Item #03 Approval of Park Place- Rezoning to PUDe Center of Good GI-i,
8
O C O,
AGENDA ITEM STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: April 16, 201
Item # 3
Contact Name:
Contact Number
Micha Rumer avu�
407 - 905 -3100, Ext. 1018
Reviewed By:
City Planner:
City Manager:
ouQieci: rarK riace (sKorman uevelopment Corp.)
Rezoning from C -3 to PUD, Land Use Plan
Project # RZ- 13 -02 -01
Commission District 3 — Rusty Johnson
ISSUE
Should the Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners approve a request from Skorman Development Corporation
for the rezoning from C -3 (General Commercial) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) on 14.11 acres of land
known as the Lake Butler Professional Campus and approve the associated Park Place PUD Land Use plan?
DISCUSSION
The proposed rezoning to PUD and associated PUD Land Use plan is a second request from the applicant in a six
(6) month time period. The original application was denied by the city commission on October 2, 2012, by a vote of
3 -1 with the Mayor absent. The applicant is not proposing changes to the PUD land use plan for this second
application.
The subject property is zoned C -3 (General Commercial) and has an approved site plan and development
agreement for the Lake Butler Professional Campus. The Lake Butler Professional Campus was originally
approved in 2008, and was proposed to be developed with the following uses on the Property: Lot 1 will consist of
a mix of professional and medical offices; Lot 2 is proposed in the southwest corner of the property and will consist
of a mix of retail and restaurant uses (see site plan attached). The proposed Park Place PUD will include 242
multi - family units on 11.34 acres and 2.60 acres of commercial and retail? The apartments will feature a club
house and pool amenity with landscaped park space within the development. The proposed apartments and
commercial out parcels will be architecturally cohesive with the surrounding development. Access is proposed via
a northbound right in on Maguire Road and an additional access from Tomyn Blvd. The table below references
the future land uses, zoning classifications and existing land uses of the surrounding parcels:
Direction
Future Land Use
Zoning Classification
Existing Land Use
North
R right-of-way
Road right-of-way
Florida Turnpike
East
Commercial
C -3 (General
Commercial )
Master stormwater pond for the Villages
of Wesmere
South
High Density
Residential
PUD (Planned Unit
Development
Villages of Wesmere
r
Commercial
C -3 (General
Commercial)
Vacant Parcel
The rezoning from C -3 (General Commercial) to Planned Unit Development allowing high density residential in a
Commercial Future Land Use designation is permitted via the City of Ocoee Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, no
land use change is being requested. The Comprehensive Plan states in the definition of land uses that: "...certain
forms of high and medium density residential housing may also be permitted within this land use when economic
conditions dictate a lower intensity use when the development is compatible and integrated into the surrounding
urban framework."
In order to help staff determine if the economic conditions exist, staff required the applicant to provide a market
analysis of the current office and multi - family trends. A copy of the market study has been included in this packet.
Several off -site improvements will be constructed or mitigated through payments based on the proposed
development and previous development agreement commitments. The first improvement is the construction of a
right turn lane on west bound Tomyn Blvd to northbound Maguire Road. This improvement will allow dedicated
right turns heading north on Maguire Road. The second improvement is a right turn lane on northbound Maguire
Road and eastbound Old Winter Garden Road. The applicant will either construct the improvement or pay the City
$400,000 to construct the improvement. The final improvement is a mitigation payment of $24,000 toward
landscaping the medians on Maguire Road.
EXISTING AND PROPOSED WAIVERS/ REQUESTS:
The first waiver previously granted that is requested is to remain in place is to Section 6.14.0 (2)(b)(i) of the Land
Development Code. This section of the Land Development Code requires a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer along
Maguire Road. The applicant is requesting a waiver to this requirement to allow a reduction of this buffer from 25-
feet to 15 -feet for the portion of the property that has frontage along Maguire Road. The applicant has justified this
request by providing a right turn lane leading into the site which will encroach into a portion of the plant able area
of the required landscape buffer.
The second waiver previously granted that is requested is to remain in place is to Section 6.14.C(2) (b)(i) of the
Land Development Code. This section of the Land Development Code requires a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer
along Tomyn Blvd. The applicant is requesting a waiver to this requirement to allow a reduction of this buffer from
25 -feet to 15 -feet for approximately 192 -feet along the portion of the property that has frontage along Tomyn Blvd.
The applicant has justified this request by providing a right turn lane leading into the site which will encroach into a
portion of the plant able area.
The applicant has requested two additional waivers from the requirements of the Land Development Code. The
City Commission has sole discretion to approve waivers from Code requirements based upon four criteria:
1. If the project is part of an integrated and master planned development;
2. If the project is compatible with surrounding developments;
3. If the project imposes no impacts on City infrastructure greater than that generated by other uses normally
permitted in the underlying zoning districts; and /or,
4. If the project provides an offsetting public benefit which is technically sound and measurable.
The first waiver that is being requested is to Section 6.15.G of the Land Development Code. This section of the
Land Development Code requires a 10 -foot wide landscape around all buildings. The applicant is requesting a
reduction of this requirement from 10 -feet to 5 -feet for the multi - family lot only. The applicant has justified this
request by stating the reduction will enhance the units by providing privacy with the diversion of landscaped areas
and sidewalks. Pedestrian areas will be designed to provide walkways to the interior of the project diverting
pedestrian traffic away from front windows.
The second waiver that is being requested is to Section 6 -4 G (1)(b) of the Land Development Code. This section
of the Land Development Code requires 2.25 parking spaces per dwelling unit. The applicant is requesting a
reduction to this requirement from 2.25 spaces to 2.15 for the multi - family development only. The applicant has
justified this request by stating that the reduced parking will provide for additional landscaping and green space
with the flexibility to add additional spaces if occupancy levels dictate.
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
The traffic analysis that was included indicates a decrease of 1,312 daily trips to a total of 3,373 trips with an
estimated highest commercial use of drive - through bank and pharmacy. The Lake Butler Professional Campus
development had an approved total of 4,685 trips. This decrease in the amount of trips on the surrounding
roadway network will not require mitigation by the developer.
SCHOOLCONCURRENCY
A finding of school capacity was provided by Orange County Public Schools on March 25, 2013, with a
determination that there is sufficient capacity to support the development of 242 multi - family total residential units.
Approval of the application is provided with six (6) conditions (see report for conditions).
DE VELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) met on March 5, 2013, and reviewed the Proposed PUD and PUD
Land Use Plan. Discussion related to the reasons the City Commission denied the project earlier were discussed.
No new comments were made. The DRC unanimously voted to recommend approving the rezoning to PUD for
242 multi - family units and commercial out parcels and the associated PUD Land Use plan.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning & Zoning Commission met on March 12, 2013, to consider approval of the applicant's request. Six
residents from the Maguire corridor spoke in opposition to the rezoning. The issues raised with those who spoke in
opposition were increased traffic, school crowding, crime, property values, and potential for low income do to noise
issues from the Florida Turnpike. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5 -2 in favor of recommending the
city commission approve the rezoning to PUD and associated land use plan with member Rob McKey and Dan
Marcotte voted against the motion.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
If the City Commission is agreeable to the change in use of the property, staff recommends the Honorable Mayor
and City Commissioners approve the rezoning request with the two waivers. Staff further recommends the
Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners approve the PUD Land Use Plan and associated First Amendment to
the Development Agreement.
If the City Commission does not agree on the change in use for the property, staff recommends the Honorable
Mayor and City Commission denies the request for PUD rezoning and retain the existing C -3 designation and
Development Agreement for the Lake Butler Professional Campus.
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map
Future Land Use Map
Zoning Map
Aerial Map
Park Place PUD Rendering
Park Place Land Use Plan
Lake Butler Professional Campus Site Plan and Rendering
Ocoee and Southwest Orange County Apartment and Office Market Overview dated March 6, 2013
PUD Rezoning Ordinance
Finding of School Capacity
Park place of Ocoee Preliminary Assessment of Traffic Noise
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
TYPE OF ITEM: (please mark with an "x')
Public Hearing
For Clerk's Dept Use:
X Ordinance First Reading
Consent Agenda
Ordinance Second Reading
Public Hearing
Resolution
Regular Agenda
Commission Approval
Discussion & Direction
Original Document/Contract Attached for Execution by City Clerk
Original Document/Contract Held by Department for Execution
Reviewed by City Attorney
Reviewed by Finance Dept.
Reviewed by ( )
_ N/A
X N/A
N/A
4
Park Place (FKA Lake Butler Professional Campus)
Location Map
Floridas Turnpike
■■■■■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■�,
N i�� � ■i ■ ■ ■1
C■
VIII
fh;i 6li,. I �
MR
c
n Z F,
'�'' 1 � r �Ma ■■ C
WIN. M
• r ■ ■1
w5 saaou �■■�
ow
Lei
• , r i � L� 11 �
.� .� •11111
1� �eIEI / /I1��
111111=
IIIIIIIII� E
• .
■ ,.... -�I�4
SoG Y.a 711/ �Jt frl �i'L
owwl
an
son
r
• � ��� �' FA'
Em
' ������ � ■■ ■� � � � '�� ■ ■ ■ ■ ■v is
• 1
2 '
P2l;
9
y �
4
� �
c
TO
u
o
°i
c c
g
O
CL -
CL
S
30
.°-�
° �
9 .v
i` t�
E
r
/2 �\ $
ML-
�
'a
=c
> 4�
i c
N
W
09
ed
Z
a
O
Y
N
}
N o
Z
V
d
J <
W
N
w
N
d
P
h
O
P
N
�O
O
f
P
m
r�>
O
G
Y
d
a
W
y 2
Q '
c C
N
v
FLI
c mmm
:n
N
1 1 �
loI
- -4w t 4,91 1 4-' t
1 - loth ,+�"
•
f
I
JLII
t lad
II�L�JI =,
aOVld i+avd LCLOO -a4
i
O
a
a
O
Z
a
J
a
W
N
D
Z W .J
F— V
Z
w J
CL CL
LLI
o Q
�a
Z
0
W
Z
Z
a
J
CL
O
J
LL Ln
�
W co
W N
N
N
r � N
V �
O�
LL W
U
O CL
Q
CL
V
Z
O
H
Q
oC
O
CL
X
O
U
N
Z
W
LL O
J
W
W
D
Z
a
0
Y
N
QGm g
j 0 un
¢¢¢uo O�'(Irymo'°mF
7¢ 2W
a'O a0 �U� <o
¢.NOnu Nag.ouuu
S
s=$
awY Oo $$ x U 5g x
Ni3 w (] <�A�u Yau�i:Y
a ilwa� F raw" -tim
�aW¢ a wwoa�a�
a wo JN = °
N 3oii z` J w 3
�Oii UO i0u
O mmii LL. U22§1 auM
fi
8 _
o
W 111111
J I
w
J
J
< 1
a
Y
A ¢ a ¢
O
a� a,aoo
w�_
oll alla<W
S� °- oowgF
il¢ %¢Su la> &6V WIF3LL °s .
alaowz� .zw z o W ..i_
w'so�d aaR?�o a¢goo
r'wcau� N�_sa� omm8a�
w
N Wg3 - ag3 ¢ ;og
ww o
y OOO°-� wgo
mFO ¢F
�.w OO� w0 F�p
6,U MR NUsxn �u
4 i
fi
8 _
o
W 111111
J I
w
J
J
< 1
a
Y
A ¢ a ¢
O
a� a,aoo
w�_
oll alla<W
S� °- oowgF
il¢ %¢Su la> &6V WIF3LL °s .
alaowz� .zw z o W ..i_
w'so�d aaR?�o a¢goo
r'wcau� N�_sa� omm8a�
w
N Wg3 - ag3 ¢ ;og
ww o
y OOO°-� wgo
mFO ¢F
�.w OO� w0 F�p
6,U MR NUsxn �u
NoilvaodaoOva aodo,aa000vwao�s ao� 0c�3ls ® b3lllW Il p�� 1
- 1VAOaddd d0 SNowaNOO
P m
.a
I _
I
i x
G
Y'9
d
ad .
S�
mA
q h
£"ms`s ° "o'
; €b d s b aF bE''i
£
g
H'�
3 t tl W ° em agoaog6g ioih
1.
" p ,°ey @ §g oa�a.� £ h b b, e 2- h � a££ s€ ri' sy�' a €;
.kd_ zz3k
YI a g. .
k C�.. z r dk° FE: wA gE
dyad Ni ° 4�' z -am ngiY
sd
ffa€ dk .waz m�. e� as g ao
F.N -gin eat s �s
8 3 ag� W!
i y b
E Nd E d
�3a.
31 i F h
fi . - E
y 3 y k3 � QFS 'en xh € 3 � 3€
Z�� °Wk• �d a � � °�� } '
€ � k
eg„ �a$ bg Egg d g
;Pq
s & X6 ❑
bbt �3 a S
h
�$ b d 0
kit � g r
g
hfi8 y � S
W$2g E
h� r k 3 k 9s, y p
w 4�.
4 y 5 8
hm yr d
£ S £ b a
k
bkm g£°
h % e
ffi o
y a g3
ax o o�
£
�Q �M
S I p K g %
I
°
<3
ix o�
FY =�
uc
2d
r €ob
2 %H�
i
4y m
2 y
fib d a
k
0o
b
d5
I
_ NOIIVHOdH001N3WdOl3A3UNVWHONS :HOd
VdIHOId `33000 W "o �� P° o l� �a�' °o I ( M
rt — 0931 b3l1IW
30V I d )Ia � i m 1,
2 I �
ti i!
I
i
I� o
s
O
W
cc` I'
J ,
2��11
m n o
f
=z
°so 0
app
!I
I�
a �
8 €8 8
=�
W<
A3AHf1S
3 c
t
£
oR o
I
ry 3oa
§ s
d _
b
�t.
o�
i�'�a II I i
'. n
— Z�
II I
m
��eod7; o
N p7
.G
I z
j O
co
�i2l�o
e
o F
a @ @ @ @ MIA ! � C r � 1'�� S"s §�C �'E b eae�g€
AI R 3�� � §�a�ggi�iY § §�t €�5� €g �ef�
one�iSee��8a9a�� €..a8a �ae�an'Gaa ®a @S€ .<s�@ o 8. i.. 0
F94 a@ J'tf@ "�M:40 §a §
a(MY MVAwo`wiwo
3Wm i
r
�o
U
O O
U
i
o
Q
° N011` HOda001N3WdOl3A30 NdWaONS :aOd s',M
e �
t/UI8 0l3 `33000
993� a� I Q €
NV ld183d
\\9 •11 a3 � h ���
4
J 8
EA = : s o'
a
o
9
h 5
i'
G
a
r
NOIlvaodaoOva ao��,aa000vwao�IS and
9931 ® b3lllW � "g ° IN'� y !
- � 30VId )l - �
Nvld NOISIAIaens
4 ^A&
ri
U_
r
41 0&
o
^
S
2° 8r
I
"A F
b
I
I
I�
-_amm
a
I o
Q ¢ ! ¢
�w III of €�
F
I I I
¢ On
g dA
v / 8
� ___—
. 8.
$g
�
r Jtl
moa.00m ;
- aavAmnos NAWOl n
NV Id =Ulb tJ=J.LbVVM
® 'J a r
III �I
I a � � a � - e� I ��� � r, O
n
� 5111
o
jr
L
I L
- ------ ---
ti
-4
It
—0i
NOIIVUOdblOO IN3WdOl3A3a NVWHONS :80=1
VaIHO
30VId >IHVd
I —,
3 11 W
NV Id =Ulb tJ=J.LbVVM
® 'J a r
III �I
I a � � a � - e� I ��� � r, O
n
� 5111
o
jr
L
I L
- ------ ---
ti
-4
It
—0i
TOMYN-BOULEVARD
0
; m
m
M
0
O
bO
1 MASTER SITE PLAN
M R LEGG
v w
ILLER
LAKE BUTLER PROFESSIONAL CAMPUS
OCOEE, FLORIDA
FOR: LAKE BUTLER PROFESSIONAL CAMPUS, LLC
M2
9
l
T i
5R
O
0
LAKE BUTLER PROFESSIONAL CAMPUS
OCOEE, FLORIDA
FOR: LAKE BUTLER PROFESSIONAL CAMPUS, LLC
• • ��� ,�� � `� ,�� �� ���� is
�• � I ��
fj 11.
¢ y
f
1 C 16
RY
i,
z'
;Y
NAI R `
Commercial Real Estate Services, Worldwide.
s
MAR - 6 2013
Ocoee and Southwest Orange County Apartment and Office Market Overview
Introduction
This report analyzes recent trends in the Orlando area rental apartment and office markets, with
focus in the Ocoee and West Orange county sub - markets. Key data analyzed includes inventory,
occupancy rates, lease rates and construction trends. Data presented in this report was revised
from the previous report dated June 27, 2012. Changes in the marketplace since June 2012
have not been significant. As a result, the conclusions as previously presented are unchanged.
Conclusions
As local employment gradually improves, the Orlando area apartment market continues to post
solid operating results as measured by occupancy and lease rates. Rents are rising as leases
renew and new rental households are formed. Limited new construction over the past four years
magnifies the growth in tenant demand. While homeownership is more affordable now than in
previous years, households continue to choose renting due to high down payment requirements
and stringent mortgage underwriting. Demand remains strongest for newly constructed units
throughout the Orlando market area and Southwest Orange County. The September 2012
occupancy rate at the newest rental communities in this market area ranges from 92% to 100 %,
which is above average for the Orlando metropolitan area.
The national recession has had a significant impact on the Orlando area office market. Vacancy
rates have increased and rental rates have decreased over the past four years. These changes
are especially dramatic in the Ocoee — Winter Garden sub- market where the February 2013
office vacancy rate is 13.8 %. Average office lease rates continue to drop, and are currently at
the lowest level since 2003.
The market implications for the subject property are as follows:
• Rental apartments are the strongest real estate sector today, and are forecast to remain
the strongest segment as the national and local economies recover from the recession.
High occupancy rates at existing communities in the market area demonstrate strong
demand for new units. Initial lease -up rates at new communities in the market area
suggests that a new rental apartment community could achieve stabilized occupancy
within two years after the first certificate of occupancy is granted.
• Because of the inventory of vacant office space in the market area today together with
declining lease rates, construction of new office space on the subject property could not
be supported until the market strengthens. This analysis shows that three years may be
required before construction of office space could be supported by market demand.
• The estimated real estate taxes generated over a ten -year period with a combination of
retail space and apartments on the property are $5,743,923. In comparison, the
estimated real estate taxes generated over a ten -year period with retail and office space
are $2,292,829. Over a ten -year period, an additional $1,159,407 in ad valorem tax
revenue would be returned to the City of Ocoee with retail and apartment development
on the property.
I Realvest"
Ocoee and Southwest Orange County Apartment and Office Market Overview
Overall Apartment Market Conditions
The September 2012 inventory of rentable apartments in the Orlando metropolitan area was
154,437 units. With about 145,043 units occupied, the overall occupancy rate was 93.9 %.
The following table summarizes current inventory, occupancy and absorption data for rental
apartments in 12 sub - markets in the Orlando area as surveyed by Charles Wayne Consulting,
Inc. in September 2012. Comparable and competitive communities for the subject property are
located in the Winter Garden - Ocoee -West Orange and Southwest Orange County sub - markets.
The occupancy rate in the Winter Garden - Ocoee -West Orange sub - market was 90.3 %, and
95.6% in the Southwest Orange County sub - market.
ORLANDO AREA APARTMENT MARKET SUMMARY
September 2012
Rentable Units Under Occupied Occupancy
Sub - market
Units
Construction
Units
Rate
A Sanford -Lake Mary
9,599
228
8,884
92.6%
B Longwood- Altamonte Springs
10,791
1
10,182
94.4%
C Casselbeny- Winter Springs- Oviedo
10,413
87
9,882
94.9%
D Apopka
850
0
795
93.5%
E Winter Garden -Ocoee -West Orange
5,123
164
4,625
90.3%
F North Orlando-Winter Park - Maitland
13,970
1,187
12,904
92.4%
G South Orlando
27,856
28
25,853
92.8%
H East Orange-UCF
31,858
41
30,174
94.7%
1 South Orange County
10,278
726
9,920
96.5%
J Southwest Orange County
12,148
540
11,615
95.6%
K Kissimmee
12,252
180
11,598
94.7%
L Lake/Northeast Polk
9,299
9
8,611
92.6%
Metro Area Total
154,437
3,191
145,043
93.9%
NOTE: Units under construction includes units undergoing renovation.
SOURCE: Residential Market Reports; Charles Wayne Consulting, Inc.
Note: Units Under Construction does not include 216 units at Casa Mirella in the Dr. Phillips -
Windermere sub - market. Construction at Casa Mirella began after the September 2012 survey.
NA1 Realvest" 2
Ocoee and Southwest Orange County Apartment and Office Market Overview
Residential Market Reports Sub - markets Map
1 1J 44 1 \
H B J 1 ` —
__I, � _V O L U - S 1-A elw
true Eferirue
437 [r 1
L l� K E 48A 46 541�t1n 431
AouM Dora l aka , tk 46
$00A IMount _Its
~ Plymouth 4318 46A
J, 4 f Lake
r _ - — — - I Late Jesup .
FGx
t 446 ,,� y � .. 46
W P ka�RL i 427 i, ea Pa k
— Seminol8 an_wood4ts Win Springs x
�. ?
even 1 ! albs E f O L E .426 I
pkk Pa ks
L
o�a._ _Qrast ` , ° AlftnnteSp�'I�igs
IVAI Realvest
426 ' 1 1 x t.... 434 t"
" Blanchaf '. P. . no
III n nion P0r4t t i
So �6ithlo t
P 4olG �"' CMISimeSo
1a, aP �� ,yCentealPark
*' D F Q
6061 o Co(ip ay a 520 i
k fatle! b° l ,l 417 1
i
15
Sf.�CIOU ..532 -_
O S� E L A ,
'I_a d
f5
523 TreeR
A 192
kC
3
T,u
VVfrx�finers " 1...:4311
i
ae
i 1
192
__
V
- 1 7
545
qq�
C,
pbell
s32
- = �;• Loughma
t
�.._
S35
77
P Oi L K
1
6 Davenport
IVAI Realvest
426 ' 1 1 x t.... 434 t"
" Blanchaf '. P. . no
III n nion P0r4t t i
So �6ithlo t
P 4olG �"' CMISimeSo
1a, aP �� ,yCentealPark
*' D F Q
6061 o Co(ip ay a 520 i
k fatle! b° l ,l 417 1
i
15
Sf.�CIOU ..532 -_
O S� E L A ,
'I_a d
f5
523 TreeR
A 192
kC
3
Ocoee and Southwest Orange County Apartment and Office Market Overview
Apartment Construction Trends
The table below summarizes the change in number of apartment complexes, units under
construction, and total inventory since March 2000. This data includes all classes of rental
communities (market -rate and income restricted). The decrease in total inventory between 2005
and 2008 was due to the number of properties sold for condominium conversion. Since 2008, as
the condominium trend reversed and properties have reverted back to conventional rental, the
number of rentable units has increased. Since the housing market collapse in 2006 and the
subsequent crash in financial markets, construction of new rental apartment communities has
fallen to less than half of the annual level seen prior to 2006.
ORLANDO AREA APARTMENT MARKET CONSTRUCTION AND INVENTORY
2000-2012
Survey Date
Number of
Rentable
Units Under
Total
Complexes
Units
Construction
Inventory
March 2000
516
118,869
13,003
131,872
September 2000
532
125,361
11,297
136,658
March 2001
544
131,767
8,202
139,969
September 2001
553
136,370
6,511
142,881
March 2002
568
141,135
5,564
146,699
September 2002
575
144,526
4,951
149,477
March 2003
585
146,802
5,822
152,624
September 2003
590
150,064
3,761
153,825
March 2004
598
151,948
4,688
156,636
September 2004
596
151,037
6,196
157,233
March 2005
598
151,496
4,440
155,936
September 2005
592
147,154
3,940
151,094
March 2006
577
140,052
3,308
143,360
September 2006
563
134,459
3,783
138,242
March 2007
557
135,782
4,050
139,832
September 2007
567
136,987
5,598
142,585
March 2008
586
139,605
6,675
146,280
September 2008
604
144,659
3,699
148,358
March 2009
618
147,511
3,888
151,399
September 2009
623
149,672
3,169
152,841
March 2010
627
150,955
1,627
152,582
September 2010
623
151,156
1,526
152,682
March 2011
630
151,952
2,000
153,952
September 2011
629
152,329
1,929
154,258
March 2012
635
153,084
3,250
156,334
September 2012
640
154,437
3,191
157,628
SOURCE: Residential Market Reports; Charles Wayne Consulting, Inc.
Note: Units Under Construction does not include 216 units at Casa Mirella.
NAI Realvest
4
Ocoee and Southwest Orange County Apartment and Office Market Overview
The graph below shows trends in apartment inventory and occupancy since March 2000. A drop
in overall occupancy rates followed the decline in apartment inventory that began in 2005. The
decline in overall occupancy rates resulted from renters moving out of apartments purchased by
investors for condominium conversion and job losses due to the economic recession. Rentable
units increased as units sold for condominium conversion were placed back into the rental
inventory as well as new construction. Overall occupancy rates rebounded after reaching a low
point in 2009 due to improving employment and demand for rental housing. Increased demand
for rental housing has been driven by a constrained supply due to limited new construction and
a growing percentage of households choosing rental housing over homeownership. Additionally,
renters have postponed purchasing a home due to economic uncertainty and more stringent
mortgage loan requirements.
Orlando Area Apartment Inventory and Occupancy
170,000
160.000
150.000
n
° 140,000
i
130,000
120.000
i
9ll 0'.
96 0'.
94 0`;
920`;
a
900". a
o
88 G`b
i A0 0'.
84 0`.
110.000 L .. _.. .. ._ .. ... .. _. _.. __. _. _. .. i 820'.
�e�t� d c` 0 �t 1 � Q d'`� c t�
5 e � �, 5� 5 4 1 11 5 y 5 4 5
Survey Data
--0— Rentable -Total occ,pancy
RAI Realvest
5
Ocoee and Southwest Orange County Apartment and Office Market Overview
Comparable Market -rate Apartment Communities
The table below summarizes data for the newer, conventionally financed market -rate apartment
communities in the vicinity of the subject property. Key observations from this analysis include:
• The eight comparable market -rate rental communities were built between 1999 and
2008.
• Lake Sherwood was originally planned as a 240 -unit condominium community. Half of
the units were converted to rental apartments in March 2010.
• The September 2012 occupancy rate at these communities ranges from 92% to 100 %,
which is above average for the Orlando metropolitan area.
• Unit absorption rates during initial lease -up at these communities ranged from 14 to 20
units per month.
Community
Year Built
Units
Acres
Density
y
ccupancy
Lease Rates
Rate
Lake Sherwood
1724 London Crest Drive
Orlando 32818
2006
120
N/A
N/A
100%
$759 - $1,099
Villa Tuscany
753 Sherwood Terrace Drive
Orlando 32818
2002
342
24.0
14.3
92%
$815 - $1,175
Key Isle at Windermere Phase 1
2415 Treasure Landing Parkway
Ocoee 34761
1999
282
N/A
N/A
98%
$860 - $1,210
Key Isle at Windermere Phase 2
2415 Treasure Landing Parkway
Ocoee 34761
2007
165
N/A
N/A
98%
$900 - $1,305
Hawthorne Groves
204 Hawthorne Groves Boulevard 2001 328 27.5 11.9 96% $830 - $1,215
Orlando 32835
Bala Sands
8008 Bala Sands Boulevard 2002 298 29.0 10.3 98% $934 - $1,500
Orlando 32818
Falcon Square
14600 Avenue of the Groves 2008 379 N/A N/A 94% $940 - $1,470
Winter Garden 34787
Altis at Lakes of Windermere
11598 Lachlan Lane 2008 280 N/A N/A 97% $1,070 - $1,600
Windermere 34786
SOURCE: Residential Market Reports; Charles Wayne Consulting, Inc.
1YA1 Realvest 6
Ocoee and Southwest Orange County Apartment and Office Market Overview
Office Market Conditions
The table on the following page shows quarterly office market statistics for the Ocoee - Winter
Garden sub - market from 2001 through February 2013. Key observations from this analysis
include:
• The inventory of office space as measured by total rentable square feet increased during
this period as a result of more properties being included in the quarterly survey and new
construction.
• The national recession had a dramatic impact on the office market beginning in the
second quarter 2007 with double -digit vacancy rates. Office vacancy rates reached a
peak of 28.7% in the fourth quarter 2008. As a result of a strong 2012 third quarter, the
office vacancy rate has improved to 13.8% in February 2013.
• As a result of decreased demand for office space, average lease rates have fallen over
30% since 2007. At $17.30 per square foot, average office lease rates are currently at
the lowest level since 2003.
Office Inventory and Vacancy Rate
650.000
600.000
550.000
500,000
m
b
LL 450.000
>ti
y 400,000
D
350.000
0
K
300.000
250,000
200.000
35.0
300%
25.0
20.0%
c
15.0
10.0%
5.0"„
150.000
O.OYb
�0 �0 % 0 5 0 N o 5 0 , p 'j0 .�0 50 '0 'S0 ' 0 ' ' 0 "0 ' 0 'S t) ' 0 S 0 0 "0 ,Q ' 0
ti� tip, ry �ti ��ti ti�� ti�� 1 ° L°� ti�'o°h ho d° ry � ry �'� � ° ryo yo ° yo °o yo n° yo n° yo °� yo `` yo �ti yo �ti
0uartor
—TotalRentabtoSF -- Vacancy
1YA1 Rea lvest
7
OCOEE- WINTER GARDEN PROFESSIONAL OFFICE MARKET TRENDS
NAI Realvest" 8
Number
Total
New
Buildings
of
Rentable
Net
Buildings
New SF
Under
SF Under
Average
Period
Buildings
SF
Vacant SF Vacancy %
Absorption
Delivered
Delivered
Construction
Construction
Lease Rate
Feb 201
61
591,779
81,948
13.8%
(7,606)
0
0
0
0
$17.30 /fs
2012 4Q
61
591,779
74,342
12.6%
8,722
0
0
0
0
$17.39 /fs
2012 3Q
61
591,779
83,064
14.0%
33,659
0
0
0
0
$19.29/fs
2012 2Q
61
591,779
116,723
19.7%
(1,068)
0
0
0
0
$18.90 /fs
201210
61
591,779
115,655
19.5%
12,464
0
0
0
0
$19.23/1s
20114Q
61
591,779
128,119
21.6%
(7,486)
1
6,000
0
0
$19.93/fs
20113Q
60
585,779
114,633
19.6%
(2,991)
0
0
1
6,000
$19.641fs
20112Q
60
585,779
111,642
19.1%
27,775
1
33,290
1
6,000
$19.68/fs
20111Q
59
552,489
106,127
19.2%
4,567
0
0
2
39,290
$19.44/1s
201040
59
552,489
110,694
20.0%
24,072
0
0
1
33,290
$20.22/fs
201030
59
552,489
134,766
24.4%
(34,706)
0
0
1
33,290
$22.04/fs
20102Q
59
552,489
100,060
18.1%
18,352
0
0
1
33,290
$22.58/fs
201010
59
552,489
118,412
21.4%
2,095
0
0
0
0
$22.58/fs
2009 4Q
59
552,489
120,507
21.8%
(718)
0
0
0
0
$21.901fs
2009 3Q
59
552,489
119,789
21.7%
4,099
0
0
0
0
$22.921fs
2009 2Q
59
552,489
123,888
22.4%
12,549
0
0
0
0
$23.37/fs
20091Q
59
552,489
136,437
24.7%
26,521
1
6,249
0
0
$23.66 1fs
2008 4Q
58
546,240
156,709
28.7%
5,909
0
0
1
6,249
$23.49/fs
200830
57
534,240
152,618
28.6%
(6,208)
0
0
2
18,249
$22.78/fs
200820
56
524,240
136,410
26.0%
6,145
1
45,000
3
28,249
$22.65/fs
20081Q
55
479,240
97,555
20.4%
33,344
5
74,000
3
67,000
$24.91/fs
2007 4Q
52
427,240
78,899
18.5%
(5,948)
0
0
5
107,000
$25.68/fs
2007 3Q
52
427,240
72,951
17.1%
(17,062)
1
12,550
4
97,000
$25.65/fs
2007 2Q
51
414,690
43,339
10.5%
(7,654)
0
0
4
64,550
$25.021fs
200710
50
407,338
28,333
7.0%
8,267
4
30,843
1
7,352
$25.10 1fs
2006 4Q
47
383,847
13,109
3.4%
4,754
0
0
4
30,843
$23.011fs
2006 3Q
47
383,847
17,863
4.7%
20,936
0
0
4
30,843
$23.09/fs
2006 2Q
46
371,337
26,289
7.1%
(2,000)
0
0
4
36,001
$23.561fs
200610
46
371,337
24,289
6.5%
33,239
4
47,112
2
15,510
$23.56/fs
20054Q
43
336,735
22,926
6.8%
3,700
0
0
5
50,112
$23.10/fs
2005 3Q
43
336,735
26,626
7.9%
7,724
0
0
4
37,602
$23.10 /fs
2005 2Q
42
331,735
29,350
8.8%
2,200
0
0
5
42,602
$22.62/1's
200510
42
331,735
31,550
9.5%
5,165
3
15,000
1
5,000
$22.68/fs
2004 4Q
40
321,735
26,715
8.3%
(9,415)
0
0
3
15,000
$22.38/fs
2004 3Q
40
321,735
17,300
5.4%
6,262
0
0
2
10,000
$22.66 1fs
2004 2Q
39
314,873
16,700
5.3%
4,600
0
0
3
16,862
$21.97/fs
20041Q
39
314,873
21,300
6.8%
11,794
2
17,356
1
6,862
$21.97/fs
2003 4Q
38
304,379
22,600
7.4%
700
0
0
2
17,356
$21.09 /fs
2003 3Q
38
304,379
23,300
7.7%
18,940
2
17,840
1
10,494
$19.71/fs
2003 2Q
35
281,539
19,400
6.9%
(575)
0
0
4
33,334
$19.75 /fs
200310
35
281,539
18,825
6.7%
16,600
2
18,000
2
19,840
$21.49 /fs
2002 4Q
34
268,539
22,425
8.4%
5,598
1
6,840
2
18,000
$23.26/fs
20023Q
33
261,699
21,183
8.1%
(2,213)
0
0
2
19,840
$22.32/1s
2002 2Q
33
261,699
18,970
7.2%
(5,770)
0
0
1
6,840
$23.47/fs
20021Q
33
261,699
13,200
5.0%
12,689
1
8,056
1
6,840
$24.61/fs
20014Q
32
253,643
17,833
7.0%
7,903
1
11,536
1
8,056
$23.11/fs
20013Q
31
242,107
14,200
5.9%
36,930
2
24,928
2
19,592
$23.47/fs
20012Q
27
204,677
13,700
6.7%
(600)
0
0
6
57,022
$24.98/fs
20011Q
27
204,677
13,100
6.4%
5,200
2
12,502
6
57,022
$22.15/fs
Source: CoStar
Property
NAI Realvest" 8
Ocoee and Southwest Orange County Apartment and Office Market Overview
Economic Impact
We analyzed and compared the economic impact of ad valorem taxes that would be generated
over a ten -year period by developing either retail space and rental apartments or retail and office
space on the property. The following assumptions were used in this analysis:
• Vacant land value is based on the current assessment of $180,000 per acre.
• The taxable value for retail buildings is $200 per square foot based upon a sample of
retail buildings built in Orange County since 2010.
• The taxable value for office buildings is $100 per square foot based upon a sample of
office buildings built in Orange County since 2010.
• The taxable value for apartment buildings is $100,000 per unit (including land value)
based upon comparable apartment communities built in Orange County since 2010.
• The total millage rate is 20.6097 per $1,000 of assess value, which includes 6.9239 mills
for the City of Ocoee.
• Based upon the current inventory and absorption rate of office space in this sub - market,
we assumed that the first 26,220- square -foot office building would not be delivered for
five years, with one additional 23,732- square -foot building completed each year
thereafter.
• Current market conditions support the complete build -out of all 242 apartments in the
first year.
The table below summarizes the total real estate taxes generated by retail, office and apartment
development on the property over a ten -year period based upon the assumptions outlined
above. The 17,000 square feet of retail space would be built under both scenarios. The
estimated real estate taxes generated over a ten -year period with a combination of retail space
and apartments are $5,743,923. In comparison, the estimated real estate taxes generated over a
ten -year period with retail and office space are $2,292,829. Over the ten -year period, an
additional $1,159,407 in ad valorem tax revenue would be returned to the City of Ocoee with
retail and apartment development on the property.
Estimated 10 -Year Total Real Estate Taxes Generated
Retail
Apartment
Office
Year
Total
SF
Taxable
Value
Total Tax
Revenue
Total
Units
Taxable
Value
Total Tax
Revenue
Total SF
Taxable
Value
Total Tax
Revenue
1
17,000
$3,670,000
$75,638
242
$24,200,000
$498,755
0
$2,322,000
$47,856
2
17,000
$3,670,000
$75,638
242
$24,200,000
$498,755
0
$2,322,000
$47,856
3
17,000
$3,670,000
$75,638
242
$24,200,000
$498,755
0
$2,322,000
$47,856
4
17,000
$3,670,000
$75,638
242
$24,200,000
$498,755
0
$2,322,000
$47,856
5
17,000
$3,670,000
$75,638
242
$24,200,000
$498,755
26,220
$4,944,000
$101,894
6
17,000
$3,670,000
$75,638
242
$24,200,000
$498,755
49,952
$7,317,200
$150,805
7
17,000
$3,670,000
$75,638
242
$24,200,000
$498,755
73,684
$9,690,400
$199,716
8
17,000
$3,670,000
$75,638
242
$24,200,000
$498,755
97,416
$12,063,600
$248,627
9
17,000
$3,670,000
$75,638
242 1
$24,200,000
$498,755
121,148
$14,436,800
$297,538
10
17,000
$3,670,000
$75,638
242
24,200,000
$498,755
144,880
$16,810,000
$346,449
Totals
17,000
$3,670,000
$756,376
242 1
124,200,000
$4,987,547
144,880
$16,810,000
$1,536,453
Total taxes collected over 10 years with Retail and Apartment development:
Total taxes collected over 10 years with Retail and Office development:
Total Taxes City of Ocoee
$5,743,923 $1,929,691
$2,292,829 $770,284
NAI Realvest
NAI Rea lvest"
f aI407875 3137
tax A07 875 3137
Commercial Real Estate Services, Worldwide.
nairealvest_com
2200 I..ucien Way, Suite 350
Maitland FL 32751 -7019
ORDINANCE NO.
(Rezoning Ordinance for Park Place)
TAX PARCEL ID #: 29- 22 -28- 8895 -01001
CASE NO. RZ- 12- 06 -03: Park Place (fka Skorman /Lake Butler Property)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF OCOEE, FLORIDA, CHANGING
THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM OCOEE GENERAL
COMMERCIAL (C -3) DISTRICT, TO OCOEE PUD, `PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT," ON CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY CONTAINING
APPROXIMATELY 14.11 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF MAGUIRE ROAD AND TOMYN ROAD, PURSUANT TO
THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER;
FINDING SUCH ZONING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE OCOEE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR A REVERTER CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR AND AUTHORIZING THE REVISION OF THE
OFFICIAL CITY ZONING MAP; REPEALING INCONSISTENT
ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the owner or owners (the "Applicant ") of certain real property located
within the corporate limits of the City of Ocoee, Florida, as hereinafter described, have submitted
an application to the City Commission of the City of Ocoee, Florida (the "Ocoee City
Commission') to rezone said real property (the "Rezoning "); and
WHEREAS, the Applicant seeks to rezone certain real property containing
approximately 14.11 acres, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by
this reference made a part hereof, from Ocoee General Commercial (C -3) District, to Ocoee
PUD, "Planned Unit Development "; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5 -9(B) of Chapter 180 of the Code of Ordinances of the
City of Ocoee, Florida (the "Ocoee City Code "), the Director of Planning has reviewed said
Rezoning application and determined that the Rezoning requested by the Applicant is consistent
with the 1991 City of Ocoee Comprehensive Plan as set forth in Ordinance #91 -28, adopted
September 18, 1991, as amended (the "Ocoee Comprehensive Plan"); and
WHEREAS, said Rezoning application was scheduled for study and recommendation by
the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Ocoee, Florida (the "Planning and Zoning
Commission'); and
WHEREAS, on August 14, 2012 the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public
hearing and reviewed said Rezoning application for consistency with the Ocoee Comprehensive
Plan and determined that the Rezoning requested by the Applicant is consistent with the Ocoee
Comprehensive Plan, and is in the best interest of the City and recommended to the Ocoee City
Commission that the zoning classification of said real property be rezoned as requested by the
Applicant, and that the Ocoee City Commission finds that the Rezoning requested by the
Applicant is consistent with the Ocoee Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, on the Ocoee City Commission held a de novo
advertised public hearing with respect to the proposed Rezoning of said real property and
determined that the Rezoning is consistent with the Ocoee Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance has been considered by the Ocoee City Commission in
accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 166.041 (3)(a), Florida Statutes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF OCOEE, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. AUTHORITY The Ocoee City Commission has the authority to
adopt this Ordinance pursuant to Article VIII of the Constitution of the State of Florida and
Chapters 163 and 166, Florida Statutes.
SECTION 2. REZONING The zoning classification, as defined in the Ocoee City
Code, of the Property described in Exhibit "A" containing approximately 14.11 acres located
within the corporate limits of the City of Ocoee, Florida, is hereby changed from Ocoee General
Commercial (C -3) District, to Ocoee PUD, "Planned Unit Development." A map of said land
herein described which clearly shows the area of the Rezoning is attached hereto as Exhibit "B"
and by this reference is made a part hereof.
SECTION 3. LAND USE PLAN The following Land Use Plan for the Property
described in Exhibit "A" to this Ordinance is hereby approved subject to the Conditions of
Approval and Waiver(s), if any, from the Ocoee Land Development Code set forth thereon:
That certain Land Use Plan for Park Place PUD prepared by Miller Legg, date
stamped received by the City on , with such additional
revisions thereto, if any, as may be reflected in the minutes of the City
Commission of the City of Ocoee meeting approving the same (the "Land Use
Plan').
The above described Land Use Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and by this reference
made a part hereof.
SECTION 4. REVERTER The Conditions of Approval incorporated into the Land
Use Plan require that, subject to the absence of certain conditions, the developer of the Property
make application for the first building permit for the residential portion of the site not later than
eighteen (18) months after the date of approval of the Land Use Plan. In the event the
application for building permit condition is not met and the City Commission does not desire to
extend the time period, after notice and public hearing, the City Commission may terminate the
Land Use Plan and cause that the zoning for the Property revert back to Ocoee General
Commercial (C -3) District.
2
SECTION 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The City Commission hereby finds the
Rezoning of the lands described in this Ordinance to be consistent with the Ocoee
Comprehensive Plan.
SECTION 6. ZONING MAP The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
revise the Official Zoning Map of the City of Ocoee in order to incorporate the Rezoning enacted
by this Ordinance and the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute said revised
Official Zoning Map in accordance with the provisions of Section 5 -1(G) of Article V of Chapter
180 of the Ocoee City Code.
SECTION 7. CONFLICTING ORDINANCES All ordinances or parts of
ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed and rescinded.
SECTION 8. SEVERABILITY If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase,
or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of
competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent
provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion hereto.
SECTION 9. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective ten (10)
days after its passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 20
ATTEST:
Beth Eikenberry, City Clerk
(SEAL)
FOR USE AND RELIANCE ONLY BY THE
CITY OF OCOEE, FLORIDA; APPROVED
AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
this day of
Shuffield Lowman & Wilson P.A.
IN
20
APPROVED:
CITY OF OCOEE, FLORIDA
S. Scott Vandergrift, Mayor
ADVERTISED 20_
READ FIRST TIME , 20_
READ SECOND TIME AND ADOPTED
20
Under Agenda Item No.
Scott A. Cookson, City Attorney
EXHIBIT "A"
(The "Property ")
EXHIBIT "B"
[INSERT MAP]
EXHIBIT "C"
LAND USE PLAN
[ATTACH LAND USE PLAN]
ffl Oran e Counter Public Schools
445 West Ameba Street • Ortando. FL 32801-1129 - Phone 407.317 3200 • www.ocps.net
FINDING OF SCHOOL CAPACITY
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL — SCHOOL CAPACITY DETERMINATION
March 25, 2013
VIA E -MAIL: skorman(aD-skormanconstruction com
Mark Skorman
Skorman Development Corp.
6000 Metrowest Boulevard
Suite 111
Orlando, FL 32835
Action: RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL for Application OCE -13 -001.
This letter serves as the official determination by Orange County Public Schools that
school capacity for the following development application is available
Type of Determination Requested
Type of Development Application
City Application #:
Application Name:
OCPS Application Date
Parcel #(s):
Requested Units ( #):
Acreage:
School Board District:
CEP ❑ Concurrency
❑ FLUM (CEP)
❑ Rezoning (CEP)
® PUD / Final Site Plan
RZ13 -02 -01
Park Place
March 15, 2013
29- 22 -28- 8895 -01 -001
Total: 242 SF: 0
+/- 17.09 acres
#4
M F: 242
Detailed Capacity Analysis: Attachment A
Upon review of the above -named application for Capacity Determination, the Office of
Planning & Governmental Relations of Orange County Public Schools finds as follows:
❑ Capacity Enhancement Program Approval (CEP): N/A
® Concurrency Approval: The Concurrency Application is approved. There is
sufficient capacity to support the development of 242 multi - family total residential units.
(Concurrency evaluation is based on total number of units irrespective of vesting.)
The following conditions apply to the approval of the application:
1. An original copy of this letter signed by the Applicant must be returned to the
within 30 days of receipt:
Orange County Public Schools
Office of Planning & Governmental Relations
445 W. Amelia Avenue,
Orlando Florida 32801 -1129
2. For a formal Capacity Determination to be valid, the local government must issue
a Development Order or approve the Applicant's development application within
180 day of receiving this letter.
3. The Applicant must pay a Capacity Reservation Fee equal to 10% of the
estimated School Impact Fees at the time the time the Final Site Plan for the
project. The estimated School Impact Fees are approximately $948,882.00.
4. Capacity Reservation Fee schedule shall be as follows:
Total Due at Issuance of 1 51 Building Permit:
$ 94,888.00
2nd Installment Due 12 Months After Approval:
$ 94,888.00
3rd Installment Due 24 Months After Approval:
$ 94,888.00
Estimated Remaining Balance:
$ 664,217.00
Total
$948,882.00
5. Notwithstanding the schedule provided by Condition #4, the Applicant may
prepay any or all of the Capacity Reservation Fee in advance or as the need
arises.
6. Upon approval of the land use application and payment of the Capacity
Reservation Fee, school capacity for the project will be reserved for three years
from the date of land use approval at which time the project is subject to re-
evaluation.
This determination is governed by the Orange County Public Schools: Capacity
Enhancement Program and Concurrency Management System Operating Procedures
as approved by the Orange County School Board, the provisions of the 2008 Amended
Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and Implementation of
Concurrency, the provisions of the municipality's adopted Comprehensive Plan, the
Orange County Charter and the Florida Statutes.
Sincerely,
Tyrone K. Smith, MPA
Senior Administrator
OCPS Planning & Governmental Relations
TKS
Cc: Michael Rumer, City Planner, Planning Department, City of Ocoee (via e-mail)
Allison Turnbull, BakerHostetler (via e-mail)
Page 2 of 4
Acknowledgement of Conditions of Approval
Applicant acknowledges receipt of this letter and agrees to the conditions set forth
herein; applicant acknowledges that Capacity Enhancement and Concurrency are not
officially approved until:
• The conditions specified above are satisfied,
• Approval of the land use action that precipitated this application is granted, and
• A Capacity Reservation Fee is paid.
Signed By Applicant: Date:
STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF _ The foregoing
instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20 b
the
produced
(Notary Seal)
Printed Name:
Notary Public, State of
Commission No.
Commission expires:
Applicant must return a signed and notarized copy of this letter the OCPS Office of
Planning & Governmental Relations The Development Order or Development
Agreement issued by the municipality granting the land use action may also accompany
this document or may be transmitted at a later date
J
as of
a on behalf of
Said person (check one) ❑ is personally known to me or ❑
as identif ication.
Page 3 of 4
Attachment A
ORANGE COUNTY PUBIC SCHOOLS
Plannlrg & Governroental Rewdons
Cancurrency DetermhwHan
Number of Invested Units:
Number of Vested Units:
" This project passes Concurrency based on capacity that is available due to Adjacency in Ocoee HS CSA.
3 /1 512 0 1 3
242
Page 4 of 4
cvffi" AIM -13
'This project passes Concurrency based on capacity that is available due to Adjacency in Lakeview MS CSA.
Quieffy.914aking Noise, f; I')C
Aeonstical Consrtltim and lVoise Control
March 11, 2013
Mr. Marc Skorman
Skorman Construction, Inc.
6000 Metrowest Boulevard
Suite 11 I
Orlando, FL 32835
Subject: Park Place at Ocoee Preliminary Assessment of Traffic Noise
Dear Marc:
As requested, I have reviewed the site location for the proposed Park Placc at Ocoee multi-
family residential project and have developed the following information related to the acoustical
design of the multi - family residential buildings and the potential for traffic noise impacts.
The northern property boundary of the project site is located adjacent to the Florida's Turnpike, a
limited access highway. The closest building is approximately 145 feet from the nearest traffic
lane.
Typically, projects that I have worked on at this distance from a multi -lane limited access
highway have ambient sound levels in the range of 65 to 75 dB(A), depending upon traffic
counts, vehicle speeds, and other information. As a general rule of thumb, the noise level will be
reduced by approximately 6 dB(A) for every doubling of the distance from the highway. Thus,
the buildings that are located farther fro n the highway will have lower levels of noise exposure.
Please refer to the attached Noise Thermometer for a comparison of these sound levels to many
common noise sources.
Multi -story buildings such as the structures planned for this project provide significant shielding
from other noise receptors located behind them. In other words, when one of the project
buildings blocks the line of sight between other buildings or nearby residences and the highway,
there will be a significant reduction in sound. Thus, any residential areas that currently have a
line of sight to the Turnpike may benefit from the noise barrier effect of the new buildings.
The most widely accepted recommendation for interior sound levels in residential buildings is to
meet a day -night average sound level (DNI) of 45 dB(A) or less. This is consistent with
4521 Old Carriage Trad— Oviedo, Efotrda 32765
Tfione: (407 681 -7444 (681 Will') TaK.• (407) 682 -7444 (682 -Slt")
tvcvcv. gttiet (yrrrakiugtroise. tout
Jfetn6er, Institute of Noise Contro(Engineering atrdjY(itiouaf('ouucdof cottstica[Cousuftauts
QgrN
guidelines published by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and
other studies that have been clone for many highway, airport, and rail line projects.
The DNL value is the average sound level experienced over a 24 -hour period, based upon hourly
averages, with a 10 dB(A) penalty applied to night time hours between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM.
Thus, a DNL value of 45 dB(A) roughly represents average day time sound levels of 45 dB(A)
and night time sound levels averaging 35 dB(A).
Most multi - family residential buildings provide an exterior -to- interior noise reduction between
25 and 30 dB(A). This is referred to as the Sound Level Reduction (SLR) rating. I have
completed acoustical analyses to determine SLR ratings for hundreds of multi - family projects
located near highways, rail lines, airports, and other major sources of noise. I have also worked
with your architect, Fugleberg Koch, on multi- family projects. The typical designs and
construction types used by Fugleberg Koch and my other clients normally provide SLR ratings
of 25 to 30 using conventional materials and design approaches.
Commonly available acoustical ugprades can be implemented to improve the SLR rating to
values higher than 30, if necessary. These upgrades would include windows and /or doors with
higher Sound Transmission Class (STC) ratings and /or additional layers of gypsum board or
exterior sheathing on the exterior walls.
A detailed analysis has not yet been done. However, based upon an estimated highway traffic
noise level of 70 DNL on site, and an SLR rating of 25 dB(A) for residential buildings, the day -
night average sound level inside the residences is estimated to be 45 dB(A). This is generally
considered to be acceptable for residences. A project- specific analysis could be done to verify
these typical values and incorporate any recommended acoustical features into the project
design.
For comparison, most residences have a background ambient sound level of approximately 45 ±
5 dB(A) due to noise from their HVAC systems, appliances, and general activity. Normal
conversational voice sound levels are in the mid -60's. Thus, the estimated sound levels are
comparable to the normal interior sound levels of a typical residence.
Please let me know if you need any additional information
Sincerely,
Lisa A. Schott
President and Principal Acoustical Consultant
Member, NCAC, INCE, and ASA
Attachment
Page 2 of .3
Q01N
Noise 'Thermometer
wy Military Aircraft Taking Off -- 1410 --
1'Itreshold of
Pain 130 --
Deafening Locomotive
Train Whistle
Hard Rock 120 y n
Band
y
Accelerating
110 Motorcycle
�, fIj Loud Auto - 100 — –
Horn Noisy
Very Loud Faclory
b �J
Noisy Urban
Street •
School •
Cafeteria 40 O
Loud
70 Restaurant _ o
% runnel
IL
� Conversation
Moderate General
O 50 Office j
Average Residence f
n 40
0
1 Faint
Bedroom at Night 30
I
Average
0 Whisper
Leaves Rustling Very Faint Whisper _ Sound Proof Romn
l0
Ty —
v� Human Breathing
l
Sound Levels are shown in A- weighted decibels, dB(A).
t0' 2007 Qrtiedy Makitig Noise, LLC All rights reserved
(Page 3 of 3