15 �ast '. . �'or a point aP beginniag; and t'raa the' poiutib of .. beginning thus establiehed� run thence !1 0 deB. 39' 47" W. a.distance of 150.0 teot• run theace . N 89 deg . 22f 53* w. a distance of �10.0 feet to the Sasterly ri�ght-of-Nay of Hercules Avenue••rwi tt�encs N,0 deg. 39' 47" w. along said Baster�y'right- oP-wap of He�culea Avenue a distnnce oP 129.0 Peet• rna th�ace S�q deg. 22t 53„ E. a distance of 220..b feet tio tkie Weaterly right-oP-May of Cirub A�enhie; run theucs 3�0 deg . 39' �+T"• $• along sai'd Weatorly rigbt-of-way of C3rus Avenue a dietance o! 280.0 feet mare or leas to the Northerly rfght ot way ot (3u].!' to Bay Boulevard; run Lheaca N 69 deg . 22t 53° w. along�the Northerly ri t-o�-way of said GulP to Bay Bonls,�ar�u a dietance o�110.0. fest to the establiat►ed �poiat ot beginning. � It is Lhs intention of the (}rantbr herein NQtMA V. CU71,�Ei� � � .to con�ep all of the landa prsaently ov�►ec� by her; Lhat xere � acquired in Deed froa Margie McKee recorded in Deed Book 1386, Page'201, Piaellas County recar�da• and aiso ac quired i,n Dead . Pra� Warren,L. Young aud Rita M. �(oung� hfs rdts recorded in ueea eook i56o,.page 583, Pinelle$ Countiy reoords. . __... . _ .. . - -=-----. ._.._. . .. �. . _.—. . .....�,......---..�y ;..�.,,�,,,........,'..- �- • - --. ...... ----- �« � '.:: � DOCUMEI�iARY> ° �a'.�i ' �' `c -L { � �� - FLORI A SURiAf('��. o;' `~ D MENTA I! �a . _. . �$ M • : � DlPT. Ut' RtYEM11E ' • • � H � �, a�, .�r. JY�I•'T� P& 4 � Z 5 �, ~* �� r.i'� +a{'%� 9 9��. �: , o KfIM� 11111 ' . _ .. ,�. ' Ill�t f . . . . . a"- "' oT MF E ��i,t�r.: �'LOMPrrn�i� ;. ... � • . �: -' QEMT.Of Hkut:NUf "�;"" � � � ' :`'• �: �A ='�ir�•�»��;.�.� 13 5. 0 0 t . i+. C� :.'�L � w �+� .. r� �4i ✓ 1 Th� � aM ��w�"^ W P/� � v�i111T'Y CONPIINY N: BRnit ClMr�nt�r� 19oeld� r � a�ars Inddene a te� tuttulu�mt d.rmdltlau oouWnad fa a tltle fnnn�aaa oo�nnitrnmt lpued by tR ;; 3 Order. 32137q Doc: FVINE:I7M-00/07 �pe f of 2 Crmbd Sy: Da��u Ka�n� �rl�teL• 11/7/201{ 11:00:3f AM E5T � � 3 i e � �sa - . il[�9l� - . � o.R. 4 7 0 3 ra�E 4 0 8 • 7��%'witk n�i 11�e, fenemenft, Ra►tdltan�enf� nnd appuHr►wnrM ttierrfo tie�onping or in any- �vlr� app�rlaininp. �0 �lillt i1Nd f0 �10�. ��. ,.�. �� 1M ,��u r�. �E� dee Bronlor hera6� wnwnanb wid� �a1d QMqM�• tl�at 1l�w gran�or :� laur/ully ar:ud o( add land u� �(« ,+�r�►b� d�at ih� p�umor hat aood ►ie6t wid Iwo(d aadaritr ro ssU and o�nwr �td la�dt dwt d�e � g�awiar rt�eirr juGy wa+r�uts tAa .tltle to icid Iat�d ar.d wd1 d�Jend eh� iomt apolnst t6s IamJal cldan oj . �`' eii or..onr mGmasoovtrs and Ikd iatd Iancl is /�w of aN sncum6ranc+�s. except taxp aceruta� au6iequent ' � �o i�C:Cr•'!'.t ♦i .:i'i �;' . f �9 ��i 16t ssl� y�nnle► Iw dpntd �nd a�obd f1�es� P�r�anb du day u�i �. Jirrl a6ov� w�1�1�.. ' . $IOn�d� �I�d.tT`.:. �.�l��.. �.<.. our. pnwncY...... ....... . �.� `�.�.._...�........,�/� ..F...�w....� ........ .:.................. � � ...---............................._........ .._...._..._.�...._�......�....� ._�_�.........._..___.�....._.......__........_......�.__ ............ . .�...._..................�................_..._�......_......�......_.�....� .....�......___......__...._.�.._......_...�....�..........._.. .... ...._..�...._..._..�...:..�._�......_._...._..._._.....:_ ...............�1 t�rsTS oR FLO&ID�I . � . � �r oF PIItSI�LA3 � . . 1 NiR6�Y CBRTIPY ehu aa 1Yb dht. l�es wa'. �n . oM�oa� drlp �ulioe'sad in 1Ae 3n1e daadd aed ia �La do.�q ata�.�ii a uL� �ck�:...ledpw�ur P�=l �PP� . '�ft�i' w, 9. t'.UI.T.F$� 6 ZS�.dOt! . 4 ;,. • a.e-tssMr. �s ec dK pen.. d«aibeb w aa .en a.euea ah�e .faqal� i�e� � •^. 1� beta�e me dut Y� aeeaNed � uwi. '`� ��... •• ••• � 0 ' wlarts3s ;or .A..a ..d dt+cW ...t: l. uie oo..tr ..d i�t. l�t ato[a.w w. 3�� •:' ��'�1; •, . M�p� �. a. �a 78 , : . �: :',, � , o „� . M•,'; . . 3 ... . ..'; . . . ti� , k Y•10 `t • r� .._._...__._...._._:-f • �. R. 61 INAil01�� •, ' `� . • � . r�+�a rw� sa�. a .no�w' at � • . �4: �amminaou ncp�rs a�K. ' . . aK ler.�l� " , xii.�.•'.' ' , . .::':. . X�' " . ..3,;, �;�:: ;;, x�.' .-. 7�rir In�ti�ra�rnr prrpamd by: Y4�%;' � . Ad�erxt ��' f � Wdar. 321i7�7 Doe: FVINE:4703-00407 Pqe 7 ot 2 CroalM {y: Da��u 1(a�rr Pri�tM: il/7/3014 11:00:3f AM BT � ( E. �' p G; F.:,= ' : � •... R • � I#: 2a10230005 BK: 17001 PG: 2467, 08/16/2010 at 08:47 AM, RECORDING 3 PAGES $27.00 D DOC STAMP COLLECTION $4375.00 KEN BURKE, CLERK OF COURT PINELLAS COUNTY, FL BY DEPUTY CLERK: CLKDU08 �� bY Pamela Wright, an ertiployee of Frst M�erican Title Inwrance Can�anY 1535 Highland Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 (877)727-5923 Retum to: GraMee Fle No.: 1038-2372647 Return Originel Doaum�nt to: FIRST AMHRICAN TITLE WARRENVILLE P03T CL081N(3 ,^. 277T5 Diehi Rd. WARRANTY DEED '�; �, ,�; Werranville, IL 60555 � . , , �' . .,, � �, . , , � :; �. . ", This indenture made on August 05, 2010 A.D., by � �� ,;�.,; ;" .. ,,.. - .. , , GTB Properties, LLP, a Floiida llmibed Uabili�yParti�ti�dy formeriy known as GTB Propertiea, a Florida General Partnership, tbrmeHy ^knQv�i,3�s Gulf-bo-Bay Propertles, a Florida General Partnership � � ; � � , , � � whose address is: 1188 Mandalay Poinit,�Gl �ea�v�1.�.FL 33765 hereinafter called the "grantor", to �,;,' �.; .,�' - - „ .. Trinity Presbyberian Churc�?,a'�lb�a�Non-Pl`ofit Corporation „ ,� „ ,• whose address is: 2001 iraitibo}�i;Driv�,`Clearwater, FL 33765 hereinafter called the "grarrt�e°;.' �� (Which bemis "GraMor" and"Gr�6e,e"�baN�ndude singular or plural, corporadon or individual, and eitfier soc, and shall include heirs, legal representatives, stxoe�a's'Snd a3s1�1►s o1�t+e �Same) � � � ��, � � `� � Witnesseti�� tha't �he granl�x� for and in oonsideration of the sum of Ten Dollars, (�10.00) and other valuable wn3ic�ra '�p�s,. [e�gipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, bargains, sells, aliens, remises�releas�s, �onveys and oonfirms unto the granbee, all that oeitain land situate in Pinel(as�ounty; �I�ida, to-wit: �". � . --_. FRONrYFiE §Ql�THWEST CORNER OF SW 1/4 OF NE 1/4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE '. � 15 EAS%�Ft,UN THENCE NORTH 0°39'47" WEST 50.01 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF GULF TO BAY ��QULEVP�D; THENCE SOUTH 39°22'S3" EAST ALONG THE NORTI-I LINE OF GULF TO BAY BOULEVARD 3b��EET,YO POINT OF BEGINNING AND SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT HEREIN CONVEYED; THENCE CAN�77NUE SOUTH 89°22'S3" EAST ALONG NORTH LINE OF GULF TO BAY BOULEVARD 110 FEEf; THENCE NORTH 0°39'47" WEST 150 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°22'S3" WEST PARALLEL WITH GULF TO BAY BOULEVARD 110 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0°39'47" EAST 150 FEET TO POINT OF BEGINNIN6, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA. .� � �� .'--_ , � __ - , --__ . _,� � ' � . �. �,��.,� � �v, . � . � : � � �� , . � � , �. . , -- � . � �� -- . . . .' �. � � � � �� ` i � ` � � . �� 'i �� ,' _-; ��` �,' . ,- -- �, __. � , ^� ,` � � � � ' . � � � . � `` -- ' Page 1 of 3 1038 - 2372647 PINEbLAS COUNTY FL OFF. REC. BK 17001 PG 2468 Parcel Identification Number: 13-29-15-00000-130-0300 ,� � �� -- �� __ --� , ___ � Subject to ali reservations, rnvenants, conditions, resMctions and easements of reoord and to all ,- ;; �, ��; �, applicable zoning ordinances and/or restrictions imposed by govemmental authorities, if any. ,.',�� ,� ; " .��, �, ,� To Have and to Hold, the same in fee simple forever. ---�,��.� :� .'-- . .� , ,' . , Md the grantor hereby oovenants with said grantee that the grarrtor is lawfully seized of said land`jrr fee" simple; that the grantor has good right and lawful auttwrity to sell and convey said land;�t�at the gj'a�tor hereby fully warrarrts the title bo said land and will defend the same against the 1�y�fii4tlairus�ofalY,� persons whomsoever; and that said land is free of all encumbranoes except ta� aaruin��ub'sequent to December 31st of 2010. �� `, � ' ,. „ .. „ In Witness Whereof, the said Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed ir� its �name, the day and year first above written. ,°� ., ., ,. . . , , ,,, . . , , � ..,, �, . , ,, . , , ,' � GTB Properties, LLP, a Florida Limited Liability -; �, �� '�''�'-� Partnership, fortne�ly known as GTB _ _ , '�; �, �� `, Properties, a Florida General Partnership, �;--�' '�; �, ��% formerly known as Gulf-to-Bay Properties,� af ;°, '�' Florida eral Partnership � �� ' ' ,°. , , , , . , „ .�. __ . ,� , , , , . , -- „ .. ' ./.1 f� A /�l ��% .if'' ``�..' By:�Richard W. Cop,ey.A91GR�'�;�, � � „ .. ,, , , , ,, - - � . �, Signed, a,, i � y► b[ir,presenc�: t �, � . ,, w ria�t{i'e '� _ _ ' . �__ . . " �-=� _ ��:, �-rsN�2 CdPF Prir�t�Natllei. . � . . . �, . `. , . �� . ,° � , .. .'. , .. . . , , . . , . . `_ , t �. � �� ibiess na �,{1�L.G��MM Print Name: a�� i� Vage 2 of 3 1038 - 2372647 PINE�,L'A.S COUNTY FL OFF. REC. BK 17001 PG 2469 State of Fiorida County of Pinellas ,� � �� -- �� __ --, , ___ � -,� �. , .. ,' � . , , ,�"�� ., � ,� , , THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEOGED before me on —Y� � � : . �' � by Richard W. Cope, as MGR, on behalf of GTB Propertles, LLP, a Florida Limited Uahtjit�l.�' �,, Partnership, formerly known as GTB Properties, a Florida General Partnership„fprm�J1►. `. `. known as Gulf-fio-Bay Propertles, a Florida Gd�eral Partnership, existing under;tlie laws of the��% State of F rida, who is/are personally known to me or who has/have produced a valid prYver's licen�e as iden ' tlon. , ;--�% ��.��-- '�� ., � �, , ' -- 1 �' � �� ,, „ „ tary Public • . _ , , , . � � :.�`�+.'"'. PAMELA C. WRIGHT (prinbed Mame) ,• , _ . �;,'Not�ry Public • St�te ot florid� ` �.`� _' � My Comm. Expires Se016. 2013 �� sa;4�, �gA.� �OIIIf11�55�00 N �� 424841 � � i� ��,�. •O My Commission expires� ��, �� " .. � -- . . , ,- ,; . . , , State of Florida � � � � ` �' � � �� . , , �� ;, ., � �� , County of Pinellas ,"• , , , , , , „ . __ � .'> . . THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT'WAS ACKNOWL�DCED before me on . by, as, on behalf o# GTB Pro�e�;LLP, a��jor�da Limited UaWlity Partnership, f�m�ly known as GTB Properties,�°FIor,Ma'General Partnership, formerly known as Gulf-to-Bay Properties, a Florida G�eFsl Pa�tae�ship xistlng under the laws of the State of Florida, who is/are personally known Eo`meQr,who Fia&� produoed a valid driver's lioense as identification and who did take an oath. Th.is �ioc�crierft has notarized pursuant to Florfda Statutes, Chapter 668. , -- �, . � „' . . . , , �� . � ` . . , , ,, ,. ', ', Notary � ,. �. , `` `` `� '� . ., ."---_ � . . ._ --_ . < � � � . . . �, . � . . � � � . � � � /w\ ��`� `.V/, `� `�M CO�TId'1�SS��1 . �/ � . . . , .� � � �6rinted Name) % PaCplfeS' Page 3 of 3 1038 - 2372647 Flexible Development Approval Comprehensive Infill Application 2008 Gulf to Bay Blvd. Description of Request.• The Applicant requests approval of a comprehensive infill redevelopment application for the development of a Culver's restaurant on a parcel located on Gulf to Bay between Cirus and Hercules Avenue. The approval includes three existing parcels — the two that front Gulf to Bay and a portion of the Trinity Presbyterian Church parcel located to the North. Simultaneously with this request, the Applicant is proposing a minor lot line adjustment, contingent upon the demolition of the existing structure on the subject property and approval of the side setbacks along the boundary of the remaining church property. Any signage illustrated is only for demonstrative and planning purposes (i.e. Sheet C-4 of the site plan includes a monument sign). The Applicant will submit an application for signage in the future. A sit-down restaurant in the Commercial District: a. Lot area of 22,000 where 3500-10,000 sq. ft. is required. b. Lot width of 220 ft. where 35-100 ft. is required; c. Height of 14'-3" to top of roof, 22'-8" to highest parapet, and 19'-4" to main parapet where 25-50' is required; d. Front (south) setback of 17.48 ft. to pavement and 89.82 ft. to building, where 15-25 ft. is required; e. Front (west) setback of 10.04 ft. to pavement and 51.28 ft. to building, where 15-25 ft. is required; f. Front (east) setback of 10 ft. to pavement and 51.28 ft. to building, where 15-25 ft. is required; g. Side (north) setback of 10 ft. to pavement and 89 ft. to building, where 0-10 ft. is required h. Flexibility to the minimum standards for Parking, providing 50 spaces where 51 spaces are required; i. Minor lot line adjustment approval for the lot as shown on the surveys; and j. Approval of a two-year development order. Consistent with Code section 2-704 for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects, together with approval of a minor lot line adjustment. 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. Gulf to Bay Blvd. is a commercial corridor in the center of the City. It has several retail and restaurant uses such as what is proposed, as well as various medical offices, professional offices, and schools. The proposed development replaces an old retail store and redevelops a vacant parcel (formerly a retail store). Culvers will be one-story in height and comparable in scale and scope to the existing restaurants in the surrounding area. Page 1 of 6 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 proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development of adjacent land and buildings. It is surrounded on three sides by right of way and the fourth side by an existing church. Rather, the redevelopment of this parcel will encourage other redevelopment on underutilized sites in this main Clearwater corridor. Also, the proposed restaurant use is consistent with existing restaurant uses to the west (KFC, Checkers), and continues the upscale redevelopment pattern that is occurring to the east (mixed use development including Bob Evans, Starbucks, Wawa). 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The proposed development includes connections to sidewalks for pedestrians, landscaping along three rights of ways, and will create a nice entrance into a residential area of the neighborhood on a corner that is currently in need of redevelopment. The restaurant use will serve the adjacent church and nearby Clearwater High and residences. Vehicular access to Gulf to Bay Boulevard is not proposed, but full access is proposed along Hercules Ave. and Cirus Ave. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. The proposed development has entrances on side streets rather than onto the state road, Gulf to Bay, which will minimize traffic congestion. The parking areas are separated from the drive through area to avoid conflict of drive through traffic with the vehicular access points. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. The proposed restaurant development is consistent with the existing and recently redeveloped properties along Gulf to Bay, which are generally commercial. Immediately across Gulf to Bay is an old retail plaza including a pizza shop and sub shop. To the east is 7-11 and Dairy Queen, and to the west is Checkers and KFC. Culvers is consistent with both the existing and emerging community character in the immediate vicinity. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. Page 2 of 6 The proposed restaurant use is separated from the residential uses to the north by the existing church, which minimizes operational conflicts between the proposed use and the residential areas. The restaurant will be additionally separated from the church by a 6 foot high masonry wall lined with a continuous row of 2 foot high shrubs within a 10 foot landscape buffer. To the west is Hercules Avenue and a vacant lot, and to the east is Cirus Avenue and 7-11. The western and eastern boundaries include 10 foot landscape buffers, and the northern boundary fronting Gulf to Bay has a 15 foot landscape buffer, both of which are comprised of continuous hedges (excluding access points) and a variety of tree plantings. Further, the design of the new restaurant includes stucco and cultured stone materials along with fabric and metal awnings, and decorative lighting. Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Criteria 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district; The site includes three frontages along rights of way. Adhering to a front setback of 15-25 ft. on each of these would create such a small developable area, that the use of the property would be significantly diminished. The setback flexibility is only reducing the front (west/east) setbacks along the two minor streets from 15-25 ft. to 10 ft. to parking/pavement. Generous building setbacks of 51.28 feet are included along the western and eastern sides along with 10 foot landscape buffers as required. 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 redevelopment is consistent with the Commercial General future land use and Commercial zoning categories and the general purpose of providing services to residents and businesses. Also, the proposed restaurant and setback variations are consistent with the following goals, objectives, and policies of the Future Land Use Element of the City of Clearwater Comprehensive Plan: A. 6 GOAL - THE CITY OF CLEARWATER SHALL UTILIZE INNOVATIVE AND FLEXIBLE PLANNING AND ENGINEERING PRACTICES, AND URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS IN ORDER TO PROTECT HISTORIC RESOURCES, ENSURE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION, REDEVELOP BLIGHTED AREAS, AND ENCOURAGE INFILL DEVELOPMENT. A.6.1 Objective - The redevelopment of blighted, substandard, ine�cient and/or obsolete areas shall be a high priority and promoted through the implementation of redevelopment and special area plans, the construction of catalytic private projects, city investment, and continued emphasis on property maintenance standards. Page3of6 A.6.2 Objective — The City of Clearwater shall continue to support innovative planned development and mixed land use development techniques in order to promote infill development that is consistent and compatible with the surrounding errvironment. Policy A.6.2.1 On a continuing basis, the Community Development Code and the site plan approval process shall be utilized in promoting infill development and/or planned developments that are compatible. A.6.8 Objective - Identify those areas of the City that a�e appropriate for redevelopment as livable communities and require that specific sustainable elements be used in the redevelopment of these areas. Policies A.6.8.1 Build active, attractive communities that are designed at a human scale and encourage walking, cycling and use of mass transit. A.6.8.2 Encourage mixed-use development that includes a combination of compatible land uses having functional interrelationships and aesthetic features. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties; The proposed development will not impede the development and improvement of surrounding properties. Rather, it complements and is compatible with the emerging upscale commercial redevelopment pattern in the area. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development; The adjoining church parcel, which is the seller of this property, will not be substantially impacted. As part of the contract between the parties, the new restaurant will include a masonry wall separating the properties. This 6 foot high masonry wall will be composed of stucco matching the building color, and include a 2 foot high decorative railing lined with a continuous row of hedges within a 10 foot landscape buffer. 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: 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; Page 4 of 6 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. The proposed restaurant is permitted in this district as a minimum standard; however, the comprehensive infill application is required due to the three lot fronts that require larger setbacks than if the two side streets were considered "side" setbacks. The redevelopment of a vacant parcel and an unrented commercial space will generate tax revenues and employment opportunities in the City. Specifically, the restaurant will create 55 jobs. The proposed development is similar to other uses in the area. 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: 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; The proposed development does not impede development of other parcels. Rather, there are significant setbacks on all four sides; however, the parcel is surrounded by three rights of way thereby requiring greater setbacks than otherwise would be required if there was only one frontage. Also, the setback flexibility is only along the western and eastern sides to reduce the setback to parking from 15 ft. to 10 ft., whereas the building setbacks are 51.28 ft. b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the city; There are no specific design guidelines required by the City. c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development is consistent with the development pattern in the neighborhood, including other existing and newer restaurants. Page 5 of 6 1 � 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 roof forms. The design of the building is attractive and provides various architectural details, including columns and awnings, as well as a variety of materials (stucco and cultured stone), colors and textures. Also, the building design includes parapet walls and building fa�ade articulation with fabric and/or metal awnings and decorative lighting. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. The proposed development includes enhanced buffering and landscape design above what is required by the CDC. There are ten foot landscape buffers surrounding the west, east and north sides of the property (excluding access points) that incorporate continuous rows of shrubs and a variety of shade and accent trees. The northern landscape buffer adjacent to the remaining church property only requires a fence by code, but features the additional element of an attractive masonry wall capped with a decorative railing. The southern boundary along Gulf to Bay includes a 15 foot landscape buffer comprised of a continuous row of hedges with clustering and planting of accent and shade trees. All landscape buffers will utilize a tiered effect and a variety of planting material in excess of what is required by the CDC. Page 6 of 6 i � ''�� j e I i '�" / 1 1 1 1 � � n� A I III ' I ' I �� :� ��. Ii�. � ��°'rrm"° */ i � SEC1lON 13, TOWNSNIP 29 SOUTM, RANGE 13 EAST CLEARWATER, PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA GRAPIIIC �CALE ,.,� .,.. .n_ --- - i�° y�� ,� „ , � . ....... . . . ? �I'(2 _;i i L�� I �. J I i. .,. � . . � .y .�.�� w�. . . ,� �.�,_.� � -- n: �� _, � � ;A;�.., . �� .� .r. �. ,r. ;�. .--� 1 � o � u,�,4, �� . �roan: , � � �M�, � n. � �. � : � .�,.�,s, �, - ,, � ,��— �-� �, �� T . .��.w�` . ro..�� _ -;�,�a � �. ; ,�w,o`�' � � �' , . "b �. _ ,� *„ .,� ; � � ! ,�. ! —=� � .... � �, ,..�,��x�� ; �..i , , � �j � , ••• � � -- 4�.�., j �R W w,. M'__ 'tl:_ - M � O._: R u J:��_ �- � � � � ='�'�� .. i � ..�,. �i 4�s��z� r m� ' �� °� e viwylwPlnwroscwl I :+� p � i��, '6 � r�/ ��a� ��,� � ii '�' m�"„ i.o.i��xM i q I � i �' - d :?Nd �I., �� i. 1� il � w �m m.�..�v: w.,.� w,P;e m"r�:.`�,n,n u.,�..a�`..��e.aes' :a� n'�.�.,�.»..�...M.�..�.�.... � ! i � i , � o . t '. �` :* ��,..< iz�� nEC�nc .�mi �.w � � . �..w � 7 Daw usww .. .� a.w ...... �d �.d�.. . ... . d.�...+ i . . ,r ..r �.....��e`�.::' m°�::::�� 4 1�� . . ',. i � � 4 I f I , 1 p YI 1 t*` • � .n. e�.� na f.Y __ �c�L �� nnj wn I �w m ii tie�AVn+rr'YU� �M��A'1'eal�aw�nar� dreN��eo�mi�.�wd�9��w'k�uvve'cr � i.__ .I� .,^� .. '*r"' � 9cxn¢.wve � . . Wva'�.� w��WSaYOrWe�Mq�wM CIY�oMLY.�blbw°M I � �L 1 srx atl• !C) 1t10� i,l .� C46 DQ> �Yyml� � I I � C I k$ Y�� I�ti I I 1w r sra..cs/v.[..s.�u..� µ1 .I� 1 • �I V i 4 a a � :� ,A i � �,�wPo.,�.,,.�.�d, s.,..o.d.. ��> �R � 1�R i� � l � '�,wa."� .� ,w�»,.o�,� �^�� ( '�j �' � . �.�"..� "'.,�a..�.,...�._...,�....�..,.,.,..... I, `2 � r �1 i �! dff I, �� r ',,. J oi � i �� I so�..e�a.��.�.e>wmoTa�i•wrm'.rrow+w..�ww.,u.... � i i �t i � �K�' , !E �ry�� .n� i� � °i I i�l i ,•e.. . _.a.o�..e. A si �i � � � �: , � ��i ' i �� ! s�n.aw.an � . i � i �� al � . �,J° o�.�s�nar� �or....,� ..w:�w:,wc�un�.�mr��ou�+.wu.r+v.��..��rn.rrw � � '� I R '�� ', � � e� � I �*ac:vsnr.cic� m � s+m �.o`" �., � . . .�„e.es.�w.a..�wa, r. ....a.e..r _ i '' I +>.. i �� sl � . 1 .�,�. .�. � .._.oM�n ' ,�„I ' . ".A ,� ' � �'' e um.wo.�i.wam.s:srw�ea ,wemrroe..a��.r�.aee ��ym.a�.M=�.aar. � : a , -� �.,�,.,@.,�..,�.�.�..e»��,,..�,�,.��.�.�,.�..,.ro�. � �, _ S "� ,� . .� t � i � �a.b...d..M� �� o Ti �t � m � �p� a . s _ _ ( ) StlYRB��''F^ _--- � �i 1 I � � . ',.N1vImYlwMwrtpfnwiwanNwnmlMik�dvwYw�nMMWBCimY'Jred. Y LLL il j I w i.owro�m.�we�wi<naNr.�'wUda.wyrwc � � i •� � ilL@$ d i�. �"r� u V� � �/ �� F u�. � . • � � �i�Zw I� 2 wu x�n�u �.w w � Y 1 ^� �x�. j 11 xn� , 1. � I . wunVMemsnn��iwneemewime>�M'�eF��vl�n�anmeU4uneranenrrmeor�vne N Z � � I .� 1;vl �'1 '.�I j rra>vu 5as �y 61F 1� s�iMVS[.£MTdu�riumx ��o-.F r•rr.......�✓w ae�r« w.. r�. Y+�+�.r�. r.rw..... � � J O b I � � i I . 1 S� � �' � i ` j 7.� A C I I E S H. � �� 2AI I ia vrxvn �.�wwo a. M�w. M��.WUMwr nw�wM 1nuu�N u�v.�weow�x✓�we l � Q; Q ,. � 1 T �.�-� i: '�-�6 i��: � i a� �...,.y...�.�.,�� ..�... �, ...-�..r,.�..�,.....c.....� �...�..�.�...�,r rc iv~icw ��c.iw.c.nMead.ix•a.,.rm.�e<emw.mmu,.e roam.yama. �ma c9 ��nz i � I � $' � h . q 1 .., D i _ ,EO.n �".e°:w�xw�.a�� »nwqa�.e�n.�w,..� a�...m.a�w�r.�on��aa� m.i p �` �a � � g�i y . � � S� �. � �r,.Mn.M .wu � K.N1.nw umw�4.�.r. g N � � � I �;7K � pn�lb�•*tllMIWlnMwr!snV�IYAWnqtOMIN�Wp1 f d'. � i� O \I �� « � .... � � � 2 , I W �•i la; �. +,.. m � o� � i � � � f : i � � ..�.o� a+.�war.aw�.,.�..n nt+.rwo�,....,nrwo�wiro��wcn,.iwc..a. e.!' > � �- i � I � � 9� o ��, � „M,�,�,. '> �h iN `��N, i � , ��.�.�.�.....�w�..��.era.....+.,�o�..m�a..aw„�.�. y »3 rw � t��! � � � MMaPR�WRw�bGbaWeLY�LSR.Za�XrbMw"M�bMnYbM021l�m�Mtlum U K <T �� ,� Q �-n F"'xdo�,"z`�'"�3n k""'�..' frl ro. m� avmv+M1:s`"m ;h'2 �,r, i q � a� n. � § a cm ,"W � „.' / , . . .. won I I � � �, I �� I� 1.. 1 Xb.� ij u I � r�u ,� e.w.o�e....�s+M�o.mrra.u,.aa...arov.a�.anwa.ro.�vrcaa�m...�.r;..�cWa Z l.. � n„� ��y u� �` Y.i'� � � I I ! owrtwerw r' "�"'"d°v°n°°"'•°•ee��ne�mx.ewra.mwre,w�er.neaen,nae�awerna..e� V U Gl i ' ! e a � - a ♦ I ,m ¢cewn.asnnN�mm.wenor.emMraee►amv.l.+��amsrew.npa.i.n.mi m G> •I Mw�. m� PWw4�voW a mnoaa ew auwmYnrmnO¢oaur o'n pa0�ry. F- aY3�; .� � ' IOi3lR�� yS�l � 1 iBNVI .. '. 0e• a c��s �`n` I ' w�u uu�'mu�p�x�m .U.InaemYmwmwtinsarm�ww+ro. I nn � �� , . ' a e.zw� V � t �d.£$! Iw -i.n�,nW •* I, �� .- �. �� l � . N�he`��a. 1.TVYnasMfotl�rvwxs9eqm8c12IDU. � i e �» � �� i '� "»." i � - _ .°If"3"" :_.�_ �V f`�'�' I n:.i ,. � ,�,. n.�s r noo n�. r�.a :R4WN [fy. r.v � n • .. . .. - zx~� � � � WY�>> '- � .e . " f� M4T M1f �' w� �i nn � I .awr.o;4` I �d' (RI IIJ.00' ,�i2 � n I I Yu�i ... �MY��ClNflCWOn .FFf< I1 9Y'. rto _ aw ' m4 / .. y " ._I '<w w� � -__,. i No ��+�M�MrraYM.uCaW C"�.e4w�.w.e�www�•A.Wr�YTw.M1MOw.sw.LLG� • �r� e L�. Y� . 1-�.�.� , r n w:q �- � � �`r«ee ��p'1R. R AiM �w��b M.x�w+M.ww�... � ... A . +w- �m A L /..�' . �. �. :I �,.. . �nw�s^�r � ■ �/�� naY�� mrw�i.� .�.�w�. "`r� au.a.'�°�iaF sm:ad .�im"xe'mr.w..:m.m � 7a SCU'VIMCST CJRN01 Of � � . �� . . •• ... ... • . '/ ti �en n A L`A I , p6 �- +x.. � ' � � � �_ .� wp�l]�yU�pYtluet lFltll,wWl��lI��I.ttrWMwlnMWb I.IM (�MRO�d� .. .�n . f-�� . � me so�m»nT � ar j . . . _ ��^ rr • a� , _ � «,,.....�..r...�M�:,. .. �,.,,.�.�..� ,� vw � . °�M""4"�+w �..Kn..�,�. � v i �r.. C3ULF TO BAY BI.YD. a ' * u Y� E� r' �� --.•- ua�mr r. w aaMny,�elM,J ,.•• ,+Fwrti.,.n.v...�1wr�i.i. Tfi N(Ni1H. Af,T j . Sy. � ..... . . . U Y�IN��! � � ;4 � l. � . � N�w4 � t;1S 11• . .. � sx�e� xp.�e+n.+w11sw��maine�9�.aeeewid.ibk.�oe�.n�w.aremy.w�• LU tl�k.<-.tl' � � �. � I 100 PUH t R GHT Of WA PER .... . I . ... vwc �xiwa_ n w�r Aer.tM6Y ALF' IL �. .y.� I . �..... 1 STAT�' OF Fl,pR A�H'C � WFV MAP � . F'M J�>�W � . . . � . . Y • '� `�s i.mA4n�14 P 3.1 GO 3Ti.OFL ._ ._ ._.._. _. _ _ g _ ._' _ _ ' � � 5 �I.IION NC 15040-7501 aA9t0 OJ 7.T 1960 r.�i�s w+ n m . _ 3AnM �c vuac� sroimrc w riaa m� uMOr iro'u ° � � ay.._.._. _ . _ ._ _.._. _.._. _. � _. _ ._ _ L..�.._.._.._.._ .' w . N � J�C NUN1�:R� -'.r=.. �._ .._. .._:.�..�..�..�..� �._.._..�.�.._....�..�,.�..�..�...._ �vYA�� SSJC.C: � nYV�tNO ln-w-NK I nfwa�ifw.n.wa.s aveqsa+u� .:.L .� .,. ]IC�_i a�wrs�.w�i.�rrw.�a�a.o� 1n' 1 October 28, 2014 Mr. Robin Kendall, PE EMK Consultants of Florida, Inc 7815 North Dale Mabry Highway, S-200 Tampa, Florida 33614 Dear Mr. Kendall, Re: �_ i t .v • M 1 Existing Tree Inventory and Ratings Culver's @ Gulf to Bay and Hercules 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 good condition. See page two for tree table with conditions. Sincerely, � �� .``�, � L. Alyson Utter Anderson Lesniak Limited, Inc. ISA Certified Arborist FL-6158A Tree Inventory for Culver's @ Gulf to Bay and Hercules Avenue - Page 1 Existinq Tree Table with Citv of Clearwater Condition Ratinqs Ta No. S ecies DBH Ratin 60 Live Oak 17" 4 61 Live Oak 19" 3 62 Live Oak 14" 4 63 Washin ton Palm 14" 4 Tree Inventory for Culver's @ Gulf to Bay and Hercules Avenue - Page 2 ir �i � � I � L J PROPOSED FLOOR PL�4N 9CALE� V8" • I'-0" x�v�qewv�qerbmiauxw-cwver.-aur+osqm-su�.,��-mrr.iausa��uvmue�aznetamr�.naoroernr.p 3 �� . ��a� �� r �.< (9dW QWS �y w o c �i� c y m o � H W �' � u • � m � w t J R o 0 � � � c = V � v n os« n. w. i� �1:� w..�: o� ,�x u-ve � A1 � � � � O �; "� �'; �_: -1 �_ '��, �,. , W r sW: f � a�i. #� �'f5r 4x al , 4 i� t��. � � �i � � � .. ,... �.1., � �> " T { � . �,� I `'��.� �!�— i_ i �� ' `� � i� �I � � � � c 5 � � o-' � � `rs + �t . ' �s , , �n; ` st ;,i� t'� �' . PR�OPO�ED SOLIT�-I EXTERIOR ELEV,4TION 9GALE� V8", I'_0" PROPO�ED E�4St EXT�R(OR ELEVAtI�I g�.�: „8.,, ,,.m„ H: �,Prqeed'•.Projccb 2014\ I d2N - Cuhcf� - Gulfro Bay:O?SD•.SD.B',zrz�x�F.rLL mbr-I �?54.dwp, I?:9;?II IJ 29ti:48 PN,1ROman. DR'G To PDF.pcJ 22,_8" AFF. - TOP OF ` " PARAPET - - 19'•4" AFF. - ° 70P OF - - PAR4PET _ _ ' .-14'-3" = 70P OF ROOF ' - �� g� � � ��a�� A� ��i; Z �y, Wm O' J7'-8" AFF. U� TOP OF � W PAR4PET iU 19'-4" AFF. Wy TOP OF (� PCR.d.PET f/1 .-I4�_3�� iOP GF RO�,^F g!��$€ � W��4 ,��o° 3�_�" AiF. � V � _ � 9TCNE U O'-0" FFE. TOP OF 9LAB ow: u a. u R6 { : NONE orom: M Job: 14-]2! II'.'.I'n�iei�r�l'ri�i 7x?III!'.li"56-f'�ilrNx-[:��If1��14iy�U2-til)'�.�I).H•,<ii-x-FXFl.wlurlf?Sh.Jxy.l'_:4�?01��.:1Fi51M1.1Ni�miin.l)W(.il��l�l)V.pci _�� _J;�. �� ''�' � ��:. ��&��....4 ��F�oi �b 2 � Wm a UW �W WV SN V N a O C � �Q'J O � � m � V �� • �-'��s � t� ��4 �,.: ,z. �. „ �F,:� �.�: � m: ._z� �.� A2b DRAINAGE REPORT r�•� Culver's Restaurant Gulf to Bay Bivd & Hercules Ave Clearwater, Florida PREPARED FOR 4200 LLC 2551 N. Wahl Avenue Milwaukee, WI 53211 November 3, 2014 C nt� f ori 7815 N Dale Mabry Highway Tampa, FL 33614 (813) 931-8900 Culver's Restaurant Gulf to Bay Bivd & Hercules Ave Port Richey, Fiorida Drainage Report EMK Project No. 31336.02 0 Table of Contents Section 1. Introduction ll. Pre-Developed Conditions 111. Post-Developed Conditions IV. Storm-Water Management Summary V. Appendices a. NRCS MAP b. FEMA Floodplain Area Maps c. Treatment/Attenuation calculations d. Pipe Capacity Calcu/ations e. Pre /Post-Developed Delineated easin Maps PG. NO. 1 2 3 4 A 8 C D E I. Introduction: Culver's proposes to construct a new restaurant. The proposed project site is approximately 1.16 acres and is located on the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Gulf to Bay Boulevard (SR 60) & Hercules Avenue. The site is situated in Clearwater, Pinellas County, in Section 13, Township 29 S., Range 15 E. The site had been developed as a day care and ancillary church facility and has recently been partially razed. The land cover is in good condition. The prevailing soil types on site consist of Urban Land, as shown in the NRCS soil survey and attached geotechnical report. The existing site slopes from the east to the west and south, where rainfall runoff flows directly into the existing gutters of Hercules Avenue and Gulf to Bay Boulevard. According to the Flood �nsurance Rate Maps, Community Panel Number 109 of 327, Map Number 12103C0109H dated May 17, 2005, this site is within Flood Zone "X". The proposed storm-water management system will provide water quality treatment and attenuation for the proposed improvements. Treatment and attenuation will be provided by the proposed Detention with Effluent Filtration System consisting of a series of storm chambers providing attenuation and a sand filter bed providing treatment. Post-developed peak discharge flow for 24-hour, 25-year event SWFWMD storm event will be less than that in the pre-developed condition. Discharge to the FDOT R/W in SR 60 will consist only of effluent from the treatment bed. The storm chambers will be constructed within the southern portion of the property; effluent from the treatment bed will discharge to the existing curb inlet lying within the R/W of SR 60 at the NE quadrant of the intersection of Hercules Avenue. Seasonal high groundwater elevation within the site is 68.2-feet, based on a geotechnical report provided by Conestoga-Rovers & Associates (please see attached). I1. Pre-Developed Conditions: Pre-Basin Area = 1.16 acres • Hydraulic soil group (HSG) of site classified as: 0 100% Urban Land • Land use is defined as: o Urban; fully developed: ■ Good condition III. Post-Developed Conditions: Post-Basin Area = 1.16 acres • Hydraulic soil group (HSG) of site classified as: 0 100% UrbanLand • Land use is defined as: o Urban; fully developed: ■ Good condition IV. Storm-water Management Summary: The existing site consists of 22% pervious area. The proposed site consists of 28� pervious area. The majority of the site (1.03 acres) drains to the Hercules Boulevard R/W. The remainder (0.13 acres) drains to the SR 60 R/W. The proposed storm-water system will treat and attenuate 2,626 cf, discharging the treatment effluent to an inlet in the SR 60 R/W. The maximum flow from the treatment effluent is 141 cfh, or 0.04 cfs. Storm-water runoff in excess of the attenuation volume (2,630 cf) will discharge through DS No. 2 and over the proposed driveway pavement weir at a crest of 72.15 to the Hercules Avenue R/W. 3 � e � 27° ST 41" N 0 � M � � f�l gi ; � M R � M � O � O �o M � � O � Y 4 � 8 � � � M Y � � I f7 O � � � 27° ST 38" N 1 Soil Map—Pinellas County, Florida (31336.02 CULVERS CLEARWATER) 327490 327400 327410 327420 327430 3D440 327450 327460 327470 327480 327490 327500 327510 3 ti �, Map Scale: 1:685 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. p Mders � N 0 10 20 40 60 A �` 0 30 60 120 180 Map projection: Web Mer�hor Caner mordina6es: WGS84 Edge tia: UTM Zone 17N WC',S84 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey � Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 3 e � 520 327530 327540 �, � ° 27° ST 41" N � � F �'w !�. �F9 ��: 1� � � M � ma �� ;r�.. E y °^ � �� k d •'}# .� v�i �.,� �""� � .� ,u�.��j ,� � �r , � � o M M � M N — � . .. .. . ..4-. .. M � � � � O i� � k M 4�� S�'�� , .�' �� , 8 �, � M � x M � x m�- M ' � � � '� �'` 27° ST 3S' N 32752b 327530 327540 3 � e � 9/25/2014 Page 1 of 3 MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOI) � Area of Interest (AOI) Soils � Soil Map Unit Polygons ,� Soil Map Unit Lines � Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features (o� Blowout � Borrow Pit � Clay Spot Closed Depression '�! Gravel Pit „ Gravelly Spot t�t Landfill �� Lava Flow ,� Marsh or swamp � Mine or Quarry � Miscellaneous Water � Perennial Water E,.r Rock Outcrop .1�.. Saline Spot P , Sandy Spot � Severely Eroded Spot ?: Sinkhole � �. Slide or Slip � Sodic Spot � � s'� �r 'x .� Soil Map—Pinellas County, Florida (31336.02 CULVERS CLEARWATER) Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation � Rails � Interstate Highways . ._ US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background - Aerial Photography MAP INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3S57) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Pinellas County, Florida Survey Area Data: Version 9, Dec 6, 2013 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Dec 17, 2013—Feb 28, 2014 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/25/2014 � Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3 Soil Ma�Pinellas County, Florida Map Unit Legend Pinellas County, Florida (FL103) Map Unit Symboi Map Unit Name Acres in AOI 30 Urban land -- -- -- - Totals for Area of Interest I USDA NaturalResources � Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 1.7 1.7 31336.02 CULVERS CLEARWATER Percent of AQI 100.0% 100.0% 9/25/2014 Page 3 of 3 :�:�� 3�g� �� i� ' �a::....... F ., ..... � �' .-. -ti�'l��?��, ��r„� kne _... t'7 - : �:�,":`,;'i �Y� 'r � ��i �; ; �i ��, -i � ;;; � :;:;::;: ,. , ... ;;'; :- �: a.m.'.p�s�u,i—\'�iL`��. �� ; Appendix C: Treatment/Attenuation calculations SITE DESCRIPTION: EXISTING 31336.02 CULVER'S CLEARWATER Description Area (s� Percentage C buildings 32,477 64% 0.95 sidewalk 1,065 2% 0.95 pavement 6,113 12% 0.95 pond n/a 1.00 open space 10,967 22% 0.20 Total 50,622 100% C total 0.61 0.02 0.11 0.00 0.04 SITE DESCRIPTION: PROPOSED 31336.02 CULVER'S CLEARWATER Description Area (s� Percentage C � total buildings 4,242 8% 0.95 0.08 sidewalk 3,208 6% 0.95 0.06 pavement 28,839 57% 0.95 0.54 pond n/a 1.00 0.00 open space 14,333 28% 0.20 0.06 Total 50,622 100% 0.74 Delta C Tc i A Delta Q V RTV 1/2 C total 0.30 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.39 = 0.34 =15 minutes =7.3 in/hr at Tc = 15 minutes for the 25-year storm =1.16 acres =2.92 cfs =2,626 cf =2,109 cf Appendix E: Pre-/Post-Developed Delineated Basin Maps J n - . a� x � � z ? � � �' qi � �a � � � � , o ,�„ ° = � N - REUSE OF OOCUYENT � m� g m PRE-DEVELOPMENT - Mx� • oes ex � , _ — -- �oE.s BASIN MAP `"°°"""D """`°"• � "" �•F � �i"a�'°"�` . t�Wllalolr o� t3osid�, 7�10. �� p� m �'� �' m GULF TO BAY BOULEVARD �� i'�`�a xm m`i i n r"'o�'n,w � � ,.. AND S. HERCULES AVENUE_ .... �.,..... — .urxp°�°i:iio.n'xn'o`rmm' ...,:::'.o`:.'.....�....�........�..�.. ....o�. �.....�. n � . a� 'v4 � �� iN � - _ � III � � � a °� g+� � f m POST-DEVELOPMENT neuse ov ooeuue�� m� o m - — ,�E �oE.: . oE s � BASIN MAP . -- .wr�""° "°�' "` µ =�� m � e � m uamu•Exr «.�mow ..... �Coo.,rit�ncs oi r]osl�.aw rma � oKOO �n� ar N m ___ _. .— __— PIIOPFNIY '� � �� _ � m � � � - � GULF TO BAY BOULEVARD s p � i �o rRa �x"Gir ... : a '.. a. �. �. .» . . n . � AND S. HERCULES AVENUE - - �� u'i��i"o'wM01ROr'iiii „,,, •° • °• ' • •" •" ••• �.....,. Mtv ne Me�oW�TCO elnolne � RNICIl1NC r�xn .nr.Ji...s�ee«.no....en..�i.:�