Loading...
FLD2009-09032 - 311 GULFVIEW BLVD S - SURF STYLE PARKING GARAGEFLD2009-09032 311 S GULFVIEW BLVD URF STYLE PARKING GARAG PLANNER OF RECORD: WW ATLAS # 276A ZONING: T LAND USE: RFH RECEIVED: 09/01/2009 INCOMPLETE: COMPLETE: MAPS PHOTOS !'1T A TT TTTl1TT ~i~rr rcrr~tcl: DRC: CDB: CLW CoverSheet CDB Meeting Date: December 15, 2009 Case Number: FLD2009-09032 (Related to DVA2009-00004) Agenda Item: D.4. (Related to E.2.) Owners/Applicant: L.O.M., Inc. Representative: Alex Azan, PE, Keith Zayac & Associates, Inc. Address: 311 S. Gulfview Boulevard (including 305, 309 and 315 S. Gulfview Boulevard and 320 Coronado Drive) CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: (1) Flexible Development approval to permit Retail Sales and Services of 34,183 square feet of floor area, a Restaurant of 6,887 square feet of floor area and a Parking Garage of 349 parking spaces (including 48 accessory parking spaces for the Retail Sales and Services and Restaurant uses and 301 public parking spaces) with a lot area of 43,543 square feet, a lot width of 180 feet on S. Gulfview Blvd. (west) and 174 feet on Coronado Drive (east), a front (west) setback of zero feet (to building), a front (east) setback of 1.4 feet (to building), a side (north) setback of 0.2 feet (to building) and 0.9 feet (to sidewalk), a side (south) setback of zero feet (to building), a building height of 59.5 feet (to highest parking deck) and 349 parking spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelonmant Arnia~t nn~ar tha r.rnv.mnno ..f tho !''.,,,,,-,,,,,,+4., ri11v11~ VJ VVI, t111~1V1 V t./iV Y1J1 V11J Vl UlV VVllllll Ulll l~' Development Code (CDC) Section 2-803.C; (2) a reduction to the required foundation landscape area from five to four feet along the east side of the building and a reduction to the required foundation landscape area from five to zero feet along the west side of the building, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3-1202.G; and (3) Vacation of the east 35 feet of S. Gulfview Boulevard. CURRENT ZONING: Tourist (T) District CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY: Resort Facilities High (RFH) BEACH BY DESIGN CHARACTER DISTRICT: Beach Walk Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 1 of 14 PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Retail Sales and Services of 7,128 square feet of floor area and a Restaurant of 6,058 square feet of floor area Proposed Use: Retail Sales and Services of 34,183 square feet of floor area, a Restaurant of 6,887 square feet of floor area and a Parking Garage of 349 parking spaces (including 48 accessory parking spaces for the Retail Sales and Services and Restaurant uses and 301 public parking spaces) (0.94 Floor Area Ratio) at a height of 59.5 feet (to highest parking deck) EXISTING North: Tourist (T) District SURROUNDING Mixed Use (Overnight accommodations and Attached ZONING AND USES: dwellings) and Parking Garage South: Tourist (T) District Overnight accommodations East: Tourist (T) District Overnight accommodations and Retail sales West: Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) District Clearwater Beach ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 0.99 acres is located between S. Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive approximately 200 feet south of Third Street. The main portion of the subject property _(311 S. Gulfview Boulevard [including 305, 309 and 315 S. Gulfview Boulevard]) is currently developed with a reta_1 Sales ~µge of 7 1 2~ gniµarP fPPt of flnnr ~rPa (Ciwrf Ct~~lel and a rP~taiNrant of Fem. (1SR ~giuaie Feet of floor area (Britt's). The other portion of the subject property (320 Coronado Drive) is developed with a detached dwelling. The Aqualea/Hyatt mixed-use project (250 overnight accommodation units, 18 attached dwellings and a parking garage for 400 parking spaces open to the public) is located directly north of the subject property. Across Coronado Drive to the east is an existing 46-room motel and 138-seat restaurant that is intended to be redeveloped into a 142-unit overnight accommodation use (approved by the CDB on November 17, 2009 - 300 Hamden Drive, FLD2009-08026/DVA2009-00002). Also across Coronado Drive are other accommodation and commercial uses. Directly south of the subject property are overnight accommodation uses. Beach Walk and Clearwater Beach are to the west of the subject property. Development Proposal: The City has been desirous of constructing additional parking to meet the needs of visitors to the beach. City Council looked at various proposals/sites and decided to negotiate with this applicant for the construction of parking open to the public on the subject property. This proposal will be constructed by the developer at their cost. The proposal is to construct retail sales uses of 34,183 square feet of floor area, a restaurant use of 6,887 square feet of floor area and a parking garage of a total of 349 parking spaces (which includes 48 accessory parking Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 2 of 14 spaces for the retail sales and restaurant uses and 301 public parking spaces). This proposal represents an increase of 27,055 square feet of retail sales floor area (a 379% increase) and an increase of 829 square feet of restaurant floor area (a 13.7% increase). The total floor area of 41,070 square feet is almost an acre of commercial floor area (0.94 Floor Area Ratio). With this increase in floor area, the applicant proposes to increase the number of parking spaces for customers and employees from 27 (existing) to 48 (proposed) spaces, or a 77.8% increase. The proposal includes the provision of 301 parking spaces open to the public (for a fee). Based on the ranges of the required parking for retail sales and restaurant uses in the Tourist District and a shared use calculation in Community Development Code (CDC) Section 3-1405, required parking for this development ranges from a high of 243 spaces and a low of 160 spaces. The proposal includes a parking reduction from the required high of 243 spaces to 48 spaces. The applicant has prepared a Parking Reduction Study analyzing this proposal, a discussion which is contained later in this Staff Report under "Minimum Off-Street Parking". The proposal anticipates the vacation of 35 feet of the existing S. Gulfview Boulevard right-of- way. It is noted that the subject property extends 10 feet farther east than the Aqualea/Hyatt project, as the Aqualea/Hyatt project dedicated 10 feet for additional Coronado Drive right-of- way. The ground and mezzanine levels of this proposed building (comprising the retail sales and restaurant uses) will be located approximately at the same location as the Aqualea/Hyatt project. The parking garage is located on the second through the sixth levels. However, the upper levels (2na through 5th) on the east side of the building (the parking garage portion) will project approximately nine feet eastward toward the Coronado Drive travel lanes. This cantilevered portion of the building will be located 1.4 feet from the east property line and will be a noticeable projection to motorists and pedestrians on Coronado Drive. It is also noted that the proposal with the retail sales and restaurant uses on the ground level is contingent upon the approval by FEMA of a Flood Zone map change from a VE-Zone to an AE- Zone. The proposal includes the construction of a wave dissipating wall within the S. Gulfview Boulevard right-of--way (preliminary approval of such wall has been given by FEMA), which must be constructed and given final approval by FEMA prior to the issuance of any building permit for the building. There is a separate Development Agreement between the developers and the City providing for such wave dissipating wall and a building permit for its construction has already been submitted to the City. While this proposal is being processed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project request, the proposal (from a comparative standpoint to the minimum setbacks for the proposed uses in the Tourist District) in essence includes setback reductions to various structures around the perimeter of the proposed parcel. The building is proposed with a front (west) setback of zero feet (to building), a front (east) setback of 1.4 feet (to building), a side (north) setback of 0.2 feet (to building) and 0.9 feet (to sidewalk) and a side (south) setback of zero feet (to building). It is noted that the proposed building almost completely fills the subject property. Although the advertised north side setback is 0.2 feet (to building), this setback only occurs at a jog in the property line (approximately midpoint of the site). The ground and mezzanine levels on the western "half' of the property are actually setback between 6.55 and 9.44 feet from the north property line. The second through sixth levels on this western "half ' step back an additional Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 3 of 14 approximate 12 feet to the parking garage levels. This is important to note as this gives building separation between the Aqualea/Hyatt building and this proposed building, since there are attached dwellings in the western portion of the Aqualea/Hyatt building adjacent to the parking garage portions of this proposed building. On the eastern "half ' of the northern portion of the site, the face of the retail floor area and parking garage is approximately three to four feet from the north property line (building columns are closer). Likewise, the proposal was advertised with a side (south) setback of zero feet (to building), which only occurs at a similar jog in the property line (approximately midpoint of the site). The ground and mezzanine levels on the western "half ' of the property are actually setback 1.41 feet at the southwest corner of the site. The second through sixth levels on this western "half 'step back approximately 33 feet to the parking garage levels. On the eastern "half' of the southern portion of the site, the building face of the ramp to the parking garage is approximately three feet from the south property line. There is an approximate 40-foot setback from the south property line to the stairwell at the southeast corner of the building, with the face of the parking garage levels set back an additional five feet (or a total of 45 feet). The proposed setbacks are similar, but greater than that approved/constructed for the Aqualea/Hyatt project to the north. The proposed building is 59.5 feet to the highest parking deck (west side). The Aqualea/Hyatt and Kiran Grande projects north of the subject property were approved with a 150-foot building height (Aqualea/Hyatt project is constructed). Although the properties across Coronado Drive to the east are all currently one story in height, a hotel at a height of 74.33 feet was approved by the CDB last month on a portion of the property across Coronado Drive. The hotel directly south of the subject property is approximately 45 feet in height, but any future redevelopment project for that property could be expected to request a building height of potentially 150 feet. The exterior base and body colors of the building will be primarily Bay Coral and Pink Bauble. Wall accents will be Skyrocket Red at the base and Peach Puff and Vanilla Cream trim. Standing seam metal hip roofs are proposed over the stair towers with a Skyrocket Red color. Also on this CDB agenda is a companion Development Agreement (DVA2009-00004) that must be approved by City Council, which provides for specific parameters of the project, the project financing, the project approval and commencement of construction timing provisions and other design considerations. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Pursuant to the Countywide Future Land Use Plan and CDC Section 2- 801.1, the maximum FAR for properties with a designation of Resort Facilities High is 1.0. The proposal is for a total of 41,070 square feet of floor area (retail sales of 34,183 square feet and restaurant of 6,887 square feet) at a FAR of 0.94, which is consistent with the Code provisions. Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to CDC Section 2-801.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.95. The proposed ISR is 0.94, which is consistent with the Code provisions. Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the minimum lot area for retail sales and restaurant uses can range between 5,000 - 10,000 square feet, while parking garages require at least 20,000 square feet. The overall proposed site is 43,543 square feet of lot area, including that portion of S. Gulfview Boulevard to be vacated. Pursuant to the same Table, the Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 4 of 14 minimum lot width for retail sales and restaurant uses can range between 50 - 100 feet, while parking garages require at least 100 feet. The lot width along S. Gulfview Boulevard is approximately 180 feet and the lot width along Coronado Drive is approximately 174 feet. The proposal exceeds these Code provisions. Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the minimum front setback for retail sales and restaurants uses can range between 0 - 15 feet (this site must meet front setbacks along S. Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive, since the subject property fronts on both rights-of- way), while the minimum front setback for parking garages can range between 15 - 25 feet. The minimum side setback for retail sales and restaurants uses can range between 0 - 10 feet, while the minimum side setback for parking garages is 10 feet. This application is being processed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project where there are no required setbacks. However, from a comparative standpoint to the above minimum setbacks, the proposal in essence includes setback reductions to various structures around the perimeter of the proposed parcel. The building is proposed with a front (west) setback of zero feet (to building), a front (east) setback of 1.4 feet (to building), a side (north) setback of 0.2 feet (to building) and 0.9 feet (to sidewalk) and a side (south) setback of zero feet (to building). On the west side, the proposed building will be similar in its location as the Aqualea/Hyatt project to the north, except there is a terrace portion of the Aqualea/Hyatt building farther westward within the S. Gulfview Boulevard right- of-way (permitted within an easement). It is noted that the subject property extends 10 feet farther east than the Aqualea/Hyatt property, as the Aqualea/Hyatt project dedicated 10 feet for additional Coronado Drive right-of--way. The ground and mezzanine levels of this proposed building will be located approximately at the same location as the Aqualea/Hyatt project. However, the upper levels (2°a through 5th) of the building (the parking garage portion) will project approximately nine feet eastward toward the Coronado Drive travel lanes. This cantilevered portion of the building will be located 1.4 feet from the east property line and will be a noticeable projection to motorists and pedestrians on Coronado Drive. It is noted that the proposed building almost completely fills the subject property. The proposal was advertised with a side (north) setback of 0.2 feet (to building). This building setback occurs at a jog in the property line (approximately midpoint of the site). The ground and mezzanine levels on the western "half ' of the property are actually setback 6.55 feet at the northwest corner of the site, and due to a slight angle between the property line and building location, approximately 9.44 feet at the stairwell. The second through sixth levels on this western "half step back an additional approximate 12 feet to the parking garage levels. This is important to note as this gives building separation between the Aqualea/Hyatt building and this proposed building, since there are attached dwellings in the western portion of the Aqualea/Hyatt building adjacent to the parking garage portions of this proposed building. A required egress sidewalk from the northern stairwell to the Beach Walk area west of the property is located at its closest point 0.9 feet to the north property line. On the eastern "half ' of the site, the face of the retail floor area and parking garage is approximately three to four feet from the north property line. Building columns are at a 1.96 and 2.86-foot north setback. The proposal was advertised with a side (south) setback of zero feet (to building). This building setback occurs at a similar jog in the property line (approximately midpoint of the site). The ground and mezzanine levels on the western "half ' of the property are actually setback 1.41 feet at the southwest corner of the site. Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 5 of 14 The second through sixth levels on this western "half ' step back approximately 33 feet to the parking garage levels. On the eastern "half ' of the site, the building face of the ramp to the parking garage is approximately three feet from the south property line. There is an approximate 40-foot setback from the south property line to the stairwell at the southeast corner of the building, with the face of the parking garage levels set back an additional five feet (or a total of 45 feet). Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the maximum allowable height for retail sales uses can range between 35 - 100 feet, restaurant uses can range between 25 - 100 feet and parking garages can be 50 feet. The proposed building is 59.5 feet to the highest parking deck. The Aqualea/Hyatt mixed-use project directly north of the subject property was approved with a 150-foot building height (Case Nos. FL 01-01-01 and FLD2004-07052). The Kiran Grande project to the north of the Aqualea/Hyatt project at 100 Coronado Drive was also approved with a 150-foot building height. The properties across Coronado Drive to the east are all currently one story in height. However, portions of the properties across Coronado Drive were approved by the CDB on November 17, 2009 for an overnight accommodation use at a height of 74.33 feet (from BFE to flat roof) (Case No. FLD2009-08026, 300 Hamden Drive [including 301, 305, 309 and 315 Coronado Drive and a portion of 316 Hamden Drive)). The overnight accommodation use directly south of the subject property is approximately 45 feet in height (from base flood elevation to the top of the flat roof). On the other hand, any future redevelopment project for that property could be expected to request a building height of potentially 150 feet. Given this property's location and the surrounding existing and proposed building heights, the proposed height is lower than what could have been requested and is compatible with the surrounding area. Minimum Off-Street Parkin: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the minimum required parking for retail sales uses can range between 4 - 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet, while parking for restaurants can range between 7 - 15 spaces per 1,000 square feet. When there are two or more uses proposed on the same property or in the same building, CDC Section 3-1405 requires parking to be determined using a shared use calculation. The shared use calculation indicates that a high (based on the top number in the range of the uses) requirement is 243 parking spaces, and the low (based on the bottom number in the range of the uses) requirement is 160 parking spaces. The proposal includes a parking reduction from the required 243 spaces to 48 spaces. The applicant has prepared a Parking Reduction Study (Study) analyzing this proposal. The premise of this proposal is that a majority of the business customers, both at the retail sales and the restaurant portions of the commercial area, are "captured" from those already visiting the beach and did not drive to this property specifically to shop or dine at these establishments. The applicant surveyed customers of their four businesses on Clearwater Beach and found that only 11 % specifically made the trip to come to Surf Style/Britts, with 66% primarily going to the beach and 23% for other reasons. Of the 329 respondents to the survey, 62% drove a car to the beach that day, while 34% were staying at local hotels on the beach and 4% took other modes of transportation to the beach. The study also found that only 11% of the respondents parked on- site at Surf StyleBritts. Otherwise, of those that had access to a car requiring a parking space, 38% parked in a public parking lot and 51% either parked in on-street spaces or at their hotel or condo. Based on the 11% specifically driving to the site to go to Surf Style/Britts and the range of required parking based on the shared use calculation of 160 - 243 spaces, a range of parking Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 6 of 14 spaces needed to meet the demand for customer parking is 18 - 27 spaces. The applicant projects the retail sales business and the restaurant to have a maximum of 27 employees on the largest shift. The Study anticipates only 80% of these employees will drive a vehicle to work (or a need for 22 parking spaces). When the customer and employee parking demands are added, this produces a requirement for parking of 40 - 49 parking spaces. The design of this project includes a designated, separate employee parking area of 24 spaces on the second level that is gated. Customer parking for the Surf Style/Britts is proposed on the second level. The balance of the provided parking is proposed to be open to the public (for a fee). The provided parking appears adequate for employees and customers. This "captured" premise of customers is borne out in the design of the proposed building. The ground floor of the building has been designed with a "beach walk through" corridor from the building entry on Coronado Drive to the building entry on S. Gulfview Drive. Persons that walk through the building or that park in the parking garage will need to walk through the retail sales portion of the building to get out of the building to go to the beach or other businesses on the beach, or to get back to their car, thus being "captured" by the retail sales area. Persons desiring to park in the parking garage will need to use the elevators located in the eastern portion of the building. There will be pay stations located on the ground floor of the building adjacent to the elevators where customers may pay their fee and receive a ticket to get out of the parking garage. This proposal takes sole driveway access on Coronado Drive at the southeast corner of the property with one lane entering and one lane exiting the parking garage. The existing driveway access for this property on S. Gulfview Boulevard was removed as part of the Beach Walk construction. Existing driveways on Coronado Drive will be removed. The proposal includes a deceleration lane on Coronado Drive similar to that constructed with the Aqualea/Hyatt project to the north. The entrance and exit to the AqualealHyatt.project is directly north of the subject property. This proposal includes abulb-out at the northeast corner so that there is a separation of traffic between the Aqualea/Hyatt project and this project. The proposal includes a loading area for deliveries due north of this project's driveway access. A seven-foot wide sidewalk will be constructed for the site frontage along Coronado Drive. A portion of the deceleration lane and the public sidewalk is located on the subject property and will require the recording of an easement for such prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-201.D.1, all outside mechanical equipment must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. Even if there is a Flood Zone map change approved, all mechanical equipment must be located above the Base Flood Elevation. The proposal locates exterior mechanical equipment on the roof of the second level north of the parking garage or on the second level in the northeast corner of the parking garage. The parapets surrounding the roof and the railing of the parking garage may be sufficient to screen the mechanical equipment. This will be reviewed at time of the building permit submission. Access to the second floor roof for maintenance of these rooftop units will be from the northern stairwell. Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the proposed driveway on Coronado Drive, no structures or landscaping maybe installed which will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20- Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 7 of 14 foot sight visibility triangles. The proposal has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineering Department and been found to be acceptable. Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-911, for development that does not involve a subdivision, all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. Electric and communication lines for this development will be installed underground on-site in compliance with this requirement. It is unknown of the location of proposed electric panels, boxes and meters for this development. If located exterior to the building, to ensure views are minimized, this electrical equipment should be painted the same color as the building. The location and potential views of such electrical equipment will be addressed at the building permit stage. Landscaping: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, there are no perimeter buffers required in the Tourist District for this overall site. This proposal includes a reduction to the required foundation landscape area from five to zero feet along the west side of the building (S. Gulfview Boulevard) and a reduction to the required foundation landscape area from five to four feet along the east side of the building (Coronado Drive). The proposed building has been designed at a zero-foot front setback to the proposed new property line on S. Gulfview Boulevard (after vacation of a 35-foot portion of the S. Gulfview Boulevard right-of--way), thereby eliminating the ability to provide the required foundation landscape area on the subject property. The applicant is, however, proposing afive-foot wide landscape area within the S. Gulfview Boulevard right-of--way (that portion not being vacated), which will require aRight-Of--Way Permit, essentially providing the required foundation landscaping albeit in the City's right-of--way. This landscape area will be planted with Indian hawthorn shrubs, dune sunflower groundcover and cabbage palm trees. Along Coronado Drive, the foundation landscape area is proposed between the public sidewalk and the building. The public sidewalk and a portion of the deceleration lane are on the subject property. This eastern foundation landscape area is also located under the cantilevered portion of the building, with an approximate 24-foot vertical growth area. This landscape area will be planted with purple lantana groundcover, bird of paradise and crape myrtle trees. Otherwise, there is very little area on-site for significant, visible landscaping. There is landscaping (viburnum hedge with cabbage palm trees) along the south property line, a small landscape area on the north side of the access ramp to the parking garage and cabbage palms on the north side of the building. The area on the north side of the building is limited in its size and ability for landscaping, as it is a narrow area between the Aqualea/Hyatt building and this proposed building that will not receive much sunlight. Solid Waste: The proposal will utilize roll out dumpsters for trash removal. Dumpsters will be located within the truck loading area behind metal screening doors. On trash days, the dumpsters will be staged in front of the truck loading area. Should the number of dumpsters be inadequate to handle the trash demand of the retail sales and restaurant uses, or should the storage area for the dumpsters be of inadequate size, any additional dumpsters will need to be located within a properly screened area acceptable to the City to avoid unsightly views. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste Department. Siege: The proposal does not include a freestanding sign. There is insufficient area for any freestanding sign. This site, much like the Aqualea/Hyatt project to the north, will utilize Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 8 of 14 attached signage for the retail sales and restaurant uses and for the parking garage. Most likely, proposed signage will need to be addressed through a Comprehensive Sign Program, in accordance with the flexibility criteria of CDC Section 2-803.I.3. Additional Beach by Design Guidelines: Section C.1 requires buildings with a footprint of greater than 5,000 square feet to be constructed so that no more than two of the three building dimensions in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length. The proposed building footprint is approximately 34,327 square feet. The project's overall horizontal plane dimensions are approximately 170 feet along S. Gulfview Boulevard, 128 feet along Coronado Drive and 240 feet along the north and south sides of the building, while the vertical plane is approximately 67 feet from ground level to the top of the building parapet. Except for the north and south building dimensions, no other dimensions are equal; thus the proposal complies with this provision. Section C.2 requires no plane or elevation to continue uninterrupted for greater than 100 feet without an offset of more than five feet. All facades of the building have been designed in compliance with this requirement, with the largest linear dimension of approximately 99 feet along the eastern portion of the north facade. All other portions of the building facade are modulated with at least afive-foot deviation, whether along the street frontages or on the north or south sides of the building. Section C.3 requires at least 60 percent of any elevation to be covered with windows or architectural decoration. The applicant has calculated the west elevation along S. Gulfview Boulevard at 63 percent, the east elevation along Coronado Drive at 51 percent, the north elevation at 46 percent and the south elevation at 48 percent. The applicant has attempted to comply with this provision to the greatest extent possible, but there is only so .much that can be done with a parking garage structure. This Beach by Design provision is a guideline that does not require relief. Section C.4 provide that no more than 60 percent of the theoretical maximum building envelop located above 45 feet be occupied by a building. The applicant has calculated the overall proposed building mass between 45 - 100 feet at 47 percent, in compliance with this provision. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no active Code Enforcement cases for the subject property. Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 9 of 14 COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Section 2-801.1 and Tables 2-802 and 2-803: Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent Floor Area Ratio I.0 41,405 square feet (0.94) X~ Impervious Surface Ratio 0.95 0.94 X' Minimum Lot Area Retail Sales and Services: 43,543 sq. ft. X' 5,000 - 10,000 sf Restaurant: 5,000 - 10,000 sf Parking Garage: 20,000 sf Minimum Lot Width Retail Sales and Services: 50 - S. Gulfview Blvd: 180 feet X ~ 100 feet Restaurant: 50 - 100 feet Coronado Drive: 174 feet Parking Garage: 100 feet Minimum Setbacks Front: Retail Sales and S. Gulfview Blvd.: zero feet (to X~ Services and building) Restaurant uses: 0 - 15 Coronado Drive: 1.4 feet (to feet building) Parking Garage: 15 - 25 feet Side: Retail Sales and North: 0.2 feet (to building); X~ Services and 0.9 feet (to sidewalk) Restaurant uses: 0 - ] 0 South:: zero feet (to building) feet Parking Garage: 10 feet Maximum Height Retail Sales and Services: 35 - 59.5 feet (to highest parking X~ 100 feet deck) Restaurant: 25 - 100 feet Parking Garage: 50 feet Minimum Retail Sales and Services: 4 - 5 349 parking spaces (including X3 Off-Street Parking spaces per 1,000 square feet 48 accessory parking spaces for Restaurant: 7 - 15 spaces per the Retail Sales and Services 1,000 square feet and Restaurant uses and 301 Parking Garage: n/a public parking spaces) (Required parking: 160 - 243 spaces)' ' See annlysis in Staff Report z Bnsed on n "mixed use" cnlculntion, See nnnlysis in Staff Report s Bnsed on Pnrking Reduction Study, See nnnlysis in Staff Report Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 10 of 14 COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-803.C (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project): Consistent Inconsistent 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from X' the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. Z. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X 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. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X' development and improvement of surrounding properties. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X~ development. 5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X~ 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 a. 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 X~ parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives: a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district; b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City; c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design elements: ^ Changes in horizontal building planes; ^ Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.; ^ Variety in materials, colors and textures; ^ Distinctive fenestration patterns; ^ Building stepbacks; and ^ Distinctive roofs forms. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. See nnalysis in StnffReport Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page I 1 of 14 COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-913: Consistent Inconsistent 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X~ 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 X~ adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X' immediate vicinity. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X' visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. See nnnlysis in Stnff Report SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meetings of October 1 and November 5, 2009, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following: Findings of Fact. The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that tiicre iS Substautiai Coiilpeteiit evidciiC2 to SiippOii ilie iviiowiiig lindingS of laCt: 1. The 0.99 acres is located between S. Gulfview Boulevard and Coronado Drive approximately 200 feet south of Third Street; 2. The proposal includes the vacation of 35 feet of the existing S. Gulfview Boulevard right-of- way; 3. The proposal includes the construction of retail sales uses of 34,183 square feet of floor area, a restaurant use of 6,887 square feet of floor area and a parking garage of a total of 349 parking spaces (which includes 48 accessory parking spaces for the retail sales and restaurant uses and 301 public parking spaces); 4. A companion Development Agreement (DVA2009-00004) that must be approved by City Council is also on this CDB agenda, which provides for specific parameters of the project, the project financing, the project approval and commencement of construction timing provisions and other design considerations; 5. The proposal includes a parking reduction from the required 243 spaces to 48 spaces, which is supported by a Parking Reduction Study; 6. The proposal includes, and is contingent upon, the construction of a wave dissipating wall within the S. Gulfview Boulevard right-of--way that would provide for a Flood Zone map change from a VE-Zone to an AE-Zone, which must be constructed and given final approval by FEMA prior to the issuance of any building permit for the building; Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 12 of 14 7. The proposal includes setback reductions from all property lines; 8. The proposed building is 59.5 feet to the highest parking deck (west side), which is less than what could be requested and is compatible with the surrounding existing, approved or anticipated building heights; 9. The upper levels (2°d through 5`") of the east side of the building (the parking garage portion) will project/cantilever approximately nine feet eastward toward the Coronado Drive travel lanes at a 1.4-foot setback from the east property line, where such building projection will be noticeable to motorists and pedestrians on Coronado Drive; and 10. There are no active Code Enforcement 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 Standards as per Tables 2-801.1, 2-802 and 2-803 of the Community Development Code; 2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2- 803.C of the Community Development Code; 3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as per Section 3-913 of the Community Development Code; and 4. That the development proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design. Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of the (1) Flexible Development application to permit Retail Sales and Services of 34,183 square feet of floor area, a Restaurant of 6,887 square feet of floor area and a Parking Garage of 349 parking spaces (including 48 accessory parking spaces for the Retail Sales and Services and Restaurant uses and 301 public parking spaces) with a lot area of 43,543 square feet, a lot width of 180 feet on S. Gulfview Blvd. (west) and 174 feet on Coronado Drive (east), a front (west) setback of zero feet (to building), a front (east) setback of 1.4 feet (to building), a side (north) setback of 0.2 feet (to building) and 0.9 feet (to sidewalk), a side (south) setback of zero feet (to building), a building height of 59.5 feet (to highest parking deck) and 349 parking spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of the Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-803.C; (2) a reduction to the required foundation landscape area from five to four feet along the east side of the building and a reduction to the required foundation landscape area from five to zero feet along the west side of the building, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of CDC Section 3-1202.G; and (3) Vacation of the east 35 feet of S. Gulfview Boulevard, with the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. That approval of this Flexible Development case is subject to the approval of a Development Agreement with the City (Case DVA2009-00004); 2. That approval of this Flexible Development case be subject to the vacation by City Council of a 35-foot portion of S. Gulfview Boulevard; 3. That approval of this Flexible Development case be subject to the approval by FEMA of a Flood Zone map change for the subject property to an AE-Zone; Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 13 of 14 4. That commencement of construction occur by the date as set out in Development Agreement DVA2009-00004; 5. That, prior to the issuance of any permit, a Declaration of Unity of Title be recorded in the public records; 6. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the elevations approved by the CDB; 7. That, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, an easement be recorded for that portion of the deceleration lane and the public sidewalk that is located on the subject property; 8. That, in the event the number of dumpsters be inadequate to handle the trash demand of this development and/or the storage area for the dumpsters be of inadequate size, any additional dumpsters be located within a properly screened area acceptable to the City; 9. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, aRight-Of--Way Permit be obtained to allow placement of foundation landscaping within. the S. Gulfview Boulevard right-of--way; 10. That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, plans be revised to show mirrors and/or other devices to aid motorists with blind spots in the parking garage; 11. That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, screening of outside mechanical equipment comply with Code provisions; 12. That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, the location and visibility of electric equipment (electric panels, boxes and meters) be shown and, if located exterior to the building where visible from adjacent roadways, be painted the same color as the building; 13. That any applicable Public Art and Design Impact Fee be paid prior to the issuance of any permits; and 14. That, prior to the issuance of any permit, all requirements of the General Engineering, Environmental Engineering, Stormwater Engineering, Traffic Engineering and Fire Departments be addressed. Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: Wayne .Wells, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: ^ Location Map ^ Aerial Map ^ Zoning Map ^ Existing Surrounding Uses Map ^ Photographs of Site and Vicinity S_ IP1nr2ning DepnrtmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cased Up for die next CDBIGulfview S 0311 Surf Style Pm•king Garnge (T) 2009..cx - /2.15.09 CDB - WW1Gulfvierv S 03/1 FLD Staff Report.rloc Community Development Board -December 15, 2009 FLD2009-09032 -Page 14 of 14 Wayne M. Wells, AICP 100 South Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756 Phone: 727-562-4504 ~ Email: wa~~ne.~~-~ells(nnwclear»~ater.conr PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE ^ Planner III Planning and Development Department, City of Clearwater, FL November ?001 to Present As part of the Development Review Division, prepared and presented staff reports for Flexible Standard Development (staff-level cases), Flexible Development (public hearing cases) and Plats before the Development Review Committee and the Community Development Board and Development Agreements before the City Council; Reviewed building permits for Code conformance; Prepared and/or assisted preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, email, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). ^ Zoning Coordinator Zoning Division, City of Pinellas Park, FL March 1989 to November 2001 Acting Zoning Director; Represented the Zoning Division on cases and issues before the City Council, Community Redevelopment Agency, Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Adjustment and outside agencies; Prepared and presented staff reports for land use plan amendments, rezoned, planned unit developments, conditional uses, variances and site plans; Reviewed final site plans and building permits for Code conformance; Prepared and/or assisted preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). ^ Program Manager, Zoning Branch Manatee County Dept. of Planning and Development, Bradenton, FL June 1984 to March 1989 Trained and supervised three employees; Prepared and presented variances and appeals to the Board of Zoning Appeals; Coordinated final site plan and building permit review for Code conformance; Assisted in preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). Interim Code Enforcement Manager- Managed the Code Enforcement Section; Supervised six employees; Prosecuted cases before the Code Enforcement Board; Investigated and prepared cases of alleged violations of land use and building codes. Planner II, Current Planning Section -Prepared and presented staff reports for rezones, planned developments, special permits, plats and mobile home parks to Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners; Reviewed final site plans and building permits for Code enforcement; Assisted in preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). ^ Planner I Alachua County Dept. of Planning and Development, Gainesville, FL June 1980 to June 1984 Prepared and presented staff reports for rezones and special permits to Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners; Reviewed site plans and plats for Code conformance; Assisted in preparation of Code amendments; Provided public information (via telephone, mail, zoning counter or predevelopment meetings). Intern -Compiled and coordinated the Alachua County Information and Data Book; Drafted ordinance revisions; General research. ^ Graduate Assistant University of Florida Dept. of Urban and Regional Planning, Gainesville, FL 1979 to 1981 Coordinated downtown study for Mayo, FL; Coordinated graphics for Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. • Planning Technician Planning Division, City of St. Petersburg, FL 1977 to 1979 Primarily prepared graphics, for both publication and presentation; Division photographer for 1% years; Worked on historic survey and report. ~nr rr ~ mTn~r Master of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning (Degree not conferred; course work completed, thesis not completed), University of Florida, 1981 Bachelor of Design in Architecture, University of Florida, 1976 LICENSES & CERTIFICATES American Institute of Certified Planners American Planning Association, Suncoast Section f'ier~,i O ~` `~ Csenva~r BNd ~Vry~ z 2 ~ r=tRST v ST PROJECT SITE s~corvD® °~~© ~ ~ t DR TFitRD ~ ~ ttt ~ ~ z 0 a ~ ~ $R~ i~7'ER DR ~ir=s~ sr BAYSIflE 2 O R x / , j $~ Y~`AY 1~--~ ` g~VR ~. ~~ $~v~ ~ + f S 4 ~~~ LOCATION MAP Owner: L.O.M., Inc. Cases: FLD2009-09032 DVA2009-00004 Site: 31 1 S. Gulfview Boulevard and Property Size: 0.87 acre 320 Coronado Drive PINS: 07-29-15-52380-000-0600 Atlas Page: 276A 07-29-15-52380-000-1100 o°j 224 ^ ~^H 225 b 229 230 229 228 L o n z3o z TH/RD ST W 301 30 ~ 25> 30 > 300 ~ 305 P 305 309 30g 311 312 315 316 315 316 19LOCTR 317 B 320 3>g 326 321 323 P 326 3 25 3 332 ~ 327 325 337 330 333 332 333 333 0 0 ~ 347 341 BR/Gy ^ ^ ~ O~/R 347 343 3 A TER D/q 42 h 345 345 ~ ^ p ^ q h 35> 3 ^ ^ ^ 46 348 Q Q 347 355 0 353 348 5 F/FTH ST ~ Q 35 0 401 ~' P 409LDCTR 406 9 411 405 LMDR 409 410 0 ZONING MAP Owner: L.O.M., Inc. Cases: FLD2009-09032 DVA2009-00004 Site: 311 S. Gulfview Boulevard and Property Size: 0.87 acre 320 Coronado Drive PINS: 07-29-15-52380-000-0600 Atlas Page: 276A 07-29-15-52380-000-1100 0 /\ - - - - - - 70 5a -?- - 3 224 52 ^ ~~4, ~ - - _ ~ - _ _ 10 Beach t of er igbt - 5p 2~ ac ed d ~ ~ p - a ~ _ a r ~ ~ c~~y~da Q D e ids ~ ~. - ~ 229 ~ 11 - - - - - - _ - ~ - - - ~ - X30 t -1- J 230 50 5 ~ Z .- 2 ~o a8 12 TH/RD ~, ----- I'e - ST parkin ~~ 30 ~ 251 - _ = 2 „~ 301 - t 3 ~ ~ _ _ _ - - t3 35 ~ 5s ,°sW30 St'~dlir t 305 z - ~0 ` - - _ t 2 305 - ,a - - _ _ - 309 _ f _ 3119V ht _ 1A - _ 'S Beach 31,x, i ,_a 31 - cco _ _ _ _ - - 315 ~ ,os 31 3151 ~ ~?1 is _ - 19L~Tj? 18 r= ~ 110 32 zA 17 - ~ - _ _ 52380 -~ ,,, 326 ~ _ ss ~1 ,a --~ - - - - _ 23 7a ,s 332 - ~i~C~tght - )a~~l a~ln~ of 3A _ r - 8?~'7 ' _ eo 65910 ~ L446 C~111~LLlliltl0 S - _ _ Q 4 330 20 ~ . , 114 _ 4A L ~r - - ~ ss ~. _ _ ~o _ 21 - ~ 333 i „5 c~10n od5dt' ~el~~lg t - a h ' - B - - _ eac _ _ SW 67 _ „a - A com~o~ iR s 2 ^ - ~ = ^ ^ ~ ~ 3 7 ~ _ _ eSiaQlr t~ 3 ~ _ 4n1 _ 7 _ 2- ~ 34 6 34yvve ni~lb~2 ~ ~ BR/GHTwATER DR _ 9 _ _ -,ta _ ~ A~,Q 1 S 345 y ^ o~^ ~M-b~ 24 35170 ,t9 348 Q 9-t~ 348 , e ~f"i`_ '~ 1~ w ~ a _ . - - - _ lg O aA LTJF6~ , '~ Ac nl tiavs 5 tta 25 - - _ _ CCS~1111~1od~10 sZ~ 353 II~g so 45 4 - s we A _ _ a - ~ F/FTy ST ~ ccot~n o,~a i s 35 _ 0 _ 2=,2 Beach 401 I ~ V ~ A r m ~ L06445_ ~ O~erpi~ht - - _ O 17640 ~ _ , ~ 40 27 ~fldafi ns ' ~ 12 406 ill - -- 9 ~ ~ - - _ _ LVCT _ ~ ~ - - ~ 1'A 88438 J _ 411 405z 2e _ 74 night _ - - ,5 ~~f c~om o,~a i s ttache tac ed 41 t 29 cQ~eda~i s r p w~llin s D ell £s 5~ ~ 7 - - - - - - 125 EXISTING SURROUNDING USES MAP Owner: L.O.M., Inc. Cases: FLD2009-09032 DVA2009-00004 Site: 31 1 S. Gulfview Boulevard and Property Size: 0.87 acre 320 Coronado Drive PINS: 07-29-15-52380-000-0600 Atlas Page: 276A 07-29-15-52380-000-1100 View looking northeast from Beach Walk at subject property 311 S. Gulfview Boulevard FLD2009-09032/D VA2009-00004 Page 1 of 2 View looking southeast from S. Gulfview Blvd./Beach Walk at subject property (Hyatt/Aqualea on left) View looking northeast from S. Gulfview B1vd.Beach Walk View looking north along Beach Walk (subject property on right; HyattJAqualea in background) View looking west from Coronado Drive at subject property View looking northwest along west side of Coronado Drive (subject property in foreground; Hyatt/Aqualea in background) View looking southwest along the west side of Coronado Drive at development south of the subject property r ,. ~y~ u~ s• s °~~_• View looking east from S. Gulfview Blvd. (Beach Walk) at hotel directly south of subject property (325 S. Gulfview Blvd.) 311 S. Gulfview Boulevard FLD2009-09032/DVA2009-00004 Page 2 of 2 View looking southeast along the east side of Coronado Drive south of the subject property View looking northeast along the east side of Coronado Drive north of the subject property View looking northeast along east side of S. Gulfview Blvd. (subject property on right; HyattlAqualea in background) _. .__ ~ _ View looking north along Coronado Drive north of subject property (Hyatt/Aqualea on left) ti., ,. 'Clearwater Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727-562-4865 ^ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ^ SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION -Plans and application are required to be collated, stapled, and folded into sets ^ SUBMIT FIRE PRELIMARY SITE PLAN: $200.00 ^ SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $ 1205.00 CASE #: RECEIVED BY (staff initials): DATE RECEIVED: * NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS) FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project (Revised 07/)1/2008) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME: L.O.M. IriC. MAILING ADDRESS: 41 OO N. 28th Terrace, Hollywood, FL 33020 _ _ _ _ _ _ __ PHONE NUMBER: 954-926-6666 FAX NUMBER: 954-608-2565 CELL NUMBER EMAIL: PROPERTY OWNER(S) L.O.M. IriC. List ALL owners on the deed AGENT NAME: AIeX L. Atari, P.E. MAILING ADDRESS: 14001 63r Way North PHONE NUMBER: 813-2OS-361.5 _ _ FAX NUMBER: CELL NUMBER: EMAIL: AIeX@kelthZayaC.COm B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) PROJECT NAME: Surf Style Parking Garage PROJECT VALUATION: $12 Million __ _.. STREET ADDRESS 311 S. Gulfview Blvd. & 320 Coronado Drive, Clearwater, FL 33767 PARCEL NUMBER(S): 07-29-1S-S2380-000-0600, 07-29-15-52380-000-1100 _ _ PARCEL SIZE (acres): 0,99 PARCEL SIZE (square feet): 43,543 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See AtttaChmerit E~ _ __ _- ___ PROPOSED usE(s): 349 space parking garage, retail store, and restaurant DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: See Attachment B Specifically identify the request (include number of units or square footage of non-residential use and all _ _ __ _ _ _ _ requested code deviations; e.g. C:\Documents and Settings\gili\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\BJXPZJSY\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11 (2).doc Page 1 of 8 reduction in required number of _ _ _ I parking spaces, specific use, etc.) \Documents and Settings\gili\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\8JXPZJSY\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11 (2).doc Page 2 of 8 .~ ,, DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNI DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES _ NO x (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents) C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5) SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see page 7) D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A) Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA -Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: ~' 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 Attachment C 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. See Attachment C _. _ __ 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. See Attachment C 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. See Attachment C __ __ _ _ _ _ __ 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. See Attachment C 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. See Attachment C C:\Documents and Settings\gili\Local SettingslTemporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\8JXPZJSY\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11 (2).doc Page 3 of 8 `F ~ WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria) Provide complete responses to the six (6) COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA -Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. See Attachment D 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 See Attachment D __ _ 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. See Attachment D 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. See Attachment D ._. 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. See Attachment D _... __ __ _ __ __ 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; O Building stepbacks; and ^ Distinctive roofs forms. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. See Attachment D C:\Documents and Settings\gili\Local Settings\Temporary Internet FileslContentAutlook\SJXPZJSY~COmprenensive mnu rrolecr \rw~ zuva ui->> (2).doc Page 4 of 8 E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual and 4-202.A.21) A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that involve addition or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with the City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption to this requirement. ^ If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt. ^ At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following; ^ Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines; ^ Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; ^ All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; ^ Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; ^ A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with the City manual. ^ Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; O Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations. ^ COPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT SUBMITTAL (SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF STORMWATER PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Applicant must initial one of the following): x ~~ stormwater plan as noted above is included ~~~III""" stormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor elevations shall be provided. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750. F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A) ~( SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) -One original and 14 copies; TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and location, including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) -please design around the existing trees; TREE INVENTORY; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 4" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of such trees; LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY; PARKING DEMAND STUDY in conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (ie. Reduce number of spaces). Prior to the submittal of this application, the methodology of such study shall be approved by the Community Development Coordinator and shall be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to the parking standards are approved; ~,( GRADING PLAN, as applicable; ^(~ PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided); ^ COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; C:\Documents and Settingslgili\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\8JXPZJSY\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11 (2).doc Page 5 of 8 ' 1 G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A) SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package; North arrow; Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared; All dimensions; Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures; Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures; All required setbacks; All existing and proposed points of access; All required sight triangles; Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; Location of all public and private easements; Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site; Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas and water lines; All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas; .._..._...... Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas; Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening {per Section 3-201(D)(i) and Index #701}; Location of all landscape material; Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities; Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks; and Floor plan typicals of buildings for all Level Two approvals. A floor plan of each floor is required for any parking garage requiring a Level Two approval. SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in written/tabular form: Land area in square feet and acres; Number of EXISTING dwelling units; Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; Gross floor area devoted to each use; Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the number of required spaces; Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces & driveways, expressed in square feet & percentage of the paved vehicular area; Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easement; Building and structure heights; Impermeable surface ratio (LS.R.); and Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. P~ FC REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale (8'/s X 11); EXISTIN REQUIRED PROPOSED /~ 3 ~ ~ d ~r7 s5- 7 Ss , ~ fir= ~ a. ~ a o. 4_.~i" ~. ~ y FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan: One-foot contours or spot elevations on site; Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel; All open space areas; Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms; Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned); Streets and drives (dimensioned); Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); Structural overhangs; ..._......... C:\Documents and Settings\gili\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\8JXPZJSY\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11 (2).doc Page 6 of 8 ~~ H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A) LANDSCAPE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): All existing and proposed structures; Names of abutting streets; Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations; Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers; Sight visibility triangles; Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing; Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including driplines (as indicated on required tree survey); Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant schedule; Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names; Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and protective measures; Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and percentage covered; Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board); Irrigation notes REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8'/~ X 11); ^ COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met. I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23) BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS -with the following information: All sides of all buildings Dimensioned Colors (provide one full sized set of colored elevations) Materials REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS -same as above to scale on 8'/: X 11 J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS /Section 3-1806) (Comprehensive sign package will be submitted) ^ All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be removed or to remain. ^ All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing; freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals) ^ Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required). ^ Reduced signage proposal (8'/: X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application. C:\Documents and Settings\gili\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\8JXPZJSY\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11 (2).doc Page 7 of 8 K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.13 and 4-801.C) Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or his/her designee or if the proposed development: • Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan. • Will generate 100 or more new vehicle directional trips per hour and/or 1000 or more new vehicle trips per day. ^ Will affect a nearby roadway segment and/or intersection with five (5) reportable accidents within the prior twelve (12) month period or that is on the City's annual list of most hazardous intersections. Trip generation shall be based on the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip General Manual. The Traffic Impact Study must be prepared in accordance with a "Scoping Meeting" held with the Traffic Operations Manager and the Planning Department's Development Review Manager or their designee (727-562-4750) Refer to Section 4-801 C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement. Acknowledgement of traffic impact study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): X A ~X Traffic Impact Study is included. The study must include a summary table of pre- and post-development levels of service for all }y-~- roadway legs and each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scoping Meeting. Traffic Impact Study is not required. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562- 4750. L. FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS/ WATER STUDY: Provide Fire Flow Calculations. Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply is available and to determine if any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this project. The water supply must be able to support the needs of any required fire sprinkler, standpipe and/or fire pump. If a fire pump is required the water supply must be able to supply 150% of its rated capacity. Compliance with the 2004 Florida Fire Prevention Code to include NFPA 13, MFPA 14, NFPA 20, NFPA 291, and MFPA 1142 (Annex H) is required. ~, Acknowledgement of fire flow calculations/water study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): X ~ Fire Flow CalculationsNVater Study is included. Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is not required. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS/ WATER STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Fire Prevention Department at (727) 562-4334. M. SIGNATURE: I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this application are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application. __ ~~y !~^~, eke Signature of property owner or re entative STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF ~if~FEtCtS '/~~ - " " "- Sworn to ands scribed before me this day of (~ , A.D. 20 to me andlor by who is personally known has produced as i ntificatio NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF FL( ••'"' ' ~ Lauren Wee: Not ry public, - -Comtnlssio~ # DD6] My commission expires:~~?JO'r~ -''~. ~ F "'iYes. DEC 30, BONDBD 1 H i<s ',i ;.~.~TIC BONDING C:\Documents and Settings\gili\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\8JXPZJSY\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11 (2).doc Page 8 of 8 L. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: I' G liar i /"` t_ (Names of all property owners) 1. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location): /~ ~ i )+~) Z r ~ /-~ 1 ~'`_ V !. ~'"//~i -rte ~ ~~ ~ *~i%r L [i /~~ fl-; -~ G' {:/ r'~-' 2. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request) I -, /~ '- " / •~ /.^ -'~ i` `~`~+'l~ S " J e` L • f- / ' %ar,~F- •r_=l,l,~!-^iJ,~- ~ ,- -~%Y'j : C--/'~' ~ ([- f ---, 3. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 4. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 5. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application; 6. That (I/we), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. -~ V A • ~. , +.~ f /y Property Owner Property Owner ~jY D N(G~~I STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF f'lid'ECLRS Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by th laws of a State of Florida, on this I I day of ~~IYI Zn p0~ personally appeared ~ ~/ who h ing been first duly sworn Deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/she signed. NOTARY PL'RLIGSTATE OF FLORID Notary Public ~'"""•- Lauren Weeks My Commission Expires: t Z,3 Ol~ ~ ' Commission # DD6T4429 ~•.,,,,,,,,.~ F:~~iies: DEC. 30, 2010 ,- j 3 . _ _~ v}. ; a 1..__.. ~ _ - k S:IPlanning DeparfinenflApplication Formsldevelopmentreviewldevelopment agreement application3.doc Page 5 of 5 -Development Agreement Application -City of Clearwater EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION LEGAL _ DESCRIPTION OF PARCELS & 35' VACATION OF GULFVIEW BLVD. R-O-W: PARCEL 1: Lot 110, LLOYD-WHITE-SKINNER SUBDIVISION, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 13, Pages 12 and 13, Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. PARCEL 2: Lots 60, 61 and 62, and the Southerly one-half of Lot 107 and all of Lots 108 and 109, LLOYD-WHITE-SKINNER SUBDIVISION, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 13, Pages 12 and 13, Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. TOGETHER WITH THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCELS: The Easterly 1/2 of Gulfview Boulevard lying West of and adjacent to the Westerly boundaries of Lots 60, 61 and 62, THE LLOYD-WHITE-SKINNER SUBDIVISION, as recorded in plat book 13 on pages 12 and 13 of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, more particularly described as follows: Begin at the Northwest corner of said Lot 60; thence 180.12 feet along the Westerly boundary of said Lots 60, 61 and 62, and along the arc of a curve to the right with a radius of 6017.52 feet, subtended by a chord distance of 180.11 feet, bearing S08'35'03"W to the Southwest corner of said Lot 62; thence N80'34'24"W along the Westerly extension of the Southerly boundary of said Lot 62, a distance of 35.00 feet to a point of intersection with the centerline of said Gulfview Boulevard, a 70 foot wide right of way, thence 179.08 feet along said centerline and along the arc of a curve to the left with a radius of 5982.52 feet, subtended by a chord distance of 179.08 feet, bearing N08'35'03"E to a point of intersection with the Westerly extension of the Northerly boundary of said Lot 60; thence S82'15'44"E a distance of 35.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. Contains 6,286.20 square feet (0.144 acres), more or less. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PARCELS WfO 35' VACATION OF GULFVIEW BLVD. R-O-W: PARCEL 1: Lot 110, LLOYD-WHITE-SKINNER SUBDIVISION, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 13, Pages 12 and 13, Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. PARCEL 2: Lots 60, 61 and 62, and the Southerly one-half of Lot 107 and all of Lots 108 and 109, LLOYD-WHITE-SKINNER SUBDIVISION, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 13, Pages 12 and 13, Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF 35' VACATION OF GULFVIEW BLVD. R-O-W: The Easterly 1/2 of Gulfview Boulevard lying West of and adjacent to the Westerly boundaries of Lots 60, 61 and 62, THE LLOYD-WHITE-SKINNER SUBDIVISION, as recorded in plat book 13 on pages 12 and 13 of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, more particularly described as follows: Begin at the Northwest corner of said Lot 60; thence 180.12 feet along the Westerly boundary of said Lots 60, 61 and 62, and along the arc of a curve to the right with a radius of 6017.52 feet, subtended by a chord distance of 180.11 feet, bearing S08'35'03"W to the Southwest corner of said Lot 62; thence N80'34'24"W along the Westerly extension of the Southerly boundary of said Lot 62, a distance of 35.00 feet to a point of intersection with the centerline of said Gulfview Boulevard, a 70 foot wide right of way, thence 179.08 feet along said centerline and along the arc of a curve to the left with a radius of 5982.52 feet, subtended by a chord distance of 179.08 feet, bearing N08'35'03"E to a point of intersection with the Westerly extension of the Northerly boundary of said Lot 60; thence S82'15'44"E a distance of 35.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. Contains 6,286.20 square feet (0.144 acres), more or less. ATTACHMENT "B" FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT L.O.M., INC. SURF STYLE PARKING GARAGE 311 S. GULFVIEW & 320 CORONADO DRIVE Description of Request The applicant L.O.M., Inc. proposes to redevelop the property with a proposed 349 space parking garage (301 public+24 employee+24retail/restaurant), 34,183 SF retail space and 6,887 SF restaurant. The subject property is the location of an existing Britt's restaurant, single family house and Surf Style retail store. Specifically, the Applicant seeks flexible development approval of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, in accordance with the plans submitted with this application as follows: a. Maximum building height of 59.50' (to roof deck). b. This project includes 301 public parking spaces, 24 restaurant and retail employee parking spaces and 24 parking spaces for the retail/restaurant customers for a total of 349 parking spaces. A Parking Study was conducted in which surveys were completed by customers of the existing Surf-Style retail stores and Britt's restaurant and included questions regarding the purpose for visiting Clearwater Beach, mode of transportation and parking facilities utilized, if appropriate. This survey was distributed at three of the Surf-Style brand retail stores owned and operated by the Applicant on Clearwater Beach, as well as Britt's restaurant on the subject site. One of the three retail stores included in the survey is located at 442 Mandalay Avenue (Store #110) and was designed, permitted and constructed without any dedicated parking spaces, and has been in operation since 2003. Store #110 exemplifies the concept that the Surf- Style stores "capture" customers that have already travelled to the beach for some other purpose (i.e. visit the beach, attend a convention, attend a wedding, etc.) in that this store has the greatest revenue of all 4 stores that are owned and operated by the Applicant on Clearwater Beach, yet it does not have any dedicated customer parking. In addition, the applicant owns a total of 24 stores that are located in similar beachfront communities such as Melbourne Beach, Panama City Beach, and Destin in Florida; Gulf Shores, Alabama and Biloxi, Mississippi. These stores are not destination shopping centers, but rather a store of convenience for visitors to the beach to purchase beachwear and souvenirs. Likewise, the existing Britt's restaurant is, predominantly, a casual dining establishment frequented by those visiting the beach for some other purpose than exclusively to dine. The premise that these establishments "capture" existing beach visitors is further evidenced by the fact that on the average 75 to 80 percent of yearly revenues are generated at this site during the peak tourist months of March through August. The survey was conducted during normal business hours during the week of October 7-11, 2009. A total of 329 surveys were distributed and collected by counter and wait staff during this time period. Only 36 (or 11 %) of the 315 respondents which had access to a vehicle utilized the private parking lot reserved for Surf-Style and Britt's customers. The existing site contains only 27 parking spaces and has been operating since 1997 without parking for its customers being at issue. Therefore, the Applicant is requesting a reduction in the reserved parking spaces required by the Community Development Code for customers and employees which provides a range of 138 to 221 spaces, down to 48 spaces. This reduction is justifiable given the nature and habits of these establishments' clientele, as demonstrated in the surveys conducted for the Parking Study and the existing operations of this and other sites owned and operated by the Applicant. c. A front (east) setback along Coronado Drive of 1.49-feet to building, where 25' is required by Code, and a 0.00' setback to pavement where 25' is required by Code; d. A front (west) setback along Gulfview Boulevard of 0.35-ft to building and 0' to pavement of Beach Walk, where 25' is required by Code; e. Aside (north) setback to building of 0.24', and 0.94' to sidewalk where 10' is required by Code; f. Aside (south) setback of 0.28' to building where 10' is required by Code; g. Flexibility to minimum standards for sight visibility triangles on Coronado Drive; h. Vacation of 35-feet of right of way along Gulfview Boulevard. The Owner of the Sun`-Style Mixed-Use Parking Structure project and the City of Clearwater are listed as co-applicants for a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) Application to relieve the project from the requirements of a VE Flood Zone. Per the existing Flood Zone Maps prepared by FEMA, portions of the project exist within the following Flood Zones: VE-14 with Base Flood Elevation (BFE) = 14 feet, VE-13 with BFE = 13 feet and AE-12 with BFE = 12 feet. FEMA requires any 2 Friday, November 13, 2009 building to be constructed on a site that lies within a VE Zone to have all structural elements above the BFE and supported on open foundations to allow floodwaters and waves to pass beneath the elevated structure. In addition, any walls constructed below the BFE of a VE Zone must be designed to break away under flooding conditions and any portion of the building below the BFE shall not be considered occupied space. The Surf--Style Beachwear retail store and Britt's Restaurant businesses are dependent almost entirely on pedestrian traffic drawn by the attraction of the beach. Therefore, it is imperative to the viability of this project to be able to capture the pedestrian traffic that utilizes the Beachwalk Promenade, which was recently constructed by the City of Clearwater, adjacent to the west side of the property to visit the beach. The most effective means to accomplish this goal is to have the ability to bring the retail and restaurant components of this project to the same level of the Beachwalk Promenade. Therefore, the Owner along with cooperation from the City of Clearwater applied to FEMA to revise the Flood Zone Maps by placing the project site entirely within the AE-12 Flood Zone. The distinction between the VE and AE Zones, are that a building is permitted to have occupied space below the BFE in the AE Zone, provided that appropriate means (flood proof walls, removable panels, etc.) are utilized to flood proof the space below the BFE. This application was approved in early September 2009, but is contingent upon the Owner constructing a Wave Dissipating Wall along the western edge of the existing Beachwalk Promenade. The details of this wall were presented to the City of Clearwater and FEMA during the application process. This wall will be constructed with a minimum top of wall elevation of 7.5 feet or 18 inches above the existing Beachwalk Promenade grades which range from approximately 5.0 to 7.1 feet. Further enhancements required by the City of Clearwater's Engineering Department will provide additional architectural features to the constructed wall so that it more closely matches the seat walls currently located on the beach west of Gulfview Boulevard. 3 Friday, November 13, 2009 ATTACHMENT "C" FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT L.O.M., INC. SURF STYLE PARKING GARAGE 311 S. GULFVIEW & 320 CORONADO DRIVE 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. West: The property is bounded on the west by the City of Clearwater's public Beach Walk promenade. The proposed development incorporates and extends the Beach Walk improvements into the project, through extension of a shell finish concrete sidewalk along Gulfview on the west side of the property and use of decorative pavers. Washington Palms and salt-tolerant landscaping will be added along Gulfview adjacent to the building. North: The property to the north the new 150-foot tall Aqualea resort. East: The Property is bounded on the east by relocated Coronado Drive and further east is an area of smaller motels. It is anticipated that this area will also be undergoing renovations, as are encouraged by Beach by Design's vision of Beach by Design. South: The adjacent property to the south is occupied by an existing 5- story motel. The height will be relatively equivalent to the proposed project. The scale, bulk, coverage and density of the proposed project are in keeping with the Design Guidelines set forth in Beach by Design for projects. The project to the north is significantly higher than the proposed development. The existing motel to the south is relatively equal in height. 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 project will enhance this area of the beach in a number of ways, including: Friday, November 13, 2009 (1) Incorporation of public sidewalks around the property and linkages to the neighboring Hyatt Aqualea and Beach Walk. (2) Construction which meets current building codes. (3) Providing 301 public parking spaces to serve the public parking spaces + 24 employee spaces + 24 retail/restaurant for a total of 349 spaces. Employee, retail and restaurant spaces will have appropriate signage and marking identifying uses. See Parking Study for Greater Detail (4) Extension of the existing promenade to the public parking spaces will allow pedestrians to access the beach from Coronado Drive by walking through the first level of Surf Style Parking Garage and walk across South Gulfview Blvd to the beach. (5) The additional parking spaces will significantly reduce traffic congestion due to circling beach patrons looking for current limited parking. (6) The guests of the proposed public parking stalls will be potential clientele for nearby restaurants and retail businesses. 3) The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The City has completed construction of Beach Walk improvements along Coronado Drive, including concrete sidewalks on the east side of the site, The parking garage layout will enhance pedestrian flow along Coronado Drive by implementing a seven foot wide pedestrian concrete sidewalk. Traffic congestion will be significantly reduced based on item 2.5. A deceleration lane into the parking garage will be constructed by the Applicant on the Coronado right-of-way for ease of entry to the parking garage, by general public. With regard to health, safety and welfare, the proposed development and structure will comply as required with applicable codes including the Florida Building Code, the Life Safety Code and the Florida Fire Prevention Code. 4) The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. The Applicant has submitted a traffic study to review potential impacts created by construction of the project based on a methodology agreed upon by the City staff, which was prepared by Elizabeth Rodriguez, AICP. There are a number of ways in which the project has been designed to minimize traffic congestion: Friday, November 13, 2009 (1) The entrance to the parking garage will have 102 feet of stacking space along Coronado Drive, enough for six vehicles (seventeen feet in length) before entering the parking garage. This will allow adequate room for stacking of vehicles entering the garage so as not to interfere with traffic flow on Coronado. (2) The site will contain 301 public parking spaces. An additional 24 spaces are also provided for employee and 24 spaces for restaurant patrons. The public parking will be provided so that surrounding retail patrons and overnight visitors will not have to wait for spaces or circle the beach area looking for a parking space, therefore allowing traffic to flow smoothly into the parking garage off the public street. Parking stalls for employees, restaurant and retail patrons will be signed and marked appropriately. See Parking Study for greater detail. (3) As shown on the proposed site plan, there is a loading/unloading area provided on the east side of the site. Delivery vehicles will be provided a space in the loading area, within the building envelope, that has access to Coronado Drive. This should keep delivery vehicles from interfering with the traffic flow on Coronado Drive. Solid waste pick-up will also be accessed on Coronado Drive. 5) The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. The property is located within the "Beach Walk District" of Clearwater Beach. The project will function as a parking garage for the "Beach Walk District." The project is also consistent with the community character of the "Beach Walk District" with the inclusion of a restaurant and retail store, which Beach by Design describes as an area that necessitates the renovation and redevelopment of the existing structures in order to create the primary beachfront destination of Clearwater Beach. As to the immediate vicinity, to the west separating the site from Gulfview Boulevard and public beach is the City's Beach Walk. The Applicant is incorporating the Beach Walk improvements into the property and providing improvements in the City right-of-way to the west of the property as envisioned by Beach by Design, including a shell finish concrete sidewalk, with Washington palms and salt-tolerant plantings along the face of the building. The Applicant proposes pedestrian access improvements to Beach Walk including a pedestrian pass through access in the center of the building providing access from Coronado Drive to the Promenade. The pass through will also provide access to the retail and restaurant uses. Friday, November 13, 2009 The parcel to the north is occupied by the Hyatt Aqualea construction site with a proposed height of 150' (above BFE). The proposed project is of a superior architectural design to the previously existing buildings and incorporates Beach by Design guidelines therefore enhancing the surrounding properties. To the east are small-scaled overnight accommodation uses. The proposed improvements to the property include sidewalks around the building that connect to the Beach Walk and provide pedestrians seamless access north and south along Gulfview and Coronado. The adjacent property to the south is occupied by an existing 5-story motel. The height will be relatively equivalent to the proposed project. 6) The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. The proposed redevelopment project will improve the visual appeal at this section of Beach Walk and South Clearwater Beach. The architectural style integrates a tropical modern design which is appropriate and aesthetically pleasing for this beachfront property. All proposed parking is within a fully enclosed parking structure, thereby minimizing any visual and olfactory impacts on the surrounding properties. Adequate loading/unloading space and sufficient stacking space at the main vehicular entrance of the property will keep vehicles off of Coronado which will enhance and encourage the flow of pedestrians from the beach to the site or other properties to the south. Access to the restaurant and retail on the Gulf front (westerly) side of the property will be pedestrian access only. Friday, November 13, 2009 ATTACHMENT "D" FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT L.O.M., INC. SURF STYLE PARKING GARAGE 311 S. GULFVIEW ~ 320 CORONADO DRIVE Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project 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 project requests are primarily limited to building setbacks in order to include the proposed 301 public parking spaces in a reasonable geometric fashion within the footprint, and reduce an excessively high parking garage. The proposed deviations from Code, which are discussed in detail below, are necessary and minimal and without which the project cannot be constructed at this location. The Applicant has designed the proposed redevelopment project to comply with Beach by Design guidelines to the fullest extent possible. The proposed redevelopment of this site into a complementary/supporting use to the surrounding resort/tourist areas is highly visible from Beach Walk and is an integral part of the City's vision of Clearwater Beach as set forth in Beach by Design. Height The request for 59.50' when 100' is allowed by Code is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design and the City LDC. Parking The Applicant has requested relief from Code parking requirements for the retail and restaurant uses. The retail and restaurant uses within the parking garage will be primarily used by pedestrian traffic along the Promenade or visitors staying in surrounding hotels. This pattern is evident with the existing Surf Style retail store and Britt's restaurant. In addition, the parking garage will maintain 301 minimum public spaces available to visitors of this area. Friday, November 13, 2009 Setbacks The project is seeking relief from building and pavement setbacks along the four property lines. The setbacks are consistent with the Aqualea project immediately north of the project, which brings the storefronts closer to the public sidewalks as encouraged in the tourist district. The side setback is consistent with the existing side setbacks to the north and south of the property; however a pedestrian access has been introduced into the project along Coronado Drive to allow pedestrian beach access through the building. This access .corridor will allow pedestrians to have a shorter distance, a safer route and direct access to the beach from Coronado Drive. Sight Visibility Triangles The project complies with sight triangle requirements. Direct Access to an Arterial The property is addressed from Coronado and traditionally has had a primary Coronado address. As such, the parcel is bounded on only one side with vehicular access. The proposed site plan provides for a parking garage entrance on the easterly side of the building on Coronado. Vehicles will enter a right turn lane that extends to the garage entrance, where vehicles enter and exit the proposed parking garage. A Coronado address shall be obtained for the property. 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 project provides a large scale parking garage that is contemplated within Beach by Design to help alleviate parking concerns and beach traffic congestion. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. The proposed project is compatible with the neighborhood, as is more particularly discussed in General Applicability Criteria 1 and Comprehensive Infill Criteria 4 below, and will encourage additional appropriate development by reducing the current parking concerns and set an example for the style of quality architecture envisioned by Beach by Design. The architectural design wraps the parking garage with a facade designed to look like the newer construction along the beach including Friday, November 13, 2009 colored banding, decorative medallions, glass storefront and parking garage openings along the east and west facades resembling window openings. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. West: The property is bounded on the west by Beach Walk and the Gulf of Mexico. South: To the south is an existing 5 story motel similar in height to the proposed project. The two projects are compatible in mass and setbacks. East: The adjacent property to the east is an area of smaller motels. It is anticipated that this area will also undergo renovations, as are encouraged by Beach by Design's vision of Beach Walk. North: The adjacent property to the north is occupied by the Hyatt Aqualea construction site, which is 150' in height and of similar scale to the proposed project. The proposed project incorporates sidewalks that allow pedestrians to walk seamlessly between north and south to Pier 60. The parking garage will enhance adjoining properties and the beach area by providing additional parking for current needs and future development. The first floor will include retail and restaurant store fronts offering tourists and local visitors shopping and eating opportunities while visiting Beach Walk. 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 Friday, November 13, 2009 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. a. Parking garages, restaurants and retail are all permitted used within the RFH land use and Tourist zoning district. 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 use is a use permitted within the Tourist zoning district. Surrounding properties are already developed or under development. The Aqualea property to the north is not impacted. The existing properties to the north and south as approved includes hotel and condominium use whereas the proposed SurF Style Parking Garage project focuses only on tourist activities and provides public parking which eliminates traffic congestion and allows pedestrians to walk to other establishments. b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City. This project furthers the City's beach revitalization objective by providing the Beach by Design contemplation for a parking garage located within the south beach area. We provide the following information concerning the height, tower separation, design, scale and mass criteria: Beach by Design VII, B Height and Tower Separation The project consists one building that is 59.5' above BFE in height measured from FEMA to the top of the main roof deck. Therefore tower separation criteria does not apply to this project. B. 3. "The floor plate of any portion of a building that exceeds forty-five feet in height is limited as follows: a) The largest floor plate between 45' and 100' exceeds 25,000 square feet and is approximately 29,531 square feet. Beach by Friday, November 13, 2009 design section B 3a gives an exception to parking structures open to the public. The Applicant requests deviations to this requirement as provided by Beach by Design. See below for discussion of mass and scale and an explanation of how the project provides a tiered effect thereby justifying such deviation. Beach by Design VII C The quantifiable aspects of the architectural vocabulary are as follows per Beach by Design: • No plane (or elevation) of the project "...continue(s) uninterrupted for greater than one hundred (100). East -The building is recessed at the south end of the east elevation to ensure no plane along this elevation is greater than 97 feet wide. South -Several changes in plane along the south elevation have been incorporated into the design of the building including a 5 ft deep by 12 ft wide shaft that breaks up the elevation so that the widest plane is 96 feet. West -the west elevation has a recessed 5 feet by 27 wide located at the center of the elevated levels. This recess is the main entrance for pedestrians from the beach as well as serving as a backdrop for the proposed artist commissioned banner. The widest plane along the west elevation is 83.5 feet. North -The stair tower is the main element along the north elevation. It also serves to break up the elevation so that there is no plane wider than 99 feet. At least sixty percent (60%) of any elevation will be covered with window or architectural decoration. West Elevation - 63% East Elevation - 51 South Elevation - 48.6% North Elevation - 46.4% The applicant request deviation from this requirement. No more than sixty percent (60%) of the theoretical maximum building envelope located above 42' will be occupied by a building. See attached calculations on sheets A403 and A404. The height and mass of buildings will be correlated to: (1) the dimensional aspects of the parcel proposed for development and (2) adjacent public spaces such as streets and parks. Friday, November 13, 2009 c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; The proposed project has a less dense scale than that of the Hyatt Aqualea, which is under construction in the adjacent parcel. At 59.5' above BFE, the scale and intensity of the development is far less than that of the Aqualea and Kiran Grande projects north of the site. The architectural style and compliance with design guidelines will support the emerging character of the area as envisioned by Beach by Design. The project's "modern tropical architecture" compliments the tropical vernacular envisioned in Beach by Design and that of the adjacent project. 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; The building steps in and out along all four elevations. Of particular emphasizes is the recess along the west elevation which creates the main pedestrian entrance from the beach as well as the location for what should become the iconic feature of the building, the banner created by an artist. • Use of architectural details such as cornices, medallions, awnings, columns, etc; A cornice has been utilized on the west elevation to separate the building base, the retail portion, from the upper parking levels. A cornice has also been placed at the very top of the building to create a termination point for the fagade. This same cornice can also be found at the top of the east facade. Medallions can also be found on all four elevations of the building. The medallion design will help create an identity for the project. They can be found primarily on the sides of the building that front public ways, the East and West elevations. Awnings have been placed on the west elevation to help bring the building down to a human scale along the "Beach Walk". • Variety in materials, colors and textures; A variety of colors have been utilized to emphasize different areas of the project. The lower levels are darker shades of salmon hues. These colors represent the corporate colors of Surf Style, the retail tenant. They will also help bring more attention to these levels. The darker hues are also carried up the columns and the stair towers to accentuate these elements. Lighter colors have been utilized on the upper levels to reduce the perception of the elevated garage mass. Friday, November 13, 2009 ~ • • Distinctive fenestration patterns; The fenestration pattern on the lower levels of the west elevation relate to the function behind them. They are large glazed openings to reveal the retail space behind them. The upper fenestrations are smaller to hide the vehicles but with reveal patterns to allow a change of color around them. On the north and south elevations the lower level fenestrations are mimicked with reveal patterns and change of color. Actual openings cannot be placed at these locations because of the wall's proximity to the property line. The upper levels which are set back from the property have more linear openings that help ensure the garage can be classified as an open garage per The Florida Building Code section 406 opening requirements. The East elevation since it faces a public way, changes back to a punched opening pattern more similar to the west elevation. • Building stepbacks; On the west elevation the building steps back at the juncture between retail and parking garage making these levels the base of the building. This stepping turns into the garage access ramp along the south elevation. • Distinctive roofs forms. The majority of the building's roof is a parking structure. The few elements that are not, the two stair towers, have been topped with hipped metal roofs to highlight these taller points on the building. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. The proposed project consists of one building with a 4-foot foundation landscape area along the east and 5-foot wide foundation landscape areas on the west side within the city right-of- way. The area north of the building is proposed as crushed coquina to match the Aqualea project for maintenance free conditions between the two buildings and help percolate a small amount of water between the two buildings. (12) Foxtail Palms will also be planted in this area. The area will not be visible to the public and the width of this area varies in size due to the property line and development to the north. Therefore bare minimum landscaping is proposed. Friday, November 13, 2009 ~ ~r The buffer along the south property line includes a low maintenance viburnum hedge and palm trees. It is anticipated that once the property south of this development is redeveloped, the same condition as the north property line will be encountered without public view or access. The west foundation landscape area is 5 feet in width and includes a combination of Washington Palms, Cabbage Palms, shrubs and ground cover. In addition, decorative pavement will extend the existing promenade to the western building entrance. Friday, November 13, 2009 Clearwater Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone : 727-56 2-4567 Fax: 727-562-4865 ^ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ^ SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION -Plans and application are required to be collated, stapled and folded into sets CASE NUMBER: RECEIVED BY (Staff Initials): DATE RECEIVED: * NOTE: A TOTAL OF 15 SETS OF THIS APPLICATION AND ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COMPLETE LEVEL ONE OR LEVEL TWO APPLICATION. COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM (Revised 04/24/2007) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A) APPLICANT NAME: L.O.M., InC. MAILING ADDRESS: 41 OO N 28th T@rraC@, Hollywood, FL 33020 __ ___ _ PHONE NUMBER: 954-926-6666 FAX NUMBER: 954-608-2565 _.. _ __ CELL NUMBER: EMAIL: PROPERTY OWNER(S): L.O.M., InC. List ALL owners on the deed AGENT NAME: AI@X L. AZart, P.E. MAILING ADDRESS: 14001 63rd Way North, Clearwater, FI 33760 PHONE NUMBER: 8~ 3-205-3615 FAX NUMBER: CELL NUMBER: EMAIL: aI@X~p kt3lthZayaC.C0171 1. ARCHITECTURAL THEME: a. The landscaping in a Comprehen sive Landscape Program shall be des igned as a part of the architectural theme of the principal buildings proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for the development. ' 1 _. _ _ OR b. The design, character, location and/or mate vials of the landscape treatment p roposed in the Compr ehensive Landscape Program shall be demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the p arcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape standards. See Attachment 1 C:IDocuments and Settingslderek.fergusonlDesktoplplanningforms_07071Comprehensive Landscape Program 04-24-07.doc Page 1 of 2 2. COMMUNITY CHARACTER: The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. See Attachment 2 3. PROPERTY VALUES: The landscape t reatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will have a be neficial impact on the value of the property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. See Attachment 3 4. SPECIAL AREA OR SCENIC CORRIDOR PLAN: The landscape treatment proposed in the Com prehensive Landscape Program is consistent w ith any special area o r scenic corridor plan which the City of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel proposed for development is located. See Attachment 4 THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 3, DIVISI ON 12 MAYBE WAIVED O R MODIFIED AS A PART OF A LE VEL ONE OR LEVEL TWO APPLI CATION, AS THE CASE MA Y B E, IF THE AP PLICATION FOR DEVEL OPMENT APPRO VAL INCLUDES A COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROG RAM, WHI CH SATISFIES THE ABO VE CRITERIA. THE USE O F LA NDSCAPE PLANS, SECTIONS / ELEVATIO NS, RENDERINGS AND PERSPECTIVES MAY BE NECESSARY TO SUPPLEMENT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WORKSHEET. SIGNATURE: I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this application are true and accurate to the best of m y knowledge and autho rize City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application. t'~~~M . ~1u~' Ili Signature of pro er representative STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PMdCtt/1S 1./~ Owa'V~ Swom to and subscribed before me this ~ day of ~Grnbe r , A.D. 20~to me and/or by V 1 VQ CV1 i n ,who is personal Iv known has produced NnTARV Di mr Tr c~~ OF LORIDA as iden ' ication. •.~~~~~.,,, • Lauren eks =Commission # D 6P4429 Nota public, ''•..,,,~.•'•• Expires: DEC. 0, 2Qlp My commission expires:'~?jUlt V BONDED THRU ATLA.YTIC BONDI CO., INC. C:IDocuments and Settingslderek.fergusonlDesktoplplanningforms_07071Comprehensive Landscape Program 04-24-07.doc Page 2 of 2 SURF STYLE PARKING GARAGE COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM ATTACHMENT 1. Architectural Theme: The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape program shall be demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape standards. This Comprehensive Landscape program is being submitted since foundation landscaping is being provided on-site on the west and east sides of the building. The standard foundation planting width required by code is five feet wide, but due to site constraints on the east side we are requesting a reduction of 4 ft. wide for the proposed planting area. Foundation landscaping on the west side is being planted in accordance with Code requirements and width of these planting areas are 5 ft. wide. The foundation planting bed proposed for the west side is five feet in width, along with additional two Washington palms within Beach Walk. Decorative pavement to match existing Beach Walk improvements is also being added. These proposed improvements however are located within the Gulfview Boulevard right of way rather than within the property boundary. The landscaping and pavement are designed to abut the existing decorative promenade and include outdoor restaurant seating under the proposed palm trees with a backdrop of foundation plantings including groundcover, shrubs and thirteen Sabal Palms against the building. The landscaping will be accented by low voltage decorative lighting. Proposed landscaping and hadscaping are designed to match the adjacent City improvements as well as the plant selection of the adjacent surrounding development. The foundation planting bed proposed for the east side is four feet in width and located within the property limits between the east building facade and a proposed 7-foot wide sidewalk and turn lane. Since the planting bed is located underneath a building overhang, it will not allow for the planting of shade trees within the bed. However selected shade tolerant understory Lagerstroemia Indica trees & plant material has been added including accent shrubs and Lantana Montevidensis (Purple Lantana) as groundcover. 2. Community Character: The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. As the south beach area continues to grow and redevelop, significant improvements are implemented as part of each project including architectural and landscaping. This project continues the redevelopment trend by augmenting and extending the existing Beach Walk improvements from the existing promenade up Friday, November 13, 2009 to the western face of the building. The hardscape improvements include, decorative concrete to match the existing promenade materials and provides an area for outdoor dining and further enhancing the beach front services offered and night life. The landscaping continues the tropical theme of the City improvements and further completes the beachfront redevelopment. 3. Property Values: The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will have a beneficial impact on the value of the property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. The property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel includes the Aqualea project under construction, the proposed Clearwater Beach Resort, proposed HI Express located across Coronado Drive and the existing motel south of the property. The redevelopment of this property into a parking garage and tourist uses on the first floor will continue the positive growth of tourist related businesses and additional beach parking. The proposed landscaping and hardscaping will continue the redevelopment of the areas between the City promenade and the properties located along Gulf Boulevard with a cohesive plant material palate and specialty pavement to match the existing promenade. These improvements will significantly increase the value of the older properties that have not been redeveloped by creating a lively and updated beachfront environment, replacing many outdated sites little or no green area within the existing parking lots. 4. Special Area or Scenic Corridor Plan: The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program is consistent with any special area or scenic corridor plan which the City of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel proposed for development is located. The landscape and pavement treatment proposed has been coordinated with the existing plant palate along the promenade as well as the proposed Aqualea project landscaping to the north. Native Sabal Palms and Washington Palms have been selected to blend into the existing palm trees west of the site. The proposed extension of the promenade has been designed to match the color, pattern and material of the existing pavement to be consistent with the Beach by Design intent. Friday, November 13, 2009 CITY OF CLEARWATER Engineering Department FORM NUMBER 100 South Myrtle Avenue, Room 220 1311-0104 P.O. Box 4748, Clearwater, FL 33758-4748 VACATION REQUEST FILING FORM Lys: Responses to Items 1- 9 are required. 1. NAME OF APPLICANT OR DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE: Name: L.d• ~ • ~ ~ ~~ Phone: 9~" ~ 9~ ' dd ~P Address: '~°10p-1~. Z6~ T~~~ ~}}D~.`(V~(GY~t~ ~-- 3'i0~-~ HEREBY PETITIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER FOR THE VACATION OF THE FOLLOWING: ^ EASEMENT TYPE: STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY ALLEY ^ OTHER: 2. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE VACATED: ~~ ;"1'_' ~~T~-T~~ ~"b`~ I ~i~~V 1 ~-V,l i~iGYtP facGt+~-~L-i 3. STREET ADDRESS OR SIMPLE LOCATION: ~j i ~ Lj laGF1(i~v~l ~' ~? car ?iZ~ Go~0+-1 ~'DO ®~ . 4. PROPOSED USE OF VACATED PROPERTY: GOM~It ~~ -a.l~- ~[,~ ~'~l~lo~'t -T _„~ 5 tom. 5. ZONING OF ADJOINING PROPERTY: North: South: ~ East: West: ®5 ~J Printed on recycled paper Page 1 Revised 6/24/2005 6. REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS: a. Proof of Property Ownership b. Land Survey of Property c. Site Plan showing Proposed Use of Vacated Property d. Filing Fee per Ordinance No. 5969-96: ($500.00 for aRight-of--Way/alley or $400.00 for an Easement) 7. THE FOLLOWING FOUR LETTERS OF NO OBJECTION ARE REQUIRED: a. Progress Energy b. Verizon Florida, Inc. c. Knology Broadband of Florida, Inc. d. Bright House 8. NAME, ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF PROPERTY OWNER (PLEASE PRINT) ~. Same as Applicant Name: ~^ ' ~ . ~~ ~ ~ C ' Phone: q~ ~Z~ ~'( ~" 4tD0 N. ~~ ~'.~v-~uc~ ~}-Ol~ Wt~Od ~(. 330Zo Address: 9. OWNERS SIGNATURE: Date:. ~ NOTARY ACKNOW.~,EDGEMENT STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ~j y p 1nrGt,~-~1 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2~0 day of ~~ u S ~ , ZDO-!, by ' `mil 61U~~~ ~ ,who is erso Ily known to me or has produced (Type of identification) My Commission expires: ~ 2~ 30~ f d NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF FLORIDA ,,,,,~",.,. Lauren Weeks :Commission # DD612010 '• 'Expires: DEC. 30, BONDED THAI; ATL4\TIC BONDING CO., INC. as Iaentl~catlon. Name of notary typed, printed or stamped: ~J Printed on recycled paper Page 2 Revised 6/24/2005 M , Ii+:"2005468543 BK: 14759 PG: 315, 11/23/2005 at 08:52 AM, RECORDING 1 PAGES $10.00 D DOC STAMP COLLECTION $5425.00 KEN BURKE, CLERK OF COURT PINELLA3 COUNTY, FL BY DEPUTY CLERK: CLKDM03 Id" 5y~5- Repred By uut REIVRN to D~rid W. Griffin. P.A. 565 South laeecai Aveaue Ckanvrer, Pl. 33736 t'r27) 4666900 Tale (727) 4669777 Pu Pn.B /28,431 THIS INDENTURE, mss rYr r^ ~ r w~ln F~ ~~ f r r 1r,Y~lr she Y Yd,b i,i,l, r i Wi Y,Yplri~/~yMrrY ~• i ~s ~. /~/,iM •r,',li lil. A i ~+r,YJ~Md M wY~. Made this ~ ~'r~' day of NOVEMBER, A.D. 2005 Between EVELYN L. GIBBON, a single woman, whose address is: 105 Holik, College Station, ~gxeY'' 77840, party of the fast part, and ; ~ ,~ ~ L.O.M., INC., aFloridn corporation, whose mailing address is: 4100 N. 28'" Terrace, Hollyv-~ood, _ . Florida 33020, party of the second pert, WitnessetL, that the said party of the first part, for and in consideratioilvf (he sum o1;Ten Dollars and other good and valuable considerations, to it in hand paid by the s>;i~~' 6f the sccand part, rho receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted'„~rgained eitd Bold to the said party of the second part forever, the following described lard, situp llyfp~'being in the County of Pinellas, State of Florida, to wit: ~` ~ • ~ ~ ~~ - ~, Lot 110, LLOYD-WHITE-SKINNER SUBD~ry1SION, s~cotd~ci~ to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 13, Pages 12 Btrl~l 13, Pubt~c'~Records of Pinellas County, Florida. •;`. `.~~ %: Parcel Identification No.: 07 - 29.- TS ~238Q ~ - 1100 a/k/a 320 Coronado Drive, f~;llarwater BF~ch, Florida 33767 ., ,. ~. ~. ,,~ .> And, the Grantor hereby covef~mtsryl~said Grantee that the Grantor is lawfully seized of said land in fee simple; that thq ({ir>fntorhas goell right and lawful authority to sell and convey said land; that the Grantor herefiX~'irl~ lyarrants tkc title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims ,of ,alf .~exsons whomsoever; and that said land is free of all encumbrances, except ja>fe38ocidin~siibsequent to December 31, 2004 and easements and restrictions of record. ; ~ ~~ , .~ '~ In Wltaesa~Dt~er4o`f~ the.s~rd party of the first part has caused these presents to be signed the day dycear abovr<<vri .~ -_ ~` fitness L .GIB ON by URA J. •' `, ~ - WILSON, Power of At rneyGJC~ ? • ` ~ ,/(~ ,,, ~/ O/ ~tpµt-i~iE K~u4F ,witness ~~ I STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF ~'~ The foregoing inatrttmentwas acknowledged before the this I~Td dey of November, 2005 by LAURA J. WII.SON, Power of Attorney for EVELYN L. GIB SON, who is personally known to me or er.picture I.D. enti ratio ~MIIIRII tiICICAtt Utltl MObr t~lO1C, laltr d MM ConwirBn Npwi My C s' w ~y,71,: ~~ B~AQBAeA R-cxpe.(,arj , Notary Public ~i i, ~~ -_ ~ 1 --=_ -, ~ ,~ ~~• ~ ~ ~`) ,' -' , , . ,,~ , , ~, , , , ~ • ~ •~ i -_- ~~ , ~~ ~`• / 'i ~• \ • ~ ~ • \ ~ ~~ . ~~ ~` '~ ,, ` ~. `. - -' , ,~ -__~ ~, ., ;' ~, w.rranty Deed pndlv3dut) INST b 95-269932 OCT 25, 1995 9:37PM ~~ BET[TBN TO kJ .Donald 0. McFarland, Enquire ~ P$EPAB$D BY: McFarland, Gould, Igaoa A BalGvao, P.A. 3118. Missouri Avenue ~ ~ •~ •~ ~ Clearwater, Florida 54818 ,: 1 :r~ ' "1~eo: Pairod N0. Parcel 1: 0?-2B•1662380.000.0800 Parcel 2: 07-29.16.62380.000.0810 Parcel 5: 07-29-1662880.000.0820 Parcel 4: 07.29-1662580.000.1080 Parcel b: 07.28-1b-62580-0004080 Grantas'~ Name: W.H. Neudeck ahla Winfred H. Neudeck PINELLAS COUNTY FLA. OFF. REC.BK 9194 PG 1151 ~ •1 1, 1 , 1, 1, - s =- ~' 1• '~ - '~ ~,~ `.~> ~, 1 30050773 COS 10-P5-1995 16:26s03~~ ~ ',~~ Rp M ~ , ~ ~ , RECO II Si 1 DOC STAAD - DA?l9 3 (10.30 , `~ ~ O;a~NSD:00. '. `. `. TOTAL: CHECI( RNT TEMDER ~______ l!1 ,660.50 `, `, ~~ . Eps cis , 013.660.50 ~ , `, ~, s.oo ,~ ~' -~~ ' -- ' , ~ _ _ Graotee'a Name: L.O.M., INC., a Florida corporation ; ; ; `, ,~ ~~ Property Address: 309, 811, 81b and 919 Gulfview Blvd, South, Clearwater, Flarlda; ` `` _: '~~ sad 914 and 918 Coronado Street, Clearwater, Fbrida :~ .~ a~;c to.s yyr^ . , .~ ,. :q ` ~ ` ~ \ ~.' ITT ~ ' `' '' `~ i ~~aFS-__.___ W A E B A N~ Y`.D E fi'b' ~` x~v ~, made thisoy f, Actobtr, ~.I1.,1885, Bs~gwea, W.X. Neudeck a/k/a Winfred K Neudeck, a married man, mhosc po#t of~ict, address ~s~ „3,,QZ ~~~? Taoaa. Bell air. ,rrt~ttT~[.S~i„r;,~a 74616 (herrinajiYr.-+efair~d.to or,'xsriantorr'~ yU1TD- LO.Al., ING, a Florida corporation, whose past off ee oddrfyt ii: x(88 Maadalgy Autnut, CJeoruroter, Fkrida 3IB30 (hencina/ter ,, r+efernd to a 'Grantec'~ ` . , ~~`. ,',~ . > W!'!N8S.48'TX, ?'list iatdf'!jrwttor, for Dreg in consideration of tlu sum of T'FN AND 00/100'5 fi10.00) Dollars and othfr'good anldch+luable consideration la said Grantor in handpoid by said Orontes, the neeipt whereof is ~bY oc~i~irwu+led~9d, has grouted, bargained and sold b the Grantee and Or+anta's a n and aaigneea fohuer t-k follauing ductibed land situate, lying and 6einP in Boowt ,pogo Cowt(r, „~ B ~ ; Lot 80, )}l'~and 82; AND, the 8outher~y one half (S'(y 1/2) of Lot 107 and ' ; , ~ ', ~~ sV of Ltot 108 and 109, LLOYD- SUBDMBION, ,~ ~ `. ~old~ to map or plat thereod as recorded io Piet Book 18, pages 12 ~, ~ _ ~ `: ~ mod 39, all of the Public Records of Pinellea County, Fbrida. SiJBJECP - = ; . `,PR.OPERTY IS COMMERCIAL P&OPEIi'I'Y AND NOT Tf~ ~ ~ 1 ~,, ' - - I~OIKESTEAD PROPERTY OF THE GRANTOR HEREIII. a. ~ , ,~ '~, S~ject to Kcal prnptr~y tazu for the ycor 1895 and subxquent ycan. 3a(tlecl to all eaaenunt, n+avatio~n, '. r,}~trictiont, and cwxnonb of mor,d. N 1~ ~ ~~ `'And said Grantor don ~' fully worrnrit the title b acid load, sad twill ~ t1u carne against tGe elairna a f' all paswu wbo-nao~aier: "Grantor'' Dreg "Grnntei are used for singular or plw cl, as condrxt nquinr. - __ _11 ~ , . PINELLAS COUNTY FLA. • OFF.REC.BK 9194 PG 1152 I 1N Wl9N&SB R'Ii7~R&OF, Crnnbor has barcunto aet pranta-'a band acid atal the d4Y and star fiat abax , "~ ~~ ~~ ._ --_-~ ~ w r ~ w.x. Naudeck Niel. wwr.a x. N.~aa~. ;;, -,, ~ ,,, Print , ~ , , , ~. ', .-~, .: .. '.~. Wir~,.,rs ~ ~ '~ '~ '~' Print Name: Chin l>n~ CG. ~ ~. ~ ' .J~i ' ,, ~~ ~ ' -- , .' __~ BTATB OF FLORIDA ; ,' ; ', - OOUAi'!Y OF PIIriF~LI.AB , ~.~~. %; ?7,e forgoing inatrwnent alai acbnorukdged bcfo,s nre this ol3 `dam a~OrtoErer,1D86, by W.H. Neudoeii a/b/a Winfred H Nsudccb, u~ho~an peraonal{~ bnaun• jo me a+r who has produced a dri~xr'a tinnae as identificotion , ~.'> .~ , .~ ~'~ ~~~s4`fCn2~ ~a.r~eK.~c~ Notary Pisaae Print Nams: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; cOa>mi..ior, N.m~.r';~' c~ ~ ~3?s,1 ,, ,, cs>~L~ ~:' . ~ - , ,. .' _ - , ,~ . .'~, ' -- ~~ C-~QLlNa CARPf;~~ >• COWS{ION NUM.ER CC313i17 --- __ ~`. ,~ `. ~~~ ~` ~.: ~, ' '' ., •~. . --_ ~ ~ ~ ,` - ~~ -- . ~ - - . --__ .~ -- ~ .~ ~` ~,; , ~ .` -- `~ . ; , . , .` ~ ` . ~ ~, . .~ '~ . ~ _ ~. (Pagt ? of Y) '~.. Surf Style/Britt's Cafe SECOND REVISED Traffic Study Prepared by ~~~E~L ~l~1l~G~ ~ Qi3 d aG~,e/3 ~ J fZC. 4846 Trinidad Dr. Land O' lakes, FL 34639 November 2009 i~d i ~.. . TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................1 Section 2. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS ............................................... 1 Section 3. FUTURE CONDITIONS .......................................................................................2 Section 3.1 Trip Generation ..........................................................................................2 Section 3.2 Trip Distribution ........................................................................................3 Section 3.3 Background Traffic ....................................................................................3 Section 3.4 Study Area .................................................................................................3 Section 3.5 Future Traffic Analysis ..............................................................................3 Section 4. CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES Page TABLE 1 Existing Intersections Analyses Summary ............................................................1 TABLE 2 Existing Roadway Capacity Analysis ..................................................................2 TABLE 3 Trip Generation .....................................................................................................2 TABLE 4 Future Intersections Analyses Summary .................................... ..................4 TABLE 5 Future Roadway Capacity Analysis ......................................................................4 APPENDIX Appendix A: Concept Plan Appendix B: Turning Movements Counts Appendix C: Existing Intersections Analyses & FDOT Generalized Tables Appendix D: Projected and Background Distribution Appendix E: Future Intersections Analyses z/~r Section 1: Introduction Brit's Cafe/Surf Style is a proposed development in Clearwater, Florida. This property is located on the west side Coronado Drive, south of Devon Street. The build-out year of the project is proposed to be 2011. The plan, which also depicts location, is included in Appendix A. The purpose of this report is to perform a detailed transportation analysis, which will evaluate adjacent roadway network and intersections analyses. This ~•eport has been revised per comments front the City pf Clearwater. The second revision is to correct the existing square footages. Section 2: Existing Transportation Analysis Turning movement counts for the intersections were collected during the PM (4:00 PM - 6:00 PM) peak periods on a @ical weekday (Tuesday -Thursday) of anon-holiday week at the three locations which are S. Gulfview Boulevard @ Hamden Drive, S. Gulfview Boulevard/Causeway Boulevard @ Coronado Drive and Hamden Drive @ Coronado Drive. The counts were taken from the Clearwater Beach Resort & Hotel Project performed by Florida Design Consultants, Inc. Counts were adjusted to peak- season conditions based on FDOT's seasonal adjustment factors of Pinellas County. The hard copies of the turning movements counts are included in Appendix B. Table 1 summarizes the intersection delay and LOS for PM peak hours. Figure 2 illustrates the existing turning movement counts at the intersections. For unsignalized and signalized intersections, the latest version of Highway Capacity Software (HCS@ was used for analyzing delay and Level of Service. The existing intersection analyses are included in Appendix C. Table 1 - Existing Intersections Analyses Summary Intersection ~ PM PeakHour Delay seclveh LOS S. Gulfview Boulevard @ Hamden Drive Signal 23.4 C S. Gulfview Boulevard/Causeway Boulevard @ Coronado Drive Signal 15.0 B Hamden Drive @ Coronado Drive Two-Way Stop 79 A Note: Level o/~Sen~ice o~tlte major street left turn movement rs presented for the unsignalized inlerseciion @'~ ~ ~ Road Facility limits were defined in the Methodology Statement. Table 2 provide the existing year link analysis for peak direction traffic flow. Capacities from the FDOT's Generalized Tables were used for link analysis and included in Appendix C. The levels of standard for both roadways are Level of Service D. Table 2: Existing Links Analyses Roadway PM Peak Hour Capacity Capacity Available Traffic EB7NB WB/SB EB/NB WB/SB EB/NB WB/SB Gulfview Boulevard: 2UL 293 188 760 630 Yes Yes Roundabout to Hamden Drive Coronado Drive: 4DL Brightwater 335 415 930 1140 Yes Yes Dr. to Hamden Drive Coronado Drive: 2UL Brightwater 335 415 420 530 Yes Yes Dr. to Gulfview Blvd. Section 3: Future Condition 3.1 Trip Generation -REVISED November 10, 2009 Traffic volumes generated by the proposed development were estimated using the appropriate rates provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) TYip Generation Manual, 7`h Edition. ITE Land Use Codes was used for the land uses and the net trip generation is shown in Table 3. Neither internal capture nor pass by were applied. Trip generation from the existing land uses was subtracted to get the net trip generation. NOTE: The land uses were rivised and this table reflects the new square feet Table 3: Trin Generation SAM Pexl:~ . PM Peak .. Land Use " LUC Intensity ~ In 'Out . Total in ;Out ;Total Daily'. Restaurant S .Retail 932 814 6,828 34,577 41 0 38 0 79 0 45 46 29 59 74 105 868 1517 Subtotal 41 38 79 91 88 179 2385 Existing Restaurant Existing S .Retail 932 814 6,058 7,128 36 0 34 0 70 0 40 17 26 22 66 39 770 343 Subtotal 36 34 70 57 48 105 1113 Net New Trips 5 4 9 34 40 74 1272 ~' _, ! % ~~ ., ~, 3.2 Trip Distribution -REVISED November 10, 2009 The revised project trip distribution is based upon direction from the City, as follows: 70% to/from the north and 30% to/from the south. Project traffic distribution is shown in Appendix D. 3.3 Background Traffic The existing traffic counts was increased by a growth factor up to the project's build out date. Based on a discussion with the City Staff, a 2% growth rate was applied to the existing counts. Vested traffic from other developments in the area was layered on to create total background traffic - as illustrated in Appendix D. 3.4 Study Area Per conversations with City Staff, the link(s) from which the project proposes to take access; one signalized intersection at either end of the link(s); and all driveways must be studied. Thus, the links, intersections, and driveways to be studies are as follows: Links: Gulfview Boulevard :Roundabout to Hamden Drive Coronado Drive :Causeway Boulevard to Hamden Drive Intersections (PM Peak): Coronado Drive @Hamden Drive Gulfview Boulevard @Hamden Drive Gulfview Boulevard @ Coronado Drive 3.5 Future Traffic Analysis As no committed improvements were identified in the vicinity of the project site, the future scenario analysis was performed with the existing geometry. Table 4 and Table 5 illustrates the future year analysis scenario for the intersections and links, respectively. The ratios of V/C were checked to ensure they were equal to or less than 1.0 for all individual movements. Future turning movements at the identified intersections and the prints out of the analyses are included in Appendix E. ~~~ ~, Table 4 -Future Intersections Analyses Summary -REVISED November 10, 2009 PM Peak Hour Intersection Delay LOS sedveh S. Gulfvicw Boulevard @ Hamden Drive Signal 27.2 C S. Gulfview Boulevard/Causeway Boulevard @ Signal 31.0 C Coronado Drive Hamden Drive @ Coronado Drivc Two-Way Stop 12.2 B Driveway Two-Way Stop 27.1 D Note: Level of Service of-the major street left turn movement is presented for the ~~nsignnlized intersection Based on the analysis all the identified intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable level of service. The project driveway is expected to operate at an acceptable level of service without any exclusive left and right turn lanes along the access roadway. Table 5: Future Links Analyses -REVISED November 10. 2009 PM Peak Hour Froject Traffic Total Traffic Capacity ', Capacity _ Bac and Traffic Available No of <.;. . Roadway Lanes EB/NB WB/SB EB/NB Vv'B/SB. EB/NB , ~V13/SB EB/NB WB/,SB EB/NB WBISB' Gulview Blvd: Roundabout to 2UL 397 198 2 0 399 198 760 630 Yes Yes Hamden Dr. Coronado Dr.: Brightwater Dr. 4DL 377 688 10 24 387 712 930 1140 Yes Yes to Hamden Dr. Coronado Dr.: Bri@twater Dr. 2UL 375 447 10 12 385 459 420 530 Yes Yes to Gulview Blvd. Note: 2% Growth Rate was npplied There is capacity available on the adjacent roadways of the project site. It is anticipated that the links are expected to operate at an acceptable level of service during the build out year of the project. Section 4: Conclusion The purpose of this report was to perform a detailed transportation for the Holiday Inn project. The adjacent roadways networks are expected to operate at an acceptable Level of Service with the project traffic in the year 2010. All the identified intersections and project driveways are also expected to operate at and acceptable level of service in the year 2010. REVISION.• An exclusive right turn lane is recommended at the main driveway for operational purposes. ~~ ~ ~~ APPENDIX A Concept Plan ~~3 f I .. ~, ~ I ~ r ;i L ' I `~ i *,,: ~ i 1 ` ~ ~ I 4 / TaagL R15YE *'' ~~ T I WNDBCAlL AMCNITLETIVML " lLAn1aD.G I 1 LEGEND rr t ~ ) - ' - PnDPENrruraE I '~I~I~s 1 5 FIEL RvE O ' I 1 PpOPOEEO COnCJEiE PAVFAElR sag~wAUk oenFNN a~wTEe: KEITH ZAYAC & t. ovAEn nAME: Lo.n.,ac ASSOCIATES, m PnoPOeEn ALPwMr PAVENEnf i iw nortm mnrEmrw ~MCUrwaaD. R xtm INC. k " Fvlc - -w cuuvE o fj ~ i ~ ~ z. ENOinEEREAIOSCAPE ARCnf1EGT: Henn urACarasocNTea, wc. (727) 797-9888 aAFarrE aAUa~ r.auTe as ~} ~ Tgt Enrearuae aoAD e, are.og t r ;,. Ir2+)Tnaegew sAeen xAAeoa, lL 3ga9a ~~ we Haan ~ ~~ ~ I 7 ' I ~ tn+l gaama w 1 ]. AnCrIr1ECTNME: FNgWCIt COrbIwUOTan, t1O nww LLrTMLAfAC.GOn I 1 Ia00 APOPRIU~ j ( aagMA OwI ,k 0i I m - NO~ Br. ca. 3 CI Iq!)33IO313w 5~ s lY i xaxlvevaanFAC eucouTUVO wnvErno MC JLC•• 4 vU1 1 a. o, . 4 ~ m lanESrLArEa eo9AevAAo _ - _ _ t I p osDMNM1fLORMI~SKII C e ~~yy SCALE: 1'-2V Psal MSnal2su J _' L ! .`],i r ' I ~ ~c~ f'. ~~as Po -__~'IL_~ I G IMC SCALE N1a)baYSgw ~'~,^, ^ S r 6 > ~,. ~ ,. ~~' , r'•. i 1~ ....... `7 " .a~a ~„e,,,~~ 71 -, .. Prwecr FOOrEm: an a>tnn oua:nEwxw.• _ 71/ a{~ ~ i f~•• •••••~•.••. am caonFno owY~ T - / ~~ ~ ~ I ~ ~°"""'" ~: ~ i 8 eew i ; (3 P,wcek o• wo s~iw'resaa oaoooFLOXwP ~'°I j ~ ~ . ~~~,;, P ~"`•"` } I i ` • d na - tratsaaetaooltw x / ~ r I I II ~ w/wg 3.20MIKk T~-ITWaBT - S E gI1NM~Sg au -.4 ! I k ~~ ~w,...sn FP ~ f~ ID.TKa~TTAI~ n~ 7 ~ ~~°r«y~~;.'"\I ""° r~_ s_;_ ir, ____________ _ -~''~ ~>~v °'°'~•~' oE9EioPEO USe. PAwnu oAPAn~rErAaarEarAwN.r ~ C' i " >, LANO wrgrAaL~ i )~ .. ~ -"" i. ~ - ~ 1 r • ~ o q.. ~vA~rwn~an NEw a~sF~µ i~ ) I ,o. _ _ _ ,: °°' --, i ~; m.9 Am' ,'~,>~' orALDEVELmAatNEw .a.was.ro..gAC9 1'~-)+ii _ ~ i _. - - at ~ p' ~~ s r .•.~ a.warEUrAT~we EauIno: e } <.~ - .- ".-. I DL1FkoPSase ArFw: aMss Pwrcl wnaF.Pwuq w.ams WaiGl w. ) k! e T .T ~- I A s.wc ..b BUEONOAIEA 'I.FbI SS MRrtF. N y f ~ ~" ~ ~ ~ _ ~... ._ r~iTV~[~w aw,*ilaoes: a.oew).w ad Daraw nxssDwew wa ` I -.. ) ' ~ 1 1 :.~ t TOTK OPEN APACE: )a BF glnAp xgntf.Pw Ma lsnfMw row9 wa ~ i ~v~,~. I .~ 1I f 1 ORdMOIevEI RlEaon uaf gets 6 ~. 2 1 ..... _. ... .__ .. r ~ tw ~ nw.I i I ~OwOFFE.laO - ..:. r~ ~ ~ ~ I N~FLTMPAnr' ~u u. U '~~1 ~. ~ _ -_ _ ~ _ tuniM aNM .., ..... ~ - _ ~ ~.. ~....e.. ,. ~ ;(~i r_K I ~ (' _ ~~oun~Y .vR AU t~l R c.wt ~..,, TOTAL a1 n6[F W.M fN~4 ,-,,~~,~ ~ 1 m G'~ ,i I Ic I~Tp~ ~ D~~ 3¢ u. O 1 i Wz~, /~ ... :~ a } t If "'" .............. - _ _ -T-_n[gcn11 ~ ~ tO MEI AI ~FRT' ~ ~ Q C ( ,A a ,u ~ ! Q " ~ ~~ ~ Ewar a:rorrtt za Ma tAt Fr. ~~ ~ ~~~ w -. ( -/ i goagwnR oT '-..,_I c .....~.- d'~ . ~ ' rr~-- ~ i; ~ ~~~ E~~ u.zgFr~ °' ~ 5ot'' :_ + ~ i ~ E ~ ez ~-~ 9r 0~-' wfaTFrornT z[MR om n:~ ~ ~ w ! r .-F . t_._ - ~ I +t. PAawoceeuwnon: ' *) *; } /-4~ I ~" 1'ma tu~aam ) g~~w.yP~E~svzeo~P~mur FankoErraomausaxavNaacaEOUnm. 'i a ~ ~k"~U y 4 ,4 ' ~3~ ~~ I alg~ ( 7~ I ~ -~w .~oaEr o,„~.__, ~ FEOU reD PnaPOeeD. 5 v}i e t M~\ .:.,~ I s STS ~.. I T ' I n°"°,.~ ~~.. ~.... °"^ ,, ~~. ~..._ m ) NETAL91L9nt p+.aaasssvAZa<{nAwaF7 asTAUnwT aant l sr.~ gnnun aFl T a`x * ~ I 7, ~„ T#.. .~ ~ ~r~,ro w -- w ~' i4a ~ a. aP~g w eP i .~g ~ ' ~ "' ~ ~ ~ ( :,, i3 ~ ~ r~ ` 1 ,n : _ jT''wM.a~w tBu Na9>m h i.o a0H a ~Y PUBLIC PN9rta(e aw aPaoa agt a+Ara ~ ErseorEE P,~«.«I: ~ aaP~s j orAL ePFCEa w wACEg a nc nAUgl j ~ ~ I ' o,.~ r ~ I ~ ~' ~~ ~ _ Aw9 a ~ ~ AETAE 0.0W{ (31N LPMESa'I £aI.OgO SF) OSPFCES /I J ~ E I ~ II a I - I .or a~ I ~ ~ ~~ u I s e ~r^'+r•w' T~ i ~ . Ymn _ ' n ~ YMp[ tgi ~ ag. rm I ~ ~ ~ O~~ *""- S NEtTAURNIT4Ow~ (gAa>gFq SPAGE3/I.ODD 9F1 _ rs PUBIIC PAnnlq: ]OO gP 1L~SFl aO13PACE9 EMROrEE PAraw: rw a a•ACEt ~ ii ~ tl YY I J I X0v ~ ~ ( ~¢ FM;~4 ~ J~ ,r •n•,, „ ~ T~w~ -~..-.~...._...~ ~...~5_~..~-~~._~i..3M ~.Mi2 PKG 6~ALLgI , 0 ` 3 E~ 1- (~)~T ~~ uwA~Oy 3 ° ~+ t2~gaA'AE•~kEV~121~Ma101M10n rHE R0001NWRNIC~E MTkE MAP _ ..man x.vn Y e r ~ ro ~ } + #.' ~ /'4 . COMNWM1 PNIEL Halwcmw,PUBLnrnO BY THE FEnEPAL FSgFNOF.rA.'T j •,`~°..~°.,~• ' ~ ,.. o.....-.. s11~ ,, a J w., ..»~ ~ MANAAFMENTAOENCY, efFE4TN£OaOwaANO aaCCAaTamEruTEn AAY 1aM aa~. FVPNOVAL OFAPEMONO FFIM COMDn10a11ETlEROf MIP O '1 ~ PENLgN WEL IELLLT MIAROOOIDNE pNNDE ipI l1E PWPOIFD ~ ~ ~ I ~' ~' ~ 1. llEIF NENE MO tEMVgOMAIEMTN1Y UMg1E NEAR OM BIIE 1 . ALL UIPAVFD OIgl01®E-MEA6 MtIIW aOMT-0FHIA1 bMll BE SOpOEp I ; -~_ ~ I ~ ~ NOpI PLAMIED AXbWU PEBMITWMl EIEQUIREDfdIWpCMMO ~o ~ ~ ~ ~~ f . ~ \\ f ~~~ - SMMED PAaI1n65TUDY "'^""-"'~"„-'^'v ,a, Ml ., IR~R,Ea 1l PEDet„BAM tLEwYlO aWLEEatTA„m NACOOIpnME Wfin iTE CITv of cLeNmATeas BEautEaEnnAno LrArowoa. Au PwPOeeD ~`~ tOEWAllO arwLnor EYgEDAenaes POPE OF a%. I~ i ' J VNI rtr µT£ 1rElE BEA ACCFeeIae PAfWnO tPACE YAEIEBY TIE VFAIIGL ~~' cLr,.M arrt aas wNiw ncwoEa pFinBAncE, wane. PAWnq '. APACE EAn9 Lows BUU>ga mDE.ow•rEN,,. aECnox.ea ~ 1 6 fnnO USe Areo lsjl WrekdPY 11-gAM Weekday SAM- qpM Weekday gPM- IZAM WeNmtl9AM- apM Weekend 611 pM nigh-SSp«es/1,000 sf 5% TN6 90)6 1 10096 155 A 1 etnl 3],036 L «es/1,000 s1 5% 20K a 9096 ill 1 12a a> Nigh-15 spaces/1,00051 30% 1 SOA 5 10096 103 50% 52 l00% 103 a,eaT LOw->>p«es/l,owel lo% 5 w96 z 10096 w% z lao% a nl{h 1B 161 a 10T 212 loW Low 11 111 { 1 135 OIInFNt. DOPNbPODTq ITInY ao~Ea, AIOOMER Muc ATE FIXTU1Ef wLL LE PAMEO,PSTSF .wn~dg OTrEBM9{E COnCENE0.0R aENOFDN toEwNN Ara LAra9tdFtq To MATCH EsturgVO CdaETSOnt Ort a:TaEn tL rouazr o9AkPt1EN srAOaa MOTE: noDELrvENEn awl gE wADE win no TwAal PMatUP n01a0. TLE AM M1FA aNNl BE COOIaMTFD wrM lOM OlF1wL CrtY OF CIFARwMER aDLO WABIE PROOwN.I OIIECTdi AT Than n. N1. EXTEWpI 110MwH0 Brwl BE AITALMED On Tr1E EATERLIR O 1NE anDPa. at.lgE POBLM.AIeT MOOESION IMPACT FEE b OOEAIO PA1Nlep1 Tnp PRDJECr Pw1011lO EILUIYM OF LUEDfq PEIMIT. 11E fEE OpA.C aE aserAnTw, mnrACr cane rA.aeAko AT maa~az TOCNQIIATE A&ESaEnf. AInT cno ~C4 of C11 AREAS s4. FT. RETAIL NORTH 12,035 BEACH WALK THRU 3,147 RETAIL SOUTH 7,754 GROUND LEVEL STORAGE 548 EGRESS CORRIDOR 613 RETAIL MEZZANINE 7,637 STORAGE MEZZANINE 2,334 STORAGE CORRIDOR 115 TOTAL 34,183 RESTAURANT 5,064 KITCHEN 1,267 RESTROOM (W) 286 RESTROOM (M) 270 TOTAL 6,887 9/ 3 w• APPENDIX B Turning Movements Counts /°~31 w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ a ~ y~~~ ~ ~ ~~ O ~~ . ~ ~' a'D f~'~ 33 i~oo aoi. f"~ i n`!bp'lb'YO aOe~~r ~, 1 ~ :~' b a a, Y _~ + ~,~.~ ~ '~ _ l b ! O 4 Y O ~~ -f ~_ 1 p ~ O'D O D D O. D.-p. ~ y. 4. {y A ~ ~ y~". Y t ! ~ a bo'Y ~. a t o~oD O.n{~.~- i s pt ae as pe e;a~p{~. i i {{~~ kx yy li {{ (F ttttfff f a o ~.ffi 1t a ~. e p e o l -1-~ l l rn Y b 4 p c ,a o-e~ e l :q a I 4 ` i l ~ ~~ I I . Y~A~' C°~-o"` $`~ j $ }~'"v-~ a~ P ~ awwM$vw-~ $ x:aj ~ ~. j t .. Y,. ~'r g. i 11}}}} "~+w.•sw~r~.; JJ ~.~a.l i~a aw.a {~.~ SSSS / o p'~''g ~~0 ~- D~DD'..wa {.1~~:. OI eeDer a.ae1 ~pO~ di~ilw~ ~ OD-^.'~; O~0~000~r~. S O}.Oip pia~0'-1D~r~. tI ~g ( 11 I 1 xx{y~ ss !!~~ 1 g '_ _ r ~~ .r W rr ~r Nr ~ rrr ~ ~ ~r ~, ~ r rr ~r r ~^r ~ ~. ~~ yj~ ~ Yb p ~Q ~ ~ a @oaeeo oa+~~ Y r r w M$ v .~ „ u a aaw~Z~ ,y O a 0 a 0 q'q 8 o W T:~ °BEII~BgPS~~$ 7C Q o Ooo.!6.6ao 9w ~'~ ~a ee6ooaao>~.6~ ~' y yy _ gg _ .~ Q S~a6~gw"~ b ogob qo 6aq~'~ ~~" 0 6 oa OOP o o. ~7j~~. 0 0 e o 0 0 0 0 0 0 :3. ~ `I o oOODOtrO Ops ~. q u aeoae~.o d.r.~~ 0 oe. o,sagC4.mr~. .~ w ,~ r &iL~r2~8i3 _ ,99:18 72756?d7$5 .. ,..- ENG. ,. _ .",per. ' 82!02 . ; Pie ~. (sali'vio~+-$y'. EBLT 2 Giu~view k3'v ~e d i ~< T C~~~Hv. 'Pbese ~ H~ieas Dr. SE1~B#~~' P2~sass 4 ~ 8 ato sett ~#~s~d.. l'~as~ +~ ~s a ~t~ ~ '~~v~cay. ~ ` _ _ ._ .. ;~ ri~ ~ ~ -- M~ x~c~xz, ~~c~: ~ ~~ ~RO~ ~.xn,~.~y~ , P~iase+ 2 R pr, S$ e 3 ~~ Bv. E8 (ia#~ ~~d) s .. . ~~ r~. I~TB , ~tesd;$ Culfcrr~iv. ~~~;kc:~i.~t.:hes :~ o u s <~ _ ~. ..~ ;~ ., r~+ 20 __ ro ~!A~ 5.0 ~.CI ~ 5.D S.Q.. ~w 3.5 3 ~ 3.5 3.5' ~4~sA~,AtCI~ -4.~ 3,f.~ ~.8 3.B MAXIMlA1~ 2 ~~ 55 ~5 ~5 ... __ w,u:x _. _ _. PL,AS1i ~t7rt~" wAtR X t7~i`I" ,~ ' ;~ ~3/~ i ~s ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ i ~5 . ~° `'~ _~. k'..l l~S'e~w. I. tiv. p~ ~w.w.w i. 7Q. }a s~~ ~~ owa~ a~eo eej-a~ a~eaa. aesoa'a-~.. II t oaY-~' o~a.e ee~r~° n.:'~eo, o. soeo~w~~-~,.:: r1 {{ ~ a a'+m is ~ u .w w a~ ~~.. f= ~ a u u a v a w ~a ~ -fg. tiN! e b a rt n..~e a. ~ w ~.....a..n..e- a -•-r& -~ ae e~~r'g u~ eowaoen-~ ~g 1 1i no.•;~ o ~ eo we~ y~ w7 h.•ea.o ae q:.:~ y ~i 1 1tlY!r t{t{t{t{t{ 6,bt'~ e~.b~i o4~r~',: o~~ba tlOee qO_~,~.R-~ (` 1 O (f.~~, O j b'6 00 +f ~~ O ~ 0.0-O,tr be e~0 ~~ ~.~- yQy It ~ !I Ob~a~ r0~,~ ~ q~b'b OOf a.'~ O~~-'tr Obe 4.06 tr.~•~~,. ~'~~~~ { .I ~i~i~a .• -t. W -~.. t 1 f ;~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~~ ~. s ~, r ~ a yy p ~ ~'yysf+~s44+ y~ ~ ' p p I i ry ~. a p o oa e~~-o.-- ~.V. N .+ ~ .. O N O •• A.M'a. QI V lT N i Y Y i O i b i tl ~'~~ O p6CY'p OOOO i~~ ~ ~ ~ a $p~b b.giap Rw~; ~. ~~1 a oOpoa Oapa i; ::~ C r ~p.:,. R b.Y'bO p'O .. ~i - ~..~ ~ ~ u'~~'15 ~. ~.~i~~ O _. il. ~ N 6C0-000. 0-Og a -0'6-0 O.O P OA $.~ ~ iiF ~• PiLI A'Y•'~YU~~+~~ ~ se_~~.~~sa~~a y O ~i ?~ O 0.000000 a: ~': LY. .R- O G O.O O'O O~ fb 11 dd ~O 0000:0 000 d ~~_: ~~~ ~ ' ~~~~ ./ i¢e~ yid }~' ~ {{~ ti yg ,Hj^M, `{j` y V W C' ~ N~ N w ~. tl~ F~ ~ 1 v r .~ N w 1 n ~~ r ~' ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~. ~ i yy+~1 s A~. ~~tt lrt-i-i ~m ( 7tLy+x~+y~1t Y![ ~i S.Z i'V1figif ~1.~ I { F • fj S . ~ rip 70 I i ear pD~p~ 4~Oa tl'O SO~.p O ~y:~ aa+- e~ agen~r~~' jjj pj aDneeo04~rg I M a~N~ 3~~~'il-:~.y'`a °o~ III]II i ~L`~~~~R~.~"y o' Zg ~ l ~~ I „t' 00;4 ~, p ~ .p ~o tl:n ~ .rt~_ 4 ~ f a mob s s p-• ~ y'~' ~/_. ~~ t f1 # ' 1 ~ ' P pi'.. ~'. 4 1 f DD f ~ r:~ S O ~ dt~/f o0!q:{f ~ r,~ ~ ~g(~~~ t • ii i . f j ! 4ni~~ Oi of Df~~~ {[ p~6'6Ofd~1'D 8'~'..r 1 ' ~ . tl b '~'-~- ab ~ ~.~~'~ p ~ 4q 1 I 7 Q j. O. b O V ~ .1 '~. :iliti O ~ f 0. tl O. 6 f a. f ~ ~j E kk ,p+py, ~~~ ,! l~ ~~ i ~~ w ~~ ~ ~, f g': ~ ~~w~~J~~~' t a a rr _f ~ e .~ ~ a r ~ tlb+d'ObO~.~ffi Ci. G., -~01 ,~~ ~a~E ~i~~C . ~~ . i ii O a b b o 0 tl 0• ~~., -: O ~ ~, - ~ tldO~b OA-~~f ~;,~~ r ~ P ~ r V M N V- p A x, ~ . . iYYiKK6FFF ~. e tf 6O'.'d"O~.d:O Q'y ~~~ i ~~ N eee+-o-oa~ b a oo a.~e ~i o n ~~6 ~` ~ '~ 'it ~$ IE''i 9d' w. S ~'. O 0 0 0 0 4 0 6 C~b••~ .~ 6 { O O P.O O O.-C O.i ~': 0 0 r Ob O 0 0 0 0 0 Y C C t4 oeQe eoelo s'. ~~..: i 7.007 Peak Season Factor Cate:gatY Fepcrt - Etepott type: Dxg'd'1(IC'p Category: 1500 P1'N~T.LAS C6WNT7Cd2Df, ue~k OaCea SF HQC6: 0.94 P$CP ~ ..__~,.~„ i o2/A1/zo.~7 - ai~o6/aoa7 I.os >;.1~ 2 41/07/2007 - 021237200'1 1..05 i„12 3 O1/14/aCD7 - 01/2p~2g07 k. 02 1. U9 4 01/21/20b7 - 01/27!20'07 2.01 1.08 5 O1i26/2007 - 02/031200' 5,99 i,ff6 ~ r~2/o4/26D~7 - OZ/20/2tl07 0,.98 I.Oai 7 02/'_11200'1 - 02/I.7/E007 0,9'6 i.03 8 02/i$.t2i1.07 - Oa/2412007 0.95 1,02 s g 02.'29f2007 - 03~03./Z(k07 0,94 2.04 •10 03/04/20D7 - 037-0/20!17 0.93 5,99 Y11 03lIi/','e$07 - 0?f~7/2007 0, 9i 0.97 *.12 Oz/18/30'0'7 - 0?/2'4/2b07 0.92 0..98 ~2~ 0.3/251'2007- - 6/31/7007 0.9.2. 6..98 'f-0 04/41/2407 - 04/07/'2007 51.9? A:. 98 `15 04!48/2'047. -'04114J2€107 0,92 4:-9:8 "16 ~J4/i5f2007 - +1~1/21f2a07 0,93 0,99 '*17 04t~2$j2007 - 04/2BI~407 0,.44 x:00 '- «18 04/29;/',Ifl07 - g5105t2"g0`7 0:95 ?r~ ~ 05I66,ts00~ - 65{I.212tlb7 0.97 2T0?l 05I13/?007 - OSJ~Q9/2007 0.4$ 1.45 ~Y 05l2012l1C,7 - O'S/26i20'?7 0.~9' l;ag 2~ U~,/27/2(7A'1 - 06f~iY200? 0.'051 1.0G ~"~' 0&I03120E17 - O6/t~4lz0s'? 1,04 1.~7: ~fi tlstia~zno~ - ~s/.~.~~a.o~a'r l.o~ l~n Zs o6li7/z~l0'1' - as,~~s12!}0!7 I,t3ff I.b7 ~'y. 20 06/2~4f2007 - OBf`3bf'2407 1.00 ?.-07 2? 07f0IJ2~[}7 - 47/0'Y'/'d6107 1:.00 1,.47 ` Z!3 0710@;13047 - 0~/T3f34i77 4;, 99 3~. fl6 "X9 C7/'i5l2DQ? - 97f22%Z{Yp't 0..99 ~~s.06 '30 V7/2'21'30D7 07J2&f~-007 2, 00 1.07 •'~1 ~ 0?129/!007 - Q8/04'"12,,007 1.03 1;,00 3E OBlOS/0~7 - 0.$/3,314"07 1.D7 1'..09 3'3 OEf12.I7007 - 08.t18f200'J 1_03 5.1D 3'4 OB/L912007 - 08135/:200'7 1..03 2.1:0: 35 OB/^c6/2007 - 49.1-.6112OQ7 1, O~Q 2 - 12 3b 09/b2/ZOA7 - 09/&8;200'7 1.OA 2,1'1 37 09/09/2'ff'Oi - A9115/2007 1.0~ .2.12. 38 0911G/2047 - 09132/200? 1.05 1..12 39 0~/23/2iib7 - 08/"2912007 1.64 1.21. 90 09/30/2A07 - 14/Qbf2U,07 1.a~4 2.1J: 41 10E.07/,20s$7 - 1f~71.3l2c)b7 1.Od l,yl 42 1oi14.~2447 - IQtio~'e6? I.oa 1,10 43 :0/$3/34b7 - 1fJJ27l2Q87 l.aa 2,11 4A; 1,0/2812:O.i1T - 11/03/2Ov<T 1.09 2..12 4S 11/06/2407 - 11/I'SI2007 1..13$ l:,l 46 12/11f7D07 - 3.11271''~a07 1,05 2.-3.4 4'i' 11/1811JOi - 1.3124I3d07 1.06 I. ~3 46 21125'!2447 - Ii1A1.72BA7 1.47 _ 1~'la 49 1~162/~i~67 - ~r~108~2~97 '!..47& 1.Ic,t 5~ i~~lo~~tzoo7 - 12Tist2~~ i,.n~ 1. i'z ~~~ Y2/16~~007 - 2/a2~L$Q0T 1.06 3,.23 s2 lalzs/~oD7 - la/2a;xaao~ 1.04 2.11 5'3 23t3012007 - 1~2/3I/2007 2..:02 1.0'$ ` Peak Sea-SAn Page 1 o>F 2 ,i W APPENDIX C Existing Intersections Analyses i~/3 ~ ,. HCS+: Signalized Intersections Release 5.3 Analyst: Inter.: Gulfview Blvd.@Hamden Dr. Agency: Area Type: All other areas Date: 2/25/2009 Jurisd: Period: PM Year 2010 Project ID: Holiday Inn E/W St: Gulfview Blvd. N/S St: Hamden Dr. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 LGConfig LT T R L LR Volume 26 162 181 451 459 36 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 RTOR Vol 0 0 Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left A A NB Left Thru A A Thru Right Right Peds X X Peds X WB Left SB Left A Thru A Thru Right A Right A Peds X X Peds X NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right A Green 15.0 40.0 38.2 Yellow 3.5 3.5 3.5 All Red 5.5 3.8 7.0 Cycle Length: 120.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 1570 3523 0.13 0.53 14.0 B 14.0 B Westbound T 621 1863 0.31 0.33 30.0 C 13.8 B R 1128 1583 0.42 0.71 7.3 A Northbound Southbound L 563 1770 0.86 0.32 50.9 D LR 504 1583 0.08 0.32 28.6 C 49.3 D Intersection Delay = 27.2 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C HCS+: Signalized Intersections Release 5.3 2°/3l HCS+; Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.3 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: Date Performed: Analysis Time Period: PM Intersection: Coronado Drive@Hamden Drive Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2011 Project ID: Britts-surf East/West Street: Coronado Drive North/South Street: Hamden Drive Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 385 88 60 2 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate,. HFR 405 92 63 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 1 468 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 492 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 Percent Grade (B) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No / Lanes 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LR v (vph) 405 493 C(m) {vph) 1540 992 v/c 0.26 0.50 95~ queue length 1.06 2.84 Control Delay 8.2 12.2 LOS A B Approach Delay 12.2 Approach LOS B HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.3 ~~~~ 1 APPENDIX D Projected and Background Distribution 2 Z/3 ~,: t- .. W a ~_ ~_ 85 °i °' a 0 .,) ~ ~. f "" a DEVON STREET SITE 2ND STREET C O C m `4 'vim D LEGEND xx - $ackground Traff+c (xx) -- Project T~ra(iic ~/\.`J~~W~\ih~/\~ ~! ran a;~.:m d N ~n ~~ '1.613 -~ "'~ I ~f' " i -.J w N N N a _ w {~ S ~ v ~ A 4~ ~ m 1 ~ N 15(153- } 5 ISl ~ y ~~ ~~ sor n O~ Z q~ O O~ /`F • ~ ~' v~ r ynJ ~\,i ,l `7 ~' "pry n> ~.~,? ~\4 ~. /~ "J1 '`~s sv ``` ,~~J ~ >>y ~ ~~l ,~ Q ~~ ~~ ~~ DEVON STREET PM Peak Hou~~ Volumes - 201 U ~ ~LEARWATER BEACH RESORT ~ HOTEL ~.n- F-`_`7--F~'{ ' ~~' ° °~ ,l1. NiM'A!lfI IL~Y'S:Jt f 4 ~~~„ ~-~ ~~ _ ~\_,~ WGif` MV J, ]u'J MME]^L~i I) 9y i111 Ml tAil l~ WJtA` ~'~~~~~ 3^ 2j/31 4 ~ ~ 181 03 1 N.T.S. 268 1' 1 25 ~ 7 523 n O x z° ~ o 0 0 it ~ z 188 293 _~ d "` ~ < r 415 335 n c r 2 ]9 m 1 r 1 J 414 ~ 333 Sb 35 379 353 25 ~ ~ l74 156 HOLIDAY INN PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING TRAFFIC FIGURE 2 3 z~~~~ 4 ~ • Legend - Background (2008) -Holiday Inn Express Project - Clearwater Beach Hotel - Aquaiea c~ s= C ~~ 196 305 ~. ~~'~~ 0 O Q O 12 f 432; 13~ 188 45 91 523 1 ~ . 37 121 1 544 7 ~ ~ 10 20 0 ._ 110 ~~ , 22 a c~ 0 N NTS 40 2 20 15 348 14 f v 4+\` ,p ` . ti~/~ 15 34fi! 14 ~ 30 58 ,, o ~r ~s ,~ X94 ~..'~ 3p 2 ~ 36~ __ 1q _. ~6. 1s2' ~ ' . .`78r ZS/3 f .. ~ Legend 188 660 (22) Background Plus 100 Coronado Dr. Plus Holiday Inn Plus Clearwater Beach Hotel ~ 712 Plus Aqualea 8 (28) -(Project) -[Parking] ~~9`~ ,,~~J~, Devon ~ ~ (24) 686 ~ < ~ [20] CD ~ .-, ~. cn rn N . ~. (10) 377 [$l ~~~ , ~ . ~~~'~~ 4 S ~/ 26 ~rpJ/~i8~ 76~\~ ~ 441 2 ~ (~~~ 78~ ~ N NTS ~60 26/~~ N , ~ ~ APPENDIX E Future Intersections Analyes ~/3~ ~. ' , HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.3 Analyst: Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 2/27/2009 Analysis Time Period: Intersection: 1st street ~ Driveway 1 Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2011 Project ID: Britts - surf East/West Street: !st Street North/South Street: Driveway 1 Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs1: 0.25 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Malor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R I L T R Vo ume 22 377 688 53 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 22 377 688 58 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? Laney 0 1 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal? No No M nor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L 2 R L T R Volume 0 0 4E 0 18 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.90 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR D 0 51 D 18 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 D 2 0 0 Percent Grade (~) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/ Storage No / / Lanes 0 0 0 1 1 Configuration LR LT R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LR LT R v vp 22 0 51 18 C(m) (vph) 871 175 433 v/c 0.03 D.29 0.04 95$ queue length O.DB 1.1.5 0.13 Control Delay 9.2 33.8 13.7 LOS A D 8 Approach Delay 28.6 Approach LOS D 2~~~~ .a J~~ HCS+: Signalized Intersections Release 5.3 Analyst: Inter.: Gulfview Blvd.®Coronado Drive Agency: Area Type: All other areas Date.: 2/25/2009 Jurisd: Period: PM Year 2011 Project ID: Britts-surf E/W St: Gulfview Blvd. N/S St: Coronado Drive CT(!fiT T.T Onn T1.TP4DCCf'T Tn/S CtrMMnAV East oun Westbound Northbound Sout oun L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 LGConfig L R LT T R Volume 280 29 B 712 690 188 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 RTOR Vol D 0 Duration 0..25 Area Type: All other areas Signal erations Phase Combination 1 2 3 9 5 6 7 8 EH Left A NS Left A Thru Thru A Right A Right Peds X Peds X WB Left SB Left Thru Thru A Right Right Peds X Peds X NH Right EH Right SB Right A WB Right Green 15.4 19.0 Yellow 3.5 3.5 All Red 3.8 4.8 Cycle Length: SD.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v c g C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound L 545 1770 0.55 0.31 15.6 B 15.3 B R 486 1583 0.06 0.31 12.3 B Westbound Northbound LT 1058 2785 0.73 0.38 16.0 B 16.0 S Southbound T 708 1863 1.05 0.38 62.6 E 52.2 D R 488 1583 0.41 0.31 14.3 B Intersection Delay = 32.6 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C z~~~/ r ~+~ ~ HCS+: Signalized Intersections Release 5.3 Analyst: Inter.: Gulfview Blvd.®Hamden Dr. Agency: Area Type: All other areas Date: 2/25/2009 Jurisd: Period: PM Year 2010 Project ID: Holiday Inn E/W St: Gulfview Blvd. N/S St: Hamden Dr_ SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R No . Lanes 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 LGConfig LT T R L LR Volume 26 162 181 411 449 36 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.D 12.0 RTOR Vol 0 0 Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left A A NB Left Thru A A Thru Right Right Peds X X Peds X WB Left SB Left A Thru A Thru Right A Right A Peds X X Peds X NB Right EH Right SB Right WH Right A Green 15.0 40.0 38.2 Yellow 3.5 3.5 3.5 All Red 5.5 3.8 7.0 Cycle Length: 1.20.0 secs Intersection Performance Summary Appr Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach Lane Group Flow Rate Grp Capacity (s) v c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS Eastbound LT 1570 3523 0.13 0.53 19.0 B 19.0 B Westbound T 621 1863 0.31 0.33 30.0 C 14.1 B R 1128 1583 0.38 0.71 7.0 A Northbound Southbound L 563 1770 0.84 0.32 49.0 D LR 504 1583 0.08 0.32 28.6 C 47.5 D Intersection Delay 26.9 (sec/veh) Intersection LO3 C HCS+: Signalized Intersections Release 5.3 3°/~ ~ t v HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.3 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 4/28/2009 Analysis Time Period: PM Intersection: Coronado Drive~Hamden Drive Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2011 Project ID: Hritts-surf East/West Street: Coronado Drive North/South Street: Hamden Drive Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma or Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Vo ume 3.89 88 6D 2 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 409 92 63 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream 31gna1? No No Minor Street: Approach Westboun Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 1 469 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1 493 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 Percent Grade (~) D 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No / Lanes 0 0 Configuration ~ Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 9 17 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LR v (vph) 4D9 994 C(m) (vph) 1540 942 v/c 0.27 0.50 95~ queue length 1.D8 2.85 Control Delay 8.2 12.2 LOS A H Approach Delay 12-2 Approach LOS B ~~; .~4 PARKING REDUCTION STUDY FOR SURF STYLE / BRITTS CLEARWATER BEACH, FLORIDA PREPARED FOR: FINFROCK CONSTRUCTION, INC. PREPARED BY: GULF COAST CONSULTING, INC. REVISED NOVEMBER 2009 PROJECT # 09-032 Robert Pergoli i, P, PTP AICP #9023, PTP 133 I. INTRODUCTION The applicant proposes to redevelop a 1 acre site to include restaurant spaces, retail space and a parking garage that will be open to the public. The parking garage will contain 349 spaces of which 301 would be open to the public and therefore not counted towards the required parking supply. The site is located at 311 S. Gulfview Boulevard and 320 Coronado Drive and currently contains the Surf Style Beachwear store, Britts Laguna Grill restaurant and a small parking area containing 27 spaces (see Figure 1). The property is the subject of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment in the Tourist "T" zoning district which requests a reduction in required parking, to accommodate the proposed 6,887 square feet of restaurant space, and up to 34,183 square feet of enclosed retail building space. This request requires an assessment of the parking characteristics of the redevelopment. Of the enclosed 34,183 square feet of building space, 3,147 will be walk-through area that will not have kiosks, will not generate any parking demand and therefore will not be included in the required parking calculation. The total retail space is 31,036 square feet. Based on City of Clearwater requirements, on-site parking should include 7-15 spaces per 1,000 square feet of restaurant space, and 4-5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail space. This would result in a code requirement of 172-258 total parking spaces (48-103 for the restaurant, and 124-155 for the retail). Per Section 3-1405 "Shared Parking" of the Community Development Code the peak shared parking requirement is 160-243 spaces between 6PM and Midnight on weekdays, and normal weekday parking would be 111-161 parking spaces as shown in Table 1. The code provides for reducing the required number of parking spaces to recognize the special situations that exist on Clearwater Beach. City of Clearwater staff has recognized the property is located in close proximity to Clearwater Beach, hotels, and condominium developments with a great potential for "walk- up" customers. Staff also recognizes the available public parking in nearby lots serves two functions, one to serve beachgoers, and two to provide parking for beach related businesses. The applicant believes the reconstruction of retail space and a small restaurant would not significantly alter parking demand and parking demand of beach related businesses is significantly lower than that of businesses elsewhere in the city. This parking study will serve to calculate that demand in a reasonable manner. II. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITIi REDEVELOPMENT The City of Clearwater has requested a detailed analysis estimating the number of parking spaces actually needed to service the proposed redevelopment based on site specific operations. The parking demand is a combination of employees and 1 W w a ~7 J PROJECT - LOCATION v I PROJECT LOCATION - SURF STYLE IPRO.IECTNO: I 09-032 Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. DATE: Land Development Consulting 102009 DRAWN BY: G.J.S. FIGURE: 1 TABLE - 1 Surf-Style Mixed-Use Structure Shared Parking Table Weekday Weekday Weekday Weekend Weekend Land Use Area (sfJ 12-6AM 9AM-4PM 6PM-12AM 9AM-4PM 6-12 PM High - 5 spaces/1 000 sf 5% 8 70% 109 90% 140 100% 155 70% 109 R t il 31 036 , e a , Low - 4 spaces/1,000 sf 5% 6 70% 87 90% 112 100% 124 70% 87 R t t 6 887 High - 15 spaces/1,000 sf 10% 10 50% 52 100% 103 50% 52 100% 103 es auran , Low - 7 spaces/1,000 sf 10% 5 50% 24 100% 48 50% 24 100% 48 High 18 161 243 207 212 T t l o a Low 11 111 160 148 135 customers. Based on data provided by the applicant the site will have 47 spaces reserved for employees and customers. The normal business hours will be 9 AM- 10 PM, however, these may be extended during the tourist season to 8 AM - 10 PM. The businesses will have a total of 27 employees. In past parking studies prepared for hotels and businesses on Clearwater Beach the percentage of employees using cars to commute to work ranges from 40% - 80%. The 80% figure has been generally accepted given the opportunities for employees to take a bus, ride the trolley, or bike or walk to work. As such the employee parking would be 22 spaces. Customer parking requirements will vary however, beachwear stores and casual restaurants typically rely on their proximity to the beach for walk-up customers. In addition, the existence of surrounding hotels, and condominiums, each with their own parking, provide customers to these businesses without generating a need for an additional parking space. Existing customer parking characteristics were established by conducting customer surveys during normal business hours during the week of October 7 -11, 2009. During this time period a total of 329 surveys were completed. The customer survey form is provided in the Appendix. This survey was distributed at three of the Surf Style brand retail stores owned and operated by the applicant on Clearwater Beach, as well as Britt's restaurant on the subject site. One of the three retail stores included in the survey is located at 442 Mandalay Avenue (Store #110) and was designed, permitted and constructed without any dedicated parking spaces, and has been in operation since 2003. Store #110 exemplifies the concept that the Surf Style stores "capture" customers that have already traveled to the beach for some other purpose (ie: visit the beach, attend a wedding, etc.) in that this store has the greatest revenue of a114 stores owned and operated by the applicant on Clearwater Beach, yet it does not have dedicated customer parking. In addition, the applicant owns a total of 24 stores that are located in similar beachfront communities such as Melbourne Beach, Panama City Beach, and Destin, Florida; Gulf Shores, Alabama and Biloxi, Mississippi. These stores are not destination shopping centers, but rather a convenience for visitors to the beach to purchase beachwear and souvenirs. Likewise, the existing Britt's restaurant is predominantly a casual dining establishment frequented by those visiting the beach for some other purpose than exclusively to dine. The premise that these establishments "capture" existing beach visitors is further evidenced by the fact that on average 75% to 80% of the annual revenues are generated at this site during the peak tourist months of March through August. Main reason for visiting Clearwater Beach Of the 329 people surveyed, 217 (66%) responded their main purpose for visiting Clearwater Beach was "to go to the beach", 36 (11%) specifically made the trip to 2 come to Britts/Surf Style, and 76 (23%) were at Clearwater Beach for "other reasons", such as a wedding, vacation, visiting friends, sight-seeing, shopping, honeymoon, seminar, volleyball tournament, convention, work, and "check out possible wedding reception locations". Mode of transportation Of the 329 people surveyed, 203 (62%) drove a car to the beach that day, 112 (34%) were staying at a local hotel on the beach, and 14 (4%) used another mode of transportation including beach trolley, taxi-cab, bike, or walking. As a result a total of 315 respondents (96%) had access to a car while on Clearwater Beach, and either parked in a public lot, on-street spaces, hotel/condo, or in the Britts/Surf Style private parking lot. Location of parkin Of the 315 survey respondents that had access to a car requiring a parking space, 119 (38%) parked in a public parking lot, 160 (51%) either parked in an on-street space, parked at their hotel, or at their condo. Only 36 (11%) actually used the private parking lot reserved for Britts/ Surf Style customers. III. CONCLUSION This analysis was conducted based upon actual customer surveys and reasonable assumptions regarding the parking characteristics of retail space and restaurant space. The shared parking requirement for the retail/restaurant is 160-243 spaces and it has been established 22 spaces would be used by employees. The remaining 138-221 spaces would theoretically serve customers. Based on the customer surveys, 11 % of the customers actually park in the private lot, therefore the customer parking requirement would be reduced to 15-24 spaces. The total recommended parking supply for the redevelopment is 37-46 parking spaces, excluding the 301 public parking spaces. The parking lot redevelopment proposes 48 parking spaces (24 employee, 24 customer) and makes improvements to the appearance of the property while providing 301 public parking spaces. The existing Britts/ Surf Style businesses presently occupying space are not heavy parking generators. The redeveloped Britts/ Surf Style and other future businesses are not expected to be heavy parking generators either. Therefore the parking demand can be reduced as compared to the shared parking table. This analysis demonstrates operations can be accommodated with the proposed 48 on-site parking spaces and justifies a reduction from the code-required 160-243 spaces. 3 AP~El~TID+~ A To view most current version, visit www.municode.com. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Section 3-1405. Shared parking. § 3-1405 (,_d ~ ~~~w~ 12.4 x 4$ ~ WEEKDAY WEEKEND I~BE Night Midnight 6 a.m. Day 9 a.m. 4 p.m. Evening 6 p.m. Midnight Day 9 a.m. 4 p.m. Evening 6 p.m. Midnight Residential 100% 60%D 90% 80% 90% GavQrnment 5% 100% 0% D % : 0"l0 Office and Marinas 5% 100% 10%D ~ / 1070 5%D Retail ~ 5% g'7 70% j i Z 90% t Z.~}- 100% ~ ~ '70% Overnight Accommodations 80% 80%D lOD%D 80% 100%D Restaurant S 10% ~~}- 50% ~} $ 100% 2~ 5fl% L~ ,8 100%D Entertainment 10% 40%D 100%D SO%D 100% Places of Worship 0% 20% 10% 100%D 20%D Others 100% 100%D 100%D 100% 100%D 1 '1 ~ l._.0 tom" Supp. No. 17, Rev CI l ~~ t~C~ l48 l35 . CD3:53 Supplement 23, March 2009 To view most current version, visit www.municode.com. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Section 3-1405. Shared parking. _.. ~< § 3-1405 f-((~ H :~ S ~ iQ3 i ~' ~ =~ ' 1 ~ ' ~ THEATER ~J ~ 1 1 i e . ~~ - 1 1 1 ~ -- f- ~-~=~ --------------- ~`=? =) -~ SHARED PARKING WEEI~AY WEEKEND ZTSE Night Midnight 6 a.m. Day 9 a.m. 4 p.m. Evening 6 p.m. Midnight Ddy 9 d.m. 4 p.m. Evening 6 p.m. Midnight Residential 100% 60% 90% 80% 90% Government 5% 100% 0% 0%, 0% Office and Marinas 5% 100%, 10% 10% 5% Retail $ 5% ' ~ 70% ~ 4U 90% t~5 100% (pcl 70% Overnight Accommodations 80% 80% 100% $0% 100% Restaurant ~ U 10% ~ Z. 50% ~ q?~ 100% ,,'Z 50% (~Z, 100% Entertainment 10% 40% 100% 80% 100% Plaees of Worship 0% 20% 10% 100% 20% Others 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Sapp. No. 17, Rev. 1 ~ ~~l Zq3 Zoe 2-~ CD3:53 Supplement 23, March 20fl9 Customer Survey Britts /Surf Style (Circle One) Thank you for your business. In order to better serve you in the future we request you please answer the following questions regarding parking usage. 1. What was your main purpose for visiting Clearwater Beach today? a. Go to the beach b. Specifically to come to this business establishment c. Other (please specify) 2. Did you drive your car to the beach today? a. Yes b. No staying at a local hotel c. Other (ie. Bus, bike, trolley) 3. If you did drive a car to the beach today, where did you park? a. Public Parking lot b. Parked at another location (on-street parking space or at hotel) c. Parked here in the private parking lot for this business 807-09 REPORTS SURF STYLE PARKING GARAGE STORMWATER NARRATIVE Existing Conditions: The existing site includes 29,970 SF of impervious area including buildings, parking lots and sidewalks. The stormwater sheet flows off the property to the adjacent Coronado Drive and Gulfview Boulevard rights of way. The stormwater is not attenuated nor treated prior to discharge. Proposed Conditions: The proposed development includes a 34,332 SF building and 6,557 SF of pavement within the property. The stormwater runoff is directed via roof drains to a stormwater vault located under the parking garage entrance ramp. The stormwater vault has a bottom elevation of 3.20 based on geotechnical recommendations regarding SHWE. The 7ft-bin weir is set at elevation 4.35. The inside top of the vault is set at elevation 6.20 to provide a 1.85-foot freeboard above the treatment elevation. MODRET INFILTRATION ANALYSIS: The attached MODRET analysis indicates the treatment volume is available within 13.1 hours. STAGE -STORAGE SPREADSHEET: Attached. Treatment volume calculation for 3/ inch over the property area is shown on this spreadsheet, just to the right of cell titled Comments '4_ , ~ y ~ ~. '~ ! _ ~ti` f._ , ~° :t' .s C n 'a ~A~,EX L. E4ZAN, PFsa: 11T0.55~2~::: ~ . ~ 3 ~f9 I:\Surf Style Parking Garage\Stormwater Report\StormwaterNarrativeRev Oct9_2009.doc Stage-Storage-Perimeter Project Name: Surf Style Parking Garage Project Number: 807=09 Designer: ala ,Date: Rev 10/9/2009 ' Comments: Treatment: (0.75"/1ft)(43573 s.f.) =2,723.31 cu-ft (~) (ft) (ft3) 4rea @ Top of Bank(TOB): 2,474.0 Elevation: .6.20 Volume: 7,422 4rea @ Design High Water(DHW): 2,474.0 .Elevation: 4.35 Volume: 2,845 4rea @ Design Low Water(DLW): 2,474.0 Elevation: 4.35 Volume: 2,845 4rea @ Bottom/Normal Water Level(BOT/NWL): 2,474.0 Elevation: 3.20 Volume: 0 STAGE AREA VOLUME STAGE AREA VOLUME TREATMENT (ft) (ft2) (ft3) (ft) (ft2) (ft3) VOLUME: 2,845 ft3 3.20 2,474.0 0.0 4.70 2,474.0 3,711.0 3.26 2,474.0 148.4 4.76 2,474.0 3,859.4 ATTENUATION 3.32 2,474.0 296.9 4.82 2,474.0 4,007.9 VOLUME:0 ft3 3.38 2,474.0 445.3 4.88 2,474.0 4,156.3 3.44 2,474.0 593.8 .4.94 2,474.0 4,304.8 3.50 2,474.0 742.2 5.00 2,474.0 4,453.2 3.56 2,474.0 890.6 5.06 2,474.0 4,601.6 3.62 2,474.0 1,039.1 5.12 2,474.0 4,750.1 3.68 2,474.0 1,187.5 5.18 2,474.0 4,898.5 3.74 2,474.0 1,336.0 5.24 2,474.0 5,047.0 3.80 2,474.0 1,484.4 5.30 2,474.0 5,195.4 3.86 2,474.0 1,632.8 5.36 2,474.0 5,343.8 3.92 2,474.0 1,781.3 5.42 2,474.0 5,492.3 3.98 2,474.0 1,929.7 5.48 2,474.0 5,640.7 4.04 2,474.0 2,078.2 5.54 2,474.0 5,789.2 4.10 2,474.0 2,226.6 5.60 2,474.0 5,937.6 4.16 2,474.0 2,375.0 5.66 2,474.0 6,086.0 4.22 2,474.0 2,523.5 5.72 2,474.0 6,234.5 4.28 2,474.0 2,671.9 5.78 2,474.0 6,382.9 4.34 2,474.0 2,820.4 5.84 2,474.0 6,531.4 4.40 2,474.0 2,968.8 5.90 2,474.0 6,679.8 4.46 2,474.0 3,117.2 5.96 2,474.0 6,828.2 4.52 2,474.0 3,265.7 6.02 2,474.0 6,976.7 4.58 2,474.0 3,414.1 6.08 2,474.0 7,125.1 4.64 2,474.0 3,562.6 6.14 2,474.0 7,273.6 6.20 2,474.0 7,422.0 N ` -..,.. MODRET SUMMARY OF UNSATURATED & SATURATED INPUT PARAMETERS PROJECT NAME : Surf Style Parking garage POLLUTION VOLUME RUNOFF DATA USED UNSATURATED ANALYSIS EXCLUDED Pond Bottom Area Pond Volume between Bottom & DHWL Pond Length to Width Ratio (L/W) Elevation of Effective Aquifer Base Elevation of Seasonal High Groundwater Table Elevation of Starting Water Level Elevation of Pond Bottom Design High Water Level Elevation Avg. Effective Storage Coefficient of Soil for Unsaturated Analysis Unsaturated Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity Factor of Safety Saturated Horizontal Hydraulic Conductivity Avg. Effective Storage Coefficient of Soil for Saturated Analysis Avg. Effective Storage Coefficient of Pond/Exfiltration Trench Hydraulic Control Features: Groundwater Control Features - Y/N Distance to Edge of Pond Elevation of Water Level Impervious Barrier - Y/N Elevation of Barrier Bottom Analysis Date: 10/9/2009 2,474.00 ftZ 2,845.00 ft3 1.50 -22.50 ft 2.20 ft 3.20 ft 3.20 ft 4.35 ft 0.05 18.50 ft/d 2.00 27.8o ft/a 0.20 1.00 Top Bottom Left Right N N N N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N N Y Y 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3~7 MODRET TIME -RUNOFF INPUT DATA PROJECT NAME: SURF STYLE PARKING GARAGE STRESS PERIOD NUMBER INCREMENT OF TIME (hrs) VOLUME OF RUNOFF (ft3) Unsat 0.00 0.00 1 1.00 2,845.00 2 2.88 0.00 3 2.88 0.00 4 2.88 0.00 5 2.88 0.00 6 2.88 0.00 7 2.88 0.00 8 2.88 0.00 9 2.88 0.00 Analysis Date: 10/9/2009 ~/ 7 MODRET SUMMARY OF RESULTS PR07ECT NAME : Surf Style Parking garage CUMULATIVE TIME (hrs) WATER ELEVATION (feet) INSTANTANEOUS INFILTRATION RATE (cfs) AVERAGE INFILTRATION RATE (cfs) CUMULATIVE OVERFLOW (ft3) 00.00 - 0.00 2.200 0.000 0.00000 0.00 2.200 0.22290 0.19440 1.00 4.067 0.16590 0.00 0.08396 3.88 3.716 0.06805 0.00 0.05214 6.75 3.498 0.04468 0.00 0.03723 9.63 3.342 0.03309 0.00 0.02895 12.50 3.221 0.02619 0.00 0.02343 13.11 3.200 0.02145 0.00 0.01947 18.25 3.041 0.01798 0.00 0.01650 21.13 2.972 0.01534 0.00 0.01418 24.00 2.913 0.00 Maximum Water Elevation: 4.067 feet @ 1.00 hours Recovery @ 13.113 hours * Time increment when there is no runoff Maximum Infiltration Rate: 6.789 ft/day Analysis Date: 10/9/2009 5/~ INFILTRATION : SURF STYLE PARKING GARAGE v m m c d E 0 ~ mro ~nra~ Total Volume Infiltrated = 2,845 ft' _,!. -`i INFILTRATION : SURF SME PARKING GARAGE ~`~._ ' ` ' v ° o ~ 8 9 10 11 12 13 Time (hrs) Max Water Elevation = 4.07 ft L.O.M INC. 4100 N. 28TH TERRACE HOLLYWOOD FLORIDA 33020 City of Clearwater Engineering Department -Stormwater Divison P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, FL 33758-4748 Re: Surf Style Parking Garage Stormwater Vault Maintenance Schedule Case No. FLD2009-09032 To whom it may concern: Please accept this letter as due notice that I, the undersigned, will agree to inspect and provide routine maintenance every 6 months in accordance with the underground Stormwater vault manufacturer's recommendation. Sincerely, Avraham Ovaknin Director L.O.M., Inc. ,- ~~ ~-- ~ ~ ~~~a~s ursit~~trts tlvvllvttHlNG SERVICES INCORPO Geotechnical Engineering & Construction Materials Testing LOM, Inc. 4100 North 28'h Terrace 1-Iollywood, Florida 33020 Attention: Mr. Gilad Ovaknin, Controller RE: Report of the Geotechnical Investigation Surf Style / Britts Clear-vater Beach, Florida Our File: DES 096406 Dear Mr. Ovalciun: July 20, 2009 In accordance with your authorization, DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. has completed the authorized investigation of subsurface conditions for the subject project. Presented herein are the results of our field and laboratory studies together with geotechnical recommendations for your consideration. FIELD INVESTIGATION PROGRAM The site of the subject project is presently predominantly occupied by existing structures consisting of restaurant and retail facilities as well as a residential st1•uchtre. As a result, access is restricted and special limited overhead access equipment was needed to perform the test borings in the westerly portion of the site. Plate ] of the attacluments identifies the respective positioning. of four (4) Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings that were utilized to investigate generalized subsw•face co~tditiol~s. These test boii~lgs were located approximately in the field based upon the survey of the site that was provided for ottr usage. Locations are considered approximate since they were specifically surveyed. The Standard Penetration Test borings were perfom~ed in general accordance with ASTM D-1586. Logs of the test borings are presented in the report attachments reflecting visual together with estimated Unified Soil Classification. The test boring logs also present tabulated and graphical}y plotted Standard Penetration resistance values corresponding to each sample interval. Sarasota Clearwater (~~~ Tampa Phone: 941.371.3949 12220 49th Street North • Clearwater, Florida 33762 Phone: 813.948.6027 Fax: 941,371.8962 Phone: 727,571.1313 • Fax: 727.572.4090 Fax: 813.948.7645 sarof fice@driggers~ng.com clwof lice@driggers eng.com tpaoffice~driggers~ng.com 2 A brief description of the Standard Penetration Test method of sampling is appended for your review. In addition to the StandardPenetration Test structure borings, the site civil consultant, Keith Zayac, P.E., requested a classification boring and aDouble-Ring Infiltration (DRI) test near the southeasterly portion of the site. The approximate positioning of the Double-Ring .Infiltration test is also identified on the attached Plate I. The results oftheDouble=Ring Infiltration test are included in the report attachments reflecting infiltration test rate versus elapsed time. A tog of the classification boring reflecting visual and Unified Soil Classification is also appended. LABORATORY TESTING A limited program of laboratory testing was also undertaken to aid in characterizing the engineering properties of the subsurface soils. Our laboratory tests included grainsize analyses, Atterberg limits and organic content tests. The results of our laboratory tests are included in the report attaclvnents. GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The site is generally relatively flat except for structure areas that have typically been elevated 2 to 3 feet above ambient grade. In general, the auea outside of the structures are paved with concrete. The concrete in the areas investigated varied in thickness from about 4.5 to 5 inches. Test borings reflected the presence of an upper unit ofpredominantly fill soils comprised of fine sands with variable shell content which overlay native soil deposits beginning about 5.5 to 6 feet below existing grade. Typically, the surface of the native soils consisted of fine sands with variable organic fines. An exception to the general trend occurred atboring B-2 where highly organic fibrous sandy silt occurred in the depth range of 6 to 8 feet. Below 5.5 to 6 feet, the test borings encountered predominantly fine sands with variable silt and shell content that generally overlay silty to clayey sands or clays which terminated above the relatively shallow limestone formation. ~~~~ Driggers Engineering Services Incorporated 3 Thie top of the limestone formation was evidenced in the elevation range of EL -22.5 to EL -33.0 feet (NA VD). The upper portion of the limestone for~i~ation was typically relatively soft but quickly transitioned into more competent limestone near EL -30.0 ~ feet. Generally, it appeared that the limestone formation was somewhat more strongly litliified within the upper 15 feet of the formation and trending to be less cemented below EL -45 feet (NAND). The limestone formation continued throughout the completion depth of the borings terminated 70 to 75 feet below existing grade. You will note that in localized areas partial or total loss of circulation of drilling fluid occured within the limestone formation apparently as a result of penetrating localized crevices or pervious seams. Such zones of localized increased porosity are relatively common within the limestone formation. You may wish to note that the conditions encountered within the test borings performed on ttus parcel were very consistent with the test borings that our firm had conducted in the neighboring Aqualea development which abuts this site to the north. Groundwater was encountered during the course of our investigation at an average of EL 1.8 S ~ `~~ ~ feet (NAND). We would ~ud~e that the normal seasonal high gromldwater level would occur at approximate EL +2.2 feet (NAND}. Naturally, higher groundwater levels can be experienced during major storm events. The Double-Ring Infiltration test indicated an infiltration test rate of 13.9 inches per hour. -~--- ~j`[; -1`; The test was conducted at a nominal depth of 2 feet below existing grade within the surficial fill soils. Your attention is directed to the fact that a thin seam of clayey silt occurred at the infiltration test location in the depth range of 4.0 to 4.3 feet. Due to the depth of the clayey seam below the infiltration test depth, it did not appear to influence the test results due to scale affects. Where laterally continuous thin clayey silt seams such as this, which would be expected to exhibit very low hydraulic conductivity, may tend to inhibit dowmvard percolation of stomnvater within a larger infiltration area. Therefore, consideration should be given to carefully examining the subgrade in the proposed storrnwater infiltration area to identify the need, if any, for removal ofthis clayey seam and backfilling with select pervious soils. Certainly, care must be exercised in the application of irrfiltratioir test results to the design of stonnwater' retention areas. The analyses must consider the permeability characte~7stics of the subgr•ade soils together with hydraulic battery conditions which will impact infiltration rates. Driggers Engineering Services Incorporated /~~, '~ 4 EVALUATION AND GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS STRUCTURE TYPE AND LOADING CONDITIONS - Based on preliminary plans provided for this office, we understand that the proposed facility will consist of a six (6) level structure incorporating ground level restaurant and retail in combination with parking on levels two (2) tlu-ough six {6). Although grading details ar•e presently in the development stage, preliminary inforn~ation suggests that the finished floor elevation for the ground level structures may occur near EL +7.5 feet or roughly 2 to 2.5 feet above existing grade. Details with respect to structural loads are also in the early stages at this time. Nevertheless, preliminary information suggests that maximum column loads would typically be less than 1,100 kips considering combined dead and live load. Interior wall loads may approach the range of 33.5 to 43.5 kips per lineal foot. FOUNDATION CONDITIONS - Based upon coastal code requirements and the magnitude of the expected structural loads, a deep foundation systeu~ is warranted. Considering the proximity of neighboring structures to this project, consideration was given to the utilization of drilled shaft foundations as well as augered cast-in-place piles. Drilled Shaft Foundations -Considering the very high magnitude of the column loads and comparatively shallow depth to the limestone formation, drilled shaft foundations offer a distinct technical and economical advantage. The advantages include the following: I. A single shaft can be utilized for' colunur support thus, eliminating the need for multiple piles and large pile caps. The elimination of enlarged pile caps and multiple piles can have a significant impact especially when the limits of the proposed structure may extend close to adjacent property lines. 2. The drilled shaft diameter and penetration can be easily adjusted depending upon specific column load magnitudes in order to achieve 100% efficiency. Driggers Engineering Services Incorporated , lh~ • R 5 3, Tecluuques are available to install drilled shafts with reduced noise and vibration as compared to conventional pile driving. 4. Drilled shafts can be designed with extremely high axial compression, tension and lateral capacity which can have a significant impact upon sheanvall cap dimensions and costs. 5. Perhaps of greatest significance is the fact that the drilled shafts have the capability ofpenetrating to depths required for safe column support. In other words, where thin hard zones may be underlain by compressible soils orcrevices/voids, the drilled shaft is capable ofpenetrating below the compressible zones to achieve safe bearing below. Angered Cast-iu-Place Piles -Although angered cast-in-place piles have been utilized in the Clearwater Beach area, there are certain disadvantages associated with the angered cast-in-place pile especially as it relates to relatively heavily loaded structures wit} concentrated column and sheanvall loads. Among these important factors are the following: 1. The limestone formation characteristically includes localized soft clay zones or solution features and cavities that occur at somewhat unpredictable depths. As will be discussed subsequently, pilot borings are recommended at major foundation locations and shearwalls to confirm safe penetration requirements for either drilled shafts or angered cast-in-place piles. Where compressible zones or voids may be encountered immediately below a relatively thin, hard rock layer, the auger-cast drilling equipment may not have the capability for penetrating tlu•ough the hard layer and bypassing the compressible zone which could otherwise produce u~idesirable settlements of the entire pile group. Thus, the auger-east piling contractor would have to assure the owner of making necessary provisions for pre-drilling as may be necessary in order to bypass compressible zones and assure needed pile penetration. ~~~~ Driggers Engineering Services Incorporated ". 2. Of major significance is the fact that augered cast-in-place piles utilize a high slump grout that is significantly more flowable when compared to drilled shaft concrete. Further, the nature of the installation ofthe piles is such that the grout can be intruded under an increased pressure head including the column of grout extending well above the ground surface. Experience by our fum in the Clearwater Beach area indicates that there is a potential for a relatively large costly intrusion of grout with the auger-cast pile installation as compared to drilled shaft foundations. 3. Reduced axial compression, tension and lateral capacity of augered cast-in-place piles can have a significant impact upon the cost associated with sheanvall foundations. Indeed, due to the reduced diameter and limited reinforcement that can be incorporated into the augered cast-in-place piles, lateral capacity can sometimes control the number of piles in corresponding shearwall cap dimensions. In summary, both drilled shaft foundations and augered cast-in-place piles were considered. However, for reasons discussed above, we consider drilled shaft foundations to represent the preferred foundation alternative which, in our opinion, will also result in the mosi cost-effective foundation concept for stnicture support. DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATION t2ECO1V111'1ENDATIONS - Plate II ofthe report attactunents presents a graph of preliminary drilled shaft axial compression capacity versus shaft diameter and tip elevation (NAND). This graph is intended to form the basis of developing plans and quantities for bid purposes only. The ultimate design of each drilled shaft must be based upon the results of the recommended load testing program and recommended program of pilot borings. Due to the high magnitude of structural loads and the potential for variations in characteristics and continuity of the underlying limestone formation, we strongly reconunend a program of pilot borings at each major shaft location. The priueipal need for the pilot borings is to confirm on a shaft-by-shaft basis that the drilled shafts are being designed for appropriate penetration for the required. loads and are not being terminated prematurely above compressible soil strata or /~~ Driggers Engineering Services Incorporated 7 cavities and voids. The pilot borings should be performed by a representative ofproject geotechnical engineer. A load testing program is also recommended to confirm load transfer values for design of the drilled shaft foundations. We recommend at least one (1}full-scale load test. The Statnamic method of load testing is generally proved to be the most cost-effective for the types of foundation formations exist on the site. Continuous geotechnical inspection is also required during the construction stage for check for specification compliance and also to monitor the shaft drilling operations. In that way, conditions encountered during the drilling operations can be compared to the results of the pilot borings to make any necessary adjustments in the selection of the fnal tip elevation. Appended are general guideline technical specifications for installation of the drilled shafts. These specifications, ofcourse,will naturallyrequireintegration with the requirements of the project sh-uch>ral engineer to develop final construction documents. LATERAL LOAD RESPONSE - As details are developed within the sheanvall elements, we would be happy to assist in analyzing the lateral response of the drilled shaft foundations. The analysis of lateral response is dependent upon soil structure interaction and consideration of the following: l . Shaft diameter, reinforcement content and concrete strength. 2. Spacing and positioning of shafts within the shearwall foundation element. 3. Top of shaft elevation and shaft head fixity or rotational restraint. 4. Axial compression or tension loads that will be applied simultaneously with horizontal shear. 5. Allowable lateral deflection. At the appropriate time, we would be happy to interact with your structural consultant to address the lateral response. ~/s~ Uriggers Engineering Services Incorporated 8 SLAB-ON-GRADE CONSTRUCTION -With proper subgrade preparation, we would anticipate that ground floor pavements may be supported on the prepared subgrade. subgrade preparation should necessitate removal of existing pavements, vegetation followed by proof-rolling of the subgrade so as to develop a uniform density of no less than 98% of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density per ASTM D-1557. You will note that one (1) of the test borings revealed the presence of a ]ughly organic soil layer beginning about 6 feet below existing grade. The presence of such a highly organic zone can have an impact upon slab-on-grade settlement depending upon potential variations in depth and thickness of the organic materials as well as overlying fill and structural loads. We would certainly recommend a thorough program of supplemental probings at such time when site demolition and clearing activities have been accomplished so as to identify any localized areas that may warrant any special subgrade preparation. Where such organic zones occur within areas that will receive a minimal application of fill, one would anticipate that additional settlement would be minimal. With proper subgrade preparation, we recommend utilization of a modulus of subgrade reaction k = 150 pci for the design of concrete pavement structures. Care must be exercised tv maintain the subgrade compaction and avoid any rutting of the subgrade prior to the placement of slab-vn-grade concrete. Rutting of the subgrade can result in anon-uniform pavement section and enhance the potential for cracking and deformation. Compaction tests, of course, should be planned on a frequency of -~ot less than one (1) test for each 2,500 square feet of slab area at the subgrade level and tluoughout all fill materials needed to establish finished grades. Our utility trenches or excavations for removal of any previous structures, conduits or utilities should also be uniformly backfilled to not less than 95% of the Modified Proctor maxunum dry density. The upper i2 inches inunediately below the pavement structu~•e and, of course, any subsequent fill soil should be densified to not less than the aforementioned 9$% compaction requirement. /s~ Driggers Engineering Services Incorporated 9 DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES, [NC. appreciates the opportunity to serve you at dais preliminary stage. Once the design is further developed, please do not hesitate to contact this office i f we can be of any firrther assistance or answer any questions you may have. With our main office located here in the Clearwater area, we certainly look forward to serving you throughout the construction stage in providing any requisite pilot borings, drilled shaft inspection and, of course, routine construction materials testing. Respectfully submitted, DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. ai riggers, P.E. Presi ent ~~'~~~ FL Registration No. 16989 FJD/cmc FJD-REP\096406 Copies submitted: (2) (2) (1) LOM, Inc.; Attn: Gilad Ovaknin Finfiock Design, Inc.; Attn: Andy Goulish, P.E. Plisko Architects, P.A.; Attn: Alex Plisko, Jr, AIA Driggers Engineering Services Incorporated ~/~~ APPENDIX PLATE I -BORING LOCATION PLAN PLATE II -PRELIMINARY DRILLED SHAFT COMPRESSION CAPACITY VS. DRILLED SHAFT TIP ELEVATION AND DIAMETER GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS FOR DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) STANDARD PENETRATION TEST BORINGS DOUBLE-RING INFILTRATION TEST SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS GRAINSIZE ANALYSES METHOD OF TESTING ~~~/ Driggers Engineering Services Incorporated 5~ PLATE I -BORING LOCATION PLAN Drigger•s Engineering Services Incorporated ~~53 PLATE II -PRELIMINARY DRILLED SHAFT' COA'IPRESSION CAPACITY VS. DRILLED SHAFT TIP ELEVATION AND DIA117ETER Driggers Engineering Services Incorporated iz/5~j 0 -20 +- -25 -30 -35 Q Z ~ -40 0 :a d w -45 -50 Preliminary Drilled Shaft Compression Capacity vs. Drilled Shaft Tip Elevation and Diameter Proposed Parking Garage- Clearwater Beach Drilled Shaft Allowable Axial Compression Capacity~Kips 200 400 600 800 1000 -55 --T * Final Design Tip Elevation To Be Based ___ on Load Testing And Pilot Boring Program - ---- -60 __ ___ _ __ _-- 1200 I'ZATE zx I~ `h~ GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS FOR DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS} Drigger•s Engineering Services Incorporated ~~/~j? GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SIIAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) 1.0 PART 1 -GENERAL 1.1 RELATED DOCUMENTS Drawings and General Provisions of Contract, including General Provisions and Division-1 Specification sections, apply to work in this section. 1.2 GEOTECHNICAL INVCSTIGATION l . Exploratory test borings conducted by Driggers Engineering Services, Inc. may be reviewed by the contractor. The data included therein may be used by the contractor for his general information only. 2. Buried structures that may affect shaft installation may be present. 1.3 SCOPE OF WORK 1. The contractor shall furnish all labor, materials, services, equipment (including temporary casings) and shall install all shafts at the locations and depths shown on the drawings or as otherwise directed by the geotechnical engineer. 2. The contractor shall furnish and place all reinforcing steel, dowels and anchor bolts as shown on the drawings. 3. The contractor shall coordinate the installation of drilled shafts with the other construction activities. Drilled shafts shall be installed fi•om the finished grade elevations shown on the drawings. P-1 '~~5~ GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) 1.4 QUALIFICATIONS Drilled shafts shall be installed by a specialty contractor with suitable equipment, competent personnel and a reputation of satisfactorily performing the work. The contractor shall have a nunimum of 5 years successful experience and a minimum of three (3) successful installations on projects of a similar size and scope to this project as well as subsurface conditions. Evidence of compliance with this section shall be submitted to the architectlengineerpcior to entering into a contract for the work. 1.5 QUALITY CONTROL AND ASSURANCE The conhactor is responsible for quality control, including workmanship and materials furnished by his subcontractors and suppliers. 2. The contractor shall submit, at least (ten) 10 days prior to drilled shaft construction, a detailed description of equipment and specific procedure(s) planned for shaft construction. 1.5.1 Survey Work The contractor shall employ a qualified surveyor to perform all surveys, layouts and measurements for drilled shaft work. The surveyor shall conduct the layout work for each drilled shaft to the lines and levels xequired and shall make actual in-place measurements of each drilled shaft plan location, shaft diameter, bottom and top elevations and deviations from specified tolerances. 2. The surveyor shall record acid submit all information pertinent to each drilled shaft and cooperate with other testing and inspection personnel to provide data for all required reports. P-2 16~53~ • GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SAAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) 1.5.2 Testing Laboratory Requirements 1. The contractor shall cooperate with all testing and inspection personnel employed to perform field quality control tests and inspections. 2. Inspection or testing does not relieve the contractor of his responsibility to perforni the work in accordance with the contract documents. 3. The geotechrrical engineer will drill a pilot boring at selected drilled shaft locations to aid in the selection of final drilled shaft depths. The pilot boring information and design tip elevations shall be available to the contractor in advance of each respective shaft construction. 1.6 JOB CONDITIONS 1.6.1 Site Information 1. Data on indicated subsurface conditions are not intended as representations or warranties of continuity of such conditions. It is expressly understood that the architect/engineer will not be responsible for interpretations or conclusions drawn therefrom by the contractor. The data are made available for the convenience of the contractor. 2. Additional test borings and other exploratory operations may be made by the contractor at rro additional cost to the owner. Notify and obtain approval fi•om owner prior to drilling borings. 1.6.2 Protection of Existing Str•rrctur•es Protect structures, underground utilities and other construction from damage caused by drilling operations. P-3 ~ ~~~~ <. GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) 1.7 SUBMITTALS 1.7.1 Installation Method Submit detailed procedures of the installation method, including (where applicable) type and number of drilling rigs and equipment, casing size and length, casing removal method, concrete placement and reinforcing steel securing and placement. 1.7.2 Concrete Mix Desien Submit concrete nvx designs suitable for method of concrete placement for engineer and testing laboratory approval prior to shaft installation. 1.7.3 Shop Drawings Submit shop drawings for all drilled shaft and dowel reinforcing steel. Z.0 PART Z -PRODUCTS 2.1 CONCRETE Concrete shall be as specified below: 1. 28-Day Compressive Stren~: 4,000 psi 2. Maximum Aggregate Size: Provide maximum aggregate size ofone-third of minimum clear spacing between individual reinforcing bars or bundles of bars, with 1 inch maximum. *To be verified by structural engineer. P-4 i s~53 's GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) 3. Water Reducing Admixtures: Where required by mix design, use ~vater reducing admixtures in strict compliance with manufacturer's directions. Admixtures to increase cement dispersion or provide increased workability for low-slump concrete may be used at contractor's option. Use admixtures in the amounts as recommended by ma<iufacturer for climatic conditions prevailing at time of placing concrete. Adjust quantities of admixtures as required to maintain quality control. 4. Slump Limits: Proportion concrete to have a slump that is suitable for the placement process used. Provide not less than an 8 inch nor more than a 10 inch slump at the time of placement. Concrete must maintain a slump of at least 4 inches throughout shaft construction including casing removal. Retarding_Admixture: The type and amount of retarder used shall be consistent with the amount of time needed to transport and place the concrete using the method adopted for shaft concreting. Reference concrete specifications for retarding admixture requirements. 2.2 REINFORCING STEEL ASTM A-615, Grade 60 2.3 STEEL CASING Steel casing shall conforni to ASTM A-252, Grade 2 or A-36. 2.4 CONCRETE MI~'ING Ready Mix Concrete: Comply with the requirements of ASTM C-94. 2. Hot Weather Concreting; The maximum acceptable concrete temperature at the truck discharge point shall be 95°F. Refer to ACI 305 -Hot Weather Concreting for Required Hot tiVeathei' Concreting Practices. P-5 I~~sj GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS} 3. Cold Weather Concreting Practices: Concrete should not be placed on any day when the outside air temperature is 40°F or less and falling unless cold weather concreting practices are followed as specified ACT 306 -Cold Weather Concreting. 3.0 PART 3 -EXECUTION 3.1 E~-'.CAVATION 3.1.1 Requirements Excavate holes for drilled shafts to the required tip elevations as directed by the geotechnical engineer. Excavate holes for closely spaced shafts (clear space of 20 feet, or less) only after adjacent holes are filled with concrete and allowed to set a minimum of 24 hours or longer as required for concrete to harden. This required clear space also applies to installation and extraction of temporary casing. Consideration of a reduced delay period will require contractor submittal of concrete strength test results to verify development of a minimum compressive strength of 300 psi at desired time subject to approval by the geotechnical and strucriiral engineer. 2. Drilled shaft design dimensions and depths shown on the drawings are based on bearing and/or friction in assumed soil sii•ata. If bearing stratum is not capable of maintaining capacity assumed, foundation system shall be revised as directed by the geotechnical engineer and architect/engineer. Revisions will be paid for in accordance with contract conditions relative to changes in the work. 3.1.2 Equipment Provide adequate equipment so work is expedited to the fullest extent possible. Use equipment fully capable of excavating shafts to depths, diameters and sizes indicated and within the specified tolerances. Equipment shall be capable of P-6 ~~/S; °~ GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) drilling to depths no less than 100 feet. Maintain equipment in satisfactory operating condition and provide sufficient quantity of equipment to maintain the projected schedule of the work. 2. Using bits or augers with a power driven rotary type rig, a shaft of a diameter specified on the drawings shall be excavated fiom the ground surface to a depth as required by the geotechnical engineer. 3.1.3 Excavated Material Remove excavated material and dispose of it off-site and in accordance with other project restrictions that may exist. 3.2 DRILLING METI3OD The contractor may use a temporary casing to stabilize the overburden soils to prevent caving. The casing shall be installed so as to avoid an annulus between the casing and the overburden soils. Where the contractor may be considering Vibro-driven casing, it will be the contractor's responsibility to verify that vibrations induced duruig the construction activities are not detrimental or objectionable to neighboring structures or facilities. The drilled shaft contractor shall be solely responsible for any such damage and is, therefore, encouraged to perforni appropriate monitoring as deemed appropriate depending upon his ways and means of construction. 2. The casing shall be sealed in a stratum of soil that will not cave or adnvt excessive water. The shaft excavation shall then be completed to the approved elevation. Care shall be take~l in the drilling to avoid caving or sloughing. The bottom of the hole shall be cleaned with a clean out bucket or other appropriate method. 3. Drilling fluid is defined as groundwater combined with the natural soil cuttings pxoduced by the drilling process. Appropriate mineral or polymer slurries designed for foundation construction may be utilized if approved by the geotechnical engineer. If the contractor plans to utilize a mineral or polymer P-7 z ~~j GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DR[IaLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) slurry, it shall be utilized in construction of the test shaft. Brushing the shaft walls particularly where mineral slurries are utilized will also be necessary if directed by the geotechnical engineer. 3.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. Shafts shall be installed by drilling and then placing concrete in the excavations. Installation shall 'include using casing, with concrete placement by the fluid displacement method (tremie method), unless otherwise approved by the geotechnical engineer. 2. Each finished shaft shall consist of a continuous column of concrete extending from the required bottom elevation to the required top elevation having film contact against the vertical and horizontal surface of the earth surrounding it. 3. Shaft drilling and concrete placement shall be sequenced to prevent damage to adjacent shaft or shaft excavations. 3.3.1 D~osal of Excavated Materials All spoil and excavated materials shall be kept away from each open shaft excavation to avoid contamination of the excavation after final clean out. All material shall be disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. 3.3.2 Removal of Drill Flttid Slurry All slurry rnud shall be removed from the site and legally disposed ofby the contractor. 3.4 CONSTRUCTION TOLERANCES * 1. Plan Location: The tolerance on plan location for the top of the drilled shaft shall not be more than 3 inches in any direction. 'Specifications to be verified vy structural engineer. P-8 ~ ~~~~ '. GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) ~`2. Plumbness: Per~l>;ssible tolerance for plumbness shall be 1.5% of the length or 12.5% of shaft diameter, whichever is less. Top Area; The contractor shall remove excess concrete at the top of the shaft beyond the limits of the shaft diameter. The shaft top diameter shall be the same diameter as the shaft below. Shafts extending above the ground surface shall be formed. ~4. Concrete Cut Off Elevation: Concrete cut off elevation at the shaft top shall be plus 3 inches to minus 3 inches for all shafts except under pile caps. Cut off elevation shall be plus 0 to minus 6 inches under pile caps. If any of the above tolerances are exceeded, the architecdengineer shall immediately be notified to evaluate the eccentricity in the shaft and reeorrunend corrective measures. The cost of re-engineering and corrective construction shall be borne by the contractor. 3.5 TEMPOR.A.RY STEEL CASINGS 1. Requireme~it: Temporary casings tivill be required. The contractor shall have immediately available for use on the job an aniple supply of casing for each size which will be required for use and shall provide additional amounts, if required, to ensure orderly progress of the job. Such casing shall have jointing devices where required of sufficie~lt strength that assembled sections of casing may be pulled complete as concrete is placed or immediately thereafter. Provide casing of sufficient strength to withstand handling stresses, concrete pressure and surrounding earth and/or fluid pressures. The casing shall be sized to provide no less than the specified shaft diameter. 2. Unless otherwise approved by the architect/engineer, all temporary casing shall be removed from shafts as concrete is placed or immediately thereafter and in such a manner as to prevent sloughing material from falling on top o.f freshly placed concrete. *Specifications to be verified by structural engineer. P-9 z ~~5~ GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) 3.6 SHAFT PREPARATION 1. The contractor's shaft cleaning operation will be adjusted so that the maximum depth of sedimentary deposits or any other debris at any place on the base of the shaft excavation shall not exceed 1 inch. Shaft cleanliness will be detennined by the geoteehnical inspector at any time prior to concrete placement. When shaft cleanliness has not been maintained as determined by the representative of the geotechnical engineer, the conhactor shall remove the shaft reinforcement and re- clean the shaft bottom as required. If required by the inspector, downhole pumping equipment for removal of cuttings shall be implemented at no added expense. 2. Prior to placing concrete in any shaft excavation, the contractor shall ensure that materials which could impair the free flow of concrete from the tz-emie pipe, has not accumulated in the bottom of the shaft. Samples of the fluid in the shaft (water, natural slurry formed during the drilling operations, mineral or polymer slurry) may be taken fiom the shaft at the discretion of the geotechnical inspector using an approved sampling tool and testing devices pzovided by the contractor. The density of the fluid in the shaft excavation prior to concreting shall be less than 75 pounds per cubic foot and sand content less than or equal to 4%. Where mineral or polymer slurries are used, the fluid viscosity should be between 28 and 40 seconds and the pH between 8 and 10. Adjustments shall be made, if necessary, to accomplish this. 3.7 REINFORCING STEEL PLACEMENT Before placing, clean reinforcing steel and dowels of loose rust, scale, dirt, grease and other material which could reduce or destroy bond. 2. Fabricate and place reinforcing cages for shafts as one continuous unit using inzzer z7ng reinforcing guide. Place reinforcement cage accurately and symmetrically about axis of hole and hold securely in position during concrete placement. *3. Use templates to set anchor bolts, leveling plates and other accessories furnished under work of other sections. Provide spacers (capable of sliding on any temporary casings required), blocking and holding devices to maintain required position during concrete placement. *Specifications to be verified by structural engineer. P-10 ~ ~/s3 f GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT' FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) The contractor shall provide sufficient centering guides at a spacing not exceeding 10 feet on center to maintain no less than the required concrete cover of reinforcement. At least three (3) centering guides per interval should be installed. Shafts larger than 36 inches will necessitate additional centering guides per interval. Centering guides designed specifically for caissons, such as those manufactured and distributed by Foundation Technologies, Inc. or Aztec shall be provided. S. Provide concrete spacers, as necessary, at the bottom of the drilled shaft reinforcing cage to maintain the specified distance behveen the bottom of the cage and the bottom of the shaft. 3.8 CONCRETE PLACEMENT 3.8.I General Fill drilled shafts with concrete as soon as possible after inspection and approval by the geotechnica] engineer or other authorized inspector. Shaft concrete shall be placed within 24 hours of the time when the shaft excavation is advanced below the temporary casing. Shafts that cannot be concreted within the 24 Dour time- framemay require deepeiung, enlargement in diameter or reaming as required by the geotechnical engineer at no additional costs. 2. Place concrete continuously and in a smooth flow without segregating the mixed materials. Place concrete by means of a tremie or by pumping from the bottom of the shaft. *Specifications to be verified by structural engineer. P-1 1 ~'~53 f w S _ ° .. . . .-~__ -._ -1 k. u ..~_ ^ ~ L._ - - ~rM A F. . e I I ~' r.. j~ ' 1 :I G~ ~ .........,. ~_., ~ ~ ~ ,_~_.r_,J ' B , _.~. L ~ w,rk -_ .......,, t•~ 1 ~ . ~ PROPOSED : _ .. PARKING GARAGE ~~w....~.,..,. a; ~ o ~~ I . ......~..e. ~ .,e B_ 4 ,.,~ . ~' ~ p l i v YA, i I o• \ J r ~ BB_3 ~:. ~` e ~ - - .-..,.....w ~s ~ DRI 1 n.. r ~~ ~ ~ - T = ~ r ai I ,,..: «y ~I d^ ~~ B STANDARD PENETRATION TEST BORING LOCATION `/~r\ ~ DOUBLE-RING INFILTRATION TEST/ HAND AUGER 80RING LO T N CA ION IJ CAD ENGINEER SHEET TITLE PROJECT N0. DATE R.D.e. / F.J.o. BORING LOCATION PLAN oES ossaos ~/~s/os PREPARED BY PROJECT NAME SCALE SHEET NO. ~ ~ S A I A A DRIGGERS ENGINEERING GULFVIEW BOULEVARD 1" = 40' PLATE ~ ~ P CLEARWATER BEACH FLORIDA ~~~~ GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) 4. Maintain a sufficient head of concrete to prevent reduction in diameter of drilled shaft by earth pressure and to prevent extraneous material from mixing with flesh concrete. Coordinate withdrawal of temporary casings with concrete placement operations to maintain a head of concrete approximately 5 feet above casing bottom. During casing extraction, upward or downward movement of the reinforcing steel should not exceed 6 inches. When casing is left in place, fill void space between casing and shaft excavation with fluid gout by means of grout pipe and pump pressure, as required. 5. Casings shall be pulled in a single continuous smooth operation without sudden jerks or impact. Care should be exercised to minimize vibrations during casing extraction. 6. Over-pour concrete placement above cut off elevation and remove all contaminated concrete. Where cut off elevation is above ground elevation, form top section above grade and extend shaft to required elevation. 7. Where a cold joint may be permitted, leave resulting shaft surface approximately level. At resumption of concrete placing, clean off surface laitance and slush with 1-to-1 cement giout or commercial bonding agent before remainder of concrete is placed. 3.8.2 tremie Method 1, The drilled shafts shall be filled with concrete by the use of a tremie or concrete pump line extending from above the ground surface to the bottom of the drilled shaft. The use of a traveling tremie plug will require approval by the geoteclutical engineer. A clean out bucket equipped with aone-directional flowgate shall be used to clean the bottom of each shaft. Sectional tremies shall have joints properly sealed to prevent water or fluid leakage into the tremie pipe. The filled hemie shall be picked up approximately 4 inches off the bottom of the shaft to allow the weight of the concrete to displace the tremie plug. At no time is the tremie to be pulled to such a height as to clear the surface of the concrete ah•eady placed in the shaft. All concrete shall be poured through the now open tremie with care taken to maintain a sufficient head of concrete to completely displace all drilling fluid and suspended cuttings of material and to provide sufficient pressure so as to prevent reduction in pile diameter by earth pressure on the fresh concrete. The concrete in each pile shall be can-ied above cut off elevation and then dipped out while fresh to cut off elevation. P-12 1/~ G[JIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) 2. All concrete shall be deposited through the tremie or concrete pump line so as to provide a continuous flow, without aggregate segregation, from bottom to top of pile. The production and delivery of the ready-mixed concrete shall be such that not more than 45 minutes shall elapse between the depositing of successive batches of concrete to ensure a monolithic unit of concrete. No deviation from this method will be acceptable. 3. During concrete pouring operations through the tremie, should the surface of the concrete in the shaft be breached by the tremie, the tremie tube shall immediately be withdrawn, resealed at the bottom and relowered below the surface of the concrete and pouring operations restarted. Should the owner's authorized inspector deem it necessary, when a breach occurs, the contractor shall retrieve the xeinforcing steel cage, redrill the shaft to reopen the hole and begin the concreting operations from the bottom of the shaft. 4. Shafts rejected due to excessive slump loss during casing removal, caving or other specification violation shall be replaced as detailed by the project geotechnical aiid structural engineer. In this regard; a minimum slump of 4 inches must be maintained tluoughout concrete pouring and temporary casing extraction. Alternatively, the contractor maybe given the option to demonstrate, at lus sole expense, that the shaft is acceptable. The proposed method of acceptance testing shall be submitted to the project structural and geotechnical engineer for approval. 5. If the owner's authorized inspector has reaso~i to suspect that concrete quality or strength may fail specifications, he may order the shaft cored for inspection and/or testing. If the core recovery and/or test results indicate non-compliance with the specifications, the contractor shall bear the expense of the investigation and/or testing and shall also, at no cost to the owner, i~istall remedial additional construction as required by the architect/engineer. Should the investigation and/or testing indicate compliance with the specifications, the owner shall bear the cost of such investigation and/or testing. 3.9 APPROVAL BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER Approval by the geotechnical engineer is required on all shaft installations and his decision and judgment on shaft length, rejection of shafts, additional shafts required and all other shaft installation and capacity questions shall be final. P-13 4'~/s3 GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) 4.0 LOAD TESTING PROGRAM l . Perform one (l) Stah~amic load test up to 1,600 tons in three 3 cycles. 2. Inshument the test shaft with five 5 levels of strain gages at elevations selected by the project geotechnical engineer. 3. A production shaft shall be utilized for the load testing. Assume a test shaft length of 60 LF and a diameter of 36 inches. 4. Install an appropriate "soft toe" at the base of the test shaft to ensuxe that all test loads are carried in pernneter shear alone. Proposed method shall be subject to approval by project geotechnical engineer. 5. Submit complete report of Statnamic load test. 4.l CONTRACT BASIS 1. Basis of Bids: A lump sum bid shall be provided based on the number of drilled shafts, design length from top elevation to bottom of shaft and diameter of shaft, as shown on drawings. The bid price shall include the cost for all materials, concrete, labor, equipment, tools and incidentals to complete the work shown. Seepage of concrete into the sides of the excavation and small cavities is normal for drilled shaft il~stallations. An allowance of 30% shall be included for concrete overage above theoretical volume. Provide unit fee for concrete in excess of 30% placed in the ground on an overall job basis not on a shaft-to-shaft basis. *Specifications to be verified by structural engineer. P-14 ~;~s3 GUIDELINE SPECIFICATIONS DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS (CAISSONS) 2. Basis for Payment: Adjustment to the lump surn will he made for the actual total length of drilled shafts installed per diameter. The actual length may vary to coincide with the conditions encountered. Adjustments will be made on net variation of total lengths, based on specified lengths of shafts. 3. There will be no additional compensation for excavation, concrete fill, reinforcing, casings or other costs due to unauthorized over-excavating shafts. Over-excavated shafts will be measured and paid for in accordance with required design or authorized depth. No payrnent will be made for rejected drilled shafts. 4. Unit prices quoted shall include full compensation for labor, temporary casing, rnater•ials, tools, equipment and incidentals required for complete installation. Unit Prices: iJnit prices provided by the contractor for the following items, as set forth in contract conditions, will apply in event additions to or deductions from work are required and authorized by written order from architectlengineer to contractor. END OF SECTION FJll/IZEP/096406 P-l5 3%.~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I30RINGS /.~~ Driggers Engineering Services Incorporated DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES INCORPORATED Project No. DES 096406 BORING NO. B-1 Project Proposed Parking Garage, Guifview Boulevard, Clearwater Beach, Florida Location See Plate I __ _ Foreman M.B. Completion Depth To Depth 81.0' Date 7/8/09 Water 3.5' Time Date 7/8!09 ~ ~ w Z a O STANDARD _ ~ -~ SOIL DESCRIPTION ~ ~ z PENETRATION TEST „ a a ~ J w fBLOWSlFT. ON 2 O.D. ~ ~ O a ~ SAMPLER-140 LI3. ~ y m Q O HAMMER, 30" DROP SURF. EL: +5.0+l--' ~ ~ 10 20 40 60 SO ,~:::: 14-7/8" Concrete Slab _ _ - =?p ____ _ Grayish-brown Fine SAND with trace of shell fra ments SP __ -- v ~~ Tan Fine SAND with shell fragments (SP) - - b Light grayish-brown Fine SAND 5 _ with Abundant Shell SP __ Dark brown Fine SAND with finely divided or anic material and shell fra mg ents (SP) 4!3/2 _ Brown Fine SAND with shell fragments SP _ - ---- ~~~' : Fi L b t li ht b SAND SP ~ rown oose rown o g ne ( } _~ t ~,: -trace of roots at depth 8.0' 2/3/6 10 ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ .v.:v• °~°~ Dense to medium dense tan -J 11!19!19 _ _ TI :v: : Q ~ to light brownish-gray Fine SAND •§ : with shell fragments (SP} ~;o: • v; ti: 12/16/24 - :o :o: ts:o: 15 :Y.:P. , ~.~ _ brownish-gray at depth 15.0' -- 5/8/11 .4. ~ :a:~: .:v: v: :pig: b: d: - __ .v:v: ~v~o~ 20 zi:v: -- -- A: R: ~;~: 7/11113 _--- - •:viti : _ <Y: CY. _ ~ P: 'b Loose light brownish-gray Fine SAND ---- with shell fragments and seams 25 ~ ` ~ ° of brownish- ra silt Fine SAND (SP/SM) g y y ®~ 7/5/2 --- - .v - _ _.___ _ c 0 T ~ Very loose brownish-gray silty Fine SAND (SM) 30 - 0/0!0 Very soft green very silty CLAY (CH) Remarks Borehole Grouted _ _ ------ _ -_--- __--- ~ Casing Length 400' ~' . DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES INCORPORATED Ii Project No. DES 096406 BORING NO. B-1 Project Proposed Parking Garage, Guifview Boulevard, Clearwater Beach, Florida _ Location See Plate I _ Foreman M.B. _ Completion Depth To Depth 81.0' Date 718109 Water 3.5' Time Date 7/8109 ~ = F o -~ m ~ ~ w ~ a ~ ~ SOIL DESCRIPTION URF. EL: +5.0+/-' w ~ O n' ~ ~ ~ z 3 ~ w O a °' m Q O ~ ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST BLOWSlFT. ON 2" O.D. SAMPLER-140 LB. HAMMER, 30" DROP 10 20 40 60 80 Remarks Borehole Grouted _ Casing Length 40.0' Very soft green very silty CLAY (CH) 35 0/1 /0 _ Light gray LIMESTONE with seams of green silty CLAY 40 12/50* * 0.3' P enetrati on Cream colored weathered, clayey LIMESTONE 45 50* * 0.2' P enetrati on 5 0 19/28/31 Cream colored weathered LIMESTONE 55 42114114 _ 60 12/27/15 ---- -- Cream colored LIMESTONE 65 14/20/23 ~~~_ DRiGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES INCORPORATED Project No. DES 096406 BORING NO. B-1 Project Proposed Parking Garage, Gulfview Boulevard, Clearwater Beach, Florida Location See Plate I __ Foreman M.B. Completion Depth To ~` Depth 81.0' Date 7/8/09 Water 3.5' Time Date 7/8/09 ~ ~ ~ -~ m ~ w ~ ~ ~ SOIL DESCRIPTION URF. EL: +5.0tl--' O a ~ y n: z 3 ~ a O a ~ m g O N ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST BLOWS/FT. ON 2" O.D. SAMPLER-140 LB. HAMMER, 30" DROP 10 20 40 60 80 Cream colored weathered cla LIMESTONE TO , yey - 20/23/12 75 35120/50" * 0 3' P enetrati on . 80 30/50* * 0.5' Penetration 85 90 SS 100 Remarks Borehole Grouted __ _ Casing Length 40.0' e~ R DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES INCORPORATED Project No. DES 096406 Project Proposed Parking Garage BORING NO. B-2 , Gulfview Boulevard, Clearwater Beach, Florida ~ Location See Plate I __ _ Foreman _ M.B. Completion Depth 70 Depth 75.3' Date 7/9109 Water 3.1' Time Date 7/9/09 ~ ~ ~ 'i w Z w ° a ~ STANDARD ° -~ SOIL DESCRIPTION rn ~ Z PENETRATION TEST ~ m a ~ J w BLOWS/FT. ON 2 O.D. a ~ ~ ~ p a a SAMPLER-140 LB. ~ ~ m Q O HAMMER, 30" DROP SURF. EL: +5.0+/-' Nis ~n ~n en ~n on 5" Concrete Slab -- ~~.~: _ Dark brown slightly silty Fine SAND with roots :~:Y • and shell ira ments SP-SM - --- ' q.a: __ Light brown Fine SAND with shell fra ments (SP) -- -- - g - ; : : P Tan Fine SAND with shell SP - 5 ~ .~,:a _ Li ht ra Fine SAND with shell fra ments SP Brownish- ra sil GLAY CH _ Dark brown clayey Fine SAND with finely divided 4/413 or anic material SC) ____ _ --- --- ~ r„.~. ~:c»•r: Firm dark brown fibrous, highly organic, sand SILT Pt 0/0/3 ____ 10 t„.~~: Very loose grayish-brown and light brown Q:v.'' sli htl sil Fine SAND SP-SM 8/11113 .a;d: Medium dense to dense light brown :~:v: a~°'~ ~ to light brownish-gray Fine SAND P 8/13/20 - .xi: r,: p ri':. • with shell fragments (S ) - - - 15 p: b: -Q:v:.. . Q. F. '~! ~~~ 11 /16/25 :6:;~ - 7, d; O: - - z;;P, ~ ~ ~ ~ Medium dense brownish-gray Fine SAND _-- ° ~~ with shell fragments (SP) - `~`O' 8/12/18 __ - _ v:vc :~;~: - rs:e: Very loose dark gray silty, clayey Fine SAND - -- - - 25 with some shell fragments (SC) :, ___ ~ Tan weathered LIMESTONE ___ 30 21/9/6 -- Cream colored weathered cla e LIMESTONE y y , Kemarks Borehole Grouted _ Casing Length _ 30.0' ~~ i DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES INCORPORATED Project No. DES 096406 BORING NO. B-2 Project Proposed Parking Gara e, Gulfview Boulevard, Clearwater Beach, Florida Location See Plate I Foreman M.B. Completion bepth To Depth 75.3' Date 719!09 Water 3.1' Time Date 7/g/pg ~ v~ w z ~ N O STANDARD = O m ~ SOIL DESCRIPTION ~ ~ z PENETRATION TEST a ~ 3 J w BLOWSIFT. ON 2" O.D. o ~ y O ~ ~ SAMPLER-140 LB. pq Q O HAMMER, 30" DROP SURF. EL: +5.0+/-' ~ ~ 10 20 40 60 80 35 VICOIII GVIVICU WCdifICICU, GldyCy LIIVICJ 1 VIVC 18/25/50' l' 0.4' 40 20/16/24 45 ---- - . 0.2' _ - 50% loss of circulation at depth 45.0' S0* Cream colored LIMESTONE Cream colored weathered LIMESTONE 50 55 60 65 12/20/17 8/10/11 14/11/15 9/16/24 .,~.; , ---- - - -1 I-- ---F ---~-----~-~~- Remarks Borehole Grouted - ---~ -- -~---- Casing Length 30.0' ~~ • '. DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES INCORPORATED Project No. DES 096406 BORING NO. B-2 Project Proposed Parking Garage, Guliview Boulevard, Clearwater Beach, Florida Location See Plate I Foreman M.B. Completion Depth 70 Depth 75.3' Date 7/9/09 Water 3.1' Time Date 7/9/09 Z w H STANDARD '~ w O °` y PENETRATION TEST m a SOIL DESCRIPTION 3 ~ w BLOWS/FT. ON 2" O:D. °- ~ O a ~ SAMPLER-140 LB. ~ N ~ m Q O HAMMER, 30" DROP SURF. EL: +5.0+/--' ~ io ~n ~n .~ ~n o.. C th l d d LIMESTONE l ream co ere ore wea , c ayey 70 - -- 41 /24/22 75 50" 3' P " 0 enetrati on . 80 85 90 95 100 Remarks Borehole Grfluted ___ Casing Length 30.0' ~ ~ ~ ~~ ®~ DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES INCORPORATED Project No. DES 096406 BORING NO. B-$ _ Project Proposed Parking Garage, Gulfview Boulevard, Clearwater Beach, Florida Location See Plate ! __ __ Foreman S.F. ___ Completion Depth To Depth 76.3' Date 7!7/09 Water 3.5' Time Date 7/8/09 LL o J p m ~ w ~ y SOIL DESCRIPTION SURF. EL: +5.5+/-' z Wo. ~ ~ ~' w w O ~ ~ map y ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST BLOWS/FT. ON 2" O.D. SAMPLER-140 LB. HAMMER, 30" DROP 10 20 40 60 80 4-1/2"Concrete Slab _ - ~~~~ Grayish-brown slightly silty Fine SAND h ll f t ith SP SM -- _w s ( s e ragmen - ) - :~:~ ~ ___ Tan Fine SAND with shell fragments (SP) - .:o: V: 5 :d:p: v: c: . --- Brown and dark brown Fine SAND with some shell - ;•r } _• .~... fra ments SP 4!4/8 - ..; ... - „ _._. Medium dense dark brown Fine SAND ,~,~,~ with fine) divided or anic material SP --- _ ---' ~~ `~~'~ _ 6/10/11 __ 10 ~~~~ ~ Medium dense brown to light brown slightly silty Fine SAND with shelf fra ments -- - - - ~id: f..iq~. g (SP-SM) 6/9/13 '~4aA: ~~'•«•' Dense to medium dense light brownish-gray 7!18/24 :~ o~ to brownish-gray Fine SAND with shell fragments 15 ~ n: ---- :~'°~~ '•9 0~ 3/8/13 --- si cv: ' --- .4ivi di:b: < ' c _ :vc 'p :p. • 20 ~:C 'v.:v. . -_ .~; v: :¢:&.' 31619 ___. _ :;viv: :~:b: - - .: :. :. Very loose dark gray silty, slightly clayey - 25 Fine SAND with some shell fragments (SM} --- 3/2/2 _ . Cream colored and light gray 30 l t d h ' ~ o cream co ore weat ered, clayey LIMESTONE 50' 0.4 P enetratio n Remarks Borehole Grouted _ ____ ___ Casing Length 30.0' ~ ~ DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES INCORPORATED Project No. DES 096406 BORING NO. B~ Project Proposed Parking Garage, Gulfview Boulevard, Clearwater Beach, Florida Location See Plate I Foreman S.F_. Completion De th To Depth 76.3' Date 7/7/09 Water 3.5' Time Date 7/8/09 '~l- H ~ o -~ ~ ~ w ~ a Q m SOIL DESCRIPTION t1RF. EL: +5.5+1-' w Fm- O °' ~ v, ~ Z w w O ~ ~ m Q o m 'D STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ,. BLOWSIFT. ON 2 O.D. SAMPLER-140 LB. HAMMER, 30" DROP 10 20 40 60 80 Remarks Borehole Grouted _ _ Casing Length _ 30.0' Cream colored and light gray 35 ol eath ed d l LIMESTONE t 30150" 3' Penetration '' 0 er , c o cream c ore w ayey . 40 ` ' 50• P 0.2 enetrati on 45 k ' 50~ 0.2 P enetration - 100% loss of circulation at depth 46 0' -- . 50 10/12/15 _ l d th d LIMESTONE ~~~ C ream co ore wea ere 55 14/17/20 -- - __. 60 _ 14/20/37 __ -_ ____ _ - 65 -- 16/15/16 39` i ~ Project No. DES 096406 BORING NO. B-3 Project Proposed Parking Garage, Gulfview Boulevard Clearwater Beach Florida _ Location See Plate 1 _ _ Foreman S.F. Completion Depth To Depth 76.3' Date 7/7/09 Water 3.5' Tlme Date 7/8/09 o O m ~ ~ a ~ SOIL DESCRIPTION SURF. EL: +5.5+/-' w ~ ~ °' ~ ~ ~ w O ~ ~ op ,Q p ~ ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST BLOWSIFT. ON 2" O.D. SAMPLER-140 LB. HAMMER, 30" DROP 10 20 40 60 80 Cream colored weathered LIMESTONE TO 25/25/50' * 0 5' P i . enetrat o 75 25/25/50* ' 0 3' P e ti t . ne ra on 80 85 90 95 100 Remarks Borehole Grouted __ _ Casing Length 30.0' ~ ~~/ uF-~tl[~[~Ei--~S ENGINEERING SERVICES INCORPORATED a + ~ DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES INCORPORATED Project No. DES 096406 BORING NO. B-4 Project Proposed Parking Garage, Gulfview Boulevard, Clearwater Beach, Florida _ Location See Plate I __ _ Foreman M.B. ~' Completion De th To Depth 71.5' Date 7/10109 Water 3.8' Time Date 7/10/09 O p~~ ~ ~ ~ a N SOIL DESCRIPTION URF. EL: +5.5+/_' Z w ~ ~ ~ z w w O ~ ~ ~p Q p ~ ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST BLOWS/FT. ON 2" O.D. SAMPLER-140 LB. HAMMER, 30" DROP 10 20 40 60 80 , R-,y: 4-112" Concrete Slab ~ - Q:~. -Brown Fine SAND with roots and shell fragments • - Rc9: • ~,:b: - Tan Fine SAND with she/! fragments {SP) -- -- :Q:v: • iv: 4; -- - - 5 :Q P Light brownish-gray Fine SAND with shell ; :a.b: fra ments SP _ :ao: ~ Brown and light brown Fine SAND with she8 6/5!13 _ _ _ _ _ 'Q'°~ d•O. fra ments SP __ - _ ~ ' ' ~ _ - -- • ? . ~ °=~~ • :o: Medium dense to dense dark brown and brown to light brown Fine SAND with shell fra ments 5/10/21 -- - - -- ~ • 4 g , ;F: =~`~°'• 10/19/24 :d:v: :v'.a•• Dense to medium dense light brownish-gray 12/16/22 -- :~ dY .v t vi Fine SAND with shell fragments (SP) - 7 5 v n: :o.°p: ' .•q•o: 9/12/12 - - ti:n: • - QrRi - -- . +t7:8: • o: d: .p:~,' 20 'P.:4. .:P: o: ~'= '• 13/15/ ~ 19 _ __ .Tf;P ._ '- u_ - __ °; - _____._._~__~._ Very loose dark gray silty Fine SAND ith f b Fi SA _ ~~~ --- --- 23 w seams o rown ne ND and trace of shell fragments (SM) ----- 9 ~ 1/1/1 __ ----------- C l d -~-- ~- -~~- ream co ore weathered, clayey LIMESTONE - - 30 50* * 0.1' P enetratio n Remarks Borehole Grouted ______ _ Casing Length 30.0' L ~~~ • a I Project No. DES 096406 _ BORING NO. B-4 Project Proposed Parking Garage, Gu{(view Boulevard Clearwater Beach, Florida Location See Plate I _ Foreman M.B. Completion Depth To Depth 71.5' Date 7/10/09 Water 3.8' Time Date 7/10/09 ~ Z w ~ STANDARD O w O a w PENETRATION TEST i m -' SOIL DESCRIPTION ~ ~ z a ~ ~ 3 J w BLOWSlFT. ON 2" O.D. o ~ y O ~ ~ SAMPLER-140 LB. m Q O HAMMER, 30" DROP SURF. EL: +5.5+/-' ~ ~ 10 20 40 60 80 35 Cream colored weathered, clayey LIMESTONE 50' * 0.5' Penetration Cream colored clayey LIMESTONE ~ - 40 ! 21/50' * 0.2' Penetration 45 Cream colored weathered LIMESTONE 22/50' ' 0.3' Penetration F 50 90/12/18 55 - 100% loss of circulation at depth 54.0' ---- Cream colored weathered LIMESTONE 20/14/44 - with phosphate ____ 60 - ~..__ ------- - Cream colored weathered LIMESTONE 27/30/17 ._ 65 12/11/14 ____ Remarks Borehole Grouted -~ ~-- _ --- ~-~ Casing Length ~ 30.0' ~-- ~ ~ DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES INCORPORATED Project No. DES 096406 BORING NO. B-4 Project Proposed Parking Garage, Gulfview Boulevard Clearwater Beach, Florida i Location See Plate I ___ Foreman M.B. Completion Depth To Depth 71.5' Date 7/10/09 Water 3.8' Time Date 7/10/09 ~ v~ z ~ ~ STANDARD o w O a m PENETRATION TEST ' i m ~ SOIL DESCRIPTION ~ ~ z a ~ ~ 3 ~ w t3LOWSIFT. ON 2" O.D. w m ¢ O d ~ SAMPLER-140 LB. ~ y m Q p HAMMER, 30" DROP SURF. EL: +3.5+/-' y ~ 10 20 40 60 80 - Cream colored weathered LIMESTONE 70 23/18/17 75 80 85 90 95 100 Remarks Borehole Grouted ___ Casing Length 30.0' ~( DOUBLE-RING INFILTRATION TEST ~.-.. _._ ..~_ . w -~ _____ .....~. C~riggers Engineering Services Incorporated u~~/j~ ~ r DOUBLE RING INFILTRATION TEST Job No: 096406 Test No. DRI-1 Date: 711 512 0 0 9 Client : LOM, Inc. Project: Parking Garage~Gulf Blvd, Clearwater Beach t.ocation: See Sketch Test Depth: 2' Outer Cyl. Diam: 36" Inner Cyl. Diam: 12" Description of Soil at Test Depth: Tan Fine Sand with Shell Depth of Groundwater Below Test Depth: 1.7' Infiltration Rate: 13.9 InlHr 20 15 O Z_ t m ~o c 0 c 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 Elapsed Time of Infiltration ~ HOURS TEST PROCEDURE: The test was conducted in general accordance with ASTM D 3385-75. A seven {7") inch hydraulic head was utilized. The infiltration rate was determined a# selected time intervals by recording the time for a 1 inch drop in water level. The seven (7") inch head was then re-established until the next test interval. The test was continued (minimum 4 hours) until stability was achieved and the infiltration rate did not vary in excess of 5% between successive one (1) hour measurements. Readings were recorded at intervals not exceeding 30 minutes. The plotted infiltration rate above represents the average of all observations during each hour interval. Technician: S.F. Reviewed by: ~,~~5 j SUMMARY Oz+' LABORATORY TEST RESULTS f. ...... _.,._._..._ _ :..:... Origgers Engineering Services Incorporated ~~/~,~ Sti2VIMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS BORING NO. pRp~ (ft) DFSCItIPTION W' y Y d ( C, A7TERBERG LIMi'TS P.P. U.C. CON. G.S. ORG. pH Cl. SO ~ RFS. Pct LL PL SL (tan {'A) (PPm) {PPm) (Obm-cm) 8-! 15.0.16.5 Brownish-gray Fine SAND with shell frogmcnts B-2 6.0-7.5 Dark brown fibrous, highly organic, candy SILT (Peet) da 0 8-? 25.0.26.5 Dark gray silty, clayey Fine SAND with some shell fragments 5}.5 38 ?4 •• IS 8 B-: 6.0-7,5 Dark brown Fine SAND with finely divided organic matvial l 0 B-3 10.0-I LS Light brown slightly silty Finc SAND with shell fragmcros Ba 25.0.16.,5 Dirk gray silty Finc SAND with scams of brown Finc SAND and tmcc of shell fragments W % = Water Content Con. = Consolidation Test v~(pcll = DryDensiry G.S.{+I) = GrainsizeAnalysis{Hydrometer) GS = Spccifec Gravity ORG. (%) = Organic Content LL = Liquid Limit Cl {ppm) - Total Chloride PL = Plastic Limit SO, (ppm) = Total Sulfate SL = Shrinkage Limit RES. (ohm-cm) = Lab Resistivity P.P. (ts~ = Pocket Penetromc[er = Sec Ttut Curves U.C. = Unconfined Comnression "" = Percent Passing No. 200 Sicvc -~ \\i.\ CLIENT: LOM• Inc. PROJECT: Proposed Parking Garage, Gulfview Boulevard. Clearwater Beach. Florida FILE: DES 096406 s GRAiNSIZE ANALYSES _. -_._ ._ _ ::, Driggers Engir7eering Services Incorporated u~/-5~ DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. u. s s+.~.e^re s.... op~rnnp M lncn~s u. s Srana.ra Sieve NuTe.IS ~,~M, too a t ~ ~ ~ s ~o ao ao .o w m ioo iw 0 90 to ~ ~ zo ~o 30 d ~ 3 a. ~ I 40 ~ a, a V ~ 1 e C {L. _ 1~ N A ~ C V 40 I ~ V Y d I ~ ~ ~ V a 30 ~ i I i ro la I _ _ • { ~ ~ _ I r ~ o l i i l o0 I DD SO 10 S l 0.5 O l 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters GRAVEL SAND SILT or CLAY I Coarse Medium Fine umber Depth Katural Moisture L ~ P, L P. I. Classification CLIENT: LOM, InC. B-1 15.0' - 16.5' r w s -gray ine with shell fragments PROJECT: Proposed Parking Garage, Gulfview Boulevard, Clearwater Beach. F]orida FILE: DES 096406 r _~•` DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. u. s sa~.are sue. ov~*~a a i~~ u. s sana..e s.... Mwne.n -rra~omwN too a = ~ a • ' to zD zo a 5o m loo lao 0 eo to eo m ~o 30 L d ~ C W 3 a j eo ; 5U ~ ~ ~ r c A O v ~ 40 I V e a ~ u u 30 a 70 20 ` i _ { I 90 30 ` v ~ i - -- ~- -} ~ ~ . ~ 90 0 --- j ' f • -• --~- t00 100 50 10 5 l 0.5 O 1 0 05 D O 1 0.005 0 001 Gra10 Size m MdbmeterS GRAVEL SAND Coarse Medium Fine SILT or CLAY vmtxr Depth Natural Masturc 1. l_ P lr P I Cussifigtwn CLIERT: LOM, Ioe. B-3 70.0' -T1.5' 9 rown s tg y si y in with shell fra ments PROJECT: Proposed Parking Garage, Gulfview BouTevard > Clearwater Beach, Florida FILE: DES 096406 ~~. DRIGGERS ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. U. S SdnAirl Si,nw O~n~s in InCPii U. S SbM+~d 57ww Nwnb~n NY~fw 100 ~ = 1 7 i i 10 ]0 30 b SO 1'0 100 1~0 O 90 I 30 90 20 70 i 30 t ei 'y 6Q I ~ I t m 3 T a i a0 v C ~ I ~, V _ ~ C I 50 m 4 ~ U C a i so ~ V Y 30 ~ ~ ~ 70 ~ ~ ~ ' I ~ am 10 ._... _ t i ~ 90 0 I ' ~ ~ 30 5 1 0.5 0 I 0.05 100 . O.OI 0.005 0.001 Groin Size in Millimeters GRAVEL SAND Coarse Medium Fine SILT or CLAY um Der pcptll Natural Moisture L L P. L P. I. Ctass'rfication CLIENT: LOM, Inc. B-4 25.0' - 26.5' Oark gray silty Fine SAND with seams of brown Fine SAND PROJECT: Proposed Parking Garage, and trace of shell fragments Gulfview Boulevard, Clearwater Beach, Florida FILE: DES 096406 ~,~ METHOD OF TESTING _s~~ ---~ ~~ , ~ , Origgers Engineering Services Incorporated / ~ -vp n,~ ~ "~ WATER TABLE FINE SAND MUCK ~f CLAYEY FINE SAND SILTY FINE SANG SHELBY TUBE SANDY CLAY CLAY CLAYEY LIMESTONE SANDY LIMESTONE ~. CORE RUN '~ LIMESTONE STAI~I)A FEIOIETI~,TI~1®t TES's' AID SAIL CLASSIFICATI®1~ 4-~-"N" VALUE OR g BLOW COUNT 7 21 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (ASTM D-1586) In the Standard Penetration Test borings, a rotary drilling rig is used to advance the borehole to the desired test depth. A viscous drilling fluid is circulated through lire drill rods and bit to stabilize the borehole and to assist in removal of soil and rock cuttings up and out of the borehole. Upon reaching the desired test depth, the 2 irreh O.D. split-barrel sampler or "split-spoon", as it is sometimes called, is attached to an i1- sizedrill rod and lowered to the bottom of the borehole. A 140 pound hammer, attached to the drill string at the ground surface, is then used to drive the sampler into the formation. The hammer is successively raised and dropped for a distance of 30 inches using a rope and "cathead" assembly. The number of blows is recorded for each 6 inch interval of penetration or until virtual refusal is achieved. In the above manner, the samples are ideally advanced a total of l8 inches. The sum of the blows required to effect the final 12 inches of penetration is called the blo~vcount, penetration resistance of "N" valur. of the particular material at the sample depth. Alter penetration, the rods and sampler are retracted to the ground surface ~vhcrc the core sample is removed, sealed in a glass jar and transported to the laboratory for verification of field classification and storage. SOIL SYMI;OLS AND CLASSIFICATION Soil and rock samples secured irr the field sampling operation were visually classi5ed as to texture, color and consistency. Soil classifications are presented descriptively and symbolically for case of interpretation. The stratum identification lints represent the approximate boundary behveen soil types. Ur many cases, this Transition may be gradual. Consistency of the soil as to relative density or undrained shear STRATUM strength, unless otherwise noted, is based upon Standard Penetration CHANGE resistance values of"N"veluesand industry•accepledstandards. "N" values, or blo~vcounts, are presented in both tabular and graphical form on each respective boring log at each sample interval. The graphical plot of bloweount versus depth is for illustration purposes only and dots not warrant continuity in soil consistency or linear variation behveen sample intervals. The borings represent subsurface conditions at respective boring locations and sample intervals only. Variations in subsurface conditions 50/0.3 ` may occur behveen boring locations. Groundwater depths shown represent water depths at the dates and time shown only. The absence DEN 07 E S of water table infomration does not necessarily imply that groundwater 50 BLOWS FOR wasuoteneountered. 0.3` PENETRATION s~ f _ From: 7275624961 Page: 2/2 Date:_8/27/2009 9_24:51 AM F LC~VV TAT CITY OP CL~ARWATER WATER DEPARTMENT LOCATION ~ ~ ~' "~~ ~ O ~' ` DATE OF 'I`EST ~ / O ~ STATIC: PSI ~ !C7 ~~ ~ RESIDUAL ~~ PSI ~ IC3 PITOT PSI ~~~ T /^T ~ w;t,ow (C7 (~ GPM p2~ r' ~ !.~ ~ .~ HYDRANT # ~c2 GRID# ~<~j` MISC: ~~~ ICI !v '~ ,~f ~ ` ~a~'~ c ~- ~ ac, - ~ ~~ ~~ CUSTOMER REQUESTING TEST 1 ~ ~ s EE // ~.9s' c 6v1E -otAw cuHVE to *'',~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~.~ ~ I H ~- ~ ~/ %~ ' ~ ,n. ~ ~~ / ~ _ _ .r ~ - MvIR InF.) I ml rm roe ro ? *~ I ~ / ~ ... I`""" I ~<~ m C f ..,_..~~or TM -71~ r * 1 S ° f ~; I ^...! ! I ! ~'m' %~ Iw. swe, 4svH, } ~ i l{ ' I 8 '.~ ~~`~ ~ *4 I aor.cerrE " ,7 II { ~ a *y I ~ ,w~ ~ ~/ ~ _ _ --- ,~ yy -- I .. If _ I: _-____ _____ J a - _ _ ot~ __ ~pp~rts rm wr ---. , I I _-- ~ d_ ' , ~ ,.:. _ --.. 1, ~ .te - r °~... w ~ ~ , • f •r,~ c ' , ~ ROR4 F u' I I ~ - -.., - ~ _ ~r P */ 1 a•nn 1 ~ .............. FEp TF~ 8~ 1 I ~ T .,..., ._...~ 1 I. 7: I ~ I I E. Fr ( Ar :,;~~_ r - ~ ,= I _____ ~ _~ ~y - * o rTw aD.w R ~ / a q...l.: a Lo Y. .~~ s a `t't-- I ~ X13` ~ k ~ s I rt ; I ,Y ,F , I y. a: i ~ ~ i I DR-M ~ I %~> °'"ie,..I r ssosT1'~ ..G I r _ 'T.e.RR *k Tr a w'N'~'~' ~ CL?T Np _ ~ ~a~' u \ ~wrra ~` ~ - I 1 d 1 I 1 ~~~ a I .absabs __ _t _ , , a. ~., . I 1 I "'~ ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 te P ,) a, L M ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ w ~ ` ~ ~~ ..~..rs ~~ c I * I rN~ I ICY ~ ~ 8 1 ~ 1 ~ {/ I I I ' I r I aNAr1ED PARKING Sll. I vAW Darn THERE BEA AR MSE99DIE PNYOTp BPAfE WHEIEBV THEVFRfKII CIEM qM BE SS WNlbs 111CLLOEB (DTMTME, ROUT[ PAAIO90 BPN`.E EKIT)PER LORaN eulDMO COCF MAPIER 55. 9ECT10111Ab Os Z` T 1 LEGEND I - - - PaoFFmruME ~ 1 ~: PROPOSED GOrM.iETE PAVEAENr 8 BI IVAIR ~ OErERAl BrTE MOTES: PPOP08ED ASPHKiPAVEMENT I s. oawERMAME: LON., INC NORM aTX 1F1NItE Xd LY 100, R SLA 1 ~~ Flm ~~ {v ~.~ 2ENDIIFERAAMDSf/iPE NCN OI:GT: ItE1TN ZAYMAASSOCWTEB. WG rOt EN1ERPYIBE ROAD EABT.3UOE b1 I E r V 9KETYIWDOIi fL 9raa5 pzz>Taaa3x N. ~ (1Zl)1WN6. Fa 1 1 1_' a. Mf nEOTNME: rRUOrpK NG ~ 3 N 1 I O fi W 1 OO MOPNA APOPK.L F; azlm Ilol)2a8wW Bu I IIarIlDmt2 Fu 11 'I a.BURVEY0RMM9E: 9 1FOREST U~YQS BpAE~V/JYI~ A olmMUa FLORDA awn I SGLLE. I--117 Iata)M' t912 Bu O FN: SCALE 1et91esseew Fw ~~ a¢w ~ Kl l,n 1. PROJECT ADOIE98: ]AG~/Oi UMLME~W BLW,B CIEMWATER FLOPoW 99raT I tRxwm I~ r ICI ~~ ~ PARCEL DR 01-AtSa2b000OSt00 I ~ aFUiURE lAT0 8E 'PF RF90 C S p ~ N NRgY ~~ ~~ MM w.P. ,r. I1Aaa rd 0 : P1E8EM I1BE M- 5tT FA L TE H H PETAL 8 RESTAUPAIfT ~ Ya•~~ MqR~ mrTRtr Yg@ v PY ~~~ ~~~ 1 u... w r B.OEVELOPEOIAE: T.IMD DSTA TNaf ENSTTNO arIE AraeA ab'RO-W VAfiTIOM AIFA PNatNO ONUDE, rETAl BREliNATIWi aT~el at (omAC) a,ZIa 6.F R11 AL) ~.) ,'~~ I 1 ToTM DEVELoPAaLE NEN ~ Ia.ala aF (OJiaAGt I 1 ..~. s. A. arrE DATA TAeIE. Fa64LIL{l: \P~9E2 OEVELOPblEN6A ' ai1N8F.ryDAC1/w,akTBF PiMI tOADBFpEN NT F• ..~.a euLOwo AREA N9RMLT.WNPiETE,MIBG: A91 af. ))>,,Tn af. 1ealeef. eaD{F. TOTM a1PERVDU8AIFA YFIOaf.pD YR))J0.Y1 eF. P1NAq 111Y6DAAD °"' a~ 'y •. '- ... TOTAL OPEN SPACE: T]as BF.RNKt ;®BF.RA•Lt ;1Tir9.Y1 OsDSIMOIEVEL EXIE~~MA;MUSE MOIi. F OPOBEOFL ~~ R` 1 *r' T AA \1iEE \ q Tf 'REBTA`t1RATIr MNDaF. H ~ ,r w.... ,:, . `TOrN: II~Pl1FN9 I e ~ w "`."~"_... ,-~.., rat mc.ro a.~ a, s o. sFi>;it2i4. MoRTH IaDEt ~ A le oai F T o '; ~ , aDDTH 6NDEe ,D MN d3e ~, ~;1'~i Q © I -- FASTffRDMR 2T MN, tAa Fi UIl1MtU) 000 fT IRVAVELEIII) O - B __ ~ wFnrffROMTt zs Mfl ors Fr Iau1LDNa1 9.ao FT oEwALlq ~ I~ ~ .- - • I T" T .tQSFL,~..-., .,~.-.r,..- ~[L ) ~~'r~r _ (I-'_^__'_Jl S ~ PETAL MpMt (3'.RLa 8FY68PNZ&s,W08Fl ss aP PROPPED 08PAOEd ~ ~ /~'°"w'-•.'Q ; REBTAlIRM6T (HpHt :a~BFN BPArE&f A00 aF) ) PUBLD PARNSp ]009PACE8 ~BPM£8 b]8P/tE3 EwlOYEE PARKNO 6~aB TOTN_ 8PME3 ~9PACEa 8PM£8 R RO. 9TM18) I ° ePN~an.Daa sFl ( RETNL 0.owt (a ~ tr w9 a 88PN~8 ° REBTAURNIT (LOWt Ia1e ~9FIfT 9PACE3f1,00a 9F) IICC S3 rePN>FB ~ ~ ~ DPN9Kap: a008P N~8 ~ 9a13PN18 > EMROYEE PARRIMO: n M 9PN~8 rorN: aPN~e aw ePAffa n Rc aTNa3~ I 12 MN PROPFIRV IIPPEIFB TO LIE WrSH W FLO00 XlT9E -VE' (EL.11A YE' Ol•13A-AE' IELEV, tat A9 aHOWM ON TIE FLOOOINSURN9CE MTE MM, /rr w ..w ..n, to THERE ARE Ip ENVN(RNJ 31. N1 UIPAVFD OISTIMBED land USe Areo (s(/ Weekday lI-6AM Weekday 9.AM- qPM Weekday 6PM~ 1lAM Wec*md9AM- aPM Weekend 611 PM Nigh - Sspaces/1,000 sf 5 1096 90% 1 1W% 155 lM6 104 tail 31,036 low-65pxes/S,OW Sf 6% 1036 9 9P16 112 10096 121 Al% g1 Nigh-15 spaces/1,00051 ]0% 1 5016 5 100M 103 5096 52 100% 103 estauran 6,881 Low-rspaces/t,OW SI 30% 5 50% 2 llp% 50% 2d 10(196 NI{h 18 16 2 201 112 Tod Low IS 11 1 1 135 enclnaurnc ra wacelTacTVae h.uvnaac KEITH ZAYAC & ASSOCIATES, INC. (727) 793-9888 T eNTeTU9use xoowD e, sre Io1 sweerT xwaY a, FL 916D R[1TNLSF AC GOY /J N (s, ilis.( Q N z~ 8x C7 ~ .~ C7 ~ M ~ Coal ~ L~~F 03 ~ ~U~ ~O to N ~~~U yq f~l1 ~m S K~wml rHLCm 1 i w a'Ei FEMe`oEOTO Ma g~° OH CUID, II~ Ir13OA BETTER BE LIME Map li LTEO WITH TdA CRaLAT dF THE BUIIDITp. LE OH THD CdLO BE CLlQl1ATE ~T FOR C4 QTR TI N ~> v.. >K rp / ~ ,~,~ *~~R, e " I Lora=r-~_'`----•, d I -_, r T 9 P.M}I jU__ 11 I o~ I a~ I /f'.~~I 1 o f ,n. ea ~ i t __ °"'°,~-.~ 4' ,I II f ~ 61,'~I 1 eIG E I ~ ,~ ~ 1 I €~1° 1 i;i a 1 1 II 1, 11 i 1 I1 ~ ~ ~'lal ;. ~ , I 11 II . I ~; I I1 I 11 ~1aa ,p ~ ~~., I nr~., ~~ ~~~ I I ' i ~ ' "~, ~~; ARDELS t,EL _ _ ~_ %; .~ ,~-~ m~°'u 211 ~ ~: I<°N.,'~ SC.4E: t'. ap' Y ~ , owwnrc score 1 I GULNIE R-O-w CURVE DATA I I, ~~ ~i / I T' a I ~I~ ~I w~ e~® raxa~ II ~' ~ _ I ~+ / ~ ~~~' ' c~,l aGU.la~ ~ _di._ vI b' I I ~ LEGEND % & ~~~er Y ~I M-NC ~ ~- ~ ~ -- - - ~ ~ ~' _m .~~ ~ II ~~~m lil ~ ~ ---- PgOPpiTT IAE ~ ~~--~N~Mf ~ -1 II 9 ! ~ ~ ~ __ ~ I Pa~OSED BYILpNG ,, ~ ~~'~~ ' ~ ~ ~ r - ----- ~~ ,~ I I , ~~ ,,~ ,,~~ I _ ~o«, II `. ~ 11 ~ ,~l~~c ~ ~'~,P ~ e ~ .,, ,I'~ _ ~.aci~'"~ ~ ~" f ~ '/~ p .-: ~; _ _ ~ ~- a' to I I; '~° ~`~ I ~ ~i ~ ~,.. aE~EG. 1 r .. Ta~a aEPLrEYEN~~,aT ~,, ,_ w _ - __ _ - __ _ E ,. 1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ _ ., ,P~ .,,.,LPw, .., ~.. .': II a ~ ' aan e,la.L P,aY f ~ I E l ~ s ..,~.~ r ~ vc~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ f i Il ~A 1 i I o-~ I, ~ ~ 1 ~ _ ... - _ _~ I of IE 1 No ...._.._ ~ ~ ~,~ a _ ..._~..... __ Y .' . IIY~ I 1~ Y~~ ~ I ' b! ~7 '~ ~I ~li TOfM T/6m 10 EE to I I 4/11 ° q9f I I 111 ®;;I 1 '" ~~. 1 ~1 ~~ ~1 1 ~"' F~1r-0e~ E~ M.lb. a, * I ~~~~ ~I~ ~!i ~ ~ b~ I ~_ ~ ~~ ~,bu, .G,GER,~~~a~a~° E M~.~~.E°~~ x,;;,?~'.,, PROPOSED PLANT LIST I ~~~. ~ ~ G~.maYY YYa~ 6nGI1f6LRR1G •6 ARCYITECN116 unnrnc ~~ KEITH ZAYAC & ASSOCIATES, INC. (727) 793-9888 aaaAn e, s're ~w BAPeTY HARBO ,PL 31b9f NN W.aEITN2AYAG.GOY we ~~~ o~~ `'z~ 8x p~, n acs ~~`~~ C7 ~Rm mp w! w W~a, ~ 6. ~a F~ U~ oa ~ ~o N ~'~ ~f ~L'"..~ V y y ~ ! NOT FOR (,~Q OF C1'I V T TI e .~' i s i Slf6SME.CYP CI1lM 17-0409 ORES PER LEVEL 6iAlA5R0 C,]I.PACfA~5961F TOTAL 80%168" 8V X18'V IxV X1B+l IflE 3PEFD TOTAL RASP IE cRauol~v>:L o a n~ k.351 3ASu ---- ro~anlaF o o ---- we --- ulw --- I:,v~6 bEQYDLEYEL 53 a CIXOlE4EL N.'l9 S.itB _ 35.191 L6v6x le a rv~ :s.sl+ fl535 wuRAt ~vn. ea o amhl~z n.at zASv flFIH IEVB 85 a IEVf1 fl,531 ]9,551 sIwR LEYH 31 0 3 uveL +zvs +xsa 1pTAL8 k1 k8 ALS 119,:85 5.118 183113 ~oTE~ w9 mwu.a. Ao a m.moyglAv TYPICAL DOUBLE HANDICAPPED STALL ~~NI~ ,,azoFz ~ ,~. a ~~ 0 ~ r~+rli i mt mmata to a 1nwn~a.+¢ '«,°~;.~ TYPICAL SINGLE HANDICAPPED STALL ~rt ~~ ~~ ~d,K ~ ~~ ~o °: ~ M 4 u ~an°°~ c°° x ~ .~.~.~~ N i I • ~ •I F' I _ o N w z ~..7 = W D v ZO 9~ LL 0 p ~W~ NH ~ L.L m ~> ~Q z ~'J,-JU'w HU ~~ I.L O h' ~' ~_ ~Ur V J U I L±- IIIIIII •{ ~' III- ~a~,m ~ TYPICAL HANDICAPPED (p SIGN DETAIL W ~~. H.s ,~, ~ ~ SITE PLAN ~ A10 ~p acw~e: u+e•-+•-o• a e ~ /~ /1 ^ 901 ~~ yys€yE (Y) (Y~ (Y, (Y) (Y1 !- ~88$ ~,N R~ ~~ 1 .m..x A ~~ b F 01NYN, NOb1NW1 ~~ ® N{NNM/Q PMIIIWINN! I re .N.>o, 1 I 1 ~~ 1 1 1 ^ 1 I 4b 501 - I ~~ O I~ 16 1 A OdNI ~N.IIBIIIN I MN1 401 M'`N ~~ RAIINN g ~~ I ~~ - - _ NNO101 -___ _ ~ I `i.~- Nl1NlL CYNNI ~~ C ® TNN~OIY NNIORx~NNRR01~ NxA1A,N1 A ~f ~ ,®,F,N V I /- ~~ 2 I %~' iC1 m~R ~ %! N.TIL ~ AlxuanaxW _ I sot MMAMN ------ ~. AxaNnw I LNML I yyy 939393 N/iROENOR NHNxrNUrNUmro1N ~ ~~ 4 ~~ ~ RM DA1YWLmINN I LRlO1NR.Y1N N.1RnNN,An NNL I €RF ~ Nm w ysgA A [ I c ra m fe ---- .. .. ---- ~ , m-- a dy ® ~ n.NR~ NN1AUawrA3w ewnR. moa ~.NONr~ MMIxNN WALU PARTITIONS TYPES v ®PRECAST CONCRETE WALL WITH 2 ~', //\~ /\ SIZED BV SLAT WALL MANUFACTURED ( [~ 1 ( T ) METAL FURRING STUDS~24'O.C. Y Y PROVIDE MIN. R-11 INSULATION. WILL HAVE 'SUT WALL' DISPLAY SYSTEM ATTACHED FROM FF T016'AFF. DRYWALL ABOVE I6 N TO UNDERSIDE OF PRECAST DECK ~ WQ ~] SAME AS ®WIOUT SLAT WALL ~ Y rz'1P~PRECAST ONLY ~ O ®8' GIZED BV SLAT WALL MANUFACTURED LL METAL STUDS ~ 29' O.C. WI(i) (AVER OF ~' ~ TVPE'X' GWB EACH SIDE WILL HAVE'SLAT WALL' DISPLAY SYSTEM ATTACHED FROM W FF TO 18'(FT) AFF. ON RETAIL SIDE ONLY ®SAME AS ®WITHOUT'SLAT WALL' x 'x DISPLAY SYSTEM x xx - ~~ ®SAME AS ®BUT WIB'20 GA STUDS ©3~", 20 GA METAL STUDS ~2d'O.C. WI(1) ~~~ - LAVER OF ~'TWE'X'GWB EACH SIDE. NMRNN ®8' CMU SEE GTRUCTURALG ~~ a . ~x~ NOTES NNW 1a01p 1-SPRY-ON INSULATION AT CEILING IN ~M~ , RETAIL, RESTAURANTANO KITCHEN AREAS ~NINLNIL ~ _ ~~ a m°~ia1~fl°L` b m N O a Q O NRONNOOBOLI rv 1 1 L J gININRlO1 My a ~ ~ 1 1 1 M. -N...1N. -' J= W q AAFAS son. ~ ~ 1 m RTUL nORm 3xms L W VERY a'- MACH WAIx1NRU 14> 1- J m m M~N~=~ -- 2159 (n LL ° °z ° 1 1~xa~, sr e ,g~ -_ -- - I C~ RIiN RORA(f x.331 LL } F ^1a.R _._~ ~ ~ 10.;L~`~ 33.10 ~ ~; ~ cn U C rRG«N 1 ---^M^ ~,I>n 2r W .iT,xoo,:i~a-------- xAa 7 V ~' i II CI~ ~ N 'I ~~> ~; GROUND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~ A10 w w w ~wg a WALL/ PARTITIONS TYPES ~ ~ w ~~ I01 ®PRECAST CONCRETE WALL lMTH2 ~'. ^ METALBFURRAING STUDSS ~U24AOCRED ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ PROVIDE MIN.R-111NSULATION. WILL HAVE O 'BEAT WALL' DIBPLAV SYSTEM ATTACHED a/ FROM FF TO 18' AFF. DRYWALL ABOVE 18 ~ W ••!y~ TO UNDERBIDE OF PRECABT DECK 0 !y~ r10~ 1N~~ ®SAME AB®WIOUT BEAT WALL Eyayy ®PRECAST ONLY ~ Q RyE ®fi' SIZED BV BEAT WALL MANUFACTURED METAL STUDS ~24'OC. VJI(1)IAVER OF ~' a~ WALL' DISPLAY SYSTEM ATTACHED ROIAT LL 9~ FFTO18'(FT)AFF.ONRETNLSIDEONLV s asa>'TS4 ~ ®SAME AS ®WITHOUT'SLAT WALL' MOO, el `J 6 4 DIBPLAY BVBTEM saao-lies 4 ®SAME AB ®BUT W/620 GP BTU05 ~'~4® a~ .^rsm / .^~ ~ ® A ©3~', 20 GA METAL STUDS~24'O.C.WI(1) `V1 LPVER OF ~"TVPE'X'GWB EACH SIDE. ~~ v/ ®e' LMU BEE BTRUCTURALS ~t ~~ 1 ~a 501 NOTES ~~ b r 1-BPRV-ON INBUTATION AT CEILING IN RETAIL, RESTAURANTAND KITCHEN ~i AREAS f3Fy^E 1 ^~ee 401 F~ --_ -= ww^wslmal 2 a^^ ___ rnw _~ .._____ 4ax g -=~-JI~~ e- -~~ '^ O ~~ \ ~/, w~ i~ ~ ~ j ~ --------- 3 ~ ~ 2 -'~ \\ /~/y~'~ ~ g 501 l 1..1-I ~ O y~ -~ ~ ~ 1lLM[ ~~ ~ O 6€~ r~ W LL ~ }J y4~ .~..IM^.1..1.1e1 V ~ W !f !NM ~ tll J ~/~ W ~~ b aBin ^ ~// IL ~ Z ,~ ~ ~C ~ ~ Saz 10 4 d !~ I \, ~ I• % \ V s~ 4 ~ ~ N ~ I I I^ 4 s I Yyi, 2 II ~~ ~ ~ ~ W 802 ~ ...~ ~~ o- q ~ a II MEZZANINE LEVEL '°°'°'~°°^'~ ~~~ ~ FLOOR PLAN A~ O,~ 402 ecw~e: maa•-r-o• xiwix~+~.iw•rrnxoxi~x ~°vn.'m °mR.: o~wwm~i.+A1o~i~..'~a.~aw'~uM°°m~r°CiuNOCS ~~m ®+ooMaoiau~oixoxar~mi~~ ~ .so~~sR.o•xaxwrrnarw.xru~usxamasmxxno~xraawiaxmiaxx ~w~x~.rtxwar~ mcnexamxmxenvaxoxn x .xoxomx~u..MSrxwrwxmroo.oomx~rr.xns~wa~nexadra s "' a ~, °a re ~ ti ~ e e S ~.... . e a ~ a f ~ ~ ~~ ~ 4 ~ ~ - - ~ ? ®e -,~.. ~ ~ ~~ a --- __ ~` ~~ ~.~ An m ~= ~ ~ ~ m ' ~ ~ _ 1e ~ -- ~, ~ e I ~ +~ ~-v k ~ 9 ~~ ~ ~ ~ a ~? ~ ~ ma ~ - ~~ a I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ i ~r.~` ~ q ~;~~ a` . _~ ~ ~ a ~ , _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ s a `~ i ~ a ®tl -O `; ~ 4~ ~~ ~,M - - - - x~ x S ~~~ _ '- _ Z ~ ~ e n n ~ 3 ~ ~IV17 /,~ur\ ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~® ® ® ® ~ m . On ~ e _ ~ z a ~v i D m a ~~ z~ r sN . ; E n • PROGRESS PRINT Nov 92, 2®®3 354p1n SURF STYLE / BRITTS I r ` ! -~ a CITY OF CLEARWATER ~ D ~ ~ ~ ~ x FINFROCK ~ ~ ' CLEARWATCR sLLCF+ r~-O~~~A ~ ~ , FINFROCK DESIGN, INC. SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN x i ~ ~ ~~ - a a ,, , ~ , ; , , ,, , , , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;~ ~, ,. ~~~~ -_ - , ~ ~~~ ~I ~ I N I 4 ~ `_° i~ ... ~ ~ a III Q dl p£ ~ i I _ ~~ ~ ~ "' I = ~ ji I~ Iu~ I I j ii j ~ \~ ~ ~ ~ S ~ f -- - ~ 5 ~ ~ i / ~ 5 ~ / ~® S e A c ~ - y TT O N ~° ~1/ Z ~ ~ o ~ ~m z ~ o m ~ ~ zm ~ ~ m ~ ~ I ` v D m .oar • PROGRESS PRINT Nov 12, 2t~ 3~54pPn { ~ ~~ -o ~ '-:~r 4 4 1-0 • SURF STYLE / BRITTS I r ~ „ ~ ; D ~ ;o: FINFROCK ' CITY OF CLEARWATER ~ ~ : _ " ~ f CIBARWATER aEncH w~oRioA y ~ FINFROCK DESION, INC. ! THIRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ru~dra.w.e.i~.~imeis~•ia.~°°t°~°o~.~m'omw~` a.owxoMnownvirmeexe.wa.,m.awxowooia~aoiwo.m.~icvwmMwu ~nosr ~~w~aaxw,rroa~rs~u~iswwmmmxn~wmrram~aMmi~arr . ~.o.nn.nxwwma ~+c.~.v..w.~a~..uaru.ncm~ru.mnm,.oa.Rw.mmm~enu:meur.~w,o~ m.,o~o .o.e~~..,.m.,.r.~snro®o.mm~.s...~.,.~a~,...exa ~ o .......................... .... ...i m 4 9 [a svnces ®vai ~ mncES ®e'a~ a 3 e b a a N a 1@ tl e _ _ ~ .-___- oR ~an ~ 6 i \/ 9 ~ - _ ~i~ h ~~ `~ ~ ~` i 3 ~~ a 9 e ~ ~~ A ~ O ~~ a a ~. ~~~ ~ ~~ e e ~~~ ~ a ~~ f z 4' s ~ ~tl a ,3~.~5®,a, ,.~.~s®aa OC e ~O h O ~ t a ~_,` d ~ = v rr Z< m n r n A • PROGRESS PRINT Nov 12, 2®93 3~b4pan y ~ SURF STYLE'J BRITTS i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ FINFROCK ~ o ~ I C`~ CITY OF CLEARWATER ~~~ y § FOURTH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ FINFROCK DESION, INC. ~' i' r 'r 'P~ P a ~Z i E W ~~ o~ ~_ r Dm Zr PROGRESS PRINT Nov 12, 2®09 3=5~ e . :SURF STYLE / BRITTS ~ r ` ~ D > ~ CITY OF CLEARWATER ~ ~ o x FINFROCK 0 ( CL~ARWAT@R BLACH - wLOR~oA q ~ ~ ~ ; FINFROCK DESION, INC. E FIFTH LEVEL FLOOR.PLAN 999 888 c~ t~ U ~z _~~ rX ~ 0= a ~m D~ Zr E PROGRESS PRINT Nov 92, 2009 354pnn ~1J . SURF STYLE / BRITTS I r ` ~ . a 0 p D ~ CITY OF CLEARWATER ~ ~ ~ ; ~ FINFROCK ~ ~ c~Enrew.•. SiXTH6LE EC FLOOR PLAN F~o~eioa ~ ~ ' ~ ; FINFROCK DESIGN, INC. ~- F SKETCH of DESCRIPTION THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY SCALE 1" = 50' ~~ 0' S0' 100' ~ ~ ~ ~ $82'15' I- " P.O.B. LOT 59 NW Comer ~ ~ q.¢ ' ~ 35.OQ' r of 60 ~ r Q - ' LOT 106 i (Y __ __ 110 (p) ------ ~ - ~-------_ f , 1 ~ Radial ---~ ------------- ~_ o LOT 60 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ---________ ~ , 1 ~ ' LOT 3~'7-----~_ ~ ~ i ~ , -.: .a : , O ----__ ___- ~-----_ ~ ----____- I r 1 ~ , y L~J ~ o -rv: ::::..:::::: ; LOT 108 ~ I 1 ~1 ~ LOT 61 ; ~ ; I -~ 1 ~ ~ _ 1 ~ ------------- , _ 1 ~a r O ~ 1 ~ ~ ----- ------__ i ~ _ , - t I Q i D 3 I ' ~ ' ~ a^ ` ~ LOT 109 i ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ - ~ LOT 62 , ~--- ~ ~ , Z' ~ ' 1 __ ~ ' ---------_ ~ ' Q ~° 1 1 ---- ' --~ ' ~~ 80'34'2 4„~ ---_ ~ 1o'(p) - i LOT 110 i o f / 35.00 , ~ ' ------ ___Radial - - 1 ; V' 1 ' i '~ SW Comer I ~ -~ 1 i ~. ~ ; Lot 62 ; ___----- i ~, ~ f ' I LO ' T 63 --- __ ~ --'--- ' ' - ~ 1 ~ i ~ ~ ' LOT 111 ~ ~' CURVE DATA ~ ' , CURVE RADIUS DELTA ANGLE ARC LENGTH CHORD LENGTH CHORD BEARING C1 6017.52' 01'42'54' 180.12' 180.11' S08'35'03"W C2 5982.52' 01'42'54" 179.08' 179.08' N08'35'03"E No. I 902601.dwg 1 1 / The Easterly 1 /2 of Gulfview Boulevard lying West of and adjacent to the Westerly boundaries of Lots 60, 61 and 62, THE LLOYD-WHITE-SKINNER SUBDIVISION, as recorded in plat book 13 on pages 12 and 13 of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, more particularly described as follows: Begin at the Northwest comer of said Lot 60; thence 180.12 feet along the Westerly boundary of said Lots 60, 61 and 62, and along the arc of a curve to the right with a radius of 6017.52 feet, subtended by a chord distance of 180.11 feet, bearing S08'35'03"W to the Southwest corner of said Lot 62; thence N80'34'24"W along the Westerly extension of the Southerly boundary of said Lot 62, a distance of 35.00 feet to a point of intersection with the centerline of said Gulfview Boulevard, a 70 foot wide right of way; thence 179.08 feet along said centerline and along the arc of a curve to the left with a radius of 5982.52 feet, subtended by a chord distance of 179.08 feet, bearing NOS'35'03"E to a point of intersection with the Westerly extension of the Northerly boundary of said Lot 60; thence S82'15'44"E a distance of 35.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. Contains 6,286.20 square feet (0.144 acres), more or less. LEGEND ID IDENiIFICATKIN PtS PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR LB UCQISED (P) PLAT RIFORMATION D DEED or DESCRIPTION INFDRMATiON F FlEU) MEASURED POB POINT OF BEGMNING POC PgNf OF COAgAENCEMENT Prepared for and Certified To: Keith Zayac and Associates, Inc NOTES: 1. NO UNDERGROUND INSTALLATIONS OR IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN LOCATED EXCEPT AS SHOWN. 2. NO INSTRUMENTS OF RECORD REFLECTING EASEMENTS, RIGHT OF WAY AND/OR OWNERSHIP WERE FURNISHED TO THIS SURVEYOR EXCEPT AS SHOWN. 3. THIS SKETCH DOES NOT REFLECT OR DETERMINE OWNERSHIP. 4. USE OF THIS SKETCH BY ANYONE OTHER THAN THOSE PREPARED FOR WILL BE THE RE-USERS SOLE RISK WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE SURVEYOR. 5. THE SKETCH WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A CURRENT TITLE COMMITMENT AND IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY ANO SIMILAR MATTERS OF TITLE. 6. MERIDUW BASED ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF GULFVIEW BOULEVARD AS BEARING SOS'35'03"W (ASSUMED). DATE: September 8, 2009 SUNCOAST LAND SURVEYING, Inc. -~ 111 FOREST LAKES BOULEVARD OLDSMAR, FLA: 34677 BOUNDARY -TOPOGRAPHIC -CONSTRUCTION STAKEOUT LB 4513 PHONE: (813) 854-1342 FAX: (813) 855-6890 Checked By ~ KOM ~ Drawn By JAC ~ 1 r 1 1 1 1 Project No. ~ 9026 Field Book Pages SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that the SKETCH depicted hereon was Performed under my RESPONSIBLE CHARGE on the date(s) shown, and meets the MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS set forth by the FIARIDA 80ARD OF PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS in Chapter 61G17-6, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATNE CODE purarard to Section 472.027, FLORIDA STATUTES. 'NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SK;rIATU~ AND THE ORIgNAL RNS~ SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER'. , f ,1 /~ ( --.~ Y A. COPEI.AND, ~PLS No.5279