The URL can be used to link to this page

LUZ2010-06002; 3400 GULF TO BAY BLVD; CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE.M LUZ2010-06002 3400 GULF TO BAY BLVD Date Received: 6/1/2010 11:36:46 AM Clearwater Christian College ZONING DISTRICT: LAND USE: ATLAS PAGE: 292B PLANNER OF RECORD: LLK PLANNER: Lauren Matzke, Planner 111 CDB Meeting Date: August 3, 2010 Case Number: LUZ2010-06002 (Related to DVA2010-06001) Owner/Applicant: Clearwater Christian College Private School, Inc. Address: 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Agenda Item: C-1 (Related to C.2.) CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT BACKGROUND INFORMATION REQUEST: (a) Future Land Use Plan amendment from the Institutional (I), Commercial General (CG), Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS), Residential Low (RL) and Water/Drainage Feature classifications to the Institutional (I), Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) and Water/Drainage Feature classifications; and (b) Rezoning from the Institutional (I), Commercial (C), Preservation (P), Low Density Residential (LDR) and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) districts to the Institutional (I), Preservation (P), and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) districts. SITE INFORMATION Property Size: 5,708,538 square feet or 131.05 acres Property Use: Current Use: College Proposed Use: College Plan Category: Current Categories: Institutional (I) Commercial General (CG) Preservation (P) Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) Residential Low (RL) Water/Drainage Feature Proposed Categories: Institutional (I) Preservation (P) Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) Water/Drainage Feature Zoning District: Current Districts: Institutional (I) Commercial (C) Preservation (P) Low Density Residential (LDR) Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 1 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc Proposed Districts: Institutional (I) Preservation (P) Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) Existing Surrounding Uses: North: South: East: West: Wetlands Visitors Center, Causeway, Tampa Bay Open Space, Wetlands, Tampa Bay Single and Multi-Family Residential, Vacant, FDOT Office ANALYSIS: The proposed amendment involves four parcels of land, comprising approximately 131.05 acres, located north of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard east of Bayshore Drive. The amendment request is to amend the future land use and zoning designations on approximately 13.35 acres of the subject property from the current Institutional (I), Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS), Commercial General (CG), Water/Drainage Feature and Residential Low (RL) future land use categories to the Institutional (I), Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) and Water/Drainage Feature future land use categories and from the Institutional (I), Commercial (C), Preservation (P), Low Density Residential (LDR) and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) zoning districts to the Institutional (I), Preservation (P), and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) districts. The subject property contains areas where the future land use and zoning designations are not consistent with the actual characteristics of the area. The City submitted administrative future land use map changes to the Pinellas Planning Council consistent with the Countywide Rules to change 4.05 acres of the subject property from Preservation (P) to Institutional (I) based on the current jurisdictional wetland line. These areas were uplands already developed with buildings, paved roads, a soccer field and a retention pond. The Countywide Planning Authority (CPA) approved this change on July 13, 2010. Other Preservation (P) areas that are inaccurately designated Commercial General (CG) and Residential Low (RL) are being addressed within this amendment. This amendment increases land designated Institutional (I) on the Future Land Use Map in order to accommodate growth of the college that currently owns and operates on the property. A development agreement has been submitted that establishes a master plan for the developed portion of the property, which resides within the proposed boundaries of the Institutional (I) land use category, and limits residential and nonresidential density (Case No. DVA2010-06001). The development agreement proposes dividing the subject property into two areas, a Mitigation Area (98.99 acres or 4,312,004 square feet) and a Master Plan Area (32.06 acres or 1,396,533 square feet). No development would be allowed outside the boundaries of the Master Plan Area. The applicant has developed a Mitigation Plan as part of the accompanying development agreement which addresses the objectives of hydrologic restoration and habitat enhancement. This plan will require approval by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). Activities proposed include removal of Brazilian pepper, creation of a hydraulic connection under Damascus Road to improve tidal exchange, improvement to tidal systems to improve water circulation, and habitat restoration for areas impacted by mosquito ditching. The applicant will address these objectives and place a conservation easement on the Mitigation Area (98.99 acres) in perpetuity. Community Development Board -August 3, 2010 -Case LUZ2010-06002 -Page 2 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc In accordance with the Pinellas Planning Council Countywide Plan Rules, this future land use map amendment is subject to approval by the Pinellas Planning Council and Board of County Commissioners acting as the Countywide Planning Authority. Based on the requested density, review and approval by the Florida Department of Community Affairs is required. 1. CONSISTENCY WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN [Section 4-602.F.1 and 4-603.F.1] Recommended Findings of Fact The following objective and policies of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan are supportive of the proposed land use plan amendment. Only those policies determined to be most relevant to this case have been included. Wetlands Protection Goals, Objectives and Policies: GOAL A.1 The City of Clearwater shall continue to protect natural resources and systems throughout the city and ensure that these resources are successfully integrated into the urban environment through land development regulations, management programs, and coordination with future land use intensities and categories. Objective A.1.1 On an ongoing basis, natural resources and systems shall be protected through the application of local, state, and regional regulations, mitigation and management plans, and permitting procedures as well as through locally instituted land purchase programs focusing on environmentally sensitive properties and significant open space areas. Policy ALL I Any permanent and temporary alteration of Department of Environmental Protection (D.E.P.) jurisdictional or non jurisdictional wetlands, the jurisdictional wetlands of the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD), beach dunes, sensitive soils, or other natural systems shall be prohibited unless such alteration is fully consistent with all local, state, and federal regulations, mitigation and management plans, and permitting procedures that may be applicable, including the wetland vegetative buffer requirement of the City's Community Development Code Policy A.1.1.3 Environmentally sensitive wetlands subject to Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) jurisdiction and the jurisdictional wetlands of the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) shall be designated by "Preservation" (P) zoning and prevented from being built upon except as permitted by the Preservation Zoning District. Policy A. 1.1.8 Mitigation plans for alteration of non jurisdictional wetlands, beach dunes, swamps, marshes, streams, creeks, one hundred (100) year flood plains, or lakes shall require not less than a 1:1 ratio of mitigation land (on- or off-site) as approved by the Engineering Department and/or City Council, and in coordination with the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). Objective D.3.3 Lower high water profiles during storm events, as necessary, to reduce house flooding occurrences and to lessen the resulting adverse effects on public health, the natural environment, public and private property. Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 3 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc Policy D.3.3.6 Limit development that will result in building(s) constructed within/or over stormwater retention/detention ponds, streams or channels. All wetlands, streams, channels, or other hydrologic features, whether wetlands, ponds or bodies of water having intrinsic hydrologic, biologic and zoological functions with no distinction made in regard to its status to whether it is man-made or natural shall be considered for a Preservation Land Use Plan classification to ensure protection from development. Policy D.3.3.8 Continue the established requirement of a twenty-five foot setback from the tops of a bank from all wetlands whether natural or man-made, and require minimum finished floor elevations in areas adjacent to lakes, bays, creeks, the Gulf of Mexico, Tampa Bay and Old Tampa Bay, and other flood prone areas. Objective D.3.5 Protect and enhance the quality of receiving waters by the use of "Best Management Practices" in accordance with the adopted watershed management plans. Policy D.3.5.2 Vegetated swales, sodding, and appropriate landscaping will be required as components of the drainage system for natural filtration before final discharge into receiving waters. Policy D.3.5.6 Continue to identify impaired bodies of water and prioritize them for improvement and enhancement. GOAL E.2 Management of Clearwater's coastal resources shall prohibit activities that would damage or destroy the natural or built environment, or threaten human life die to hurricane hazards, and shall promote activities that enhance the natural and built environment. Objective E.2.1 The City shall continue to protect coastal wetlands, estuaries and wildlife habitats to maintain or increase the acreage for threatened and endangered species populations. Policy E. 2. 1.1 Restoration and enhancement of disturbed or degraded estuaries identified by the Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) program shall be accomplished by strict regulation of proposed impacts to wetlands and by controls on the operation and installation of marinas and other water-dependent uses. Policy E.2.1.2 Development applications shall be reviewed to ensure that proposed new development or redevelopment will not encroach on or remove wetlands or beaches. New development and redevelopment shall be guided away from environmentally sensitive areas and into those most able to withstand impacts. Policy E.2.1.8 Future land uses which are incompatible with the protection and conservation of wetlands and wetland functions shall be directed away from wetlands. Policy E.2.1.9 The type, intensity or density, extent, distribution and location of allowable land uses and the types, values, functions, sizes, conditions and locations of wetlands are land use factors, which shall be considered when directing incompatible land use away from wetlands. Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 4 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc Policy E. 2.1.10 Land uses shall be distributed in a manner that minimizes the effect and impact on wetlands. The protection and conservation of wetlands by the direction of incompatible land uses away from wetlands shall occur in combination with other goals, objectives and policies in the comprehensive plan. Where incompatible land uses are allowed to occur, mitigation shall be considered as one means to compensate for loss of wetlands functions. Objective F.1.5 The City shall continue to maintain the wetland inventory of 760 acres as identified in the City's 2005 Wetlands Survey. Policy F. 1.5.1 Wetlands shall not be dredged and filled or disturbed in any manner other than by natural phenomenon and their natural functions shall be protected, except through the implementation of State or City mitigation standards. Policy F. 1.5.3 The City shall protect and prevent disturbance of any natural wetland areas whether publicly or privately owned, by utilizing assessments and authority provided by the Florida Department of Environmental (FDEP), the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD), Pinellas County and the Army Corps of Engineer. Policy F.1.5.4 The City shall within the limits of state legislation protect all mangrove species from disturbance and/or destruction and to provide public awareness of mangrove resources and their importance and value to the food chain of marine life through the strict enforcement of the City tree protection ordinance. Objective G.1.4 Preserve natural open space areas which constitute aesthetic, and/or ecological community assets. Policy G.1.4.3 Continue to designate appropriate land "Preservation" and "Recreation/Open Space" in the Future Land Use Plan whenever feasible. Policy G. 1. 4.4 Preserve coastal and interior wetlands, floodways, floodplains, and other environmentally significant areas to protect their aesthetic and environmental qualities which benefit the City. Storm water Goals, Objectives and Policies: Policy A.I.1.5 Stormwater shall be controlled through consistent application of local, state, and federal regulations, mitigation and management plans, and permitting procedures for both site-specific and basin-level development plans. GOAL D.3 Provide the most cost effective and efficient provision of stormwater management including the improvement and enhancement of stormwater quality discharging into local receiving waters, and provide maximum practical protection to persons, property and the natural environment. Objective D.3.2 The City of Clearwater shall continue to develop watershed management plans which should seek to identify, evaluate and implement the most cost effective and cost efficient programs for stormwater management, including stormwater quantity and quality. These plans should also address any projects included in the Pinellas County Surface Water Management Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 5 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc Plan for the implementation of all stormwater management, as well as recommended funding sources. Policy D.3.2.3 All stormwater management improvements should seek to meet applicable goals, guidelines, and regulations established to provide flood protection and pollution abatement. Policy E.2.1.4 The City shall work toward reducing the existing quantity and improving the quality of stormwater runoff to estuarine and surface water bodies by ensuring that development and redevelopment adheres to the treatment standards set forth in State Water Policy, and complies with the retention and treatment requirements of Chapter 62- 25 F.A.C., the Environmental Resource Permitting Rules 40D-4, 40D-40, 40D-400, F.A.C. of the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) and with any more stringent local regulations. Objective E.2.3 Clearwater Harbor and Tampa Bay are designated Outstanding Florida Waters and are under a non-degradation rule. Clearwater will continue to manage stormwater runoff and control erosion during construction to reduce waterborne sediments. As additional initiatives are approved under the SWIM program, they will be considered for inclusion in the Community Development Code. Policy E.2.3.1 Restoration and enhancement of disturbed or degraded drainage systems shall be implemented by upstream detention of stormwater, maintenance of existing drainage channels, widening of bridges, culverts and other stormwater conveyance structures. Objective F.2.1 The City shall continue to protect, improve and enhance surface waters from stormwater runoff discharging into both interior and coastal surface waters. Policy F2.1.5 Management plans shall be developed for waterbodies with known or suspected water quality problems in the City to include Tampa Bay, Clearwater Harbor, Stevenson Creek, Allen's Creek, and Alligator Creek. Threatened and Endangered Species Objectives and Policies: GOAL E.2 Management of Clearwater's coastal resources shall prohibit activities that would damage or destroy the natural or built environment, or threaten human life die to hurricane hazards, and shall promote activities that enhance the natural and built environment. Objective E.2.1 The City shall continue to protect coastal wetlands, estuaries and wildlife habitats to maintain or increase the acreage for threatened and endangered species populations. F. 1.3 Objective The City shall continue to maintain and enhance the City's wildlife and natural native vegetation resources. Policy FIJI Prohibit destruction and disturbance of all conservation land uses to protect wildlife and plants especially those that are threatened or endangered species. This policy shall include known, professional wildlife management and habitat restoration techniques. Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 6 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc Coastal Storm Area Objectives and Policies: Objective A. 1.2 Population densities in the coastal storm areas are restricted to the maximum density allowed by the Countywide Future Land Use Designation of the property, except for specific areas identified in Beach by Design: A Preliminary Design for Clearwater Beach and Design Guidelines, in which case densities identified in Beach by Design shall govern. All densities in the coastal storm area shall be consistent with the Pinellas County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and the Regional Humcane Evacuation Study. Policy A.1.2.2 Continue to cooperate with the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council and Pinellas County to meet the regional objectives for evacuation of permanent populations as well as other emergency concerns. Recommended Conclusions of Law Although this application requests a change to the future land use map for lands currently designated Preservation (P) which would impact existing wetlands, the proposed Mitigation Plan, if approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District, will enhance existing, surrounding wetlands resulting in a net increase in higher quality wetlands. All development will be limited to the lands designated Institutional (I), and the Master Plan included within the proposed development agreement (Case No. DVA2010- 06001) includes a new stormwater management system and buffers between development and the surrounding wetlands consistent with the City's Community Development Code. These additional improvements to the site, coupled with the Mitigation Plan, will enhance the water flow in the areas surrounding the uplands, consistent with the Comprehensive, Plan Goals, Objectives and Policies. There is an active eagle nest immediately east of the subject area that is addressed in the development agreement. Any development or construction activities related to this land use change must comply with the state's Bald Eagle Management Plan and any additional regulations of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. The proposed land use change results in an increase in allowed residential density; however, this density is limited by the development agreement to a maximum of 750 temporary residents (dormitories). The development agreement also requires that a hurricane evacuation plan, approved by the City, be developed in accordance with the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council recommendations for evacuation of a student population and include in its published Safety Manual. II. CONSISTENCY WITH COUNTYWIDE PLAN RULES Recommended Findings of Fact Proposed future land use categories on the subject property will include Institutional (I), Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) and Water/Drainage Feature. The developed areas will be designated Institutional (I) and the remaining areas will be designated Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) and Water/Drainage Feature. Two land use categories, Residential Low (RL) and Commercial General (CG), are being removed from the property as these areas are primarily preservation areas that are inaccurately designated and will therefore be Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 7 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc more appropriately assigned to be consistent with the Countywide Rules as discussed below. The purpose of the existing and proposed Institutional (I) category, as specified in Section 2.3.3.7.3 of the Countywide Rules, is to depict those areas of the county that are now used or appropriate to be used, for public/semi-public institutional purposes; and to recognize such areas consistent with the need, character and scale of the institutional use relative to surrounding uses, transportation facilities, and natural resource features. This category is generally appropriate to locations where educational, health, public safety, civic, religious and like institutional uses are required to serve the community; and to recognize the special needs of these uses relative to their relationship with surrounding uses and transportation access. The existing college and support uses meet the intent of the Institutional (I) category. The purpose of the existing and proposed Recreation / Open Space (R/OS) category as specified in Section 2.3.3.7.2 of the Countywide Rules, is to depict those areas of the county that are now used, or appropriate to be used, for open space and/or recreational purposes; and to recognize the significance of providing open space and recreational areas as part of the overall land use plan. This category is generally appropriate to those public and private open spaces and recreational facilities dispersed throughout the county; and in recognition of the natural and man-made conditions which contribute to the active and passive open space character and recreation use of such locations. There will be a net increase of 0.24 acres in the Recreation / Open Space (R/OS) category, primarily at the northwest portion of the site along Bayshore Boulevard that is currently designated Residential Low (RL). The purpose of the existing and proposed Preservation (P) category as specified in Section 2.3.3.7.1 of the Countywide Rules, is to depict those areas of the county that are now characterized, or appropriate to be characterized, as a natural resource : feature worthy of preservation; and to recognize the significance of preserving such major environmental features and their ecological functions. This category is generally appropriate to those natural resource features it is designed to recognize wherever they may appear and at a size. significant to the feature being depicted in relationship to its surroundings. In recognition of the natural conditions which they are intended to preserve, these features will frequently occur in a random and irregular pattern interposed among other categories. The purpose of the existing and proposed Water/Drainage Feature category as specified in Section 2.3.3.9.1 is to depict those water bodies and drainage features now committed to, or proposed to be recognized for, these respective functions based on their physical characteristics and use. Water bodies include ocean, estuary, lake, pond, river, stream and drainage detention areas. Drainage features recognize existing natural and man-made drainage ways and water bodies, and proposed drainage ways and water bodies, that are part of the Pinellas County Master Drainage Plan, as subsequently refined through the individual Watershed Management Plans that are shown in the Stormwater Management Element of the respective local government Comprehensive Plans, or that are part of an approved site plan or other authorized development order action of the local government with jurisdiction. This category is designed to reflect water bodies and drainage features as defined herein and located on the Countywide Plan Map, as same may be revised from time to time through the map amendment or map adjustment process, and subject to their actual location on the ground. Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 8 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc The college campus site is located on Tampa Bay and is directly accessible from a main entrance off the Courtney Campbell Causeway (Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard) which is designated a Unique/Scenic View Corridor on the Pinellas Planning Council's Scenic Non-Commercial Corridor Map. The site is also adjacent to but not accessible from Bayshore Boulevard. The intent and purpose of the Scenic/Noncommercial Corridor designation is to guide the preservation and enhancement of scenic qualities, to ensure the integrity of the Countywide Plan Map, and to maintain and enhance the traffic operation of these especially significant roadway corridors in Pinellas County. Properties designated in the Unique/Scenic View subclassification are characterized by their unique scenic, cultural, recreational or historic resources and typically classified as Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) or Preservation (P). The immediate area north of the Courtney Campbell Causeway (Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard) is characterized by recreation/open space areas including a public beach and the City's Visitors Center, wetlands uses, and single and multi-family residential (with allowable densities ranging between 7.5 units per acre to 15 units per acre) along Bayshore Drive. West of the subject property are mixed use residential/office/retail uses along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. The subject property contains areas where the future land use and zoning designations are not consistent with the existing character of the area. Recently, on July 13, 2010, the Countywide Planning Authority (CPA) approved a request by the City for administrative adjustments to the Future Land Use Map to change 4.05 acres of the subject property from Preservation (P) to Institutional (I) based on the current jurisdictional wetland line. These areas are developed uplands with existing buildings, paved roads, a soccer field and a retention pond for the college campus. Other Preservation (P) areas on the subject property that are inaccurately designated Commercial General (CG) and Residential Low (RL) are being addressed by this amendment. This amendment increases land designated Institutional (I) on the Future Land Use Map in order to accommodate expansion of the Clearwater Christian College campus that has existed on this site and under the ownership of the college since 1967. The accompanying proposed development agreement for the property establishes a master plan for the developed portion of the property, consolidated within the proposed expansion of lands designated Institutional (I) and limits associated with residential and nonresidential density for the entire subject property (Case No. DVA2010-06001). The development agreement proposes dividing the subject property into two areas, a Mitigation Area (98.99 acres or 4,312,004 square feet) and a Master Plan Area (32.06 acres or 1,396,533 square feet), with no development being allowed outside the boundaries of the Master Plan Area. In order to mitigate impacts to wetlands in the Preservation (P) category to develop the proposed Master Plan Area, the applicant proposes to address these objectives within a Mitigation Area and to place a conservation easement on the Mitigation Area (98.99 acres) in perpetuity. The request to amend the Future Land Use Map category on portions of the site from Preservation (P) and Recreation / Open Space (R/OS) to Institutional (I) is consistent with the applicable requirements of the Countywide Plan Rules Section 4.2.7.1.4, which allows a plan amendment to a non-residential use on a Scenic Non-Commercial Corridor if it is a logical in- fill, extension or terminus of an existing non-residential classification of an adjoining existing non-residential use, the amendment is considered in relationship to the existing delineation of Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 9 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc surrounding categories, and the amendment is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Scenic/Non-Commercial Corridor Element. The Institutional (I) category will allow the extension of a non-residential classification for the expansion of the established college campus and is consistent with the existing delineation of surrounding categories, and the purpose and intent of the Scenic/Non-Commercial Corridor Element of the Countywide Plan. The proposed preservation mitigation areas will enhance the existing wetlands in the Preservation (P) category. Recommended Conclusions of Law The proposed plan amendment is consistent with the purpose and locational characteristics of the Countywide Plan Rules as well as the additional regulations set forth pertaining to Scenic/Non- Commercial Corridors and the Scenic/Non-Commercial Corridor Element; therefore, the proposed amendment is consistent with the Countywide Plan Rules. III. COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTY/CHARACTER OF THE CITY & NEIGHBORHOOD [Section 4-602.F.2, 4-602.F.3, 4-602.F.4, 4-603.F.3, and 4- 603.F.61 Recommended Findings of Fact The subject property is located on the north side of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard at the easternmost edge of the City of Clearwater boundaries. Development on the property is concentrated on the upland area located in the southeast corner of the site which is currently designated Institutional (I) and accessed by Damascus Road. The Courtney Campbell Causeway / Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is located on the south side of the property. Area within the subject site is primarily wetlands which continue to the north and east. To the west across Bayshore Drive are single and multi-family homes with Future Land Use Map categories of Residential Urban (RU) and Residential Medium (RM) and zoning districts of Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) and Medium Density Residential (MDR). The Residential Urban (RU) category permits 7.5 dwelling units per acre and the Residential Medium (RM) permits 15 dwelling units per acre. The Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) and Medium Density Residential (MDR) zoning districts primarily permit residential uses. The proposed Institutional (I) future land use category permits 12.5 dwelling units per acre and a floor area ratio of 0.65 and the proposed Institutional (I) zoning district permits educational facilities, schools, places of worship and governmental uses. The Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS), and Water/Drainage Feature future land use categories surrounding the Institutional (I) area have very limited development potential. The Preservation (P) and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) zoning districts allow recreational uses. These less intensive districts are located adjacent to the residential districts west of the subject property. Recommended Conclusions of Law The proposed future land use and zoning designations are in character with the Future Land Use Map and zoning designations in the area. They are compatible with surrounding uses and are consistent with the character of the immediate surrounding area. Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 10 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc IV. SUFFICIENCY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES [Section 4-602.F.5 and 4-603.F.4] Recommended Findings of Fact The total area of the subject property is 131.05 acres (5,708,538 square feet), of which 82.32 acres (3,585,859 square feet) is designated Preservation (P), 22.87 (996,217 square feet) is designated Water/Drainage Feature, 19.84 acres (864,230 square feet) is designated Institutional (I), 3.41 acres (148,539 square feet) is classified Residential Low (RL), 1.05 acres (45,738 square feet) is designated Commercial General (CG), and 1.05 acres (45,738 square feet) is designated Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) on the Future Land Use Map. An additional 0.56 acres is unclassified right-of-way (Damascas Road). The site is currently developed with educational facilities, dormitories, athletic fields and parking to support the college. The future land use and zoning amendment request proposes an increase in the amount of land designated Institutional (I) on the Future Land Use Map to 26.55 acres (1,156,518 square feet). A development agreement has been submitted that proposes dividing the total property into two areas, a Mitigation Area (98.99 acres or 4,312,004 square feet) and a Master Plan Area (32.06 acres or 1,396,533 square feet) (Case No. DVA2010-06001). No development will be allowed outside the boundaries of the Master Plan Area. The proposed Master Plan area includes the 26.55 acres of Institutional (I) as well as some land designated Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) and Preservation (P) on the Future Land Use Map. Because all current and proposed development would be located within the Institutional (I) area, for the purposes of the public facilities analysis, only those land use changes within the boundaries of the proposed Institutional expansion area will be analyzed. For those land use designations where both residential and nonresidential development is allowed, the current public facilities demand analysis will utilize the most intensive use and density allowed. The Institutional (I) future land use category permits 12.5 dwelling units per acre (residential equivalent of 3 beds per unit) and a floor area ratio of 0.65. The subject property could yield a maximum of 243 dwelling units (729 dormitory beds) or 551,556 square feet of nonresidential floor area in the area currently designated Institutional (I) within the proposed Institutional (I) expansion area. The Residential Low (RL) future land use category permits 5 dwelling units per acre and a floor area ratio of 0.40. The portion of the subject property within the Institutional expansion area designated Residential Low (RL) would allow up to 3 dwelling units (9 dormitory beds) or 12,197 square feet of nonresidential floor area. The Preservation (P) future land use category permits a floor area ratio of 0.10, which could yield a maximum of 20,778 square feet of nonresidential floor area. The Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) future land use category permits a floor area ratio of 0.25, which could yield up to 1,307 square feet of nonresidential floor area within the proposed Institutional (I) expansion area. Water/Drainage Feature and ROW do not have any development potential associated with the area. Under the proposed Institutional (I) category, the subject area (26.55 acres total) could yield 331 dwelling units (993 dormitory beds) or a floor area of 751,736 square feet. Because the proposed development agreement would limit the allowable development within the Master Plan area, and all development will be within the Institutional expansion area, the public facilities demand analysis for the proposed changes will be based on these proposed limits, which are up to 170,000 square feet of nonresidential floor area and up to 750 dormitory beds (equivalent of 250 dwelling units). Community Development Board -August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 -Page 11 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc Roadways The subject site is proposed to have direct access to Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. According to the traffic analysis submitted by the applicant and approved by the City's Engineering Department, potential traffic generation will be distributed along Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard in the following manner: 10% of the trips will be distributed east on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and 90% of the trips will be distributed west on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. The traffic analysis submitted by the applicant utilizes different segment beginnings and ends than those included within the Pinellas County Metropolitan Planning Organization Level of Service Report; therefore, the following table does not utilize the trip distribution percentages provided within the secondary analysis. The resulting figures assume that the net new trips generated would be distributed onto one single adjacent segment without consideration to direction of traffic, thus presenting the maximum potential traffic to be generated on the segment by the proposed parcel and related land use change. Table 1: Maximum Potential Traffic depicts traffic characteristics of the subject property based on the current and proposed Future Land Use Map designations. The table indicates the maximum potential trips generated by future land use category based on the traffic generation rates in the Countywide Plan Rules. The table also shows the potential roadway level of service impacts to Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard under the current and proposed future land use designations. Note: The Countywide Plan Rules traffic generation guidelines are the accepted methodology for reviewing the roadway impacts of proposed Future Land Use Map amendments. Courtney Campbell Causeway from the Hillsborough County Line to Bayshore Boulevard currently operates at a level of service F, peak hour according to the Pinellas County Metropolitan Planning Organization 2009 Level of Service Report. Trips generated by the proposed future land use category would not further degrade the operating level of service, of the PM peak hour. Tablet: MAXIMUM POTENTIAL TRAFFIC Pro posed Institutional 1) area -' 26.55 acres) Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard: Courtney Campbell Causeway Segment Hillsborou h County Line to Ba shore Blvd Existing Conditions Current FLUM1 Proposed FLUM2 Net New Trips Maximum Daily Added Potential Trips N/A 3,777 5,098 1,321 Maximum PM Peak Hour Added Potential Tri s3 N/A 359 484 125 Roadway Volume 52,000 55,777 57,098 1,321 Roadway Level of Service PM Peak Hour F F F° F4 Adopted Roadway Level of Service Standard D Peak Hour Notes: N/A = Not Applicable. FLUM = Future Land Use Map, Clearwater Comprehensive Plan. 1. Based on Pinellas Planning Council (PPC) calculations of 192 trips per acre per day for the Institutional (I) Future Land Use Category (19.48 acres), 0.3 trips per acre per day for the Preservation (P) Future Land Use Category (4.77 acres), 3 trips per acre per day for the Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) Future Land Use Category (0.12 acres) and 50 trips per acre per day for the Residential Low (RL) Future Land Use Category (0.7 acres). 2. Based on PPC calculations of 192 trips per acre per day for the Institutional (I) Future Land Use Category. 3. Based on MPO K-factor of 0.095. 4. Based on the 2009 Florida Department of Transportation Quality/Level of Service Handbook. Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 12 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc Table 2: Trip Generation Comparison by Zoning Designation, indicates the estimated trip generation for specific uses allowed in the current and proposed zoning districts based on the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip Generation 81h Edition. The analysis compares trips generated by the current enrollment of the current use of the subject property (college) to the proposed maximum enrollment of the current use of the subject property (college) and a more intensive institutional use allowed within the proposed Institutional District (church). Table 2: TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON BY ZONING DESIGNATION Avg. Net Change PM Peak PM Net Land Use Development Daily Average Trips Peak Change Potential Trips Daily Trips Average Trips PM Peak Rate Trips EXISTING DESIGNATIONS: "I", "P", "OS/R" & "LDR"Zoning districts ( "I", "P", ``R/OS", "RL", and "Water/Drainage Feature" Future Land Use categories) University/College' 3 575 students 1,369 N/A 0.21 121 N/A (2.38 trips/student) PROPOSED DESIGNATIONS: "I" Zoning District ("I" Future Land Use Category) University/College' 925 studentS4 2,202 833 0.21 194 73 (2.38 trips/student) Church2 751,736 SFS 6,848 5,479 0.55 413 292 (9.11/1,0 0 F GFA) Notes: GFA = Gross floor area. SF = Square foot. DU = Dwelling unit. N/A = Not applicable. 1. Institute of Transportation Engineer's Trip Generation 8`h Edition Land Use 550. 2. Institute of Transportation Engineer's Trip Generation 81h Edition Land Use 560. 3. Existing enrollment of Clearwater Christian College (2010). 4. Proposed enrollment of Clearwater Christian College. 5. Total gross floor area ratio permitted by the underlying I Future land use map category is 0.65. Two possible uses were analyzed in the Trip Generation Comparison by Zoning Designation table. University/College use reflects the current and proposed use of the subject area. Trip generation rates for University/College uses are based on number of students, not density. Based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual, this use and the increase in students would result in an increase of 73 PM Peak trips. Church use was chosen because it is an intensive institutional use. A church use developed at the maximum intensity in the Institutional (I) District (751,736 square feet) would result in an increase of 292 PM Peak trips on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard (Courtney Campbell Causeway). Both of the possible uses analyzed generate additional trips; however, the Church use scenario analysis is for a greater development potential than the proposed maximum density being limited by the Development Agreement accompanying this application. The traffic impact analysis submitted by the applicant used real time data to develop an accurate volume count for the adjacent segments of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard between McMullen Booth Road and the Clearwater city limits, as well as for the intersections of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and Bayshore Boulevard and Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and Damascus Road. This study indicates that the existing roadway levels of service on these segments is D, peak hour, and the signals are operating at level of service C. The additional trips generated by the proposed changes to the site will not negatively affect the level of service on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and the intersections will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 13 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc Mass Transit The citywide level of service for mass transit will not be affected by the proposed plan amendment. The total miles of fixed route service will not change. The subject property is located on a mass transit route. Potable Water The current future land use designations could use up to 66,835 gallons of potable water per day. Under the proposed future land use designation, potable water demand could approach approximately 82,100 gallons per day, which results in a net increase of 15,265 gallons. Wastewater The current future land use designations could produce up to 59,809 gallons of wastewater per day. Under the proposed future land use designation, sewer demand could approach approximately 72,190 gallons per day, which results in a net increase of 12,381 gallons. Solid Waste The current future land use designation could generate 988 tons of solid waste per year. Under the proposed future land use designation, 2,157 tons of solid waste could be generated per year, or an increase of 1,169 tons. Recreation and Open Space The City has sufficient parkland or recreational facility capacity to serve future development under the proposed amendment. Open Space, Recreation Land and Recreation Facility impact fees will be required for future development prior to the issuance of a building permit. Impact fees will be determined as part of the development review process. Public School Facilities Based on factors established by the Pinellas County School Board, the current Institutional (I) plan category (potential of 243 residential units) and Residential Low (RL) plan category (potential of 3 residential units) could generate the following number of students. Elementary School: 0.15 students per unit x 246 units = 36.90 students Middle School: 0.07 students per unit x 246 units = 17.22 students High School: 0.10 students per unit x 246 units = 24.60 students TOTAL = 78.72 students Based on factors established by the Pinellas County School Board, the proposed Institutional (I) plan category (potential of 331 residential units) could generate the following number of students. Elementary School: 0.15 students per unit x 331 units = 46.65 students Middle School: 0.07 students per unit x 331 units = 23.17 students High School: 0.10 students per unit x 331 units = 33.10 students TOTAL= 105.92 students An increase of 27.2 students could occur as a result of the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment. The subject property is located within Concurrency Service Area (CSA) C for elementary and Concurrency Service Area (CSA) C for middle schools. According to enrollment and capacity data from the Pinellas County School District, there is available capacity within both CSA C and the high school CSA to accommodate the potential additional students. Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 14 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc Recommended Conclusions of Law Based upon the findings of fact, it has been determined that the traffic generated by the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment will not degrade the existing level of service on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard or the operational efficiency of the signalized intersections. There would be increased demand for potable water, wastewater, and solid waste service, although the increase would not negatively impact the City's ability to meet the adopted level of service standards for these public facilities. Open space and recreation facilities and mass transit will not be affected by the proposed amendments. V. IMPACT ON NATURAL ENVIRONMENT [Section 4-603.F.5.1 Recommended Findings of Fact The total area of the subject property is 131.05 acres, characterized primarily by wetland habitat currently designated Preservation (P) and Water/Drainage Feature on the Future Land Use Map (105.19 acres total). Smaller portions of the wetland area are designated Residential Low (RL) and Commercial General (CG) which is inconsistent with the physical characteristics of those areas of the property (4.46 acres total). The proposed map amendments would expand the existing Institutional (I) area by changing the designation of Preservation (P), Residential Low (RL), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS), and Water/Drainage Feature to Institutional (1) on the Future Land Use Map, resulting in 26.55 acres of land designated Institutional (I). The applicant received approval of a Petition for Formal Determination of Wetlands and Other Surface Waters from SWFWMD on December 3, 2009, approving their specific purpose wetland survey depicting location of the upland areas within the property boundaries. Upon approval of this land use map amendment, the applicant intends to apply for additional changes to the jurisdictional wetland boundaries in order to accommodate additional development within the proposed Institutional (I) area. Prior to any development or construction activities on the site, permits would be required from the appropriate regulatory agencies including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and SWFWMD. The proposed plans would potentially impact 7.8 acres of habitat, a portion of which is currently designated Institutional (I) on the Future Land Use Map. The applicant has provided a Threatened and Endangered Species Report including an analysis of the species of animals and habitat present within the area proposed to be impacted. Impacted habitat includes black mangrove forest (2.48 acres), Brazilian pepper/landfill forest (1.75 acres), mixed grasses (1.55 acres), open water (1.11 acres) and small stands of pine and oak within the wetland boundaries. According to this report, the majority of the areas being impacted are already degraded habitats; however, 1.55 acres of high marine marsh dominated by specific species of mixed grasses (1.55 acres) is functional habitat that would be impacted by the proposed plans, should they be permitted by the appropriate regulatory agencies. The applicant worked to minimize the impact to the high quality Preservation (P) areas, and has submitted a Mitigation Plan for 99 acres of the wetlands area that would, according to the plan, restore and enhance the degraded wetland ecosystem. The proposal addresses the objectives of hydrologic restoration and habitat enhancement through the removal of Brazilian pepper, restoration of habitat impacted by mosquito ditching, enhancing tidal creek flow, and creating a hydraulic connection under Damascus Road. Community Development Board -August 3, 2010 -Case LUZ2010-06002 -Page 15 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc The proposed land use change facilitates the development of a Master Plan for the college. The accompanying development agreement (Case No. DVA2010-06001) limits any development to the Institutional (I) area within the Master Plan and includes a new stormwater management system and buffers between development and the surrounding wetlands consistent with the Clearwater Community Development Code. A conservation easement would be placed on the Mitigation Area in perpetuity, further restricting the future development potential within the subject area. Recommended Conclusions of Law Based upon the findings of fact, it has been determined that although the proposal could result in limited impacts to wetland habitat surrounding the college, the proposed mitigation strategies could improve the overall wetland ecosystem. The applicant will need to receive further approvals and permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies before any development could take place. The Mitigation Plan, which would also need to be approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Southwest Florida Water Management District, would result in a net increase of higher quality wetlands, while impacts to higher quality habitat is being minimized by the plan. Any development would require compliance with the City's tree preservation, stormwater management, and wetland buffer requirements. VI. LOCATION OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES [Section 4-602.F.6.1 Recommended Findings of Fact Due to the development on the subject site being restricted to the southeast portion of the site, the location of the proposed Institutional (I) boundaries is logical and an appropriate classification. The district boundaries are appropriately drawn in regard to ownership lines and proposed master plan and mitigation areas. The proposed Preservation (P) boundaries will make the zoning designations of some areas currently zoned Residential Low (RL) and Commercial (C) consistent with the actual characteristics of the area. The proposed boundaries will continue to maintain an extensive buffer between the college in the southeast corner of the subject site and the residential uses approximately 1,800 feet to the west. The district boundaries are appropriately drawn in regard to ownership lines and proposed master plan and mitigation areas. Recommended Conclusions of Law The district boundaries are appropriately drawn in regard to location and classifications of streets, ownership lines, existing improvements and the natural environment. VII. CONSISTENCY OF DEVELOPMENT WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND CITY REGULATIONS [Section 4-602.F.11 The proposed Institutional (I) future land use and zoning designations permit a floor area ratio of 0.65 and a 0.85 impervious surface ratio. The subject property meets the minimum lot area of 40,000 square feet required for educational facilities uses in the Institutional (I) zoning district. Any development of the property that does not meet minimum standard requirements will be subject to the use criteria in the Flexible Standard Development process or Flexible Development process. Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 16 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS The request for amendment to the Future Land Use Map involves a change from the Institutional (I), Commercial General (CG), Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS), Residential Low (RL) and Water/Drainage Feature future land use categories to the (I), Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) and Water/Drainage Feature future land use categories. Also involved is a request for rezoning from the Institutional (I), Commercial (C), Preservation (P), Low Density Residential (LDR) and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) zoning districts to the Institutional (I), Preservation (P), and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) zoning districts. The subject property is developed as a college. The site is surrounded by preservation and wetland areas to the north and east, the Courtney Campbell Causeway to the south, and residential uses to the west. The proposed amendment is compatible with the existing neighborhood. The use and density of this property is proposed to be limited through a companion development agreement application (Case No. DVA2010-06001). The proposed Institutional (I), Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) and Water/Drainage Feature Future Land Use Map classifications and Institutional (I), Preservation (P), and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) zoning districts are consistent with both the City Comprehensive Plan and the Countywide Rules, are compatible with the surrounding area, do not degrade public services below acceptable levels, are compatible with the natural environment with the approval of the Mitigation Plan and the granting of a conservation easement over lands designated Preservation (P) are consistent with the development regulations of the City. Approval of this land use map amendment does not guarantee the right to develop on the subject property. Transportation concurrency must be met, and the property owner will have to comply with all laws and ordinances. in effect at the time development permits are requested. Based on the above analysis, the Planning and Development Department recommends the following actions on the request: ACTION: Recommend APPROVAL of the Future Land Use Map amendment from the Institutional (I), Commercial General (CG), Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS), Residential Low (RL) and Water/Drainage Feature categories to the Institutional (I), Preservation (P), Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) and Water/Drainage Feature categories and the rezoning request from the Institutional (I), Commercial (C), Preservation (P), Low Density Residential (LDR) and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) districts to the Institutional (I), Preservation (P), and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) districts. Prepared by Planning & Development Department staff: ?Lauren Matzke, AICP, anner III Attachments: Resume Application Location Map Aerial Photograph of Site and Vicinity Current Future Land Use Map Proposed Future Land Use Map Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 17 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc Current Zoning Map Proposed Zoning Map Existing Surrounding Use Map Site Photographs Community Development Board - August 3, 2010 - Case LUZ2010-06002 - Page 18 of 18 S:\Planning Department\C D B\ and Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Staff Reports\LUZ2010-06002 Staff Report 072210.doc Resume Lauren Matzke, AICP 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 727-562-4547 lauren.matzke(amyclearwater.com PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE • Planner III • Planner II City of Clearwater October 2008 to present September 2008 to October 2008 Responsible for numerous aspects of the Growth Management Act of Florida such as . comprehensive planning, Future Land Use Plan amendments, rezonings, and annexations. Update Community Development Codes by Ordinance. Prepare staff reports for the City Council and Community Development Board. Responsible for providing informational assistance to the public and developers concerning development plans. General planning for development and redevelopment. • Senior Planner February 2007 to September 2008 City of St. Pete Beach, FL Implemented new legislative directives for Florida's growth management laws related to governments' comprehensive planning and land development regulations. Served as staff to the City Commission, Planning Board and Historic Preservation Board. Administered the land development regulations, processed future land use plan amendments and rezonings. Prepared a special area plan for the commercial district within the City's Historic District. Served as the city's representative on countywide and regional planning agency committees. Authored the City's Evaluation and Appraisal Report. Maintained the Certified Local Government requirements for the historic preservation program. • Environmental Specialist III August 2005 to February 2007 Florida Department of Environmental Protection Tallahassee, FL Served as primary reviewer of local government comprehensive plan amendments, sector plans and evaluation and appraisal reports for the northwest region of Florida. Provided comments and recommendations to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. Drafted policies and comprehensive plan language regarding natural resource protection, assisting local government representatives. Served as the Department's representative on thr Rural Economic Development Initiative (REDI) and numerous springs protection working groups. • Planner August 2006 to December 2006 Florida Planning and Development Lab Tallahassee, FL Comprehensive Plan update for the Town of St. Lucie Village, Florida. Amended the Town's Comprehensive Plan, including Goals, Objectives and Policies and Data and Analysis to bring into compliance with all changes to Florida Statutes since 1993. Performed land suitability analysis utilizing GIS to guide amendments to the Future Land Use Map. Created a complete and updated Map Series using best available data for all Elements. • Planning Intern Glatting Jackson Orlando, FL June 2005 to August 2005 Case study research and reports on transit oriented developments for City of Charlotte, NC. Identification of stakeholders for community involvement portion of transportation project. Participated in iterative design process at community and client meetings in Pennsylvania for traffic corridor redesign project. EDUCATION Master's Degree in Urban and Regional Planning, Florida State University, 2006 Bachelor of Science in Design and Environmental Analysis, concentration in Gerontology, Cornell University, 1998 LICENSES AND ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIPS American Institute of Certified Planners (2009 to Present) American Planning Association (2003 to Present) Florida Chapter (2003 to 2005) New York Metro Chapter (2005 to Present) B e e:v. - ,v4d seem .^a.d•- aoea ®a6is=•. .. ex /? mS J? - - Z L,1 ^.a av .IS apl °/,J'PE r- .9 ;t.2_]5 O S?-._.? ee"'-_e'- lj?•` c-_ ry ? tPT C Si •°..rM19°S - 3J 2?E<.'3: F < E .. ........ °9 .=e •... ........Y Jc?'a a?s Y ^,tpTy ?^ +rae?a a e ??"?l'FI . GEE b^ ? QQU n^ Ir G ? 7 1, El - y ^°[°R 3^^em?.y?.ao yaa a = env - e a9 c .• c .. 3 m?° ?E'C n • - ° a 4 ° °z 55 LOCATION MAP LUZ2010-06002 & Owners: Clearwater Christian College Case: DVA2010-06001 Property 131.05 Site: 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Size (Acres): Land Use Zoning 16-29-16-00000-120-0100 16-29-16-00000-140-0100 From : I, CG, P, R/OS, I, C, P, & OS/R PIN: 16-29-16-00000-130-0200 RL & Water/Drainage Feature 16-29-16-00000-110-0100 To: I, P, R/OS, & Water/Drainage I, P, & OS/R Feature Atlas Page: 292B S:\Planning Department\C D BUand Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Maps\Revised Submittal - Used for CDB\LUZ2010-06002 LOCATION.docx i T RU S P WATER was wos P P R(0S DREW ST R was os RL K a - •• WATER v o i RL V _ L RL i P P ___ R/OS ¦¦ ¦¦? RLM O 0 ? •• •• Jy • WATER • R G y i r •• ?Q .• RUi P t¦¦¦¦¦?? R 0 f RM ATE • . RL I?ATER P , RL RI C ) A • © RL CG ". goes . R/OS R/OS _ CG ¦¦.6106. CG 9 Go Ad R/OS WATER ::T:/U: R(OS ; 14 CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE MAP LUZ2010-06002 & Owners: Clearwater Christian College Case: DVA2010-06001 Site: 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Property Size (Acres): 131.05 Land Use Zoning 16-29-16-00000-120-0100 16-29-16-00000-140-0100 I, CG, P, R/OS, I, C, P, & R/OS PIN: 16-29-16-00000-130-0200 From : RL & Water/Drainage Feature 16-29-16-00000-110-0100 I, P, R/OS, & Water/Drainage I, P, & R/OS To: Feature Atlas Page: I 292B SAPlanning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\L.UZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulfto Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Maps\Revised Submittal - Used for CDB\LUZ2010-06002 FLU BEFORE.docx --- WA R - RU p WATER wos R/oS P 0 P i RL L R/OS 0 _°, e ? ? ° ? I R/OS OS 17 WATER fts I t r RIOS C J h -? i I RL P i i P i j oS -- I LM P i 'R0 i WATER P RM WATER ' CG ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ R(OS ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ R/OS - ------------- ¦ ¦ R/OS OS RMS WATER U R(OS ° ? ate; e?4; „oz PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE MAP LUZ2010-06002 & Owners: Clearwater Christian College Case: D V A2010-06001 Site: 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Property Size (Acres): 131.05 Land Use Zoning 16-29-16-00000-120-0100 16-29-16-00000-140-0100 From : I, CG, P, R/OS, I, C, P, & OS/R PIN: 16-29-16-00000-130-0200 RL & Water/Drainage Feature 16-29-16-00000-110-0100 To: I, P, R/OS, & Water/Drainage I, P, & OS/R Feature Atlas Page: 292B SAPlanning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Maps\Revised Submittal - Used for CDB\LUZ2010-06002 FLU AF-fER.docx OS/R __ i 3 f J OS/R OSIR - osi DREW ST ¦-¦??-¦¦FS¦¦s?¦¦a,¦a?a? ????s¦@news1on8soa OS/R ,; k e `e= y?? LDR ((?JJ7 DR : (, - - LDR . ' BAYL K ' _ ?? LD ` --- -?M? - ? ? LDR V` -- . : OS/R _ 1iIiL?;`nt ¦ _,:. P; : d r •_., -: - ¦ P ¦ _ r manna LDFC ? MHP Jy?p ' ???? Lamovsa# O -- 41? _ _ ?---- _--. ,? ? y? ?? P y? 01 ?+ MDR ? ? LDR LD R C ?s R ? ma am$ su?r ss 0.s ? •a P ° CURRENT ZONING MAP LUZ2010-06002 & Owners: Clearwater Christian College Case: DV A2010-06001 Site: 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Property Size(Acres): 131.05 Land Use Zoning 16-29-16-00000-120-0100 16-29-16-00000-140-0100 I, CG, P, R/OS, I, C, P, & OS/R PIN: 16-29-16-00000-130-0200 From : RL & Water/Drainage Feature 16-29-16-00000-110-0100 I, P, R/OS, & Water/drainage I, P, & OS/R To: Feature Atlas Page: 2926 SAPlanning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Maps\Revised Submittal - Used for CDB\LUZ2010-06002 ZONE BEFORE.docx --' - OS/R (% OS/R SIR DREW-STiDi , OS/ I ¦• :OS/R BAS LN- OS/R LDR -= LMDR ; OS/R j ¦ : P : I OS/R P I ••• MHP QQ • 5 ¦ - -- •?? • ••• ••• ?? •• MDR 77 77 ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ goes COURTNE CAMPBELL CSWY OS/R P PROPOSED ZONING MAP LUZ2010-06002 & Owners: Clearwater Christian College Case: DVA2010-06001 Site: 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Property Size(Acres): 131.05 Land Use Zoning 16-29-16-00000-120-0100 16-29-16-00000-140-0100 From : I, CG, P, R/OS, I, C, P, & OS/R PIN: 16-29-16-00000-130-0200 RL & Water/Drainage Feature 16-29-16-00000-110-0100 To: I, P, R/OS, & Water/Drainage I, P, & OS/R Feature Atlas Page: 292B SAPlanning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Maps\Revised Submittal - Used for CDB\LUZ2010-06002 ZONE AFTER.docx Pre ervation / Wetlands ills _wsr T1 I - Preservation / We lands ® ti Preservation We& ds a? • Cohge and ,• Aociated ?.' Facilities w Vacant & FDOT t 111" 1114 ll "JI R R - , l YCAA F? EXISTING SURROUNDING USES MAP LUZ2010-06002 & Owners: Clearwater Christian College Case: DVA2010-06001 Site: 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Property Size (Acres): 131.05 Land Use Zoning 16-29-16-00000-120-0100 16-29-16-00000-140-0100 From : I, CG, P, R/OS, I, C, P, & OS/R PIN: 16-29-16-00000-130-0200 RL & Water/Drainage Feature 16-29-16-00000-110-0100 To: I, P, R/OS, & Water/Drainage I, P, & OS/R Feature Atlas Page: 292B SAPlanning Department\C D B\Land Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd - Clearwater Christian College\Maps\Revised Submittal - Used for CDB\LUZ2010-06002 EXIST.docx AERIAL MAP Owners: Clearwater Christian College Case: LUZ2010-06002 & D VA 2010-06001 Site: 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Property 131.05 Size(Acres): Land Use Zoning 16-29-16-00000-120-0100 16-29-16-00000-140-0100 PIN: From : I, CG, P, R/OS, I, C, P, & OS/R 16-29-16-00000-130-0200 RL & Water/Drainage Feature 16-29-16-00000-1 10-0100 To: I, P, R/OS, & Water/Drainage 1, P, & OS/R Feature Atlas Page: 292B SAPlanning Department\C D BTand Use Amendments\LUZ 2010\LUZ2010-06002 - 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd -Clearwater Christian College\Maps\Revised Submittal - Usedfor CDB\LUZ2010-06002 AERIAL.dc)cx 1. View looking north from Gulf-to-Bay Blvd at subject property i t:w t' LUZ2010-06002 & DVA2010-06001 Clearwater Christian College 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Page 1 of 3 3. Representative buildings on subject property. 2. View looking south from Gulf-to-Bay Blvd 5. View looking west from existing parking lot on subject property towards Preservation area. 4. View looking north across existing athletics fields towards Preservation area. 6. View looking north from existing parking lot on subject property towards Preservation area. 7. View looking north along Bayshore Drive at typical sing family housing located across Bayshore Drive from subject property Preservation area 21-1?" -4 IN# 9. View looking east from Bayshore Drive at Downing Street at subject property Preservation area Preservation area LUZ2010-06002 & DVA2010-06001 Clearwater Christian College 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Page 2 of 3 family housing located across Bayshore Drive from subject property Preservation area i _ ., 10. View looking east from Bayshore Drive at subject property 10 8 9 i Location Map for site photographs (pages 1-2). LUZ2010-06002 & DVA2010-06001 Clearwater Christian College 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard Page 3 of 3 Matzke, Lauren From: hilda brown [hilditabrown@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2010 12:27 PM To: Matzke, Lauren Subject: I'LL NOT APPROVAL I OBJECT TO EXPENSION OF CLEARWATER HRISTIAN COLLEGE INTO HE WETLANDS BETWEEN COURTNEY CAMPBELL AND HARBOUR TOWNE. THE EXPANSION FOR MORE DORMITORIES AND ATHLETIC FIELD IS NOT A HEALTH OR SAFETYISSUE AND ILLREDUCETHE PROPERTY VALUE OF HARBOUR TOWNEBY INCREASING NOISE , PEACEFUL SERENITY AND POLLUTION. SINCERELY JAMES AND HILDA BROWN AND HAROLD H GUTIERREZ UNIT 210 APTO=201 UNIT 230 APTO=101 The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Get started. Matzke, Lauren From: Christiane [ChristianePerreve@earthlink.net] Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2010 12:53 PM To: Matzke, Lauren Subject: Christian college private School It is outrageous that you people are thinking to give permition for such thing, destroying our environnement. Those people do not paid taxes and have the audacity to think this is ok to do what they want, Here in harbour Town we going to fight against this, they are like another BP, greediness, they should buy another grown for there sport evens and not destroy our ecology, also to reduce the value of our condos. Went we did ask you to do some trimming in the bushes in the from of the water (it was only trimming) you refused saying it is the wetland and you can not do that, This is a bigger issue that trimming bushes , we are the taxes they are not. Christiane Perreve Matzke, Lauren From: Robert Cundiff [robertcundiff@clearwater.edu] Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 8:20 AM To: Matzke, Lauren Subject: Approve Clearwater Christian project Ms. Matske, As a 11 year resident of Harbour Towne Condominiums and fourteen year faculty member of Clearwater Christian College, I express my SUPPORT of the CCC project and my embarrassment of the HT Board Treasurer. I've looked at the CCC plans, and the net result in my opinion will be negligible on the environment. CCC has been a good steward of its property, always conscious of the environment as well as city, county, state, and federal codes. As I look at the plans, I see no health or safety issues; it would have no negative effect on the property value of HT. It would not increase pollution, have no effect on the peaceful serenity of HT; our noise comes from Bayshore Blvd., not US 60. The wetlands on the property would continue to buffer the coast. HT is at least a half-mile, as the birds fly, away from the project, and would not be affected in any way by the plan's implementation. The college has for more than 40 years contributed positively to Clearwater. It wants to continue to do that. HT Board Treasurer Ms. Anderson, who has communicated with you, does not speak for Harbour Towne on this; as far as I know she does not speak even for the HT Board, which I don't think has voted on a position. Also I don't appreciate her contacting the Sierra Club for help derailing the proposal. I don't appreciate her using her position to try to influence HT residents. Dr. Stratton has expressed his willingness to meet with her, but Ms. Anderson apparently is not willing to meet with CCC administration to talk about her concerns Please don't let a small, but vocal number of residents, who have a right to express their opinions, to influence negatively the positive results this project would engender. There are many residents of this area, much less vocal, who approve of the project. Thank you, and best wishes. Bob Cundiff Resident, Harbour Towne 200-207 Bayshore Blvd Clearwater, FL 33759 Robert S. Cundiff, Ph.D. Professor of Communication Chair, Dept. of Communication Arts Clearwater Christian College From: IAnde85911@aol.com [IAnde85911@aol.com] Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2010 10:53 AM To: kdelise@knology.net; MARLARCAR1@aol.com; ROBLIN @TALKTALK. N ET; charlene. strong @snet. net; jjimandkathync@bellsouth.net; darrelwoodrow@hotmail.com; sonjawoelfle@ipaper.com; sbwill@tampabay.rr.com; SissonSez@aol.com; brutledge4@verizon.net; selmaanusic@hotmail.com; judecav@yahoo.com; asmrio@yahoo.com; deborahfauth@comcast.net; GRHaislip@aol.com; rhinton@tampabay.rr.com; groundhog22@roadrunner.com; RJohn53904@aol.com; bigcubsfan493@yahoo.com; diaber@scarrittlincolnmercury.com; julez-cz@hotmail.com; Margostyle@aol.com; lauriedean123@yahoo.com; dolden@tampabay.rr.com; LeaOsler@aol.com; christianeperreve@earthlink.net; LL_pettit@yahoo.com; mquatman@yahoo.com; rr.realtor@verizon.net; Patrossignol@aol.com; Ocalawoods@aol.com; rosariosr@gmail.com; Tom64potter@aol.com; Coluzzi113@aol.com; rickmoon@stormbringerband.com; rachelk0g0ayahoo.corr: ft iuv.corr.• itsdianaftcox.net; katnapll@msn.com; attrain40@yahoo.com; dspatorico@phetersonstern.com; patti@equibore.com; mquatman@kh- pa.com; TomHassel@aol.com; terrysomers@gmail.com; johnmastromarchi@yahoo.com; rcjl3@verizon.net; mhrodwell@aim.com; blueyechef@msn.com; mdesalvia@southernwine.com; davelarsen36@hotmail.com; olszewskimatthewolszewski@yahoo.com; karena3@peoplepc.com; sonjawoefle@gmail.com; mhandell@tampabay.rr.com; margaretk0l@earthlink.net; lydiamunson@yahoo.com; mrtl548@yahoo.com; gablecat@tampabay.rr.com; Jiwhiteh@aol.com; tennis21000@hotmail.com; roblin2@btinternet.com; tsdegroot@tampabay.rr.com; carmen@abrahamson.biz; lunseth@hotmail.com; Ikaye@tampabay.rr.com; mcovely@phillies.com; jbvista7@yahoo.com; f.paimtree@hotmail.com; hilditabrown@hotmail.com; Robert Cundiff Cc: jellis@resourcepropertymgmt.com; yogisch@tampabay.rr.com; sburke46@hotmail.com Subject: Wetland incursion near Harbour Towne Owners I encourage every owner to write to the city planner Lauren.Matzke(a MyClearwater.com to object to the expansion of Clearwater Christian College into the wetlands between Courtney Campbell and Harbour Towne. The expansion for more dormitories and athletic fields is not a health or safety issue and will reduce the property value of Harbour Towne by increasing noise, pollution, peaceful serenity, and protection from storms and hurricanes. Wetlands buffer the coast from many invasive sources and should be protected at all costs. Sincerely Ingrid Anderson Matzke, Lauren From: Wendy Segade [wendy@searchprodirect.com] Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 12:32 PM To: Matzke, Lauren Subject: Hi Lauren - Wetlands on Bayshore Blvd. Hi Lauren, It has come to my attention there is a proposed use of the land on the east side of N Bayshore Blvd at the edge of the protected wetlands. I cannot object strongly enough to the expansion of the private Clearwater Christian College into the wetlands area near Bayshore Blvd. As it is, I have seen this area depleted of wildlife in the past 10+ years I have been a resident of this area. I am purchasing a condominium at Harbour Towne this week and have previously owned several properties here. I love this area deeply and do not feel it is wise to build anything on the shoreline side of the street as this has always been an inappropriate land use given the fragile nature of the environment here. As it is, many animals have already been pushed out of the area as we encroach upon their turf. I recommend this project be disallowed as it is harmful to the fragile environment as well as the aesthetic beauty of this area. Sincerely, Wendy Segade, Principal Recruiter wendv@searchprodirect.com 727-797-7909 Matzke, Lauren From: marlarcarl@aol.com Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 12:56 PM To: Matzke, Lauren Cc: IAnde85911 @aol.com; lydiamunson@yahoo.com; rickmoon@stormbringerband.com Subject: Clearwater Christian College Dear Ms. Matzke: I am a unit owner at Harbour Towne Condominium. I am writing with regard to the expansion of the above-referenced college. When I bought my unit at Harbour Towne, I knew exactly how many square feet of living area I was purchasing. Rules and Regulations prohibit me from expanding my property, and I was aware of that limitation when I purchased the unit. Clearwater Christian College knew, or should have known, at the time of purchase of the land on which they built their school, that their acerage abutted the wetlands, which they knew were protected by law and that expansion would be very limited. As I see it, the college falls under similar restrictions to those that preclude me from adding on to my existing property. To allow them to destroy a portion of the protected wetlands would be tragic as well as harmful. The wetlands are protected for a reason and to further endanger our already fragile ecosystem to accommodate an institution that wants more space for sporting events would be a travesty. Please help us save the wetlands. Not just for the property owners at Harbour Towne, but for all of us who care about preserving our planet. Thank you. Marilyn Beck Harbour Towne Condominium Matzke, Lauren From: Lkx [Ikx@juno.com] Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 8:52 PM To: Matzke, Lauren Subject: Wetlands near Clearwater Christian College Ms Matzke, city planner: Please protect the wetlands .... Do not allow the college to invade the wetlands around their property. The college may have bought the property years ago, BUT they knew exactly where and the number of acres they were buying at that time. If they have the money to invade the wetlands and build and build, they should have enough money to buy land elsewhere to do all the expansion of playing fields and more buildings without destroying the waters around them. Sincerly, L. Kay Flack 210 N. Bayshore Blvd. $0.99/day Car Insurance? Insurance deal just passed allows YOU to legally pay $1/day iQuotes.orq Matzke, Lauren From: Jinene Harvey [gablecat@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 2:24 PM To: Matzke, Lauren Subject: zoning change i live at harbour towne on bayshore . i've lived in the mcmullen booth corridor for 40 of the 50 years i've lived in the city. i read the published zoning notice in the times and called this to the attention of the board members. my concern is solely of loss of estuary and environmental encroachment resulting from any fill in the bay. about 1980, the city employed city Forrester/ environmental person. mike kenton [ now passed on] also jim sheeler a grants specialist. mike kenton's lasting presence in the city is now the beautiful 'tune/ road ' of oaks on east cleveland st and neighboring sts in skycrest. jim sheeler [ whom i spoke to recently to refresh my memory ] was involved in writing monetary grants for several depts as well as survey of black , white and red mangroves preservation on bayshore and cooper point . there was also a request from a developer group to put houses and docks etc on the n end of the ccc property. the city turned this down- w a bit of some contentiousness by the developer/ city / state. damage to the mangrove from fill and cutting resulting from lessened tidal flow was absolutly ruled out at the same time DOT and state was exploring removing the small culvert and small decrepit drawbridge just east of damascus. so the courtney could be widened. we have the hump bridge resulting. water flow/ estuary flow was crucial for this design. and it was turned down. increased east side development was not available for the college. they knew that now they want the west side filled in. an over head view on map quest shows extremely narrow channels of water around this piece of very low land . in about 1982-3 2 canoes of us got grounded on the north end of cooper point. even at that time 30 years ago, we noticed fewer shore birds or nesting areas. it is super shallow at hi tide only a few inches. the state and city reports should be in the city archives. the taxpayers paid for it. i submit that memory can be short si hq ted _given a desired outcome. jinene harvey 240 n bayshore blvd apt 202 clearwater fl 33759 727-726-8961 Matzke, Lauren From: E S [f.palmtree@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 8:25 PM To: Matzke, Lauren Subject: Clearwater College building expansion As a owner of a Harbour Towne condo for 7 years I am deeply concerned about Clearwater Christian College's request to build a dormitory on protected wetlands that is near my property. In this day and age of environmental disasters i find it unacceptable that this city even consider that someone be allowed cause more damage to the mangroves and wetlands. Bayshore is a beautiful road in a beautiful area. Let's keep it that way. With the current economic downturn I am sure that there are people who want and need to sell property or buildings that might suit the schools need. The college knew that when it was built it was bordering protected wetlands yet they proceeded. If they need more dorm space let them buy property near the school and build there. Of note, there are signs posted across from Harbour Towne stating it is against the law to cut the mangroves or tamper with them. This rule does not allow me or Harbour Towne to cut the mangrove down so we have water views which would make my property more valuable as well as beautiful. Yet owners in the expensive homes along Bayshore are allowed to and do cut them. Why is this allowed?And now there is a proposal to allow a college to wipe out the mangrove completely! How absurd. Please acknowledge my stance on this serious matter and not allow any further destruction to Tampa Bay. Thank you, ERIC STOCKI Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. Sign up now. Matzke, Lauren From: patrossignol@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 10:45 PM To: lAnde85911 @aol.com Subject: Fwd: Petition to preserve wetlands- Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: lAnde85911@aol.com To: patrossignol@aol.com Sent: Wed, Jul 21, 2010 10:15 pm Subject: Re: Petition to preserve wetlands- Thanks. PETITION AGAINST APPROVAL OF REZONING WETLANDS BY CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE I oppose any rezoning requested by Clearwater Christian College or anyone else of the wetlands north or west of Courtney Campbell Causeway based on environmental concerns, reduction in property values and deleterious effects on existing residential habitats. Pat Rossignol W Matzke, Lauren From: Kathi Knapp [katnap11@msn.com] Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2010 11:13 AM To: Matzke, Lauren Cc: iande85911@aol.com Subject: Opposition of REZONING OF WETLANDS Ms. Matzke, I am resident of Harbour Towne Condominium who adamantly opposes the wetlands rezoning and development by Clearwater Christian College. I cannot even believe this is being considered. People who live along this beautiful area are not even allowed to trim the mangroves unless they were grandfathered in. How is this even possible??? Wetlands buffer the coast from many invasive sources and should be protected at all costs. In their natural condition, wetlands provide many benefits, including food and habitat for fish and wildlife, water quality improvement, shoreline erosion control. Wetlands also function like natural basins, storing floodwater, creating protection from hurricanes. This expansion would also reduce the property values in this area by increasing noise, lights, pollution and decreasing peace and serenity of this beautiful natural area. Now people kayak, fish and enjoy the wetlands, which protect this area and insulate us from hurricanes, noise, and pollution as stated above. Sincerely, Kathi Knapp 220 N. Bayshore Blvd. Clearwater, FL 33759 The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail. Get busy. Matzke, Lauren From: lAnde85911@aol.com Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 10:40 AM To: Cc: Matzke, Lauren kdelise@knology.net; MARLARCAR1@aol.com; ROBLIN@TALKTALK.NET; charlene.strong@snet.net; jjimandkathync@bellsouth.net; darrelwoodrow@hotmail.com; sonjawoelfle@ipaper.com; sbwill@tampabay.rr.com; SissonSez@aol.com; brutledge4 @verizon.net; selmaanusic@hotmail.com; judecav@yahoo.com; asmrio@yahoo.com; deborahfauth@comcast.net; GRHaislip@aol.com; rhinton@tampabay.rr.com; groundhog22 @roadrunner.com; RJohn53904@aol.com; bigcubsfan493@yahoo.com; dlaber@scarrittlincolnmercury.com; julez-cz@hotmail.com; Margostyle@aol.com; lauriedean123@yahoo.com; dolden@tampabay.rr.com; LeaOsler@aol.com; christianeperreve@earthlink.net; LL_pettit@yahoo.com; mquatman@yahoo.com; rr.realtor@verizon.net; Patrossignol@aol.com; Ocalawoods@aol.com; rosariosr@gmail.com; Tom64potter@aol.com; Coluzzi113@aol.com; rickmoon@stormbringerband.com; rachelkulig@yahoo.com; derrick@spatorico.com; IkxQuno.com; itsdiana@cox.net; katnap11 @msn.com; attrain40@yahoo.com; dspatorico@phetersonstern.com; patti@equibore.com; mquatman@kh-pa.com; TomHassel@aol.com; terrysomers@gmail.com; johnmastromarchi@yahoo.com; rcj13@verizon.net; mhrodwell@aim.com; blueyechef@msn.com; mdesalvia@southernwine.com; davelarsen36@hotmail.com; olszewskimatthewolszewski @yahoo. com; karena3@peoplepc.com-, sonjawoefle@gmail.com; mhandel1@tampabay.rr.com; margaretk01@earthlink.net; lydiamunson@yahoo.com; mrt1548@yahoo.com; gablecat@tampabay.rr.com; Jiwhiteh@aol.com; tennis21000 @hotmail.com; roblin2@btinternet.com; tsdegroot@tampabay.rr.com; carmen@abrahamson.biz; lunseth@hotmail.com; Ikaye@tampabay.rr.com; mcovely@phillies.com; jbvista7@yahoo.com; f.palmtree@hotmail.com; hilditabrown@hotmail.com Subject: CCC Mitigation Plan Lauren- I have some auestions about the CCC mitigation plan, that may be answered in the board's report but I wished to draw your attention to several factors in Fla Stat. 373.4136 and 373.414. Many are concerned that the mitigation efforts do not outweigh the damage to the acres of wetlands that will be destroyed: 1) How much will the mitigation efforts even improve the existing wetlands. No water flow across Courtney Campbell will be improved and Courtney Campbell is the problem with the water oxygenation. The effects of Courtney Campbell are longstanding and this mitigation will have little overall effect. 2) Any improvement to existing wetlands likely will be minimal or occur over a very long period of time, if at all. The plan itself admits that the efforts are doomed if water flow is not increased and the only increase results form some form of pipe or tunnel under the small Damascus road. The water flow from that would be minimal and any good results are purely speculative. The plan does not address who will monitor the improvement and how long it will take to see improvement. 3) The overall damage to acres of wetlands and surrounding residential areas far outweigh any benefits from the mitigation plan. Repeatedly the preservation of wetlands is a high priority in the Comprehensive Land use plan, as well as Florida Statutes and is not to be ignored easily. Endangered species such as the eagles nest will be affected for "more parking spaces" at the college. I would be interested to see how the mitigation credits are identified and withdrawn in this case. Please consider all of the factors in the above statutes in reaching your decision. See partial statute excerpts below. Sincerely, Ingrid 373.4136. Establishment and operation of mitigation banks (1) Mitigation bank permits.--The department and the water management districts may require permits to authorize the establishment and use of mitigation banks. A mitigation bank permit shall also constitute authorization to construct, alter, operate, maintain, abandon, or remove any surface water management system necessary to establish and operate the mitigation bank. To obtain a mitigation bank permit, the applicant must provide reasonable assurance that: (a) The proposed mitigation bank will improve ecological conditions of the regional watershed; (b) The proposed mitigation bank will provide viable and sustainable ecological and hydrological functions for the proposed mitigation service area; (c) The proposed mitigation bank will be effectively managed in perpetuity; (d) The proposed mitigation bank will not destroy areas with high ecological value; (e) The proposed mitigation bank will achieve mitigation success; (f) The proposed mitigation bank will be adjacent to lands that will not adversely affect the perpetual viability of the mitigation bank due to unsuitable land uses or conditions; (g) Any surface water management system to be constructed, altered, operated, maintained, abandoned, or removed within the mitigation bank will meet the requirements of this part and the rules adopted thereunder; (h) It has sufficient legal or equitable interest in the property to ensure perpetual protection and management of the land within a mitigation bank; and (i) It can meet the financial responsibility requirements prescribed for mitigation banks. (2) Mitigation bank phases.--A mitigation bank may be established and operated in phases if each phase independently meets the requirements for the establishment and operation of a mitigation bank. The number of mitigation credits assigned to a phase of a mitigation bank may be less than would be assigned to that phase upon completion of all phases of the mitigation bank. In such case, the department or water management districts shall increase the number of mitigation credits awarded to subsequent phases of the mitigation bank. (3) Addition of lands.-The department or water management district shall authorize the addition of land to a permitted mitigation bank when it is appropriate to do so and the addition of the land results in an increase in the ecological value of the existing mitigation bank. Any such addition shall be accomplished through a modification to the permit which reflects the corresponding increase in the total number of mitigation credits assigned to the bank. (4) Mitigation credits.--After evaluating the information submitted by the applicant for a mitigation bank permit and assessing the proposed mitigation bank pursuant to the criteria in this section, the department or water management district shall award a number of mitigation credits to a proposed mitigation bank or phase of such mitigation bank. An entity establishing and operating a mitigation bank may apply to modify the mitigation bank permit to seek the award of additional mitigation credits if the mitigation bank results in an additional increase in ecological value over the value contemplated at the time of the original permit issuance, or the most recent modification thereto involving the number of credits awarded. The number of credits awarded shall be based on the degree of improvement in ecological value expected to result from the establishment and operation of the mitigation bank as determined using a functional assessment methodology. In determining the degree of improvement in ecological value, each of the following factors, at a minimum, shall be evaluated: (a) The extent to which target hydrologic regimes can be achieved and maintained. (b) The extent to which management activities promote natural ecological conditions, such as natural fire patterns. (c) The proximity of the mitigation bank to areas with regionally significant ecological resources or habitats, such as national or state parks, Outstanding National Resource Waters and associated watersheds, Outstanding Florida Waters and associated watersheds, and lands acquired through governmental or nonprofit land acquisition programs for environmental conservation; and the extent to which the mitigation bank establishes corridors for fish, wildlife, or listed species to those resources or habitats. (d) The quality and quantity of wetland or upland restoration, enhancement, preservation, or creation. (e) The ecological and hydrological relationship between wetlands and uplands in the mitigation bank. (f) The extent to which the mitigation bank provides habitat for fish and wildlife, especially habitat for species listed as threatened, endangered, or of special concern, or provides habitats that are unique for that mitigation service area. (g) The extent to which the lands that are to be preserved are already protected by existing state, local, or federal regulations or land use restrictions. (h) The extent to which lands to be preserved would be adversely affected if they were not preserved. (i) Any special designation or classification of the affected waters and lands 373.414. Additional criteria for activities in surface waters and wetlands (1) As part of an applicant's demonstration that an activity regulated under this part will not be harmful to the water resources or will not be inconsistent with the overall objectives of the district, the governing board or the department shall require the applicant to provide reasonable assurance that state water quality standards applicable to waters as defined in > s. 403.031(13) will not be violated and reasonable assurance that such activity in, on, or over surface waters or wetlands, as delineated in > s. 373.421(1), is not contrary to the public interest. However, if such an activity significantly degrades or is within an Outstanding Florida Water, as provided by department rule, the applicant must provide reasonable assurance that the proposed activity will be clearly in the public interest. (a) In determining whether an activity, which is in, on, or over surface waters or wetlands, as delineated in > s. 373.421 (1), and is regulated under this part, is not contrary to the public interest or is clearly in the public interest, the governing board or the department shall consider and balance the following criteria: 1. Whether the activity will adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare or the property of others; 2. Whether the activity will adversely affect the conservation of fish and wildlife, including endangered or threatened species, or their habitats; 3. Whether the activity will adversely affect navigation or the flow of water or cause harmful erosion or shoaling; 4. Whether the activity will adversely affect the fishing or recreational values or marine productivity in the vicinity of the activity; 5. Whether the activity will be of a temporary or permanent nature; 6. Whether the activity will adversely affect or will enhance significant historical and archaeological resources under the provisions of > s. 267.061; and 7. The current condition and relative value of functions being performed by areas affected by the proposed activity. CIT17 OF CLEARWATER APPLICATION FOR COMPREREI S11TE PLAl?T AMENIIAIENT (INCLUDING FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT) PLANNING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, 2" d FLOOR PHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4576 APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNERS, AND AGENT INFORMATION: CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COL= PRIVATE SCHOOL, INC. APPLICANT NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard, Clearwater, FL 33759 PHONE NUMBER: (727) 726-1153 FAX NUMBER: PROPERTY OWNERS: Same as applicant. (List all owners) Katherine Cole, squire, and AGENT NAME: Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP MAILINGADDRESS. P. 0. Box 1368, Clearwater, FL 33757-1368 PHONE NUMBER: (727) 726-1153 FAX NUMBER: SITE INFORMATION: LOCATION: 3400 Gulf-toy=Bay Boulevard STREETADDRESS: 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit "A" attached. PARCEL NUMBER: SIZE OF SITE: 131.05 acres _ total (After change 26.55 acres Institutional) FUTURE LAND USE Inst. , CG, Inst. CLASSIFICATION: PRESENT: Preservation, Water REQUESTED: Preservation ZONING CLASSIFICATION: PRESENT Tnst. .C-, REQUESTED: Tnc;i-- Preservation Preservation PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT: Rec/OS Betr710 No text amendment (use additional paper if necessary) I (We), the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this application are true and accurate to the best of my/(our) knowledge. Signature of propert y owner or representative Katherine E. Cole Signature of property owner or representative JAYNE E. SEARS Commission # DD 907040 Expires September 2, 2013 STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of May A.D., to me by Katherine E. Coe who is personally known kg o eed as-dentifir? . 3 CITY OF CLEARWATER SE???T AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT ?9lyyrfpF~? MUNIICIPAILv SERVICES BUILDING, 10 SOUTH MYRTLE LE AVENUE, FLOOTR PHONE (727)-562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4576 CLEAFda=R CHRISTIAN COLLEGE PRIVA'T'E SCHOOL, INC., a Florida non-profit corporation of all property owners) 1. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property: Located at 3400 Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and adjoining parcels. fgPP attached list of parcel numbers,) (Address or General Location) 2. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: Land use plan amendment to Institutional and rezoning to Institutional. (Nature of request) 3. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint Katherine E. Cole, Esquire and Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP as (hishheir) 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 (1/we), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foreg_oingg i?s?? true and-correct - - - - - - - CLEARt?=R MSIAN COLLEGE PRIVATE SCHOOL INC. Prope ner Propeity Owner Randy T. Livingston STATE OF FLORIDA, Vice President COUNTY OF PINELLAS Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this 2_7 day of May 2010 personally appeared Randy T. Livingston* who having been first duly sworn deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/she signed. *as Vice President i of Clearwater Christian College Private School, Inc. otary Public My Commission Expires: RYAN MCNAMARA my COMMIss1oN p DD05453 EXPMM: APO 14,2013 !L Nowy Dow" Am* Q? . S: application forms/development review/Affidavit to Authorize Agent tipo•»t?URY ) 1 EXHIBIT "A" Parcel ID#: 16/29/16/00000/120/0100 16/29/16/00000/130/0200 16/29/16/00000/140/0100 16/29/16/00000/110/0100 Legal Description: See the attached map depicting areas for land use plan amendment and the specific amendment requested. 3 - ! EXHIBIT "B" TO COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION The Clearwater Christian College, owned by Clearwater Christian College Private School, Inc. ("College"), has been located at the easterly terminus of the City, adjoining Tampa Bay since the 1960s. The College campus is currently comprised of approximately 138 acres. The majority of the developed campus is zoned Institutional with a land use designation of Institutional and the adjoining lands owned by the College primarily have a land use designation of Preservation (although there are pieces of Commercial General property along Bayshore and the Courtney Campbell Causeway). The City submitted administrative future land use plan changes consistent with the Countywide Rules to change 4.05 acres of the College property from Preservation to Institutional based on the current wetland jurisdiction line. This administrative change received final approval on July 13, 2010. There remain some pocket areas within the College property that do not have a land use designation and zoning consistent with the surrounding areas or the actual use of the developed portion of property. The designations were placed on the property without the benefit of legal descriptions due to the geographic location within a natural area; therefore, the applicant has used the City's GIS to identify the areas necessary to change based on inaccurate labeling, on- ground conditions, and the proposed site plan. This application is for a future land use change and rezoning on approximately 13.35 acres of the College property, as shown below. For a more detailed explanation, please see attached exhibit "Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps". The application is accompanied by a development agreement application covering 131.05 acres of the College Property and limiting the development rights afforded to the applicant by this change. From To Net Change Institutional I 19.84 26.55 6.71 Preservation P 82.32 82.14 0.18 Recreation/Open Space R/OS 1.05 1.29 .24 Commercial General CG 1.05 0 (1.05) Water/Drainage Feature 22.87 21.12 (1.75) Residential Low RL 3.41 0 (3.41) The approval of this request will (i) consolidate all zoning and land use to Institutional on upland development areas and Preservation, Recreation/Open Space, and Water/Drainage Feature on other areas; (ii) allow for changes to certain Preservation areas to accommodate the addition of facilities as shown on the College's 2 I proposed master development plan; (iii) provide the mechanism for the College to seek approval of a Mitigation Bank through the appropriate state and federal agencies by moving the existing wetlands jurisdictional line west. Simultaneously with this request, the College has submitted (i) an application for approval of a development agreement which describes the proposed master development plan ("Master Plan"); (ii) an application for vacation of the right-of-way currently known as Damascus Road and for vacation of an existing ingress/egress easement, which will be relocated and an ingress/egress easement provided; and (iii) a flexible standard development application seeking approval of the site plan as to the construction of certain proposed facilities (as part of the campus Master Plan). The College was faced with a difficult procedural conundrum in preparing for the future. Because of the surrounding environmentally sensitive lands, several state and federal permits are required to implement the Master Plan. However, such permits cannot be issued without appropriate future land use plan and zoning categories. Finally, future land use categories are traditionally dependent upon the natural environment. Thus, in an effort to coordinate the several permitting requirements, the College must first request the necessary future land use and zoning changes. These changes are based upon a change of the existing, jurisdictional wetland line (as shown on the Exhibit titled "Existing Jurisdictional Line") to one that aligns with the proposed Master Plan (as shown in the attached Exhibit titled "Master Plan"). The requested changes and accompanying development agreement result in a net reduction of development potential on the Property. The change is necessary to accommodate the space needed to provide the appropriate facilities for a four-year college. Without this change, certain projects proposed on the campus cannot be permitted through the appropriate state and federal permitting agencies. In June 2010, the City made some administrative adjustments to the land use categories in an attempt to harmonize the existing development on the campus with the Institutional land use category. Those changes were processed through the countywide approval process and approved on July 13, 2010. This application is the next step in the College's long range planning process. This request is predicated on the significant improvements proposed on the preservation lands ("Mitigation Plan Area"). The College owns approximately 138 acres of property in the "corner" of Tampa Bay, adjacent to the Coopers Point Nature Park ("Coopers Point'). This future land use application impacts 13.35 acres, however the accompanying development agreement covers 131.05 acres of the College property. Since the Courtney Campbell Causeway was constructed, the Bay has seen a decline in water quality. The proposed Mitigation Bank Plan (attached hereto) provides the means to restore a degraded wetlands system and improve the Bay's water quality. This application is the impetus to improve approximately 100 acres of wetlands/conservation area, despite the fact that some existing wetlands will be impacted by development. 3 J i Standards: 1. The proposed amendment further implementation of the Comprehensive Plan consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the Plan. Below are examples of the proposed amendments consistency with various goals, policies and objectives of the plan: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT A.1 GOAL - THE CITY OF CLEARWATER SHALL CONTINUE TO PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES AND SYSTEMS THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND ENSURE THAT THESE RESOURCES ARE SUCCESSFULLY INTEGRATED INTO THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT THROUGH LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS, AND COORDINATION WITH FUTURE LAND USE INTENSITIES AND CATEGORIES. A. 1.1 Objective - On an ongoing basis, natural resources and systems shall be protected through the application of local, state, and regional regulations, mitigation and management plans, and permitting procedures as well as through locally instituted land purchase programs focusing on environmentally sensitive properties and significant open space areas. Policies A.1.1.1 Any permanent and temporary alteration of Department of Environmental Protection (D.E.P.) jurisdictional or non jurisdictional wetlands, the jurisdictional wetlands of the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD), beach dunes, sensitive soils, or other natural systems shall be prohibited unless such alteration is fully consistent with all local, state, and federal regulations, mitigation and management plans, and permitting procedures that may be applicable, including the wetland vegetative buffer requirement of the City's Community Development Code. A.1.1.3 Environmentally sensitive wetlands subject to Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) jurisdiction and the jurisdictional wetlands of the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) shall be designated by "Preservation" (P) zoning and prevented from being built upon except as permitted by the Preservation Zoning District. A.1.1.5 Stormwater shall be controlled through consistent application of local, state, and federal regulations, 4 # mitigation and management plans, and permitting procedures for both site-specific and basin-level development plans. A.1.1.8 Mitigation plans for alteration of non jurisdictional wetlands, beach dunes, swamps, marshes, streams, creeks, one hundred (100) year flood plains, or lakes shall require not less than a 1:1 ratio of mitigation land (on- or off-site) as approved by the Engineering Department and/or City Council, and in coordination with the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). Response: The project will meet all local, state and federal regulations regarding stormwater design and permitting, as shown on the site plan submitted simultaneously with this Plan amendment application. Furthermore, the adjustment of the jurisdictional line is dependent upon approval by SWFWMD and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ("USACOE") and the prescribed mitigation measures. A proposed stormwater plan was developed based upon the proposed Master Plan. Attached for your information are a Stormwater Narrative and an exhibit showing the proposed wetland buffer area as required by City Code ("Wetland Buffer Area"). In addition to the wetland buffer area, the Stormwater Plan retains the runoff internally, minimizing the impact to Tampa Bay. As there is currently a significant amount of runoff to the Bay A.1.2 Objective - Population densities in the coastal storm areas are restricted to the maximum density allowed by the Countywide Future Land Use Designation of the property, except for specific areas identified in Beach by Design: A Preliminary Design for Clearwater Beach and Design Guidelines, in which case densities identified in Beach by Design shall govern. All densities in the coastal storm area shall be consistent with the Pinellas County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study. Policies A.1.2.2 Continue to cooperate with the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council and Pinellas County to meet the regional objectives for evacuation of permanent populations as well as other emergency concerns. Response: The proposed land use change results in a net increase of dwelling units on the total 131.05. However, the accompanying development agreement will limit the residential density in several ways: (i) only temporary student housing is permitted, (ii) there is a limitation of 750 dormitory beds, (iii) overall development potential is limited to only the Institutional portion of the property. The College currently has dormitories that provide housing 5 i ? during the school year to approximately 600 students; the master site plan proposes a maximum of 750 students at full build-out. The College does not and will not have permanent housing on its site. The Master Plan for the College provides for the addition of dormitories; however, any temporary student housing will remain less than the permitted 12.5 units/acre allowed by the institutional land use category and 1 dwelling unit/acre allowed on the Preservation and Recreation/Open Space categorized lands. The Countywide Rules state that the relative intensity and potential impact shall be the equivalent of 3.0 beds per dwelling unit. The City of Clearwater Code and the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan are silent as to a Residential Equivalent Use for educational facilities thereby relying on the Countywide Rules. Using the default 3.0 beds/du, the proposed Institutional portion of the campus (26.55 acres, after land use plan amendment) could support 768 beds. The maximum student population at full build-out is expected to be 925 students with no more than 750 of those students living on campus as limited by the associated Development Agreement. The College has a hurricane evacuation plan for its residents and the students, faculty and staff who attend and work at the College in its Comprehensive Safety and Emergency Response Protocol. The accompanying, proposed development agreement will limit the student population and dormitory construction on the property to what is proposed in the Master Plan and requires an evacuation plan for the students. A.2 GOAL - A SUFFICIENT VARIETY AND AMOUNT OF FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES SHALL BE PROVIDED TO ACCOMMODATE PUBLIC DEMAND AND PROMOTE /NF/LL DEVELOPMENT. A.2.2 Objective - Future Land Use in the City of Clearwater shall be guided by the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map and implemented through the City's Community Development Code. Map categories are further defined in Policy #A.2.2.1. below. Policies A.2.2.1 Land Uses on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map shall generally be interpreted as indicated in the following table. The intensity standards listed in the table (FAR - floor area ratio; ISR - impervious surface ratio) are the maximum allowed for each plan category, except where otherwise permitted by special area plans or redevelopment plans approved by the City County. Consequently, individual zoning districts, as established by the City's Community Development Code, may have more stringent intensity standards than those listed in the table but will not exceed the maximum allowable intensity of the plan category, unless 6 I I otherwise permitted by approved special area plans or redevelopment plans. Excerpt from Land Use Plan Classification Table Requested Plan Categories PLAN CLASSIFICATION PRIMARY USES PER PLAN CATEGORY MAX. DENSITY/ INTENSITY PER PLAN CATEGORY CONSISTENT ZONING DISTRICTS Institutional (1) Public/Private 12.5 Dwelling Units Institutional Schools; Per Acre; (1) Churches; FAR 0.65; Public Offices; ISR 0.85 Hospitals Hospital Bonus Provision FAR1.0 Preservation (P) Natural/Undeveloped FAR 0.10; Preservation Water ISR 0.20 (P) Features; Beaches and Dunes Response: The project will comply with the uses, density and intensity standards of each respective proposed plan category as outlined in the Table above. The applicant requests zoning districts that are consistent with the respective plan categories. The Residential Equivalent Use of 3.0 beds/dwelling units is applied for the dormitory use, consistent with the Countywide Plan. A.2.2.6 The Community Development Code shall provide for safe on-site traffic circulation and connections to adjacent arterial and collector streets consistent with Florida Department of Transportation and Institute of Traffic Engineers design guidelines. A.3 GOAL - THE CITY OF CLEARWATER SHALL ENSURE THAT ALL DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES MEET THE SAFETY, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND AESTHETIC NEEDS OF THE CITY THROUGH CONSISTENT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. 7 a A.3.2 Objective - All development of redevelopment initiatives within the City of Clearwater shall meet the minimum landscaping/tree protection standards of the Community Development Code in order to promote the preservation of existing tree canopies, the expansion of that canopy, and the overall quality of development within the city. Policies A.3.2.1 All new development or redevelopment of property within the City of Clearwater shall meet all landscape requirements of the Community Development Code. Response: The project shall meet or exceed the landscape requirements of the Community Development Code. City staff must review and approve the landscape plan in connection with site plan review and the pending flexible development application. A.4 GOAL THE CITY SHALL NOT PERMIT DEVELOPMENT TO OCCUR UNLESS AN ADEQUATE LEVEL OF SERVICE IS AVAILABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THE IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT. AREAS IN WHICH THE IMPACT OF EXISTING DEVELOPMENT EXCEEDS THE DESIRED LEVELS OF SERVICE WILL BE UPGRADED CONSISTENT WITH THE TARGET DATES FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE APPLICABLE FUNCTIONAL PLAN ELEMENT. A.4.1 Objective - The City shall examine and upgrade the Concurrency Management and information system as appropriate for granting development permits. This system shall continue to consider the current, interim, and ultimately desired Levels of Service for roads, transit, water, sewer, garbage collection, public school facilities, and drainage systems and shall provide data on sub-sectors of the City in which service deficiencies exist or in which services are adequate to serve existing and planned new development. This level of service status will be considered and made part of the staff recommendation at the time of zoning, site plan, or plat approval. The level of service monitoring system shall be adjusted, at a minimum, annually to determine adequacy or service capacity. Should a requested development permit result in approvals which would burden service systems above adopted levels, permission to proceed with the development will not be granted until the City has assured that adequate services will be available concurrent with the impacts of development. 8 Policies A.4.1.1 No new development or redevelopment will be permitted which causes the level of City services (roads, recreation and open space, water, sewage treatment, garbage collection, public school facilities and drainage) to fall below minimum acceptable levels. However, development orders may be phased or otherwise modified consistent with provisions of the concurrency management system to allow services to be upgraded concurrently with the impacts of development. Response: The project will meet all applicable level of service standards adopted by the City. A traffic study has been submitted to demonstrate that the project will not degrade the adopted LOS for the transportation network. Compliance with the water, wastewater, stormwater management and solid waste standards will be demonstrated and confirmed on the site plan submitted simultaneously with the plan amendment application. A.6 GOAL - THE CITY OF CLEARWA TER SHALL UTILIZE INNOVATIVE AND FLEXIBLE PLANNING AND ENGINEERING PRACTICES, AND URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS IN ORDER TO PROTECT HISTORIC RESOURCES, ENSURE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION, REDEVELOP BLIGHTED AREAS, AND ENCOURAGE INFILL DEVELOPMENT. A.6.1 Objective - The redevelopment of blighted, substandard, inefficient and/or obsolete areas shall be a high priority and promoted through the implementation of redevelopment and special area plans, the construction of catalytic private projects, city investment, and continued emphasis on property maintenance standards. A.6.1.6 Land use decisions in Clearwater shall support the expansion of economic opportunity, the creation of jobs and training opportunities as well as the maintenance of existing industries through establishment of enterprise zones, activity centers and redevelopment areas and by coordination with the Chamber of Commerce, Tourist Development Council and other economic development organizations and agencies. Response: Redevelopment of the College campus and implementation of the Master Plan supports the expansion of economic opportunities by providing new jobs through increased student enrollment, solidifies the long-term success of the College, maximizes the land owned by the college taking a poorly planned, out of date campus and creating a state of the art, welcoming student facility. 9 As stated in the Avoidance and Mitigation Report prepared by Delta Seven and attached hereto, the College considered relocation prior to embarking on the land use change. This change provides a redevelopment opportunity otherwise not available. Although the change results in a net decrease of development potential, the change is necessary to accommodate the facilities needed by the college to succeed in today's competitive collegiate environment. The isolated location of the College as compared to urban services and the limited facilities on site necessitates the use of vehicles for students to travel to athletic events, College events and even graduation ceremonies. The proposed future land use change and Master Plan consolidate educational facilities, provide the means to construct additional facilities and create a campus atmosphere that limit the need for students to leave the campus for College activities. A.6.2 Objective - The City of Clearwater shall continue to support innovative planned development and mixed land use development techniques in order to promote infill development that is consistent and compatible with the surrounding environment. Policies A.6.2.1 On a continuing basis, the Community Development Code and the site plan approval process shall be utilized in promoting infill development and/or planned developments that are compatible. A.6.2.2 Encourage land use conversions on economically underutilized parcels and corridors, and promote redevelopment activities in these areas Response: The existing campus is an underutilized property that has a poorly designed parking and road system creating significant pedestrian/vehicular conflicts. Furthermore, the existing campus has not evolved to match the success of the College. The conversion of Preservation lands for the creation of expanded collegiate facilities further stabilizes the economic and community benefit of the College while creating an opportunity for the much larger impact of the improvement of an underperforming and dying ecosystem. Without changes to the campus and approval of the Master Plan and development agreement, which will require significant mitigation, the Coopers Point ecosystem will further deteriorate and the College will not be able to thrive in the future. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT TRAFFIC CIRCULATION 10 4 1, B.1 GOAL - THE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION SYSTEM SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE SAFE, CONVENIENT AND EFFICIENT DELIVERY OF PEOPLE AND GOODS BYA MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. B.1.3 Objective - The City will continue to monitor traffic counts, accidents, and road improvements, to provide timely status evaluation of level of service conditions for issuance of development approvals. Policies B.1.3.1 Requests for amendment to the Future Land Use Map will have an analysis of traffic impacts. Response: A traffic study has been submitted to demonstrate that the project will not degrade the adopted LOS for the transportation network. The proposed internal traffic circulation plan significantly improves safety by minimizing pedestrian/vehicular conflicts by keeping traffic along the perimeter of the campus. The proposed ingress egress easement through the College provides safe, efficient access to campus facilities and for the public to access Coopers Point Nature Park. A traffic study, as prepared by Gulf Coast Consulting, is included as an exhibit to this application. B. 1.4 Objective - The City shall specifically consider the existing and planned LOS the road network affected by a proposed development, when considering an amendment to the land use map, rezoning, subdivision plat, or site plan approval. Policies B. 1.4.1 The City shall continue to review trips generated by development projects through the Traffic Concurrency Management Program. B. 1.4.2 For those roads which are not currently operating at an acceptable LOS, or which do not have programmed improvements to upgrade service to an acceptable level, the concurrency management system shall be used to monitor traffic growth, with the dual intent of maintaining average operating speeds and restricting the aggregate and individual trips generated by development in the City limits. Response: As demonstrated in the enclosed Traffic Study, the project will not degrade the adopted LOS for the transportation network. 11 STORM WATER D-3 GOAL - PROVIDE THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT PROVISION OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT INCLUDING THE IMPROVEMENT AND ENHANCEMENT OF STORMWATER QUALITY DISCHARGING INTO LOCAL RECEIVING WATERS, AND PROVIDE MAXIMUM PRACTICAL PROTECTION TO PERSONS, PROPERTY, AND THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. D.3.2 Objective -The City of Clearwater shall continue to develop watershed management plans which should seek to identify, evaluate and implement the most cost effective and cost efficient programs for stormwater management, including stormwater quantity and quality. These plans should also address any projects included in the Pinellas County Surface Water Management Plan for the implementation of all stormwater management, as well as recommended funding sources. D.3.2.3 All stormwater management improvements should seek to meet applicable goals, guidelines, and regulations established to provide flood protection and pollution abatement. D.3.5 Objective - Protect and enhance the quality of receiving waters by the use of "Best Management Practices" in accordance with the adopted watershed management plans. D.3.5.2 Vegetated swales, sodding, and appropriate landscaping will be required as components of the drainage system for natural filtration before final discharge into receiving waters. D.3.5.6 Continue to identify impaired bodies of water and prioritize them for improvement and enhancement. Response: The proposed new stormwater management system will measurably improve flood protection and pollution abatement. It enhances the natural filtration before final discharge into receiving waters given a considerable portion of the existing system was constructed in the 1960s-1970s prior to present, more stringent regulations. Old Tampa Bay is an impaired body of water that will be improved and enhanced as a result of the College's new stormwater management system and the proposed mitigation plan, when the Master Plan and mitigation plans are approved and constructed. The existing campus co- exists without any buffer between the developed property and the wetlands. The proposed land use change provides sufficient space to 12 C L. provide a buffer adjacent to the new, proposed development, consistent with City Code, as shown on the Wetland Buffer exhibit. E.2 GOAL - MANAGEMENT OF CLEARWATER'S COASTAL RESOURCES SHALL PROHIBIT ACTIVITIES THAT WOULD DAMAGE OR DESTROY THE NATURAL OR BUILT ENVIRONMENT, OR THREATEN HUMAN LIFE DUE TO HURRICANE HAZARDS, AND SHALL PROMOTE ACTIVITIES THAT ENHANCE THE NATURAL AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT. E.2.1 Objective - The City shall continue to protect coastal wetlands, estuaries and wildlife habitats to maintain or increase the acreage for threatened and endangered species populations. Policies E.2.1.1 Restoration and enhancement of disturbed or degraded estuaries identified by the Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) program shall be accomplished by strict regulation of proposed impacts to wetlands and by controls on the operation and installation of marinas and other water-dependent uses. E.2.1.2 Development applications shall be reviewed to ensure that proposed new development or redevelopment will not encroach on or remove wetlands or beaches. New development and redevelopment shall be guided away from environmentally sensitive areas and into those most able to withstand impacts. E_2.1.4 The City shall work toward reducing the existing quantity and improving the quality of stormwater runoff to estuarine and surface water bodies by ensuring that development and redevelopment adheres to the treatment standards set forth in State Water Policy, and complies with the retention and treatment requirements of Chapter 62-25 F.A.C., the Environmental Resource Permitting Rules 40D-4, 40D-40, 40D-400, F.A.C. of the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) and with any more stringent local regulations. E.2.1.5 The City shall proactively pursue and facilitate coordination and participation in the implementation of the Tampa Bay Estuary Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP), and related plans, as a means of achieving E - 6 Goals, Objectives, and Policies Coastal Management mutual local and regional resource management and restoration goals for Tampa Bay. E.2.1.10 Land uses shall be distributed in a manner that minimizes the effect and impact on wetlands. The protection and 13 t1 i conservation of wetlands by the direction of incompatible land uses away from wetlands shall occur in combination with other goals, objectives and policies in the comprehensive plan. Where incompatible land uses are allowed to occur, mitigation shall be considered as one means to compensate for loss of wetlands functions. E.2.1.12 The City will continue to protect estuaries located entirely within the City limits and estuaries located within the City and another jurisdiction. The City will continue to coordinate and cooperate with other jurisdictions through such methods as interlocal agreements to ensure adequate sites for water-dependent uses, prevent estuarine pollution, control surface water runoff, protect living marine resources, reduce exposure to natural hazards, and ensure public access. Response: The proposed land use plan amendment facilitates the implementation of a Master Plan for the campus. The intent of the Master Plan is to bring the student population, classrooms and facilities to the interior of the campus, away from the wetlands and the mitigation area. Conversely, the perimeter of the campus will be lined with the athletic fields and parking area, creating a buffer between the population center and the environmentally sensitive lands. The approval of the plan amendment and accompanying development agreement provides for a limitation on the potential development on the College campus below what would potentially be permitted, and ensures a long-term environmental strategy resulting in benefits to the mangrove/wetland area that exceed the impacts. Furthermore, it results in a net reduction of development potential on the College's property. Although there is an impact to 5.69 acres m.o.l. of Preservation and Water/Drainage Feature designations proposed, there is an impact to approximately 1.84 acres of actual wetlands in this area and a proposed improvement of approximately 100 acres of wetlands adjacent to the developed property. The "Mitigation Bank Plan" (summary is attached) maximizes the benefits to the environment and ensures a permanent solution to the continued deterioration of the surrounding wetlands. Additionally, changes proposed in the Mitigation Bank Plan as well as the upgraded stormwater plan will positively impact the water quality of Tampa Bay. There is a bald eagle nest on the property adjacent to the College, as shown on the attached map. The College and the nest have peacefully co-existed for several years and this map change does not impact any requirements or limitations the state may place on development within the 14 I buffer area surrounding the bald eagle nest. Attached for reference is the executive summary from the state's Bald Eagle Management Plan. As stated by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, the bald eagle is not listed in any manner by the state as a protected or endangered species. However, the management plan does require certain precautions in the area surrounding an active nest. Any proposed development would conform to the Bald Eagle Management Plan as regulated by the state and outlined in the Development Agreement. E.2.3 Objective - Clearwater Harbor and Tampa Bay are designated Outstanding Florida Waters and are under a non-degradation rule. Clearwater will continue to manage stormwater runoff and control erosion during construction to reduce waterborne sediments. As additional initiatives are approved under the SWIM program, they will be considered for inclusion in the Community Development Code. Policies E.2.3.1 Restoration and enhancement of disturbed or degraded drainage systems shall be implemented by upstream detention of stormwater, maintenance of existing drainage channels, widening of bridges, culverts and other stormwater conveyance structures. Response: The existing drainage system is degraded and out of date. The proposed land use plan amendment, proposed Master Plan, improved stormwater management system and proposed Mitigation Bank Plan will result in positive impacts on Tampa Bay and the Coopers Point Nature Park area. CONSERVATION ELEMENT F.1 GOAL -TO PROTECT AND CONSERVE ALL ASPECTS OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND TO ENHANCE NATURAL FEATURES WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO THE EXISTENCE OF THE NATURAL QUALITIES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF CLEARWATER'S SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENT. F. 1.1 Objective - The City shall continue to protect and improve ambient air quality. Policies F. 1.1.1 Require all new residential and non-residential development to provide a specified amount of Florida friendly shade trees based on an established desired ratio of pervious to impervious surface areas. Shade trees will serve to provide heat reduction, noise abatement, buffering, replenishment of oxygen, and aesthetic beauty. 15 • A Response: The project will comply with this requirement through the site plan review process and a proposed site plan has been submitted simultaneously with the plan amendment application. Approximately 220 trees will be required at buildout of the Master Plan providing a greatly enhanced aesthetic environment and buffering while reducing heat and replenishing oxygen. The Master Plan submitted in conjunction with this application contemplates a full landscaping plan as each project is constructed. F. 1.2 Objective - The City shall continue to protect floodplains, drainage ways, and all other natural areas having functional hydrological characteristics. F.1.2.4 Utilize design methods that will trap stormwater sediments before entering surface waters. Response: The project will help trap stormwater sediments before entering the surface waters of Tampa Bay. Currently, an outdated stormwater system discharges primarily into the wetlands and Tampa Bay. The improvements to the wetlands and associated stormwater improvements required through the associated Development Agreement ensure these methods. F. 1.3 Objective - The City shall continue to maintain and enhance the City's wildlife and natural native vegetation resources. Policies F.1.3.1 Prohibit destruction and disturbance of all conservation land uses to protect wildlife and plants especially those that are threatened or endangered species. This policy shall include known, professional wildlife management and habitat restoration techniques. F.1.3.4 Prohibit development that will needlessly disturb or destroy native vegetation. This shall be achieved through the site plan review process and site inspections. Response: The proposed site plan and future land use plan amendment intrudes into the preservation area adjacent to the College. However, a significant portion of the area (less than two acres) that is impacted is not high quality preservation areas and should be repaired and enhanced to create a better conservation area. The approval of the development agreement which accompanies this request shall require a conservation easement to be placed on the remaining property owned by the College. Additionally, the development agreement requires significant mitigation on the conserved lands to rehydrate and enhance the quality of the Coopers 16 • i Bayou area and the Tampa Bay estuary. The Master Plan (attached hereto) which is tied to the land use change has been prepared to avoid all impacts to species listed as Threatened or Endangered and a Mitigation Plan required by the Development Agreement has been designed to improve habitat for these species. A Threatened and Endangered Species Report and associated maps, as prepared by Delta Seven, is included as an exhibit to this application. F.1.4 Objective - The City shall continue to manage all conservation areas located in the City to prevent any unnatural disturbance or adverse impacts from the developed urban environment. Policies F. 1.4.3 The City shall maintain and enhance the Courtney Campbell Causeway/Parkway as a "unique/scenic view" on the Countywide Scenic/Non-Commercial Corridor Map, a Florida Scenic Highway, an aesthetic gateway and landmark of Clearwater. Response: The proposed land use amendment and accompanying site plan creates the opportunity for improvements to the entrance of the College campus which can be viewed from the Courtney Campbell Causeway. Additionally, the mitigation required by the development agreement which accompanies this application will increase the habitat for wildlife in the area and require a conservation easement on approximately 100 acres of environmentally sensitive lands. These lands are adjacent to the City/Pinellas County Conservation Area known as Coopers Point Nature Park. Depending on the approval of the Mitigation Bank by the state and federal agencies, opportunities will exist to combine these conservation areas. F. 1.5 Objective - The City shall continue to maintain the wetland inventory of 760 acres as identified in the City's 2005 Wetlands Survey. Policies F.1.5.1 Wetlands shall not be dredged and filled or disturbed in any manner other than by natural phenomenon and their natural functions shall be protected, except through the implementation of State or City mitigation standards. F.1.5.2 The City shall protect and preserve riverine floodways from all new land uses other than recreational and/or open space through site plan review and enforcement of the Community Development Code. F. 1. 5.3 The City shall protect and prevent disturbance of any natural wetland areas whether publicly or privately owned, by utilizing assessments and authority provided by the Florida Department of 17 Environmental (FDEP), the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD), Pinellas County and the Army Corps of Engineer. F.1.5.4 The City shall within the limits of state legislation protect all mangrove species from disturbance and/or destruction and to provide public awareness of mangrove resources and their importance and value to the food chain of marine life through the strict enforcement of the City tree protection ordinance. Response: The approval of this plan and the accompanying development agreement will provide the mechanism for the College to proceed with requesting approval of a Master Plan, stormwater improvements, a mitigation bank and mitigation plan from the appropriate state and federal authorities. The mitigation bank/plan will enhance the mangrove and wetland area adjacent to the master site plan area. Although the plan includes dredge and fill activities, the filling of minimal areas to support the Master Plan results in the improvement of approximately 100 acres. The approval of the bank by state and federal agencies will create the first and only mangrove mitigation bank in the Tampa Bay estuary region. Any work done in the wetlands areas shall be permitted by state and federal agencies and consistent with the restrictions included in the Development Agreement. F. 1.6 Objective - The City shall continue to protect beaches, sand dunes, and dune vegetation for their natural function and for their recreational open space uses. F. 1. 6.8 Access to recreational areas and facilities shall not be eliminated or reduced as a result of public or private improvement and/or acquisition of rights-of-way, bridges, accessways, or development Response: The proposed Master Plan and Development Agreement which accompany this request create a safer access to Coopers Point Nature Park, a public nature preserve by providing a perpetual easement minimizing the current pedestrian/vehicular conflicts. Furthermore, the requirement to place a Conservation Easement on approximately 100 areas of property provides an opportunity for the City to expand its access to a passive recreational facility. F.1.7 Objective - The City shall continue to manage and protect all City- owned lands that are in their natural state, and to provide educational information programs and create public awareness. F. 1. 7.4 The City shall establish benefit of the general public to egress to and from natural areas. conservation easements for the provide pedestrian ingress and 18 R . a Response: The proposed Master Plan and Development Agreement which accompany this request create a safer access to Coopers Point Nature Park, a public nature preserve. Additionally, the Development Agreement requires the placement of a conservation easement and the transfer of title to a conservation organization of the remainder of the College's property that creates the opportunity for a larger, public park facility. F.2 GOAL - DISCHARGES OF STORMWATER SHALL BE MANAGED TO PROVIDE FLOOD PROTECTION FOR THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF. CLEARWATER AND TO PRESERVE, PROTECT, AND ENHANCE THE WATER QUALITY OF RECEIVING WATERBODIES. F.2.1 Objective - The City shall continue to protect, improve and enhance surface waters from stormwater runoff discharging into both interior and coastal surface waters. Policies F.2.1.4 The City shall continue to implement a stormwater ordinance requiring redeveloped sites other than single-family residential areas, to incorporate water quantity and quality controls consistent with new development regulations, recognizing that case-by-case limitations may call for partial controls, off site improvements or payments in lieu of improvements to achieve this goal. F.2.1.5 Management plans shall be developed for waterbodies with known or suspected water quality problems in the City to include Tampa Bay, Clearwater Harbor, Stevenson Creek, Allen's Creek, and Alligator Creek. F.2.1.8 All City stormwater management plan projects within watersheds of the City shall comply with applicable SWIM Plans for that waterbody or watershed. Response: The project will meet all local, state and federal regulations regarding stormwater design and permitting, as shown on the site plan submitted simultaneously with this Plan amendment application resulting in a significant improvement to the current stormwater management system and surrounding ecosystem. G.1 GOAL - TO DEVELOP A SYSTEM OF OPEN SPACES, PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES WHICH ARE DESIGNED FOR THE MAXIMUM SATISFACTION OF THE RECREATIONAL NEEDS OF CLEARWATER'S RESIDENTS AND TOURISTS. 19 K a G. 1.1 Objective - The City shall ensure that parks, open space, trails and recreation facilities are efficiently and adequately maintained for all segments and districts of the population according to the level of service standards established for the City. G.1.4 Objective - Preserve natural open space areas which constitute aesthetic, and/or ecological community assets. G.1.4.3 Continue to designate appropriate land "Preservation" and "Recreation/Open Space" in the Future Land Use Plan whenever feasible. G.1.4.4 Preserve coastal and interior wetlands, floodways, floodplains, and other environmentally significant areas to protect their aesthetic and environmental qualities which benefit the City. Response: The mitigation of the preservation area and the grant of a conservation easement will protect the aesthetic and environmental qualities benefiting the City, the public and the College as well as restrict future development on the remaining College property. The future land use map changes requested more accurately reflect the actual development pattern in this area and provide a mechanism for (i) improving the quality of the existing wetlands and (ii) providing the means for the College to expand its facilities. 2. The amendment is not inconsistent with other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Response to Standard 1 above. The proposed land use changes are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as well as the current use of the property and surrounding parcels considering the significant amount of mitigation that is required in the environmentally sensitive land area. Although there is a net reduction of preservation land use category, the proposed change creates a consistent, environmental and preservation area on a significant portion of the Property. Furthermore, the associated development agreement requires a significant amount of mitigation, likely above that required by the impact, resulting in the improvement of an estuary system that is slowly dying, consistent with policy E.2.1.10. This request is predicated on the fact that approximately 100 acres of conservation and preservation lands will be improved and perpetually maintained, resulting in a better wildlife habitat and increased water quality in Tampa Bay. Without the investment of private resources for such mitigation, the likelihood of improvements to this estuary area is minimal. The net result to the environment and the community is consistent with these policies. 20 K -t i 3. The available uses to which the property may be put are appropriate to the property in question and compatible with existing and planned uses in the area. The future land use plan amendment will not have an adverse effect on any of the existing improvements, or neighboring properties. The College has been in existence at this location for approximately 50 years so the Institutional use is well established and in need of expansion and upgrading. The surrounding wetland areas which are connected to Tampa Bay are appropriately designated Preservation. To the extent the College proposes to change existing Preservation areas to Institutional in order to accommodate expansion, the College proposes to mitigate such areas, as discussed above and in the proposed development agreement. The residential neighbors to the west are approximately 1,500 feet from the developed portion of the property. 4. Sufficient public facilities are available to serve the property. Existing public facilities are in place to accommodate the proposed expansion. The addition of a NCAA-compliant baseball field, renovation of a NCAA-compliant soccer field and a consolidated parking area are accessory uses to the existing College and will not generate additional facilities impacts. Other improvements proposed are consistent with the development standards set forth in the City Code. The existing lift station along the western edge of the campus is currently being upgraded by the City and will accommodate the proposed campus expansion/improvement. A traffic study prepared by Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc., dated May, 2010 ("Traffic Study") is included in this submittal. The Traffic Study confirms that the adjacent intersections and roadway segments will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service after the proposed expansion. Please see the enclosed Traffic Study for more detailed information. 5. The amendment will not adversely affect the natural environment. The changes from Preservation to Institutional are either in areas which are not actually jurisdictional areas due to previous FLUM mapping errors, or to the extent jurisdictional areas are impacted the applicant must go through the appropriate permitting through SWFWMD and USACOE and will provide appropriate mitigation. This is insured in the proposed development agreement accompanying this request. There is a net change of 5.69 acres of Preservation or Water designated lands to Institutional. Analyzing each City GIS feature individually, as well as onsite conditions assessments, shows that approximately 4 acres of existing Preservation and Water lands are currently improperly categorized as Preservation or Water as explained in the "Land Cover of Former Future Land Use Inside Edge of Future Development" 21 e • (map and narrative), attached. For example, the areas proposed to change from Water to Institutional are actually borrow pits and former stormwater areas; the area surrounding the borrow pits are of a low quality and do not constitute lands that require protection. The new jurisdictional line appropriately shows the distinction between true conservation areas and the proposed institutional use. The proposed changes to the land use plan make clear the true Preservation areas are tied to a development agreement requiring environmental improvements and still result in only a net loss of Preservation and Water/Drainage Feature categorized areas of 5.69 acres. The College engaged Delta Seven, Inc. to complete an Avoidance and Minimization Report to determine the most appropriate way to proceed with enhanced development. The Avoidance and Minimization Report is attached. 6. The amendment will not adversely impact the use of the property in the immediate area. The following are the parcels adjacent to the property; however, it is important to note the area in which development is occurring is approximately 1,500 feet from the College's nearest neighbors which are either Commercial parcels or residential parcels located across Bayshore Boulevard to the west. The property adjacent to Bayshore Blvd. (and therefore the residential properties) is requested to change to Preservation and Recreation/Open Space to capture the intended use of the property. The City property known as Coopers Point Nature Park is adjacent to the east. The proposed land use amendment and accompanying development agreement will result in the addition of college property to the Coopers Point Nature Park after the college mitigates any development that occurs on the property. As such, the proposed development will be in harmony with the existing neighborhood. 22 0 " Location Zoning Land Use Designation Actual Use North Preservation Preservation Wetlands Northwest LMDR Residential Urban Residential (across Bayshore) East Water Water Tampa Bay Preservation Preservation Coopers Point Nature Park South (across Preservation Preservation Causeway Gulf-to- Bay/Courtney Campbell Cswy.) West LMDR Residential Urban (Across MDR Residential Medium Bayshore) MHP Residential Low Med. Southwest Commercial General Commercial Vacant #528553 v6 - ClwrChristianCollege/Ex. to LU app final 23 '6 W r 7/14/10 Mixed Use Calculation for 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd. Developed portion of Property is zoned Institutional District (maximum FAR = 0.65 and maximum density = 12.5 du/acre in INS land use) .................. 1,156,518 sf 1. Land area zoned Institutional District (26.55 acres)' 2. Permitted FAR ....................................................................0.65 3. Maximum permitted floor area (#1 x #2) .................................751,736 sf 4. Floor area existing/proposed nonresidential uses .........................170,000 sf 5. Floor area not used (#3 - #4) ................................................581,736 sf 6. Land area available for residential uses (#5 - #2) ........................894,978 sf 7. Land area available for residential dwellings in I District (#6).........894,978 sf 8. Divide by square footage in an acre .........................................= 43,560 sf 9. Lot acreage available for dwellings in I District (#7 _ #8) ...............20.54 acres 10. Lot acreage available for dwellings in I District (#9) .....................20.54 acres 11. Maximum density in INS land use ..........................................x 12.5 du/acre 12. Number of dwelling units (du) available in I District (#10 x #11) ....... 256 du 13. Maximum number of beds/residents in I District (3 beds/residents = one dwelling unit) .....................................................................768 beds/residents2 Note: Existing Residential/Dorm Proposed New Residential/Dorm Total Residential/Dorm @ buildout 78,612 sq. ft. 34,000 sq. ft. 112,612 sq. ft. Existing Non-Residential Proposed Non-Residential Total Non-Residential @ buildout 72,388 sq. ft. 97,612 sq. ft. 170,000 sq. ft. 1 On the balance of the College property there are Recreation/Open Space, Preservation and Water/Drainage Feature future land use categories. The acreage of the Recreation/Open Space and Preservation could (through appropriate transfer of density and density averaging applications) yield an additional 83 dwelling units (249 dormitory beds) pursuant to City Code Section 4-1402(6) which allows density of a maximum of one dwelling unit/acre on preservation and recreation lands. 2 The proposed Development Agreement limits density to 750 beds total on all Property subject to this application (not just the Institutional property). 0 250 500 Feet PROPOSED CAMPUS CHANGES TO FUTURE LAND USE Proposed Campus L 7j Proposed Institutional Ctearwafer Christian College ® Administrative LU Changes 7/13110 Future Land Use Category Residential Estate- Reside nfiaISuburban Residential Low a Reside ntia I Urban Residential Low Medium Residential Medium . Res ide ntia I H igh - Resort Facilities High - Reside nta VOffi ce Limited - Reside ntiallOffice General - Reside ntiaVOffice/Retait a Commercial Neighborhood Commercial Limited . Commercial General Industrial Light - Industrial General - Preservation Recreation/Open Space . Institutional Transportation/Utility Community Redevelopment District - Central Business District Water - Road Municipal, No Future Land Use . Unincorporated, No Future Land Use July 13, 2010 Produced By IN WADETRIM Clearwater Christian College Proposed Campus Changes to Future Land Use FEATURE DESCRIPTIONS OID 2145 ,- Existing LU P The feature spans property boundaries and should be split into two. No change in designation is Proposed LU P recommended. O1D 2170. Existing LU P This feature spans the property boundary between the college and the Cooper's Point Preserve and should be l d li d Proposed LU Mixed P / I an a rea y ne an split. The portion remaining within the college boundary includes mangrove shore existing building and parking lot. The feature should be designated I or mixed I and P. 01D 2179 Existing LU W No Change Proposed LU W 01D 2180 Existing LU P This feature overlies the main portion of the mangrove habitat on the college property. The habitat grades July 6, 2010 1 of 7 Clearwater Christian College Proposed Campus Changes to Future Land Use FEATURE DESCRIPTIONS Proposed LU Mixed P / I from very poor quality mangrove habitat, including uninhabitable waters in ponds and ditches, to moderately well functioning mangrove habitat in the north. The area also includes some small areas of high salt marsh and salt barrens. The entire forest is cris-crossed with excavated mosquito control ditches which have since filled in with muck. The spoil mounds in the feature are estimated to number in the hundreds and many of these are populated with Brazilian Pepper. The feature has as inclusions several areas designated RL and these are recommended for incorporation into the P feature. Adjacent areas 2629, 2619, 2187, 2621, and 2622 are recommended for partial inclusion. These are discussed within their own category. Areas to be removed from the P designation are those which will be included within the boundaries of the expansion plans of the college. Two of these are located around feature 2612 (mangrove shoreline) and the area adjacent to feature 2622 (see map). The latter is primarily an upland island populated by pine, cabbage palm, and oaks but also includes a large stand of Brazilian Pepper, small man made drainage ditches, and scattered mangroves. The last area to be designated I from P is north and west of the existing shallowly curved boundary of feature 2181 out to the limit of the proposed development plans. The habitat within the area includes an existing soccer field, a relatively small area of moderately functioning mangroves, and an almost equal area which is an upland island populated by oaks, cabbage palm, and palmetto, with only a few scattered pines. The island is ringed by a Brazilian Pepper lined mosquito ditch which supports little life due to the extremely impaired water quality. Only a small portion of the area is old landfill composed of concrete rubble populated by Brazilian Pepper. - OID 2181 7 1 -7-7 Existing LU I The feature is the college campus. The boundaries of this feature should be adjusted to reflect the actual ROW of Damascus Rd or to include that ROW should it be vacated as is desired. Other boundary Proposed LU I adjustments are suggested to include the college expansion, parts of 2612, 2180, 2622. And 2621 and merge with 2188. The latter features are described individually under their own heading. Portions of the areas over which the feature is to be expanded are concrete rubble mounds populated by Brazilian Pepper, upland islands, and highly to moderately stressed mangrove stands. O1D 2182 Existing LU RL This feature is a portion of the mangrove habitat on the college property. The habitat grades from very poor quality mangrove habitat, including uninhabitable waters in ponds and ditches, to moderately well Proposed LU P functioning mangrove habitat in the north. The area is cris-crossed with excavated mosquito control ditches which have since filled in with muck. The feature is designated RL and is recommended for incorporation into the P feature. July 6, 2010 2 of 7 Clearwater Christian College Proposed Campus Changes to Future Land Use FEATURE DESCRIPTIONS OID 2183 '`. it 4 Existing LU RL This feature is a portion of the mangrove habitat on the college property. The habitat grades from very poor quality mangrove habitat, including uninhabitable waters in ponds and ditches, to moderately well Proposed LU P functioning mangrove habitat in the north. The area is cris-crossed with excavated mosquito control ditches which have since filled in with muck. The feature is designated RL and is recommended for incorporation into the P feature. QlD ?•: 2184 rw ?, _ .. ? ;. 4a CAE ?'Y'.F f , y ]rni? S , k - ti ,r, - l! Existing LU RL This feature is a portion of the mangrove habitat on the college property. The habitat grades from very poor quality mangrove habitat, including uninhabitable waters in ponds and ditches, to moderately well Proposed LU P functioning mangrove habitat in the north. The area is cris-crossed with excavated mosquito control ditches which have since filled in with muck. The feature is designated RL and is recommended for incorporation into the P feature. 01D 2185 Existing LU RL This feature is a portion of the mangrove habitat on the college property. The habitat grades from very poor quality mangrove habitat, including uninhabitable waters in ponds and ditches, to moderately well Proposed LU P functioning mangrove habitat in the north. The area is cris-crossed with excavated mosquito control ditches which have since filled in with muck. The feature is designated RL and is recommended for incorporation into the P feature. OID .. c^,y, 2186 - - .N}.1 -s' t ?.. sJ''yiA"'ST A' Sf,? R1 Mf C ,f Existing LU RL This feature is a portion of the mangrove habitat on the college property. The habitat grades from very poor quality mangrove habitat, including uninhabitable waters in ponds and ditches, to moderately well Proposed LU P functioning mangrove habitat in the north. The area is cris-crossed with excavated mosquito control ditches which have since filled in with muck. The feature is designated RL and is recommended for incorporation into the P feature. OID 187 Existing LU I The feature is a small area populated by Brazilian Pepper, Cabbage Palm, and mangroves. It spans the limit July 6, 2010 3 of 7 Clearwater Christian College Proposed Campus Changes to Future Land Use FEATURE DESCRIPTIONS Proposed LU Mixed I / P of development under the college expansion plans. The feature is to be split and designated I and P as appropriate. OID 3188 '• ti? -?? ti s f "` r Existing LU I The feature should be merged with the expanded 2181. It is a single large oak tree on the island described in 2180. Proposed LU I OID 2189 Existing LU RL This feature spans the college property line. Part of the feature is within the Bayshore ROW and should be designated R/O. The feature should be split at the property boundary. The area remaining in college Proposed LU R/O ownership is populated by mangrove trees. OID 2190 Existing LU R/O This feature spans the college property line. Part of the feature is within the Bayshore ROW and should be designated R/O. The feature should be split at the property boundary. The area remaining in college Proposed LU R/O ownership is populated by mangrove trees. OID 122 Existing LU W This feature, designated W, is actually a borrow pit and a remnant of an old landfill operation. The water quality in the pit is insufficient to support life. The proposal is that the land use is to be designated 1. Proposed LU I OID 2613 Existing LU R/O The feature spans the property line between the college and the ROW. The feature should be split. The portion remaining in college ownership should be designated R/O consistent with the adjacent use to the Proposed LU R/O northeast. This feature is predominately wetland and consists of mangrove forest. 010 2614 :ter a ' July 6, 2010 4 of 7 Clearwater Christian College Proposed Campus Changes to Future Land Use FEATURE DESCRIPTIONS Existing LU W The feature spans water and mangrove forest. The boundary should be adjusted to match the conditions on the ground with the mangrove forest being designated P. The feature may be divided so that the boundaries Proposed LU Mixed P and coincide with the property line. W OID _ ? 2615 h4?-_ L w? 4 ?tb`N1x --.- i +"ctx 1"+3t+:{j f'4`r ? ? Existing LU I The majority of the feature is properly designated but the boundaries should be adjusted to match the wetland jurisdictional line to the east (border of feature 2623), with those areas remaining as wetland to be designated Proposed LU Mixed I and P as P. OID 2619 Existing LU R/O The feature spans the property line between the college and the ROW. A portion of the FDOT ROW has been used for Mitigation by the FDOT. Another portion is leased as the Welcome Center. The remainder of Proposed LU R/O the FDOT portion is a recovery zone with a sidewalk or a mixture of Brazilian Pepper and Cabbage Palm with a mixed understory. The feature should be split. The portion remaining in college ownership is wetland and consists of a variety of habitats including mangrove, high salt marsh, and salt barrens. 2620 Existing LU RL The feature is an almost pure stand of mangroves. It is recommended to be designated P. Proposed LU P OID 2621 a n?z * 1? r . Existing LU RL The area within the feature is a small upland island populated by oaks, pines, cabbage palms, and ringed with Brazilian Pepper. The feature spans the boundary of the future development plans of the college. The very Proposed LU Mixed I / P southern portion is recommended for designation as P in agreement with proposed preservation plans and the northern segment is recommended for designation as I consistent with the college facility. OID 262' ." x} Existing LU RL This feature lies over a small man made drainage ditch bordered by concrete rubble left over from the time July 6, 2010 5 of 7 Clearwater Christian College Proposed Campus Changes to Future Land Use FEATURE DESCRIPTIONS Proposed LU Mixed I / P when the property was in use as a land fill. The vegetation is primarily Brazilian Pepper, but there are occasional mangroves, pines, and a very small area of high salt marsh. The feature spans the boundary of the future development plans of the college at both the northern and southern extreme. The very southern and northern portions are recommended for designation as P in agreement with proposed preservation plans and the central segment is recommended for designation as I consistent with the college facility. It is noteworthy that the very straight eastern edge of this feature coincides with the previous property boundary before the college acquired the lands to the west. OID 2623 1 5 l . x u ?? % - .:r .?,an x-:•.= wcr Existing LU P The feature covers the existing mangrove shoreline but the margins do not match the wetland line or the limit of open water and it should be adjusted. In the south, portions of feature 2613 should be added to this feature Proposed LU P such that the mangroves within 2613 and outside the FDOT ROW are designated P. OiD 2624 k ?1 rx t jz- N Existing LU P The feature overlies an existing stormwater retention pond, the corner of a building, and portions of the access roadway within the proposed development boundary. The existing P designation should be modified Proposed LU I to I. OID. 2625. Existing LU P The feature appears to be a GIS digitization remnant and matches no on the ground features. Its location is the middle of the existing parking area. The P designation should be modified to I. Proposed LU I O]D 2626. i Existing LU RL The area within this feature is a small patch of habitat designated as a salt barren. These habitats are desirable for ground nesting birds and certain species of butterflies. The proposal is to designate the area P in Proposed LU P accordance with the plans to preserve the area. OLD 2627- ;, .. . . 1 k"' _ R-3 Existing LU RL The feature covers an area populated by a mixture of Brazilian Pepper and mangrove trees. The former are growing on spoil mounds created by the excavation of mosquito control ditches. The proposal is to designate Proposed LU P the area P in accordance with the plans to conduct mitigation activity which would restore the natural conditions. July 6, 2010 6 of 7 Clearwater Christian College Proposed Campus Changes to Future Land Use FEATURE DESCRIPTIONS 011) 2628 Existing LU RL This feature covers an area which is where two mosquito ditches excavated 50 to 65 years ago join together. Proposed LU P The area includes muck filled ditches, highly stressed mangrove trees, and a few oak trees growing on spoil from the excavation. The proposal is to designate the area P in accordance with the plans to conduct mitigation activity which would restore the natural conditions. OID 2629 .t ra .: ., k_ `? ea x- Existing LU GC The feature spans the property boundary between the FDOT ROW and the college. The area has been Proposed LU Mixed designated as wetlands but is dominated by Brazilian Pepper. That portion of this feature which lies within college ownership is to be incorporated into mitigation and should be designated P. That portion within the ROW should be deferred to the FDOT. July 6, 2010 7 of 7 A I'? \ \ ' $.: claw rP t. \\\\ \ z 0760, w kt? 1f Y, 7b 7 J I 0 250 500 Feet PROPOSED CAMPUS FUTURE LAND USE - Proposed Campus L 7J Proposed Institutional M Clearwater Christian College ® Administrative Charges Future Land Use Category Residential Estate Residential Suburban Residential Low Residential Urban Residential Low Medium Residential Medium - Residential High - Resort Facilities High - Residential/Office Limited - Residertiavoffice General - Residential/Office'Retail Commercial Neighborhood Commercial Limited . Commercial General Industrial Light . industrial General . Preservation Recreation/Open Space . Institutional TransportationAJtility ® Community Redevelopment District - Central Business astrict ftter/Drainage Feature - Road a Municipal, No Future Land Use . Unincorporated, No Future Land Use July 6, 2010 Produced By Ia WADETRIM a• I-(rF5'f'. o?aG XY x \\ 1 FROM TO Net Change ?.. ;? Commercial (C) 1.05 (1.05) i?x Institutional (1)1l1 19 99 26 55 6 56 \ Low Density Residential (LDR) 2.66 (2.66; Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) 1.16 1.00 (0.16) Preservation (P) 106.25 103.56 (2.69) r r 131.10 131.11 13.11 * Total changed, either +/- .. I Includes approximately 4.05 a. of former Preservation (P) addressed by admin istrative I revisions to the FLUM, July 13, 2010. :. . , - ,. S p,,r 1:I The net change in zoning resulting from the changes reflected above is approximately 13.11 a.; however, there is a discrepancy of approximately 0.01 a. between the total acreage of the i c r 4k? original features and the total acreage of the product of the changes. This discrepancy is due to rounding errors and other anomalies related to the application of GfS. M NOTE: Actual acreage may vary by +/- 0.05 a. due to inaccuracies associated with source GIS +?p P data. ? ?'daz "Mello rr F r 0 Vow x r+ T? 0 250 500 Feet PROPOSED CAMPUS CHANGES TO ZONING - Proposed Campus I Z I Proposed Institutional Q Clearwater Christian College ® Administrative LU Changes 7/13110 Zoning Zoning Districts Low Density Residential District Low Medium Density Residential District Medium Density Residential District ® Medium High Density Residential District - High Density Residential District Mode Horne Park - Commercisi District Downtown District Ofte District . Institutional District . Industrial, Research, & Technology District . Tourist Distict a Open Space/Recreatbn District . Preservation District July 13, 2010 Produced By WADETRIM E t{ i J ` da *'rT+G':+rSC)'Ft.sR, - a _ r i.. r i . x s` «.,"' - - r'S^ .'y n-alU W N, J 1 f 1 0 250 500 Feet PROPOSED CAMPUS ZONING - Proposed Campus I Z I Proposed Institutional Clearwater Christian College ElAdministrative Changes Zoning Zoning Distrkts Low Density Residential District Low Medium Density Residential District Medium Density Residential District ® Medium High Density Residential District - High Density Residential District Mobile Home Park . Commercial District Downtown District Office District Institutional District Industrial, Research, & Technology District - Tourist Distict Open Space/Recreation District - Preservation District July 6, 2010 Produced By IN WADETRIM V??,,? Y •{ .,•.ttt•?._r,' ""*f .rc ?f"'1'cx . ''?L .,,np ..?'' r _,?[': ?,•:..i. ?'.J y`'. t[l'. ? r? 1,.° (( 47."i ''?? ;MCe ,?, S?L:? aw .k, ,?a t4•'"•f1T? - .r k ;-it,+'? a1?? - .? ..t v`fn?F v??:y,.?' ? ? cur, '? i? ??? ? ? ?'?'' ,uJ +,? _ t ?. •`x-a? S y1ar f .. k r ! +S - i J r._ "` t ?_, 1 4 : 4f i r w tc 7V r f•tir i'ti'J, ,!!?'4fFf?'. L1 W ?'t ` i ?...,K :ems. ,•?f '?.`; :wr. y'35•?K?'Ay'?.?R`' w''' '?''`.t. ?.?,•1`.ot? d ?µ " r„'.,v Trli?7 ?r,•..?'.. .;fir? ,} s. "re+i,. - }^Y; ?7 '?1 ..,rte ? ," .. ?.,. •.,.Fw.1b?.." ..t3 r.1 ?:??:aTt. " y k.., { 1 •..C• ,,?? n`+ h ?. pp??_ ?,i ? S•? 'a?. ?:,i^ ? .M ?_ 'z.,_ i. _?1D ,E. .J??y_.1?' 6 ?'r'4 , • ?4i,Aa' .r,J .K.? Y ?'?7?„ „ i•? t)! ?grt' L {' l? ?a r.:.r s ??k y •-'? F; ,?R''?°.•. a n.4??'.,.. ??'i5, °{.?" ,? .ar aQ r,G. v ? a,w ,r.?;'a"?"A`.aLS"??yt fir; ?a,?S;,. ?? &'µ?'ii ` c r.-..=r. aK. 47 ,, l' •? ?!rr?l yam' ? ,?,.? A xr" • r _ - ' KF" yy d ,y ? `%7 ^ I >>7 •y0>e4 "FF?' SrawR: 6. a a :, .+ r 1 k. ai4 Y .Ei` ?"d ? -? h _, l y.:fi ?° ? n. - air C ,. t Jr? er ? =.q??,,,??,yy?• ?? T;? J. ¦ - > _?yt iJ> 1 ?tT•?J `'s'!f 'rte , ?? Y 40. `T ZF,, ?, 1 - 'i'?l i , .?.,y Y '? -?'1 a 1i Y';F- i 4t ttiF f.:•`".t i :1 444 L y ' r$y' P'?Y.: ?r??l4 x ?eq' rs 31,?ti } l1 __ k?x<k ; }?i ] }°. qt , j{ ?? ? ? ?h+? 8 ? • ?.?_?le.? r,?. x .y? t y? ?r? ????afj ? va??? j ? !x eia:-i• ?:t ?$>?.7"? R ;?_,` ?`` M?•' 'k r,:? ? " ??4 f- p -.Q, ,'7\? "c .1?' ,?f??a' ?• s, y.',?.??i'+•IP r !}t?' :? "Afix." ?, `' '?.. S-''°T.-'J??t '+ f ? Y s, r? .:;, r"' r ?? tb h ,y . I I_• r'I ,4b I . II r a + r,_ ? 7 by 1?. A 1{,t •1. r 1 ??' / Q? x i by e sit ray, kY l.f 11 o O. n W 5 v m j cao m ? 7 ? a. FL F JIDINAMINOV111111110MA E HOFJO -0, U) a g N m Q 8 m 9 g of m 4 e e a Q. H Z °- C ?' ?' d c gQ g d $ qg S' m tD m Z, li R N C7 }r 0 ??11?Y?Y C m , 7 3' cS' y co f FF O O y ?, TI Q? E C m y `$ cr r 3 ' Z n g N _ M ? Oit 1 ? Q nF c Cr $ d ?. ? 3' am ? Oi. G. a 01 .-. Ul R a E! y m a g m dY? 3 a m a N v o o n ter y v bo v Q cr. I y ' v u (A -9 m ' CD m W ,3.r ° LAND COVER OF FORMER FUTURE LAND USE INSIDE EDGE OF DEVELOPMENT JULY 2010 The purpose of this map is to demonstrate graphically and numerically that a significant portion of the proposed College property was incorrectly designated when the City and County Future Land Use Map (FLUM) was prepared and adopted many years ago. When reviewed with the accompanying map and table entitled "Proposed Campus Changes to Future Land Use", the reviewer will note there are several FLUM categories on the College property (e.g. Residential Low) that appear throughout the property leading one to surmise that at one time the property was envisioned for residential and commercial use. While these FLUM designations and respective zoning classifications would entitle the College to certain densities and intensities, the goal of both the College and the City is to correct the many FLUM mapping errors as part of the campus master planning process resulting in a new campus land use map that correctly reflects FLUM designations consistent with the needed campus expansion plan and/or the actual underlying use of the land. It is obvious that there are many inconsistencies between what is actually on the ground and the FLUM designations assigned to the property. Currently, the City's FLUM portrays 4.77 acres of Preservation (P) and 21.22 acres of other uses. The City's existing FLUM also portrays approximately 0.56 acres with no designated use which appears to be the Damascus Road right-of-way. The table below shows the existing and proposed FLUM designations inside the proposed edge of development for the College expansion (26.55 acres). FLUM Designations Inside Edge of Development FROM TO Net Change (Z) Commercial General (CG) - - - Institutional (1)111 Preservation (P) Recreation/Open Space (R/OS) Residential Low (RL) 19.48 26.55 7.07 4.77 - (4.77) 0.12 - (0.12) 0.70 - (0.70) Water (W) . 0.92 - (0.92) 25.99 26.55 13.59 +/- * Total changed, either Includes approximately 4.05 a. of former Preservation (P) addressed by administrative revisions to the FLUM, July 13, 2010. izl The net change in land use resulting from the changes reflected above is approximately 13.59 a.; however, there is a discrepancy of approximately 0.56 a. between the total acreage of the original features and the total acreage of the product of the changes. This discrepancy is due to vacation of the Damascus Road right-of-way. NOTE: Actual acreage may vary by +/- 0.05 a. due to inaccuracies associated with source GIS data. As noted in the Features Description Table dated July 6, 2010, some of the more obvious mapping errors included designating areas as Preservation that are already developed or disturbed, included areas of Brazilian Pepper and borrow pits. The attached exhibit indicates that approximately four (4) acres' of College property inside the edge of development were incorrectly interpreted and labeled. More specifically, these areas include: • Area #1 Brazilian Pepper (0.87 Acre) • Area #2 Borrow Pits (1.26 Acres) In contrast, less than two (2) acres were correctly interpreted and labeled: • Area #3 Properly Classified as "Preservation" (1.84 Acres) It is important to note that surveying most of these areas would be extremely difficult recognizing there few points of reference in the field. Therefore, these areas were calculated utilizing the City's GIS files as agreed upon by City staff, subsequent to the July 13, 2010 administrative revisions addressing the 4.05 acres of Preservation (P) within existing uplands. In summary, while the proposed expansion of the campus envisions impacts to existing wetlands that will be mitigated through the appropriate local, state and federal permitting and approval entities, the proposed impacts to "actual" wetlands is significantly less due to the incorrect FLUM designations on the College property. Only 1.84 acres inside the edge of development are correctly designated as Preservation (P), meaning that the reduction of 4.77 acres as shown does not represent a corresponding reduction in actual land cover. 'Acreage subsequent to administrative revisions, July 13, 2010, addressing the 4.05 acres of Preservation (P) within existing uplands. LEGEND PROPOSED 3URISDCTIPI4/WETLI'D LINE EASING -1- UNf PROPERTY LINES ?..? PROPOSED BUILONC PROPOSED CURB B CUTTER PROPOSED ASRNLT -1.1NT PROPOSED CONCRETE PAVEMENT PARKING C-Ill NTURE E.P-S- AEA L.? FUTURE BUILDING LINE EXISIIG BUILDING - ------ PROPOSED FENCE r- O m PROPOSED NETIMN 00 GARY A FIER PACIS PROPOSED SAND VOL l COURT - PROPOSED TENNIS/. TR.ALL COURT FIELD 1111 ,." I ! 11 I ? 01 ? 01 / 'A\ ?H Gtr RENOVATED SOCCER FIEiD 2 ? WOMEN'S POOL I1 OUTDOOR AYPxITEATUR[ J PROPOSED WET POND LV D -1 wR[ u o \??7 NTURE EXPANSION AREA 3 - u61 I mAM /n. -) 11 EXISTING JURISDICTONAL WETLAND LINE ? I I ? K J. WIR9NB.D II E7:J a wa IIIIONA Ate 5 I TnTTT7L. 9 i X F / ??\M1 VROPOFFD BTB11t!RMG tOt LANDED ! ?A. . -mm ni ii ii til- A ( II j l m l i7T._T77TT 5 i 11''''1I1I7r''1I .1 LL1LJ.IJ.L jW11111f 24 FUTURE EYPM51ON AREA. TYP. PROOp5LOZLIu yuc MIT TS PROPERTY BOUNDARY CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE EXISTING & PROPOSED FACILITIES BW1il?P Y0. ConAlru ct? E.?r1?rv ne Hem-' t REAATe S9.- 1-1 total Scume FK Cdnmrn A EPe14r LIDraY/01fiP JPIy-69 17,00 FT If SIn,Y) NC 12,000 coo 12,900 B DPmcocN No!! xq-06 15.00 FT (1 AvrN) NC 13,ODO (LOT) 13,000 GbLSrcoml E p ry 31 5B 1 (3 S--) NC 2.,009 ooo 25000 xt'p Omm 0 Em an;Noll MOA-66 22.00 R 12 ST.,-> < 50 FI 16.500 17,W7 33.570 WO-1% Dorm EXp-T- E CP1nwn mII -4-82 17.50 FT (2 Sl- < 50 11 4,125 4,000 1B,125 Olf. R E-,I,s A f 51-L, NRII 9--90 37.75 PT (3 5t-) NC 17,612 Coo 17,611 SkNR no - 1-I.q ue 'f 001m 8,513 0.0D 8,513 SI-1, Nall - EXXV- Clorsrovmt G y -11 ?5-97 M 2].OD rt () Slow) < 5D FI 19500 17,GW 38 }J0 , O." E-'- I, GY-IITUm Fe xm6-61 27.00 FT (I Story) < 50 Fl 24,625 6.500 31,125 Locker romp CON. SlorogR E,ponslan Wol kcwih Blag, 13.OG Fl (1 st-) uc ILA ooO 1]S D] L 1, En1A?[e C Cnopel/rne n 16 x/n N/n < 5D F1 x/A 51,112 51,112 111xSlrut- K Clmmao*/LOD N/A N/A K 50 Fl N/A 36 ODD ]6.000 NR. St-l- TOtPI 151,000 131,617 787,617 EAGLES NEST LOCATION YENS POOL -1UTURE EXPANSION AREA SITE DATA MASTER PLAN AREA "FSt1AO E-1,,S Cm CODE RCOUxE.cNI ASTER PUN (INSn1U71ONAL ZONINC) ARD (AC/SF) 13105 AC/5,760.- SF - ]6,55 Ac/I, 156,516 SF 9DILDING AREA (4) 151.000 Sf - -.612 SF MOR AREA, X-110 (FART DD3 0-65 (MAXJ 048 (fxN DEVELOPUENT TOTAL) HEIGHT En) 4B FT 51 IT b FT IMPE-OUS SURFACE RATIO (6R) D.D. 095 10,48 WRMrtORY B[D6 600 NA 750 PARKING 101AL 396 0.5-1 PER 1 STUDENTS 685 SPACES FOR 925 STUDENTS HANDICAT'PED (INCL N TOTAL) 211 11 TOTAL 1Po15 14 NANDICAPPED TOR 685 TOTAL SPACES (lsx) BUILDING SEIBACI6 r DNI (SOUI1) 777 ]5 170 FRONT (WEST) Id19 25 1619 SIDE (NORTH) H72 10 1179 SIDE (EAST) 140 10 170 PAVEMENT SETBACKS FRONT (SOUTH) 0 15 0 EROxI (NEST) 1791 IS 1571 SIX (UST) 140 10 1w SIDE (NORTH) 1115 10 1113 I-ED Nf HNUDR LIE ARU DADA) 277045 SF PARKING LOT INTEROR LANDSCAPING 12% 1- OF VUA 34.010 SO, !1- (17,281 Dr VW) TR¢ Rf0.XflCM[xtS t TREE PLR 15D 5' RmMPEO -ORIGIN uNDSCAPiN6 ]27 N 80 40 - 0 BE 160 SCALE IN FEET - 660 RADIUS FRO. EAGLES NEST -STING 1-10""IDNU WETLAND 111E O 7 -R O PNIxR E[PA No?c eESmENIAL/DaRM PROPOSED: 3A,LW RCSIOENPIAL/DORU :.'L. 111.61] NON-RESIOLNIUI EXISTING. 72.388 N0N-RESIDENTAL PROPOSED. 97,612 330 RADIUS 1RCN EAGLES NEST 660 RADIUS FROM EAGLES NEST BEGINNING OF Cm OF ?CLDANAIER OA 1Iv p \.( t7 ,y EXISTING BLPLlM.G. IrP ; 77 7 / 7 } j AND USE PLAN MAP AMENDMENTS ZONING CLASSIFICATION AMENDMENTS / PLOORN PQ rocrD -11 USE PLAN 1-11111110NA1 (I) NSIINTIONAL (I) INSTIlLMONAL (1) XX j RESIDENTIAL LRA' (RL) R7ESEWATION (P) ? CONIMERC'UL GENERAL IOC) WRIER/DRUNAHE (N) ROCK-ION/UPE1 SPACE IR/oS PECRFATTGN/OPr1 SPr (R/OS) PRE5CRVAIOx (P) nAIER/ORUNAG[ (W) I ZONING DISTRICT INSTItU1ow (I) INS1M11ONAL (1) INSIIVTIONAL (1) LOW DESITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) PRESERVATION (P) CCNNERPµ (C) OPEN SPACE/RECREATION (055) FUTURE EXPANSION AREA < OPEN SPACEJRECNCAWON (OSR) RREScRv,oN (P) o? dSp? p? RF U z a O 0 V) Q4 W>0) ??co E 0.oM z Qa W ? z W a > d o Pa. W N C W W UOW - E- F„ F., rn d E?2 ?D < v UoU a a W U SSUEO FOR'. CAIE. ll 106 NO ZZZ2290.09M ixEEl EX-1 a Clearwater Christian College Stormwater Narrative Update The four major drainage areas within the site are the Campus and Parking area, the Southwest Parking Lot, the Soccer Field, and the Baseball field. The general approach for the campus area is to consolidate all the existing interior campus and parking area treatment systems into one wet detention pond in front of the Cathcart Hall. Runoff in the proposed parking in the southwest corner of the site will be treated in dry retention areas that will conform to the City's criteria of complete exfiltration within 24 hours. The athletic fields will be managed by underdrains and sand filter effluent systems. A net increase in water quality treatment is expected to result from construction of the systems above. Currently a significant portion of the interior campus discharges directly to the small saltwater pond in front of Cathcart Hall. This pond fluctuates with daily tidal flows thus it provides little residence time for treatment of runoff. The various other interior campus treatment swales appear to function, but due to their dependence on drainage structures that require constant maintenance, parking lot flooding occurs with some frequency. The existing soccer field has no treatment system and discharges untreated runoff to Coopers Bayou. The proposed underdrain systems are essential as the existing soccer field saturates in seasonally wet periods to the extent that there is a history of cancellation of organized collegiate events with other colleges. A second critical component of the stormwater management system for the athletic fields is the proposed raised trail around the soccer field and increased grades around the perimeter of the baseball diamond and practice field. The intent in both cases is to contain runoff within the fields and force treatment, first through the underdrains directly under the playing surfaces, then through sand filter side drains. There is currently no buffer between the existing soccer field and the adjacent wetlands area which is actually a SWFWMD-designated mitigation area). In some locations around the existing soccer field the wetland buffer continues to be less than the City's required 16.75 foot width, however, the trail over compensates for the decreased buffer by containing all runoff within the field and treating it in the underdrain/sidedrain system. The Master Plan, as attached to the development agreement and being reviewed in conjunction with the FLD application, includes a wetland buffer around the new development proposed on the campus and meets the City Code for the site average of 25 foot. t LEGEND PROPERTv LINES JURISDICTIONAL METUND PROPERTY LINES PROPOSED BUILDING PROPOSED CURB & CURTER WENAND BUFFER AREA Ex6nNC BUILDING 0 tD FIELD IRRIGATED AND FERTILIZED ID OUT-0F-801-f- LINE. BEGIN TAANSISUON 0 NATIVE GRASSPEGCTATION (TYP). FUTNRE DL OPMENI AREA. WETLAND BUFFER AREA (1YP) BEGINNING AT OUT-OF-BOUNDS LINE. GRADES INCREASE 10 PREVENT DIRECT DISMAREE TO COOPERS BAYOU INFETRANON OF RLNDM AND WATER OUAUTY TREATMENT VIA SWFWMD APPROVED UNDERORAN MIEN (TW). FIELD IRRIGATED AND FERTILIZED 10 OUT-OF-BOUNDS LINE. BEGIN 1RANSISTION TO NAIVE CRASS/VE(ETATION (NP). PROPOSED WEILAND BOUNDARY AFTER IMPACTS. 7,fEWEILANDTYB)UFFER 3W I ?o PROPOSED NEW PARNINC LOT LAYOUT WEIWID BUFFER IYPIGN WETLAND BUFFER DATA LINEAR FOOTAGE OF WETLAND BUFFER 4,741 LINEAR FEET TOTAL WETLAND BUFFER AREA 132,700 SQUARE FEET AVERAGE WETLAND BUFFER WIDTH 27.40 FEET MINIMUM WETLAND BUFFER WIDTH FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 16.75 FEET MINIMUM WETLAND BUFFER WIDTH FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS 0.00 FEET EXISTING PARKING AREA - NO /w"D. AREA ADYCENT ID METFUTURE OEVELOPIAENT N eRFA (TIP). / N 111 40 B 60 160 SCALE IN FEET TR/IL CONSISTS OF PERVIOUS MATERIAL AND RAISED ABOVE GROUND 6,_12. TO CONTAIN ALL RUNOFF AND PREVENT DIRECT OtSCFPRGE TO COOPERS BAYOU. INFILTRATION OF RUNOFF AND MAIER QUALITY TREATMENT M SVWWAID APPROVED UNDEPIX N TREATMENT S STEM (TV). 0. of oa 1. F U z a O U Q cn rx wj? A E ?Wa1 ?c) F m 0.o z w? x a? ?<- 0] vOW - ? E" Em o Ham ? a ?C?W U 3 ? CD W co w a U ISSUED EDRI DALE BN, JOE "2 SHEET u EX-2 a Clearwater Christian College Threatened and Endangered Species Report Prepared by: Tom Cuba, Delta Seven During the ten year course of study at the project site, the following species of interest were noted. Some are currently formally protected and some have been protected in the past and have recovered, yet remain species of concern in project development. Bald Eagle, Haliaeetus leucocephalus Formerly listed as an Endangered species, this bird has recovered and been de-listed. It is still, however, protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and under the Florida Bald Eagle Management Plan. The nest at the project site is actually nine feet East of the property line and is within the Cooper's Point Preserve. The nest has been occupied in years past, abandoned, blown down, and rebuilt with the help of the Audubon Society which installed a nest platform in the tree to aid in attracting new birds. The rules allow for a tiered or layered approach to protection. The thresholds include distance (1500, 660, and 330 feet circles), activities (active, passive, permanent, temporary), season (during nesting season or not), and behavioural (the circles may become elliptical, or even semicircles) all of which are subject to interpretation and adjustment by the Fish and Wildlife Biologist. The latter will assess the character and history of the nesting pair and the circumstances of the planned activity and issue a "Biological Opinion" which will guide and be binding upon the property owner (s). This particular pair has been the subject of an opinion in the past, which allowed the construction of Steele Hall, a parking lot, retention pond, and additional clearing of land to within 50 feet of the nest tree. The proposed activities call for the removal of Brazilian Pepper and Mangrove areas, neither of which are used for either feeding or nesting by the Eagle. The proposed activity is passive recreation and may or may not qualify as an approved activity pursuant to an as yet to be issued biological opinion. Preliminary biological assessments indicate that the prime habitat of the Eagle is to the north and east and will not be affected by the proposed use. Construction can occur in the non-nesting season and will not affect the nesting pair. The post construction use may or may not have the potential for having an adverse affect, but the categories of potential affect are abatable and manageable. While final approval will rest in the formal Biological Opinion to be issued by the USFWS / FWC biologists, the expectation is that the proposed use can be approved. Snowy Egret, Egretta thula This bird is a shallow water wading bird and has been seen attempting to feed in the shallow waters north of the mangrove forest in the area proposed for the mitigation bank. No observations of successful feeding were made, indicating that the bank will improve habitat suitability and enhance the populations of this bird. Clearwater Christian College Threatened and Endangered Species Report Page 2 of 3 Brown Pelican, Pelecanus occidentalis Brown Pelicans feed in the waters well to the east of the project and would be expected to nest in mangroves along the shore of a large swamp such as that within the college boundaries. Trees in this forest, however, seldom reach a size large enough to support nesting pelicans and none have been observed. Pelicans have been seen resting in the shallows of the bayou, but not feeding or attempting to feed. Roseate Spoonbill, Platalea ajaja The spoonbill feeds by wading in shallow waters and feeding on small fish and Crustacea. It has been seen feeding successfully in the waters to the east of the college. To the west of the college, in the bayou, feeding attempts have been observed but feeding success was never observed. The proposed project is expected to positively affect the feeding success of the spoonbill. Impacted Habitat Black Mangrove Forest, Avicennia germinans: 2.48 ac. As is well documented in formal reports the black mangrove forest within the boundaries of the project range from moderately to severely degraded. They remain classified as a mangrove forest only because of the presence of the often severely stressed trees. Most, and in many locations, all ecological function associated with the classical forest of this type have been lost due to bad water quality, unsuitable sediments, and an almost complete loss of water circulation. The area to be impacted is severely degraded. Brazilian Pepper / Landfill Forest, Schinus terebinthifolius: 1.75 ac. The project area includes mounds of discarded concrete and dirt mounds from an old use as a highway staging and disposal area. The mounds have become populated by Brazilian Pepper and biological surveys show that there is virtually no understory present. Mixed Grasses, Distichlis spicata and Sporobolus virginicus: 1.55 ac. The area impacted is a high marine marsh dominated by these grasses. It is wet only at the highest tides during a full or new moon. The habitat is functional and supportive of typical wildlife such as mangrove butterflies and marsh rabbit. Avoiding the impact was not possible. Clearwater Christian College Threatened and Endangered Species Report Page 3 of 3 Open Water: 1.11 ac. There are two open water habitats within the impacted areas. One is a borrow pit which is now used as a stormwater treatment facility. The second is a borrow pit which is not well connected to the remaining wetlands and is stagnant. During the years of study, no life forms other than anoxic bacteria were observed in this pit. The remainder of the habitats to be impacted are small stands of pine and oak within the wetland boundaries (0.27 ac), transitional areas usually populated by shrubs wetland plants such as Iva and Bachharis (0.07 ac), open sand within the access road to the City lift station (0.07 ac) and other low functioning minor habitat components. In summary, the project plans have been developed to direct the greatest impact to already degraded habitats and only smaller segments of functional habitat (marine high marsh) will be lost. The high marsh is one of the easiest to replace through mitigation. Due in large part to the very low functional nature of the habitats to be impacted, the project will not adversely affect the natural environment. In balance, the removal of the lowest functioning habitats and the planned restoration of the remaining habitats will result in a higher functioning natural environment than what exists today. Table 1. Impacted habitat types and acres. See map for location. VEGETATION AREA IN ACRES Avicennia germinans 2.4823 Iva-Baccharis 0.0694 Mangrove 0.0626 Mixed 0.1686 Pinus elliottii 0.1186 Quercus 0.1477 Schinus terebinthifolius 1.7456 Transition 0.2504 Uncertain 0.0432 Grasses 1.5473 Open 0.0657 Water 1.1061 TOTAL 7.8075 PROPOSED INSTITUTIONAL AREA NORTH 0 200 400 r ? r GRAPHIC SCALE 0 o: w J 0 m w 0 a m SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR I RECORDING INFORMATION THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NE 1/4 SEC 16, TWP 29 S, RGE 16 E EASTERLY PROJECTION ORTHERLY LINE OF THE N OF GOVT LOT 4 RAO: 235.75' ARC: 195.98' C3 CH: 190.39' ?? ' " o z Z CLEARWATER 13 W CHB: N18'16 ' ' " iv m CHRISTIAN 49 37 DELTA: 47 0i N ^ o COLLEGE RAD: 32.00' LO w 3 z l ARC: 40.04' ' C3 3 o N a \1\ C2 CH: 37.46 CHB: N21'03'55"E yti o 0 o p 000 CO w DELTA: 71'38'38" ? ?y6'C? o ro W) J C2 I O GOVT 26.55 LOT I GOVT LOT 3 GOVT LOT 4 ?? - ACRES nyurrmflnm TAMPA BAY RAD: 64.66' ARC: 38.49' r O C1 CH: 37.93' Q? Nmnnmrmnn "n? CHB: N42'11'57"W ? r) DELTA: 34'06'32' I v C?mmnnl P EASTER N o TRACT PER i _j C in O ORB 16135, PG 2664 1 I L1 190.g4' ^ ?w L2-L22 1582'35'34"W w V) J-I f l R/W STA TORBAY 60 V) gLVD LEGEND/ABBREVIATIONS - -` GULF- AMPBELL CAUSEWAY LB = LICENSED BUSINESS COURTNEY S CAUSEWAY POINT OF REFERENCE R/W = RIGHT OF WAY DA\A POINT OF BEGINNING PG/P = PAGE ORB = OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK FOR GEOMETRY LINE TABLES AND NOTES, SEE SHEET 2 OF 3 FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION, SIGNATURE AND SEAL, SEE SHEET 3 OF 3 WADE TRIM SKETCH & DESCRIPTION A WADE TRIM COMPANY - CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND SURVEYING SINCE 1976 DATE: JULY 7, 2010 1410 LPGA Blvd., Suite 148, Daytona Beach, FL 32117 SITE PLAN LB #2232 117565 Phone: 386-274-1600 Fox: 386-274-1602 LIMITS2.DWG SHEET 1 OF 3 1" = 400' 1 _j SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L1 84.92 S82'35'34'W L2 17.01 N10'57'32'W L3 120.50 S89'43'26'W L4 18.28 S00'12'38'E L5 92.71 S89'47'22'W L6 6.47 S33'01'58'E L7 18.60 S09'00'021W LB 33.79 S71'15'45'W L9 11.95 S89'201091W L10 24.75 N17'57'12'W L11 10.92 N08'41'14'E L12 5.28 N87.12'04'W L13 4.07 S24'52'04'W L14 21.04 S59'38'37'W L15 15.93 N83'06'54'W L16 22.49 S03.24'39'W L17 21.52 S71'34'54'W LIS 23.33 N82.13'05'W L19 31.20 S89'26'45'W L20 23.73 N63'03'36'W L21 29.40 S34'48'54'W L22 36.36 N65'35'26'W L23 17.49 N1B'25'35'E L24 11.75 N66.10'36'W L25 36.90 N07'24'44'E L26 34.57 N27.46'29'E L27 26.14 N22.06'03'E L28 21.03 S85'27'49'E L29 47.05 N00'22'32'W L30 10.17 N76'03'09'W L31 49.43 N09'14'50'W L32 49.13 N21'51'04'W L33 15.55 N61'45'36'W L34 36.76 N39.48'21'W L35 38.04 N03.51'29'E L36 39.77 NOl'01'26'W L37 22.62 N39'14'16'W L38 6.68 N02.01'50'E L39 21.83 N48'07'04'E SURVEYOR'S NOTES: THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDING INFORMATION L40 23.22 N23'43'08'W L41 17.15 N60'13'20'E L42 10.05 N06.42'31'E L43 13.11 N41.29'06'W L44 25.74 N45'22'31'E L45 23.82 N63'18'48'E L46 49.94 N53'55'07'E L47 56.85 N00'16'34'W L48 180.68 N89'43'26'E L49 107.99 N00'16'34'W L50 17.99 N89'43'26'E L51 68.66 N00.56'49'W L52 71.74 N14'00'29'W L53 67.82 N14.13'49'W L54 56.35 N14.40'09'W L55 33.98 N14.45'24'W L56 156.14 N56.53'14'E L57 62.82 N69.40'42'E L58 14.89 N61'22'43'E L59 82.57 N71'52'59'E L60 53.45 N73'20'51'E L61 89.41 N06'12'39'E L62 139.90 N89'59'27'E L63 98.98 N59'58'40'E L64 36.67 N59'58'40'E L65 39.40 N59'58'40'E L66 62.41 N59'58'40'E L67 25.85 N1B'16'39'E L68 33.69 N19'31'42'W L69 53.28 N45'49'14'E L70 26.81 N79'47'39'E L71 74.24 S89.45'54'E L72 67.91 S60'10'21'E L73 67.11 S90.00'00'E 1. BASIS OF BEARINGS: ASSUMED, WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF STATE ROAD 60, AS SHOWN, BEING S82'3534'W. 2. THERE MAY BE EASEMENTS AND OTHER ITEMS OF RECORD NOT SHOWN HEREON (NO TITLE WORK FURNISHED). 3. THIS IS A GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATION FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED TO DEPICT A FIELD SURVEY. 4. THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY. WADE TRIM CIVIL ENGINEERING do LAND SURVEYING SINCE 1976 1410 LPGA Blvd., Suite 148, Doylono Beoch, FL 32117 LB 12232 17565 Phone: 386-274-1600 Fox: 386-274-1602 SKETCH & DESCRIPTION DATE: JULY 7, 2010 SHEET 2 OF 3 1 KJK SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION RECORDING INFORMATION A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED WITHIN GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE 16 EAST AND GOVERNMENT LOT 4, SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE 16 EAST, AND THE NORTH M OF THE NORTHEAST 14 OF SAID SECTION 16, PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY MOST CORNER OF THE CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE CAMPUS LANDS, WITH THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 60 (ALSO KNOWN AS GULF-TO-BAY BOULEVARD, COURTNEY CAMPBELL CAUSEWAY AND DAVIS CAUSEWAY) FOR A POINT OF REFERENCE; THENCE S82'35'34'W ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 190.84 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION; THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE S82-35.34-W FOR A DISTANCE OF 84.92 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE N10'57'32'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 17.01 FEET TO A NON-TANGENT CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 64.66 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 38.49 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 34'06'32', A CHORD BEARING OF N42'11'57'W AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 37.93 FEET TO A NON-TANGENT LINE; THENCE DEPARTING SAID CURVE ALONG SAID LINE S89'43'26'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 120.50 FEET; THENCE S00'12'38S FOR A DISTANCE OF 18.28 FEET: THENCE 589'47'22 W FOR A DISTANCE OF 92.71 FEET; THENCE S33'01'58'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 6.47 FEET; THENCE S09'00'02'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 18.60 FEET; THENCE S71'15'45W FOR A DISTANCE OF 33.79 FEET, THENCE S89'20'09'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 11.95 FEET; THENCE N17'57'12'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 24.75 FEET. THENCE N08'41'14"E FOR A DISTANCE OF 10.92 FEET; THENCE N87'12'04'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 5.28 FEET; THENCE S24'52'04'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 4.07 FEET; THENCE S59'38'37"W FOR A DISTANCE OF 21.04 FEET; THENCE N83'06'54'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 15.93 FEET; THENCE S03'24'39'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 22.49 FEET: THENCE S71'34'54°W FOR A DISTANCE OF 21.52 FEET; THENCE N82'13'05'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 23.33 FEET; THENCE S89'26'45W FOR A DISTANCE OF 31.20 FEET; THENCE N63'03'36'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 23.73 FEET; THENCE S34'48'54N FOR A DISTANCE OF 29.40 FEET; THENCE N65'35'26'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.36 FEET; THENCE N18'25'35 E FOR A DISTANCE OF 17.49 FEET; THENCE N66'10'36"W FOR A DISTANCE OF 11.75 FEET; THENCE N07'24'44"E FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.90 FEET; THENCE N27'46'29'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 34.57 FEET; THENCE N22'06'03'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 26.14 FEET; THENCE S85-27-49-E FOR A DISTANCE OF 21.03 FEET; THENCE N00'22'32 W FOR A DISTANCE OF 47.05 FEET; THENCE N76'03'09'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 10.17 FEET; THENCE. N09'14'50'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.43 FEET; THENCE N21'51'04'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.13 FEET; THENCE N61'45'36'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 15.55 FEET; THENCE N39'48'21'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.76 FEET; THENCE N03'51'29'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 38.04 FEET; THENCE N01'01'26'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 39.77 FEET; THENCE N39'14'16'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 22.62 FEET; THENCE N02'01'50'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 6.68 FEET; THENCE N48'07'04'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 21.83 FEET; THENCE N23'43'08'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 23.22 FEET; THENCE N60'13'20'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 17.15 FEET; THENCE N06'42'31"E FOR A DISTANCE OF 10.05 FEET: THENCE N41'29'06'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 13.11 FEET; THENCE N45'22'31'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 25.74 FEET; THENCE N63'18'48 E FOR A DISTANCE OF 23.82 FEET; THENCE N53'55'07'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.94 FEET; THENCE N00'16'34'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.85 FEET; THENCE N89'43'26E FOR A DISTANCE OF 180.68 FEET; THENCE NOO'16'34"W FOR A DISTANCE OF 107.99 FEET; THENCE N89'43'26'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 17.99 FEET; THENCE N00'56'49"W FOR A DISTANCE OF 68.66 FEET; THENCE N14'00'29'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 71.74 FEET; THENCE N14'13'49'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 67.82 FEET; THENCE N14'40'09'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.35 FEET; THENCE N14'45'24V FOR A DISTANCE OF 33.98 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 32.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 40.04 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 71'38'38, A CHORD BEARING OF N21'03'55'E AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 37.46 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE N56'53'14'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 156.14 FEET; THENCE N69'40'42 E FOR A DISTANCE OF 62.82 FEET; THENCE N61'22'43'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.89 FEET; THENCE N71'52'59'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 82.57 FEET; THENCE N73'20'51'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 53.45 FEET; THENCE N06'12'39'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 89.41 FEET; THENCE N89'59'27"E FOR A DISTANCE OF 139.90 FEET TO A NON-TANGENT CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 235.75 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 195.98 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 47'37'49, A CHORD BEARING OF N18'16'13'W AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 190.39 FEET TO A NON-TANGENT LINE; THENCE DEPARTING SAID CURVE N59'58'40'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 98.98 FEET; THENCE N59'58'40'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.67 FEET; THENCE N59'58'40"E FOR A DISTANCE OF 39.40 FEET; THENCE N59'58'40'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 62.41 FEET; THENCE N18'16'39E FOR A DISTANCE OF 25.85 FEET; THENCE N19'31'42'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 33.69 FEET; THENCE N45'49'14'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 53.28 FEET; THENCE N79'47'39"E FOR A DISTANCE OF 26.81 FEET; THENCE S89'45'54 E FOR A DISTANCE OF 74.24 FEET; THENCE S60'10'21'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 67.91 FEET: THENCE S90'00'00'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 67.11 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE 16 EAST; THENCE S00'00'00"W ALONG SAID SECTION LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 659.12 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 4; THENCE DEPARTING SAID SECTION LINE S89'30'50'E ALONG THE EASTERLY PROJECTION OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 4 FOR A DISTANCE OF 214.66 FEET TO THE APPARENT SHORELINE OF OLD TAMPA BAY; THENCE MEANDER SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SHORELINE AND SEAWALL (CLOSURE TIE-LINE BEING S38'48'27V FOR A DISTANCE OF 1195.01 FEET) TO THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND CONTAINS 26.55 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT TECHNICAL STANDARDS A BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL 5J-17.050 THRU 17.052. LB 12232 17565 THIS SKETCH MEETS MINIMUM S SET FORTH BY THE FLORIDA LAND SURVEYORS PER CHAPTER FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE. WADE TRIM /-, '.' X" ---- & - KENNETH J. KUHAR FLORIDA PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR/MAPPER //6105 CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND SURVEYING SINCE 1976 1410 LPGA Blvd., Suite 148, Daytona Beach, FL 32117 Phone: 386-274-1600 Fax: 386-274-1602 SKETCH & DESCRIPTION DATE: JULY 7, 2010 SHEET 3 OF 3 KJK MITIGATION AREA NORTH 0 200 400 GRAPHIC SCALE S52'41'38"W 97.82' N89'32'S1 "W 81.65' SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION LEGEND/ABBREVIATIONS LB = LICENSED BUSINESS R/W = RIGHT OF WAY PG/P = PAGE ORB = OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDING INFORMATION NORTH LINE OF SEC 16-T29S-R16E N89'32'51 "W 2136.42' S52'42'01 "W C5 RAD: 418.31' 73.01' ARC: 208.37' CH: 206.22' CHB: S38'25'25"W DELTA: 28'32'27" C6 RAD: 268.31' ARC: 243.90' CH: 235.59' CHB: 526'39'08"W 0 a= > J 0 to m M^ w C) 0 X } CD THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NE 1/4 SEC 16, TWP 29 S, RGE 16 E w to w I N °O N 01 N O I o to to 0 z ) c w N DELTA: 52'04'59" RAD 235 75' 98.99 ACRES ' ARC: 195 98' MORE OR LESS C4 . ?y H: 190 ' . CHB ' ' " 37 49 DELTA: 47 : RAD: 32.00 ARC: 40.04' C4 RAO: 5475.83 C3 ' CH: 37.46' CHB: N21'03'55"E n'L ARC: .00 150 ' DELTA: 71'38'38" \ 5 G C2 CH: CHB: N DELTA: 150.00 83'22'38"E 01'34'10" v ?G C3 RAD: 5525.83' ARC: 151.37' C1 CH: 151.36' CHB: S 83'22'38"W DELTA: 01'34'10" 589'22'57"E 344.66' o: 0 w ? Z J CLEARWATER GOVT LOT 3 GOVT LOT 4 n CHRISTIAN COLLEGE POINT OF BEGINNING I I - ?O wuwv ?? P N EASTER ° 0 TRACT PER ORB 16135, PG 2664 o' A 0 m rri R/W RAD: 5525.83' ARC. 488.01' CH: 487.85' CHB: N86'41'32"E DELTA: 05'03'36" J ? Cnnnmurr? mnmrrr PAP J ?1WllJlllT-- ? ? ?? C2 J' C7 I -+-?-"'-582.35'34 C1 828.46, -- i STATE ROAD 6OVO --- GULF-TO-BAY CAMPBELL CAUSEWAY LO co I .- (w VIN N GOVT LOT 1 TAMPA BAY COURTN pAVIS CAUSEWAY POINT OF REFERENCE FOR GEOMETRY LINE TABLES AND NOTES, SEE SHEET 2 OF 3 FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION, SIGNATURE AND SEAL, SEE SHEET 3 OF 3 WADE TRIM SKETCH & DESCRIPTION A WADE TRIM COMPANY - CIVIL ENGINEERING & LAND SURVEYING SINCE 1976 DATE: JULY 7, 2010 1410 LPGA Blvd., Suite 148, Daytona Beach, FL 32117 OVERALL LB 112232 #7565 Phone: 386-274-1600 Fax: 386-274-1602 LESSX.DWG SHEET 1 OF 3 1" = 400' SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L1 50.00 NO5.50'16'W L2 75.89 NB2'35'34'E L3 17.60 N18'25'35'E L4 11.75 N66'10'36'W L5 36.90 N07'24'44'E L6 34.57 N27'46'29'E L7 26.14 N22'06'03'E LB 21.03 S85'27'49'E L9 47.05 N00'22'32'W L10 10.17 N76'03'09'W L11 49.43 N09'14'50'W L12 49.13 N21'51'04'W L13 15.55 N61'45'36'W L14 36.76 N39'48'21'W L15 38.04 N03'51'29'E L16 39.77 N01.01'26'W L17 22.62 N39.14'16'W L18 6.68 N02'01'50'E L19 21.83 N48'07'04'E L20 23.22 N23'43'08'W L21 17.15 N60'13'20'E L22 10.05 N06'42'31'E L23 13.11 N41'29'06'W L24 25.74 N45'22'31'E L25 23.82 N63°18'48'E L26 49.94 N53'55'07'E L27 56.85 N00'16'34'W L28 180.68 N89'43'26'E L29 107.99 N00'16'34'W L30 17.99 N89'43'26'E L31 68.66 N00'56'49'W L32 71.74 N14'00'29'W L33 67.82 N14°13'49'W L34 56.35 S14'40'09'E L35 33.98 S14'45'24'E L36 156.14 S56'53'14'W L37 62.82 S69'40'42'W L38 14.89 S61'22'43'W L39 82.57 S71'52'59'W SURVEYOR'S NOTES: THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDING INFORMATION L40 53.45 S73'20'51'W L41 89.41 S061121391W L42 139.90 N89'59'27'E L43 98.98 N59'58'40'E L44 36.67 N59.58'40'E L45 39.40 N59'58'40'E L46 62.41 N59'58'40'E L47 25.85 N18'16'39'E L48 33.69 N19'31'42'W L49 53.28 N45'49'14'E L50 26.81 N79'47'39'E L51 74.24 S89'45'54'E L52 67.91 S60'10'21'E L53 67.11 S90'00'00'E 1. BASIS OF BEARINGS: ASSUMED, WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF STATE ROAD 60, AS SHOWN, BEING S82'3534"W. 2. THERE MAY BE EASEMENTS AND OTHER ITEMS OF RECORD NOT SHOWN HEREON (NO TITLE WORK FURNISHED). 3. THIS IS A GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATION FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED TO DEPICT A FIELD SURVEY. 4. THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY. WADE TRIM CIVIL ENGINEERING do LAND SURVEYING SINCE 1976 1410 LPGA Blvd., Suite 148, Daytona Beach, FL 32117 LB #2232 #7565 Phone: 386-274-1600 Fax: 386-274-1602 SKETCH & DESCRIPTION DATE: JULY 7, 2010 SHEET 2 OF 3 KJK SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDING INFORMATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN GOVERNMENT LOTS 3 AND 4, SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE 16 EAST, AND THE NORTH OF THE NORTHEAST '/ OF SAID SECTION 16. PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY MOST CORNER OF THE CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE CAMPUS LANDS, WITH THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 60 (ALSO KNOWN AS GULF-TO-BAY BOULEVARD, COURTNEY CAMPBELL CAUSEWAY AND DAVIS CAUSEWAY) FOR A POINT OF REFERENCE; THENCE S82'35'34'W ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 828.46 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 5525.83 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 151.37 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01'34'10", A CHORD BEARING OF S83'22'38"W AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 151.36 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION; THENCE DEPARTING SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE N05'50'16'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO A NON-TANGENT CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 5475.83 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 150.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01'34'10", A CHORD BEARING OF N83'22'38'£ AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE N82'35'34"E FOR A DISTANCE OF 75.89 FEET; THENCE N18'25'35E FOR A DISTANCE OF 17.60 FEET; THENCE N66'10'36"W FOR A DISTANCE OF 11.75 FEET, THENCE N07*2,V44'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.90 FEET; THENCE N27'46'29'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 34.57 FEET; THENCE N22'06'03'£ FOR A DISTANCE OF 26.14 FEET; THENCE S8527'49£ FOR A DISTANCE OF 21.03 FEET; THENCE N00'22'32'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 47.05 FEET, THENCE N76-03-09-W FOR A DISTANCE OF 10.17 FEET; THENCE N09'14'50'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.43 FEET; THENCE N21'51'04'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.13 FEET; THENCE N61'45'36'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 15.55 FEET; THENCE N39'48'21'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.76 FEET; THENCE N03'51'29E FOR A DISTANCE OF 38.04 FEET; THENCE NOI'01'26'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 39.77 FEET; THENCE N39'14'16'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 22.62 FEET; THENCE N02'01'50'£ FOR A DISTANCE OF 6.68 FEET; THENCE N48'07'04'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 21.83 FEET; THENCE N23'43'08'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 23.22 FEET; THENCE N60'13'20'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 17.15 FEET; THENCE N06'42'31'£ FOR A DISTANCE OF 10.05 FEET; THENCE N41'29'06'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 13.11 FEET; THENCE N45'22'31"E FOR A DISTANCE OF 25.74 FEET; THENCE N63'18'48'£ FOR A DISTANCE OF 23.82 FEET; THENCE N53'55'071 FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.94 FEET; THENCE N00'16'34 W FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.85 FEET; THENCE N89'43'26'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 180.68 FEET; THENCE NOO'16'34"W FOR A DISTANCE OF 107.99 FEET, THENCE N89'43'26E FOR A DISTANCE OF 17.99 FEET; THENCE NOO'5,6'49"W FOR A DISTANCE OF 68.66 FEET; THENCE N14'00'29'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 71.74 FEET; THENCE N14'13'49'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 67.82 FEET; THENCE N1440'09'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.35 FEET; THENCE N14'45'24'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 33.98 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 32.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 40.04 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 71'38'387, A CHORD BEARING OF N21-03.55-E AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 37.46 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE N56-53.14E FOR A DISTANCE OF 156.14 FEET; THENCE N69'40'42E FOR A DISTANCE OF 62.82 FEET; THENCE N61'22'43'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.89 FEET; THENCE N71'52'59E FOR A DISTANCE OF 82.57 FEET; THENCE N73'20'51'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 53.45 FEET; THENCE N06'12'39E FOR A DISTANCE OF 89.41 FEET; THENCE N89'59'27'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 139.90 FEET TO A NON-TANGENT CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 235.75 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 195.98 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 47'37'49', A CHORD BEARING OF N18'16'13'W AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 190.39 FEET TO A NON-TANGENT LINE; THENCE DEPARTING SAID CURVE N59158'40"E FOR A DISTANCE OF 98.98 FEET; THENCE N59'58'40'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.67 FEET; THENCE N59'58'40'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 39.40 FEET; THENCE N59'58'40'£ FOR A DISTANCE OF 62.41 FEET; THENCE N18.16.391 FOR A DISTANCE OF 25.85 FEET; THENCE N19'31'42 W FOR A DISTANCE OF 33.69 FEET; THENCE N45'49'14'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 53.28 FEET; THENCE N79'47'39'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 26.81 FEET; THENCE $89'45'54'£ FOR A DISTANCE OF 74.24 FEET; THENCE S60'10'21'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 67.91 FEET; THENCE S90'00'DO'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 67.11 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE 16 EAST; THENCE NDO'00'00'£ ALONG SAID SECTION LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 663.42 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE DEPARTING SAID EAST LINE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE N89'32'51'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 2136.42 FEET TO A NON-TANGENT CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 418.31 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 208.37 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 28'32'27', A CHORD BEARING OF S38'25'25 W AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 206.22 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S52'41'38'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 97.82 FEET; THENCE N89'32'51'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 81.65 FEET; TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BAYSHORE BOULEVARD (A VARIABLE WIDTH RIGHT-OF-WAY); THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE S52'42'01'W FOR A DISTANCE OF 73.01 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 268.31 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 243.90 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 52'04'59', A CHORD BEARING OF S26'39'08'W AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 235.59 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOO-37-03-W FOR A DISTANCE OF 1378.55 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LANDS KNOWN AS THE EASTER TRACT, PER OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 16135, PAGE 2664 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE DEPARTING SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE S89'22'57E ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 344.66 FEET; THENCE CONTINUE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID EASTER TRACT S52'12'03'£ FOR A DISTANCE OF 572.80 FEET; THENCE 500'46'40'E FOR A DISTANCE OF 191.08 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED STATE ROAD 60 AND A NON-TANGENT CURVE; THENCE DEPARTING SAID EASTER TRACT BOUNDARY LINE, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 5525.83 FEET. AN ARC LENGTH OF 488.01 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05'03'36", A CHORD BEARING OF N86-41.32E AND A CHORD DISTANCE OF 487.85 FEET TO THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND CONTAINS 98.99 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SKETCH MEETS MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS AS SET FORTH BY THE FLORIDA BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS PER CHAPTER 5J-17.050 THRU 17.052, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE. KENNETH J. KUHAR FLORIDA PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR/MAPPER //6105 WADE TRIM SKETCH & DESCRIPTION CIVIL ENGINEERING do LAND SURVEYING SINCE 1976 DATE: JULY 7, 2010 1410 LPGA Blvd., Suite 148, Daytona Beach, FL 32117 LB 112232 X17565 Phone: 386-274-1600 Fax: 386--274-1602 SHEET 3 OF 3 KJK T ?. An Equal 09?pr11 rry Ernpbyc Todd Pressman Chair, Pinellas Ronald E. Oakley Vice Chair, Pasco Hugh M. Graroling Secretary, Hillsborough Sallie Parks Treasurer, Pinellas Carlos Beruff Manatee Bryan K. Beswick Desoto Jennifer E. Closshey Hillsborough Neil Combee Polk Mbert G. Joerger Sarasota Matitza Rovira-Forino Hillsborough H. Paul Senft, Jr. Polk Douglas B. Tharp Sumter Judith C. Whitehead Hernando David L Moore Executive Director William S. Bileaky General Counsel Southwest Florida 2379 Broad Street, Brooksville, Florida 346046899 Dater 1Vlanagement Distr iCt (352,(352) 796-7211 or 1-800-423-1476 (FL only) TOD only: 1-800-231-6103 (FL only) On the Internet at WaterMatters.org Bartow service office Sarasota Service office Tampa Service office 170 Century Boulevard 6750 Fruitville Road 7601 Highway 301 North Bartow, Florida 33330-7700 Sarasota, Florida 34240.9711 Tampa, Florida 33637$759 (363) 534=1448 or (941) 377-3722 or (813) 985.7481 or 1-800-492-7862 (FL only) 1-800-320-3503 (FL only) 1-800-836-0797 (FL only) December 3, 2009 Randy T. Livingston Clearwater Christian College Private School, Inc 3400 Gulf to Bay Boulevard Clearwater, FL 33759 Subject: Final Agency Action Transmittal Letter for Formal Determination of Wetlands and Other Surface Waters Petition No.: 42004951.011 Project Name: Clearwater Christian College County: Pinellas Sec/Twp/Rge: 15, 16/29S/16E Dear Mr. Livingston: This letter constitutes notice of Final Agency Action for Approval of the above referenced Petition for Formal Determination of Wetlands and Other Surface Waters. This approval does not authorize any construction activities or constitute conceptual approval of any anticipated projects. Construction, alteration, operation, removal or abandonment of a surface water management system requires a.permit from the District pursuant to Rule 40D-4.041, Florida Administrative Coale, (F.A.C.), and Section 373.413, Florida Statutes, (F.S.), unless exempt pursuant to 40D4.051, F.A.C., or 373.406, F.S. You or any person whose substantial interests are affected by the District's action regarding a petition may request an administrative hearing in accordance with Sections 120.569 and 120.57, Florida Statutes, (F.S.), and Chapter 28-106, Florida Administrative Code, (F.A.C.), of the Uniform Rules of Procedure. A request for hearing must. (1) explain. how the substantial interests of each person requesting the hearing will be affected by the District's action, or proposed action, (2) state all material facts disputed by the person requesting the hearing or state that there are no disputed facts, and (3) otherwise comply with Chapter 28-106, F.A.C. Copies of Sections 28-106.201 and 28-106.301, F.A.C. are enclosed for your reference. A request for hearing must be filed with (received by) the Agency Clerk of the District at the District's Brooksville address within 21 days of receipt of this notice. Receipt is deemed to be the fifth day after the date on which this notice is deposited in the United States mail. Failure to file a request for hearing within this time period shall constitute a waiver of any right you or such person may have to request a hearing under Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.S. Mediation pursuant to Section 120.573, F.S., to settle an administrative dispute regarding the District's action in this matter is not available prior to the filing of a request for hearing. z? ?Mu Permit No., 42004951.011 Page 2 of 2 December 3, 2009 If you have any questions concerning this approval, please contact Rick A. Perry, P.W.S. at the Tampa Service Office, extension 2056. Sincerely, Alba E. Mas, P.E., Director Tampa Regulation Department AEM:RAP:gjn Enclosures: Approved Formal Determination of Wetlands and Other.Surface Waters w/Attachments Noticing Packet (42.00-064) Sections 28-106.201 and 28-106.301, F.A.C. cc: File of Record 42004951.011 Thomas R. Cuba, Delta Seven, Inc. Eric Hickman, Florida Department of Environmental Protection SPECIFIC TPURPOSE WETLAND SURVEY aINAa HE S 14a YC i6,1tkS Y i \ f wbl F T ( x- ti (w ) 7 -I.) ; i6YS' R?rt . w /I Pv : O i ?'I / - A "1 141 17 7.- ? snn. Ilxurort 13,) i? WJ3•(sl) - --- 9 LtlFf 'S1) COOPERS RAYOU / '' f 6E0 R. 149 RM( Nfi;.r51W Dt; i mVm WE a 48, 9, ItRS AfM 21x12 (yT r - Is'I) / MO raD MA;rC) / TW (AM 0 / TIDAL GAUGE Et TOP OF GAUGE - 4.61' NOVO 29 / WATER SURFACE - 0.18' MUD 29 532PM 0MS 7/2UO7 mw r, 11 / TOP OF GAUGE - 2.79' MM 29 WATER SURFACE : 0.16' NCVD 29 r 11:19M 06/03/2007 MMYM MS ¢ g8, IF, bk SC IA 12fl NW i SURVEY upolor 1. THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED ON MARCH 12 TURQAW MARCH 15. 2007 AND AUGUST 3 IHRQICN AUGUST 6, FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING WETLAND FLAG LOCA7"S W 7HE SUB.ECT PROPERTY AS SHOWN HEREON. WETLANDS DELINEATED BY DELTA SEWN. NC; M7 3RD AVENUE NORTH, STATE 701, ST. PETERSBURG. FL 33701. 2. THE DENOFWARK WDRNATWN HEREON US BASED UPON A BENCHMARK RETRIEVED FROM THE NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY DATASHUM ME BEIOMMA K USED IS DESIGNATED AS COURTNEY B. PD AGO459, MTN A PUBLISHED ELEVATION M 366 FEET ON ME HAND 88 DATUM (COMPUTED ELEVATION OF 4.52 NCN 29). 3. THE VERTICAL CLOSURE IS WIRN THE ALLOWABLE TOLERANCES. N ACCOIDANCE WTR FLORIDA'S MINIMUM TECHNICAL STANDARDS. AS OEFWED N STATE STATUES 61617-6.001, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE. 4. THE AREA DEPICTED HEREON 5 LOCATED WTHN FLOOD ZONE 'AE' AND '%r (BASE FLOW ELEVATOR • 9 FEET AND BASE FLOCK ELEVATION • 9 FEET, RESPECTNELY). ACCORDING 70 THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY ROOD INSURANCE RAIL MAP DATED SEPTEMBER 3. 2000, MAP NUMBER 12103CO129G NAP DATUM BASED ON WAND 88, 5. THIS sURWY COMPLES WAX ME STATE OF FLORIDA'S MNAWW 7ECHNGL STANDARDS AS DEFINED N STATE STATUTE 61017-6.001 FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE. 6. THE LEAN HIGH WATER WAS PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED NIBS AREA AND VERIFIED BY ME FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PR07CCTION AS 0.67 FEET NAND 6B (1.53 FEET NOVO 39} d ' 7. THE APPROXIMATE MANCROVE LINES HAVE BEEN DICIVED FROM A RECTIFIED ORMOPHO70 SUPPLED BY TIE CLIENT. u 8. MS SURVEY IS MMDE0 FOR USE OF THE PARTY AND/OR PAt7ES AS INDICATED N THE IS b TITLE BLOCK. TH SURVEY S HOT VALID WHOM THE RASED SEAL AND SIGNATURE OF A PROFESSIONAL SIAFdWR AND MAPPER LICENSED BY ME STATE OF FLORIDA DATA SOURCM 1. A SPECIAL PURPOSE SWFWMD.APO ACOE DELINEATION SURVEY FOR CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE BY MIND EVANS AND ASSDCNRS• INC. LARD 10/22/2001. 2. A a" AND 70POGRAPHIC SURVEY BY FORESIGHT SURVEYORS, NC DATED F, r 05/06/200 d £ - i C THIS SURVEY S NOT INTENDED TO BE A 901NMOVn SURVEY. THE BOUNDARY INFORMATION d CONTAINED HEREIN S DERIVED FROM THE DATA SOURCES AS SEATED ABOVE. U LEG= (SI) SURM DATA COMPILED FROM DATA SOURCE 01 m3W (S2) SURVEY DATA COMPILED FROM DATA SOURCE #2 (L) SURVEY DATA COMPILED FROM LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS R/W R011 OF WM .. p Pon POINT OF BEGIN POC POINT OF COMUENDEMERY k 0 WETWID FLAK 8 SO.7. SOMME FEET k AC ACRES PRESSURE WELL DL GAUGE ',A,,LCS NEST !/v i sW33YrE 1EL) ----? , ,='? 400 (s) I B. E511 1501 75' 0" 150" 7. I 73,1 I; . SC.ALF: 1' = iSI;' I j so esdl6p?w NI9 b?)W J 6 I a I I t. ? I \ f• I it I ; I ?I e B I I I I PRESSURE WELL ( TOP OF WELL . 756' NOD 29 GRIND SURFACE - 1.86' NON 29 08/-/2OQ7 ; ( 1 1 LOT 3 ` N3 1 --- ? :dI? swbs]t dal Jlz ? x x ,A1. WhWWENI I ? JP w17 I r41a I 331 I? 7 =/+LAW 0) :fin t>M a) ? ?--- E Cl-1W R/I WEB) /-7 E(tENiiN?IFnK??NGi. N >.,< .GAGE _w.?\ ?mtf c/Opf ?? 006 WIRTH In a WE RE 1/4 asa. W, nM.A4t W1P61'3RY WAY ` 1 1 \ PRESSURE EI, TOP OF WELL - 060wD SUNS \ oe/os/2aa7 PB'SM& WELT \ TOP OF WELL - 340' YGN 29 CRDUND SURFACE 198' NOVO 29 07/18/2007 \ \ \ Dt \ \ BGTERDADLO EWLF704llAYRw CoOrT1EY GWBELLCNAO"y pWLeGWBBNY _ walnWa , avow ¢xnr4Nt a Del[ RDAk w ` -- _ _ __ _ _ aIA+LN 37'16' UI.NNY'PY PRESSURE WELL GROUND SURFACE - 3.32' 07/12/2007 4 - a I-INMNT IN 2 [IIRVE TABLE AM ROF 4MNWNT LOT3 tNDY a SG IS 19P9 RIND CIFVE ARC RADNS DELTA CIMND CH BEARING BI 243,w 1 31' S 'S9' 2 S26 '08'00 S2 82 208.77' 418-31' 2"2'27' 2D 6.2.'W) S2 '-fiWI'MYD WILAw :1f? (m AY.aY(S2) SN ( j7) Am I P.. ?r ] UI174 AfiniWW Ww. 1 j EDraAm ff P,1 1 / I .-WilE .Y NON 29 - AS' MOVD 29 SWAG MIIAkF.',M N7 ro'x3^r s46 x'nW :'GUS b' z:DA wn. I m7i 1 t E s r1a I /` d] I SEtnxv ts+st) 6N6-AW I ' \ I1 y,cl,_4? a R= µY I L =M( DF THE N I/1 OF ttC IF, 129 RISE - \ qP 4982.970-3 S057. (112.098 AC.) clw 'S CERTIFICATION U NNE UNDERSIGNED PROFESSIONAL 9ATEYoR W MAPPER HEREBY CERNFY THAT THIS RECORD OF SURVEY WAS PREPARED UNDER W MCI SUPERVISION. THAT 70 THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE NFORMK MN, AND RELIEF S A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF THE LINO SHOWN AND OESCADED AND THAT O MEEM THE SMANW TECHNCA STANDARDS FOR I" SURVEYING N THE STATE OF FLORIDA' CHAPTER 6107-6. FLORIDA ADMINIPS ANL CODE. WADE TRN. NC 8745 1ENDERSON REVD SUE 220. RENAISSANCE 5 TAMPA FLORIDA 336M (813)882-8366 P SURVEYING AND MAPPING BUSINESS PLO7555 SIGNED (DATE) ROB DLWANE211L FL PROF651OW SURVEYOR AND MAPPER 06657 j F s= oAN H ffjjppff{{pp tt O O FO U q Q? W ? w a ?C z 0.1 a v, re ' r, Z (Tai] ?+ la H ? C x L a: F F UFF BOG a v?C4 ] a(P] ca< ? k] X 0. 4 Gov axw a ° U m 3r E_ U ?KS'ED F(W.: vT E, 'EWE D3.26.07 RD INAL 062.07 RD 0 4YSION II 9.7 RD DM 53 2.( PD COPY 0.{.12 RD fWENIU 99-74.M PD aos ND zzz22so.oaM o 1 OF 2 THE MMN WO a mvI7NM[xi Lm 4 sUDIFCT FWYNFRTY ANA 5.706.258 SOFT. (131.044 AC.) TmA uPan Aar. 825367.7 soil. (18,946 AC) UPLAND AREA 'A' • 7.274.5 SO.FI. (0.167 AC) UPLAND AREA'S' . 4&1318 SO.n. 11.105 AC) UPLAND AREA *C* • 17.720.9 SOP. (0.407 AC.) UPLAND AREA' . 2,3087 SOFT. (0.053 AC) UPLAND AEA r . 716.7799 SOFT. (16.456 AC) UPLAND AREA r (PREWWMI DCTLRIWIED) - AD82.0 SOFT. (8759 AC.) ?{ QP 7G4 0( T. /p 1104 GRINF h/' ^/ TOF OF GaLYi[ . 4.87 NCVD A WATER SURFACE - 006' NOVD 29 A:55PY 01/17/2007 NUDE GAUGE Il TOP OF GAME - 310' NOD 29 WATER SURFACE • MOW NM 29 11 MAN 06/03/2007 i i; 74 ]AP (SI ) SURVEY DATA COMPILED FROM DAG SOURCE 12 40 (52 SURVE DATA COYRED FROM DATA SOURCE (t) U) IL SLW4TY atA COMPRFD FROM LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS N R]M' Poe RGM OF MY PONT Or SEGMhC sz P0C NWT OF COMMEMCEMEM I NE LAND FLAG Ie W SOIT. SOUARE FEET o6. AC. ACRES . P PREmWE MEu ? IIDA OA G[ U A Et{f t R U S?rcr PROPERTY ARE. Z d 5.108,158 SOFT. (31.044 AC.) .] 707 P . O ?... u , I I AAF. 815,28).] SOFT. (10546 AC.) 0 o ? l fA iAOE (MIL-0 DFTMS a U 1 U L) tZ . 11111 11 UPIARD AFa 'A .13]4.5 Sari. (010] AC.) ' ' 0 a W > - to 8 • 4&370 SOFT. (1.105 AC.) UPLAND AREA UPLAND AREA 'C . 17.728.9 SOJT. (0407 AC.) U) ' to z - UPLAND AREA b' . -V&7 SOFT. (0.053 AC) UPLAND AREA E. . n6,]79. SOFT. (16.455 AC.) a W N M WLAND AREA 'r Ix (PREVIOUSLY DFTERUMEO) . 53.081.0 SOFT. (0.759 AC.) M Q. C) m z TOT. HT AM AREA 4.015703 SOf . (112.098 AC.) w J .3 Q t`' O ? ma FEZ' U O UD E< j W..0 z QPL6 DETAIL 'C' AND -D SCALE I. - 60' 5 a q6 X Q? O C'J iY?.7 x0.4 V p U a txp .wi z zU m n 3w < FOO ? r a F . Ua V ISSUED FOR: DATE: FT: 2 REUE. 03.1601 RD FINAL 00.2107 RD 4 REY61Ox II. t907 RD COPY 0502.08 RD COPY 0).1109 RD d RMSCw 093409 RD d . N8 'Z2 SKEET I a 2 OF 2 9 SPECIFIC PURPOSE WETLAND SURVEY - DETAILS P .0 CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE MITIGATION BAN[ PLAN JULY 6, 2010 Prepared by: B lei SEIMICES, ac. 110 S. Edison Ave. Tampa, FL 33606 Ph: (813) 259-1085 Fax: (813) 259-1086 Clearwater Christian College Mitigation Bank Plan July 6, 2010 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 EXISITING ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS ....................................................................................... 2 3.0 PROPOSED RESTORATION ACTIVITIES ..................................................................................... 3 3.1 Brazilian Pepper Removal ................................................................................................................. 4 3.2 Mosquito Ditch/Spoil Island Restoration ............................................................................................ 4 3.3 Internal Hydrologic Improvements ..................................................................................................... 4 3.4 Improved Tidal Exchange Via a Created Hydraulic Connection ........................................................ 4 4.0 PROPOSED ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS .................................................................................... 4 5.0 REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE ............................................................................................................ 4 6.0 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................. 4 FIGURES 1.0 Project Location 2.0 Project Site 3.0 1926 Aerial 3.1 1942 Aerial 3.2 1957 Aerial 3.3 1973 Aerial 4.0 FLUCFCS Map 5.0 National Wetlands Inventory 6.0 Soils 7.0 Brazilian Pepper 8.0 Improved Tidal Exchange v:.. Created Hvdrologic Connection Clearwater Christian College Mitigation Bank Plan July 6, 2010 1.0 INTRODUCTION Birkitt Environmental Services, Inc., Wade Trim, and Delta Seven have been providing consulting services to Clearwater Christian College for the development of Mitigation Bank since early 2009. The proposed mitigation bank design is based on extensive field data and 2-D hydrologic modeling. Birkitt has attended pre-application meetings with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) Jacksonville Regulatory Office and the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) Tampa Office. Feedback from these agencies has been obtained to facilitate preparation of the permit application. Additionally, a Draft Prospectus has been submitted to the USACE and has been distributed to the Internal Review Team (IRT). The IRT is made up of representatives from the USACE, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). A revised Prospectus and Draft Public Notice based on initial comments by the USACE reviewer have been prepared and is on schedule to submit this month. The state and federal permit applications are scheduled for submittal in August, 2010. It is anticipated that state and federal permits will be received within 12 to 18 months. Additionally, Birkitt presented the proposed mitigation bank to the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council in April 2010. The proposed CCC Mitigation Bank (CCCMB) site is located in Pinellas County, FL at 3400 Gulf to Bay Blvd., Clearwater, 33759. It is near the western end of the Courtney Campbell Causeway (Hwy 60 or Causeway), approximately 1.5 miles east of the intersection of Hwy 60 and U.S. 19. The proposed CCCMB site includes approximately 99 acres of undeveloped land consisting primarily of forested mangrove habitat. (Figure 1.0 - Project Location). Historically, the project area consisted of natural mangrove forest and estuarine open water habitats along the western side of northern Tampa Bay (Figure 2.0 - Project Site). It has since been ditched for mosquito control and impounded by the construction of Hwy 60. The historical aerial photographs included in Figures 3.0 through 3.3 clearly show the progression of disturbance to the area over the last 70 years. The 1926 aerial shows the area of the proposed mitigation bank prior to the creation of the mosquito ditches and the construction of the Causeway. The undisturbed mangrove forest habitat is clearly visible. In 1934, the Causeway was constructed and is evident in the 1942 aerial. Mosquito ditches can also be seen traversing throughout the mangrove forest on the CCC site at this time. From the 1957 aerial on, increased development can be seen within the uplands surrounding the proposed project area. The historical aerials display further degradation of the habitat from the encroachment of the surrounding development and mosquito ditching. As part of the construction of the mitigation bank, CCC is proposing the restoration and enhancement of this degraded estuarine wetland ecosystem. The primary goal of the construction of the bank is restoration of the natural estuarine ecosystem once present throughout Upper Tampa Bay and includes water quality improvement and habitat enhancement for wildlife and threatened and endangered species. These goals are proposed to be accomplished through the following specific project objectives: • Hydrologic Restoration - The driving force behind the healthy function of an estuarine ecosystem is hydrology. The mixing of freshwater from upstream sources and more saline waters from the Gulf create a unique habitat that is used by a significant amount of Florida wildlife, including almost every commercially important species of fish in state Clearwater Christian College Mitigation Bank Plan July 6, 2010 waters during some stage of life. The wetland vegetation associated with estuarine systems protects adjacent uplands from storm surges and helps filter upland stormwater runoff, resulting in better water quality in Tampa Bay. The objective is to restore the natural hydrology and tidal exchange of the area by removing the numerous manmade alterations and re-establishing a hydrological connection throughout the site. Habitat Enhancement - The use of an estuarine system by wildlife is dictated by the quality of available habitat within the system. Human activity has diminished the quality of much of the available habitat within the proposed mitigation bank area. The removal of spoil mounds, the restoration of the natural hydrologic regime and tidal flushing, and the removal of nuisance-exotic vegetation will provide higher quality habitat that will be able to host a greater diversity of wildlife species. 2.0 EXISTING ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS The Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) and the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) were utilized to classify land types and wetland habitats (Figure 4.0 - FLUCFCS Map and Figure 5.0 - National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). The proposed mitigation bank site is composed almost exclusively of wetland habitat with the exception of some of the spoil piles that are a result of the mosquito ditching found throughout the site. The wetland habitat present is mainly comprised of red (Rhiziphora mangle), black (Avicennia germinans), and white (Laguncularia racemosa) mangroves, with Brazilian pepper present along the southern and eastern edges of the site. There is also some open water habitat primarily within the northern portion of the site and a small area of saltmarsh habitat within the southern portion of the site. The soils indicate that the mitigation bank site is predominantly composed of hydric soils (Figure 6.0 Soils). The wetland habitat within the site has been hydrologically impaired by mosquito ditching and the construction of Hwy 60. These anthropogenic alterations have contributed to the degradation of water quality and benthic and mangrove habitats. Impoundment of the upper Tampa Bay Basin north of Hwy 60 has increased residence times and reduced tidal flushing of the subject area. Anoxic muck has collected and accumulated within the mosquito ditches, tidal creeks and coastal embayments. These activities have substantially altered the natural hydrology of the area by modifying the natural exchange of fresh and salt waters, a crucial component to the health and productivity of an estuary. This channelization has eliminated sheetflow of freshwater runoff across the area and has had a similar effect on tidal flooding, thus altering the hydrologic regime, especially in regards to salinity gradients. Waters within the upper reaches of the mosquito ditches exhibit high levels of hydrogen sulfide concentrations and are likely the result of stagnation. Spoil piles from the removal of material to create mosquito ditches and concrete inclusions are acting as barriers to tidal flow. Intertidal mud with a very high organic content has accumulated in the upper most reaches of the coastal embayments. These areas are submerged except perhaps during extreme low tide and contain silty anoxic mud. In addition, there is approximately 0.31 acres of Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), a nuisance exotic plant that has colonized portions of the mangrove fringe and spoil mounds, available for removal within the property boundary (Figure 7.0 Brazilian Pepper). Currently, the subject area is providing low ecosystem function. The mangroves, tidal creeks, mosquito ditches and embayments are serving as low productivity habitat for the resident and Clearwater Christian College Mitigation Bank Plan July 6, 2010 transient fauna (i.e. fish, birds, invertebrates, etc.) which typically utilize mangroves as a habitat. For example, mangroves are utilized by federally managed fish species as Essential Fish Habitat (EFH), but due to the lack of proper hydrology and tidal exchange there is limited access to this critical habitat for various life stages of fish. Without the creation of the bank, the site will continue to be minimally productive and is likely to continue to degrade. 3.0 PROPOSED RESTORATION ACTIVITIES The following activities are proposed for the restoration and enhancement of the CCCMB site: • Brazilian pepper removal and restoration of habitat • Restoration of habitat impacted by mosquito ditching • Internal hydraulic improvements by enhancing tidal creek flow • Improved tidal exchange via creation of a hydraulic connection under Damascus Road. 3.1 Brazilian Pepper Removal As part of this project, approximately 0.31 acres of nuisance-exotic Brazilian pepper located along the mangrove fringe will be removed within the project site (Figure 7.0 Brazilian Pepper). 3.2 Mosquito Ditch/Spoil Pile Restoration A portion of the mosquito ditches/spoil mounds on the project site will be restored during the construction of the bank. The area proposed for restoration would include both those spoil piles that coincide with the proposed mitigation channels, as well as selected spoil piles located along the mosquito ditches that feed into the main mitigation channels. These spoil mounds will be excavated by either heavy equipment or hydroblasting to the mean high water elevation. Revegetation will occur naturally through secondary succession. (Figure 8.0 Improved Tidal Exchange via Created Hydrologic Connection). 3.3 Internal Hydrologic Improvements Selected improvements to tidal systems are proposed that would improve water circulation and thus improve site water quality and habitat. The proposed improvement includes creating a network of mitigation channels by demucking and expanding existing mosquito ditches. The channels would be established throughout the property and would terminate in Cooper's Bayou where the muck bottom tapers off. Reconfiguring the mosquito ditch systems will improve the tidal exchange and flow of water through the habitat (Figure 8.0 Improved Tidal Exchange via Created Hydrologic Connection). This restoration concept is expected to improve water quality in the short term but without creating a hydraulic connection under Damascus Road, it is presumed likely that the system would eventually sediment back in, resulting in the low dissolved oxygen and stagnant conditions which caused the current degraded habitat. This design concept is proposed in conjunction with water exchange improvements. 3.4 Improved Tidal Exchange Via a Created Hydraulic Connection Due to the fact that the tidal exchange between other portions of Tampa Bay and the CCCMB site was historically reduced by the construction of Hwy 60 and other anthropogenic activities, the ideal restoration plan would include some means of improving tidal exchange. Therefore, 3 Clearwater Christian College Mitigation Bank Plan July 6, 2010 the proposed mitigation bank restoration plan includes the installation of a approximately 42 foot wide bottomless arch pipe (conspan) under Damascus Road at the entrance to CCC (Figure 8.0 Improved Tidal Exchange via Created Hydrologic Connection). This activity would create a hydraulic connection from the mitigation site to the adjacent waters of Tampa Bay, under Damascus Road. The implementation of this design, in conjunction with the internal hydrologic improvements, will increase water flow, provide greater circulation, and improve water quality. Improved water circulation will increase dissolved oxygen levels (reducing anoxic conditions) and create more appropriate salinity levels and gradients. These results should improve the overall level of function that the habitat provides. 4.0 PROPOSED ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS In total, the approximately 99 acres is proposed for restoration or enhancement at the mitigation bank site. It is anticipated that these activities will result in a significant net benefit to the benthic and EFH within the mitigation bank site. These activities would include improved hydrology and tidal flushing into this altered system, resulting in higher dissolved oxygen levels and more appropriate salinity levels and gradients. The proposed conditions will result in net water quality improvement, and habitat enhancement for wildlife and threatened and endangered species. The exclusion of nuisance-exotic vegetation and the removal of spoil mounds within the project area would also result in higher levels of function to support wildlife. The removal of the nuisance-exotic species, Brazilian pepper, from the project area would allow native vegetative species to recruit within these areas and would provide habitat that could support a greater diversity of wildlife species. The removal of selected spoil mounds and re- contouring of mosquito ditches would restore a more natural hydrology and tidal flushing to these previously impacted areas. The installation of a culvert under Damascus Rd. would also improve tidal exchange and flushing, resulting in increased water flow, greater circulation, improved water quality, and net benefit to the regional watershed. 5.0 REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE The goals associated with this project are far reaching and have the potential to effect a significant positive change not only within the CCCMB site, but also throughout Tampa Bay basin. High quality mangrove forests, once abundant throughout Tampa Bay and Florida, have suffered significant losses throughout the last century. Agricultural, commercial, and residential development has placed a huge burden on one of the most important ecosystems found in our state. Mangrove forests, when functioning properly, provide the base of the inshore food chain and habitat for hundreds of species of birds, fish, and other wildlife. The habitat serves as Essential Fish Habitat which supports fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity. Mangrove habitat improves water quality in Tampa Bay by filtering stormwater originating in the uplands. Economically speaking, they provide nurseries for almost every commercially important fish caught in our waters. They protect our shorelines from extreme erosion during storm events. Mangrove forests attract visitors and provide economic benefits to Florida due to the wide variety of recreational opportunities they provide. It is for these reasons that the restoration of mangrove habitats in Tampa Bay is among Florida's top environmental priorities. 4 Clearwater Christian College Mitigation Bank Plan July 6, 2010 In addition, the Tampa Bay Estuary Program has identified preserving and enhancing Tampa Bay's mangrove and saltmarsh habitat as a priority in the May 2006 "Charting the Course" as well as identifying the restoration of estuarine habitats within the bay the highest priority within the 1995 Master Plan for Habitat Restoration and Protection. The opportunity to restore a highly degraded mangrove system will be a significant benefit to the region. 6.0 CONCLUSION The proposed CCC Mitigation Bank restoration and enhancement plan will include: 1) removal of nuisance exotic vegetation, 2) restoration of mosquito ditches/spoil piles 3) internal hydrologic improvements via creation of tidal creeks/channels and closure of selected mosquito ditches, and 4) improved water exchange through installation of a culvert under Damascus Road. These improvements will provide regional benefits to water quality, benthic, and mangrove habitat to the Tampa Bay basin. Significant improvements to EFH are expected. The improvements will result in increased wildlife usage and will provide the opportunity to preserve and restore vital wetlands habitat within this highly developed area of Tampa Bay. The mitigation bank will meet all of the criteria in Chapter 62-342.400 F.A.C. Mitigation Banks and 33 CFR Part 332 Compensatory Mitigation for Loss of Aquatic Resources as published in the April 10, 2008 Federal Register. 5 r .?! j 1 t Drew - ...- r?l rn Legend O Proposed Mitigation Bank Boundary E1UBL -Estuarine and Marine Deep Water E2AB2/USM - Estuarine and Marine Wetland E2EM5P - Estuarine and Marine Wetland E2SS3U - Estuarine and Marine Wetland E2USM - Estuarine and Marine Wetland i PUBHx - Freshwater Pond r t Fps ?? _ _ '? ?• ? 1. ? ?.r•?w„Wa?? ..- A r BRUIT Figure 5.0 IV MIA. tvru ..; W _ H National Wetlands Inventory ? Clearwater Christian College Pinellas County FL o 255 510 1020 Wntx:TRi m eel sue.. ...,.. u,w r • -- • . .: emiev? NAD 83, State Plane Florida West [Feet] Legend -] Proposetl Mitlpa .Bank Boundary KESSON FINE SAND, VERY FREQUENTLY FLOODED w , as. WABASSO SOILS AND URBAN LAND T 1 W?WE S 0 355 510 1,030 Feet NAD 83, State Plane Florida West [Feet] 5. Bald Eagle Management Plan Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The dramatic recovery of the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in the past 35 years represents one of the great conservation success stories in our nation's history. This management plan provides the framework for the conservation and management of the bald eagle in Florida to ensure its continued recovery. This plan meets the requirements of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's (FWC) listing process (Rule 68A-27.0012, Florida Administrative Code [F.A.C.]). The listing process was initiated in July 2002, when the FWC was petitioned to reevaluate the status of the bald eagle, which was considered a threatened species in Florida (Rule 68A-27.004, F.A.C.). Action on the petition was delayed due to a listing moratorium, which was lifted in April 2005. Following the guidance of FWC's listing process, a five-member biological review panel was approved in June 2005. The panel assessed the eagle's population and distribution data against species-imperilment criteria (Rule 68A-1.004, F.A.C.), and determined that the bald eagle no longer met the criteria for state listing at any level. As a result, the panel unanimously recom- mended that the bald eagle be removed from Florida's list of imperiled species. The panel also acknowledged the importance of protecting nest sites, and suggested that continued protection of nesting habitats was necessary to sustain recovery of the species (Sullivan et al. 2006). The decision to delist the bald eagle in Florida is based on the following biological data: (1) bald eagles occur throughout the state; (2) the population does not experience extreme fluctuations in distribution or numbers; (3) the estimated number of adults has increased more than 300% during the past three eagle generations (defined in this document as a total of 24 years); and (4) the population is not expected to experience significant declines over the next 24 years. The continental bald eagle population began to decline in the 18th century as a result of habitat loss and direct persecution. The decline intensified during the mid-20th century with widespread use of organochlorine pesticides such as DDT compounding the losses from habitat destruction and shooting. DDT was used widely in the U.S. until it was banned in 1972, in part because it caused eggshell thinning in raptors, resulting in widespread reproductive failure. Bald eagles reclaimed their entire historic range by the late 1990s, and their estimated population in the Lower 48 states increased from an estimated 417 pairs in 1963 to 9,789 pairs by 2007. Bald eagles have met or exceeded the population goals established in each of the five regional recovery plans, and in August 2007, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) removed the species from the list of species protected by the Endangered Species Act. The USFWS recovery plan for the southeastern United States established 400 bald eagle nesting territories as the number necessary to down-list the Florida population from endangered to threatened, and 1,000 nesting territories in the state as one criterion for delisting the eagle nationally. By early 2007, there were 1,218 active bald eagle nesting territories in Florida (FWC unpublished data). The goal of this management plan is to maintain a stable or increasing population of bald eagles throughout Florida in perpetuity. To achieve this goal, bald eagles and their nests must continue to be protected through science-based management, regulation, public education, and law enforcement. Continued conservation efforts are required to prevent a population decline of 10% or more that might trigger a re-evaluation for relisting the bald eagle. To maintain the - iii - Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Bald Eagle Management Plan conservation goal, this management plan establishes four conservation objectives that will be calculated annually as five-year running averages. All of these objectives have already been met, and maintaining these objectives will assure that the goal of this management plan is met: (1) a minimum of 1,020 nesting territories per year over the next 24 years; (2) an average of 68% of nesting territories producing >1 nestling per year; (3) an average reproductive success of >1.5 fledglings per active nest; and (4) maintain the current area of occupancy (>770 mil) and extent of occurrence (52,979 mil) of eagles statewide. In addition to being our national symbol, reasons for continued conservation, management, and monitoring of Florida's bald eagles include the following: (1) Florida supports 11 % of the nesting population in the Lower 48 states, more than any state other than Alaska and Minnesota; (2) 67% of all eagle nests in the state are located on private lands; (3) disturbance can negatively affect the reproductive success of nesting eagles; (4) growth of Florida's human population assures continued encroachment into eagle nesting and foraging habitats; and (5) the public insists on continued conservation of this magnificent species. The FWC's biological review panel determined that Florida's eagle population would not experience significant declines over the next three generations, but acknowledged that protection of nest sites should continue. This plan proposes continued regulation of nesting habitats during the first five years following delisting. The FWC will monitor Florida's eagle population and will study the effects of human activities near eagle nests. After five years, results of this research will be evaluated and regulations will be adjusted as appropriate. To ensure that the conservation goal and objectives continue to be met, this management plan recommends a suite of conservation actions. These actions are best accomplished by applying an adaptive management approach that allows adjustment to policies, guidelines, and techniques based on science and observed responses to implemented conservation measures. The conservation actions are organized into the following sections or sub-sections: Habitat Management, Land Acquisition, Private Lands Incentives, Law Enforcement, Proposed Regulations, Permitting Framework April 2008, Local Government Coordination, Monitoring Plan, Education and Outreach, and Ongoing and Future Research. Management of bald eagles in Florida through the implementation of this plan requires the cooperation of local, state, and federal governmental agencies; non-governmental organizations; business, agricultural, and forestry interests; universities; and the public. This plan was developed by the FWC in collaboration with a diverse group of stakeholders, and its successful implementation requires the cooperation of and coordination with other agencies, organizations, private interests, and individuals. Any significant changes to this management plan will be made with the involvement of our stakeholders. The FWC formally solicited public comment and peer-review on the proposed delisting action of the bald eagle in Florida at several junctures of the delisting process and the writing of this management plan. Comment periods were noticed in the Florida Administrative Weekly to solicit: (1) information on the bald eagle's biological status to be considered during the development of the Biological Status Report for the Bald Eagle (Sullivan et al. 2006); (2) information on the management needs of the eagle and any economic, social, and ecological factors to consider as part of its management; and (3) public and stakeholder input on drafts of r - w - Bald Eagle Management Plan Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission the management plan. Public comments also were received following release of the Biological Status Report for the Bald Eagle in 2006, and at the September 2007 FWC Commission meeting when a draft of this Bald Eagle Management Plan and its associated rule changes were presented to the Commissioners and received conceptual approval. Following this meeting, the FWC created an "ad-hoc" committee of some of its most active bald eagle stakeholders, and this committee met several times into early 2008 to assist the FWC in resolving issues remaining with regulation and management of the state's bald eagle population. Five years following approval of this plan, the FWC and its stakeholders will re-evaluate the biological status of the bald eagle in Florida. If nest-monitoring data suggest that modification of guidelines for the regulation of land uses surrounding eagle nests may be appropriate, then this management plan will be revised accordingly. - v - ii: Nib t r? r1?k.?h + ?f?` . • ,C :i ` • ' an "ate } k qa ,M '*r Z-tt 9 +f °N. ?1(FS ?e 0 Y s '7 „r a ?..,.+ .>r..y _'d' p,m '.+} .•ry• ,.t: iK J 1 f•7.... r g 4 ,? t %(? r 4? rt xl; u3r' l e;s ?` 7'r4 d (r n '?' ?we°f ' v" V?"? ?r ? t ..r. r •r?? ? T ? ieiKCry.; v?; s+fi rr ,;ot? ? jr,. i.. ? ? ? f ,q y •rrr.' .PG jr'"'.? ' '#- .rP?S ° ?' k ? ?,?r ? ` V1 _ r? '"7.? ;? .}ti,. q. •. ?" '?T `1 •?.y f....}}}} ?y,_ e f. ,.:'1 i 1 - K,'?.i. ?• ti ,ryy, a ,,+?qr,?,r 5? ?. .ir,i"!t yy ?r 'Nl?i a {it-vt , f r ,.,0.r •a. } !M y {"t•.. g f fi `sh?'',:i yt y. -?F.,S.?R. :r,? i.?.axYr?`R''°•?4?°r•"? "r?N.? : -.' ?.4 ?y /.•''7 _,•?? r 7t: r 1: ?;«iC.A. sy a ,.a,??,-+` - ' f ti l rt.7 ..: ? t, ti A .. a}t .?? •;+"h L? ? r ? X ? ? ` s. f - ' ? r? r Y :rrt ?f a -n215 e;.. tw .,.? y rl• r.?'? tYa ..>, rW. r ??'O{? A a?~ ? err? t',? 'tt?fr r ? '? ? A e .. ?y? ? ? ? ?, .FX? wj?, 4',tY?i d "'a'+? ?+ ?'{r"d f -'? t .; ?l •Mt t? y? r w:,t+ ?. !,yrt ?j y}x-"`r •,S?r Y r,' G _ r7% Y fi f r X• •hi ' SY Y? i . t - '.?•. }},' ,t 3:J,s y? 5, 5 474•,j{ St dt -V'*f: t ?? ? r x 'R _,j•:? ? V.y ?:i?? ? 1_ ?'1j??, Y.??FT+ ?y't,."r?, 3t?T+yY ?t(.ti •,' y, r ? t• Si ? p' 71 i .t+d t f t?, .. ?'' ''?.3 .r;hw' ..u' 7 s+' r atyiA rr u. .• - r." .ir £: !t'Ci+ r tR,t + s- •r. a Ir L.? * • ?, ? m., C M n4:z?^4 cam„ ?r r ,? t: 2 r'?7°yti yf t` .+ ?'? „i"?r '` x- ,. J, It ? :x '° a yr? Yl.' a • ur' 7 :. S r?rr?''1j .,..2 1? ,,.re: `+ .y t?{4 y r i'4' n }.. ; rz •+`r °•F '? 1 A.; 7!, '}fix e r f,,,.? yjr'y?r?' ,a,y3- r ?1?' r {r?W ':?7 1? t ? •. "fir ?jt?::? ?e S'?? ??f4'? ,t. ?, t 7•x_. 4.i" ?', ,z '. r !C '??t'. { ?v?FF'?.?1v.,.. l!'t`.C't'r''?' f ?.y t' Xy#+,?x ? J lsrycl?"'• sS?,,1,i1X J '^7 ?rapi?i, F+,."! fJ?....,i•r ?'' R ,tS{ ",rl! ?'>r+ yTr4A 6`''? rp >, t ,a < r.?J +. t ?y q• r Y, .:? ..? ?8rr' '. , ? r ? ?? :. ? y Jsy 1 F'.? M ,?,?y.?? x ?^?,r : s? ?. ? r a d 7 e? 1 ..y /? •h„ x a'id` x r"7` '. L ` .?r C :%. ,r.?r ..???, ? , ?r A '?i'•"k r?`t?? ,??fi , r ?(?,R;?k•7M?.o?? '?' ?+,?rt ?f ?N£?:t;. '? ?3' ax r, •+°,;{Sfi4fs ?,?,'?,'7Ay i? zl, .s y •?. ,?:,????3?, i Wf'::t7 r ?S s'?5 ,T 5 J ? ?.i j?• a? p?:? fi /Ir P ?? a "n'7t`,1 J`.'?%1"+'??rf- ff.? 1y?` ? ? 4 l ` d ?, ? s ?'+. , .- ;+' .4•. •{ [ * u 7§ i Z •4?• '?„ Cf ?:+F: t 1 r, ft ?+? ,?-. r ?! y i' a ? :., .r sf -'t .rr ," t •y f, K.><- ?tJfi r• r ?T•4'R t ?' C'+at 'r ,.. `1+ i r• r? yf r'. ?.,,, y' .yr -. ? 'T# ; ;1 ? R Y3r r xE' "°'"{t t? ? 7r• ??? 4 7V ? i .j w; ?1,r' S ., M 7 } <t '.. '" d' 'SV f 'e..+`Y i"f n" ?` i, ";' y¢}i,' a- ?' • s, •*-. 'o. i' ir(?, r •*`" g.r ..W `xr ? •Q`.g'i' ?-`.'. y>• ,r1_5 :{ .n?? ? ?? s `>A I? a y ? .r r "k .:'1. ?7( ??,y'4;,•,r'` ?` -?J 'i? c?' . t ?i r ? ??'' r , `'t 7 45y?>,- A T ,? _ r r,t. ' a 3 r•r - r it'! ,r? a iR- 'y!Ya, /,. •IF .:••:a3 Y y.':r. • ue:. r. ?r ?.>,?,' rr ..:'? ?t.x?'.?S 1 ? w•1 r T',ww"a t..s.r ! r ?!`'" i 3! `K'pq? ?'y : ?:. ?"? e ? ?',i i%' .yL, G •- ? z ,?. ?<t-' ??Y ?ii? "' k s ^}:' r y, .?"'i+J r ?1s r' ' ti r'? v _it :.tifra, '! fix. w w ?? ? _ ''.'' ? Y -{ .r t ?,. :,r' r Z- .Y. t ?Xl'.;t. ?,.[. - k???i a.• ?? Ze:. r . X..,f. ,.'.C•?;, ?'S r r ?' -,?,- 'ik., :w :fT .';??y yr rF'. ?' t .t?•r } i? i' i••;1.,r' VII, ?... ? 7 1 :;, z s. .e s e.ii '!'"? ,r ?r??_',Y` 1'f ?r`'.4 . ?` +s r'- K s".,??''e ?,• rats ..• ?. ?r ''1>„d?4 a< r r ?? yv 1}": lwfi- t xY ? r.-, r?Y u < r ., c p1' tt,+? Ar'a criKft Jir^ L ' Y ?t¢ 6 ?$yd.•. `` ?: a1,r ?'7 'R'1"'* ? ,? d• s ? 7 rt ? ?: n , ?. :ni ?' r ,, 7 nXV.; o?,.:+. .r• ? f ? .1 t *bk rr . 1 { ,? ^'S'r .. r w itkif+2P .? C >• ,t : i.'sY? F "J• , ? r? ' _ _ ' A rl,? t.•+ ? f°"rr+? - ?' ?.rX .?M r ? ? t,? t t.r F'_ v k. ?! ,a-' j•t , r t+ a '' nt }Y,"? r,ECZr°,,pt.w"s+T sv. T•` X s` 3"Fd t r r - - 5V ,.. P ?.y 5'{ >r1 h? ;.?+'fiK -.irY`..??` 'A- t .; ?rDCn„ • '„,v. ?, .I,?v r- ?, f,yq'?t-'? rr?h.,.d t`''? t r r £ ! !} ra.. ?t. y'r`,7F'X» ...? ?r'T-t'i- r d.d.7sr•'-?'x'',s i. ,u -'3^.'':. .,n •::? ? +1'1 A `?'?tAr a ? ?? ?? .ri? _ y, +?' ,t "? ?r @ - ? ry...? `Y? "?, iry F, ? ?• '?? !'•? w:ti? Iiii. '•?'1 ,?{rfe%?? ??t ??F ??a? yn'Y?r (? a ?? r +1'.r ?• x f,. df f ,r?..-jOiO',.'.-'sa•' y' `, F ..'! A, r - r. f;, { to w x . ?' a ,? ` ¢` . " 1t?,i t? AT• ,?; ?;i ` t r ' e4rz'M r^?;?' ?p?'' srf? "?y `' rar a?>, t * ,+r•?2 t.•?,.@ .$:"';A•:r S ?- ..,?Mry ??.!7. ?''a-;? ° .x xM'='T ?.: i•` r ?s ,?.y? ?+-'r?`ff;.-}?2?' ,Cz`e?• ?,'y '.?? t';?cy?r'?r -ry'a, ? ?, ,4 '.r?t: 1 r .? •fi.l T4. ,,,..+, l i.r r9.. ? : r .;?,. t .? ?r t 'n+ '•?-r: A•f'!.. i ?:,+t ? ? ?f?iR ix?xi, . i:t' eK'? y yF ??, V?r?.~,? .r ,? ? .Ir -:yf. .'A }- a]l, t y?::i- "-"? r,• rs°r? ?-f, Lb ' a;.'? e4'f. y1 r .Ews ?? e+y' .a ?,4 b-;'??`x- vf'e. ?..;?"1 yH. t?;.. ,r yr ..?f?,+ft'r ?i? ?:'Z :o'I-"?lj": ?*r.. •KT?1'?{ :: y,' ,;C, N• trif;-, - a,iM. F ?. •.7 }. d_. a('" ?"il .. ? r b7. t: A' - ''1` "t :,?.. '4"'?;, ,.l ?'r? -_-*K,? ?a. ?1 «?? 1 li•.. r` r. •;?', fl "7?? y ? ,A•. dti ? 7 ? ,?? r?.? 7:. iC ? :..+-v cn ?: ` d ?-i.,?r ? t ." 'est ? f ,T ;7: .?i'•'7. rs- j t,:•• L 9f 7. a^• ?, b .te 3? ???i +l •.n Yt .! ? P-.t t°' r??:,i???.r?S-• .rt,?`? ;f i,J6 '+"?,p? tC;.^ax! ° w '??,? •• y, ka ?. a•,?;. 4 u ?.: 1"'iy'??:rrr jy rrii.F..: +,..?i -:S S ?Sf ?i.F k_. 4{ 'SY ?,^'.. . M^&M'?+'. rc:?.il. ,}r ,', ':S't? ?y,.. ?.J.. y, r, '`*^??., .J r' ,? %IrF w:. ,{ ?1 ! .i .+0.?,.,?'7?• 3'-'Slur`'' 'r4 d ,ry'r+'. '? vy ?%. ? t , ? ? !?? C'?. ?,,..??y` '' S, ?,q, :?5 ,??'f?..?€•,q. v'.12`c +y •1 4,.« 'C: s'...f+ Icy . ?fi >. lyf•' '•.? ,y r - r `.+?'x i, la . r :? ??: $Wtt..'i. f ?' y;.: „: rt. a 'tt : !. t yr? r,/Ft^?p?r/°+}' },'? ?t t"'e +r. .. r. st' '? Y- '+? k ? e " f r ?J r ,7l` .'e? 7i 1 G ? x i :: v •f'::?"? 5 T i ?`% .; =,;y! - r ??.. y,. •;:,.. ??'r -a' ?... i' ',? J .IN 1-; e ! {:T:?y" S? :?Z,a! r;4+. #'•if !(''l? urJ:,. r x _!"s.t?7i ?3}.e+i?Y? rq N.a?+y ?Ra ?'}?'+??1. is T` 3?.a,ww Y t ,S '? .,fS'• , ix -t!., '•::b Y-?Y .';•r '• r.l '.,? s. v-?, t't6' ?' r?.. ,rf' 'y FY"? +i 4_, .:•4 }7 ii?'?7t.. •?? ??; ?'tid Kt r'` ^~:,w.,. s,•4.r.Y •(- z_.iw R.? rT?:.s ?I I rya: } d.r ? k ? 4 y+?, /,.' y? r 4., i .1?1 ''t ? ? : .?_y c' >.,: 1 r+. ?it? k{. ?` t,. -saq?y?? lx ? .r,a E •:.: l Y •. 1 „t,t t ???' ?z' ? -, 1 , a .? `::^Vr '? n # f ?t y ? J yhx * tiF'rF ??x.Y ?E? ?'? •>: ."Yf } ??f' 1?'? '+?,t ` '4i??''„ '+A?,'?ih?' C'w 4 ?a}?` •? ,r .., 'T ? "? •^ t w t k sb ? i??a ?? r ,,, - .::.ryi /r f 17 Y {y}' a. Ur. t s r+. <' r' 1 .,rrn L4y{ k !S"y''? !G. K r .ce,{ •M , 430;,- uhl. y Al.'1. r;utd?, {? IfP'str.i. 7'<# ?. X dy w { fI y,.l S:V• aq ¢ 3 r1, +nr y F°r 'f..t" r y(S.ry '? `? ''•R ?:A,., ?, r''.r! ±c .r??,IF 3 rr r? rrti6L s r3; y,Y? - y , , r F" :. k '',,, ; r. ,? rr t , ,r,, ?F < $ s cM , r• k.. ?.r 'S- ,iK•PP 'E t?;.?'?.,11 "' :'1-ter '' ??'?4!r •.. ...?.r: t t". .. r ?"z.. -.._ •? t.cw, 2 A = ?o m x c_ O 0. '^ ro o a v = ~ o ?' rD n 11 c I 00 • 3 9L o ? a c ? ? n ° 4 F C < (D d C) Obi w d r M o Q. > m CD S z ° CL rn x x co co 07 m v O m -n W o v o w m O. a) A A c c N N N to C) (D (D O M ly, G N WC? d n R_ w O w w O n N o z (D ? O rn Z Z 3 ? O Vi O O Oo co pqj tC (A 2 ? w A N V `,$ O O Clearwater Christian College Description of Existing and Proposed Buildings Cathcart Hall Multi-purpose building including cafeteria and board room on the first floor and administrative offices on the second floor. Minor expansion anticipated for additional office space. Dambach Hall Classrooms and Gospel Center Memorial Chapel. No expansion proposed. Easter Library Library and offices. No expansion proposed. Emmons Hall Women's residence hall. Expansion proposed. Gymnasium Gymnasium, cafe, rehearsal hall. Expansion proposed. Merritts Hall Men's residence hall. Expansion proposed. Paden Hall Women's residence hall. No expansion proposed. Steele Hall Men's residence hall, faculty offices, science labs, lecture hall and classroom. No expansion proposed. Development Office Located at corner of SR 60 and Bayshore Boulevard. Office may be relocated on campus at future date within existing or proposed structures. Information/Security Bldg Currently located along Damascus Road adjacent to Easter Library. To be relocated closer to front of campus. Chapel/Student Services Proposed new building. Classroom/Lab/Parking Proposed new building with first floor parking under the structure to be located on the existing parking lot along the southerly edge of the expanded stormwater pond. P:ZZZ229009M,000, BUILDING, DESCRIPTIONS 4 ? "LZ4 Y !F Delta Sever, Inc. Environmental Consulting Avoidance and Minimization Report Clearwater Christian College Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida June V, 2010 Prepared. by Thomas R. Cuba Delta Seven Inc, PO Box 3241, St. Petersburg, F133731 http://www.Delta-Seven.com and Randy Livingston and Phil Larsen Clearwater Christian College Prepared by Delta Seven Inc. P.O. Box 3241 Saint Petersburg, FL 33731 Avoidance and Minimization Report Clearwater Chr istian College Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida June 1", 2010 Prepared by Thomas R. Cuba Delta Seven Inc, PO Box 3241, St. Petersburg, Fl 33731 http://www.Delta-Seven.com and Randy Livingston and Phil Larsen Clearwater Christian College Clearwater Christian College: Page 2 Clearwater Christian College. Property boundaries, selected mapped ditches, and recent data collection sites. See text. SR 60 is at the bottom of the image. Bayshore is to the left. Old Tampa Bay is to the right. Location The site is located at the west end of the Courtney Campbell Causeway (SR60) on the western shore of Old Tampa Bay. The central Latitude and Longitude for the site is -082° 41'52.73"W 27° 57'52.73"N. Situation: Campus Clearwater Christian College ("CCC" or the College) has worked to craft a comprehensive development plan that contemplates future enrollment growth, student expectations for service, the College's cultural profile, availability of local facilities, and the growing competitive nature of higher education. The College has given careful consideration to the development of this plan from its earliest work. It began with an assessment of the existing facilities and their use compared to industry standards developed by the Society for College & University Planning (SCUP). Significant gaps between such standards and existing campus conditions and facilities were evaluated against the backdrop of enrollment projections and trends in educational majors experienced by the College. Furthermore, such analyses were tested and refined for compatibility with practical (e.g., physical space) and economic realities. The result of the work is a plan that should service the College for many years to come. Enrollment is projected to grow over the next decade to a maximum of 925 with a mix of 750 residents to 175 commuters. Faculty and staff to support that student population would rise to about 150. The College's mission, coupled with the present and proposed footprint of the campus, presents a practical limit to the growth in student enrollment. The mission of CCC is shown below: "Clearwater Christian College exists to provide an excellent liberal arts education centered on God's Word, with a focus on challenging students to love God wholly, to know Him intimately, and to serve Him fervently; educating men and women to minister faithfully and humbly with evangelistic zeal as they impact eternity for Jesus Christ in every avenue of life. " Pursuing this mission extends far beyond the classroom into every area of College activity. The focus necessarily culminates in a pervasive application of discipleship, which by definition is labor intensive ultimately resulting in a practical cap of our enrollment. Simply stated, the personal attention given to each student mandates an upper limit on enrollment overall in order to fully satisfy the mission. The College believes the existing campus can accommodate the growth with the modifications contemplated in this plan. The changes needed to service such growth, while not inconsequential in the absolute sense, are not of enough substantive weight to merit relocating the College in its entirety. The College currently has nine buildings covering about 153,000 square feet in addition to parking, athletic, and other common facilities. Locating another facility of equal size and functionality (e.g., dorm space, cafeteria space, classrooms, offices, labs, etc.) would be very Clearwater Christian College: Page 3 challenging and cost prohibitive. It would require the sale of the College's existing facilities to aid in funding such a move. Frankly, there are not many entities seeking used college facilities. If the College were to attempt to build a comparable facility, these same hurdles would exist, as well as others. That is, we would need to find a suitable property on which to build, sell the existing facility to aid in funding, and build comparable facilities at today's construction prices. The interruption to the students' educational careers would be unacceptable forcing them to transfer to other institutions and causing the loss of millions of dollars in tuition revenue during the construction period. Given all of the above, the College has carefully selected the planned improvements to the existing campus necessary over the next decade to serve the enrollment growth in a way that optimizes the blend of educational needs, the modern student's expectations, and the College's own historical and distinct operating directives. To begin, there are presently four dormitories on the campus: • Paden Hall (ladies' dorm, houses 300 women) • Emmons Hall (ladies' dorm, houses 300 women) • Merritts Hall (men's dorm, houses 300 men) • Steel Hall (men's dorm, houses 300 men) Each of the ladies' dorm units contain three bedrooms accommodating four beds each, a communal area, and a restroom/shower per unit. The men's units each house four bunks while providing a communal restroom/shower on each floor. Growth in enrollment contemplates adding. extensions to both the men's and women's sides of campus allowing housing on campus to grow from about 600 presently to the anticipated 750. The additions to the dorms while accommodating growth needs will also minister to students' expectations as well. That is, the modern student demands more living space. Consequently, it is no longer expedient, e.g., to house four men in a single dorm room. The pressure to reduce this number to increase the living space per student continues to mount annually and students are increasingly using housing accommodations as part of their evaluation of where to attend College. Consequently, the College is required to make such accommodations when it can for the sake of meeting student expectations and holding a competitive position in the area of student housing. Part of the historic cultural character of CCC has been a men's and women's side of campus. The College has not moved to co-ed dorms as most other higher education institutions have done, but continues to require a certain level of decorum between the genders that is reflected even in its housing accommodations. For example, curfews are mandated, dorm visitation is prohibited, dating is regulated, and there is even a dress code that promotes modesty. Consequently, the development plan calls for both a men's and women's pool for future enjoyment. The addition of separate pools in addition to other facilities, e.g., sand volleyball and tennis courts, is likewise intended to make staying on campus more attractive and, thus, create more discipleship venues. The need to make the campus increasingly attractive to the student body both functionally and aesthetically has been a desire of growing importance on the part of the administration. The Clearwater Christian College: Page 4 College is not a "town school." That is, students cannot easily walk off campus and be found in the midst of other commercial enterprises. Consequently, the need to offer more to the student becomes increasingly compelling. Even so, most students find it necessary to have their own vehicle and more students are bringing a car to college to meet their basic transportation needs. This trend is much the same as what has been experienced with personal computers and cell phones. What use to be a luxury to the student is now a necessity. Again, because of the limited proximity to other commercial enterprises and because roughly 80% of our students are campus residents, it is not reasonable to simply ask the students to not bring vehicles to campus. Students will simply look fora college or university that will allow them to bring their vehicle and CCC will be placed at a significant competitive disadvantage. The convergence between attempting to make the campus more attractive functionally and the growth in personal vehicles has culminated in the need for more parking and parking that is removed from the general thoroughfare. It is not only desirable but also safer to make the campus a predominantly pedestrian campus and move parking to the perimeter where traffic is routed safely away from pedestrians. Presently, during peak times of enrollment and activity, places to park on campus are simply rare. The College has even had to make temporary arrangements with the City of Clearwater to make use of their contiguous property as overflow parking. We cannot be assured that this relationship will persist. Perhaps, the single largest planned and most needed addition is the chapel/fine arts building. The College simply has no facility like this on its existing campus. Chapel, which is a daily event for our College family, occurs in the gymnasium. Every day we set up and take down the chairs needed for this event in our gym. The wear and tear on the floor is significant not to mention the limitation on the use of the gym before and immediately after because of set up and breakdown time. In addition to the issue pertaining to chapel, the College has no place for fine arts productions including its own graduation commencement exercise. Off campus facilities are often not reliable. Two years ago the College had to find an alternative site on short notice to hold its graduation exercise because Ruth Eckerd Hall cancelled our reservation in favor of a more lucrative production. Plays and musical productions require the College to rent facilities, which often are simply difficult to find and expensive. Additionally, renting facilities requires that our students provide their own transportation to view such events, which becomes a safety concern for us. Furthermore, productions must sometimes be scheduled to occur over two nights because the venue is not large enough to accommodate all anticipated guests, again increasing costs. Right now the College's physical space, such as office space, meeting space, classrooms, is severely limited. Adding faculty and/or staff to meet growing program needs has forced us to share some offices. While this may seem inconsequential, it is a matter of importance as it relates to recruiting qualified personnel. Few professionals while willing to do so are not greatly in favor of sharing offices. Likewise, genuine meeting space is very much at a premium. Student meetings for things like Greek Clubs become a logistical exercise especially if the numbers in the group become large. Classrooms are fully utilized. The lack of available Clearwater Christian College: Page 5 classroom space severely limits developing and offering new programs, which are needed to remain competitive with what our sister institutions are able to do. All of these additions and improvements are contemplated in the context of fulfilling our mission as an institution of higher education. Failure to provide adequate facilities could jeopardize the College's accreditation as provided by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, our accrediting agency. The statement below is from Section 2.11.2 of the Commission's requirements for accreditation: "The institution has adequate physical resources to support the mission of the institution and the scope of its programs and services. " The Commission requires the College to self-evaluate such facilities and report to the Commission its evaluation in the context of reaffirming its accreditation. The evaluation is assessed by both an off-site and on-site committee made up of employees from other institutions. Their reports are relied on by the Commission in rendering its approval of the College maintaining its accreditation. There are many significant adverse effects should the College lose its accreditation, e.g., it would be in default of its bond indenture and, consequently, jeopardize its access to Title IV funding for student aid through the Department of Education. The following section presents an executive summary of the facilites use studies. Situation: Indoor Facilities Needed At that time that the college entered into this process it was intuitively aware of the shortcomings of the facilities, but had never had a facility audit, or had the facility needs quantified in any way. Lafferty Architecture began the process by performing an audit of the existing facilities and comparing their findings to the national standards as set by the Society of College and University Planning. Although the college desired to grow to a student body of 950 students, the existing college enrollment was used to determine the present needs. Lafferty used the classification manual published by the National Center for Educational Statistics to classify building and facilities uses to categorize the spaces. Findings are based on current fall enrollment of 550 students and uses square feet per student for comparison. Clearwater Christian College lags behind other colleges in the small college classification in four key building space uses. 1. General use space. This represents the student recreation and general student use areas. Clearwater Christian College has only 39% of the national average for general use space. 2. Labs. Clearwater Christian College has only 42% of the national average for lab space. It is also important to note that the fastest growing major at the college is Exercise and Sports Science. As it continues to grow the lab numbers will get even worse. Clearwater Christian College: Page 6 3. Special use space. Facilities for music and drama. Clearwater Christian College is at 78% of the national average, but this number does not consider the need for a chapel. "Chapel at CCC is viewed as an integral part of the educational process" The Guide (p. 22). Presently, chapel is held in the gymnasium each morning. 4. Classroom space. Clearwater Christian College has 90% of the classroom space of the average small college. Situation: Parking and Vehicle Circulation The present campus has 386 paved parking spaces. In the fall of 2009 there were 504 registered vehicles for students and faculty/staff. The need for parking caused the college to use lawn space for parking at the front of the campus, behind the men's dorm area, and in the center of campus near the gymnasium. The college expects this problem to worsen as the number of students bringing cars increases. The college's location, which is isolated from business, banks, etc., further promotes the need for students to have a car. Currently, there is little distinction (other than some sidewalks) between the vehicular and pedestrian realm of the campus, and in many cases the two are identical. Students walk to most buildings in the streets and they are not wide enough to accommodate two-way traffic and pedestrians. The Damascus Road, Which is the only way onto the campus, and which serves as a right-of-way for the city/county land north of the campus, does not meet the width requirements for two-way traffic and cause many vehicles, especially delivery trucks, to pull off the road and onto the sidewalk so other vehicles can pass. Conclusion: Additional parking and streets are needed to service the present student enrollment and make the campus safer for pedestrian traffic. Situation: Sports Facilities The college presently has one soccer field and one tennis court. The soccer field presently services both women's and men's soccer teams for both practices and games, which generates significant time conflicts. It is also the only outdoor intramural facility for the campus. The soccer field does not meet the NCAA minimum standards for size. Also, because the field is near sea level and drains poorly, it is unplayable most of the rainy season. During the fall of 2009 no home games could be played on campus because the field was unplayable due to rain. Instead, the college had to rent fields from the City of Clearwater for home games, which caused additional travel, time out of class, and diminished fan support. In addition, competition to rent fields continues to grow. Baseball has had to rent fields since the program began. For years the team enjoyed a friendly relationship with the city, renting a field at the Joe Dimaggio Complex in Clearwater. However, since the construction of the Bright House Field for the Philadelphia Phillies and the Phillies contract with the city the Dimaggio Complex is unavailable for most of the days that a field is Clearwater Christian College: Page 7 needed by the college. There have also been increasing numbers of requests to the city of Clearwater for fields. This made it necessary for the college to use a field at a Christian high school in St. Petersburg, about thirty minutes from the campus Survey Results from Athletes 2007-2010 Survey results from the 2007-2008, 2008-2009, and 2009-2010 academic years confirm the need for improved facilities in order to attract and keep student athletes. The 2010 survey shows the following findings regarding student athletes who participated in the three outdoor sports (women's soccer, men's soccer, and baseball). 67 student athletes, representing 13% of the total student body participated in the three sports. 62 of the 67 student athletes responded to the survey (93%). Here are some key findings: Question: How important was the athletic program in your decision to attend Clearwater Christian College? 24% stated that it was the deciding factor in coming to CCC and that they would have gone somewhere else if there was no program. 59% stated that the athletic program was either very important or the deciding factor. 71% stated that the athletic program played an important, very important, or deciding factor in deciding to attend CCC. Lost revenue: The. students that would have attended other colleges if the athletic program was not available represent a tuition loss of $321,000 in this academic year. It is not unreasonable to assume that at least half of the group would have attended other colleges had it not been for the athletic programs available. This represents lost revenues of $470,800 for this academic year. A loss of the students citing the athletic program as very important or the deciding factor represents a loss of $770,400 for the academic year. Question: What were the best aspects of your sport? Of all that responded, no students cited facilities as any one of the best aspects of their sport Question: What is something we can do better in your sport? The most often cited answer to this question was to improve the facilities. The following are exact quotes from the student athletes in answer to this question: Improve the field. It is unplayable. Build a baseball field. We need a baseball field on campus or at least one that's very close to campus that we can use. Fix the field. Clearwater Christian College: Page 8 Facilities are horrible. We have to drive ourselves using our money 30 mins away to practice. Get a better weight room and field. Conclusion: The economic viability would be greatly jeopardized by the elimination of any of the outdoor athletics teams due to lack of facilities. Improvements to the existing facilities (including the construction of a baseball facility on campus) will be necessary in the near future to insure the continuation of these three student generating athletic teams. History In 1926, prior to the construction of SR60, the main part of the campus would have sat on an island off the eastern shore of Pinellas County. Between the mainland and the island was a large mangrove swamp open to the waters of the bay both to the south and to the north through what is now Cooper's Bayou. The aerial photograph taken in 1965 shows how the causeway had terminated water flow through the mangrove swamp. The aerial also shows the college lands in their condition prior to the acquisition by the college. The wetlands had been cris-crossed with mosquito ditches and the uplands were being used as a solid waste disposal site and much of the discarded concrete remains on the property today. Note the absence of either of the two ponds which are on the site under the existing conditions. The 1967 aerial shows the first buildings of the campus. To the south, a pond can be seen. Even though the campus is clearly being built into the uplands as they existing in 1967, it is suspected that the fill for the site required to meet building code was obtained from this pit. The second pond, now located near Cathcart Hall is not yet visible. In the 1972 aerial, the building which is now the library has been built and there is a rectangular pond to the north. In the 1975 aerial, the gymnasium can be seen in the north sector of the campus and while Cathcart Hall has not yet been constructed, the rectangular pond has been shaped to resemble the existing conditions. The pond has been excavated to obtain fill for the Clearwater Christian College: Page 9 Project area, 1965. Tidal flow has been severed to the south by SR60 and site is used for disposal of waste concrete. Close up view of project site, 1965. new buildings. It is important to note that in the 1971 aerial this pond has no outfall to the bay, while in 1975 the overflow pipe has been added to the east side and under rainy conditions waters are discharged to prevent flooding. It was at this time during the development process that environmental and stormwater regulatory controls were enacted. Prior to 1973, no permits would have been required of the work done on the property. Pinellas County adopted storm water regulations in 1973, followed by the FDEP. The submerged lands were in private hands. The Water Management District did not exert jurisdiction until 1984. The Army Corps of Engineers (COE) would have had jurisdiction over the construction of SR 60. At the time, the COE used the mean high water line for jurisdictional determinations. The work at the college was not regulated. Subsequently, the college has developed incrementally to achieve the existing conditions. In 1998, the college acquired title to the main portion of the swamp lying between the campus and Bayshore. Financial needs subsequently led to the sale of an out-parcel located immediately north of the FDOT field office on SR60 just east of the Bayshore intersection. The wetland lines have been flagged and surveyed. The WMD has approved the line and, while staff of the COE have reviewed the line in the field on two separate occasions, the COE will approve the line until a permit application has been filed. Clearwater Christian College: Page 10 1967. Buildings appear. South borrow pit excavated. 1971. Campus development continues. Rectangular north borrow pit excavated. 1975. The north borrow pit is already connected to the bay with an overflow ditch for flood control. Set too low, the pipe backwaters at spring tide levels. Resources at risk The property is generally described as previously developed uplands to the east and isolated undeveloped uplands lying within mangrove swamps to the west. Historically the site, was once a natural mangrove forest and later parts of it were used as a landfill. The original mangrove forest was partially hydraulically isolated by the construction of the Memorial Causeway. The exact effects of that causeway are not yet determined. The area has been extensively ditched for mosquito control, but many of these have filled in over time and are no longer hydraulically functional or are extremely limited in function. The uplands are dominated by oaks and palmetto with some pine and cedar. No endangered or otherwise listed species were encountered. The wetlands are dominated by mangroves but not all have developed into a forested situation, many areas being populated with short and small diameter mangroves. The wet areas of the swamp, including the ditches, are variable, sometimes well populated with fauna and sometimes virtually devoid of inhabitants. Water quality measurements in the swamp are variable and also indicate a high degree of impairment. This summary is supported by the studies conducted during the concept development phase. Studies Commencing in 1998, ecologists from Delta Seven Inc. have studied a wide array of the ecological components which make up the remnant marsh / swamp system located north of SR60, west of the existing campus, and east of Bayshore Blvd. The studies conducted prior to 2005 have been summarized in the following excerpt. The undeveloped portions of the property were described through the use of a concerted broad spectrum data collection effort. Water quality data were collected at 24 sites. Parameters included salinity, dissolved oxygen, hydrogen sulfide, and turbidity. Water levels were recorded at two sites through a quarter of a tide cycle in order to determine relative water elevations between the bayou and the bay. Water velocities were measured concurrent with the water levels. Fourteen transects were run through the property during which notes were taken on vegetation, faunal use, general habitat condition, sediments and soils, and habitat type., Major drainage ditches were explored using kayaks on two separate occasions. Notes from these trips were used to characterize the streams. Visual observations were recorded on the occurrence or the Clearwater Christian College: Page 1 1 notable absence of fish, crabs, snails, clams, and birds. In addition, nine bottom samples (petite ponar) were collected and three Hester-Dendy traps were set. The fauna collected by these devices were analyzed and used in addition to the visual observations to characterize the habitats into relative functional categories. The data and observations were used to prepare habitat maps of the system. Only the areas actually verified have been mapped. Consequently the maps include significant areas of grey, most of which is mangrove forest based on aerial interpretation. One type of habitat, the mangrove thicket, was revisited in order to collect data on tree / sapling density. Hydraulic subdivisions of the site The northern portion of the property is mostly the open waters of Cooper's Bayou. These waters are shallow and somewhat restricted in flow by the presence of Cooper's Point and the SR 60 causeway. The internal hydrology is provided by a system of relict mosquito ditches. These were apparently last maintained about 40 years ago (Pinellas County Arthropod Control Report). The system has been divided into three levels of . conveyance. The term stream is herein applied to those water courses that are too wide for the average person to cross. Most of these are also deep and wide enough to kayak, but at high tides, overhanging branches prohibit access. The next smaller category is termed here a ditch. These are narrow enough to be easily crossed but are still permanent, but not always wet, features. They may dry out at low tides, are always muddy or mucky in the center, and never completely closed in by mangrove roots. Finally, the term collector has been used here to describe obvious water courses that are completely or nearly completely filled in by mangrove roots, herbs, muds, sands, etc, and are often only a shallow, narrow depression in the substrate. These are only wet at the highest tides and carry a good deal of the rain runoff into the system. The sediments in streams and ditches is most often a very thick layer of very fine mud. Streams have been measured at more than a meter deep with another meter of mud. Ditches, seldom have more than 20 cm of water, but often have in excess of a meter of soft mud. The system of streams, ditches, and collectors hydrate the flood plain. This plain is most often a flat peat Clearwater Christian College: Page 12 supporting a variety of treed systems. Occasionally in the flood plain or at intersections of the drainage system, is an open area that has been termed a pool. These are always very muddy and are quite hazardous to the unwary. Muds can be in excess of a meter deep. The southeast borrow pit, or pond, is artificial, more than 3 meters deep, and stagnant. The bottom is mucky. It is connected to a small stream to the south by a nine inch pvc pipe. The pond to the west of Cathcart Hall is a borrow pit which is first seen in the 1968 aerial photograph and has been altered to approximate the existing shape by the time it is seen in the 1975 photograph. The invert controlling elevations of the pipe which connects it to the bay is +0.71 ft above MSL. The elevation is such that the pond only receives tidal input during high tides. The internal waters are connected to the north to Cooper's Bayou by a set of three streams and to the south east through two 30 inch pipes under Damascus Road. The waters do not connect internally except at extreme high tide. The northern flood plains flood and ebb to the north and the southern ditches through the higher marshes ebb and flood under the road. The water in the systems is a mixture of stagnant bay water and rain water. Salinity is highly variable. Dissolved oxygen concentrations are all very low. Free hydrogen sulfide was documented at several sites. These parameters are indicative of very poor waters generally marginal or even incapable of providing adequate habitat for marine and estuarine organisms. Habitats These waters support a variety of identifiable habitats. In addition to the open waters of Cooper's Bayou, and those water courses already identified, there are uplands (Oak hammock, Oak-Pine hammock, Palmetto scrub, spoil), transitional habitats (pepper, shrub-scrub, barrens, mangrove scrub), and vegetated wetlands (forest, stream forest, thicket, marsh, salt grass meadow). The upland Oak hammock habitat occurs on the upland islands. It is dominated by live oaks with an understory of brush and palmetto. The oak-pine hammock Clearwater Christian College: Page 13 occurs when pines are intermingled with the oaks creating a mixed forest. The uplands without tree cover are almost entirely Palmetto scrub. These are areas (two) where palmetto has dominated the landscape eliminating all other vegetation. Spoil refers to the mounds of dredged material left at the side of the mosquito ditches more than 50 years ago. Each spoil mound forms a small upland island in the middle of the flood plain (see 1965 aerial). Soils are salty and fresh water is scarce, leaving them desert like in nature. Vegetation can be oak, salt shrubs, or Brazilian Pepper. Spoil habitats would not be undesirable were it not for the typical dominance by exotic plants. Transitional habitats are often dominated by Brazilian Pepper. Brazilian Pepper occurs in scattered patches and in large stands throughout the site.. In some areas, the Pepper is growing on old mounds of spoil covered land fill materials, mostly concrete. In others, it is growing on the fill created at the edge of the causeway. It occurs on spoil mounds throughout the swamp. Where the pepper has not invaded, other habitats occur. Shrub-scrub is dominated by short woody shrubs, like Baccharis and Iva. This habitat normally occurs in periodically flooded sands, not muds. It occurs only at the edges of the uplands. Salt barrens are flat sandy areas which are flooded at extreme high tides. Evaporation of ponded salt water leaves a sandy flat with salt content so high that plants are unable to grow. At the edges of the barrens are the mangrove scrub. The stunted mangroves are the last vegetative matter that can survive as an area becomes more salty on its way to becoming a salt barren. In truly wet habitats such as the flood plains, washes, and stream banks, mangroves dominate. The mangrove forest is characterized by trees attaining heights of 8 meters. The trees near water sources are mature and well formed but subject to frequent perturbations from salinity and dessicating events. These are primarily Black mangrove (Avicennia germinans) and they occur in the northern flood plains and near the edges of the larger streams. The mangrove thicket is composed of small spindly trees growing very close together. These trees are often less than 3 cm in diameter and less than 2 meters in height. Stem counts were conducted in Clearwater Christian College: Page 14 order to document the dense growth. The mangrove thicket is an impaired habitat but the dynamics behind its formation are not yet fully understood. The stream forests occur at the edges of the streams and ditches. The hydration associated with the water courses stimulates growth and encourages the Red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) and it is dominant along the banks of the northern streams, but becomes scarce in the middle and southern areas as hydration decreases. Higher portions of the wetlands are normally too wet for Brazilian Pepper and too dry for mangroves. These areas are the marshes and salt grass meadows. Marsh areas are wet and muddy, dominated by short grasses and herbs while salt meadows are dominated by grasses and herbs but the soils are sandy, not muddy. Inundation is frequent but only at very high tides and only to shallow depths. Fauna The marine fauna observed were poor and not well distributed. The dominant organisms were fiddler crabs, mangrove crabs, and the coffee bean snail. Each of these has the ability to breath air for a short time, lessening their dependancy on good water quality. The upland fauna was more balanced, including rattle snakes, water snakes, rabbits, and lizards. Birds, were unusually uncommon. The bottom samples and Hester-bendy samples were examined for faunal inhabitants. Populations and diversity were both very poor to even non existent. Breder traps set to catch fish were only productive at the culvert under Damascus road. During the transects, and the characterization of the water courses, it was learned that a great portion of the swamp was not regularly hydrated. The vegetative cover and the fauna noted indicate that large areas of the mangrove system are impaired. Habitat Summary Prior to the construction of the SR60 causeway the waters of Cooper's Bayou were replenished by the rising and falling tides. The causeway and the use of parts of the property.as a landfill altered that hydrology in a way that restricts the waster flows. Cooper's Bayou Clearwater Christian College: Page 15 is a mud flat. The mangrove forest that is evident in the 1926 aerial has been semi impounded, then ditched. The ditches have largely filled in with silt greatly reducing the capacity for hydration. The ecological condition of the streams themselves is very poor. The south borrow pit is a very harsh habitat. The lack of water flow and high organic content has generated a system with low or no oxygen. The condition is most conducive to anaerobic bacteria, specifically, Desulfovibrio which extract the oxygen in sulfate (S04) in order to survive. The by product is hydrogen sulfide (H2S). This not only gives the swamp its smell but is toxic to most fish, invertebrates, and even plants. During our investigations, these bacteria were so dominant that the waters of the borrow pit were white. There were many places where the surface of the sediment was covered with colonies so large they were visible to the naked eye as a white cottony film. Waters were tested and free H2S was detected. The lack of oxygen and the hydrogen sulfide make the sediments and the waters less supportive of typical estuarine and swamp fauna. The sulfide also affects the ability of the mangroves to attain maturity. The conclusion is that the degradation of the floral and faunal populations is a result of these factors. The spatial variability of the degradation is generally along a north and south axis. The streams to the north are more open and carry more water into and out of the northern flood plain. The mangroves in the northern sections tend to be taller and more mature, with larger trunks, well developed canopies, and are firmly rooted in a well formed peat soil. The fauna are better developed than in the south, but still poor in abundance and diversity. The bottoms of the streams themselves are generally lifeless, with the exception of the bacteria. Fish were noted in the more northern and open areas and in the surface waters of the streams. Fish populations were sparse. Very little bird life was seen. As the streams narrow to the south and blockages occur, the condition of the mangroves degrade. Mangroves growing at the edges of the streams do a better-than those in the flood plains. The latter begin to form dense thickets of spindly mangroves the farther they are from the streams. The trees in these thickets are Clearwater Christian College: Page 16 almost all the same height indicating similar ages. The thickets are in an arrested state of forest development. The aerials indicate that mangrove cover has been continuous but the mangroves are not maturing. During the transects, many dead mangroves were noted. It is possible that the mangroves in these areas are undergoing an unnatural cycle beginning with a heavy seed set and growth typical of most forests, but there is a point where the development ceases and the majority, if not all, of these die, leaving the ground open to the next seed set. This may or may not be enhanced or facilitated by unusually harsh winters. The mangroves are probably between five and ten years old. Not all the thickets are of the same height. Some are only a foot or two in height while others are nearly 8 feet. , In the more extreme southern portion, where the land rises above the flood plain, the peats have not formed. The soils are sandy and drier, although still wetlands. These are the marshes, meadows, scrubs, and barrens. The condition of these habitats is much more typical. Rabbits, raccoons, mice, snakes, insects are abundant and the vegetation is in a natural state with the noted exception of the invasive Brazilian Pepper. Where the peppers occur, the understory has been shaded out and the overstory out competed. The habitat value drops considerably. These studies were augmented by ongoing data collection focused on developing a profile for mitigation and improvement. Litter fall and pneumatophore density data were collected to provide baseline information. The litter fall is inconclusive on its own and will only be useful in post mitigative comparative analysis. The pneumatophore density, however, is very high indicating highly stressed mangroves, supporting. the tree density and condition notes collected prior to 2005. Additional Hester-Dendy, litter bag, ponar, and fish seine studies were conducted and additional water quality data were collected. In many instances, the waters within the swamp were white with the heavy growth of Desulfovibrio producing Hydrogen Sulfide, toxic to both plants and aquatic fauna. Bathymetric soundings were taken in the open waters to provide information of potential exchange pathways. These post 2005 data confirm the original data sustaining the conclusion that the greatest majority of the mangrove habitat within the property is moderately to severely degraded and not a well functioning ecosystem. These data are being presented separately with the mitigation proposal. Clearwater Christian College: Page 17 Avoidance Avoidance of impacts is the most effective manner to preserve wetlands under most circumstances. In the instance of the wetlands on this property, the poor to marginal quality of the wetlands lessens the effect of the avoidance in that what is being preserved is not otherwise desirable nor functional. Still, the protocol of avoidance was rigidly pursued. Avoidance options considered: 1. Hold enrollment steady By eliminating growth entirely, it may be presumed that the need for improvements and new facilities would be minimal to nonexistent. This is a false presumption. A few years ago the College lost access to the baseball field at which it held intercollegiate sporting events. The soccer field is already below national standards. The College, as pointed out previously, is unique in that its religious services must be held in the Gymnasium due to the lack of a respectable chapel. Traffic patterns as they exist are cumbersome and generally unsafe. Eliminating new enrollment would not lessen the need for growth nor provide impact avoidance. The option was rejected. 2. Move the campus to a new location. Moving the campus is functionally and economically untenable. Just moving the College, without considering the increase in enrollment, was estimated to require $40 Million dollars. The disruption in schedules would be a major hindrance alone, but it is the logistics and economics of locating, purchasing, designing, and building a second campus while keeping the existing campus open which eliminates the option. The option was rejected. 3. Eliminate the sports program. Elimination of the sports programs would eliminate a portion of the wetland impact but would also lead to the demise of the College itself. Intercollegiate sports are a normal and expected part of post secondary education and institutions which do not offer these programs are not economically viable. The option was rejected. 4. Conduct the sport program at a remote site. The College was in this position recently using a baseball field in Clearwater. Management difficulties, reliability of the facility, conflicts with other users, and the lack of a practice field all made the option very unsuitable. Transportation costs alone are staggering when taken over the course of the year. Remote sports programs would not eliminate the need for other campus facilities and traffic safety related modifications. The option was rejected. 5. Open an branch campus. Clearwater Christian College: Page 18 The option was discarded due to a lack of property available and the tremendous expense. Purchasing, designing, permitting, building and operating a separate branch not only results in much greater overhead costs, but increases transportation between the campus' for both faculty and students and creates scheduling problems which must per force include travel time. It is functionally untenable. The option was rejected. 6. Completely rebuild the campus within the upland foot print. Conceptually, this option would call for the demolition and replacement of both old and new buildings and reconstruction in a manner which could support the College operations. In reality, given the need for new buildings, sports facilities, traffic re-routing, the impact is not eliminated. Furthermore, the College would be "out of business" for several years interrupting degree programs and careers. The option was rejected. Other constraints on avoiding impacts relate primarily to traffic patterns and traffic safety. The College is required to maintain access by the public through the campus to the Park property located to the. north. Internally, the College has a responsibility to eliminate or reduce user conflicts between vehicular traffic and pedestrian traffic. This is even more pronounced in a campus with the social atmosphere of the Clearwater Christian College. Routing both college and public traffic around the core campus resolves the logistics and also forces the location of parking areas out of the core campus and into the perimeter where student, visitor, and sporting event parking will not destroy the campus functional plan. Traffic concerns also led to the disposal of the small piece of uplands, previously owned by the college, and located in the extreme southwest portion of the site, just north of the FDOT field office on SR60. Alternatives being examined in 2003 and 2004 included using this parcel for structures or baseball and soccer fields. Upon investigation and after discussions with the agencies, the development team learned that the FDOT would not allow a frontage road along SR60 which would connect the parcel being discussed with the main campus. The ramifications of that decision are that any connection would need to go through the mangrove swamp. None of the agencies were in a position to support such a road. Direct access, even though it would require students to exit out of the main campus onto SR60 and then re-enter the campus, were examined. Access to the parcel from SR60 directly was eliminated by the FDOT. Access from Bayshore would create unmanageable traffic problems which were unacceptable to the City staff and to the local residents. The options were rejected. 7. Avoid impacts by selecting the least well functioning portions of the wetlands to be impacted. Ecologists worked closely with the design team and the College staff to develop a campus layout which would meet the college needs, provide adequate traffic safety, resolve user conflicts, and provide public access while eliminating wetlands which were dominated by Brazilian Pepper, pock-marked with mosquito mounds, littered with old concrete from the previous uses, and which included unsuitable ditch habitats. By applying these criteria rigorously, impacts as measured in square feet were lessened, but impacts on wetland function were nearly eliminated. Clearwater Christian College: Page 19 Minimization During the minimization process, alternatives such as described in item 7 above were examined in detail. Options such as including vertical growth were examined, but found to be cost prohibitive. In retrospect, much of what was conducted within item 7 above resulted in not only avoiding the impact, but in minimizing the effect of that impact. As an example, there is a borrow pit in the southern portion of the property which is virtually devoid of life and is hydraulically connected by a very small PVC pipe which carries flow only at extreme high tide levels. Superficially, this mangrove lined open water body seems to be a nice ecological feature. The data, however, reveal its true condition and it is proposed to be completely eliminated, reducing impacts to more desirable habitat elsewhere. Cumulative Impact The direct impact of the proposed development, while substantial in terms of square feet, is minimal in terms of wetland function. There is no cumulative negative impact because of the otherwise isolated nature of the campus. There is, however a potential cumulative positive impact which arose from the pre-application meetings. The college had acquired ownership to more than 80 acres of mangrove swamp lands which, after study, had been determined to be of low to poor functional quality. Mitigation plans were prepared which would serve to restore the great majority of these wetlands. During pre- application meetings, and calculations based on UMAM and E-WRAP procedures, the determination was made that should the mitigation plan as conceptualized be instituted, it would result in more than the required amount based on the ratios in effect at the time. The agencies opined that there would be no extra mitigation credits awarded to the College for over compensation. The College has determined to explore the severance of the swamp and the creation of a mitigation bank. This action, as a cumulative impact, will result in a net positive impact from the project. Clearwater Christian College: Page 20 Clearwater Christian College Private School, Inc. Deeds 1. O.R. 2356, Page 748 2. O.R. 4248, Page 1055 3. O.R. 4248, Page 1059 4. O.R. 2465, Page 102 5. O.R. 10311, Page 1231 6. O.R. 10778, Page 1420 7. O.R. 10214, Page 919 .L •J All i110 ?*l.} ? ?:, 111'1 •. .:1? ...... .... 1111••1 •+ ' ..... . J ......... . yh N VAN .. :R 4? } a N ?b Y? • 4, 1w H r? d R w P A' g i 1 w rn{ IQ ? 0 1w J1 q 3 .1 LO a - n ......111111 1 • I I ffii I ; 1+1 i ? ' iTY F ?' 1 •i •;1 :ri ? :n la '? r t '1 a tr era $ nn ?,? ? ?• ? r cr\ alp Doll ?t Neal ?,?+? $? " .. ion* d 041 V) to to t 04 A ?+ 1 0 a x 1} A it . M 0 ?rru1b+ a iEE a It. 'PI oil ct *51 01 a 01 0 GA ?•+? ?'?, ????y ?? ?, Bpi RO A\ ttAt •ts ?A 1 mP?aa?u Kra ?'? ? ? . ? w X0% Is W wiAVi ti .?T ?erN o e » `1 r • a c? jr °wab Cpl{. vsyJ i,Q 1 . a y o p ?t e? ?- 1 d G A 1 M W dQ4 n !1 { to ? Q y ppQ (?qq?? 40 14 1 ? + 1? ?r y I a„ h y o M A ? ?1+ ? 1 ?? +, ? •o tA H f .......:. .. •. ...... .... .,............,....i....?.?......n•.uu:u...?w?.a....e.....:Vw1iYti4Yf+,MUF6::?.+:..n«.??.r.'rv4n.,..+vY ALU..w.ca...?ui4.J.+vM+...w. + .. ....:.... ......?...: ?. y..l. ?...I:.a{FIB.... :....... Er- k .s_? ,55 f WA 16 4248 W'11034 WARRANTY DEED THIS INDENTURE, Made this L= day of December, 1974, DERWIN B. SMITH. II. Joined by his wife. LINDA B. SMITH, residing at 968 Monterey Point of the City of St. PeterabuggCounty of Pinellas, and State - ~- of Florida, Parties of the First Part. and CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE PRIVATE SCHOOL, INC., y A Florida corporation, 3400 Gulf to Bay Boulevard,Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida, 33519, Party of the Second•Part. WITNESSETH, that the said Parties of the First Part, for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars and other valuable con- sideration to them in hand paid by'the said Party of the_Second Part. the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, have granted, bargained, and sold to the said Party of the Second Part, its successors and r ri .4 assigns forever, their undivided one-half interest in and to the try h n following described land being described as follows: Y Q T ?• ; ¢ x Being a parcel of land in the NEB o Ito f the NEIL of Section 16, c, 11 a Township 295, Range 16E, City of Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida, being described as follows: Start at•the SE corner of the NEIL of the NEh of w Section 16-29-16 and go N 00°02` 42" E, 719.33' along the east line of said NZ14 of the NEii of Section 16 to the P. O. air VA" thence go N 89° 57' 18" W, 900.00': thence go N 00' 02' 42" R,cn 609_58' to a point on the north line of said Section 16; thence go S 89° 32' 56" E,. 900.02' to the NE corner of said Section 16, thence go S 00° 02' 42" W, 603.20' along the east T line of Section 16 to, the P. O. B. Containing 12.53 acres more or less. i j- na 00. 55 J r c sea Between ci • i . . w 4248 i ' And the said Parties of the First Part do hereby fully warrant the title to said laiud, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. f Signed,Sealed and delivered-in .??y? Y:.?. x 4 ' Jahe ?.MOCwnne of • j ?S.?1fW) l.: ; ifee? .y. ?. C? 7 ' Dz ias B. SMITS. IE i F 9 LINDA B. S141Tfi STATE OF FLORIDA ) :iM COUNTY OF PINELLAS )SS-. I H3REBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in the. State aforesaid and in the County aforesaid to take ac)amowled9a!ants, ersonall a aced DSRWIN B. _SMETH FI P Y PLC , joined by his wife, LINDA B. SMITH, to me known to bs the persons described in ` z? r • • 1 .: t._ .:.,'fix and 'who .executed the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged beforo" ,:,•, , wcty },:. me that they executed the same. { WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day of December, 1974. j 5: NOTARY PUOLIC t r 9 ? + c My Commission Expires { ? ? v ? Robrl PyGk. Stl¦ cf Ifatt¦ R:ix€{r•`?• 1 r,•j •-• }, .F-" - Q..cfdziab Eg*u PAT Z! FT J "??Cif ?? i 1 n A .•a t. yj, om1.1. 4248 natoSs t ADMINISTRATOR'S DEED THIS INDENTURE, executed this 17th day of December, 1974, between DERWIN B. SdITH, II, Administrator of the Estate of a Derwin B. Smith, Deceased, Party of the First Part, and :i CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN PRIVATE SCHOOLS, INC., a Florida corpora tion, as Party of the Second Part, whose address is 3400 Gulf to ..Bay Boulevard, Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida, 33519, W I T N E S S E T H: Party of the First Part, pursuant to order of the Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida, dated the 16th day of December •p a. zs t '?y ' Lsrq _? apt J 1974, and in consideration of the premises in the sum of TEN and ;cn NO1100 ($10.00) DOLLARS and other good and valuable considerations in hand paid, grants, bargains, sells, aliens, premises, releases, =:•;? 3x conveys, and confirms to the Party of the Second Part, and to its a ° ? A tea:,., assigns forever, that certain real property situate in Pinellas E F=A I. " !! County. Florida, more particularly described as follows: ""• '? v ?' Part of Government Lot 4 in the NE 1/4 of the t ° ' :• •ki' .= ° HE 1/4 of Section 16, Township 29 S, Range 16 E, City of Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida. being described as follows: Start at the SE corner of the HE 1/4 of the - ' :> NE 1/4 of Section 16-29-16 and go N 00 02' ° 42" E, 719.33' aloe the east line of said r HE 1/4 of the HE 1/4 of Section 16 to the P.O.B., thence go N 89' 57' 18" W, 900.00'; M o» thence go N 00' 02' 42" B.-609.581 to a point ,°,: on the north line of said Section 16; thence S go S 89° 32' 56" E, 900.02' to the HE corner i of said Section 16, thence go S 00' 021 42" W, 603.20' along the east line of Section 16 to the P.O.B. Containing 12.53 acres more or less. TOGETHER with all and singular the tenements, heredita- ments and appurtenances belonging or in anywise appertaining to l that real property. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same to the Party of the Second Part, and to its assigns, in fee simple forever. AND the Party of the First Part does covenant to and with the Party of the Second Part, ice assigns, that in all things preliminary to and in and about this conveyance the orders i ct t• 9248 rurto60• " F of the above-namP4 Court and the laws of Florida have been followed and complied with in all respects. a IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Party of the First Part has set his hand and seal on the day and year first above written'. WIV e ?? G7ti? I? (SEAL) D RW SMITH It, A >.n strator of the Estate of Derwin B. Smith, Deceased Signed, Sealed and Delivered .. Y' V • in the Presence of: ?? .,: ?•?' 1;.•?i', r .r_ ?_. }a 11 6A It k STATE OF FLORIDA ss s COUNTY OF PINELLAS ) - I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day personal) appeared before ': - me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths a:3 take •'. ;' acknowledgments, DERt4IN B. SMITH, II, as Administrator of the ?.: Estate of Derwin B. Smith, Deceased, to me well known and known to me td be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Administrator's Deed; and he acknowledged before me that he ` executed the same for the purposes therein expressed. WITNESS my hand and official seal at St. Petersburg, Pinellas County, Florida, this 17th day of December, 1974. tart Pu is ` My Commission Expires: - 8aan Puklit. Scat w R•: ids al tare • tits W,u na Nu tµwas .IAY 71, 1413 , 'K{°.!• .. ............ . .. ......... r ..,...,..,. .... ?.5"MW dan.Ml:vr:v.. •r. wn ..,.,• ....:r,.e9enMARfravlmi?r_rrs?,!rr•.xr.r.r..w..w +.;.. , ,. ?r M y 4 w W Q h ? h r ?? ? ? X11 r? AECORD 0 H Tin .4 p bagp &0 93kmu , °$ p. w 'd.' H. u v p Y v ?, /Q H n S7 M'r! 0 w 'p b 0.. Id'G?I tf "x.. 0. u 1` ?• t11 'MW03 a0,~? 'a A Y w « • 'tl 0 e? w ro M p .?'tl OW ro? vy bq .I44 > to d wb on *a to n eow g w o u 43 11. N p QI.p •',.ul u p'o ,17.•I•*4N? ?'1'`. N.9w A 'A 014 w .+ "' N Y •M a "? 0 o 0 N 'd (q w •r M '0 '. H /L H bb 1? m a upW c b u of oA u '° O d ~u.M1«a V m a ' h tt ? 'R H , 171 w ? h 1 Ao9 K •j 40wd°,? vyy ?nlrOtl v 14 u too kV + 071 » b p Y ld" u' ? 90%414 !i r' i? o v 1141 n u to it !j 04. 01 .1. 41 0 A v loot ,? + • Y 1'' ,r• d' 41 .1 tlr N 1a I1 +? .• .IU fol n ? ?? 4M 1 ? ?t ? p 11 M, •? to r1 1j v? ,a I+J '? ?? ?. +? 41 ?•111...J ... '? b {L••11 • ? . 1 P Ilti 1 too ? ? P Ifff. ? ? •{M/1 M1} ? 1.1 U. t} ?? 1a1 '" ;{ ' 'ZI '? q N .?i!1 ie ? s yr It w mn?1? a a??A ?lt1 br.uro W v"«? M MI 41 U ?i MMo"u ? ate ?r fa a ro « ..1 H 0 ? roll ? u & u ? b o ?• o U „ M w ? b it I v 4 w •n p, 0 0uOJ .1 1. ?i a 41 11L., H 10 •Y MI 1` N H P ?, L to ,1 •• 41 , .11 .,1 h ++ ?1 w t+ 1 0 V ti v M a ..1 31 t• y M 1 l• I+ i? .u rr v M H c v w 0 a '0 N ° H a iA Y ???a ca rrr U? ti t,+? •YK. 1•Y ' AIN11a3c- Sti' i?3NI? .Y .M ' Q w u' 5 n •dd+ 3 M .: N Y Vl d .a ?': ? n 0v0 atu m .? M M N? C 7 'Cf 0 ?d " id p ? C a 14 p 0?'? 11u?•b ?. RF 41 0? yp?? eew to . ? ?` N V M N A .?i »?i W M ..1 p p N U " 0 ff 1' •w pp 0 u 0( Ai ,':,V d A y A V u u t1 Mva M 0?? x top?SO ?b e a rh ??yy p , i V. 4 0 ?'y so _ N too a M All'?. '" ?? V w ???a.M 0 a a? w ?:? 8 u N a ti?• .h•..:y?,y 14 F N. M'6 01d z •* 0 I I j i • . i?`' °'? ti'ti .'?'? yet ?.}"+?.?, • •{*'t_3??t;??> ¢i1?•,?:'?P YytQ•'?`.?-,`-14 `•?} _? =`.Y ;??? . ... ? .. . •TIIIS INSTRUMEV7'tRFPAILED OV AND RETURN TO: STEPHEN A. BAKER h ALLAN & SHIPP, P.A. 4. Attorneys at Law I REn 6675 13th Avenue North, Suite 2C Fc St. Petersburg, FL 33710 S- :I INST 4 90-332660 Nov 4, 199912___x' PINELLAS COUN OFF , REGrgk-'7IIn 2c? PO 23i INST * 98-371343 NOV 20., 1998 I:36PM WARRANTY DEED TF _ .... ,.r P INELLAS COUNTY FLA. r (CORRECTIVE) OFF. REC .8K 10311 PO 1231 e _0 THIS WARRANTY DEED made this oZ day of C 47 b -e 1998, by DERWIN B. SMITH, lI, a mauled person wI whose address is 4755 Overlook Drive N.E.. St. Petersburg, FL 33703, and w? LINDA BRl,GG, a married person, formerly known-as LINDA B. S_M1TH 0 whose address is 1356 88th Avenue North. St. Petersburg, FL 33702; 3 09 hereinafter called the grantor. to CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE PRIVATE SCHOOL, WC. N a Florida non-profit corporation 0 o whose post office address is 3400 Gulf-to-Buy Boulevard, Clearwater, FL 33759 u hereinafter called the grantee. I acs (WHEREVER USED HERELNTHETERMS "GR,U.'TOR"AND"GRAN'TEF"INCLUDE ALL THE PARTIES MM w TO'rln5 M-TRt,.%jLv r A..ND Tr1E IlEIRS. LEC.%L REPRESEYTATIVES A.VD ASSIGVS OF LVDn*lDt-AL. . U V%'D T1IESVCCESSGP_N AND A&MIG.NS OF CORPORATIONS.) t-I a , a ra a WITNESSETH, that the grantor. for and in consideration of the sum ofTen ($10.00) Dollars A and other valuable considerations. receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, bargains, a sells. aliens, remises, releases. conveys and confirms unto the grantee. all that certain land situate 1% in Pinellas County. Florida, vi7• E- 81 SEE THE. ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" FOR L1: GAL DESCRIPTION CORRECT PARCEL NUMBERS oI I:e• RO*'O Parcel Numbers: #16129/16/00000/12010200 0 I-x #16/29/16/00000/1:;0/0200 .16/29/16/00000/130/0200 INT #16/29/16/00000/140/0200 16/29/76/00000/140/01 QO FUS Wrr• The subject property is not the homestead of either Grantor. P.l' REV This Warranty Deed is a corrective deed made to correct the legal description ul Ae.(_Zi_ set forth in that certain Warranty teed from grantor to grantee dated 02/20/98. recorded 02/24198 in OABook 10001, at page 2157, which in error excluded that certain property deeded by grantor to Robert D. Winn and Mary S. Winn by Warranty Deed-Aited 11/16/92, recorded 11/18/98 in O.R.Book 8094, at page 1155, all of the public records of Pinellas County, Florida. K?w.•a•: t ftn FP.'... E+ v i v?6 C ' PINELLAS COUNTY FLA. OFF,REC 392 TOGETHER with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances- thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. PINELLAS'COUNTY FLA. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same in fee,simple forever. OFF.REC .9K 103 11 PQ 1232 AND the grantor hereby covenants with said grantee that the grantor is lawfully scivc•d of said land in fee simple. that the grantor hereby fully wartarris the title to said land and wil! detenti the same against thu lawful claims of all persons whomsoever, and that said land -is free of-all encumbrances. except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31. 1497. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said grantor has signed and seated these presents the day and year first above written. WITNESSES: l_ Printeg& DERWIN II - ' Print• r a4y - WITNESSES: LINDA BRAGG, AA LI DA B. SMITH i Print• e t- STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PINELLAS ?¢? ?,,?,? The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thi day of ? , 1998, by DERWIN B. SMITH, II, a married person. who is personally known to-me or* who has produced. ag identitiL-,tiun :utdwhhip diiid take an oath. ?a?I IQMtIMV ANN JONM Af K COMMf W" 0 CC 403051 Notary Public. OtPIRES 8EP 04, 190 80xXon+OU My Commission Expires: (SEAL) S'CA"fir OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PINELLAS The foregoing instrument %vas acknowledged before me this L2 day of 1999- by LINDA BRAGG. a married person, VIVA LINDA U. SMITH, a'hcr' rs41a y known n me or who has produced.- as identification w o t to •c an t?ath. _ tr(C M ? J4 p?Eg ecuon+eumorF?x?wueecR+c Notary Public My Commission E?xpires: (p-'7.014SEAL) ??i]j?$• iA?.h Y*'F''_`7: ?;j,.VpJr?i ?i• ?. :... ZIP, ..?/V• Cam' • • YJ?Itl? i T PINELLAS COUNTY FLA. OFF. i 11 "Alt LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Cm-M edl Page I of 2 PINELLAS COUNTY FLA OFF.REC.9K 10311 PO 1233 The North %: of the NE %1 of Section 16, Township 29 South, Range.-16 East, Pinellas County, Florida, and that part or portion of Government Lots 3 and 4 vfsaid Section, which lies North of a line beginning in the West boundary of said Government Lot 3 at a point 250 feet North of its Southwest corner and extending North 87° East to navigable water in Old Tampa Bay: LESS: That portion thereof deeded to Robert D. Winn and Mary S. Winn, husband and wife, on November 16, IM by deed recorded in U.R.Book 8094, page 1155, public records of Pinelins- County, Florida, described as follows: That portion of the NW% of Section l6. 'township 295. Range 16E, lying south of Drew Street. East of Unit 1 of Crystal Heights Subdivision, and Northwesterly of Bayshore Boulevard - together with the riparian rights thereto, being more particularly described as follows: From the NE corner of the NW%. of Section 16, Township 295. Range 16E, as a point of reference, thence; S 0°37'03" W along the North :South Centerline of said Section 16 a distance of 33.0' to the Northeast corner of Lot 9, Unit F of Crystal Heights Subdivision as a Point of Beginning; thence continue S 0*3T_03" W along said centerline (being also the Easterly boundary of said Unit I of Crystal Heights Subdivision. as recorded in Plat Book 28. page 64, of the public records of Pinellas County, Florida), a' distance of 222.47 to a point on the Northerly right-of-.oay of Bayshore Boulevard (a I00' right-of-way); thence along a curve to the right, having a radius of 368.31 ", a chord bearing of N 41 "35'49" E. and a chord distance of 146.1 T to a point of tangency: thence N 61 "021 f" E along said tangent right-of-way a distance of 184.66' to an intersection with the Southerly right-of--way of Drew Street (currently a 33' right-of--way); thence N 89°29'50" W along said Southerly right-of-way 03' frorn and parallel to the North line of said Section 16). a distance of 242.21' to the Point of Beginning. Containing; 23.549 square feet (0.54 acres) M.O.L. Together with the riparian rights to the lands lying directly East, across the 100'right- of-way for Bayshore Boulevard (as recorded in County Petition No. 80, dated August 4, 1925) being further described as follows: 17ie North 222.47' of the Northwest'/, cif Section 16, 'township 29S. Range 16E. lying between the Easterly lint: of Unit I ofCrystal Heights Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 28, page 64. of the public records of Pinellas County, Florida, and extending Easterly to the mean high water mark of Old Tampa Bay - Less a 100' right-or-way tier Bayslwre Boulevarl - as described in County Petition No. 811, dated August 4, 1925. t? f t Riparian rights granted are limited to the Lesser of: (A) Fifty (50') [Let from the upland, or (11) the maxintutn dock length permitted by law, whichever is the least. .': l H? 51:110978 blN 1 i • t7• t ?8 t ?4; ,}1i; c?; Oi DEG-DERWIN SMITH II/LINOA 8 SKIT RECORt;NG ?.t ... :? CHECK AMT. TEPIOE?c0: 50 iC110091 JAg 11-04-1996 RECORDIDED-aWR ISTIANiCM Contiona1100 2fEXIIIJUT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Co ec ed I PINELLAS COUNTY FLA. OFF 4 Page 2 of 2 PINELLAS COUNTY FLA. OFF , REC .8K 10311 PO 1234 LESS' That portion thereof deeded to Conservative Christian Private Schools, Inc., on March 28, 1966, by deed recorded in O.R.Book 2357, page 13, public records of Pinellas County, Florida, described as follows: Start at the NE corner of Government Lot 4 in the NE %i of Section 16, Township 29 South, Range 16 East for P.O.D. and go South 00 °02'42" West 558.44 feet along the East line of said Government Lot 4: thence go North 89°30'26" West 300.00 feet: thence go South 41 929'04" West 453.31 feet to a point on the Northerly right-of-% ay line of Courtney Campbell- Parkway: thence go South 82 °38'52" West 302.52 feet along said right-of-way line: thence go North 00"02'42" East 2,654.20 feet; thence go south 89u s r t 8" East 900.00 feet to a point on the East line oftheNE%4oftheNE54 of the aforementioned Section 16; thence go South 00°02'42" West 719.33 feet along said East line. to the °.0.8.. and also i Part of Government Lot 4 in the NE%4 of the NE'/4 ofSection 16, Township 29S., Range 16 E., City of Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida. being described as follows: Start at the SE comer of the NE%4 of the NEV* of Section 16-29-16 and gaN 00°02'42" E. 719.33' along the East line of said NE'/4 of the NE'/4 of Section 16 to the PAR.. thence goN 89°5718" W. 900.00': thence go N 00°02'42" E. 609:58' to a point on the North line of said Section 16: thence go S 89°32'56" E. 900.02' to the NE confer of said Section 16, thence go S 00°02'42" W. 603.20' along the East line of Section 16 to the P.0.13. LESS AND EXt EPT• "The right-of-way of Davis Causeway (known as Courtney Campbell Causeway). Pinellas County. 1;lorida, and also LESS AND EXCEPT: A 100' right-of way ror Day,hure Boulevard us describer[ in County i'ctition No. 80. dated AuLtust 4.1925. TALI 119.50 CHECK HILT t 119.50 t 1.00 rlIts INST1111M r1' PREPARED nY.$-No twTulux.to: STEPHEN A. BAKER 00-OOSZSS JRN- 7-2000 t0ivt ALLAY & SHIPP. P.A. P INELLSS pro p?eX 10779 Rt3 to m AttornLys at Laiv IIt?I11UI??m1lY,? ??? 6675 13th Avenue North. Suite 2C St. Petersburg, FL 337t0 [Parcel 10 1116/29/16/00000/240/1000 WARRANTY DEED 1FltM F. CF BlrG, MM OF MRT PUEM MIM, FU RBA X 4Q Q 11:10:32 S99 1x: .t: ISM: EPG; wpow 0 ws ; I1Md ACC SiA? P - EM9 3 135100 .50 : T. il?IDERED: P M.50 C1Ift 1.00 ?oPlmr amc THIS WARRANTY DEED made: this !o day or January. 2000: by :ALBERT W. COPELAND. a married person whose address is Post Ot'liee'liox 4454. Clearwatcr. FL 33758 hcrLinaller called the grantor. to CLE.IRWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE PRIVATE SCIIOOL. IYC a Florida non-profit corporation ; whose post -orrice address is 34oo C.uI[ to B Iioulcvard:`'CIcanvatcr. FL 3375e1 hercinatler called the grantee. (UMEREVEM tNFM 1181mv T11E TFIL%c; "[:P- rnit" VS0 "CILI,NTEE" INCLUDE ALL TIIE Rlt lF-C rn TlIL1 MITKt CIF \T.\Xp TtIE IlFdtiS. LEGM. krrRL4F_v r,%Ttv F .\?p ,?tti1C»»\\ OF L\pif'flll'AI ti. \?nTHEst-r tiOHS,\VU,e\C(C.?.?1)FCOttrop%TION,,) tWITNESSETH. that the grantor. for and in consideration or the sum of Ten (510.00) D WI= and other valuable considerations, receipt whercof is hereby acknowledged. hcrcby grants, bargains. sells, aliens. remises, Meascs, conveys and confirms unto the grtnk:c. "aH thai c Rain land situate in Pinellas County. Florida. vie _ A tract of land lving_in the Northwest quarter of Section 16. Township 29 2E3 South. Range 16 East, and lying East of r More Soulcvard. described as follows: From the center of said Se ti 16 0 1 11 '' EC c on , run 14.0 37 03 E. along the North-South centerline of said Section 16 a distance of 205.00 feet for a OR2'.c c OS P.O-B.; and run thence 114.89027'56"W, a distance of 109.07 feet to a point on =`,\`? the Easterly County-occupied right-of-way line of Buyshore Boulevard (County Road No. 30), run thence along said E te l w.F as r y County-oceuplcd. right- oC.wnv line. an a curve to the left having a radius of 533.911. are 204.87•. Pic REV chord 203.62•. chord beating N.27°23'54"E.; thence 5.73°35'10"E, 18.00 feet to a point on said Morth-South centerline: thence S 00°37'03"W OAi . . . along said- CK North-South centerline a distance of 176.72 feet to the P.O.B. in Pinellaf;NV AkUr , County. Florida. 1-ni 'rhe above-described property is not and never has been the homestead or Grantor. i i 1 P INELLAS COt1NTy FLA. OFF AEC-ex 10778 PG I421 TOGETHER with all the ten=ets. hereditaments and appurtenances' thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same in fcc simple forever. AND the grantor hereby covenants with said grantee that the grantor`is lawfully seized of said land in fee simple; that the grantor hereby fully warrants the Title to said land and will " defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever, and that said land is free of all encumbrances. except taxes accruing subsequent to December it. "1996. IN NVITYESS WHEREOF. the said grantor has signed and sealed these presents the day and year first above written. WITNESSES: Print: k ALBERT W. COPELA D Print: t a? - STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PINELLAS The foregoing insmuncnt was acknowledged before me this .,? day of January:. 2000. by ALBERT W.CCOOJPELAND, a married person. who is personally known to me or who has produced - as idcndFcation. 44 Notary Public My Commissio wires: (SEAL) w nr DOMAJOLEW « ?yftk-00M0(rM1& Conmtrs *WACCCMppt I r i } a? I INST s 98-272432 RUG 24, 1998 I OSPH 1 f , Ollis space left blink inlcoliunally fist Clerk of Court, axarding : PINELLRS COUNTY FLF usa .l OFF REC SK 10214 PG 919 WY40 ' i 01 VII-LAIn Al 1995 t2:J7s.12 ?rrlltkllKi 1 119.5 I'm SiRMp - M219 J 11,fS0;0? `? 9t g , s p `. `? `? ?. f ,, CHECK 1M11 ETOM: KREO • `' : 1 9 , 9 5 0 CHWEs WARRANTY UERD 1'1111 WARRANTY Uf:Idl), acute this [f day of _-Qv-?r, 1"S. Ix1wecn WILLIAM U. WIL KINS. a Married man. F. DRUCG LAUER. it married 8`i1tk, and ROBIIR'1' JACOBSEN. nn unmarried man, as tenants in common, whim (nailing addresk1s-:5112 Rocky Point Drive, Suite 7211, 'I'anlli a, fl. 33hO2, as "Gramor", and C UARWATFI Cltlt'STIAN E COLLEGE PRIVATE SCHOOL. INC., it Florida 1xn fir?p(ofil corporation, whose nailing a address ix,W(N) Gulf to Buy Illvd., Clearwater, Fl. 33759, itink"ost: tax idyntification number ? i 'T'hat Glramor. for and in txwsidgr.ITvtf of tht: suRotMgn Dollars ($10.00) and other good f and valuable consideration, paid by tilantL- to Grp6t, flu: receipt of which is acknowledged, dotty hereby gram, hargain, scgl and "%-cy m Gralie t, its`heirs and assigns forever the following i ' described lalul situated in 1he,Counly 1t(Pinellas. Ni me t• ' Fb rida: \ ' '' ` ' ?.?yVl1: 1• Y.lt1311 A(. R rCl 1 111:U LIIiItISCO) lopilicr with all I V b-[tae enothcnts, hvr dilatncots, appurtenances and rights of Grantor in the ; i alovwdt:xrhbyd pfenns?s. ". % To ltn and to hold, the same in I'ec simple forever. ? l ,'. -Uri hk?r htrvl?y covenants with Gramm that Grantor is fully scized of said land in fee simpic; Ih:m??r;lnttlt?as good right and lawful authority in sell and convey said land; and that k,rantor do Wherchy fully warrant lite title ua said land, and will dul'end the some against the .?\ I?a•fNl rluian?nahall Ix:rsanas whumstwver, y _ I'Ilis collwyance Is made and aecepiml subject lo: ?`?` ?`?` it. Nimmtlenis, co enams, restraCnons, cli itus an h veservalions of rccord, I) illy: and ? b. Taxes liar the year 19118 and thermller. ' THIS M NOT IIODII-XI'l-AD 1'R0I,I:ItTV. I'rulx ray Appraiser's I. 1). Nu.: Ni Ox. C7ra.1Ly, ?.yYrvri??ht?. I\' -. ".v..?. .lG. •:?v .•.':J... O:nits:'• 12L SM1«Et 9 I Mff ...... I' Page I of 3 n,.,• v. .... P IIIELLAS COUNTY FLA OFF kEC SK 10214 PG 921 IN WrrNGSS WI IHRtiO1', ft-Grantor has caused these presents to Ix: signed and sealed the day and year above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence: ou_ilLJ4't 4 sit; ere • _,L?lCL?4!?_C O ST•71 -ripod Nan1e . ' S tore / PCNKe A. P4CYA'J-r 1 Point Nunro 1 j slynrtula D de Acosr-A "GRAWOR" t, c Jam. ?' " WIl_I.IAA1 li. WILKINS - % .. 1 ? ? 1 ? ? ? ? i ,'> Point Nltnla ? - _ ,/?• '` ! ? `. ? ` `? ? ? i',' f % tSly uro ? ?? , ,? 1 _. /1. r+FYi1Nf ?r .--i `??`? `?``l. r IhiM Ndn -1, / ? ?' s % ,y % ? 1 1 slyllaluro ?'•?`, `,`, _ ,; O01-11'I'1A 8SICN Iloilo 111110. r til 1411pfa i ' ? ` c '? 141st ll?nnw„ • •' tirA"1't: UI 1-UMMA I011N'I'1' UI; 4? `??? Th )aiegoing instrumorn wits arknowli dScd before me this( day of?Ie411i 'r? ??I?><lH. by WILLIAM If. WILK INS, who is Ixrsuktlly known to iou or hits pnxlucL.& as idenlilicatiun and did not take an loath. Notary Public WItHABROWII Mrtbaon?lnerrar? • `,? , My Cumntssion Upires: t YIrdClrtllcp;?ppp tiI'A'1'IiUI t'lAWIDA °o"i0TM"'?Irnmula.wr? COUNTY UF ?i&bC?Lau k r {h i The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before one this(-, day of (Z . ` 199X, by F. BRUCE. I.A111{It. who is lkrwlt;tlly known to me or has produced ? _as idumificantin and did nut take an troll. Notary Public A. My Commission Expires: UNN"fCORM Page 2 of .1 i • P INELLAS COUNTY FLF1 OFF.REC.9K 10214 PG 921 .S*rAl'H OF FLORIDA COUN'rY 0r%•1G?.Cr? ; The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Zday of who is personally known to me or has produced j 1998 by ROBERT JACOBSEN , , _as identification and did not take an oath. / ? L Notary Fuh is My Commission Expires: MARY L, SpiftAD R This Instrument Prepared by: ffOTARYMIJOAlf OFRORIOA., _ .' MYCOAp1 M'I OCTOBER210208 James M. Ilantmond, ticq, #041412 , 1831 N. Belcher Road Suite A-I - - Clearwater, Florida 33765 { (813) 791-i1O44 ` > fI` / > . . ? % . ., % % ' i Page 3 of 3 V I t EXHIBIT A PINELLAS COUNTY ri-A• OFF REC.BK 1021 4 PG 922 Comsecleg at a polar 30.0 fist North of the tsuthengt eeraor of Government C l ounty, atting tat 2, Action 16, TeVnehip at South, tango 16 pet, P ' ptaridal rue North 0131'03" Case along tAs 1lortb-South eenterlla of 0414 _ ' - . ?\ ' Seetlaa 16l 32.49 test to a folst of Beginning. 6414 1.03. belts 30.0 cost aid P 0 6 oceed 60 P , ' ? `\ / r?? ` \ > . rnn s . . pr . North of the original ctntorline of scats reed 32 f t th i " . ' os ose so 13. i Cat sloag said Nertb-toutb ecnters North 0 31 03 h t b t 1 ' / // e aeta y eing t 36" Nest $4.03 lest to a post on 0 met lkrth H 21 / ` ` right at way at 04y Shore 6suleverdl Choose tellwas said latterly right of \ \ / wP along cone to the right, awls{ • radius of 361.11 tea. 4 chord bearing ./ \ ` / of tough 41'34012" Vest. 0 laid diseases of 111.91 felt. Arm as are ? I all once of 113.15 poi thosee Sough 30'03'31" nit, still steel sold right I _ / ? ? ` f of We- 43.46 flee to a Intersection Vick 0 lino Was 30.0 test North of the 6' 3" l . J r J Cou ong 2 3 origin d ecatertias of lute Food 00. 60, those* aovth 09 et 14 site 103.0 flat to the point of A{iaoing. \ % % ? ? r? % ` ? / / % ) % \ \ / / \ \ . % \ r / ; , t i • \ \ IN \ \ ` ` ? ? / ? ` ? ` _ \ % \ \ \ ) N, 1 .... ?• -'J I;T».3:• ,? J`j• 1.52'.: 1... .11 114 Deed from Clearwater Christian College Private School, Inc. to Easterland Properties, LLC O.R. Book 16135, Page 2664 Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida I#: 2008029675 BK: 16135 PG: 2664, 01/30/2008 at 04:18 PM, RECORDING 3 PAGES $27.00 D DOC STAMP COLLECTION $0.70 KEN BURKE, CLERK OF COURT PINELLAS COUNTY, FL BY DEPUTY CLERK: CLKDM04 Prepared by and Return to: Roger A. Larson, Esquire Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP 911 Chestnut Street Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-461-1818 STATUTORY WARRXNTVJWED THIS INDENTURE, is made on this dajaof`\?'? _ _, 2008, between CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE PRIVATE SCHUOL, ` INC., a Florida 4t-for-profit corporation ("Grantor") whose post office address is,340dk \Qulf to flay Boulevard, Clearwater, Florida 33759, and EASTERLAND PROPERTIES, I.LC, a Flar}da`)<i tetl.tiabilify'company (Document #L07000121312) ("Grantee"), whose post office address is 3400 Gulf td bfiy Boulevard, tfearwater, Florida 33759. > W 1 T ESSETH: Grantor, for and in co?ist'derau'of eipollars ($10.00) to Grantor in hand paid by Grantee, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby 49knowledged, has granted, bargained and sold to Grantee, and Grantee's heirs, successors and assigns'fpr;vit,&6,1 allowing described land, situated in Pinellas County, Florida: ,.Sea Exhibit' attached hereto. - - - _St?$JECT to applicable land use and zoning restrictions and to easements, reservailions and restrictions of record, if any, which are specifically not reimposed or extended hereby, and to taxes for the year 2008 and subsequent `,+years. Grafrtor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all pm-a5 s'whomsoever. The tax parcel number for the aforedescribed property is 16/29/16/00000/130/0200. PINELLAS COUNTY FL OFF. REC. BK 16135 PG 2665 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has hereunto written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of- Print name ignature RCUnCk A-A. - 'c tll wx3 Print name STATE OF FLORIDA ) set Grantor's hand and seal the day and year first aj)ove - - - CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE PRIVATE SCHOOL, INC., a Floridapdt-for=profk corporation ` By: t2rt % ?- `?? - - Randy T. Livingston Vice President Address: - - 3400 Gulf to lRay Boulevard Clearwater, F1oii4a 33759, ? ??rt?QrQo1 ate eai} COUNTY OF PINELLAS ) - ' The foregoing instrument wasaFlmowledged befpre me this by Randy T. Livingston, as Vice PresWnt! of Clearwater Christian profit corporation, on behalf of'the co>ilration. [Hej [She] 31:9 day of QAAU , 2008, College Private School, Inc., a Flon not-for- [is- personally known to me] Fhas-produced RMwcNioN ?.? # Ss i MY LOMFAIS9 # DD 299802 Notary Publi En,,,, XM 2009 Print name _ngAWf `j[. &t [ It V0U1 ? pwk tu?,w,iw, My conunission expires: NoWto?Adifinistrator,` This transfer is exempt from the payment of documentary stamps based upon the case of Cresbeiit Mlaui\Center, LLC vs Florida Department of Revenue. 01/29M 03,59 PM d-1 11422867 v1 -ClearwsterChristianWarrantyDeed PINELLAS COUNTY FL OFF. REC. BK 16135 PG 2666 EXHIBIT "A" - -'' Legal Description PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3 OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE -t6,LAOT, PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3 OF SAP k'CTION 1'f; THENCE NORTH 00° 37'03" EAST ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE ©? WD-SECTION, 282.84 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89° 56'33" EAST PARALLEL WITH THE GULF TO BAY,BOULEVARD, ALSO KNOWN AS STATE ROAD 60, COURTNEY CAMPBELL CAUSEWAY',AND DAVIS,CAUSEWAY, 4.22 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; , )- FE THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF BAYSHORE BOULEVRR TM FOLLOWING i. TWO COURSES: NORTHEASTERLY 223.51 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 568.91 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTRAL ANGLE OF WHICH IS 22¢,30' 35", AND THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS: NORTH 12° 30' 08" EAST, 222.07 FEET; THENCISNORTH•00° 37'03" EAST, 284.19 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID. RIGHT OF WAY AT A RIGthT E1NGL`E; $?IkING SOUTH 89° 22-57- EAST, 344.66 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 52° 12' 03" EAST, 8-;tZ6.FEE-t THENCE SOUTH 00° 46,40" EAST, 191.08 FEET RADIALLY TO A POINT ON THE,NORTNtip( (RIGW OF WAY OF THE GULF TO BAY BOULEVARD; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT'OF,WAYSTHE FOLLOWING TWO COURSES: SOUTHWESTERLY 69.41 FEET ALONG THE A9C;OF`A,5525r83 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTRAL ANGLE OF WHICH IS?' 43"11" AN?THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS: SOUTH 89° 34' 55" WEST, 69.41 FEET; TH6NNCE SOUiiI 89' 36' 04" WEST, 324.14 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT OF WAY BEARING 14012TH 019 41'20" EAST, 48.11 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89° 56'33" WEST PARALLEL WITH TH, r=,NLrTO-BAY BOULEVARD, 458.86 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 'I, . ? SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 7.82A7iREa" # LAND" MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO AND 7A@ T, R `'W)TH COVENANTS, EASEMENTS, RESERVATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS OF REC??RD,iF ANY. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE EXPANSION CLEARWATER, FLORIDA PREPARED FOR: CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE PRIVATE SCHOOL, INC. PREPARED BY: GULF COAST CONSULTING, INC. MAY 2010 PROJECT # 10-011 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION II.. EXISTING CONDITIONS M. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT IV. CONCLUSION APPENDIX A APPENDIX B Robert Pergol CP/PTP AICP # 9023 / PTP #133 I. INTRODUCTION Clearwater Christian College maintains a campus along Damascus Boulevard north of SR 60 (Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard) in Clearwater. (See Figure 1) The site. is presently zoned Institutional (I) and Preservation (P) and contains 575 students. The college plans to expand enrollment to 925 students (350 additional students) and modify the campus and a Flexible Development Application is being filed which requires a traffic impact analysis. Prior to completing this traffic impact study a methodology was established with City of Clearwater staff. H. EXISTING CONDITIONS The development of this site will have a traffic impact on the section of Gulf-to- Bay Boulevard (SR 60) between McMullen Booth Road and the Clearwater city limits. This section of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard is a six-lane divided arterial roadway which transitions to four-lanes divided at Damascus Boulevard and is controlled by traffic signals at the McMullen Booth RoadBayside Bridge interchange, Bayshore Boulevard and Damascus Boulevard. To establish existing conditions PM peak period (4-6 PM) intersection turning movement counts were conducted at the following locations in May 2010: Gulf-to-Bay Blvd. (SR 60) / Bayshore Blvd. (signal) Gulf-to-Bay Blvd. (SR 60) / Damascus Blvd. (signal) Intersection geometrics and signal timings were recorded in the field. Based on FDOT traffic counts, SR 60 carries 50,232 AADT with a K-100 volume of 4,795 which is consistent with the PM peak hour intersection turning movement counts. The SR 60/ Damascus Blvd. signal also serves a beach exit. Existing conditions were analyzed using HCS software. Existing PM peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 2, and the HCS printouts are included in Appendix A. Overall intersection levels of service (LOS) are shown below: EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE Intersection Location Tyne LOS Average Delay Gulf-to-Bay / Bayshore Blvd. Signal C 22.2 sec/veh Gulf-to-Bay / Damascus Blvd. Signal C 33.4 sec/veh The adjacent segments of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard were analyzed using the FDOT Generalized Capacity Tables. The segment between McMullen Booth Road and Damascus Boulevard is considered a six-lane divided arterial with a center turn lane and has a posted speed of 45 MPH. The segment east of Damascus A O a as ? w ? a p a x U COO U A P? GULF - TO - BAY SHORE LINE W C7 Pq W Q GU CLEARWATER CHRISTION COLLEGE N PROJECT' NO: PROJECT LOCATION - Clearwater Christian College 10-011 Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. DATE: FIGURE: 5/2010 Land Development Consulting DRAWN BY: G.J.S. N 1994 -' U F- EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUME (2010) PROJECT NO: 1o-o1i Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. DATE: FIGURE: Land Development Consulting 5/2010 DRAWN BY: G.J.S. Boulevard is a four-lane uninterrupted flow causeway, without traffic lights, and a posted speed of 60 MPH. The segment between McMullen Booth Road and Bayshore Boulevard operates at LOS D carrying 4,724 vehicles during the PM peak hour, the segment east of Damascus Boulevard operates at LOS D carrying 4,610 vehicles on a four-lane uninterrupted flow segment. EXISTING ROADWAY LEVELS OF SERVICE Roadway Segment Lane Peak Hr. LOS D Pk Hr. (From - To) Type Volume Capacity LOS SR 60 (McMullen Booth-Bayshore) 6LD 4724 5360 D SR 60 (Bayshore - Damascus) 6LD 4730 5360 D SR 60 (East of Bayshore) 4LD 4610 6040 D III. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT A. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC As requested by the City of Clearwater, background traffic in 2012 was estimated by applying a 1% annual growth rate to existing traffic. B. PROJECT TRAFFIC Clearwater Christian College is a private school and approximately 80% of the students live on campus with the remaining commuting. Based on the traffic counts the campus currently generates only 61 PM peak hour trips (23 entering/3 8 exiting). Project traffic from the expansion was estimated using ITE Trip Generation. 8t' Edition, Land Use Code 550 (University/College). An increase of 350 students would generate 833 daily trips of which 74 would occur during the PM peak hour (22 entering / 52 exiting). Project traffic was distributed to the roadway system based on the following percentages which were calculated from existing traffic counts at Damascus Boulevard: 10% east on Gulf to Bay Boulevard (8 PM trips) 90% west on Gulf to Bay Boulevard (66 PM trips) Project traffic was distributed to the roadway system and the intersections and adjacent segments of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard were reanalyzed. Project traffic from the proposed expansion comprises insignificant impact as compared to the PM peak hour LOS D capacity of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. P x H 0 0 M w t-? U W C7 PU W A Q GA A 0 N x Q N 90% U 55% r#0 10% ?- ? 2844 2746 a 2670 2574 f- ?- N 00 00 A GU 351 -? - 2493 6 -F- 2664 2291 GULF -BAY 39 - 323 1968-? 2046 _? 2062 2023-?- - co 0 0' 2031 -' ~ U I TWO-WAY TWO-WAY 4, 890vPH 4,701 VPH TWO-WAY 4, 865vPH SHORE LINE PROJECT NO: FUTURE PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUME (2012) 10-011 Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. DATE: FIGURE: Land Development Consulting 52010 DRAWN BY: G.J.S. Roadway Segment Lane Project LOS D Project (From - To) Type Traffic Capacity % SR 60 (McMullen Booth-Bayshore) 6LD +47 5360 0.88% SR 60 (Bayshore - Damascus) 6LD +66 5360 1.23% SR 60 (East of Bayshore) 4LD +8 6040 0.13% Future PM peak hour volumes are shown in Figure 3, the HCS printouts are in Appendix B. The expected future intersection levels of service are shown below: FUTURE INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE - 2012 Intersection Location Tore LOS Ave. Delay Gulf-to-Bay / Bayshore Blvd. Signal C 25.1 sec/veh Gulf-to-Bay / Damascus Blvd. Signal D 39.5 sec/veh The intersections would continue to operate at an -acceptable level of service. With background traffic and project traffic added the adjacent segments of Gulf- to-Bay Boulevard would continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. The project impact will not affect the level of service on Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard. FUTURE ROADWAY LEVELS OF SERVICE - 2012 Roadway Segment Lane Peak Hr. LOS D Pk Hr. (From - To) Type Volume Capacity LOS SR 60 (McMullen Booth-Bayshore) 6LD 4865 5360 D SR 60 (Bayshore - Damascus) 6LD 4890 5360 D SR 60 (East of Bayshore) 4LD 4701 6040 D IV. CONCLUSION The campus will be expanded to accommodate up to 350 additional students. This analysis demonstrates the additional traffic will comprise approximately 1% of the LOS D capacity of the adjacent segment of Gulf-to-Bay Boulevard and would not materially affect operations and levels of service. The adjacent intersections and roadways segments would continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. APPEND]EKA Synopsis Report: 150057CL-20080528.syn Page: 1 County: 15 Station: 0057 Description: SR 60/GULF-TO-BAY BL,W OF PINELLAS/HILLS LINE 3024 Start Date: 05/28/2008 Start Time: 0600 ------ --------- ------------ Direction: ------- E --------- -------- ------------- Direction: ------- W ------- ---------- Combined Time 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total lst 2nd 3rd 4th Total Total ------ 0000 --------- 71 ------ 48 ------ 42 --- --- 28 - 189 1 82 50 50 41 223 1 412 0100 31 30 29 15 105 1 34 38 25 17 114 1 219 0200 31 20 20 15 86 1 23 23 14 16 76 1 162 0300 18 17 33 30 98 1 19 19 31 16 85 1 183 0400 39 34 55 63 191 1 18 24 47 36 125 1 316 0500 83 149 171 220 623 I 47 54 82 119 302 I 925 0600 316 424 504 538 1782 1 186 217 333 275 1011 I 2793 0700 629 758 784 714 2885 1 273 316 353 278 1220 I 4105 0800 751 625 667 522 2565 1 329 324 364 331 1348 I 3913 0900 435 438 406 373 1652 1 322 313 311 361 1307 1 2959 1000 307 349 335 302 1293 1 276 322 337 360 1295 I 2588 1100 317 320 324 322 1283 1 320 348 341 342 1351 1 2634 1200 316 336 322 301 1275 1 328 344 326 368 1366 I 2641 1300 325 323 325 319 1292 I 334 367 321 346 1368 I 2660 1400 304 325 316 347 1292 I 349 362 359 322 1392 1 2684 1500 370 446 446 509 1771 I 367 386 383 510 1646 1 3417 1600 465 489 432 496 1882 1 521 523 499 535 2078 I 396 1700 478 517 501 515 2011 1 582 646 571 569 2368 I 379 1800 429 425 343 307 1504 1 574 585 472 466 2097 I 601 1900 291 264 238 221 1014 1 362 325 284 257 1228 I 2242 2000 214 195 182 188 779 1 276 271 235 201 983 I 1762 2100 212 179 210 155 756 1 225 242 204 188 859 I 1615 2200 148 145 104 110 507 1 173 171 152 208 704 I 1211 2300 75 79 83 67 304 1 158 123 116 82 479 I 783 -- - -- 24-Hou ------ -- ---- - r Totals: --------- ----- ----- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------- 27139 --------- -------- -------- ------ ------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 25025 ------- ------ - 52164 ---------- A V? `5 Z, 4(,4 k 53 s2 S2,8A3 AOT Gz $'t3 , ?i'i S F +? .X18 Axle Fcc?vr = •?©, 232. A Aoo-r = S 9123 2 P M PEAK 43 9 q, 412 2 DAy Av - 00 -T---- ocF qi7? (R . R2. M Peak Volume Information Direc tion: E Direction: W Combined Directions Hour Volume Hour Volume Hour Volume A.M. 0715 3007 1045 1369 0715 4283 P.M. 1700 2011 1700 2368 1700 4379 Daily 0715 3007 1700 2368 1700 4379 Truck Percentage ---------------- 3.91 ------------ ----- ------------ --4_02---- -------- --------- 3.96 - ------ ------- 0?D Tfv4?S ----------------- Classification Summary Database Dir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 TotTrk TotVol E 259 21363 4456 16 413 59 4 270 283 6 6 0 4 0 0 1061 27139 W 224 -------- 19915 -------- 3881 17 ------------ 378 64 5 ----------------- 261 250 16 ------------------ 6 --------- 0 8 0 ---------------- 0 1005 25025 ------------------ D - , 5S Synopsis Report: 150057CL-20080529.syn Page: 2 County: 15 Station: 0057 Descript ion: SR 60/GULF-TO-BAY BL ,W OF PINELLAS/HILL S LINE 3024 Start Da te: 05/29/2 008 Start Time: 0600 - - ---- ------ -------- ------ ------------- Direction: ------- E ----------- --- ---- ----------- Direction: ------ - W ------ Combined Time 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total 1st 2 nd 3rd 4th ----- Total Total ---------------- -------- 0000 ------ 50 ------- 59 ------ 53 ------- 37 ----------- 199 1 -------- 86 ------ 70 ----- 56 --- 59 271 1 470 0100 30 25 30 26 111 1 39 29 28 27 123 I 234 0200 22 33 24 21 100 1 20 32 29 28 109 1 209 0300 19 29 40 34 122 1 24 38 21 22 105 1 227 0400 28 56 58 65 207 1 31 31 48 48 158 1 365 0500 86 121 143 212 562 1 54 65 97 105 321 1 .883 0600 311 400 457 553 1721 1 165 259 314 270 1008 1 2729 0700 638 712 773 823 2946 1 311 304 326 299 1240 1 4186 0800 743 667 616 554 2580 1 323 340 344 339 1346 1 3926 0900 499 463 433 376 1771 1 302 317 352 324 1295 1 3066 1000 321 386 297 324 1328 1 308 344 309 301 1262 1 2590 1100 308 343 309 316 1276 1 352 342 338 343 1375 I 2651 1200 282 344 351 335 1312 1 314 344 390 350 1398 1 2710 1300 326 328 310 349 1313 1 329 433 312 318 1392 I 2705 1400 330 324 344 348 1346 1 372 354 351 333 1410 I 2756 1500 330 417 452 505 1704 1 398 434 438 506 1776 ( 3480 1600 506 588 436 446 1976 I 514 540 529 573 2156 I 4132 1700 518 482 472 468 1940 1 601 677 640 588 2506 I 4446 1800 431 413 353 326 1523 1 587 501 476 530 2094 I 3617 1900 276 265 245 226 1012 1 365 395 296 319 1375 I 2387 2000 211 223 179 233 846 1 300 276 239 232 1047 I 1893 2100 169 201 208 143 721 1 245 225 217 207 894 1 1615 2200 149 223 164 103 639 1 149 155 176 175 655 i 1294 2300 105 99 99 71 374 1 166 141 - 148 122 577 1 951 -------- 24-Hour ------------- Totals: ------ ------- ----------- 27629 -------- - ---- - ----- -------- ---------------- 25893 53522 -- - ------ -------- ------ ------- ------ ------- P ----------- eak Volume ------ - Informat ------ ion ----- -------- --- --- - Direction: E Direction:'W Combined Directions Hour Volume Hour Volume Hour Volume A.M. 0715 3051 1145 1391 0715 4303 P.M. 1530 2051 1700 2506 1700 4446 Daily 0715 3051 1700 2506 1700 4446 Truck Pe -------- rcentage 3.94 ------------------- ------- ---------- 3.79 --------- ------ ----- -------- 3.87 --------- ------------------------- Clas sification Summary Database Dir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 TotTrk TotVol E 187 21755 4598 12 473 61 1 259 269 2 5 0 7 0 0 1089 27629 W 153 20980 3779 11 390 81 8 268 198 15 4 0 6 0 0 981 25893 axs'NOSVHSXd 0091 L {T'0'0'T] QdAO£8 VS=00=S1 60OZ-ga'Ld-9Z Nosvas Wad 60'1 00'1 80OZ/T£/ZT - SOOZ/8Z/ZT ES EI'I VO'T BOOZ/LZ/ZT - SOOZ/IZ/ZT ZS 9T'T LO'i 8002/OZ/ZT - BOOZ/VT/ZT IS 9T'T LO'T 8002/ET/ZT - BOOZ/LO/ZT OS 9I'T LO'T BOOZ/90/ZI - 800Z/OE/1I 61, 91'T LO'T 8002/6Z/TT - 80OZ/EZ/TT BV 9T'T LO'1 8002/ZZ/IT - 80OZ/9I/TT Lb 9T'T LO'T 8002/ST/TT - 80OZ/60/IT 9V 91'T LO'T 80OZ/80/11 - BOOZ/ZO/IT Sig ST'1 90'1 80OZ/TO/TT - 800Z/9Z/01 VV VT'T SO'T SOOZ/SZ/OT - 80OZ/61/OT £V £I'1 VO'T 80OZ/81/01 - 800Z/ZT/OT ZV VT'I SO'T BOOZ/IT/01 - 800Z/SO/OT TV VT'i SO'i 800Z/VO/01 - 80OZ/SZ/60 OV VI'T S0'1 80OZ/LZ/60 - 800Z/IZ/60 6E ST'T 90'T SOOZ/OZ/60 - BOOZ/VT/60 8£ VT'T SO'T 80OZ/£I/60 - 800Z/LO/60 LE T,T'T SO'T SOOZ/90/60 - 80OZ/TE/80 9E VT'i SO'T SOOZ/OE/80 - BOOZ/VZ/80 S£ VT'I SO'T 8002/£Z/80 - 800Z/LT/80 VE VT'T SO'I 80OZ/9I/80 - BOOZ/01/80 E£ ET'T VO'T 80OZ/60/80 - 800Z/EO/80 ZE ZT'T EO'T BOOZ/ZO/80 - BOOZ/LZ/LO TE ZT'T EO'i BOOZ/9Z/LO - 800Z/OZ/LO 0£ TT'T Z0'1 800Z/61/LO - BOOZ/£T/LO 6Z TI'T Z0'1 8002/ZI/LO - 80OZ/90/L0 8Z 01'1 TO'I 8002/SO/LO - 80OZ/6Z/90 LZ OT'T TO'T 80OZ/8Z/90 - ..8OOZ/ZZ/90 9Z 60'T 00'i 800E/IZ/90 - 800Z/ST/90 SZ 80'T 66'0 80OZ/VT/90 - 80OZ/80/90 VZ 80'T 66'0 SOOZ/LO/90 - 80OZ/IO/90 EZ LO'i 66'0 800Z/TE/SO - 8002/SZ/SO ZZ LO'T 86'0 800Z/VZ/90 - 800Z/8T/SO IZ SO'i 46' 80OZ/'LT/SO - BOOZ/TI/SO OZ VO'T 96'0 80OZ/OT/SO - 80OZ/VO/SO 61 EO'T S6'0 800Z/EO/SO - 80OZ/LZ/VO 81* ZO'T V6'0 80OZ/9Z/VO - 8002/OZ/VO LT* TO'I E6'0 80OZ/61/VO - 800Z/ET/VO 91* 00'1 Z6'0 800Z/ZT/VO - 80OZ/90/VO ST* 66'0 16'0 BOOZ/SO/VO - 80OZ/OE/EO VT* 66'0 T6'0 80OZ/6Z/EO - SOOZ/EZ/EO ET* 86'0 06'0 8002/ZZ/£0 - 8002/9T/EO ZT* L6'0 68'0 BOOZ/ST/EO - 80OZ/60/EO TT* 86'0 06'0 8002/80/EO - SOOZ/ZO/EO OT* 66'0 T6'0 800Z/10/£0 - 8002/VZ/ZO 6 00'1 Z6'0 80OZ/EZ/ZO - 800Z/LI/ZO 8 TO'T E6'0 80OZ/91/ZO - 80OZ/OT/ZO L £0'T S6'0 80OZ/60/ZO - 80OZ/E0/ZO 9 SO'1 L6'0 80OZ/ZO/ZO - 80OZ/LZ/10 S 80'T 66'0 80OZ/9Z/TO - 8002/OZ/10 V 60'T 00'1 800Z/6T/10 - 80OZ/ET/10 E EI'T VO'T 80OZ/ZI/TO - 8UOZ/90/10 Z 9T'T LO'I 8002/SO/I0 = 80OZ/TO/10 T ----------------------------3JSd------ ------35-- - SS.LIIQ ?ISfiM Z6'0 :aDOW HaIMI?,UMO0 SVggaNId OOST :MdODSSK'J `I'IK =.aaai Luoaau - moaax mdoOSSvD uoiDva NOsvas xvad 8002 2008 Weekly Axle Factor Category Report - Report Type: A LL 666 County: 15 - PINELLAS ( Week Dates 1513 1514 1515 1516 SR60, US19A - US19 SR60, US19 - HILLS SR590, US19A - HILLS SR693/694, US19-US19 1 01/01/2008 - 01/05/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 2 01/06/2008 - 01/12/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 3 01/13/2008 - 01/19/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 4 01/20/2008 - 01/26/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 5 01/27/2006 - 02/02/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 6 02/03/2008 - 02/09/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 7 02/10/2008 - 02/16/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 8 02/17/2008 - 02/23/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 9 02/24/2008 - 03/01/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.96 10 03/02/2008 - 03/08/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 11 03/09/2008 - 03/15/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 12 03/16/2008 - 03/22/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.9B 13 03/23/2008 - 03/29/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 14 03/30/2008 - 04/05/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 15 04/06/2008 - 04/12/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 16 04/13/2008 - 04/19/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 17 04/20/2008 - 04/26/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 18 04/27/2008 - 05/03/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 19 05/04/2008 - 05/10/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 20 05/11/2008 - 05/17/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 21 05/18/2008 - 05/24/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 22 05/25/2008 - 05/31/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 23 06/01/2008 - 06/07/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 24 06/08/2008 - 06/14/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 25 06/15/2008 - 06/21/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 26 06/22/2008 - 06/28/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 27 06/29/2008 - 07/05/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 28 07/06/2008 - 07/12/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 29 07/13/2008 - 07/19/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 30 07/20/2008 - 07/26/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 31 07/27/2008 - 08/02/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 32 08/03/2008 - 08/09/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 33 08/10/2008 - 08/16/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 34 08/17/2008 - 08/23/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 35 06/24/2008 - 08/30/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 36 08/31/2008 - 09/06/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 37 09/07/2008 - 09/13/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 38 09/14/2006 - 09/20/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 39 09/21/2008 - 09/27/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 40 09/28/2008 - 10/04/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 41 10/05/2008 - 10/11/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 42 10/12/2008 - 10/18/200B 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 43 10/19/2008 - 10/25/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 44 10/26/2008 - 11/01/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 45 11/02/2008 - 11/08/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 46 11/09/2008 - 11/15/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 47 11/16/2008 - 11/22/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 48 11/23/2008 - 11/29/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 49 11/30/2008 - 12/06/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 50 12/07/2008 - 12/13/2008 0.99 0.96 0.99 0.98 51 12/14/2008 - 12/20/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 52 12/21/2008 - 12/27/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 53 12/28/2008 - 12/31/2008 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.98 Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS+' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site /nformadon Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 511212010 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection SR 601BAYSHORE BLVD. Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction FDOT/CLEARWATER Analysis Year 2010 EXISTING Project ID Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Ni 1 3 3 0 1 1 Lane Group L T TR L R Volume, V v h 317 1916 2340 321 71 79 % Hea Vehicles, %HV 4 4 4 4 4 4 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed P or Actuated A A A A A A A Start-up Lost Time, H 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension, UE 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filterina/Meterina. l 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 80 0 0 0 0 20 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, Nm Buses Stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Time for Pedestrians, p 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only EW Perm 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 G= 17.0 G= 88.0 G= G= G= 18.0 G= G= 1 G= Timing Y= 5 Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 C cle Len th, C = 140.0 trol Dela and LOS Determination Lane Group Capacity, . EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 334 2017 2717 75 62 Lane Group Capacity, c 263 3910 3084 223 200 v/c Ratio, X 1.27 0.52 0.88 0.34 0.31 Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.80 0.79 0.63 0.13 0.13 Uniform Delay, d, 9.6 5.4 21.6 55.6 55.4 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 0.268 0.501 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.50 0.12 0.41 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay, d2 147.9 0.1 3.3 0.9 0.9 Initial Queue Delay, d3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 197.5 1.6 14.2 1 56.5 56.3 file://C:\Documents and Setdngs\rpergolizzi.GCC\Local Settings\Temp\s2klD.tmp 5/13/2010 Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Control Delay Lane Group LOS F A B E E Approach Delay 29.4 14.2 56.4 Approach LOS C B E Intersection Delay 22.2 Xc = 1.93 Intersection LOS C Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.3 Generated: 5/13/2010 4:40 PM file://CADocuments and Settings\rpergolizzi.GCC\Local Settings\Temp\s2klD.tmp 5/13/2010 PROJIECT: LOCATION: QAM LANE TYPE: NB SB EB WB PEAK HOUR / P.H.F. DATA CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE PROJECT NO: 10-011 Bayshore Blvd (SB) & Gulf-to-Bay Blvd (E-W) May 11, 2010 SPEED LIMIT: SIGNAL TIMING: @ St Y $ (SECONDS) N/A NS N/A NB 2 Lane SB 35 SB 7 Lane EB 45 EB 7 Lane WB 45 WB TIME PM 4:00-4:15 4:15-4:30 4:30-4:45 4:45-5:00 5:OD-5:15 5:15-5:30 5:30-5:45 5:45-6:00 PEAK HOUR TIME PM 5:00-5:15 5:15-5:30 5:30-5:45 5:45-6:00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 14 N/A 4 114 15 104 5 20 N/A 88 5 41 PM PEAK HOUR COUNTS NB NB NS SB SB SB EB EB EB WB WB WB TOTAL HOURLY L T R L T R L T R L T R VOLUME VOLUMES 1,006 1,114 1,080 1,103 4,303 1,187 4,484 1,314 4,684 1,353 4,967 HOURLY F LOW DIAGRAM 1,272 5,126 _ 160 648 0 0 0 137 0 193 538 3,661 0 0 4,395 505 9,429 1 1 NB NB NS SB SB SB EB EB EB WB WB WB TOTAL 79 0 71 L T R L T R L T R L T R VOLUME L 1,187 2,491 ?--317 - + L- 331 f-2,743 1,314 1,916 -+ - 2,412 1,353 2,233 -+ 0 -j 0 -? 1,987 ,z72 ? t r _ 0 0 0 71 0 79 317 1,916 0 0 2,412 331 5,126 0 0 0 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR 5:00-6:00 INTERSECTION PHF 0.95 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR VOLUME 5,126 PEAK HOUR VOLUME NS 0 PHF NB #DIV/01 PEAK HOUR VOLUME SB 150 PHF SB 0.87 PEAK HOUR VOLUME EB 2,233 PHF EB 0.93 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WB 2,743 PHF WS 0.94 1 1 0 0 Detailed Report Page I of 2 HCS+' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 51132010 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection SR 60/DAMASCUS BLVD Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction FDOT/CLEARWATER Analysis Year 2010 EXISTING Project ID Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Ni 1 2 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 Lane Group L T T R LT R LR Volume, V v h 19 1983 2612 4 8 0 9 2 36 % Heavy Vehicles, %HV -4 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Pretimed (P) or Actuated A A A A A A A A A A Start-up Lost Time, h 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 Unit Extension, LIE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/Metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade I Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, Nm Buses Stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Time for Pedestrians, P' 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only Thru & RT 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 10.0 G= 103.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Lengt h, C = 140. 0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LO S Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 20 2110 2779 4 9 10 30 Lane Group Capacity, c 124 2931 2559 1143 129 115 116 v/c Ratio, X 0.16 0.72 1.09 0.00 0.07 0.09 0.26 Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.07 0.84 0.74 0.74 0.07 0.07 0.07 Uniform Delay, di 61.1 4.4 18.5 4.9 60.7 60.7 61.5 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 0.366 0.545 0.218 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.28 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.9 46.1 0.0 0.2 0.3 1.2 file://C:\Documents and Settings\rpergolizzi.GCC\Local Settings\Temp\s2k4F.tmp 5/13/2010 Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Initial Queue Delay, d3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay 61.7 2.5 56.2 1.1 60.9 61.1 62.7 Lane Group LOS E A E A E E E Approach Delay 3.0 56.1 61.0 62.7 Approach LOS A E E E Intersection Delay 33.4 Xc = 0.94 Intersection LOS C Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+rM Version 5.3 Generated: 5/1312010 11:31 AM fileWCADocuments and Settings\rpergolizzi.GCC\Local Settings\Temv\s2k4F.tmp 5/13/2010 PROJECT: LOCATION: 26M LANE TYPE: NB SB ES WB PE AK HOUR / P.H.F. DATA CLEARWATER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE PROJECT NO: 10-011 Damascus Rd/Beach Exit (N-S) & Gulf-to-Bay Blvd (E-W) May 12, 2010 SPEED LIMIT: SIGNAL TIMING: 9 rz Y (SECONDS) 2 Lane NB 10 NB 2 Lane SB 10 Sg 4 Lane EB 45 Eg 5 Lane WB 45 WS TIME PM 4:00-4:15 4:15-4:30 4:30-4:45 4:45-5:00 5:00-5:15 5:155:30 5:30-5:45 5:45-6:00 s N/A 10 4 122 WA 10 4 122 12 112 5 18 N/A 104 5 25 PM PEAK HOUR COUNTS NB NB NB SB SB SB EB EB EB WB WS WB TOTAL HOURLY L T R L T R L T R L T R VOLUME VOLUMES 974 1,009 1,158 1,187 4,328 1,091 4,446 1,237 4,673 1,062 4,577 HOURLY FLOW DIAGRAM 1,061 4,451 38 23 13 0 20 5 0 46 33 3,848 0 0 4,805 9 8,779 1 t TIME NB NB NB SB SB SB EB EB EB WB WB WB TOTAL 36 0 2 PM L T R L T R L T R L T R VOLUME 4:30-4:45 4:45-5:00 1,158 2,656 4-- 19 -# 4 4-2,616 5:00-5:15 1,187 1,983 -? ?- 2,612 5:15-5:30 1,091 2,002 -? 0 -? 0 -? 1,994 i- 1,237 r 8 0 9 2 0 36 19 1,983 0 0 2,612 4 4,673 8 0 9 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR 4:30-5:30 INTERSECTION PHF 0.94 1 0 1 17 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR VOLUME 4,673 PEAK HOUR VOLUME NB 17 PHF NB 0.61 PEAK HOUR VOLUME SS 38 PHF SS 0.45 PEAK HOUR VOLUME EB 2,002 PHF EB 0.96 PEAK HOUR VOLUME WB 2,616 PHF WB 0.92 TABLE 4 Generalized Peak Hour Two-Way Volumes for Florida's Urbanized Areas' 9/4/09 STATE SIGNALIZED ARTERIALS FREEWAYS Lanes 2 4 6 8 Class I (>0.00 to 1.99 signalized intersections per mile) Median B C D E Undivided 930 1,500 1,600 *** Divided 2,840 3,440 3,560 *** Divided 4,370 5,200 ?=, *** Divided 5,900 6,970 7,160 *** Lanes 4 6 8 10 12 B 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 13,730 C 5,500 8,320 11,050 13,960 18,600 D 6,770 10,150 13,480 16,930 21,950 E 7,300 11,290 15,270 19,250 23,230 Class H (2.00 to 4.50 signalized intersections,per mile) Lanes Median B C D E 2 Undivided ** 1,020 1,480 1,570 4 Divided ** 2,420 3,220 3,400 6 Divided ** 3,790 4,880 5,150 8 Divided ** 5,150 6,530 6,880 Class Ill/I.V (more than 4.50 signalized intersections per mile) Lanes Median B C D E 2 Undivided ** 500 1,150 1,440 4 Divided ** 1,220 2,730 3,100 6 Divided ** 1,910 4,240 4,680 8 . Divided ** 2,620 5,770 6,280 Freeway Adjustments Auxiliary Ramp Oversaturated Lanes Metering Conditions* +1,800 +5% -10% of E UNINTERRUPTED FLOW HIGHWAYS Lanes Median B C D t CA 2 Undivided 730 1,460 2,080 2,620 4 Divided 3,220 4,660 6 040 6,840 6 Divided 4,840 6,990 9,060 10,280 Uninterrupted Flow Highway Adjustments Lanes Median Exclusive left lanes Adjustment factors 2, Divided Yes +5% Multi Undivided Yes -5% Multi Undivided No -25% Non-State Signalized Roadway Adjustments (Alter corresponding state volumes by the indicated percent.) Major City/County Roadways -10% Other Signalized Roadways - 35% State & Non-State Signalized Roadway Adjustments (Alter corresponding state volumes by the indicated percent.) Divided/Undivided & Turn Lane Adjustments Exclusive Exclusive Adjustment Lanes Median Left Lanes Right Lanes Factors 2 Divided Yes No +5% 2 Undivided No No -20% Multi Undivided Yes No -5% Multi Undivided No No -25% Yes + 15% One-Way Facility Adjustment Multiply the corresponding two-directional volumes in this table by 0.6. BICYCLE MODE' (Multiply motorized vehicle volumes shown below by number of directional roadway lanes to determine two-way maximum service volumes.) Paved Shoulder/ Bicycle Lane Coverage B C D E 0-49% ** 310 1,180 >1,180 50-84% 240 360 >360 *** 85-100% 620 >620 *** *** PEDESTRIAN MODE' (Multiply motorized vehicle volumes shown below by number of di rectional roadway lanes to determine two-way maximum service volum es.) Sidewalk Coverage B C D E 0-49% ** ** 480 1,390 50-84% ** ** 1,100 1,820 85-100% ** 1,100 1,820 >1,820 BUS MODE (Scheduled Fixed Route)' (Buses in peak hour in peak direction) Sidewalk Coverage B C D E 0-84% >S >4 >3 >2 85-100% >4 >3 >2 >1 Values shown are presented as hourly two-way volumes for levels of service and are for the automobile/truck modes unless specifically stated. Although presented as peak hour two- way Vol times, they actually represent peak hour peak direction conditions with an applicable D factor applied. This table does not constitute a standard and should be used only for general planning applications. The computer models from which this table is derived should be used for more specific planning applications. The table and deriving computer models should not be used for corridor or intersection design, where more refined techniques exist. Calculations arc based on planning applications or the Highway Capacity Manual, Bicycle LOS Model. Pedestrian LOS Model and Transit Capacity and Quality ofservice Manual, respectively forthe autounobilehruck, bicycle, pedestrian and bus modes. ' Level of service for the bicycle and pedestrian modes in this table is based on number of motorized vehicles. not number of bicyclists or pedestrians using the facility. 3 Buses per hour shown are only for the peak hour in the single direction of the higher traffic flow. * For oversaturated conditions during peak hour, subtract 10% from the LOS E (capacity volumes). This number becomes the new maximum service volume for LOS D. and LOS E cannot be achieved Source: '• Cannot be achieved using table input value defaults. Florida Department of Transportation *** Not applicable for that level of service letter grade. For the automobile mode. volumes greater than level of service D Systems Planning Office become F because intersection capacities have been reached For the bicycle mode, the level of service letter grade (including 605 Suwannee Street, MS 19 F) is not achievable because there is no maximum vehicle volume threshold using table input value defaults. _ Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 www.dot.state.fl us/nlaliliine/svstems/sm/los/default shtm 2009 FDOT QUALITY/LEVEL OF SERVICE HANDBOOK APPENDIX B University/College (550) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Students On a: Weekday . Number of Studies: 7 Average Number of Students: 3,002 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per Student Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 2.38 2.03 - 3.31 1.57 Data Plot and Equation 18,000 17,000 ------- --- - -----•- .-------• -------- ------- --- i 16,000 --------------------- ---• ;--------- 11 ? ........... 15,000 ------ ------- ------ -------- -------- ----- ---------------- 14,000 --------------•---•------------'------ -----..-•- X ------------------- 13,000 •--•-- =-------- ---------- ----- ---•-•-- --- •• ---•----; ...... a W 12,000 --------- ------•- -------- ----...- - --.... ----... ----.. .2- it- 11,000 -•------• . --------------- N 10,000 X--------------------- :......... a) > 9,000 .....-- ...-•-- ------. ------• rn 8,000 ------ --- ---- .....-- ;-. -... -------- -------- --...-- ------ Q 7,000 ; 6,000 ---------: 5,000 ------ -------- -•---- -------- -------- -------- ------ -...-- 4,000 --...- -X •--•--- .......... ...•--• ,---••--- •------ •----- 3,000 ------ ----- -------- ---•---- -------• ...----- 2,000 -- .... .....-- ..... ------ . . ....... ....... --..... . •--- 1,000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 X = Number of Students X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ------ Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 2.23(X) + 440.00 R2 = 0.98 Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1031 Institute of Transportation Engineers University/College (550) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Students On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Number of Studies: 6 Average Number of Students: 9,545 Directional Distribution: 80% entering, 20% exiting Trip Generation per Student Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.21 0.15 - 0.26 0.46 Data Plot and Equation 9,000 8.000 -------------------=-------------•• 7,000 --------- -- . ------•--..._---- . W 6,000 ----------------- --- ------------ ' ------------. ----------- -- a F- 5,000 ---------- --.-- ---•----- ---•-- ------- (D 4,000 •-------------- --.-._ m Q 11 3,000 -- -- ---------------- 2,000 - - - 1,000 .......... ---------'-------- ---•------• 0 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 X = Number of Students X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ------ Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.21(X) - 69.14 R2 = 1.00 Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1032 Institute of Transportation Engineers University/College (550) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Students On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Number of Studies: 8 Average Number of Students: 7,327 Directional Distribution: 30% entering, 70% exiting Trip Generation per Student Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.21 0.20 - 0.77 0.46 Data Plot and Equation 8,000 7,000 6,000 U) a c W n 5,000 F N U L 4,000 N co N Q 3,000 H 2,000 1,000 n \I i ------------------- --------- ---------- ------------------------------ r i - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 10000 20000 X = Number of Students X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.19(X) + 118.58 30000 40000 ------ Average Rate R2 =1.00 Trip Generation, 8th Edition 1033 Institute of Transportation Engineers Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS+' DETAILED REPORT. General Information Site Infonnation Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 511412010 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection SR 601 BAYSHORE BLVD. Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction FDOT/CLEARWATER Analysis Year 2012 WITH PROJECT Project ID Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Ni 1 3 3 0 1 1 Lane Group L T TR L R Volume, V (v h) 323 1968 2493 351 78 81 % Heavy Vehicles, %oHV 4 4 4 4 4 4 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95, 1 0.95 Pretimed P or Actuated A A A A A A A Start-up Lost Time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 4 4 3 3 Unit Extension, UE 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filterinq/Metering. 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 9.000 nnn Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 80 0 0 0 0 20 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 . 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, Nm Buses Stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Time for Pedestrians, P 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only EW Perm 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 Timin I G= 17.0 G= 88.0 G= I G= G= 18.0 G= G= G= g Y= 5 Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 140.0 Lane Group Capacity, ontrol Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 340 2072 2909 82 64 Lane Group Capacity, c 263 3910 3082 223 200 v/c Ratio, X 1.29 0.53 0.94 0.37 0.32 Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.80 0.79 0.63 0.13 0.13 Uniform Delay, di 51.2 5.5 23.7 55.8 55.4 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 0.268 0.501 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.50 0.13 0.46 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay, d2 157.1 0.1 7.0 1.0 0.9 Initial Queue Delay, d3 QO 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 208.3 1.6 18.9 56.8 56.4 file://C:\Documents and Settings\rpergolizzi.000\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2E.tmp 5/14/2010 'Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Control Delay Lane Group LOS F A 8 E E Approach Delay 30.8 18.9 56.6 Approach, LOS C 6 E Intersection Delay 25.1 Xc = 2.02 Intersection LOS C Copyright 0 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+7M Version 5.3 Generated: 5/14/2010 9:56 AM fileWCADocuments and Settings\rpergolizzi.GCC\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2E.tmp 5/14/2010 . 1 Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS+' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Infonmation Analyst RP Agency or Co. GCC Date Performed 511412010 Time Period PM PEAK Intersection SR 60 /DAMASCUS BLVD Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction FDOT/CLEARWATER Analysis Year 2012 WITH PROJECT Project ID Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Ni 1 2 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 Lane Group L T T R LT R LR Volume, V v h 39 2023 2664 6 8 0 9 8 82 % Hea Vehicles, %HV 4 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Pretimed (P) or Actuated (A) A A A A I A A A A A Start-up Lost Time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/Metering, 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 25 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Time for Pedestrians, GP 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing EB Only Thru & RT 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 10.0 G= 103.0 G= G= G= 10.0 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Lengt h, C = 140. 0 Lane Group Capacity, ontrol Delay, and LO S Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 41 2152 2834 6 9 10 70 Lane Group Capacity,c 124 2931 2559 1143 129 115 114 v/c Ratio, X 0.33 0.73 1.11 0.01 0.07 0.09 0.61 Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.07 0.84 0.74 0.74 0.07 0.07 0.07 Uniform Delay, d, 61.8 4.5 18.5 4.9 60.7 60.7 63.9 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 0.366 0.619 0.218 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.29 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 Incremental Delay, d2 1.6 1.0 54.8 0.0 0.2 0.3 9.5 file://C:\Documents and Settinas\rueraolizzi.GCC\Local Settinizs\Temn\s2k40.tmu 5/14/2010 Detailed Report Page 2 of 2 Initial Queue Delay, d3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay 63.4 2.6 66.2 1.1 60.9 61.1 72.6 Lane Group LOS E A E A E E E Approach Delay 3.8 66.1 61.0 72.6 Approach LOS A E E E Intersection Delay 39.5 X,:: = 1.00 Intersection LOS D Copyright ® 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.3 Generated: 5/14/2010 9:59 AM file_HC_\Documents and Settings\merzolizzi.GCC\Loca1 Settinss\TemD\s2k40.trnD 5/14/2010