Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
FLS2005-08059
J., ., Planning rtment 4 _.x amater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Y ,?s? :.., Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 0 Fax: 727-5624865 ? SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION (3 SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION Including 1) collated, 2) stapled and 3) folded sets of site plans ? SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE f7U .6 .4 DATE RECEIVED: RECEIVED BY (staff initials): ATLAS PAGE #: ZONING DISTRICT: LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: SURROUNDING USES OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES: NORTH: SOUTH: WEST: EAST: * NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS) FLEXIBLE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION Single Family (LDR or LMDR only) Residential Infill Project (Revised 12/30/2004) -PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT- A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202-A) APPLICANT NAME: COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER, INC. MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD, CLEARWATER, FL 33759 (727) 799-1618 FAX NUMBER: PROPERTY OWNER(S): COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER, INC. (Must Include ALL owners as listed on the deed - provide original signature(s) on page 6) At ff; 1 ? ??r? AGENT NAME: GAYLOR ENGINEERING pig l? l l lfnt r nr?a_ri MAILING ADDRESS: 400 DOUGLAS AVE., STE. C, DUNEDIN, FL 34698. CIIYOF CLEA0AKF6 PHONE NUMBER: (727) 785-8844 FAX NUMBER: (727) 736-2953- CELL NUMBER: E-MAIL ADDRESS: B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202-A) STREET ADDRESS of subject site: 1850 NcMULLEN BOOTH ROAD, CLEARWATER, FL 33759 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEE ATTACHED (irnalisted he04+291?00800320500,d Ou?i291?i000003?00300 PARCEL NUMBER: PARCEL SIZE: 19.96 AC or 869, 457.6 SF (acres, square feet) PROPOSEP USE(S) AND SIZE(S): EXISTING.. BLDG. 46,820 SF PROPOSED ADDITIONAL 22,659 SF :. (number of dwelling units, hotel rooms or sgyeredm age of nonresidential use) PROPOSED TOTAL OF 69,479 SFJ-1ff0,OEAT SANCTUARY DESCRIPTION OF, REQUEST(S): REDUCTION OF NUMBER REQUIRED PARKING SPACES FROM 1 SPACE PER 2-SE Attach sheets and be specific when identifying the request (Include alirequested code deviations: e.g. reduction In required number of parking spaces, specific use, etc.) TO 1 SPACE PER 3.0 SEATS. Page 1 of 7 - Flexible Standard Development Application Residential Infill 2005- City of Clearwater DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES NO X (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents) C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5) IR SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see page 6) D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A) Provide complete responses to the six.(6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA - Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The existing church has been at this location for more than 20 years and has been in harmony with the adjacent properties. The proposed scale, bulk, coverage, density and character will be typical to what is existing in the area and that is being onstructed. 21 The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. All adjacent land has been developed to its full potential. Any activity relative to the proposed development will be normal to the existing activity. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The proposed development will be in full compliance with cur ent regulations and will not adversely affect health.or safety. '? ti.. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. HI16 15 7005 ftmig-ll?I? n???ta?r AsmiT m ? ?? J ZThe CITY O F CLEARW?lATER 5he proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. existing development has been at this location for the last 20 years and is consistent with the community. (-6-?he design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. The proposed development will enhance the visual, acoustic and olfactory effect in the community on the adjacent properties. Page 2 of 7 - Flexible Standard Development Application Residential Infill 2005- City of Clearwater ? Provide complete responses to the sev ) RESIDENTIAL INFILL PROJECT CRITERIA- EXINWh how each criteria is achieved, in detail: The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development is otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and development standards. The proposed development would be impaired by limiting the amount of people that could see the facility. n D! C I n' n 2. ? The development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infill project will not materially reduce the fair market value of abutting properties. (Include the existing value of the site and the proposed value of the site with the improvements.) The existing development has existed for over 20 years at this location. The general location of the sanctuary would be located further away from adjacent properties. 3. The uses within the residential infill project are otherwise permitted in the City of Clearwater. All other aspects of this project are in compliance with all City requirements and other agency codes. 4. The uses or mix of use within the residential infill project are compatible with adjacent land uses. This item is not relative to this request. 9.he development of the parcel proposed for development as a residential infll project will upgrade the immediate vicinity of the parcel roposed for development. This project will upgrade the immediate vicinity because of a more pleasing architectural aspect and better interal traffic flow. 76.he design of the proposed residential infll project creates a form and function that enhances the community character of the immediate cinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City of Clearwater as a whole. The proposed project will create a pleasing development with features that will be in keeping with the area along McMullen Booth Road. / 7. J lexibility in regard-to lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified by the benefits to community character and the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and the City, of Clearwater as a whole. The proposed development will maintain specimen trees where possible and will thus enhance the community character and the immediate vicinity. ) e??CEuVVL& 05 AUG 15 PQ.AHrili NG DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER Page 3 of 7 - Flexible Standard Development Application Residential Infill 2005- City of Clearwater E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Manual and 4-202.A.21) A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that inv addition or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must Include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance the City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemF to this requirement. If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as io why the site is exempt. ORIGINAL ? At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following: Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines; Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; ? All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; ? Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; ? A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with City manual. ? Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations. ? COPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT SUBMITTAL (SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable ? Acknowledgement of stormwater plan requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): Stormwater plan as noted above is included Stormwater plan is not required and planation narrative is attached. A a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor elevations shall be provided. CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RE I EQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750. F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A) SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) -One original and 14 copies; Vp' TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and location, including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) - please design around the existing trees; M( LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY; PARKING DEMAND STUDY In conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (ie. Reduce number of spaces). Prior to the submittal of this application, the methodology of such study shall be approved by the Community Development Coordinator and shall be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to the parking standards are approved; vti ( GRADING PLAN, as applicable; ? PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided); ? COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A) /0 SITE PLAN with the following Information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): ? All dimensions; Rv,EC SVED ? North arrow; ? Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared; Location map; ? Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package; AUG 15 2005 Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures; ? Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures; NING DEPARTMEW ? All required setbacks; PL 1??VY OF CLEARWATER I/ All existing a proposed points of access; All required sight triangles; CI I Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; Page 4 of 7 - Flexible Standard Development Application Residential Infill 2005- City of Clearwater Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site; 7 Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas and water lines; All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas; 7 Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas; Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening (per Section 3-201(13)(1) and Index #701); ? Location of all landscape material; Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities; Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; and Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks. ORIGINAL SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in written/tabular form: ? Land area in square feet and acres; Number of EXISTING dwelling units; Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; Gross floor area devoted to each use; Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the number of required spaces; Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces and driveways, expressed in square feet and percentage of the paved vehicular area; ? Size and species of all landscape material; _ Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easement; .Z- Building and structure heights; Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. ff^ REDUCED SITE PLAN to scale (8 %4 X 11) and color rendering if possible; ? FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan: ? One-foot contours or spot elevations on site; ? Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel; ? All open space areas; 7 Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms; ? Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned); ? Streets and drives (dimensioned); Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); Structural overhangs; Tree Inventory; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 8" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of such trees. L. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A)f(??[? 1-0 ? LANDSCAPE PLAN: I? v ? All existing and proposed structures; _ Names of abutting streets; AUG 15 2005 Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations; Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers; ? Sight visibility triangles; PLANNING DEPARTMENT ./ Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping Islands and curbing; CITY OF CLEARWATE?R Proposed and required parking spaces; O Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, Including driplines (as indicated on required tree survey); Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, Including botanical and common names; Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant schedule; Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and protective measures; Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and percentage covered; ? Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board); Irrigation notes. CtT REDUCED LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8 % X 11) (color rendering if possible); Oil' IRRIGATION PLAN (required for level two and three approval)- 0 COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met. Page 5 of 7 - Flexible Standard Development Application Residential Infill 2005- City of Clearwater I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN WhMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4 I1.A.23) Required in the event the application includes a development where design standards are in issue (e.g. Tourist and Downtown Districts) or as part of a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project or a Residential Infill Project. W" BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS - all sides of all buildings including height dimensions, colors and materials; E/ REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS - four sides of building with colors and materials to scale (8 Y2 X 11) (black and white and color rendering, if possible) as required. J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS/ Section 3-1806) O/ All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs: Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be removed or to remain. ? All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing; freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals) ? Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required). ORIGINAL ? Reduced signage proposal (8 Ys X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application. K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.13 and 4-801.C) Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or his/her designee or if the proposed development: • Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan. • Will generate 100 or more new vehicle directional trips per hour and/or 1000 or more new vehicle trips per day. • Will affect a nearby roadway segment and/or intersection with five (5) reportable accidents within the prior twelve (12) month period or that is on the City's annual list of most hazardous intersections. Trip generation shall be based on the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip G'Odr-all anal.-:0 The Traffic Impact Study must be prepared in accordance with a "Scoping Meeting" held with the Traffic Operati?,ManagelanSin, artment's Development Review Manager or their designee (727-562-4750) V ,k...., Dep Refer to Section 4-801 C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement. Al Irl 2005 ? Acknowledgement of traffic impact study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): P' A MINING DEPARTMENT Sl(.? raffc impact Study is included. The study must include a summary table of pre- and post-developmenn'tAevi Ishf-sseerv oee ofrr alllliroadway legs and each turning movement at all intersections Identified in the Scoping Meeting. 5"M ITTEll S Ea?R'rt-'Wlt Traffic Impact Study is not required. 6 E N N ETr E L-Bo , CAUTION -IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750. L. SIGNATURE: I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this application are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and authori City representativ to visit and p ograph the property des/riin this application. Signature of property owneror representhtiJ STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Swo to nd subscribed before e this day of A.D. 20 0> to me a d/or by -I-,00 ii who is personally know has produced as My NAOMI POWELL EXPIRES: March 2, 2007 Page 6 of 7 - Flexible Standard Development Application Residential Infill 2005- City of Clearwater • AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: (Names of all property owners on deed - please PRINT full names) 1. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location): Countryside Christian Center 1890 McMullen Booth Road, Clearwater, FL 33759 2. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request) Reduction of number required parking spaces from 1 space per 2-seats to 1 space per 3.5 seats. 3. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: MICHAEL J. GAYLOR, P . E . , GAYLOR ENGINEERING as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 4. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 5. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application; 6. That (1/we), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is true a correct. Prop rty Owner Property Owner Property Owner Property Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS efore me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned t e laws oft State of Flor' a, on personally appeared M,t??/ De posts and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/she s!5 My Commission Expires: - NAOMI POWELL MY COMMISSION # DD 188976 EXPIRES: March 2,2W7 suim Thn, NataN PWic Underm tem _ who having been first duly sH Notary ECEVED SAPlanning DepartmenllApplication FormsWevelopment revioMflexible standard development application residential Mitt 2005.doc ; j PLKNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF cLEARWAIER Page 7 of 7 - Flexible Standard Development Application Residential Infill 2005- City of Clearwater rKln'1 SA.IIA`tlKrblrlt_ l,rK1=01 rH`t I.IK rrRJM xLJ. rGr re,l (Of Asir. .7q emnu,, xL;) t=- rt whi COMMONWEALTH [AND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY i ltd mce Group Hol fts Compmy LOAN POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE ORIGINAL POLICY NUMBER 411-333440 SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE B AND THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS HEREOF, COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Pennsylvania corporation, herein called the Company. Insures, as of Date of Policy shown In Schedule A. against loss or damage, not exceeding the amount of insurance stated in Schedule A, and cons, attorneys' fees and expenses which the Company may become obligated to pay hereunder, Sustained or incurred by the insured by reason of. 1. Title to the estate or interest described in Schedule A being vested otherwise than as stated therein; 2. Any defect in or Hen or encumbrance on such title; 3. Lack of a right of access to and from the land; 4. Umnuketabi ity of such title; S. The invalidity or unenforceabWty of the hen of the insured mortgage upon said estate or interest except to the extent that such invalidity or unenforceability, or claim thereof, arises out of the transaction evidenced by the insured mortgage and is batted upon: A. usury, or b. any consumer credit protection or truth In lending law; 6. The priority of any lien or encumbrance over the lien of the Insured mortgage; 'I. Any statutory lien fdr labor or material which now has gained or hereafter may insured mortgage, except any such lien arising froni an paproy n co d priority ofor and ver the Hen a the nced subsequent to Date of Policy not 6neneed in whole or in proceeds of the indebtedness secured by the insu red mortgage which at Date of Policy the insured has advanced or is obliated to advance; 8. The invalidity or unenforeeability of any asaignatant, shown in Schedule A, of the insured mortgage or the failure of said assignment to vest title to the insured mortgage in the named insured assignee free and clear of all hens. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by is duly authorized officers, the Policy to become valid when countersigned by an authorised oitker or agent of the Company. : COMMONWEALTH LAND TiTLE INSURANCE COMPANY by Prosident a EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE 1f The following matters are expressly excluded from the Coverage of this policy: R 1. (a) Governmental police povmr, (b) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation relating to environmental protection. (c) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building and zoning ordinances) restricting or regulating or prohibiting the occupancy, use or enjoyment of the land, or regulating the character, i dimensions or location of any Improvement now or hereafter erected on the land, or prohibiting a separation In ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a pan. (d) The effect of any violation of the matters excluded under (a), (b) or (c) above, unless notice of a defect, lion or encumbrance resulting from a violation has been recorded at Date of Policy in those records in which under state I statutes deeds, mortgages, lis pendens, liens or other title encumbrances must be recorded in order to impart eooslructive notice to purchasers of the land for value and without knowledge; provided, however, that without limitation. such records shall not be construed to include records in any of the offices of federal, state or local environmental protection, zoning, building, health or public safety authorities. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise of such rights appears in the public records at Date of Policy. 3; Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a) created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company and not shown by the public records but known to the insured claimant either at Date of Policy or at the date such claimant acquired an estate or interest insured by this policy or acquired the Insured mortgage atod.not disclosed in writing by the insured claimant to the Company prior to the date such insured i claimant became an insured hereunder; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant: (d) attaching or r' created subsequent to Date of polio or material). y (except to the extent insurance is afforded herein as to any statutory liens for labor ! ?I 4. Unenfonceability of the lien of the insured mortgage because of failure or the insured at Date of Policy or any subsequent owner of the indebtedness to comply with applicable `'doing business" laws of the state in which the land is situated. 420 American Lane Title Association Loan Policy . 1970 (Rev. 10/17/70 and 10/17/114 _ Air, 15 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER rKu•i L.L V1KIDILG {..r K1J11MY 4.11K rrRjm rou. . Cdr rt,lfisr ndr. -Va odIMOD M3 3UM rC 'lssucd with Policy No. • • SCHEDULEA Policy No.:411-333440 Effective Date: September 24, 1985 at 8:14 AN File Number: 8933-285 ORIGINAL Amount of Insurance: S 700,000.00 1. Name of Insured: Florida Federal Savings and Loan Association 2. The estate ort Interest in the land described in this Schedule and which is encumbered by the insured mortgage b a fee simple (it other, specify sane) and is at the effective date hereof vested fin: Countryside Christian Center, Inc., a Florida Non Profit Corporation 3, The land referred to in this policy h described as follows: That Part of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 4, Township 29 South, Range 16 East, Pinellas County, Ylorida, described as follows: Begin at the Southwest corner of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of said Section 4, and run thence N45014'35"E along the diagonal line formed by the aforesaid southwest corner and the northeast corner of the Northwest 114 of the Southwest 1/4, 373,35 feet to the point of beginning; thence S890 47'061E, 1018.59 feet, thence NO012154"rs, 242.79 feet along the westerly right of w4ky of NeWbUen Booth Road (SR 5931, thence N89°47'06"W, 775.57 feet to aforesaid diagonal line, thence 045014135"V, 343,52 feet along the aforesaid diagonal line to the point of beginning, 4. The mortgage, herein referred to as the insured mortgage, end the assignments thereof, if any, are described as follows: mortgage executed by Countryside Christian Center, Inc., a Florida non-profit corporation in favor of Florida Federal Savings and Loan Association dated September 23, 1985, filed September 24, 1985 in 0. R. Book 6080, page 821, of the Public Record& of Pinellas County, Florida. Countersigned: Amornan Land Thk A; OCIation Loan Folicy - 1910 (Amended 10/11/70) M 6?C?C??9N/C?D AUG 15 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER FfOPI COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER This instrument pared by (and return t -G Rpbert N. - Butler r NOW "M $ 1o1rTGRT 1+, o. Box 1286 Tampa. FL 33601-1288 Property ippra sec's raxcal Identification Number(a) WARRANTY DEW kmnwfxry Tax Pd. /75V Irvtanaible Tax Pa. Aften F D Bakur. Cfsrk, P1r,31l.?s Count, ;y' 08mry filer, PHONE N0. ¦ INST # 95-13 1 JUN 1, 1995 12:41PM : 813 726 8848 PINELLAS COUNTY FLA_ pFg_REC.BK goo? PG 589 ORIGINAL FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY The Grantor, TAMPA FOUNM T14N FOR CEMRAL PALSY, INC. a Florida. not for profit corporation, whose mailing address is 2215 E. Henry Street, Tamapa, Florida 33610-44991 in consideration of ten dollare and other valuable considerations received from the Grantee, hereby grants and conveys to the Grantee, COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER, INC., whose mailing address is 1850 McMullen Booth Road, Clearwater, Florida 34619, the real property in Pinellas County, Florida, described on attached Exhibit A. The Grantor heraby covenants and warrants that the property is tree of all encumbrances (subject to lien for 'zeal estate taxes not yet due and payable and to all other matters sat rr forth on attached Exhibit B), that lawful sei-san of and good right --i"- to convey the property are vested in the Grantor, and that the Grantor hereby fully warrants the title to the property and will r>intl defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. Dated this r' day of May, 1995. signed in the presence of two witnesses -Akd-02r 'i> (919 + _ l (Print) ?M/? 34 (sign) 9d/?- (Print) Etie6.a CEREBRAL PPECEMEDD AUG 1.5 2095 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER (affix corporate seal-) FROM COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER PHONE NO. : 013 726 0048 • PINELLAS COUNTY FLA. OFF.REC.BK 9007 pG 590 0 7 R.IGNAL t::9 I STATE OF FLORIDA GOUN`.R'Y OF , r a The foregoing instrument eras acknowledged 'bef a vto this day of May, 1995, by enf ? 8&ss- as o?"T 'A FOUNDATIoN FOR ORAL PALSY, IM, a Florida not for profit corporation, on behalf of the. corpora?? who in personally known to me or who has produced j4kWA as identification, (affix notarial seal) 717. Notary Pu c my co=ission expires: (Pr/ntJtype name Q Notary) ??- HMLY M. REMAN Notary Public-State of s.? mycomm mICC306MExPM-. Camission nUmbOr 'A'n ftgga 14.1998 Odra. w„oEe,xm+l?rr?noa?suro?.nR: TPA2-271821 Di uts• i t'A r Al H LLIC RAL f'HL,.;Y 'ki DOW L t AMI- - btu' a GU 1'04. OU i;I?kv, ,iii. t't?L• &1 Ail AR $I i 1/4.0u UAf bL., $. UU . AUG 15 2ecs PLANNING DEPARTMENT CIIYOFCLEARWATER FROM : COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER PHONE NO. : 813 726 8848 • PINELLAS COUNTY FLA- UFF. REC. $IC 9007 PG 591 $xutBIT a ORIGINAL LAgal D884=iption A tract of land lying within the Southwest 1/4 Of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 4, Township 29 South, Range 16 East, Pinellas County, Florida and being more particularly described an follows: DEG= at the Northeast corner of Hidden Oaks as recorded in plat Book 102, Pages 20 and 21 of the public recesds of Pinellas Cotmtiy. F?arida; thence 3. 8x deg 47 ta3.r, 39 sec W along the Northerly boundary of said Hidden Oaks, for 73.21 feet; thence N, 74 deg 08 shin 51 sec W, for 135,58 feet; thence leaving said Nortberly boundary N. 00 deg 00 min 05 eeo 9, for 511.93 feet; thence S. 99 deg 31 min 08 see R, for 192.21 feet to the Westerly right of way line of McMullen Booth Road as described in Q.R. Sack 6703, Pages 1716-1718 of the public records of Pinellas Grnmty, Florida; thence along. said right of way S. 01• deg 40 Min 47 sec F, for 197.43 feet to the point of curvature of a curve concave to the West; thence Southerly along the arc of said vux", having a radius of 11359.16 feet, a central. angle of 03 deg 42 min 47 sec, an arc length of 339.60 feet and a chord bearing S. OU deg 49 min 24 sec 8, for 339.59 feat to the POINT OF SKG11FhT1 3. RECEIVED 411; 1 5 2005 MANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER FROM : COU14TRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER EXHH1BIT H PHONE N0. : B13 726 BM P,INELLAS COUNTY FLA. 0F'F.REC.BK 9007 PG 592 1. Reservations and Easements as incorporated in instrument recorded in Deed Bock 1114, Page 151 and Deed Book 1114, Page 501. 2. Basement in favor of the City of clea7rwater, recorded in U.R. Book 3033. Page 725. 3. Easement for ingress and egress as incor- porated in instrument recorded in O.R. Book 7602, Page 1134. ORIGINAL RECEIVED k'+.1t) I ? 7005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWAi ER FROM COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER q } 4. ¦.Qr at ,f -...!'•'?r..-Vu,111 1101106•-4..i.d11 111iIT1 f¦MIf 1h/'P°f N t.e•m.f fflhm ?lM111A 1 7A?r + tA•1?i1 Il rhl!¦u????/(p 'IVnci, r.r ta. we. ;r INS te1.rR? j W.. b.¦r?P? T1. i7?°q11 U'? wr.,, *-04081 *1 wash flaw.. 16 V4 Nm. 1N. 1 > Jhlr? ?jp(/ 0 r11ts 1r.. q°R.11*a .d lmT.w.g111 M.¦ • 1 b•r1y mot w¦r ?¦ 10wf M f1,. ?.Nti urcorgr #I Im, ..A. ?f¦n¦f rf 8°bf t.iv, 1o if r M6. frt3¦••f r1111.v1 (Et 1.¦¦rU 11 . nIM pnTtrt¦Ir? W.r. plur.rir. Mlnl, '?I 11?f1 Gn(T, .a 1041 Mrs [it n.Melu?;;3410¦¦Im I T+ Mlrf. W1RG FGVCC B .•J/?4d00 t?W? t? I4F?.7'S ,07.0 . rb 24161 a 4 d? U r ao t ? ti WcAUr Z-Af Ac. S w E 1 S OV60Vea P ibrl4C$ --+--, • , - ? WG76 SLR, C,V T*qG/NC rT4ac ?E`!?i?d d?JINI' '`•• M,tWflpC,d 1k'.l?E^ Cr'?'1?063'Ja ?. 7? 7ji 1fr'117G7rW OA t, ./r ,+1cra ?z•???? rsgC?'(? :r. M?atC d • +ac'•? `?7' A PHONE NO. 813 726 BB48 LLAS COUNTY FLA. OFF.REC.BX 9007 PG 593 • ??;.? 1 f ?1OL?° ! r ORIG14JAL FICALY R/w HNC D.Q b7d?, PGS? 1716-I i'/G? It ? ?Av e- 1Ed6F.14 11ro461 .d- to'v6•,4o DJe41N4r,& v1rCH A6,0NG OUM':RLV 60UNOAd1ey .4- r7: 49• S Aor /'••?t'zzMwtb? .?? c'o,?cr?.e a? swl?s oF?sw? ' . _ _ SJI?S4C1 01? .?E?c.4 rE • ... , 9or1 a flti ? This sketch is not a su%"Vey. and is attached hereto for the purpo?ee of complying with F. $. Section Z8.aZZ(4). X41±, ? ? 7u?J PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER COUNTRYSID%CHRISTIAN CENTgp LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ORIGINAL PARCEL / THAT PART OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF T/1£ SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 4, TOHN' SH/P 29 SOUTH, RANGE 16 EAST, 01MELLAS COUNTY, 'ZORIM, DESCR/BED AS FOLLOWS: FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SA/O SECTION 4, RUN THENCE MW/4:35 Z' ALONG THE WOO/M L/NE FORMEO BY THE AFOMMIO SOUTHWEST CORNER AND THE NORMMST CORNER OF T//£ NORTNWESTT 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWSST 1/4 A D/STANCE OF .J73.35 ACET TO TN£ PO/NT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S,694706'£; 1018.59 f,-,f T, THENCE N007,9 54 "£, 242.79 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY R/GHT OF W4r LINT OF MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD (SR 6YJ,) AS DESCR/BED IN O.R. BOOK 1, 46, PAGE 457, OF 1HE PURL/C RECORDS OF P/NEZLAS COUNTY, FLORID4,• THENCE N89 47061W,, 775.57 FEET TO THE AFORES410 OL4GONAL L/NE,• THENCE S45'14 a5V,, 34.3.52 FEET ALONG THE AMRESA/O 01400NOZ LINE TO MF PD/NT OF BEG/NNN49 LESS THAT PORTION COAWrEO TO P/NELLAS COUNTY FOR ROAD R/GHT OF WAY AS DESCR/BED IN O.R. BOOK 6980, PAGE 72J, OF THE PURL/C RECORDS OF PINELL 45 COUNTY, FLOR/DA. AND ALSO LESS THAT PORTION COMEYED TO P/NELLAS COUNTY fOR ROAD R/GHT OF WAY AS DESCR/BED IN O. R. BOOK 6774 PAGE 2244, OF THE PURL IC RECORDS OF P/NELLAS COUNTY, RORIa4. PARCEL // THAT PART OF THE SOUTHWEST 1,14 OF SECTION 4 7OWNSH/P 29 MUM, RANGE 16 EAST, P/NELLAS COMM FLOR/0,4 DESCR/BED AS IVILOWS- BEG/N AT THE SOUTWIS'EST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF S4/O SECT/ON 4, ANO RUN IMNCE N45714 a5'E, 1219.16 IZET,• THENCE 5894706'E, 4.3722 FEET TO A PO/NT ON THE WEST R/GHT OF WAY LINE OF MCMULLEN 8047H ROAD (SR 59.3); THENCE ALONG SA/O WEST R/GHT OF WAY L/NE SOD'122W*,, J26.41 FEET,- THENCE N894706' , 1700 FEET,- THENCE S00'12347f; 82875 FEET ALONG S4/D K'EST R/GHT OF MY LINE, THENCE N897725W 492.43 FEET TO THE EAST BOUNDARY OF SALL S LAKE PARK .3RD ApD/7TON AS RECDRDEO IN PLAT BOOK 71, mar 21, or THE PURL/C RECORDS OF P/NELLAS COUNTY, fZOMM04- THENCE N05'4545"E, 1J501 FEET ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY OF SALL S LAKE PARK J; P, ADD/T/ON,• 1H£NCE N8, 9:?J:707 81, 22 FEET ALONG 7HE NORTHERL Y 801IND4RY OF SALL S LAKE PARK ,JRO ADDMON TO THE WEST BOUNDARY OF SECTION 4,• THENCE NOO'19'19'E, 50.20 FEET ALONG THE WfSr 60UND4RY OF SECTION 4 TO MC PD/NT OF BEGINNING. LESS THAT PART OF THE NORTHWEST 1,14 OF THE S0l1)9VWS7 1,14 OF SECTION 4 70MINSH/P 29 SOUIN, RANGE 16 EAST, P/NE71-4S COUNTY, 4ZORIal 2ESCRIS&O AS FOLLOWS: FROM TTIE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 114 OF S410 SEMON 4, RUN THENCE N4574:752' ALONG THE OG4GVNAL LINE FORMED BY THE AFORESA/D SOUTHWEST CORNER AM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORINMEST 1,14 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 A 0/STANCE OF .J7J.J5 f,--ET TO THE PO/NT OF BEGINNING,- THENCE 599'47062; 1018.59 FEET, THENCE NOO'12542, 242.79 fV7 ALONG THE WESTERLY R129117 01- WAY LINE OF MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD (SR 5.9W AS DESCR/BED IN O.R. BOOK 1,346, PAGE 457, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF P/NELLAS COUNTY, FLOR/04, THENCE N89 4706, 77957 FEET TO THE AFOREM1,0 0146ONAL LINE,- THENCE S45'14:J57 ,JM52 FEET ALONG THE AFOR£SA/O 01AG01M LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING: LESS THAT PORTION CONEYEO TO P/NEZL4S COUNTY FOR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY AS OES•CR/BED IN O. R. BOOK 6,3,71, PAGE 1958, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF P/NEZLAS COUNTY, 1AZORID4 ANO ALSO LESS THAT PORTION CON/EYEO TO P/NELLAS COUNTY Mf RQAO RIGHT OF WAY AS DESCRIBED IN O.R. BOOK 6734, PAGE 2244, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF P/NELLAS COUNTY, FLOR/DA. ' ANO A TRACT OF LAND LYING IMNIN THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF S£CT/ON 4, TOWNSH/P 29 MIM RANGE 16 EAST, P/NUMS COUNTY, FLOR/DA AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS . FOLLOWS.- BEG/N AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIDDEN OAKS AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 102, PACES 20 4NO 21 OF THE PUBL/C RECORDS OF P/NELLAS COUNTY, IZOR/LL4,• THENCE S. 81 0£G 47 MIN 99 SEC W ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SA/D H/DOEN OAKS, Mf 7.111 FEET, 7WENCE N. 74 DEG' 08 MIN 51 SEC W, FIR 83558 FEET, THENCE LEAMO SA/O NORTHERLY BOUNDARY N. 00 DEG 00 MIN 05 SEC E, F29? 5/ARJ FEET,- THENCE S. 89 DEG 31 MIN 08 SEC E, FOR 192 21 FEET TO THE WESIFRLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF MCMULLEN BOOTH RaV AS DES•CAMED IN O.R. BOOK 670.Y, PAGES' 1716-•1718 OF THE PUBL/C RECORDS OF P/NELLAS COUNTY, FLOR104- THENCE ALONG SA/O R/GHT OF WAY S. 01 PEG 40 JUAN 47 SEC E, FOR 197sCT FEET TO 1.*VE PD/NT OF CURIiATURE 01 ,4 CURW 001VC4W TO THE OES'T,• THENCE saclPytRL r ALONG THE ARC OF 5410 CURD, NAl9NG A 940141S OF 11.359.16 FLr£T, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01 OEG 42 MIN 47 SEC, AN ARC LENGTH OF .J.39.60 fEET AND A CHORD BEARING S. 00 DEG 49 MIN ?4 SEC E, FOR ,3.79.59 f£ET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS 19.9689 ACRES, MORE OR LE'S'S (Mf R P Ak'!°NING DEPARTMENT Cl7V CAF aFmu' m 0 RECEIVED AUG 1 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER FLS2005-08059 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD Date Received: 08/23/2005 COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CTR INC ZONING DISTRICT: I LAND USE: INS ATLAS PAGE: 265A PLANNER OF RECORD: NOT ENTERED CLWCoverSiieet ??pLu 8/23/2005 ?'I` '? Receipt #: 1200500000000008146 1:06:02PM r Date: 08/23/2005 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid FLS2005-08059 03 Flex Std-Commercial 010-341262 475.00 Line Item Total: $475.00 Payments: Method Payer Initials Check No Confirm No How Received Amount Paid Check COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN R_D 1279 In Person 475.00 CENTER INC Payment Total: $475.00 THIS IS NOT A PERMIT. This is a receipt for an application for a permit. This application will be reviewed and you will be notified as to the outcome of the application. cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 PLA?t?ot?«iGa?Dtb`c????Pd $'?j'?? _.. _.. _ 1 _z 2;? -_,ATB,, LANG RANGE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW December 16, 2005 Gaylor Engineering 400 Douglas Avenue, Suite C Dunedin, FL 34698 CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4576 RE: Development Order regarding case FLS2005-08059 at 1850 McMullen Booth Road (Countryside Christian Center) Dear Mr. Gaylor: This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-202.E of the Community Development Code. On September 29, 2005, the Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed your application for Flexible Standard Development to construct a 22,659 square foot addition to an existing Place of Worship, including a parking reduction from one space for every two seats to 0.66 spaces for every two seats (or one for every three seats), per Section 2-12031 The DRC recommended approval of the applications with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1. The proposal complies with Place of Worship criteria under the provisions of Section 2-1203.I; 2: The plan complies with General Applicability Criteria under the provisions of Section 3-913; and 3. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding area. Conditions of Approval: 1. That any future changes be reviewed and approved by the Planning Staff; 2. That all signage meet the requirements of Code and be architecturally-integrated with the design of the building with regard to proportion, color, material and finish as approved by Staff prior to the issuance of any sign permits; 3. That the fire department connection be relocated to within 40-feet of a fire hydrant prior to the issuance of a building permit; 4. That the applicant obtain Pinellas County right-of-way permits for work in the McMullen Booth Road right-of-way prior to the issuance of a building permit; 5. That the wheel stops be shown to be installed where parking stalls abut a sidewalk to prevent vehicles from encroaching into the pedestrian travel way prior to the issuance of a building permit; 6. That white directional pavement arrows be installed to provide better internal flow for the parking lot prior to the issuance of a building permit; BRIAN J. AUNGSC, MAYOR FRANK HIBBARD, VICE MAYOR HOPI' HA.MICfON, COUNCIBIEMBER BIu. JONSON, COUNCIL.MEMBER CARLEN A. PETERSEN, COUNCILNIEMBER 'EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Y December 16, 2005 ~ FLS2005-08059 Page 2 7. That the applicant provide an agreement that no vehicles will park on City's right-of-way i.e. McMullen Booth Road prior to the issuance of a building permit; 8. That compliance with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule occur prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; and 9. That easements are required to protect access to unrestricted water mains and fire hydrants on site. The applicant shall dedicate and record water line easements to the City of Clearwater subject to the Water Department's approval of water lines for City ownership prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. I concur with the findings of the Development Review Committee and, through this letter, approve your application for Flexible Standard Development with above 9 conditions. The approval is based on and must adhere to the application dated received, August 15, 2005 and site plans dated received, November 8, 2005. Pursuant to Section 4-303, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of Flexible Standard Development approval (December 16, 2006). All required certificates of occupancy shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do not change with successive owners. The Community Development Coordinator may grant an extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of validity. The Community Development Coordinator may approve an additional extension of time not to exceed one year for good cause shown and documented in writing. The coordinator must receive the request for this extension within the one-year period of validity after the original time extension. The Community Development Coordinator may approve an additional extension of time not to exceed on year for good cause shown and documented in writing. The coordinator must receive the request for this extension within the one-year period of the validity after the original extension. The issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call John Schodtler, Planner I at 727-562-4547. Sincerely, Michael Delk, A P Planning Director S: (Planning Departmen6C D BlFlex Standard (FLS)Ilnactive or Finished CasesWcMullen Booth 1850- Countryside Christian Ctr (I) - Approved I FLS2005-08059 Development Order. doc Dec. 16 2005 04:34PM YOUR LOGO YOUR FAX NO. 7275624865 NO. OTHER FACSIMILE START TIME USAGE TIME MODE PAGES RESULT 01 97362953 Dec.16 04:33PM 01'06 SND 02 OK TO TURN OFF REPORT, PRESS 'MENU' ##04. THEN SELECT OFF BY USING '+' OR '-'. FOR FAX ADVANTAGE ASSISTANCE, PLEASE CALL 1-800-HELP-FAX (435-7329). Schodtler, John From: Rice, Scott Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 2:38 PM To: Schodtler, John Cc: Doherty, Steve; Elbo, Bennett Subject: FLS2005-08059 - 1850 McMullen Booth Road Engineering has completed review of the resubmittal for the subject application and updated Permit Plan. Approval conditions: Prior to building permit, the fire department connection shall be relocated to within 40-feet of a fire hydrant. Prior to building permit, applicant shall obtain Pinellas County right-of-way permits for work in the McMullen Booth Road right-of-way. Prior to building permit, wheel stops shall be shown to be installed where parking stalls abuts a sidewalk to prevent vehicles from encroaching into the pedestrian travelway. 6. Prior to building permit, indicate where white directional pavement arrows shall be installed to provide better internal flow for parking lot. Prior to building permit, applicant shall provide an agreement that no vehicles will park on City's right-of-way i.e. McMullen Booth Road. Prior to CO, comply with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule. Easements are required to protect access to unrestricted water mains and fire hydrants on site. Prior to C.O. applicant shall dedicate and record water line easements to the City of Clearwater subject to the Water Department's approval of water lines for City ownership. D. Scott Rice Land DeveL Engr. Manager 727-562-4781 scott.rice@MyClearwater.com Clearwater U FAX COVER MEMO CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT 100 S. MYRTLE AVE., 2nd Floor CLEARWATER, FL 33756 (727) 562-4567 FAX: (727) 562-4865 TO: .0 Al 1 G4sg le ,L G-f Y" A FAX: 2.36 " .?953- Phone: FROM: J oN d Sc44,o aTLa.. Phone: DATE: // L6 o:5' SUBJECT: GGG - f"i-av C - 6100 I MESSAGE: ' ' AM s-rjLa . WA[Titiet ony ?sods "wp 2GsjjA _, Rr-,V'; 5 V4S To 136 if"115tnk IForR `f Mit CAS-G 7k &y k14 u.G 13660 (3A6K,L,*dG8m7 Ana A SP6i-Z- s4r•M :n?dijJ& TD 66T' Q"- f2- lg-vjs A12JG? Corm t.c?- NUMBER OF PAGES(INCLUDING THIS PAGE) Nov. 28 2005 10:42AM YOUR LOGO YOUR FAX NO. 7275624865 NO. OTHER FACSIMILE START TIME USAGE TIME MODE PAGES RESULT 01 97362953 Nov.28 10:42AM 00'35 SND 01 OK TO TURN OFF REPORT, PRESS 'MENU' ##04. THEN SELECT OFF BY USING 1+1 OR 1-1. FOR FAX ADVANTAGE ASSISTANCE, PLEASE CALL 1-800-hB-P-FAX (435-7329). oag[OT Zn9*££rd,29 OR 400 Douglas Avenue • Suite C • Dunedin, FL 34698 Civil Engineering (727) 785-8844 FAX (727) 736-2953 Land Planning Monday, November 07, 2005 E-Mail: gaylormg@tampabay.rr.com Recycling Systems Ethanol Plants bify VEi rl?Jlearwater Attn: Mr. John Schodtler Planner 1 Planning Dept. P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, FL. 33758-4748 Dear Mr. Schodtler; R"ECEVED Nnv () 8 2K5 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER The following is a response to the City of Clearwater comments relative to the Countryside Christian Center Site Improvements (FLS2005-08059) at 1850 McMullen Booth Rd. Please find attached 15 copies of the revised Site Plan set 10 of 10 also find 15 set of the revised Landscaping and Irrigation Plan. Engineering Conditions 1. Is a tie-in into a force main proposed? A force main is not proposed. All references to force main has been removed from the drawings and the general notes. 2. McMullen Booth Road is C.R. 611. Reference to McMullen Booth Road as S.R. 593 has been removed and changed to C.R. 611 3. Show the location of all existing unrestricted fire mains and fire hydrant assemblies shown on the property. Existing and proposed hydrants and FDC have been labeled 4. Is the new building sprinkled? FDC is now shown on the plan 5. The words, "City of Clearwater' shall not be cast..... The detail of the manhole covers will be modified to not have "City of Clearwater" cast onto lid 6. Will walkway on north side of new building allow immediate access to the handicapped..... Handicap will cross under the portico across driveway then to parking spaces. Prior to issuance of the Building Permit. 1. Applicant shall obtain Pinellas County right-of-way permit.... This is acknowledged and complied with. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy: 1. Easements are required to protect access to unrestricted water mains and fire hydrants..... This is acknowledged and complied with. Fire Conditions All 2 way drive lanes must be 24' wide...... This is acknowledged and complied with. Q A fire sprinkler system in accordance with 2002 NFPA 13 is required. This is acknowledged and complied with. Nnv mg 2005 Show location of fire hydrant for fire fighting..... P"MNG ER Fire Conditions: continued CMYOFC?? Please see the existing hydrant across the proposed driveway at the North West comer of the proposed building and near the mid section of the existing structures along with existing FDC. Also see existing hydrant on the North Boundary at North West corner of existing structure. Also see proposed hydrant at the East boundary near the mid entry driveway. Also see proposed FDC at the North West corner of the proposed structure to be located less than 100 ft. from the existing hydrant. All of these items can be seen on page 5 of 10. Landscape Curbing Condition Eliminate or revise the proposed curbing around the existing trees..... This is acknowledged all landscape island around existing trees will be bollard type as suggested by the City and as shown on sheets 5 of 10 and sheet 8 of 10. Landscape Staff recommends changing out the proposed Laurel Oaks..... Will revise plan to show Live Oaks. Protected trees Notwithstanding any other provision of this Division, the number of required off-street parking spaces may be reduced..... This is acknowledged and will be complied with. Land Resource Condition Show the 26", 25", and 38" oak trees ..... preserved. This is acknowledged and will be complied with. Delete all proposed curbs at all interior landscape islands due to the potential root impact.... This is acknowledged all landscape island around existing trees will be bollard type as suggested by the City and as shown on sheets 5 of 10 and sheet 8 of 10. Unable to read diameters of tree to be removed....... This is acknowledged and will be complied with. Be advised that a previous tree deficit exist..... This is acknowledged and will be complied with Provide a tree preservation plan..... The preservation plan is being compiled by Mr. Robert Seamans with Pete and Ron's Tree service and will be submitted this week. Parks and Recreation Condition Open space/recreation impact fees are due... This fee was paid upon the first submittal of this plan in an around 1995. This will be verified and complied with at what ever payment level is required if any. Traffic Engineering 1. Show 20'X20' sight distance triangle at all intersections inside parking lot..... ORIGINAL This is acknowledged and will be complied with. 2. Comply with the City's minimum driveway spacing requirement of four hundred sixty feet (460').... The proposed driveway exceeds this requirement. All other driveways are existing and were permitted at time of that construction. 3. The additional driveway along McMullen Booth does not comply with the City's.... This item was agree upon in the DRC meeting held on Sept. 29, 2005 would be allowed. Please refer to the traffic study furnished in the original submission. 4. Applicant did not comply with the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.2. "Site design shall provide a deceleration lane(s) to enter the site without impeding traffic flow ....... This item was agree upon in the DRC meeting held on Sept. 29, 2005 would be allowed. Please refer to the traffic study furnished in the original submission 5. Wheel stops must be installed where parking stall(s) abuts a sidewalk..... This is acknowledged and will be complied with. 6. Install white directional pavement arrows to provide better internal flow.... This is acknowledged and will be complied with. 7. Applicant shall provide an agreement that no vehicles will park on the City's right-of-way... This is acknowledged and will be complied with. General note: Comply with the current Transportation impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule. This is acknowledged and will be complied with. We thank you for this opportunity to discuss these items regarding the improvements for this project. We are happy to comply in every regard to the comments the City has requested. Sincerely, RECEVED V? A?? 4? ka A >? 20P.5 Michael Gaylor, P.E. MAN[NG ?RTMENT Gaylor Engineering CRY OFCLEARWATER \\Sta-100\shareddocs\Projects\Countryside Christian Sanctuary - 03030\Correspondence & LOT \Responce to City Comments 11-4- 05.doc .. Page 1 of 2 Schodtler, John From: Greg Larison [glariso1 @tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 10:25 AM To: Schodtler, John Cc: Bronco; Jim Burbridge; Jo A Larison-FO; Richard &Carol Frost; Horne, William Subject: RE: Development John- Thanks for replying. I have lived here for a number of years and do not remember anybody from the city contacting us in regards to this gate being Permitted to empty into our community-if it was, the traffic today was not anticipated-keep in mind, the school was not anticipated either. Now we Have large trucks coming through to make deliveries and children being dropped off. The church could help out the running of stop signs by just Having one of the patrol cars sit here at my place-this way-people may slow down and definitely stop at the intersection of St Croix and Lawrence. I think speed humps are also needed both on Lawrence and St Croix to slow traffic down. John-please understand I have nothing against the church- Our own residents are at fault also due to renters moving in and out and we ourselves just don't anticipate what could happen when a little one may run out in front of us. Thanks again for keeping us informed and if I can be of any assistance please let me know. Greg Larison 727/797-7399 -----Original Message----- From: John.Schodtler@myClearwater.com [mailto:John.Schodtler@myClearwater.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 7:50 AM To: glarisoi@tampabay.rr.com Cc: William.Horne@myclearwater.com; RLFROSTY@aol.com; jol912@tampabay.rr.com; bronco-41947@yahoo.com; jburbridge@aol.com Subject: RE: Development Mr. Larison: Thank you for taking the time to participate in the review of this Development Review case (1850 McMullen Booth Road - Countryside Christian Center). I will make sure that your concerns about the traffic coming through your neighborhood are brought up to the applicant at the Development Review Committee meeting on Thursday. As to the concerns over whether the rear entrance was permitted. The City's Traffic and Parking department has on record an approved parking lot plan showing the rear entrance as it exists today. The Development Review Committee granted this site plan and parking lot approval on November 4, 1996. John Schodtler Planner I -----Original Message----- From: Greg Larison [mailto:glarisoi@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:33 AM To: Schodtler, John Cc: Horne, William; Richard &Carol Frost; Jo A Larison-F0; Bronco; Jim Burbridge Subject: Development John- 9/27/2005 f, Page 2 of 2 My name is Greg Larison and I reside at 2984 St Croix Dr, Clearwater. My residence is at the corner of St Croix and Lawrence Dr. We as residents of Salls Lake have had numerous problems with this church in the past and is still ongoing- an exit gate was installed empting into=our division untold number of cars racing thru here and ignoring stop and speeding signs. We have had the city here on numerous occasions in regards to our problems but of no cure. This gate was opened Without consulting this community and with disregard to the impact it caused. On weds. We have gangs of kids roaming thru here that Clearwater police have had to respond to and I have inquired to the church about this and was told I should be living in the woods-in other words put up with the kids- hired police are to keep any of our children off of their property but allows kids supposed to be attending church to roam freely through out our neighborhood. I have spoke many times to the city about why this gate was allowed and now with opening a service entry into Paul B Stephens School here traffic is becoming unbearable-( near collisions at the school entry and the church gate, running stop signs and racing) We have so many young children living here very capable of walking across a street and being hit by speeding cars late for church and I'm afraid something is going to happen before action is taken. Parking for Easter and special occasions at the church already overflow onto our lawns and we are verbally abused just for asking not to run over our sprinkling systems or parking on our grass-parking actually blocked the only entry for the fire department to get to the school that the school had to put up a no parking sign so police can write tickets-and now with this addition the church wants to add and do away with more parking spaces on their property where is the overflow going to park? How much more traffic is going to speed through and stop signs ignored before we say no more- l am asking the city to have the church close this rear entry and exit (was it properly permitted, traffic studies done, residents notified?) Police already direct traffic on McMullen-Booth road- have the church position police here at this intersection to direct traffic too. I'm inviting you and anyone else who wishes to come and witness our problem here on Weds. nights, Sats. or especially Sunday mornings beginning at 7:30 and I'll furnish all the coffee. Check with your police department and traffic control if we have not called-only after this gate was opened- I apologize for such a lengthy letter, but I did try to call you and I did leave you a voice message Greg Larison/ 727-797-7399 Concerned of our communities' future and children 9/27/2005 V CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT September 27, 2005 Post Office Box 4748, Clearwater, Florida 33758-4748 Municipal Services Building, 100 South Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone (727) 562-4567 Fax (727) 562-4576 GAYLOR ENGINEERING, 400 DOUGLAS AVENUE STE C DUNEDIN FL 34698 RE: FLS2005-08059 LOCATED AT 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD - COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CTR INC Dear GAYLOR ENGINEERING: The following are comments generated at the City's Pre-Development Review Committee (PRE-DRC) meeting regarding your case number: FLS2005-08059. These comments are generated early to give you assistance in preparing responses to the comments for the upcoming DRC Meeting on September 29, 2005. Please be prepared to address these comments and any others that may be generated at the DRC meeting. Resubmittals will not be accepted at the meeting, please make arrangements to resubmit to Sherry Watkins after the DRC meeting. If you have any questions about times or location, please contact Sherry Watkins, at 727-562-4582. Sincerely, John Schodtler Planner I Cc: File ,,., *? londitions Associated With FLS2005-08059 4Y? 4 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD Engineering Condition Steve Doherty 562-4585 09/19/2005 Prior to DRC: Not Met 1. Is a tie-in into a force main proposed? If not, please remove references to such a sanitary connection. 2. McMullen Booth Road is C.R. 611. Remove S.R. 593 from all applicable pages. 3. Show the location of all existing unrestricted fire mains and fire hydrant assemblies on the property. 4. Is new building to be sprinkled? If yes, Fire Department Connections shall be shown on the plan prior to DRC. 5. The words, "City of Clearwater" shall not be cast onto private manhole covers. 6. Will walkway on north side of new building allow immediate access to the handicapped without pedestrian movement into vehicular accessway? Please respond. Prior to issuance of the Building Permit: 1. Applicant shall obtain Pinellas County right-of-way permits for work in the right-of-way. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy: 1. Easements are required to protect access to unrestricted water mains and fire hydrants on site. Prior to C.O. applicant shall dedicate and record water line easements to the City of Clearwater subject to the Water Department's approval of water lines for City ownership. General Note: DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review, additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. Environmental Condition Heather Faessle 562-4897 09/15/2005 1) No Issues. Not Met Fire Condition Leonard Rickard . 562-4327 09/16/2005 All 2 way drive lanes must be 24' wide. All drive lanes with islands must be 20' wide on each side Not Met of island. Show on plan PRIOR TO DO 09/12/2005 A fire sprinkler system in accordance with 2002 NFPA 13 is required. PRIOR TO DO Not Met 09/16/2005 Show location of fire hydrant for fire fighting use. Must be within 300' of building as hose lays and Not Met on same side of street as building. This is in addition to the proposed new hydrant which is to be used for the fire sprinkler system. PRIOR TO DO 09/16/2005 Show locaton of FDC for fire sprinkler system. Must be within 40' of hydrant. PRIOR TO DO Not Met Landscape Curbing Condition John Schodtler 727-562-4547 09/23/2005 Eliminate or revised the proposed curbing around the existing trees to meet Land Resource Not Met Comments. The curbing around the proposed trees islands is acceptable. Landscape John Schodtler 727-562-4547 09/23/2005 Staff recommends changing out the proposed Laurel Oaks with another type of shade tree (Live Not Met Oaks, Elms, Sycamores, Pines, or Bald Cypress). 09/23/2005 Protected trees. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Division, the number of required Not Met off-street parking spaces may be reduced by up to 25 percent in a Level One approval upon showing that the reduction in off-street parking spaces is necessary to preserve protected trees located on the parcel provided for development. -- Perform analysis to verify if this will negate the FLS request for parking reduction. Print Date: 09/27/2005 CaseConditons Page 1 of 3 • lb • FLS2005-08059 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD Land Resource Condition Rick Albee 727-562-4741 09/22/2005 Show the 26", 25" and 38" Oak trees along the western most bank of parking to be preserved Not Met prior to D.O. 09/22/2005 Delete all proposed curbs at all interior landscape islands due to the potential root impacts of trees Not Met to be preserved. Recommend that bollards or timbers be utilized to deliniate the islands. Revise prior to D.O. 09/22/2005 Unable to read diameters of trees to be removed, plan is too cluttered, submit a clean demo plan Not Met prior to D.O. 09/22/2005 Be advised that a previous tree deficit exists. In 1997 a tree permit, #3611, was applied for for Not Met clearing the south parcel for parking and retention ponds. The required replacements were never installed. Therefore a 257" deficit @ $42 per inch exists. All additional trees to be removed shall be replaced on an inch for inch basis and/or payment @ $48 per inch. 09/22/2005 Provide a Tree Preservation Plan prepared by a certified arborist, consulting arborist, landscape Not Met architect or other specialist in the field of arboriculture. This plan must show how the proposed building, parking, stormwater and utilities impact the critical root zones (drip lines) of trees to be preserved and how you propose to address these impacts ie; crown elevating, building lintels, root pruning and/or root aeration systems. Other data required on this plan must show the trees canopy line, actual tree barricade limits (2/3 of the drip line and/or in the root prune lines if required), and the tree barricade detail. And any other pertinent information the arborist feels relates to tree preservation prior to building permit. Parks & Recs Condition Debbie Reid 562-4818 09/16/2005 Open space/recreation impact fees are due prior to issuance of building permits or final plat (if Not Met applicable) whichever occurs first. These fees could be substantial and it is recommended that you contact Art Kader at 727-562-4824 to calculate the assessment. Storm Water Condition Bob Maran 562-4592 09/16/2005 no issues Not Met Traffic Eng Condition Bennett Elbo 562-4775 09/14/2005 Show 20'x 20' sight distance triangle at all intersections inside parking lot. Objects within the sight Not Met distance triangles must not exceed the City's height limitations. 2. Comply with the City's minimum driveway spacing requirement of four hundred sixty feet (460') per City's Community Development Code Section 3-102.C. Class 3. 3. The additional driveway along McMullen Booth Road does not comply with the City's Community Development Code Section 3-1402 B. and the City's Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.2.2. The traffic impact analysis conducted for the proposed driveway indicated a LOS of "D" with no improvement in LOS for the 3 existing driveways. Also, the addition of a 4th driveway will create more conflict points on McMullen Booth Road which is listed as a constrained roadway by the Pinellas MPO. 4. Applicant did not comply with the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan - Policy 6.2. " Site design shall provide a deceleration lane(s) to enter the site without impeding traffic flow for roadway operating at or lower than LOS of "E". The Traffic Impact Analysis conducted did not study Wednesday evening service(s) where traffic volume is at it's highest normally between the hours of 4p.m. - 6 p.m.. 5. Wheel stops must be installed where parking stall(s) abuts a sidewalk to prevent vehicles from encroaching into the pedestrian travelway. 6. Install white directional pavement arrows to provide better internal flow for parking lot. 7. Applicant shall provide an agreement that no vehicles will park on City's right-of-way i.e. Print Date: 09/27/2005 CaseConditons Page 2 of 3 FLS2005-08059 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD 0 Traffic Eng Condition Bennett Elbo 562-4775 McMullen Booth Road. All of the above to be addressed prior to CDB. General note: Comply with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule. CaseConditons Print Date: 09/27/2005 Page 3 of 3 1 ? 4 Sep. 27 2005 08:24AM YOUR LOGO CityOfClearwater-Plan Dept YOUR FAX NO. 727 562 4865 NO. OTHER FACSIMILE START TIME USAGE TIME MODE PAGES RESULT 01 97362953 Sep.27 08:23AM 01'30 SND 04 OK TO TURN OFF REPORT, PRESS 'MENU' #04. THEN SELECT OFF BY USING '+' OR FOR FAX ADVANTAGE ASSISTANCE, PLEASE CALL 1-800-HELP7FAX (435-7329). ? 1 • Page 1 of 2 Schodtler, John. From: Schodtler, John Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 7:50 AM To: 'Greg Larison' Cc: Horne, William; Richard &Carol Frost; Jo A Larison-FO; Bronco; Jim Burbridge Subject: RE: Development Mr. Larison: Thank you for taking the time to participate in the review of this Development Review case (1850 McMullen Booth Road - Countryside Christian Center). I will make sure that your concerns about the traffic coming through your neighborhood are brought up to the applicant at the Development Review Committee meeting on Thursday. As to the concerns over whether the rear entrance was permitted. The City's Traffic and Parking department has on record an approved parking lot plan showing the rear entrance as it exists today. The Development Review Committee granted this site plan and parking lot approval on November 4, 1996. John Schodtler Planner I -----Original Message----- From: Greg Larison [mailto:glarisol@tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:33 AM To: Schodtler, John Cc: Horne, William; Richard &Carol Frost; Jo A Larison-F0; Bronco; Jim Burbridge Subject: Development John- My name is Greg Larison and I reside at 2984 St Croix Dr, Clearwater. My residence is at the corner of St Croix and Lawrence Dr. We as residents of Salls Lake have had numerous problems with this church in the past and is still ongoing- an exit gate was installed empting into our division untold number of cars racing thru here and ignoring stop and speeding signs. We have had the city here on numerous occasions in regards to our problems but of no cure. This gate was opened Without consulting this community and with disregard to the impact it caused. On weds. We have gangs of kids roaming thru here that Clearwater police have had to respond to and I have inquired to the church about this and was told I should be living in the woods-in other words put up with the kids- hired police are to keep any of our children off of their property but allows kids supposed to be attending church to roam freely through out our neighborhood. I have spoke many times to the city about why this gate was allowed and now with opening a service entry into Paul B Stephens School here traffic is becoming unbearable-( near collisions at the school entry and the church gate, running stop signs and racing) We have so many young children living here very capable of walking across a street and being hit by speeding cars late for church and I'm afraid something is going to happen before action is taken. Parking for Easter and special occasions at the church already overflow onto our lawns and we are verbally abused just for asking not to run over our sprinkling systems or parking on our grass-parking actually blocked the only entry for the fire department to get to the school that the school had to put up a no parking sign so police can write tickets-and now with this addition the church wants to add and do away with more parking spaces on their property where is the overflow going to park? How much more traffic is going to speed through and stop signs ignored before we say no more- l am asking the city to have the church close this rear entry and exit (was it properly permitted, traffic studies done, residents notified?) Police already direct traffic on McMullen-Booth road- have the church position police here at this intersection to direct traffic too. I'm inviting you and anyone else who wishes to come and witness our problem here on Weds. nights, Sats. or especially Sunday mornings beginning at 7:30 and I'll furnish all the coffee. 9/27/2005 0 s , • Page 2 of 2 Check with your police department and traffic control if we have not called-only after this gate was opened- I apologize for such a lengthy letter, but I did try to call you and I did leave you_a voice message Greg Larison/ 727-797-7399 Concerned of our communities' future and children 9/27/2005 r ` i 0 Mr. Williams: Thank you for taking the time to participate in the review of this Development Review case (1850 McMullen Booth Road - Countryside Christian Center). I will make sure that your concerns are brought up to the applicant at the Development Review Committee meeting on Thursday. As to a wall around the property, all I can do is ask the applicant if this is a possibility. Additionally, I suggest your continued communications with the Church over the concerns with the music. John Schodtler Planner I -----Original Message----- From: ROYWFLORIDA@aol.com [mai Ito: ROYWFLORIDA@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 6:12 AM To: Schodtler, John Subject: 1850 McMullen Booth Road Mr Schodtler, I live at 1843 Oak Forest Drive S. My back yard faces the north end of the parking lot and is closest to the building. I am concerned about this expansion due to the current noise levels created by this establishment. This is certainly "Not the church you grew up with" because I never heard all the deep bass vibrations coming from any other church. At least once during the week and Sunday mornings there is a disturbance of peace to anyone living along this north end of the property. I have called and left messages and asked if there is some way that they could turn down the music. Nothing has changed. Can they be required to install a nice high sound barrier/wall around the property to minimize this intrusion in to my tranquility? Any assistance from Clearwater would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Roy Williams 1843 Oak Forest Drive South Clearwater, FL 33759 727-796-3692 813-362-1414 (cell) 6 _ . Page 1 of I Schodtler, John From: Greg Larison [glarisol @tampabay.rr.com] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:33 AM To: Schodtler, John Cc: Horne, William; Richard &Carol Frost; Jo A Larison-FO; Bronco; Jim Burbridge Subject: Development John- My name is Greg Larison and I reside at 2984 St Croix Dr, Clearwater. My residence is at the corner of St Croix and Lawrence Dr. We as residents of Salls Lake have had numerous problems with this church in the past and is still ongoing- an exit gate was installed empting into our division untold number of cars racing thru here and ignoring stop and speeding signs. We have had the city here on numerous occasions in regards to our problems but of no cure. This gate was opened Without consulting this community and with disregard to the impact it caused. On weds. We have gangs of kids roaming thru here that Clearwater police have had to respond to and I have inquired to the church about this and was told I should be living in the woods-in other words put up with the kids- hired police are to keep any of our children off of their property but allows kids supposed to be attending church to roam freely through out our neighborhood. I have spoke many times to the city about why this gate was allowed and now with opening a service entry into Paul B Stephens School here traffic is becoming unbearable-( near collisions at the school entry and the church gate, running stop signs and racing) We have so many young children living here very capable of walking across a street and being hit by speeding cars late for church and I'm afraid something is going to happen before action is taken. Parking for Easter and special occasions at the church already overflow onto our lawns and we are verbally abused just for asking not to run over our sprinkling systems or parking on our grass-parking actually blocked the only entry for the fire department to get to the school that the school had to put up a no parking sign so police can write tickets-and now with this addition the church wants to add and do away with more parking spaces on their property where is the overflow going to park? How much more traffic is going to speed through and stop signs ignored before we say no more- l am asking the city to have the church close this rear entry and exit (was it properly permitted, traffic studies done, residents notified?) Police already direct traffic on McMullen-Booth road- have the church position police here at this intersection to direct traffic too. I'm inviting you and anyone else who wishes to come and witness our problem here on Weds. nights, Sats. or especially Sunday mornings beginning at 7:30 and I'll furnish all the coffee. Check with your police department and traffic control if we have not called-only after this gate was opened- I apologize for such a lengthy letter, but I did try to call you and I did leave you a voice message Greg Larison/ 727-797-7399 Concerned of our communities' future and children 9/26/2005 Locate Hell) Exit Cotes A 'g -41 4 Y-i'ly+ V .MA Owner 14ame Search Exact Address Search Parcel ID Search Approxunate Address or Intersection Search Find the location of interest and follow the provided instructions. To return tc, this page, use the "Locate" menu on the top of the screen. ?e Scale: 1:3, 3,708 Map 268695,76 , 1328097,97 -- Image; X16 , 92 _... m,e ?. Local intranet :A Start »I Windor)s Media Player ?Inbox - Microsoft C?u...? ? Deyelo ment - Mess... "'City of learlr•)ater G,. ?...: ? G /Clearwater 2ornn... -? ,47 AM • 10:10 am Case Number: FLS2005-0805850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD Owner(s): Countryside Christian Ctr Inc 1850 N Mcmullen Booth. Rd Clearwater, Fl 33759 TELEPHONE: No Phone, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email Representative: Gaylor Engineering 400 Douglas Avenue Ste C Dunedin, F134698 TELEPHONE: 727-785-8844, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: No Email Location: 19.96 acres located on the west side of McMullen Booth Road approximately ??? feet south of Sunset Point Road. Atlas Page: 265A Zoning District: I, Institutional Request: Flexible Standard Development to construct a 22,659 square foot addition to an existing Place of Worship, including a parking reduction from one space for every two seats to 0.66 space for every two seats (or one for every three seats), per Section 2-1203.I. Proposed Use: Places of worship Neighborhood Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition Association(s): Clearwater, F133761 2544 Frisco Drive TELEPHONE: 727-725-3345, FAX: No Fax, E-MAIL: Djw@gte.net Presenter: (JohnTSch?zitler; Planner I Attendees Included: The DRC reviewed this application with the following comments: General Engineering: 1 . Prior to DRC: 1. Is a tie-in into a force main proposed? If not, please remove references to such a sanitary connection. 2. McMullen Booth Road is C.R. 611. Remove S.R. 593 from all applicable pages. 3. Show the location of all existing unrestricted fire mains and fire hydrant assemblies on the property. 4. Is new building to be sprinkled? If yes, Fire Department Connections shall be shown on the plan prior to DRC. 5. The words, "City of Clearwater" shall not be cast onto private manhole covers. 6. Will walkway on north side of new building allow immediate access to the handicapped without pedestrian movement into vehicular accessway? Please respond. Prior to issuance of the Building Permit: 1. Applicant shall obtain Pinellas County right-of-way permits for work in the right-of-way. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy: 1. Easements are required to protect access to unrestricted water mains and fire hydrants on site. Prior to C.O. applicant shall dedicate and record water line easements to the City of Clearwater subject to the Water Department's approval of water lines for City ownership. General Note: DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review, additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. Environmental: 1 . 1) No Issues. Fire: 1 . All 2 way drive lanes must be 24' wide. All drive lanes with islands must be 20' wide on each side of island. Show on plan PRIOR TO DO 2. A fire sprinkler system in accordance with 2002 NFPA 13 is required. PRIOR TO DO 3. Show location of fire hydrant for fire fighting use. Must be within 300' of building as hose lays and on same side of street as building. This is in addition to the proposed new hydrant which is to be used for the fire sprinkler system. PRIOR TO DO 4. Show locaton of FDC for fire sprinkler system. Must be within 40' of hydrant. PRIOR TO DO Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 9 Harbor Master: • No Comments Legal: No Comments Land Resources: No Comments Landscaping: ? (????? P No Comments (/1 kA (L3 ?G? N? 7 Parks and Recreation: 1 . Open space/recreation impact fees are due prior to issuance of building permits or final plat (if applicable) whichever occurs first. These fees could be substantial and it is recommended that you contact Art Kader at 727-562-4824 to calculate the assessment. Stormwater: no issues Solid Waste: No Comments Traffic Engineering: 1 . Show 20'x 20' sight distance triangle at all intersections inside parking lot. Objects within the sight distance triangles must not exceed the City's height limitations. 2 Comply with the City's minimum driveway spacing requirement of four hundred sixty feet 460') per City's Community Development Code Section 3-102.C. Class 3. The additional driveway along McMullen Booth Road does not comply with the City's Community Development Code Section 3-1402 B. and the City's Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.2.2. The traffic impact analysis conducted for the proposed driveway indicated a LOS of "D" with no improvement in LOS for the 3 existing driveways. Also, the addition of a 4th driveway will create more conflict points on McMullen Booth Road which is listed as a constrained roadway by the Pinellas MPO. 4 Applicant did not comply with the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan - olicy 6.2. " Site design shall provide a deceleration lane(s) to enter the site without impeding traffic flow for roadway operating at or lower than LOS of "E". The Traffic Impact Analysis conducted did not study Wednesday evening service(s) where traffic volume is at it's highest ,iiprmally between the hours of 4p.m. - 6 p.m.. 5/ Wheel stops must be installed where parking stall(s) abuts a sidewalk to prevent vehicles from encroaching into the pedestrian travelway. 6. Install white directional pavement arrows to provide better internal flow for parking lot. ?'5?'8. Applicant shall provide an agreement that no vehicles will park on City's right-of-way i.e. McMullen Booth Road. All of the above to be addressed prior to CDB. General note: Comply with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule. Notes: Planning: No Comments Other: No Comments Development Review Agenda - Thursday, September 29, 2005 - Page 10 LL *CITY OF CLeRWATER Cearwater PLANNING DEPARTMENT o MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 0 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE: (727) 562-4567 FAX: (727) 562-4576 W W W . MYC LEARW AT ER. C OM September 14, 2005 Gaylor Engineering 400 Douglas Avenue Ste C Dunedin, Fl 34698 RE: FLS2005-08059 -- 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD -- Letter of Completeness Dear Gaylor Engineering : The Planning Staff has entered your application into the Department's filing system and assigned the case number: FLS2005-08059. After a preliminary review of the submitted documents, staff has determined that the application is Complete. The Development Review Committee (DRC) will review the application for sufficiency on September 29, 2005, in the Planning Department conference room - Room 216 - on the second floor of the Municipal Services Building. The building is located at 100 South Myrtle Avenue in downtown Clearwater. Please call Sherry Watkins, Administrative Analyst, at 727-562-4582 no earlier than one week prior to the meeting date for the approximate time that your case will be reviewed. You or your representative (as applicable) must be present to answer any questions that the DRC may have regarding your application. Additional comments may be generated by the DRC at the time of the meeting. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 727-562-4547 or John. Schodtler@myclearwater.com. Sincerely yours, John Schodtler Planner I Letter of Completeness - FLS2005-08059 - 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTHRD NO. OTHER FACSIMILE 01 97362953 START TIME Sep. 14 02:35PM Joe Sep. 14 2005 02:36PM YOUR LOGO CityO?Clearwater-Plan Dept YOUR FAX NO. 727 562 4865 USAGE TIME MODE PAGES RESULT 00'38 SND 01 OK TO TURN OFF REPORT, PRESS 'MENU' #04. THEN SELECT OFF BY USING '+' OR '-'. FOR FAX ADVANTAGE ASSISTANCE, PLEASE CALL 1-800-HELP-FAX (435-7329). 6 0 LL CITY OF CLEARWATER Cie, arwater PLANNING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE: (727) 562-4567 FAX: (727) 562-4576 WWW.MYCLEARWATER.COM September 14, 2005 RE: NOTICE OF FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR FLEXIBLE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL AT 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD (FLS2005-08059) To Surrounding Property Owners: As a property owner within 200 feet of 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD, the City of Clearwater Planning Department gives notice that an application for Flexible Standard Development to construct a 22,659 square foot addition to an existing Place of Worship, including a parking reduction from one space for every two seats to 0.66 space for every two seats (or one for every three seats), per Section 2-12031. On September 29, 2005, the Development Review Committee (composed of the City's professional staff) will review and determine whether the application demonstrates compliance with the City's Community Development Code. Following that review and determiniation, the Planning Director will issue a Development Order approving, approving with conditions, or denying the application. The earliest date that the City will make a decision on the application will be September 29, 2005. The City encourages you to participate in the review of this application. You may contact me at 727-562-4547 or John.Schodtler@myclearwater.com for further information, visit our office to review the files and/or submit written comments to be considered in the City's review of the application. Please be advised that the applicant may submit additional or new information regarding this case; which you may review during regular business hours. However, no further notice will be provided to you should the application be amended. An appeal of the decision of the Planning Director may be initiated by the applicant or property owners within the required notice area who present competent substantial evidence at, or prior to, the Development Review Committee meeting on September 29, 2005 . An appeal must be filed, including an appeal fee, with the Planning Department within seven days of the date of the Development Order. Thank you for your interest in the City of Clearwater's development review process. You may access our Planning Department through the City's website: www.myclearwater.com. Sincerely yours, ? JA/ Jo n Schodtler Planner I Letter of Notification - FLS2005-08059 - 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD ARRIGO, LUANN M 3032- SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2120 BARRETT, JEROME E JR BARRETT, KAREN A 2981 CASTLE WOODS LN CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1811 OLIVER, ROBERT OLIVER, CHARLOTTE B 2982 CASTLE WOODS LN CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1810 TAUBE, MICHAEL S MENDELSON, MARTIN R 1826 OAK RIDGE RD SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3727 STROH, JAMES 1850 OAK RIDGE RD SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - TERMULO, A REGINALD TERMULO, HEIDI M 1802 OAK RIDGE RD SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3725 DEVORE, RONALD E DEVORE, DEBORAH M 210 HANCOCK CT SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3723 ROSENTHAL, STEVEN ROSENTHAL, JOYCE 221 14AN000K CT SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3723 OLD HARBOR PL HMOWN ASSN INC 2531 LANDMARK DR STE 206 CLEARWATER FL 33761 - 3928 ARLO, RICHARD J SARLO, KATHLEEN M 3036 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2120 FERNANDEZ, RICARDO L FERNANDEZ, GAIL 2987 CASTLE WOODS LN CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1811 INTERCIT INC 1585 S IOTH ST SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 4109 NUSSBAUM, BEAT H NUSSBAUM, BADIA 1817 OAK RIDGE RD SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3724 DIETZ, FROSTY K REVOCABLE TRUS DIETZ, FROSTY K THE 1803 OAK RIDGE RD SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3724 HUANG, MING QI YANG, LI JING 1804 OAK RIDGE RD SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3725 GALLAGHER, GUY M GALLAGHER, MICHELLE L 212 HANCOCK CT SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3723 OLD HARBOR PL HMOWN ASSN INC 2531 LANDMARK DR STE 206 CLEARWATER FL 33761 - 3928 OLD HARBOR PL HMOWN ASSN INC 2531 LANDMARK DR STE 206 CLEARWATER FL 33761 - 3928 HYDE, JERRY L 2975 COUNTY RD 193 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1807 NIETZOLD, RAYMOND G NIETZOLD, TINA M 2988 CASTLE WOODS LN CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1810 HAM, STEPHEN F HAM, TAMARA L 1824 OAK RIDGE RD SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3727 SHUBERT, ROBERT B SHUBERT, 0 JANE 1807 OAK RIDGE RD SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3724 KLEPES FREDERICK G KLEPES, CARMEN M 1801 OAK RIDGE RD SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3724 JACOBS, JACK JACOBS, JANE 1806 OAK RIDGE DR SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3725 MERRILL, GARY B MERRILL, CHRISTINE 214 HANCOCK CT SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 3723 OLD HARBOR PL HMOWN ASSN INC 2531 LANDMARK DR STE 206 CLEARWATER FL 33761 - 3928 OLD HARBOR PL HMOWN ASSN INC 2531 LANDMARK DR STE 206 CLEARWATER FL 33761 - 3928 Clearwater Neighborhood Assoc Doug Williams FLS2005-08059 PO Box 8204 1850 McMullen Bth Rd Clearwater, FL 33758 THOMPSON. PAUL OINELLAS COUNTY 4k I C PROP LTD THOMPSOI?, SARA 315 COURT ST ATTN BURKE & NICKEL PO BOX 1194 CLEARWATER FL 33756 - 5165 3336 E 32ND ST # 217 ROSWELL GA 30075 - 2823 TULSA OK 74135 - 4442 COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CTR INC CLAUSEN, DAVID STOBER, KEITH A 1850 N MCMULLEN BOOTH RD CLAUSEN, KATHY STOBER, ANA MARBELLA CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1814 1867 OAK FOREST DR S 1871 OAK FOREST DR E CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1817 BERRYMAN, MARY B WILLIAMS, ROY A STEWART, DAVID M 1849 OAK FOREST DR S WILLIAMS, IRENE L STEWART, JULIANA M CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 1843 OAK FOREST DR 1887 OAK FOREST DR E CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1817 TOPER, RAYMOND L HUFFMAN BARBARA A HENNEQUANT, ALDON L TOPER, TIFFANY D , 1879 OAK FOREST DR E HENNEQUANT, DIANE M 1883 OAK FOREST DR E CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1817 1875 OAK FOREST DR E CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1817 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1817 STOBER, KEITH A CLAUSEN, DAVID BREDAL, ERIK P STOBER, MARBELLA CLAUSEN, KATHLEEN BREDAL, VIBEKE B 1871 OAK FOREST DR E 1867 OAK FOREST DR S 1861 OAK FOREST DR S CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1817 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 COLLAZO, PEDRO J BERRYMAN, MARY B THE WILLIAMS, ROY COLLAZO, MARIA L 1849 OAK FOREST DRS WILLIAMS, IRENE L 1855 OAK FOREST DR S CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 1843 OAK FOREST DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 HARRIS, THEODORE C 1R SPURR, ROBERT T STATHIS, ANDREW W 1837 OAK FOREST DR S SPURR, TERESA B STATHIS, RENEE M CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 1831 OAK FOREST DR S 1825 OAK FOREST DR S CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 NARCISI, JOHN G LASELLE, SCOTT J BENEDICT, THERESA P NARCISI, ANNE P LASELLE, LINDA L 1807 OAK FOREST DR S 1819 OAK FOREST DR S 1813 OAK FOREST DRS CLEARWATER FL 33759 1821 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 CUTTING, FRED SJOQUIST, GREGORY A MASKELL, MELANIE A CUTTING, KATHRYN E SJOQUIST, JOAN M 1812 OAK FOREST DR W 1801 OAK FOREST DR S 1806 OAK FOREST DR W CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1823 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1821 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1823 BARTENOPE, ANTHONY M MERCURIS NIKO B BARTENOPE, ANN C 1824 OAK FOREST DR W MAYER, MARCUS 1818 OAK FOREST DR W CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1823 1832 OAK FOREST DR W CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1823 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1823 LAI, PATRICK K *G, ROBERTF OULLEN, WAYNE A LAI, PRISCILLA T 1846 OAK FOREST DR W PULLEN, CLAIRE L 4612'BRAD CT CLEARWATER FL 33759- 1823 1852 OAK FOREST DR W ROCKVILLE M D 20853 - CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1823 MACLAREN, PETER M THOMPSON, STACY DU BOIS, DEAN A 1858 OAK FOREST DR W THOMPSON, BRET DU BOIS, MARY BETH CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1823 1864 OAK FOREST DR W 1870 OAK FOREST DR W CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1823 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1823 CHOO-CHEW, REYNOLD C YUNKER, WARREN H CASCINO, CYNTHIA M CHOO-CHEW, JUMMATTIE C YUNKER, MARY H 1871 OAK FOREST DR W 1876 OAK FOREST DR W 1877 OAK FOREST DR W CLEAR WATER FL 33759 - 1824 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1823 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1824 SUKHRAM, PREMANAND TORREY, ARTHUR T SR MOZSGAI, MIRELLA SUKHRAM, DENAYSHAWARIE TORREY, JOAN K MOZSGAI, CSILLA 1865 OAK FOREST DR W 1859 OAK FOREST DR W 1853 OAK FOREST DR W CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1824 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1824 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1824 NAGY, MICHAEL D TOTH, BILL L SHUMAN, MARK 1847 OAK FOREST DR W TOTH, PHRYN M SHUMAN, LISA B CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1824 1841 OAK FOREST DR W 1833 OAK FOREST DR W CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1824 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1824 JOHNSON, CHESTER W DUMALA, ERIC M MASEY, RALPH J 1827 OAK FOREST DR W DUMALA, ROXANNE E MASEY, DARYL L CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1824 1821 OAK FOREST DR W 1830 OAK FOREST DR S CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1 824 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1820 BOROW, EDWARD MILETICH, JAMES M THE SKANTZE, CHERYL E BOROW, ROSELEE MILETICH, SHARON L THE 1846 FOREST WOOD DR 1836 FOREST WOOD DR 1840 FOREST WOOD DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1812 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1812 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1812 SLUSSER, SYLVIA I ZUCK, JOHN E WHITTINGHAM, ROY ZUCK, PATTI M WHITTINGHAM, ZERICA 1852 FOREST CLEARWATER WOOD DR DR - 1812 1858 FOREST WOOD DR 1864 FOREST WOOD DR FL 33759 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1812 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1812 CANTRELL, JEFF WHITE, GENE M PAYNE, MALCOLM E CANTRELL, BECKY WHITE, JENNETTE B PAYNE, LORRAINE Y 1870 FOREST WOOD DR 1876 FOREST WOOD DR 1877 FOREST WOOD DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1812 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1812 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1813 JOHNSON, CRAIG & MEGAN COREY, STEPHEN & JEANETTE LYONS, EDWARD J JR 1871 FOREST WOOD DR 1865 FOREST WOOD DR 1859 FOREST WOOD DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1813 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1813 CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1813 COLE, MONICA A 1853, FOREST WOOD DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1813 BELZER, ROBBIN 1876 OAK FOREST DR S CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1822 SOLIS, RAMON SOLIS, PATRICIA C 1886 OAK FOREST DR E CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1816 LARISON, GREGORY L LARISON, JOANN 2984 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2118 ABELOW, KATHERINE E 3033 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2121 COLE, RICHARD T COLE, LEIGHA A 301 ST CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - MACCHIARELLA, JOHN MACCHIARELLA, KATHERINE 3009 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2121 CLEARWATER, CITY OF PO BOX 4748 CLEARWATER FL 33758 - 4748 PERRY, FRAZER V PERRY, VIVEEN E 89 BIRCH ST CLOSTER NJ 07624 - 1702 WOXELL, STEPHEN S 1850 OAK FOREST DR S CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1822 SPENCE, CATRINA & TODD 1880 OAK FOREST DR E CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1816 MARANVILLE, DENNIS M MARANVILLE, BRENDA J 2972 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 21 18 BURBRIDGE, JIMMIE R BURBRIDGE, DONNA S 2977 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 21 19 DOOLIN, PHILIP N DOOLIN, ALICE S 3029 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2121 • KETTLE, ROBIN A 1860 OAK FOREST DR S CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1822 FOWLER, JEFFERY A FOWLER, CAROL A 1884 OAK FOREST DR E CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 1816 EGAN,SUZANNE 2978 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 21 18 ACKER, RANDALL S 2971 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2119 DESFOSSES, JOSEPH R DESFOSSES, LINDA K 3025 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2121 WHITE, DAVID R SCHMITT, EMIL J PO BOX 904 SCHMITT, SANDRA C SAFETY HARBOR FL 34695 - 0904 3013 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2121 MC NUTT, LINDA J 3005 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2121 THORNLOW, JOSEPHINE C THE 214 ORANGEWOOD LN LARGO FL 33770 - 4012 CAMPBELL, PATRICIA L 2631 BURNTFORK DR CLEARWATER FL 33761 - RUTKOWSKI, GARY A 2518 RANCHSIDE TER NEW PORT RICHEY FL 34655 - 3607 SMITH, DAVID M SMITH, DOROTHY L 3004 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2120 SMITH, KAREN C 3016 SAINT CROIX DR CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2120 MOON, JACOB DANN, ALAN HAAS, RICHARD DENNIS 3020 ST CROIX DR DANN, JANET HAAS, DOREEN MAE CLEARWATER FL 33759 - PO BOX 1461 3028 SAINT CROIX DR PALM HARBOR FL 34683 - CLEARWATER FL 33759 - 2120 Oagfo,t ?l2 Ll2££l2 9 9 Civil Engineering Land Planning Recycling Systems Ethanol Plants Process Engineering John Schodtler City of Clearwater Planning Department Dear John: 400 Douglas Avenue • Suite C • Dunedin, FL 34698 (727) 785-8844 FAX (727) 736-2953 2 September 2005 E-Mail: gaylormg@tampaboy.rr.com L I - 0 2 2005 C.1 Y(-"t.. I.JJO i Re: Countryside Christian Center FLS2005-08059 - 1850 McMullen Booth In answer to your request for submitting documents and per your letter dated August 26, 2005 we submit the following: 1) The proposed sanctuary will have a seating capacity of 2500. 2) The tree inventory by Samnik & Associates, LLC was submitted with the eight copies of Copley Design and Associates, Inc. landscape and irrigation plans. We are submitting an additional eight copies of the tree inventory and landscape plans. Please note that the landscape plans have tree inventory legend that references the Samnik inventory and shows the Samnik graphic inventory. 3) Eight landscape and irrigation plans were submitted although we are submitting an additional eight sets of landscape and irrigation plans. 4) Eight sets of building elevation and floor plans were submitted for reference. We are submitting an additional eight sets of building elevations and floor plan drawings. Note these plans are on 11 x 17 sheets. 5) Two copies of the traffic impact study by King Engineering were submitted directly to Mr. Bennett Elbo. We are submitting an additional two sets as requested signed and sealed by King Engineering. 6) Please find attached two parking demand studies by King Engineering that are signed and sealed. Thank you for your assistance and consideration. If there are any other issues regarding this submittal please let us know. qLASi er ely, RR BEAN P:\Countryside Christian Sanctuary - 03030\Schodder, John hr 9-2-05.wpd 4?2fDo z ?i2 g&WZ%in9 ouglas Avenue, Suite C Dunedin, FL 34698 (727) 785-8844 (Fax) 736-2953 E-Mail: gaylormg@tampabay.rr.com DATE: September 2, 2005 TO: Mr. John Schodtler City of Clearwater Planning Department Municipal Services Building 100 S. Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 (727) 562-4547 VIA: Hand Deliver RE: Countryside Christian Center Sanctuary Case No.: FLS2005-08059 tRIGINAL SEP 0 2 2035 ;1CS? CITY OF C.1j We are sending you X Attached Under Separate Cover the following items: Shop Drawings X . Prints -X-Plans Samples Specifications X Copy of Letter Change Order Other COPIES NO. DESCRIPTION 1 03030 Letter Regarding "Clarification Request " 8 sets 03030 Tree Inventory by: Samnik & Associates, LLC 8 sets 03030 8 Color Renderings with 8 Landscape Development Plans 8 sets 03030 First Floor Plan, Second Floor Plan & Front North Elevation 2 03030 Traffic Impact Study F2 1 03030 Parking Demand Study These are transmitted as checked below: .For approval Approved as submitted Resubmit copies for approval -X -For your use -Approved as noted -Submit _____copies for distribution X As requested ---,Returned for corrections Return corrected prints For review and comments Other For bids due marks: Signed: PACountryside Christian Sanctuary - 03030\Correspondence & LOT\Schodtier, John LOT 9-02-05.wpd Clearwater August 26, 2005 Gaylor Engineering 400 Douglas Avenue Ste C Dunedin, F134698 CIT-fir' OF CLIWRWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE: (727) 562-4567 FAX: (727) 562-4576 WWW.MYCLEARWATER.COM RE: FLS2005-08059 -- 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD -- Letter of Incompleteness Dear Gaylor Engineering : The Planning Staff has entered your application into the Department's filing system and assigned the case number: FLS2005-08059. After a preliminary review of the submitted documents, staff has determined that the application is Incomplete with the following comments. Clarify request. Application indicates. request is for 2,800 seat capacity and the plans indicate 2,500 seat capacity. Which is it? t,2: Could not locate Tree Inventory, as checked off on the application check list. .f3: Could not locate landscape plans as checked off on the application. Could not locate building elevations at checked off on the application. Provide two copies of the traffic impact study. 6.i Parking demand study does not indicate who performed the study. It is not signed by anyone. Section 4-202 of the Community Development Code states that if an application is deemed incomplete, the deficiencies of the application shall be specified by Staff. No further development review action shall be taken until the deficiencies are corrected and the application is deemed complete. Please resubmit by Monday, September 5, 2005 (12:00 noon). If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 727-562-4547 or John. Schodtler@myclearwater.com. Sincerely yours, Jo n Schodtler Planner I Letter o(fncornpleteness - FLS2005-08059 - 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD Aug. 26 2005 03:16PM YOUR LOGO CityOfClearwater-Plan Dept YOUR FAX NO. 727 562 4865 NO. OTHER FACSIMILE START TIME USAGE TIME MODE PAGES RESULT 01 97362953 Aug.26 03:15PM 00'39 SND 01 OK TO TURN OFF REPORT, PRESS 'MENU' #04. THEN SELECT OFF BY USING '+' OR FOR FAX ADVANTAGE ASSISTANCE, PLEASE CALL 1-800-HELP-FAX (435-7329). ?J Q z QD CD ku LL o mo? ,, U on P,awxaeP,?a, v sXVnX wawXDOXNaowewnm ]? PNDRD®OPb4m Ml D MVED ADRIIDNIL PMDr1D RlB n]0 E49TIN0 aiWeEDANDPAVLa PNi0X0•nDTOfKPF0iV8® I I I I I ` I I I I . I I t I `\ k I ; / / AFA MJ NI8F11 LpdDNICIdI ? ? / cnvww uE AVA air M[•. MIOp/t ? , ? Dffi ICLMpim / \ ? ROI LRC. I.Ck /? / ?N , bEE bXETTO POX I••eDBCNE CRT IF CLEMVATM FROM" _'TLiT 9 Iw 14 ?fgOPoB®?PNK1 MVPq i- F 9ED A9 • VND J1. PMPJam=PMI1TP NND o ?Ji` - _ `(? ?..?r I PpDPOBFDA l _ ?a1G I/ _ _? N? ` 9 1 YCNL0.IEN EOOTII NDMIS0.5W) EgSTN ?TBB ? ( ua?uuax sooTN nD?Elea wY) onaa.-o koa vun no.xolr .? von INR?2T) 1M• pt F: Z c. 0A m .. ?W ,...?.._e.??. E ..om.m.l...• Lrtam?wwna+ / / ? - N i COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER oA c °'m aXEE 4 a 10 .eD... Xv. «wY PROPOSED SANCTUARY WITH ADDITIONAL PARIONG SITE PLAN KEY SHEET 9 0 agoo ?/sue = 933 i /?., 4? z /3 -- I -?rJC? .. - -- - C i? ?i tJ a _ i - - --- - -- - In o. r ti ro rf Cut...L - _ -- -- ?r?9 t?l =: Ir Ph1 Exit N- Open T,,k List GEE GIS {I ct- view Add Dektc Print ®: _ .a79Oxi+?ra _ 1, y ?•. : i !'r ?t?.ti75 ,`«ttii. " Name:GAYLORENGINEERING Updated: 4/4!20063 JLP Atlas Address: 1860 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD tAastetm: FLS2005-08059 ; 266A PRJ#: FLS2006-08069 Pq Nan-COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CTR INC Zoning Description: Flexible Standard De'velopn-tent to construct a 22,659 square foot addition to an existing Place of";1=orship• including a parking reduction from one space for A-DD'- _ _•.__ _: F<_rr _- s : e • c? i t ?2i7C5 (,37`. -J J . Variance Planner: IVIS t ®G:,. c, r r- ; b :elk D 37f)-tt5n t3 ?:; Project Val j' - II ®i? .' F?rck8t3?-t915U{?eNJt'-?? Ui,...i _ F Code Value Description Last Updated _ By App Re 1 Completion Lett DRC Decist -OD 1998-01369 :OD1998-04261 -OD1998-04799 -OD2001-01045 -OD2001-06649 :LS2005.08059 AIS2001-00307 DCL-0008447 D CL-0008989 D CL-0010847 OCL-0014483 DCL-0017093 0 CL-0019445 O CL-0019497 SGN1999-08005 SGN2000-02002 T NI P2001-11018 T M P2002-10010 T Nt P2003-10008 T MP2 003-1 1011 T I,i P2 004-1 1 01 1 Tt•:1P2005-11003 T M P2005.11011 T M P2006-i 14i 120 1.1 0 .^•LC Hold c rde. 2661 P 0 HOLD Nck ..f„l„rrdE -- 1r•_c4T -.,1+ 185( 185(; 185( LegalDescription: 185( .F;' .` t '- tP, 1 - ,^•F i TH i•! 191 t.-- ?• 185( -1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD APR Flexible Standard 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD REC R : Ic c° cai, a. 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD EXE 'RECORD OHLV 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD OB _HP,I, .,.,;?S Tz',EE 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD OB CHI RI . i.> 1850 MCMULLENd BOOTH RD OB t?E IL S-L 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD OB PE 41L Sr:L ES .! 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD OB 1w r,E u L 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD OB R li Proiect N COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CHURCH LARRY MCD0NALD COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN LARRY MCD0NALD DANNY DOLLAR CHRISTMAS TREES COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CTR INC COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CTR INC COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS r Description: Hold w/overide L? ) View I EditTag for Parcel 04-29-16-00000-320-0500 I -_ 1 + Updated 411712007 By JAW Edrt !j Code HOLD Hold Level: Hold WlOverride OK Cancel a r Di ll C C ti i' Help 1 sa ow ase rea on: No Yes Notes sI 3 Sight lighting does not conforn-I to County Approved site plan All site lighting. existing and proposed shall be brought into Code conformiiance with full prorerty line Cut o6 fixtures. 1850 N MCMULLEN BOOTH RD RET POLE S^!t - 127.[ S: FT. i-, : EXISTING ELEC_Rt1- 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD CMP PC,L E S G!! - 127.:' (T0 E XIST HG ELECTRIC) 1850 MCMULLEN BCInTH RD CMP CHQIS71 S -PEE SALES -INCLUDES =C ; U -Ei 1850 MCMULLEN! BOOTH RD CMP t 'i; y; i_,; -EE. = c!i F+ C ,RISTLf?.STREE 'c.=LE t i12=•C2 -_ i2!2_';C2 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD Vol i r ,, L! REE E=LES i 1250h:1CN•1ULLEN! BOOTH RD Ct•AP C .. '€ R.L rliy DhLL C iRI_ G _ -„_ i _.°C_' - t. c[' 1850 MCI iULLEN! BOOTH RD CMP t =C ,X -= +- FCR C?PisT61AS TREE S- ES 11:2 C,0= - 12.2 C- 1850 MCMULLEN BOOTH RD CPAP ce^. a r _cr;icc cn Cur 1850 MCt•:tULLEN BOOTH RD CMP t' SAL _S 1 t: 1850MCI•IULLEN BOOTH RD Ct•AP :a-rs =:= EVE!,-; RCh Tags attached to this parcel COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS E CHRISTIAN CENTER COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS NATA CHRISTMAS TREES COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS DE CHRISTIAN CTR INC GAYLOR ENGINEERIN, 6E CHRISTIAN CENTER COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS i E CHRISTIAN CENTER COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS NATA CHRISTMAS TREES JOSEPH GRANATA LAR CHRISTMAS TREES DANNY DOLLAR ?R CHRISTMAS TREES DANNY DOLLAR LAR CHRISTMAS TREES DANNY DOLLAR 1ANIELS CONSTRUCTION CHARLES A DANIELS [R CHRISTMAS TREES DANNY DOLLAR I COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN! CENTER CGCO16918 COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER CGCO16918 i JOSEPH GRANATA CHRISTMAS TREE OL'L-00rj0406 ! DANNY DOLLAR CHRISTI•.1AS TREES OCL9701460 I DANNY DOLLAR CHRISTMAS TREES OCL9701460 { DANNY DOLLAR OCL9701460 ' DANNY DOLLAR CHRISTMAS TREES H A'.•:EISMAN j COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER CCnINTRYSIDE CHRIS DANNY DOLLAR CHRISTMAS TREES H A.'•A'EISI•:1.AN COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER COUNTRYSIDE CHRIS _.t .t 0 s I, n ?' arle lJ ' --------- --- I I I , ? ll --------- -- L l: sw ? i l:l_" ? g nx ? "° O+ - / nr nr i ? ( I I / Ir+o V V ? /? 4 m s II , -I ? -Q -??- N - of . _G ORIGINAL 9-v I I I I K I V I /? ~ ) ?.OIO RA7R lI w y 70rN ? \ ? ' ? 171710 V. tg04 IGPOI ROC?A SAI7Y?L'!9l/Ol'1011 M! .?_Aila ]?7s?i 49'rp?rpyp y7y RE"CEIVED NOV 0 8 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CINOMEARWATER ? bld:erfein av aw aYeuw,rna h' a+ ?M4 Saemtaaw ek aw 0arrm?+7 etl f H for ur f' ?yqM Mnxvti a lea ny t ar f +M aeumaa me na nlan er <ewm. U.ra >em ,. d1aa U. arw of I _ First Floor Plan ecn?e ine alq 6nhMf rrer M a r41/ ra 11r Oenn a aNn an aM Oa)ea4 b aoaan le fdi hp'1A N /y .a•ryy y ow.ft fM M iN Gr?Mr M !r OmMIN to rays nM4 aCWnp rwiaala3a Raq a fe. MMMY fU UI, ' Arq'r0 a af4r4 IR7rf Oi a?wl.?ua i1 pYTr ar as ®W Wba cngrnklda b IM k'Meef. mN? r??F U0 m CJ V uV .:7T On?C^7 U VL ? W OC= 0 a t m La d Q R0 V a I Rumor Prejact 0,?n I Oela: Aaava( 1. 2009 .A2 ? 0..V Wk $--k- ae I I 11 _I i mes1 LC?F UDNm ORIGINAL M Cd LL .uG 0?7 ag o? m 3 (1? Z = U Q? 0 NOV 081005 PUMNING DEPARTMENT ? `M VI I't,?iwylOF CL,ATER Ddiw AW&,s, T. 70M 4?A 11[rr 'CK A3 nN TP aha Qetanwfa prpra wa aref.aaa b ras anywy >I wwwiw.h a IM a.elwal•I b.+e1 M w eaaM1 eah ?eap.ef M ab Reba. an0 fM rerraef wlee M aeana wa awrae Of ar awn auvaax, w %?'r*elka ad .anon i ar,.am. arh AV aa.1 I.w etl asvamq a we peta, M. rasa a Ihela eenanmb eM aaa nM* ea rmwxe w.. ,nrwar ?+ are naenN naaa '9a AnakaMe r awn /pr.rMe Nd M tr uaM to Ift 11- r .1n a aaw R'ehat ra adfiher b Ib4 RR:a a r m*SNb. e Second Floor Plan xwel via°ar-0 01 sh, f , O _ arosaaM. rM oaan as a aa.ares ro Man nrea. "•'?'0 ?nrmu?s eawas a Ifn aaMlWII (el C-ft" rmi aw..A OS:q?eJS sn by dhoa meat b OybinoV b Wah aq ew #' a u.erew" b 1M MdnW. mNx rNI? 'Rom m 7N ? Q1m tm o U?cA m Rear (South) Elevation Right Side (West) Elevation Left Side (East) Elevation ORIGINAL NOV 0 8 2005 d . lJ ?FEE! 0 R°?`? ..e 0 m. o m Z U Q met mww- PIaieCt: 03411 Dale. Aogwt f, 1009 Front (North) Elevation Z Elevations tl,. r! VIA•-P-0• O d Mhw d -ft fm bhi 0/ IN MifCl b 11M Rerye/ em fMlawmis d IM .p.. SNir b ws wMM JIF r rnel M IW i1q'wl. aM LM McAiw! /A M lw?el IM a/M d IMr Mwv.Mt M sW MSM ! eMww h.. s rtl oem nwMdnyM tl fwfweq W emS?nA IM ems sV Of wrMM f0 rrM ttl1? '7 hrMfMCM MOMS, d !M •'eMw1S hJ M COW ebnr?wh fm eb'wfbs d" MhMn01 M fMMtlM •M fh hM't Yw OIM wsmawy d IM pawl. aM MtMM} am"4+ ?wlftlelhM a ahw Ok'Yewh rCe MI b -W of IM arm r tlAA m tlAlr'rejR11 b aeWbM fe IN ltlulr PMMIr e b wrrsMAr Of IMO PlOfltf a7 st IM1d q OP?'Otl i0 w91 rd Sie OIOOr OrRrMtlbn b h1 Mi/i10L A5 Sheet 9 of - J • orcec- Tnvetn+ov? ORIGINAL 1 Mi) VIP ? 1 Vl/ 4 k?J zf x RECEIVED Nov 0 8 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER J 1 0"-TN&;L,v Marian Copley, RLA Copley Design Associates, Inc. 1666 Laney Drive Palm Harbor, Florida 34683 ORIGINAL February 22, 2005 RE: Countryside Christian Church Dear Ms. Copley: ENGAGEMENT , As you requested, I completed my assignment on Monday, February 21, 2005. ASSIGNMENT My assignment was to inventory and assess each subject tree as annotated on a provided tree survey in accordance with the City of Clearwater's tree grade requirements, record each subject tree's grade onto the provided survey, provide a written report of inventory and tree assessment, and provide written specificity for tree protection and tree preservation. SUMMARY OPINION There are six (6) trees which are # 2 (highlighted in blue on the attached survey), one hundred fifty-seven (157) trees which are # 3 (highlighted in pink on the attached survey), and six (6) trees which are # 4 (highlighted in yellow on the attached survey). In addition, there are six (6) cabbage palms (Sabal palmetto) with fifteen feet.(15') or more of clear trunk and two (2) queen palms (Syagrus romanzoffiana) with no clear trunk. Following is an explanation of the rating system which was used: CITY OF CLEARWATER TREE RATING SYSTEM 0 Dead, require removal 1 Poor (nearly dead, hazardous), require removal 2 Below Average (declining, diseased, poor structure, potential hazard), require removal. 3 Average (worthy of preservation but has some minor problems, minor decline, tip die-back, minor inclusion) problems can be corrected. 4 Above Average (rather healthy tree with very minor problems) 5 Outstanding (very healthy) EIE 6 Specimen (unique in size, age, exceptional quality) ????? NOV 0 8 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER 1015 Michigan Avenue ? Palm Harbor, FL 34683 • (727) 786-8128 • (727) 789-1697 Fa, ORIGINAL Countryside Christian Church February 22, 2005 Author. Joseph R. Samnik Certified Arborist, #SO-0408 Certified - Bureau of Entomology, #7774 Page 2 Trees rated 0-2 should be removed because they pose a hazard, no replacement required, trees rated 3 are worthy of preservation but could be sacrificed. to allow additional preservation requirements for trees rated 4-6, trees rated 4-5 should receive most of the attention for preservation. Great efforts must be made to preserve these trees, and trees rated 6 (very rarely used) are trees that cannot be removed. PRESERVATION SPECIFICATIONS SCOPE OF WORK: all trees designated for preservation. OBJECTIVE: Eliminate failure potential of limbs and branches. Provide clearance for pedestrian and vehicular traffic. All work shall be performed in compliance with the following standards: ANSI A300, ANSI-Z133, and appropriate Federal, State of Florida, Pinellas County, and City of Clearwater regulations and to the specifications contained herein. SPECIFICATIONS: Crown Cleaning: All trees: Remove diseased and broken branches. Remove dead branches 2" in diameter or greater. Reduce limbs/branches with weak attachments by up to 30% of length. Root pruning: Any tree which will be impacted by construction within the critical root zone: Root pruning shall only be performed using equipment approved prior to commencement of work. Prune to a depth of 18" - 24". Back fill with site dirt from trench. Chemical Application: To all trees to be preserved, apply as a foliage spray solution, at highest labeled rates, the following compatible products: • F-45 (Equivalent: Manzate; Mancozeb) • Copper • Sequesterine Iron • Adjuvent Apply Cleary's and Subdue fungicides as a soil drench at the highest labeled rates to entire canopy area limits. Apply solution amount at non-irrigated levels. RECHYED NOV 0 8 2005 PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER ORIGINAL Countryside Christian Church February 22, 2005 Author. Joseph R. Samnik Certified Arborist, #SO-0408 Certifled - Bureau of Entomology, #7774 Page 3 Barricades: For all trees to be preserved, barricades shall be erected at the limits of each tree canopy using orange construction fencing. These tree barricades shall be built using 2' x 2' x 4' high wooden posts at 6' on center. No encroachment or trespass within tree barricades shall be permitted. Encroachment or trespass includes, but is not limited to foot traffic, vehicles, construction material, debris, excavated material, run-off of noxious materials in solution, or grade change. Mulch: Apply to all trees to be ,preserved. Recycled tree debris is acceptable. Pine bark is acceptable. Shredded cypress or similar is not acceptable. Apply mulch three to four inches in depth from within one foot of the tree trunk to the limits of the barricade. I affirm that my opinions have been made in total good faith, based on the facts presented during my inspection, with no coercion from others. I further affirm that I have no interest with the parties or people involved with this issue nor any interest with regard to the outcome. My responsibility to Copley Design Associates, Inc., Countryside Christian Church, the City of Clearwater, and Public Trust ends with this report. I have no responsibility to inspect or ensure any or all of the recommendations made in this report are executed, planned, or implemented. This report does not fall under the category of Privileged Information or Confidential Work Product. To simplify information in this report, it is sometimes necessary to use trade names of products. No endorsement is intended, nor is criticism implied of similar products which are not mentioned. ' Read all pesticide labels carefully before using. Remember, the label is the law. The pesticides recommended in this report must be applied by a State Certified Pesticide Operator licensed in lawns and ornamentals (L&O) holding a current identification card pursuant to Chapters 482 and 1055D of the Florida Statutes and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Please advise if I may be of further assistance to you in this matter. Sincerely, RECEYED J eph R. Samnik JRS/abh - D tN l_IiS ASSENCF- P ? O1D E NY NOV 0 8 2005 ptAHNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER 4r?o ItE-aod?9oW Q ®--- -- - - _ r . _cc EEy?lr F?LDD I? - DEC 2 PLANNING & t?EVELOPtaiENT" 71 J(?'nv? SERVICES CITY CAF CLEARWATFR C,*"rjzlrj loo mdmuftfl Bm?h Rmd roOmmgftwQ FbAdg 33762 [by Pau a G3ofl°? Tm sagvuoa Pete & Roes Tree Service mc. Hillsborough: 876-4444 • Pinellas: 586-5113 • Sarasota/Manatee: 951-2625 Fax: 813-876-5328 • www.prtree.com Countryside Christian Church 1850 McMullen Booth Road --, Clearwater, Florida 33759 Nov. 8, 2005 , i ! DEC 2 2005 i PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Re: Hazardous Tree Evaluation c n? 1,RWATER The site evaluated is to be used for parking. This report looked at 40 trees. • Most trees are in very good shape, however need dead wooding minimum • Three trees (11, 12 & 13) have been topped but will survive. • Three trees (9, 26 & 40) are in very bad shape and should be removed. • Eleven trees have been root pruned as shown on tree maps. All trees over drives or parking should be elevated 16' over drives and 8' over lawns. Each tree should be Class II pruned in the near future, and vines cut regularly. Attached is an explanation of the Tree Hazard Evaluation Form" defining all the "Code Words. If you have any further question I can be reached at 727-586- 5113, 813-876-4444 or bob@prtree.com Trees of concern were inspected for highly visible and patent signs or symptoms of stress or decline. Problems not apparent upon visual inspection cannot be and were not noted. All trees of concern should be monitored on an annual basis for new or deteriorating conditions. Thank ou for using Pete & Ron's Tree Service. KZ- Robert G. Seamon Certified Arborist i o?da?d?o va?;0 G3o00di: ? -i i VON fthingm"on Tmg Rtpoffu i Using the Hazard Rating EVALUATING AND USING HAZARD RATINGS The goal of the hazard evaluation process is to assess the danger and risk associated with a tree. By conducting a sys- tematic, thorough evaluation, the parts of the tree that are likely to fail are identified so that they can then be treated to reduce the hazard. For situations where appropriate treat- ments will be applied to all trees, there is no need to assign a hazard rating. The goals of the inspection are fulfilled solely by performing the inspection and recording observations on the EVALUATION FORM. This is most commonly the case for commercial arborists, although there may be cases when hazard ratings would be helpful for communicating the risk associated with individual trees to the client. For the most part, however, a numerical rating is of little value to a homeowner who simply wants a safe environment. In other cases, a manager may be confronted by multiple locations, evaluators and a large number of trees. For these situations, hazard ratings define the seriousness and extent of potential danger to site users. They assign a level of risk to activity in and around individual trees. For trees where the hazard rating is 3, there is less concernabout hazard an for trees with ratings of 12. Clearly, the greater the 0azard rating, the greater the risk associated with a tree. For municipal and utility arborists hazard ratings help prioritize work. Obviously, all the trees within a city or along hundreds of miles of right-of-way cannot receive a high level of care and treatment. There are simply too many trees and limited time and resources. What the manager can do, is to separate out those trees in greatest need of care and attend to them first. The hazard rating provides a way to do this. A typical approach would be to sort out the trees rated I I and 12, abate their hazards, then work down the scale as resources allow. Hazard ratings do not define "danger." Certainly trees with ratings of 12 may be considered more dangerous than those with ratings of 3. However, a tree does not become dangerous at- a given rating. Put another way, "danger" does not begin at a rating of S or 6 or 7. From our perspec- tive, assessing whether or not a tree is dangerous is largely dependent upon the context: Since hazard ratings consider the nature of the failure, its potential for injury and the target, ratings with the same lue will have different character. For example, a rating of ight result from these situations: (1) a large tree with a large trunk cavity but with a minor target (4 + 3 + 1), and DEC 22005 ?n PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CI, v OF CLEARWATER (2) long, small-diameter branches that are weak y attac9 d below a decayed heading cut in the crown of a tree over- hanging a heavily used area (I + 3 + 4). Since the compo- nents which made up the rating are different, treatment may differ as well. Thus, hazard ratings cannot strictly define a numerical line for action, between either removal and retention or treatment and no treatment. This must be an administrative decision, one made by owner and manager. In municipal situations, where an agency might manage a very large number of trees, there may be practical limits to the amount of work that can be undenaken and only the most severe and significant hazards may be addressed. Some level of risk will always be present when people live among trees. The decision of how much risk is tolerable remains with the owner and manager. ABATEMENT OPTIONS Abatement of hazard involves consideration of both tree and target. Choice of one or more abatement options is a function of the individual situation. There is a clear differ- ence among residential sites, parking lots, picnic areas and hiking trails as targets. Similarly, specimen trees and resid- ual forest stands are also different. Development of abatement options should be as system- atic as development of the ratings, considering the nature of the site, tree and target. Treatment of hazardous situations is framed by the nature of the individual situation. For example, trees in imminent danger of failure and targets that cannot be moved restrict the range of possible abate- ment options. Hazards which result from deadwood and hangers in the crown can be abated by crown clean prun- ing. Altematively, cable/bracing and/or reduction of end weight may be required when the most likely failure is that of large scaffolds. Where the hazard is posed by a tree in decline, there may be few abatement options and removal may be the only choice. The TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM includes comments on hazard abatement, including standard proce- dures of target removal, pruning, cable bracing and tree removal. In addition, the FORM considers the effect of abatement on adjacent trees. While simple pruning may not impact other trees in a group, removal may open up the group to an extent that increases hazard associated with the residual trees. Abatement actions must deal with all hazards in the tree, not just be most likely failure. Following the application of abatement procedures, a follow-up evaluation should oc- cur, for the hazard associated with a tree will have changed. A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas Tt3 HAZARD OVAL UAf1N FORM 2nd Edition C 1(ISTTIpt 0 HAZARD RATING: Wocation: dress: S ?.G v U'0-i? + + Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Owner3t,? public private ? unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Date: Inspector: iv?? SAM Needs further inspection Date of.last inspection: Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS V C,V V I N IAN Tree #: T_ Species: r DBH: ! # of trunks: ` 1 Height Spp?read: Form: C generally symmetric C minor asymmetry i`/major asymmetry ? stump sprout u stag-headed Crown class: . ? dominant O co-dominant intermediate ? suppressed Live crown ratio: Jv % Age class: ?young Posoemi-mature ? mature ? over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ? crown cleaned excessively thinned C toeeed ? crown raised ? pollarded ? crown reduced 11 flush cuts r cabled/braced ? none an/ multiple pruning events Approx. dares: Special Value: ? specimen ? heritage/historic ? wildlife `C unusual CI street tree ? screen shade C indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH ' al Foliage color. Wo o ? chlorotic ? necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: ormal Z Foliage de ? sparse Leaf size: ;= normal ? small Dieback? Y N i T O stakes ? wi ? curb/pavement _ a d I r V Annual shoot growth: 13 e xcellent ? a g w verage ? poor v LLL??? l? ? ? other ??ndwaod development ? excellent oor G none ? average ? - ' Vigor class: ? excellent average - fair 01 poor I DEC 2305 Major pests/diseases: I i_ I SITE CONDITIONS ()_&_IJEOtLUNMtN 1 Site Character. ? residence commercial C inous;r;al C park In open space ? natural ? ? d oodlandVoresCtl v SERVICES ATER d break - i Landscape type: ? parkway ? raised bed ? container J mound lawn ? n bv er shrub bor Irrigation: none ? adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? YO ? construction O soil aisturbance O grade change ? line clearing - site clearing dripline paved: 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0° .0 25%0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°.0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% line ? ac lk ? idic ? small volume ? disease center ? history of fail a a acted!? droughty ? saline Soil problems: ? drainage ? shallow ? O clay ? expansive -Z,_° aspect: 7slope rouu utilities ? traffic ? adjacent veg. ? hts ? signage ? line-of-sight ? view O overhead lines ? underg s: ? li ti Ob t g on ruc s letree ? belov+ canopy O above canopy ? recently exposed ?sin d g [llwindward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow g , : Exposure to wen Occurrence of snowfice storms never ? sgldom ? regularly Prevailing wind direction: TARGET Use Under Tree: ? building O parking traffic ? pedestrian ?:recreation andsc n target be may d? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: J occasional use ? intermittent use ? frequent use O constant use ? hardscape C1 small features ? utility lines The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS. Suspect root rot: 19 Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe .? moderate O low Undermined: O severe 01 moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted 11 root area: O severe ? moderate O low Potential for root failure: ? severe O moderate O low LEAN: __J_5- deg. from vertical [Id 'natural ? unnatural ? self-corrected Soil heaving: Yo Decay in plane of lean: Y © Roots broken Y © Soil cracking: Y ? Compounding factors: Lean severity: O severe Pmoderate O low nonum nrrrrTQ- i.X-4n nroeonro of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) HAZARD RATING Tree part most likely to fail: G Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Size of part: 1- <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (1545 cm): Inspection period: annual biannual other - 3 -18-30" (45-15 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) aiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use; L- _ + e) + 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective.part ? reduce end weight O crown clean O thin ? raise canopy O crown reduce ? restructure O shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further. O root crown D decay ? aerial O monitor dwoa? Remove tree: Y (nN Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: 0 none ? evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O goveming agency COMMENTS - Date: V. . A Photo raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas r TR M HAZARD FVAL UAVON FORM 2nd Edition G 121ST??tJ HAZARD RATING: r ?*dress: I + ? + i, ovation: Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Owner: public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Date: ?I Inspector: Need ?'Ju-ilhar _ ins io Date of last inspection: Dead a r- TRE£ CHARACTERISTICS t _- Tree #: ?_ Species: 0 2 DBH: 25 # of trunks: Height 75 1 Spread: L Form: C generally symmetric C minor asymmetry { Enajor asymmetry C3 stump sprout u stag-heade DEC Z 2005 PLANNING R DEVELOPMENT Crown class: ? dominant co-dominant ? intermediate G suppressed I SERVICES Live crown ratio: - -? % . Age class: O young' a ni-mature O mature ' ? over-mature/senescent C'- OP EARWATER Pruning history: ? crown cleaned -?r excessively thinned . toeeed O crown raised ? pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced O none E[.,MUltiple pruning events Approx. dares: ?? Special Value:. O specimen ? heritage/historic O wildlife E unusual O street tree ? screen 112 shade Q indigenous C protected by gov. agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. normal O chlorotic -7i necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: t/normal ? sparse Leaf size: normal ? small Annual shoot growth: ? excellent average ? poor Twig Dieback? Y edwood development: ? excellent Isd'average ? poor G none Vigor class: O excellent average - fair 0 poor Major pests/diseases: N Growth obstructions: O stakes ? wire/ties ? signs ? cables ? curb/pavement ? guards ? other SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence commercial C irous:real park ? o?? pee?n space ? natural O woodland\f o rest Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed O container mound [9 awn O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: Emi one ? adequate Einadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction O soil oisturbance O grade change ? line clearing = site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-500,16 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0% -.0-25:,16 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow ? com acted roughty O saline O alkaline ? acidic O small volume El disease center O history of fail rl;w O clay ? expansive 12 slope aspect: Obstructions: ? lights ? signage ? line-of-sight O view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities O traffic O adjacent veg. ? sed ('windward, canopy edge C1 area prone to windthrow Exposure to wind: O single tree ? below canopy O above canopy ? recently exp Prevailing wind direction: ?R I Occurrence of snowrice storms never O seldom C1 regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: ? building O parking 7 traffic ? pedestrian ? recreation Klanc loarget be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: ' /Occasional use O intermittent use O frequent use ? constant use ? hardscape Q small features ? utility lines The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. THEE UEFECI S ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y(9 Mush/room/conk/b cket present: Y© ID: Exposed roots: O severe I?`moderate ? low Undermined: O severe O moderate O low Buttress wounded: Y N When: Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % ?- Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate ow LFAN: deg. from vertical natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y I? Roots broken Y Soil cracking: Y (D Lean severity: O severe O moderate O low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = seven:, m = moderate, I = low) ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES DEFECT Poor taper Bow. sweep ? 7. Multiple attachments included bark Excessive end weiohl flow hive Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part 1 - <6".(15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-15445 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (c cm); 4 ( (75 ); cm) aiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating _ Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT -- Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape Inspect further. O root crown O decay 0 aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: 9 ??WOO? Remove tree: YO Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: ?9 ac?'none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS • V- A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in UrbanAreas T TR& HAZARD FVAL UAWN FORN 2nfJ- Edition cite/Address: location: s? MG V LLB Owner: public private ? unknown other Date: 11 /iLEfnspector: 00!n? Date'of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: 1+ 1 +?_ _ Failure + Size Potential of part + Target = Rating Hazard Rating Immediate action needed Needs furt her inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Trees V ";-!61 '- SiQeci, :: ?/? fj?? ? X56 6Vl@M LA• C? D?Ff: Qf t>lunks:. Height: _ EOL Spread: ?RS 01 Form: C generally symmetric ????C minor asymmetry emajor asymmetry ? stump sprout u stag-headed Crown class: ? dominant Bco-dominant ? intermediate Ci suppressed Live crown ratio: _;2&e % Ageclass: ? young 1 _: ?-mi-mature O mature O over-mature/senescent Pruning history: O crown cleaned 0 excessively thinned ! tossed ? crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced ? none =tiple pruning events Approx. da:zs: Special Value: G specimen ? heritage/historic O wildlife r- unusual ? street tree O screen L-shade O indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. normal ? chlorotic :j necrotic Eoicormics? Y N Foliage density: O normal O sparse Leaf size: ? ,orrnal ? small ?? poor Twig Dieback? Y Annual shoot growth: O excellent 9/average ? 01gor ndwood development ? excellen_t L verage O poor G none class: ? excellent average _ fair G poor Major pests/diseases: Growth obstructions: O stakes ? wire/ties N O curb/pavement rr O other SITE CONDITIONS ` aNNING & DEVELOPMENT Site Character. ? residence L/ commercial C inous;rfal C park ? open space O natural 0woodland\10f&t SERVJCES Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed ? container ? mound prawn C3 shrub border C %`nd break ^C , OF n,_EARWATER Irrigation: E none O adequate C inadequate C excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y C`1 D construction ? soil cis:3rbance ? grade change O line clearing - site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage ? shallow O co acted O droughty ? saline ? alkaline O acidic O small volume ? disease center O history of fail O clay ? expansive -!'slope L10 ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights O signage O line-of-sight ? view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities ? traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: ? single tree ? below canopy O above canopy ? recently exp sed IB'Frindward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: ?R Occurrence of snowAce storms never ? seldom ? regularly TARGET O recreation O landscape ? hardscape O small features O utility lines .traffic ?pedestrian UseUnderTree: Obuilding Oparking 10 target be moved? Y © Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: M Occasional use •O intermittent use j] frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. ? signs ? cables I Ktt Uti-tU I S ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y (D Mu11sh4roam/conk/b cket present: YO 10: Exposed roots: O evere .11derate O low Undermined: ? severe n moderate flow Rapt pruned: _tL e ow distance from trunk Root area affected: Ly % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe O moderate L?Ilow Potential for root failure: O severe L`lmoderate O low LEAN: deg. from vertical & natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N ? U Lean severity: O severe O moderate O low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN Poortaper Bow. sweep ? Codominantsiforks .Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weioht Cracks/splits Hangers Girdling Wounds/seam Decay cavity QL. UM Conks/mush rooms/bracket Bleedin /sap flow Loose/cracked bark Nesting holelbee hive Deadwood/stubs Borers/termites/ants Cankers/oalls/burls Previous failure HAZARD RATING o ntrr5 Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - seven: Tree part most likely to fail: ?-++ Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (1545 cm): inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45 75 cm); 4 ->30" (75 cm) aiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating =Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use: 2 + 2 + =_ _ ?_ 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape Inspect further. O root crown decay 0 aerial 0 monitor Cable/Brace: (o S'TV/"IA? Remove tree: -Y0 Replace? Y © Move target: Y (P Other. w 1 Effect on adjacent trees: 8none O evaluate Notification: O owner D manager O governing agency COMMENTS Ell Date: V. A Photo raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in UrbanAreas TR HAZARD FVAL UAMN FORM 2nd-' Edition StAddress:ocation: C giS TIA s ') / l? ? G V LL-? opvo Owner public private ? unknown other ??-? SM?? Date: << S Inspector: Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: 1+ k +? _ Z/ Failure + Size Potential of part + Target Rating Hazard Rating Immediate action needed Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree ff: 4 Species: 08H: ?_ # of trunks: ? Height: Spread: Form: C generally symmetric C minor asymmetry P??major asymmetry ? stump sprout v stag-headed Crown class: G dominant ? co-dominant ? intermediate suppressed Live crown ratio: % Age class: ? young k. sami-mature ? mature ? over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ? crown Ilea ed excessively thinned toeeed O crown raised ? pollarded ? crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced ? none multiple pruning events Approx. clates: ? Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife E unusual O street tree 0 screen L'shade 0indigenous G protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. OR ? chlorotic :j necrotic Epicarmics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: OR normal ? sparse Leaf size: normal ? small O stakes Owir ' sr ? signs _ O_cab_les Annual shoot growth: ? excellent 8 average ? poor Twig Oieback? Y N O curb/pavement 0 _ rdst i V r7 -'s dwood development: ? excellent C1 average or G none ? other Vigor class: ? excellent average stair n poor ( l ?? 9 Major pests/diseases: ? SITE CONDITIONS ANNING & DEVELOPMENT Site Character. ? residence commercial G industrial C park O?ope?n space ? natural Owoodlan- fit' SERVICES Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed ? container mound [! awn . O shrub border C wind break C'_ OF CLEARWATER Irrigation: 11/0 ne O adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y G) G construction O soil oisturbance O grade change O line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 0010 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N % dripline w/ fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage ? shallow ? compacted O droughty G saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume ? disease center O history of fail ? clay O expansive - slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights ? signagee ??? line-of-sight O view ? overhead lines O underground utilities O traffic ? adjacent veg. .0 Exposure to wind: O single tree f3below canopy O above canopy ? recently exp sed O windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms never O seldom ? regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: O building O parking _ traffic ? pedestrian ? recreation anc learget be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: 3'occasional use p intermittent use O frequent use O constant use O hardscape O small features ? utility lines The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. I KEE t)L to l b ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y (V Mushroom/conkfi cket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: C1 severe ?'moderate b low Undermined: ? severe Li moderate O low r, Root pruned: - distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe O moderate Ffow Potential for root failure: O severe ? moderate Plow LEAN. deg. from vertical atural O unnatural ? self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y ® Roots broken Y ?I Soil cracking: Y f' factors: Lean severity- 0severe oderate C3 low Compounding CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES DEFECT Poor taoer Bow. sweep Codominants forks I Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weight- T---Wounds/seam bark :e hive Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Sae of part: 1- <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm): Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) aiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: ( = 3 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use + + HAZARD ABATEMENT une: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin P O raise canopy O crown reduce ? restructure ? shape r Inspect further. O root crown D decay 0 aerial ? monitor Cable/Brace: VV Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: ? none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS E F- A Phota raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas r TR HAZARD E VA L UA 100N FORM 2nd Edition c. dress: ,? ^ C 1?IS T/fit tJ ocation: P050 Owner public private ? unknown other Date: << S Inspector: BQD? ? M0? Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: Z+ Z,+ Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree: Species: L14 t/i OCCg Spread: 1 DBH: # of trunks: __L_ Height _58_L_ Form: LL /generally symmetric C minor asymmetry . C major asymmetry ? stump sprout u stag-headed Crown class: ? doom/iinnant o-dominant ? intermediate ? suppressed Live crown ratio: . l?y .% Age class: ? young - s:mi-mature ? mature over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ? crown CZ1 nn d ?:? excessively thinned r tocced ? crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced C flush cuts r cabled/braced O none tYmultiple pruning events Approx. ?a:es: Special Value: O specimen [/heritage/historic ? wildlife E unusual O street tree O screen 0-shade ? indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH! Foliage color. normal ? chlorotic : i necrotic Epiiccormics? Y N Foliage density: normal ? sparse Leaf size: ;.formal ? small Annual shoot growth: O excellent average O poor wig Dieback? Y dwood development: O excellent O average !!poor G none Vigor class: O excellent = average - fair or Major pests/diseases: t F= SITE CONDITIONS PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Site Character. ? residence commercial C inoustral park ? open space ? natural O odlanddorest SERVICES . V awn OF CLEARWATER Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed El container J mound ®'(awn ? shrub border C wind break CI Irrigation: r?none ? adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction ? soil cisturbance ? grade change ? line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 0010 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ till soil: 0% .0-2? 6 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage ? shallow ? compacted ? droughty ? saline ? alkaline O acidic ? small volume ? disease center O history of fail O clay ? expansive _ slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights ? signage ? line-of-sight ? view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities ? traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: d single tree below canopy ? above canopy ? recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms ? never ? seldom O regularly TARGET U e Under Tree: ? building O parking • traffic u pedestrian ? recreation ? landscape ? hardscape ? small features ? utilitylines 'target be mov ? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: occasional use O intermittent use O frequent use ? constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. Growth obstructions: ? stakes ? wir N ? curb/pavement ? other i I r-L ULI Ct 10 ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y(9 Mushmom/conk ket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe -C moderate b low Undermined: O severe 01 moderate O low Root pruned: 21( distance from trunk Root area affected: -% Buttress wounded: Y .NW,hen/: Restricted root area: D severe O moderate Gifiw Potential for root failure: D severe D moderate Lwow LEAN: deg. from vertical atural D unnatural D self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Yo Roots brokenr-YLIJ Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors: Lean severity. O severe ? moderate ? low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poor taoer Bow. sweep ? attachments bark e end weiah Wou racked bark " hole/bee hive Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1- <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (1545 cm): Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) allure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = HazarRating Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use; + Z + = 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further. O root crown D decay 0 aerial D monitor PONIPWOOD Remove tree: Y (D Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: D none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS S um . E r.,. . A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban-Areas TR HAZARD E VA L UA *ON FORM 2nd Edition ?,r r dress: ,? ^ ?i ?IS TIC tJ „ovation: s a LLeNSWIM o Owner: public private ? unknown other Date: << S Inspector: ?'? S?M20 Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: z+ Z+ = s Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed - Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS d?K Tree: Species: DBH: 40 # of trunks: Height 5 spread: _78L . Form: C generally symmetric L"minor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprout 0 stag-headed Crown class: G dominant 0,6-dominant ? intermediate O suppressed Live crown ratio: .30 % Age class: ? young :mss:mi-mature ? mature O over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ? crown cleaned D, excessively thinned r tocced ? crown raised ? pollarded ? crown reduced ? flush cuts r cabled/braced O none C/ ultiple pruning events Approx. dares: Special Value: G specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife r unusual Q street tree ? screen •shade Q indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color i;d'normal ? chlorotic :1 necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: L normal ? sparse Leaf size: normal O small Annual shoot growth: ? excellent P average • ? poor Twig Dieback? Y 110dwood development ? excellent Oaverage (9 poor G none Vigor class: O excellent _ average 'Glair n poor Growth obstructions: hO stakes Owire e: N ? curb/pavement O other 4 'O:signs ? Cables , j? gads 2 2005 E? Major pests/diseases: L_ ---- PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT E- -Lb RVIU SITE CONDITIONS S Site Character. ? residence commercial G inoustr;al park ? open space ? natural ?woddlandVorest CI ; v OF CL EARWATER Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed O container ? mound &4n O shrub border C ti nd break Irrigation: none ? adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y(P ? construction O soil ois:urbance O grade change ? line clearing = site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0 .0-256 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°a 10-25% 25-50% 5075% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty O saline O alkaline O acidic ? small volume ? disease center O history of fail O clay ? expansive = slope aspect: Obstructions: ? lights O signage ??O line-of-sight ? view O overhead lines ? underground utilities 0 traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree tfa'below canopy O above canopy ? recently exposed O windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms 0 never ? seldom ? regularly TARGET e Under Tree: O building O parking -traffic O pedestrian ? recreation n landscape O hardscape Li small features target be m21ccasional ? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: use O intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. O utility lines I Htt Utt•t1; I b ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y Mushroom/Cank/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe •C moderate b low Undermined: O severe O moderate O low I Root pruned: ? distance from trunk Root area affected: ?% Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe O moderate L9?t6w Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate Bdow LEAN: _A..-. deg. from vertical d3 natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y Roots broken Y 10 Soil cracking: 7-0'-J^ 19 O?? ?v Lean severity. 0 severe moderate O low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poor taper Bow. sweep Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weiahl Bleedin /sap flow Loose/cracked bark Nesting hole/bee hive Cankers/oalls/burls l [-Previous failure HAZARD RATING OL SCA Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - seven: Tree part most likely to fail: - Size of part: 1 - <fi" (15 cm); 2.6-18" (15-45 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45 75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm j aiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating =Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use; Z 6 2 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use + HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean D thin O raise canopy O crown reduce D restructure O shape Inspect further. O root crown O decay 0 aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: Remove tree: Y © Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: t? none O evaluate Notification: Downer O manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS V- . A Photo raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban :Areas TR HAZARD EVALUAWNFORM2nd'Edlfio.n Site/Address: M ovation: Owner: public private ? unknown other Date: << /6-57 Inspector. Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: + _ + w Failure + Size Potential of part + Target = Rating Hazard Rating Immediate action needed Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS ,,% ?/ Tree #: d Species: ?? V? ?` DBH: S1 # of trunks: _ Height 4 spread: Form: C generally symmetric ??e4inor asymmetry C major asymmetry O stump sprout O stag-headed Crown class: O dominant f?'co-dominant O intermediate O suppressed Live crown ratio: ?_ % Age class: 0 young :? lami-mature O mature G aver-mature/senescent Pruning history: O crown cclleaV ?0 excessively thinned toeeed O crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts C cabled/braced O none. vmultiple pruning events Approx. • a:es: Special Value: O specimen ? heritage/historic O wildlife unusual Q street tree O screen [shade O indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE. HEALTH Foliage color normal Ochl/hlorotic i necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: O normal Ersparse Leaf size: normal O small Annual shoot growth: O excellent . O average e poor Twig Dieback? V dwood development O excellent i?average O poor G none I r r class: O excellent -,average . ?ir n poor Major pests/diseases: Growth obstructions: O stakes VA N O curb/pavemi 17t O other U/ F DEC 2065 SITE CONDITIONS Y? Site Character. O residence commercial C inoustral park O open space O natural woodlandvorest SERVICES ? ITY OF CLEARWATER wiad breC - Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed O container -; mound Iwn O shrub border Irrigation: none O adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y PJ O construction O soil cisturbance O grade change O fine clearing . site clearing % dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0% ',0-25=o 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty C saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay O expansive = slope aspect: Obstructions: O lights O signageO line-of-sight O view O overhead lines O underground utilities O traffic O adjacent veg. O Exposure to wind: Qsingle tree (elow canopy O above canopy O recently exposed 0 windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms O never O seldom O regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: O building 0 parking -traffic O pedestrian ? recreation O landscape O hardscape C3 small features tilarget be moovv d? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: V occasional use O intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. O utility lines I Ii?ttM-t?; I ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y (9 Mushroom/con®ket Present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe O moderate blow Undermined: O severe 0 moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: 5--% Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe O moderate 02 low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate Po'19 LEAN: deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors_ Lean severity: Osevere moderate O low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES PoortaDer Bow. sweep Included bark Excessive end m Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of pare 1 - <li" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (1545 CM); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) a iure Potential + Sae of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + ? + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape Inspect further, O root crown O decay 0 aerial 0 monitor Cable/Brace: DO Remove tree: Y0 Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O goveming agoncy Date: COMMENTS n u F." A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in UrbanAreas TRPF HAZARD FVAL UA #ON FORM 2nd Edition G 121STIP? Wdress: HAZARD RATING: ' ^ M G V (.t.eN + ovation: SO Cori, __L + t Failure + Size + Target _ Hazard Owner: public private ? unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Imme ' ctiea-Heeded Date: << S Inspector:- Needs "--R Date of last inspection: Itv„ Y Oead t e t L? TREE CHARACTERISTICS q QA Tree #: S Species: ? t ? DBH1Qrr# of trunks: 2 Height 3- Spread: V Form: C generally symmetric ??C minor asymmetry G?major asymmetry O stump sprout ? stag-headed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Crown class: O dominant Nlc//o-dominant O intermediate G suppressed SERVICES %;1-.' OF CLFARWATER Live crown ratio: 25 % Age class: W ng _ s=rni-mature O mature O over-maturelsenescent Pruning history: O_ crown cleaned ?J excessively thinned f-7, toeeed O crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced ? flush cuts r cabled/braced C?none `multiple pruning events Approx. ia:es: Special Value: G specimen ? heritage/historic O wildlife r unusual Q street tree ? screen shade ? indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. normal ? chlorotic ? necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: formal ? sparsee? Leaf size: ` normal O small O stakes ? wire/ties ? signs. ? cables Annual shoot growth: ? excellent 2/average O poor Twig Dieback? Y N O curb/pavement ? guards dwood development ? excellent t'_7average - O poor G none O other Vigor class: G excellent P/ex?average ...: fair Q poor Major pests/diseases: y I N E / SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence fg commercial C inoustr;al __ park O open space O natural O woodlandVorest Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed O container mound - [ awn O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: :R one ? adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil cis-,urbance O grade change ? line clearing . site clearing • dripline paved: 0°a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N • dripline w/ till soil: 001a 10-25=0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% • dripline grade lowered: 0a.a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% ` Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted ? droughty G saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay O expansive _ slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights ? signage ??O line-of-sight ? view ? overhead lines O underground utilities 0 traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree p elow canopy O above canopy ? recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowlice storms ? never ? seldom. O regularly TARGET e Under Tree: C1 building O parking traffic O pedestrian O recreation O landscape O hardscape ? small features O utility lines target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: m occasional use O intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. HLL _U Lftt; IS _ ROOT DEFECTS: - Suspect roof r At: Y N Mushroam/conklbracketyresent: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe -O moderate O low Undermined: O severe ? moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEAN. deg. from vertical.,. O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean:- Y .N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Lean severity: O severe O moderate O low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES - Poortaoer Bow. swee Codominantsiforks bark end flow d bark bee hive Previous failure HAZARD RATING 5 Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail. Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (1545 cm): Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) Faiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + 1- + - 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use NT HAZARD ABATTEEME t O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape Prune: O remove defective par Inspect further. O root crown O decay 0aerial monitor Cable/Brace: (T? U??-? ??10 Remove tree: Y(9 Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: P nlaone O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager 0 governing agency Date: COMMENTS V- . A Pho raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in UrbanAreas TRE HAZARD EVAL VAPOk FORM 2nd Edition dress: vocation. __1 205; Q Owner: public private unknown other Date: t1 S Inspector: Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: Failure + Size + Potential of part 1 = r7 Target = Hazard Rating Rating Eff 2 TREE CHARACTERISTICS tF 29 L Tree Species: V10, DEC t DBH:? # of trunks: Height Spread: Form: C generally symmetric C. minor asymmetry major asymmetry O stump sprout 0 stag-head d PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Crown class: G dominant O co-dominant intermediate O suppressed 'tTY Or- CtF 4RyyATER Live crown ratio: 20 % Age class: O young = semi-mature M'mature O over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ? crown cleaned r? excessively thinned r toeeed ? crown raised ? pollarded ? crown reduced O flush cuts C cabled/braced ? none Vultiple pruning events Approx. dares: ll Special Value: ? specimen O heritage/historic ? wildlife r --unusual Ostreet tree ? screen Chade D indigenous C :protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. O normal lorotic ch D necrotic . Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: ? normal ?? hl? ilsparse leaf size:. C normal O small ? stakes O wire/ties ? signs O cables Twig Dieback?o N r Annual shoot growth: ? excellent O average (N'poo ? curb/pavement ? guards Odwood development ? excellent '? ?, l? Oor G none O average O other , Vigor class: ? excellent -_ average ? --- fair or I V Major pests/diseases: _ SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence 12/commercial C inoustrial - park O open space ? natural Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed ? container mound tdlawnen El shrub border Irri ation ? none ? adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled ? woodland\f o rest C %vind break to Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil oisturbance O grade change ? line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0°a .0-25 a 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 01° 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage ? shallow O compacted ? droughty O saline ? alkaline O acidic .? small volume O disease center ? history of fail ? clay O expansive = slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights O signagee O line-of-sight O view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities ? traffic O adjacent veg. C1 Exposure to wind: O single tree P//below canopy ? above canopy O recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms O never O seldom ? regularly TARGET Under Tree: O building O parking o'traffic u pedestrian ? recreation ? landscape ? hardscape O small features ? utility lines 10, target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: 2 occasional use 0 intermittent use ? frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: A W 0 Suspect root rot: Y (D Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe •O moderate blow Undermined: O severe 01 moderate ? low W hen/: Root pruned: ?- r distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y (D ,. Restricted root area: O severe . O moderate p(ow Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate 9401 degrfrom Bnatural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N •vertical? , , Decay in plane of l4ar - Y. Nots broken Y 0 Soil cracking: Y L ' Vt''?A?v lean severity ? severe ? moderate ? low Compondir? factors -- { .f di t C t r !of individual defects and rate their severity (s = seven:, m = moderate, l =low) ese c e ca TSf CROWN DEFE . DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES I ,Poor taper - - -- ? • ?? =a Boer, swe' " Godominantsiforks .Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weiaht , I Wounds/seam I Loose/cracked bark Nestino hole/bee hip Bore :I v Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1 -low; 2 -medium; 3 -high; 4 -seven Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part 1 - <6'.(15 cm); 2 - 618" (15-45 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) ,allure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use; + ? + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ? remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean ? thin O raise canopy- O crown reduce O restructure O shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further. O root crown ? decay O aerial 0 monitor Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: Downer O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS E U-- A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TRLT ,HAZARD EVALUA*N FORM 2nd Edition C X215 ?I? HAZARD RATING: ' dress: o /1/1 c. v c,?e?? o __L + ( + notation: s Failure + Sae + Target = Hazard Owner. public private ? unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating S?M0 Immediate action needed Date: << 5 Inspector: NeedshMier rtspeRO-1.- - ---- Date of last inspection: Dead t1f; \ ? (f " ff? 0 ? /? l TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree P Species: / DBH: I-1 # of trunks: Height ?_ Spread:_ DEC 2 2Z ILL Form: t= generally symmetric C minor asymmetry Cp jor asymmetry ? stump sprout ? stag-headed Crown class: O dominant Leo-dominant ? intermediate ? suppressed ((( PLANNING R DEVELOPMENT - / SERVICES Live crown ratio: v % Age class: O young l4ami-mature O mature C] over mature/senescen CITY OF CLEARWATER Pruning history: O cro n cleaned ?0, excessively thinned = tocced O crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced none C multiple pruning events Approx. rates: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife E -unusual O street tree O screen • ade C indigenous C;protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. Pnormal O chnI rotic :C necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: O normal ; C7sparse Leaf $ize: C normal O small C1 stakes Owire/ties C3 signs O cables Annual shoot growth: O excellent O average 0?' Oor Twig Dieback? Y N O curb/pavement ? guards ledwood development: O excellent 7 average 112"Poor G none ? other Vigor class: O excellent _ average u Q poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence commercial G inoustr;al park ? open space O natural O woodland\forest Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed ? container ? mound I1?&n ? shrub border C %vind break Irrigation: one ? adequate C inadequate C excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction ? soil oiszurbance ? grade change ? line clearing = site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 001a 0-25516 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage ? shallow O compacted ? droughty C saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume ? disease center ? history of fail ? clay ? expansive = slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights O signage??O line-of-sight O view ? overhead lines O underground utilities Otraffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: ? single tree Plbelow canopy ? above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windth row Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms ? never O seldom ? regularly TARGET Under Tree: O building arget be moved? Y tP Occupancy: occasional use larking . traffic ? pedestrian O recreation O landscape ? hadscape O small features ? utility lines Can use be restricted? Y N 0 intermittent use ? frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root tot: YO Mushroom/conklb rcket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O se e ? moderate ? low Undermined: ? severe n moderate . O low Root pruned: _ distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe ? moderate ? low Potential for root failure: O severe ? moderate O low LEAN: deg. from vertical ? natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Dmay inpiane of lean: -Y N -Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Lean severity: O severe O moderate ? low ' Compoudd7r?g factors:' , ?. r r GROWN DF,F.ECTS:-la e!prese }ce of individual defects and ate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I =low) .:- 7 -QEFECT ROOT CROWN ' Poor faoer J:IU Bow. swee C, iiants/fork*- .Multiple attachments I chided bark -Excessive end weight Cracks/splits Hangers Girdling Wounds/seam Decav Cavity Conks/mush rooms/b racket Bleedin /sao flow Loose/cracked bark Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs Bore rs/termites/ants Cankers/oalls/burls Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail. Size of part: 1 - <fi" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm): Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45 75 cm); 4 - AT (75 cm) Failure Potential + Sae of Part + Target Rating _ Hazard Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT O crown reduce ? restructure ? shape Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean D thin O raise canopy Cable/Brace: Inspect further. O root crown O decay O aerial O monitor Remove tree: Y (3) Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. T Effect on adjacent trees: 9?6one O evaluate Notification: Downer O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS E V- . A Photo raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in UrbanAreas T TR HAZARD FVALUAON FORM 2nd Edition G ?2tS TIC ;re/Address: HAZARD RATING: G _ ,? n l ovation: s / f?, G VLLB Failure + Size + Target = Hazard l? Owner: public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Date: Inspector: Needs further inspection Date of last inspection: Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS , / G V S LA N 01641 Tree N: Species: n M, O^V` V DBH: ? # of trunks: Height U It Spread: - ? I Form: C generally symmetric C minor asymmetry C major asymmetry & Lump sprout Ci stag-headed Crown class: ? dominant l9 co-dominant ??//? intermediate ? suppressed Live crown ratio: % Age class: f?young = s:mi-mature ? mature ? over-mature/senescent Pruning history: ? crown cleaned ?? ; excessively thinned r tocced ? crown raised ? pollarded ? crown reduced ? flush cuts C cabled/??brace??d ? none ` multiple pruning events Approx. ia:es: ?0 t S?ls O WC) Special Value: O specimen ? heritage/historic ? wildlife r --unusual ? street tree . 0 screen L5t?ade ? indigenous C protected by gov. agency ALTH TREE HE // Foliage color l ormal ? chlorotic :? necrotic Epicormics?(D N Growth obstructions: __.// Leaf size: C normal (] small Foliage density: (2/normal ? sparse cellent Cfaverage ? poor Twig Dieback? Y N th ? l h ? stakes ? wire/ties ?s' ig tt11 C1 curb/pavement u' e : oot grow Annua s x dwood development ? excellent i?"average ? poor O none ? other Vi or class: ? excellent eaverage C fair n poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS PLANNING oEVELOpti?r Site Character. C3 residence 62/commercial G inaus;ral park ? open ??space ? natural ? woodl ndVorest SERVICES Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed ? container mound &ra'wn ? shrub border C win break CITY OF CIT /\RWA-T. Irrigation: ° none ? adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction ? soil aisturbance ? grade change . ? line clearing - site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-500,10 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N % dripline w/ till soil: 0010 .0 2? 0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% ' Soil problems: ? drainage ? shallow ? compacted ? droughty C saline ? alkaline ? acidic ? small volume ? disease center O history of fail ? clay ? expansive = slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights ? signage ? line-of-sight ? view Q overhead lines ? underground utilities ? traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree ? below canopy ? above canopy ? recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms O never ? seldom ? regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: ? building P'parking -traffic ? pedestrian ? recreation O landscape O hardscape ? small features ? utilitylines Orgetbemove ? Y (9 Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: occasional use ? intermittent use ? frequent use ? constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. I htt -Utf-tu l zi ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rat: Y6) Mushroom/conk/b cket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe •O moderate O low Undermined: O severe n moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEAN. - deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Lean severity: ? severe ? moderate O low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Bow. sweep Codominants forks Multiple attachments included bark Excessive end weigh' Wounds/seam ?- Blee in ae ow- • Loose/cracked',bark` Nestirfo- a #iive ' - '47Ca4rs1oatl rls Previous failure " HAZA1qD 'RrATWG Failure potential: ) • low; 2 - medium:3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: S¢e of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) aflure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + I + 1 = J 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure ? shape Inspect further. O root crown O decay O aerial []monitor Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS U.- . A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas TRLY HAZARD FVAL UA N FORM 2nd Edition Wdress: 64 )-Y51 Ve Chle-OTIN? ovation: 1?)G; Me- n_ L) (L_cFJ fcY'Z' 1 k( ? Owner: public private ? unknown other Date: 11 Inspector: Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: +-1 + 2 Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree C A Species: G I DBH: 1A _ # of trunks: 1 Height _ Spread: 16 Form: C generally symmetric Lnor asymmetry C major asymmetry O stump sprout u stag-headed Crown class: O ?doominant co-dominant O intermediate G suppressed Live crown ratio: t 1in % Age class:, O young _ sa-mi-mature O mature O over-mature/senescent Pruning history: O crown cleaned M, excessively thinned = toeeed O crown raised 0 _pollarded O crown reduced O 1 sh cu s ?abled/braced O none L;../Multiple pruning events Approx. dares: TO f eeo Special Value: O specimen O heritagethistoric O wildlife r- unusual O street tree O screen shade O indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH V icormics? Y N tic E G Growth obstructions: normal Foliage color. O chlorotic p necro Foliage density: t4 normal O sparse Leaf size: normal O small O stakes O wire/ties O sin Annual shoot growth: O excellent P average ? poor Twig Dieback? Y N g • 0 curb/pavement s O none O / O other ledwood development O excellent poor average l2 Vigor class: O excellent F/average fair O poor DEC 2 i Major pests/diseases: _i SITE CONDITIONS SERVICES Site Character. O residence (R/commercial G inaus:r;al park ? open space ? natural . O woodlan orest CITY OF CLFARWATFR. Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed O container G mound lawn O shrub border C %vind break Irrigation: one O adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil oiszurbance O grade change O line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ till soil: 0010 1.0-25=0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty O saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay O expansive = slope ° aspect: Obstructions: 0 lights O signagee //O line-of-sight 0 view O overhead lines O underground utilities O traffic O adjacent veg. O Exposure to wind: O single tree Llow canopy O above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms O never O seldom O regularly TARGET ??/ ULUnder Tree: O building ('/parking -traffic 0 pedestrian O recreation O landscape O hardscape O small features O utility lines urge( he moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: E10ccasional use O intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DLHC I'S ROOT DEFECTS: SusPect root rot: YO N Mushroom/conk/bket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe .O moderate O low Undermined: ? severe O moderate O low Root pruned: - distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEAN: deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors: Lean severity. O severe O moderate O low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT R0OT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poortaoer Bove. sweep Codominants/forks .Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weioht Co nksli?ushroomstbrac .. f ?tee.l?e•nlr?n only ( « . .LV VJGIAaI.?cY Vain S 1 ._1;~ -Nestitt?"Sitl11y1b??ltNe Previ Ttailure HAZARD-RATING : - Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe I CS Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm): 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45 75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm j siiure P tential + Size of Part + Target Rating =Hazard Rating Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use; + 1 + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further. O root crown D decay 0 aerial O monitor SIG I /s'1 5 u Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: Downer O manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS A U. . A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in.Urban Areas r TRA HAZARD EVAL. UAWN FORM 2nd Edition °'f dress: ? ?ISTj?'C1J vocation: s G V LLB .? Owner: public private ? unknown other ?? s?Ma? Date: << Inspector: Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING:-- + i Failure ze + Target = + S Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree #: _1! Species: G ?? O DBH: # of trunks: ____L- Height '5 Spread: Form: C generally symmetric P-06nor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprout u stag-headed Crown class: ? dominant Vco-dominant O intermediate O suppressed Live crown ratio: . lQ in v % Age class: Rung C sami-mature ? mature O over-mature/senescent Pruning history: O crown cleaned 0-1, excessively thinned r tocced O crown raised O p larded crown reduced O flush cuts C cabled/braced ? none multiple pruning events Approx. 1a:es: Special Value: O specimen ? heritage/historic O wildlife L unusual Q street tree ? screen O-shade D indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH! Foliage color. 4oormal O chlorotic D necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: n /normal O sparsee? Leaf size: normal O small Annual shoot growth: O excellent EYaverage ? poor Twig Dfeback? Y N ledwood development ??O excellent B'average ? poor G none Vigor class: ? excellent average -. fair n poor Major pests/diseases: DEC - 2 20 PLANNING .8. SITE CONDITIONS ?_?? SERVICES Site Character. ? residence L9Icommercial C inoustral C park O open space C3 natural Owoodl nd\forest CITY OF CLEARWATrR + Landscape type: O parkway O raised bed O container C mound P wn ? shrub border C wind break Irrigation: "n'?one O adequate C inadequate C excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil oiszurbance ? grade change ? line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0010 10-252,16 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage O shallow ? compacted O droughty ? saline O alkaline ? acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail ? clay ? expansive - slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights ? signaVbelowcanopy line-of-sight O view D overhead lines ? underground utilities O traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: ? single tree O above canopy ? recently exposed O windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms ? never . ? seldom O regularly TARGET U e Under Tree: ? building L ?arget he move Y N Occupancy: occasional use Growth obstructions: O stakes O wire/ties I O curb/pavement O gu rd; O other i larking -traffic O pedestrian O recreation ? landscape O hardscape O small features O utility lines Can use be restricted? Y N ? intermittent use O frequent use ? constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: ect root rot: Y N Mushroom/conk/bket present: Y N ID: Susp O Exposed roots: ? severe O moderate b low Undermined: ? severe n moderate ? tow Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root are ? severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe ? moderate ? low LEAN: ? deg. from vertical natural ? unnatural ? self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y 6) Roots broken Y (9 Soil cracking: Y N Lean severity, ? severe O moderate ? low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, l= low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poortaoer Bow. sweep Codominantsiforks Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weight i G flow hive HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1-low; 2 -medium; 3 -high; 4 -severe fiiee part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45 75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm j siiure Po ential + Size of Part + Target Rating _ Hazar,Rating Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + -I- + 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight ? crown clean O thin O raise canopy ? crown reduce O restructure O shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further. O root crown O decay O aerial ? monitor ??1?1 SVGIG? ?' Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: ? none O evaluate Notification: ? owner ? manager ? governing agmy Date: COMMENTS • V- A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in UrbanAreas r TRP HAZARD EVALUAVON FORM 2nd Edition Wress: vation: V LL Owner public private unknown other Date: 11/S Inspector: ???:r S 14400 Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: +I+ Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS K Tree: Species: t ?t DBH: A of trunks: Height Spread: Form: C generally symmetric N4/minor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprout 0 stag-headed Crown class: ? dominant co-dominant ? intermediate . G suppressed Live crown ratio: % Age class: . P(Oung = s-__rni-mature O mature G ove r-mature/sen e scent Pruning history: C1 crown cleaned r_-, excessively thinned = tocced ? crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced t/none `multiple pruning events Approx. dares: - Special Value: ? specimen ? heritage/historic D wildlife E unusual ? street tree O screen aade 0 indigenous C protected by gov agency Tner ur-AITiJ Foliage color. E'normal ? chlorotic : necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: normal O sparse Leaf size: normal ? small Annual shoot growth: O excellent average O poor Twig Dieback? Y N Odwood development ? excellent O average ? poor G none Vigor class: ? excellent Verage C fair ? poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS FE ANN fYLOPMEr,T Site Character. O residence ommercial G inaus;ral park ? open space ? natural O wootlandVorest SERVICES CITY OF CLFARWATEq Landscape type: O parkway V awn G raised bed O container mound L?l'fawn O shrub border C %vi . hrPak Irrigation: none O adequate C inadequate G excessive rJ trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N C} construction O soil oisturbance O grade change ? line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 00e 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 00,0 .0-2? 6 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% llow O compacted ? droughty ? saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center ? history of fail h ? s Soil problems: O drainage a O clay O expa nsive . slope ° aspect: ? Obstructions: ? lights ? signage ? line-of-sight ? view . ? overhead lines 0 underground utilities 0 traffic O adjacent veg. Exposure to wind: O single tree ? below canopy ? above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowtice storms O never O seldom . O regularly TARGET Under Tree: O building parking --,traffic ? pedestrian ? recreation ? landscape O hardscape O small features ? utilitylines ? Y ove target be m Can use be restricted? Y N V c, Occupancy: asional use C7 intermittent use O frequent use O constant use Growth obstructions: O stakes O wire/t ? curb/pavement O other k ? Y E I l -2 'nnr J 4 j ) The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: . . Mushroom/conk/b ket present: Y N ID: Suspect root rot: Y 9 Exposed roots: O severe -O moderate b low Undermined: O severe O moderate O low Root pruned: -__ distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEAN: _ deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Lean severity: O severe O moderate O low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS. Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poortaoer Codominantsiforks _Multiple attachments included bark Excessive end weiohWounds/seam Bleedin /saoflow r " Loose/cradked bark "" ? Nestin hole/bee hive- i Deadwood%stutis - --i ' Previous failure "HAZARD RATI N Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: - . Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm : , , Inspection period: • annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30' (75 cm) Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating r ll Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: a u e + I- + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape inspect further. O root crown O decay O aerial O monitor CableBrace: b??? OO ?1 r? Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS V- . A Pho aphic Guide to the Evaluation of rd Trees in Urban Areas r TRET HAZARD EVAL UAITON FORM 2nd Edition WARD RATING: 1 - 3 dress: - Map/Location Failure + Size + Target - Hazard Owner. public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Date: , r .Inspector ' S J?lt't Need p t1 n - Date of last inspection: Dead ?; ?( r... TREE CHARACTERISTICS ?? - "rt Tree #: Species: • DEC 2 2005 DBH: 2 If of trunks: Height -Av_ spread: Form: C generally symmetric L: minor asymmetry C major asymmetry O stump sprout u stag-head PLANNING 8 DEVELOPMENT Crown class: O dominant co-dominant O intermediate O suppressed SERVICES Lfve crown ratio: % Ageclass: Oyoung sami-mature O mature G over-mature/senesc CITY OF CLEARWATER ? - - ---- - Pruning history: O crown clean d C; excessively thinned = toeeed ? crown raised ? pollarded ? crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced 0 none multiple pruning events Approx. ya:es: Special Value: O specimen O heritagethistoric ? wildlife r unusual Q street tree O screen shade ? indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE ]HEALTH Foliage color. normal 0 Di necrotic Epicormics? Y?? NN Growth obstructions: ns O cables ? si /tf i C1 Foliage density: O normal .?... 12 /Sparse 12 hl?parse Leaf size; normal efsmall g es w re O stakes al shoot growth: ? e xcellent O average 9/oor Twig Dfeback? Y . N O curb/pavement C1 guards dwood development: O excellent ? average Koor G none O other Vigor class: O excellent - average it n poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence commercial C inouSUr,al - park O open space O natural 0 woodland\f o rest Landscape type: parkway G raised bed O container mound 995w n O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: Lm none O adequate C inadequate C excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil ais;Jrbance O grade change ? line clearing - site clearing dripline paved: 0010 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0°a t0-2520 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% 0i, 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% ~ %dripline grade lowered: Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty O saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay ? expansive - slope ° . aspect: Obstructions: O lights O signage O line-of-sight O view C3 overhead lines O underground utilities O traffic ? adjacent veg. O Exposure to wind: ? single tree ? below canopy O above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms O never O seldom ? regularly TARGET qa Under Tree: O buildin n target be mov ? Y f Occuoancv: occasional use parking ---:traffic O pedestrian D recreation O landscape O hardscape O small features O utilitylines Can use be restricted? Y N -O intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y0 Mushro am/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: ? severe -C moderate ? low Undermined: ? severe O moderate ? low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe 0 moderate ? low Potential for root failure: ? severe ? moderate ? low LEAN: 20 deg. from vertical natural O unnatural ? self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of teaR Y Roots broken Y WO Soil cracking: Y Compounding `factors: Lean severity: O severe O moderate ? low CROWN DEFECTS:- Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) -DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS Poortaoer 103M ILooornuianLb/IUIN., .Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weichl I Wounds/seam l Loose/cracked bark Nestino hole/bee hive RANCHES Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1-low; 2 -medium; 3 -high; 4 • severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (1545 cm): Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) raiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use; T + + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ? remove defective part O reduce end weight ? crown clean O thin ? raise canopy- O crown reduce ? restructure O shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further. O root crown O decay O aerial ? monitor ti???? doll Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: Downer D manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS 0 V-- A "o raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in UrbanAreas TR HAZARD EVALUAft FORM 2nd Edifian dress: ?? ?FS7'(LY51OE G}'t1?ISTl?N Location: ?s G n/' ?l (•C?? Owner: public private ? unknown other Date: << Inspector.: d? -? ??MV Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: __L_ +(+ Failure + Size + Target = . Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs p n Dead t E Y E TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree fir 169 Species: ?? ?, 11 DEC 2f105 OBH: # of trunks: Height 2 Spread: Form: C generally symmetric C minor asymmetry major asymmetry ? stump sprout u stag-headed PLANNING A DEVELOPMENT Crown class: O dominant co-dominant ? intermediate G suppressed SERVICES Live crown ratio: yv % Age class: IRfo"ung C semi-mature O mature ? over-mature/senescent CITY OF CLEARWATER Pruning history: ? crown cleaned ?0, excessively thinned = toeeed ? crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts G` cabled/braced O none ?ltiple pruning events Approx. dares: Special Value: O specimen ? heritage/historic. O wildlife r unusual O street tree Vcreen ?ahade C indigenous C protected by goy agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. Formal '? chlorotic ?.necrotic Epicarmics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: !S/normal- O sparse Lea%[ze; C normal O small O stakes ? wire/ties ? signs ? cables guards Odwood al shoot growth: ? excellent Baverage O poor Twig Dieback? Y N ? curb/pavement O development: ?? eexx ellent average O poor G none ? other Vigor class: ? excellent "average - fair 01 poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence IJ'bommercial C inoustrial - park ? open space ? natural O woodiand\forest landscape type: ? parkway C, raised bed O container mound awn ? shrub border C wind break Irrigation: 0 none ? adequate C inadequate C excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil oisturbance ? grade change ? line clearing - site clearing % dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N % dripline w/ till soil: 0010 ;0-25=0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% % dripline grade lowered: 0°.0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty O saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay ? expansive = slope aspect: Obstructions: ? lights O signage O line-of-sight O view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities O traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: ? single tree ? below canopy O above canopy O recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms O never ? seldom ? regularly TARGET 1 Under Tree: O building C target be mov ? Y N Occupancy: - occasional use traffic O pedestrian O recreation O landscape O hardscape [I small features O utility lines larking -. Can use be restricted? Y N b intermittent use ? frequent use ? constant use ' The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: ®ket Suspect root tot. Y N Mushro om/conk/b present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe •O moderate b low Undermined: O severe O moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe O m?od??erate ? low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LUN: .LSnnL deg. from vertical 1G}?fiatural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N y Decay irrplanerdf lean, Roots broken Y Soil cracking: Y N •, - , "'9 ! lean severity- O severe O moderate O low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFa TS: 1n?ic?te''reience of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEF T '?7?1 r ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poortaoer -Bow. sweeo_. T =!-'Q Codortimants forks,, - Multile attachments f '.h,-included bark Excessive end weight i/saD flow racked. bark hole/bee hive Bo r Previous failure HAZARD RATING NC Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 618" (15-45 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45 75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) aiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating =Hazard sting Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use'. + ? + I = 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT -- Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape I ect further. O root crown O decay D aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: Downer D manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS V. A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation of azard Trees in Urban Areas TRM HAZARD f VAL UA N FORM 2nd Edition dress: )I-rr(Ly7rl e C? l3T/AN Location: I 1?)S a - Owner: public private Lf? unknown other Date: it Inspector: Date of last inspection: - ? G. + __L + Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs ?' Dead tree, L? TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree #: { Species: 2 DBH: ? # of trunks. ___1- Height ? ??Spr??ead: 6 \, Form: C generally symmetric C minor asymmetry L_Ktalor asymmetry O stump sprout G stag-headed PLANNING & DEVELOPMEN Crown class: O dominant -dominant O intermediate O suppressed SERVICES Live crown ratio: .450 /o o Ageclass: Oyoung _ semi-mature O mature G over-mature/senescent CITY OF CLEARWATER Pruning history: ?` crown cleaned ? ;; excessively thinned = tocced O crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced ly'Fione `multiple pruning events Approx. cia:es: Spgcial Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife r unusual O street tree O screen Shade O indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. normal O chlorotic :i necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: Venormal O sparse Leaf size: normal ? small Annual shoot growth: O excellent- average O poor Twig Dteback? Y ledwood development: ? excellent average O poor ? none Vigor class: O excellent erage _• fair O poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITinmQ Growth obstructions: O stakes O wire/ties O signs N O curb/pavement O guards O other O cables Site Character. O residence commercial G inousmal park O open space O natural Owoodland\forest Landscape type: O Parkway G raised bed O container mound awn O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: Ltf 'n"one O adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil oisvirbance O grade change O line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 00 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0010 1,0-25=0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°0 10-25% 25-50% 5075% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty O saline ? alkaline O acidic ? small volume ? disease center ? history of fail O clay ? expansive = slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights O signage O line-of-sight ? view D overhead lines ? underground utilities 0 traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree. O below canopy O above canopy ? recently exposed O windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowlce storms O never O seldom ? regularly TARGET ' Under Tree: 0 building V Target be mov ? Y N Occuoancv: occasional use )arking = traffic ? pedestrian 0 recreation O landscape O hardscape Cl small features C] utility lines Can use be restricted? Y N b intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Y N ID: t : Suspect root rot: Y Mushmom/con racket presen Exposed roots: ? e -? moderate O low Undermined: ? severe s© I ?% B O moderate O low uttress wounded: Y N When: Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: Restricted root area: ? severe G moderate O low Potential for root failure: ? severe O moderate O low LEAN: deg. from vertical natural ? unnatural ? self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y Roots broken Y ® Soil cracking: Y Lean severity: ? severe ? moderate O low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DS BRANCHES DEFECT R00T CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOL Poortaoer Bow.swee 4 Cndnminants/forks -.Multiple attachments ~ Included bark Excessive end weioht racked bark hole/bee hive Borers/termites/ants Cankersloalls/burls Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <fi" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating re Potential + i Fa Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use; u i . 1 . 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use + + ABATEMENT HAZARD . Prune: O remove defective part ? reduce end weight ? crown clean O thin O raise canopy ? crown reduce ? restructure C3 shape ctt further. O root crown O decay O aerial ? monitor Innsppee Cable/Brace: ( ] Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none ? evaluate • owner D manager O governing agency Date: Notification: ? COMMENTS • F." A Pho raphic Guide to the Evaluation of azard Trees in UrbanAreas r TR HAZARD EVAL UA N FORM2nd?'Edifion dress: HAZARD RATING: 0 1( 5 ,vocation: Us ! +" G n/' V L??? Failure + Size + Target Hazard Owner: public private unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed SAM Date: Inspector. Needs furtrms ` Date of last inspection: Dead tree II i ZZ TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree: Species: ?l DBH: # of trunks: Height y spread: DEC 22005 Form: C generally symmetric?? Lt;4nor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprout O stag-headed Crown class: G dominant 1Erc//o-dominant ? intermediate O suppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPME? SERVICES Live crown ratio: _ _ % Age class: O young = s_mi mature ? mature O over-mature/senescent CITY OF CLEARWATER Pruning history: O crown cleave ? .° excessively thinned = tocced ? crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced ? flush cuts r cabled/braced ? none ultiple pruning events Approx. dares: Special Value:.. ? specimen ? heritage/historic ? wildlife r unusual O street tree ? screen IIade ? indigenous O protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color.. (!?/nnoorntai O chlorotic D necrotic' Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: Lf normal - ? sparse . Leaf size: i= normal ? small Annual shoot growth: Ve, 11 t, O average O poor Twig Dieback? Y •dwood development ; excellent O average O poor G none Vigor class: Yexcellent = average O fair G poor Major pests/diseases: N -Growth obstructions: ? stakes ? wire/ties ? signs O curb/pavement O guards ? other SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence commercial G inoustnal - park ? open space O natural ? woodland\forest Landscape type: C1 parkway G raised bed O container -J mound 9-15awn ? shrub border C wind break Irrigation: ;; none ? adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction ? soil oisvirbance ? grade change ? line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 0°a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ till soil: 0010 .0-25;6 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°4 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty ? saline ? alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail ? clay ? expansive = slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights O signage O line-of-sight ? view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities ? traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree O below canopy O above canopy ? recently exposed Cl windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms O never O seldom ? regularly TARGET Under Tree: ? building I 4 arget be mov d7 Y N Occuoancv: ;ccasional use parking _ traffic 0 pedestrian O recreation O landscape ? hardscape Q small features Can use be restricted? Y N O intermittent use O frequent use O constant use O cables O utility lines The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspectrootrot: Y© Mushroom/conk/bracket Present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe •O moderate O low Undermined: O severe . O moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate LEAN: deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors: Lean severity: CROWN DEFECTS:tIndicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = seven:, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLD; Poor taoer _ Bow.swee Codominantsiforks .Multi le attachments included bark Excessive end weioht Cracks/splits Hangers Girdling Wounds/seam Decav Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bra Bleedin /sao flow Loose/cracked bark Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs Borers/termites/ants When: Olow -? O severe O moderate O.low BRAN Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1-low; 2 -medium; 3 -high; 4 -severe Tree part most likely to fa Size of part: 1- <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45 75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) fsiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use; .2 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use + ? + 0-1 HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy_ O crown reduce O restructure O shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further.- O, root crown O decay O aerial O monitor Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. V v DO Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager []governing agency Date: COMMENTS 11 V- A Pho raphic Guide to the Evaluation of rd Trees in UrbanAreas r TR , HAZARD EVALUANN FORM 2nd Edition dress: 65 J"T19.15, ? CR1Q1STIAQ Location: I PS a M G MV L?- Owner: public private ? unknown other Date: « Inspector: ? -? S(9?MC)r? Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs n6pasiien Oeadt? F rE ? inn TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree: _ Species: P DBH: A of trunks: ___-L- Height _16 Spread: 2S DEC 2 2()05 Form: C generally symmetric minor asymmetry C major asymmetry O stump sprout 13 stag-headed Crown class: ? dominant W -o-dominant ? intermediate O suppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT a semi-mature ? mature ? over-mature/senescent SERVICES Live crown ratio: /o Age class: oung CITY OF CLEARWATER Pruning history: O cr n cleaned ?? excessively thinned locoed ? crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced lTUsi ccu?s T? catiie?/brace none C multiple pruning events Approx. =.es: Special Value: O specimen 'O heritage/historic ? wildlife E unusual O street tree O screen ?-shade ? indigenous G protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. IRnormal orotic chl O D necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage, density: O normal ?? lo? t?sparse Leaf size: :- normal ? small ? stakes 0wire/ties ? signs O cables Annual shoot growth: O e , xcellent O average boor Twig Dieback? Y N O curb/pavement ? guards *wood development O excellent ? average b /poor 0 none O other Vigor class: ? excellent I _ averages Z. fair ! or U G NG O y TI0 5ce Rwc) -4 10 YCry / Major pests/diseases: F0551 U cy T 1 SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence Nk/ommercial C inoustral park O open space ? natural ? woodland\forest Landscape type: O parkway O raised bed O container J mound gown ? shrub border C wind break Irrigation: L /-none O adequate C inadequate C excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction O soil cisturbance ? grade change O line clearing . site clearing % dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N % dripline w/ till soil: 0% .0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% % dripline grade towered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage ? shallow O compacted ? droughty O saline ? alkaline ? acidic ? small volume ? disease center ? history of fail ? clay ? expansive . slope ° aspect: Obstructions: 0 lights ? signage O line-of-sight ? view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities ? traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: ? single tree ? below canopy ? above canopy O recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowlice storms ? never ? seldom ? regularly TARGET I nder Tree: ? building e ?arget be moved Y N Occupancy: - ccasional use )arking -.traffic ? pedestrian ? recreation 0 landscape ? hardscape ? small features O utility lines Can use be restricted? Y N O intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe O moderate b low Undermined: severe O moderate O low Restricted distance from trunk Root area affected:% Buttress wounded: Y N When: / Root pruned: rnfrootana: O severe C3 moderate O low Potential for root failure: ? severe O moderate O low = deg. from vertical natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N LEAN: Decay in plane of lean: Y ; Roots broken Y f?l Soil cracking: Y Lean severity: O severe O moderate O low ' Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poor taper Codominants forks Multiple attachmen Included bark Excessive end weic Cracks/splits flow hive Previous failure HAZARD RATING s Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail:. Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30r' (75 cm) Faiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: -L + n + = S 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use - -_ HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce D restructure O shape Inspect further. O root crown O decay O aerial 0 monitor Cable/Brace: Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N . Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none Cl evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS • V. A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas r TR& HAZARD EVALUANON FORM2n'd"Edifion 5-te/Address: Avocation: . M G V L?-?? Owner public private Il-? unknown other Date: << 4AEnspector?-T S??MV Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: +(+ Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs f inspectitL Dead tr = 2 2 n n 1 TREE CHARACTERISTICS r7O Tree #: Species: 1 tA- L0 DBH: 19 # of trunks: 1 Height yt Spread: 2 Form: t= generally symmetric C minor asymmetry Major asymmetry ? stump sprout u stag-headed Crown class: ? dominant t?co-dominant ? intermediate O suppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT o p?.:ni-mature O mature G over-mature/senescent SERVICES Live crown ratio: /a Age class: Oyoung CITY ()r CLFARWATER Pruning history: ? cr wn cleaned ?(D excessively thinned = tocced ? crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced flush cuts` cabled/braced none C multiple pruning events Approx. ales: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife E unusual ?street tree creen O-shade D indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. ?? normal O chlorotic :3 necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: 8/normal ? sparse Leaf size: • normal ? small Annual shoot growth: exc;?excel ? average ? poor Twig Dfeback? Y N dwood development lent Oaverage ? poor G none Vi r class: t?fexcellent - average _ fair O poor Major pests/diseases: Growth obstructions: ? stakes O wire/ties O signs ? curb/pavement ? guards O other SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence ommercial C inaus:r;al -- park ? ozaw pace ? natural ? woodland\forest Landscape type: parkway G raised bed O container ? mound n O s hrub border C wind break Irrigation: one ? adequate C- inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction ? soil ois;Jrbance O grade change ? line clearing - site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50016 50-75% 75400% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75400% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage ? shallow ? compacted ? droughty ? saline ? alkaline O acidic ? small volume ? disease center O history of fail ? clay O expansive - slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights O signage ? line-of-sight ? view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities O traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree ? below canopy O above canopy ? recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms ? never O seldom ? regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: O building O parking _-traffic ? pedestrian ? recreation O landscape ? hardscape O smali features O utilitylines `arget be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: ? occasional use (3 intermittent use ? frequent use ? constant use ? cables The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. 1 nLL -ULrLIU I ay ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y ® Mushmom/conk/f7lEhket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe -O moderate b low Undermined: O severe 0 moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: -_ ' Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEAN: deg. from vertical natural r-1 unnatural ?seif-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay.tn.plane ot.lean: Y (F Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N l ?j(7 dVEV MI VE Lean severity: Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS. I"ndi6te presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ' ` ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLD; Bow. swee Codominantsifotks- .Multi `te attac'ftrtrents Included bark Excessive end weiaht nds/seam L cs/mushrooms/bracket din /sap flew se/cracked bark ino hole/bee hive O severe oderate O low CHES Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) aiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard ting Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: 1 + ( + 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune; O remove defective part O reduce end weight . O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape l aspect further. O root crown O decay O aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: (? OOb Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS \J Y,- A Pho aphic Guide to the Evaluation of .T TMT HAZARD EVALUAITO dress: G ei3 Tl,N( location: S a G U t?L(!3j ? Owner. public private unknown other Date: ti Inspector. AKQ Date of last inspection: rd Trees in Urban Areas N FORM 2nd Edition HAZARD RATING: j + 1 - + l ___ _ Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Dead e TREE CHARACTERISTICS pecies: r ..y?yy?? Tree #: 2 SIt - ? OBH: ---k-?- # of trunks: ' Height? Spread: ` WC 2 GYW ? stump sprout u stag-heade Form: C generally symmetric Pminor asymmetry C major asymmetry I J U! Crown class: O dominant o-dominant ????? intermediate O suppressed PLANNING & SERVICES DEVELOPMENT Live crown ratio: % Age class: ?lyoung =semi-mature C1 mature O over mature/senesce t CITY (-)F CLFARWATER Pruning history: O cr wn cleaned ?: excessively thinned f_` toeeed O crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced none r. multiple pruning events Approx. ?!zres: Special Value: G specimen O heritage/historic D wildlife r unusual Ostreet tree O screen 0-shade O indigenous C protected by gov. agency Irnrr uritITV Foliage color.L, „ normal O chhlorotic O necrotic Epicormics? Y N? Growth obstructions: Foliage density: O normal 3? 8-sparse ?? Leal size: ?orma U,'mail O stakes O wire/ties ? signs O cables e ual shoot growth: O excellent &-Sverage O poor Twig Dieback? Y N O curb/pavement O guards dwood development D excellent PMv rage ? poor G none O other Vigar class: ? excellent .average air poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence commercial G inoustral = park O open space O natural Owoodland\forest Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed O container mound Ekwn O shrub border C %vind break Irrigation: 5 none O adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil oisturbance O grade change O line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%. Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill sail: 0°a .0-25=0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% i dripline grade lowered: 0°° 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty O saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay O expansive - slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights O signage O line-of-sight O view O overhead.lines O underground utilities 0 traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree O below canopy O above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge O area prone to windth row Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowlce storms O never O seldom O regularly TARGET 0 Under Tree: O building target be moved? Y N Occupancy: O occasional use arking _ traffic O pedestrian D recreation O landscape O hardscape O small features O utilitylines Can use be restricted? Y N intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: ®. Suspect root rot: Y Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe •C moderate b low Undermined: O severe O moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: i Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEAN: deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N' •- ;Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors: Lean severity: U severe D moderate O low CROWN DEFE=.r-lndicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) nr:;crT _ ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Bow. Multiple attachments I Included bark Excessive end weight Cracks/s Hanaers /Sap flow ,acked bark hole/bee hive Cankers/galls/burls Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 618" (15-45 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) Rating siiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hara Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: rd + r + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape Ins ect further. O root crown D decay D aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: /000 K Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. .' Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: Downer D manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS s T.,. . A Pho raphic Guide to'the Evaluation of rd Trees in Urban Areas r TR HAZARD EVAL UAIC N FORM 2nd Edition ? 12157l?c N ?+?D dress: Ranrr? _ ?. a c. v c,c.er? + ovation: M ?o S Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Owner: public private ? unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating T Immediate action needed Date: << S Inspector: r? tt t1 /f r Nee Date of last inspection: rPn rPr"O?? ?G ? Its. 9 \1!! II TREE CHARACTERISTICS LI - " Tree Species: DEC 2 M% DBH: # of trunks: 1 Height ?u Spread: Form: C generally symmetric `,t?/minor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprout u stag-headel Crown class: O dominant O-dominant ? intermediate G suppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT ,,__,,// 5EFtVICES Live crown ratio: % Age class: C7young =semi mature O mature O over mature/senesce t -14TY , )F CLFARWATER Pruning history: O crown cleaned O excessively thinned = toeeed ? crown raised ? pollarded ? crown reduced-D fbifi cuts-l] cabled/braced one C multiple pruning events Approx. dares: Special value: D 'specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife f --unusual Ostreet tree ? screen UtKiade C indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. t?'normal O chlorotic : necrotic Epicormics? Y,,?? NN Growth obstructions: Foliage density: PTnormal O sparse OR Leaf size: normal CRImall O stakes 0wire/ties C1 signs O cables ^nnual shoot growth: ? excellent OR average ? poor Twig Dieback? Y N O curb/pavement O guards ledwood development O excellent average O poor - G none O other Vigor class: O excellent = average 19K r O poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence Kcommercial C inous;r;al - park ? open space O natural O woodlandVorest Landscape type: O parkway ? raised bed ? container - mound Q1awn O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: Nlfrone O adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction ? soil oisturbance ? grade change O line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0°0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% y Soil problems: O drainage ? shallow ? compacted ? droughty ? saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume ? disease center O history of fail O clay ? expansive = slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights O signage O line-of-sight 0 view O overhead lines O underground utilities ? traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree ? below canopy O above canopy ? recently exposed O windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowlice storms O never O seldom O regularly TARGET ' Under Tree: O building O parking -_:traffic O pedestrian D recreation O landscape O hardscape C small features O utilitylines target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occuoancv: ? occasional use O intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rat: Y ()N Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe •O moderate b low Undermined: O severe L-1 moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: r Restricted root area: O severe ? moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEAN: deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heavfhg: Y N . i ??tJecayinn p( nb'of-lean_-•Y -N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N w ??' Lean severity O severe O moderate O low Compounding factors:" ;`CROWN -DEFEC+Sf-Indisat sence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I =low) -ai:ECT, _ROOTCROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES -Bor?, swee ' Godorninantsiforks .Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weight - Cracks/splits Hangers Girdling Wounds/seam Decav Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleeding/sac) flow Loose/cracked bark Nestino hole/bee hive Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1 -low; 2 -medium; 3 -high; 4 -severe Tree part most likely to fail. Size of part: 1- <6" (15 cm), 2 - 6-18" (1545 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) allure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use: k- .+ ? + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy, O crown reduce O restructure O shape Inspect further. O root crown O decay O aerial D monitor Cable/Brace: QlnJ ODD Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. ? Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: Downer O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS V. . A Pho aphic Guide to the Evaluation of rd Trees in Urban Areas r TR9 HAZARD EVALUA77ON FORM 2nd Edition L dress: ocation: Owner: public private. L-'? unknown other ?-? StNt?r.? Date: << Inspector: Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: 03 ?+ { + - Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs e rn Dead t (?`?TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree #: Als Species: L4 Vie- C* K_ 40 2 S DEC 2 DBH: ---?-I--- # of trunks: ? Height: A_2- ?? ? i+?-- Form: C generally symmetric C. minor asymmetry C_ , ajor asymmetry ? stump sprout iJ stag-headed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Crown class: ? dominant r?Kco-dominant ? intermediate ? suppressed SERVICES Live crown ratio: o Ageclass: Oyoung mi-mature O mature O over-mature/senescent CITY ? )F CLF ARWATFR /a --- Pruning history: O crown cleaned ?F excessively thinned C toeeed O crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced ? flush cuts r cabled/braced O none L-?Multiple pruning events Approx. oases: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife r -unusual Q street tree O screen & ade D indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. Vormal ? chlorotic D necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: ? normal e sparse Leaf size: I normal l?small ? stakes O wire/ties ? signs O cables -" ual shoot growth: ? excellent 0/average ? poor Twig Dieback? Y N O curb/pavement ? guards 6 G none O O other dwood development: ? excellent poor average Vigor class: O excellent ?, !,leverage - fair 01 poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence commercial G inous;r;al - park ?.o.peen space. Q natural ? woodland\forest Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed O container _ mound 'L?tawn O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: Vnone ? adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction O soil oisvirbance ? grade change ? line clearing _ site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25%, 25-500,16 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N • dripline w/ till soil: 001a 10-25=6 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage O shallow ? compacted ? droughty ? saline ? alkaline O acidic O small volume ? disease center ? history of fail O clay ? expansive _ slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights O signage O line-of-sight O view C overhead lines ? underground utilities 0 traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree ? below canopy O above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms ? never O seldom ? regularly TARGET Under Tree: O building i target be moved? Y N Occupancy: O occasional use arking . traffic O pedestrian ? recreation O landscape O hadscape ? small features O utility lines Can use be restricted? Y N 0 intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rat: Y Mushmam/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe .O moderate O low Undermined: O severe O moderate O low Root pruned:_ distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: a Restricted root area: O severe C1 moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEAN: _? deg. from vertical % natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decaytr<plaF:ot leon: Y Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y 1 N? CompaurLding :factors: Lean severity. O severe O moderate O low f ' • i s Ir t i CROWN DEFECTS: Indicte presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I =low ?+ "nc?tl^T ?"?]r! I ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poor taoer Bow.-sweep- Multiple attachments I Included bark Excessive end weiaht Cracks/solits m flow hive Previous failure HAZARD RATING S Tree part most likely to fail: Failure potential: 1-low; 2 -medium; 3 -high; 4 -severe Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 618" (1545 cm); !nspection period: annual biannual other - 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) aiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + ? + . 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy. O crown reduce O restructure O shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further. O root crown O decay O aerial O monitor o EJ( "S"IP p ? W Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: Downer O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS V'' A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas r TRffl HAZARD EVALUA#ONFORM2nd''Ediflon 60) -1.5 ,? ^ G e213 T?P? tJ dress: Location: S / l? ? e- OAV Owner public private unknown other Date: << S Inspector: .,?'? SAM Date of last inspection: TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree N: _ Species: G/A W f f1 . D? DBH: # of trunks: ? /?Height: Spread: II metric L-(minor asymmetry C major asymmetry O stump sprout u stag-headed DEC 2 2005 Form.. t_ genera y sym PLANNING. ????// Crown class: O dominant 't"co-dominant O intermediate O suppressed & DEVELOPMENT , SERVICES Live crown ratio: ?0 % Age class: .O young -semi-mature O mature O over-mature/senescent CITY OF CLFARWATER Pruning history: O crown cleaned ?0- excessively thinned ? tocced O crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts C: cabled/braced O none t' multiple pruning events Approx. is:zs: ? Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife r unusual ? street tree 0 screen C?'shade D indigenous C protected by gov. agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. (!?no al Cl chlorotic D necrotic ' .Epicar nics? Y N Foliage density: normal O sparse Leaf size:. ` normal ? small Annual shoot growth: ft excellent' b average *O poor Twig Dieback? Y N ledwood development t excellent 7 average O poor G none Vigor class: ? excellent = average _7 fair ? poor Major pests/diseases: Growth obstructions: O stakes O wire/ties O signs ? cables O curb/pavement O guards O other SITE CONDITIONS - Site Character. O residence L?Tcommercial G inaus;rial park O open space O natural O woodlan0dest Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed O container mound IVawn O shrub border C %vind break Irrigation: 5 none O adequate C inadequate C excessive O trunk wettled Recent site, disturbance? Y N * O construction O soil ais::rrbance O grade change O line clearing _ site clearing % dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N % dripline w/ fill soil: 010 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% % dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25750% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty O saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay O expansive - slope 10 aspect: Obstructions: ? lights O signage ? line-of-sight ? view ? overhead lines O underground utilities O traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree O below canopy O above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowlice storms ? never O seldom O regularly TARGET W I Under Tree: 0 building 0 arget be moved? Y N Occupancy: O occasional use HAZARD RATING: L+(+ 3 Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating . Immediate action needed Needs sp n? Dead t r'1 parking traffic ? pedestrian O recreation O landscape O hardscape O small features O utility lines Can use be restricted? Y N d intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rat:. Y V Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe -O moderate b low Undermined: O severe O moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEAN: deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken . Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors: Lean severity: O severe O moderate O low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = seven:, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN . . TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Bow. sweep Codominants fOrks ..Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weight Cracks/s lits Hangers _ Girdling Wounds/seam Nesting holePoee hive Deadwood/stubs Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1- <6° (15 cm): 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm): Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18 3tl" (45 75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) aiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard-Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use: 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape O decay O aerial O monitor Ins ect further. O root crown Cable/Brace: n w Q O? Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Elfect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS • r,_ . A Pho raphic Guide to the Evaluation of rd Trees in Urban Areas TR HAZARD E VA L UAMON FORM 2nd Edition dress: rrZR J F.Tr -Y5I Ot cwip'IS T? N 0 CA(_A ff Location: ?s a M G M tJ t,f:??N (?f:a? Owner. public private ? unknown other Date: << Inspector. ? -? SSMC Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: V+ ? + 0 Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs f ec f Dead tr TREE CNARACTERISTlCS I U ? ? c es: S i pe Tree read: 3?- Sp ht ? Hei k 22 L Z X05 L g s: # of trun DBH: ,? ? Form: L generally symmetric C. minor asymmetry L?major asymmetry ? stump sprout I stag-headed _____j Crown class: CJ dominant. EQco-dominant ? intermediate O suppressed - PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Live crown ratio: % Age class: ?young ?mi-mature O mature O over-mature/senescent CITY OF CLEARWATER Pruning history: O cr wn cleaned ?r° excessively thinned = toeeed O crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced none r.-- multiple pruning events Approx. ? a:es: Special Value: ? specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife E unusual astreet tree O screen eshade O indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. normal ? chlorotic :O necrotic • Epicarmics? Y N Growth obstructions: Leaf size: E- normal O small ? stakes O wire/ties O signs ? cables Foliage density: Li normal C3 sparse / "anual shoot growth: ? excellent V average ? poor Twig Dieback? Y N ? curb/pavement 0 guards ? excellent &average ? poor G none ? other Odwood development re/average Vigor class: ? excellent _ fair n poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence commercial C iroustrial . park ? open space ? natural O woodland\forest Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed O container C mound B'lawn O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: vnone O adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction O soil aist:;rbance O grade change O line clearing - site clearing dripline paved: 0010 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0% ?0-25-',16 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% -L dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage ? shallow ? compacted ? droughty ? saline ? alkaline ? acidic ? small volume O disease center O history of fail ? clay ? expansive = slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights ? signage ? line-of-sight O view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities ? traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree . ? below canopy ? above canopy ? recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms ? never ?seldom ? regularly TARGET E a UnderTree: O building arget be moved? Y N Occupancy: ? occasional use larking _ traffic ? pedestrian O recreation tXlandscape ? hardscape O small features ? utilitylines Can use be restricted? Y N 0 intermittent use O frequent use ? constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y Q Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe •O moderate O low Undermined: O severe O moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: / Restricted root area: O severe O moderate 0 low Potential for root failure: Cl severe O moderate O low LEAN: "- deg. from vertical . O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y At Decay in plane of lean: ,Y Roots broken Y (D Soil cracking: Y 0 Lean severity: C] severe O moderate Olow Compounding factors: CROWN DEFEM'Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) r?WT t." ROOTCROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES I760rtaoer L • .Multiple attachments -Included bark Excessive end weight Cracks/splits Gi /Sag flow •acked bark hole/bee hive ; Bore Cankers/oalls/burls j Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1- low: 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1- <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm): 4 ->30" (75 cm) Hazard Rating =siiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use; + + _ 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape Inspect further. O root crown D decay 0 aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: ?!'?? CnJd O (? Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS 11 V A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation oI Trees in UrbanAreas r TRffl HAZARD EVAL UA* N FORM 2nd Edition 0 dress: ocation Owner: public private ? unknown other ?-? SM?? Date: << (S7 Inspector: Date of last inspection: TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree #: 20 .Species: DBH:_ # of trunks: ?14,ght• Spread: '- II mmetric C minor asymmetry O? ajor asymmetry O stump sprout u stag-headed DEC 2 2Z I? Form. t? genera y sy ? ' PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Crown.class: ?/dlom?inant B'co-dominant C3 intermediate Osuppressed SERVICES Live crown ratio: w % Age class: Oyoung -]?!-!z'a0'rni-mature O mature G over-mature/senescent CITY nF CLEARWATER Pruning history: ?? crown cleaned i? excessively thinned ? toeeed O crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced ? flush cuts r cabled/braced 12/none C multiple pruning events Approx. da:es: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife F -unusual O street tree 0 screen Pt ade ? indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE REAM Foliage color. L4ormal p chlorotic ? necrotic Epicorrnics? Y NN Growth obstructions: Foliage density: O normal parse Leaf sie: normal I??7small O stakes O wire/tfes O signs O cables annual shoot growth: O excellent C3 average (q/poor. Twig Dfeback? Y N ? curb/pavement O guards Odwood development: O excellent Ppoor G none 7 average O other , Vigor class: O excellent - average G fair >oor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character O residence El commercial C inous;r al = park O open space O natural ? woodland\forest Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed O container O mound I?Tawn O shrub border C %vind break Irrigation: `` //none O adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction O soil oisturbance ? grade change ? line clearing - site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50%a 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0% t0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% % dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage ? shallow O compacted O droughty O saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay O expansive - slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights O signage O line-of-sight O view O overhead lines O underground utilities O traffic O adjacent veg. O Exposure to wind: ? single tree ? below canopy O above canopy O recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowlice storms O never O seldom O regularly TARGET Under Tree: ? building l! warget be mov ? Y N Occuaancv: occasional use arking .traffic Cl pedestrian O recreation O landscape O hardscape O small features O utilitylines Can use be restricted? Y N 0 intermittent use O frequent use ? constant use HAZARD RATING: +S+ Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Need Dead t s ? ^ ? I n /? n Illl I The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS. Suspect root rat:/ YJ N Mushroom/conk/bracket piesent:D N ID: Exposed roots: O severe •O moderate §1/ow Undermined: O severe n moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: r 11 Restricted root area: O severe O moderate Lvj4w Potential for root failure: V evere O moderate O low LEAN: ? deg. from vertical 8 natural ? unnatural O self corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: N Roots broken ©N Soil cracking: Y Lean severity: Conipounding'factors:._ CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) TRUNSCAFFOLD; T OOT COWN F-!:EF::E -- Included back I Excessive end weight. Cracks/splits Hangers Girdling Wounds/seam - ' Decav Cavity Conks/tn ush rooms/b racket Bleeding/sap flow LoosUcracked bark Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs Bore rsAermites/ants Cankersigalls/buris Previous failure HAZARD RATING u Tree part most likely to fail. Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - seven: Size of part: 1- <6" (15 cm): 2 - 618" (15-45 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other _ 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) allure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating:. 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + 1? + _ 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: 9 /remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean Othin O raise canopy_ O crown reduce O restructure O shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further O roooot`crown D decay O aerial Qm; or Remove tree:0 N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent.trees: V hone O evaluate Notification: (3'owner O manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS 0 e11,evere O moderate O low B V' A "A HAZARD Guide to the Evaluation of rd HAZARD EVALUA ON TR dress: r-Q CIS -PA (vocation: G V LLB Owner public private unknown other ?-??M?? - Date: << Inspector: Date of last inspection: Trees in Urban Areas FORM 2nd Edition HAZARD RATINf? Failure + S'izee .. + Target Hazard Potential of part Rating .Rating Immediate action needed Needs fu ec Dead trei I r E CHARACTERISTICS TRE Tree Species: U VV n 4s' S S rread: Y F EC 2 2005 I L OBH: ` # of trunks: p Height: _ - O stump sprout v stag-headed mmetr r as f y y najo Form: L generally symmetric C. minor asymmetry L ??/ Crown class: O dominant 12 co-dominant O intermediate O suppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Live crown ratio: • % Age class: O young ?:ni-mature O mature O over-mature/senescent CITY OF CLEARWATER Pruning history: O cr wn cleaned r° excessively thinned O toeeed O crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced none O multiple pruning events Approx. nras: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife r_ unusual O street tree O screen Pt ade D indigenous G protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. normal 3 chlorotic D necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Leaf size: normal O small O stakes O Wre/tfes O signs O cables Foliage density: O normal gi, hl parsee . shoot growth: O excellent L7average O poor Twig Dieback? Y N O curb/pavement O guards development: O excellent average O poor G none O other *wood Vigor class: • O excellent -_ average _7 fair "or ge S h MaE OF ry"' Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence commercial C inoustr;al park O open space O natural Owoodiand\forest Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed O container O mound Lawn O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: none O adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil aist:rrbance O grade change O line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: .0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 001a ',0-25`o 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°a 10-25%. 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty O saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay O expansive - slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights O signage O line-of-sight O view O overhead lines O underground utilities O traffic O adjacent veg. O Exposure to wind: O single tree O below canopy O above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms O never O seldom O regularly TARGET nder Tree: O building ? argel be moved? Y N Occupancy: O occasional use parking -traffic O pedestrian O recreation O landscape O hardscape L1 small features O utility lines Can use be restricted? Y N 0 intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: . ® - Suspect root rot: Y ® Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N I0: Exposed roots: O severe -O moderate b low Undermined: b severe Root pruned: - distance from trunk Root area affected: % Restricted root area: O severe G moderate O low Potential for root failur I ? unnatural O self-corrected O moderate O low Buttress wounded: Y N When: e: ? severe O moderate O low LEAN: deg. from vertical O natura Sail heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Lean severity: Compounding factors: ' CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLD! Poortaoer Bow. sweep Codominantsiforks Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weioht I Wounds/seam flow d bark bee hive O severe b moderate O low BRANCHES Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium: 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (1545 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >3T (75 cm) Potential + Size of Part +Target Rating = Hazard Rating i r Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use: ai e u 2 /7 ?. 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy_ O crown reduce O restructure O shape Inspect further. O root crown Cl decay O aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: t OYO VJ 0y Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS • V-- A Pho aphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard TR HAZARD EVAL UA N dress: `i 1215 71? fvocation: LLB Owner: public private ? unknown other Date: II inspector: Date of last inspection: Trees in Urban Areas FORM 2nd Edition HAZARD RATING: _ I +--L+ I _ 5 Failure + Size + - Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs f ":Nwinspeetiefi Dead tr TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree ff: Z? Species: J DBH: Z2?' # of trunks: ---- L_. Height Spread: i DEC 2 2 Form: C generally symmetric C /minor asymmetry C major asymmetry O stump sprout u stag-headed Crown class: O dominant co-dominant. O intermediate O suppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Live crown ratio: % Age class: ? young sami-mature ? mature ? over-maturelsenescent CITY OF CLEARWATER Pruning history: O cr wn cleaned excessive) thinned = toeeed O crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced ? flush cuts cabledfbraced none r.-- multiple pruning events Approx. cla:es: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife [---unusual O street tree O screen hade (2-indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. ?n/ormal O chlorotic Di necrotic Epicarmics? Y N Foliage density: 'rf normal ? sparse Leaf size: normal O small ,? ual shoot growth: O excellent average ? poor Twig Dfeback? Y N al Wwood development ? excellent 1 ?average O poor G none Vigor class: O excellent = average !Moir G poor Major pests/diseases: Growth obstructions: O stakes ? wire/ties ? signs ? cables O curb/pavement O guards O other SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence commercial C inoustral -- park ? open space O natural ? woodland\forest Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed 01 container mound awn O shrub border C %vind break Irrigation: ?, none ? adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? constriction O soil cistsrbance ? grade change O line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 0010 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0°0 .025° 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% , dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%° Soil problems: O drainage ? shallow O compacted O droughty ? saline ? alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center ? history of fail O clay ? expansive = slope ° aspect: ---__- Obstructions: O lights O signage O line-of-sight O view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities ? traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree ? below canopy ? above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms O never O seldom ? regularly TARGET ?l Under Tree: D building target be moved? Y N Occupancy: J occasional use parking . traffic O pedestrian D recreation ? landscape ? hardscape ? small features O utility lines Can use be restricted? Y N O intermittent use ? frequent use ? constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: i Suspect root rot: Y(9 Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: O severe -? moderate b low Undermined: ? severe O moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe ? moderate ? low Potential for root failure: ? severe ? moderate C1 low LEAN: deg. from vertical ? natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Lean severity: Q severe ? moderate O low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS. Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I =low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Bow. Included bark Excessive end iushrooms/bracket /sao flow racked bark hole/bee hive l Bore rs/termites/ants Previous failure HAZARD RATING S Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1- <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) Faiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating _ Ha tting Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + ? + ? 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean ? thin O raise canopy O crown reduce ? restructure ? shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further. O root crow ? decay O aerial 0 monitor Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. 00106-1000 Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS • V, . A Phot aphic Guide to the Evaluation of rd Trees in UrbanAreas TMT HAZARD FVAL UA N FORM 2nd Edition dress: La ) 1215 TIIt N location: S a l f?, G t? (•t? COT-A Apvd7 Owner public private unknown other S Inspector: -? Date: 11 Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: ? - Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs Dead tr ^ 1 TREE CHARACTERISTICS U U t Tree #: Species: ( K__ j A ?_? Zoe ?? OBH:? # of trunks: Height Spread: DEC 2 2005 Form: C generally symmetric 177 minor asymmetry major asymmetry ? stump sprout I stag headed Crown class: G dominant l??co-dominant ? intermediate ? suppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Live crown ratio: % Age class:ung s_:ni-mature O mature (3 over-mature/senescent CITY OF CLFARWATER Pruning history: O?'c?rown cleaned ?.? excessively thinned = tocced O crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts C cabled/braced B'none `multiple pruning events Approx. da:es: ??? ? Special Value: ? specimen ? heritage/historic O wildlife r unusual ? street tree O screen f??hade ? indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color normal Q chlorotic J necrotic Epicarmics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: CD normal ? sparsee Leaf size: C normal ? small ? stakes O wire/ties O signs ? cables gee ? poor Twig Dieback? Y N shoot growth: O excellent 15 avera O curb/pavement ? guards development Wwood 'O excellent _ idaverage ? poor G none ? other Vigor class: ? excellent :!?/average C fair . ? poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence commercial C inous;ral - park ? open space ? natural ? woodland\forest Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed O container mound &awn O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: FG none ? adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction Cl soil oisturbance O grade change O line clearing - site. clearing dripline paved: 0010 10-25% 25-50016 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N driptine w/ fill soil: 00;0 .0-25"-I6 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% driptine grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage ? shallow O compacted ? droughty ? saline ? alkaline O acidic ? small volume O disease center ? history of fail O clay ? expansive - slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights ? signage ? line-of-sight O view ? overhead lines O underground utilities O traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree ? below canopy ? above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms ? never O seldom O regularly TARGET Wz nd er Tree: O building L rget be move Y N Occuoancv: occasional use larking -traffic ? pedestrian ? recreation O landscape ? hardscape L-1 small features ? utilitylines Can use be restricted? 'Y N ? intermittent use ? frequent use ? constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS. Suspect root rot: Y0 Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: ? severe -? moderate ? low Undermined: severe O moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: S% Buttress wounded: Y N When: ' Restricted root area: O severe O??mo??derate ? low Potential for root failure: ? severe ? moderate ? low LEAN: 1'? deg. from vertical Snatural [!?unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Soil cracking: Y N JC> Decay in plane of lean: Y Roots broken y 0 Pt t/t-, Lean severity: Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate prdsence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = seven:, m = moderate, I = tow) DEFECT Poortaoer Bove. sweep Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weight racked bark hole/bee hil TRUNK SCAFFOLDS evere ? moderate ? low ES Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1- <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm): Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) allure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard-Rating Target rating: 1 -occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + ? + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce ? restructure ? shape Inspect further. ? root crown O decay O aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. 1 C=7 37J Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS ?J V- . A Pho g raphic Guide to the Evaluation of rd Trees in Urban Areas r TR HAZARD EVAL UA ON FORM 2nd Edition dress: HAZARD RATING: ?IS 71? Oocation: S w Failure + Size + Target Hazard Owner public private ? unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating ytJ Immediate action needed Date: ?I S Inspector: - SAM Needs f e Date of last inspection: Dead tri -c"o",TWT TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree Species: ?????? DBH: # of trunks: ? Height. Spread: DEC 2 2005 Form: C generally symmetric C minor asymmetry CCxiajor asymmetry ? stump sprout u stag-headed Crown class: O dominant. L7co-dominant ? intermediate O suppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Live crown ratio: 030% Age class: O young V:e-rni-mature ? mature Dover-mature/senescent CITY-OF CLFARWATER Pruning history: ? crown cleaned r---: excessively thinned r toeeed ? crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced ? flush cuts C cabledibraced P'none C multiple pruning events Approx. dares: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic ? wildlife r unusual 0 street tree ? screen GUt'6de C indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color no al ? chlorotic : necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: normal ? sparse Leaf size: C normal ? small ? stakes O wirelties O signs •O cables Av ual shoot growth: ? excellent D verage ? poor Twig Dteback? Y. N G 6 0 curb/pavement ? guards ? other dwood development ? excellent none average O poor Vigor class: O excellent T/ average - fair n poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence l44mmercial C inoustrial C park ? open space ? natural O woodlanNorest Landscape type: ?/ O parkway G raised bed ? container O mound [dawn ? shrub border C %vind break Irrigation: ;knone ? adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil ois;urbance O grade change ? line clearing - site clearing dripline paved: 006 10-25% 25-50010 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0% 0-25;0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% % dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage ? shallow O compacted ? droughty ? saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume ? disease center ? history of fail O clay O expansive - slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights O signage O line-of-sight ,? view O overhead lines O underground utilities O traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: ? single tree O below canopy ? above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms O never . O seldom ? regularly TARGET Under Tree: ? building C target be move ? Y N Occunancv: occasional use 71 parking = traffic O pedestrian ? recreation O landscape O hardscape ? small features C] utility lines Can use be restricted? Y N 0 intermittent use ? frequent use ? constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y(9 Mushroom/cank/bracket present' Y N 10: Exposed roots: O severe -? moderate O low Undermined: O severe O moderate ? low Root pruned: - distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: t Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: ? severe O moderate O low LEAN. deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N ..? ?? allan: Y.I. y Roots broken. Y N Soil cracking: Y N I Lean severity: O severe ? moderate ? low 3 r--CF owff mcTs.-Idsrp2nTTes'ehce of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m - moderate, I = low) TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES ? ? • pEFECT f ( ROOT CROWN ruur td= Bow.swe° .._.. - z + I C00thinantsffottcs ? o 'Multi le attachments '-Included bark Girdling Wounds/seam Decav Cavi Conks/mushrooms/t Bleedin /sao flow Loose/cracked bark Nesting hole/bee hiv Deadwood/stubs Borers/termites/ants Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium: 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1- <6" (15 cm):2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm): inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm): 4 - >30' (75 cm) =siiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating =Hazard sting Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + ? + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise anopy_ O crown reduce ? restructure ? shape Inspect further. O root crown O decay 0 aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner 0 manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS- 9 V, . A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation of rd Trees in Urban Areas -TR HAZARD FVAL UA 7TN FORM2nd Edition dress: Iv ocation Owner public private unknown other 4r ??-? Date: << Inspector: Date of last inspection: HAZARD Rnnr1G: + l = Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Dead J Fer-? EL It I I V TREE CNA CTERISTICS Tree Species: U d OBH: # of trunks: Height -SAL SSpread: DEC 22005 U L Form: C generally symmetric C minor asymmetry ±-'Kajor asymmetry ? stump sprout v stag-headed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Crown class: G dominant co-dominant C3 intermediate G suppressed SERVICES ' v? % Age class: ng C semi-mature O mature C3 over-mature/senescent CITY OF CLFARWATER e7 C Live crown ratio: you Pruning history: Vone wn cleaned ?0, excessively thinned C toeeed ? crown raised ? pollarded ? crown reduced ? flush cuts r cabled/braced . C multiple pruning events Approx. 1a:es: Special Value: G specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife `C unusual ?street tree ? screen Ct?ade C indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color normal ?l chlorotic 71 necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: ? normal (/ /Sparse Leaf size: normal ? small Annual shoot growth: ? excellent L°laverage ? poor Twig Dieback? Y N Wood development ? excellent i average ? poor G none Vigor class: ? excellent Is/:averaga G fair Q poor Major pests/diseases: Growth obstructions: ? stakes ? wire/ties ? signs O curb/pavement ? guards ? other SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence 14 commercial C inous;ral park ? open space ? natural ? woodlandVorest Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed O container mound lawn ? shrub border C wind break Irrigation: Vnone ? adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction ? soil ois:urbance ? grade change O line clearing . site clearing % dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ till soil: 0°a ',0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage ? shallow ? compacted ? droughty ? saline ? alkaline ? acidic ? small volume ? disease center O history of fail O clay ? expansive . slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights ? signage ? line-of-sight ? view ? overhead lines O underground utilities ? traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: ? single tree ? below canopy ? above canopy ? recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms ? never ? seldom ? regularly TARGET ..?? lines Orgetbernoved? nder Tree: Cl build'mg Jparking . = traffic ? pedestrian ? recreation ? landscape ? hardscape ?small features ? utility Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: v occasional use b intermittent use O frequent use O constant use ? cables The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: ®. Suspect root rot: Y? Mushroomlconk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: ? severe •O moderate ? low Undermined: ? severe ? moderate ? low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: i Restricted root area: O severe O ;Zatural to O low Potential for root failure: O severe ? moderate ? low LEAN: 0 deg. from vertical ? unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y lD Roots broken Y (2) Soil cracking:' Y 0 ,Q IN d?? ?.? N Lean severity: 01 severe 0 moderate ? low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) -------------------- DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Bow. swe Multiple attachments I Included bark Excessive end weiaht flow hive Bore Previous failure HAZARD RATING NG Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (1545 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) Hazard Faiiure Potential + Size of Part +TargetRating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use; = + t _ 3 - frequent use; 4 -constant use + -- HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: ? remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean Othin O shape O raise canopy O crown reduce ? restructure monitor e Inspect further. O root crown D decay Cable/Brace: Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. 11// Effect on adjacent.trees: O none O evaluate Notification: Downer ? manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS • r,. . A Photo raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas lR • HAZARD EVAL UA RON FORM 2nd Edition A dress: C 03TIAQ cation: s? MG V (•t??-> (? Owner: public private ? unknown other Date: << S Inspector: two ? S Mc - Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: I I +_1+?= s ?S Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs zIhec.in Dead ti e TREE CBkRACTERISTICS IL. Tree #: Species:. L/ p DBH:t # of trunks: Height Atol Spread: DEC 25 Form: C generally symmetric L a inor asymmetry C major asymmetry O stump sprout u stag-headed Crown class: G dominant co-dominant ? intermediate O suppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Live crown ratio: _ % Age class: ? young. , _:mi-mature O mature ? over mature/senes SERVICES cant CITY OF CLFARWATER Pruning history: ? crowri clean 0' excessively thinned = toeeed ? crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced flusYi'buts_El cabled/braced O none ultiple pruning events Approx. ?a:es: Special Value: O specimen • O heritagelhistoric ? wildlife C unusual O street tree ? screen Pd/ade O indigenous C protected by gov. agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. . normal O chldrotic i necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: CJnormal ? sparse Leaf size: normal ? small Annual shoot growth: 0 excellent Maver`agee ? poor Twig Dieback? Y wood development: 0 excellent ?'average ? poor G none Vigor class: ? excellent _ average C fair G poor Major pests/diseases: N Growth obstructions: ? stakes ? wire/ties ? signs O curb/pavement ? guards O other SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence commercial C inous;r;al - park ? open space ? natural ? woodlandVorest Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed ? container - mound [0'lawn O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: ?Jnone O adequate C inadequate C excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N - O construction ? soil ais:urbance ? grade change O line clearing - site clearing % dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N % dripline w/ till soil: 001a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% % dripline grade lowered: 0°a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage O shallow O compacted ? droughty O saline O alkaline O acidic ? small volume ? disease center ? history of fail ? clay ? expansive = slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights O signage ? line-of-sight O view ? overhead lines O underground utilities ? traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree O below canopy ? above canopy ? recently exposed O windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms O never O seldom ? regularly TARGET Under Tree: 0 building I- farget be move v Y N Occupancy: occasional use 7-_ parking .traffic ? pedestrian O recreation O landscape ? hardscape 01 small features utility lines Can use be restricted? Y N d intermittent use O frequent use O constant use O cables The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS. Suspect root rot: Y. DN Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N 10: Exposed roots: O severe -O moderate O low Undermined: O severe n moderate O low Root pruned: - distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: i r Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate Cl low LEAN: deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors: Lean severity. O severe O moderate O low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = seven:, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poortaoer Bow. sweep, Codominantsiforks .Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weiaht I I Wounds/seam 1 Conks/mush room s/bracket Bleeding/sap flow Loose/cracked bark Nestina hole/bee hive rmites/ants ialls/burls Previous failure HAZARD RATING C ? Failure potential: 1 -low; 2 -medium; 3 -high; 4 -severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1- <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (1545 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) aiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazar sting Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use; + ? + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape ther. O root ccrown O decay 0 aerial O monitor ect fur nsp Cable,/Brace: ? ? Remove tree: Y ) Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: Downer O manager O goveming aggncy Date: COMMENTS n r.. . A Phot aphic Guide to the Evaluation of r -TRHAZARD FVAL UA dress: )1,-3-T17rI ?i 1eIST1 J* 1'. dr? l ovation: l ?S a bl e. n? U LLB DQZM Oeipvo -- Owner public private ? unknown other Date: ?I S Inspector: Date of last inspection: rd Trees in UrbanAreas N FORM'2nd Edition HAZARD RATING: Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs ft sec - Oead tre TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree if:,L Species: U ? ? DBH:# of trunks: Height Spread: ad: DEC 2 2005. Form: L generally symmetric Lr4nor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprout tJ stag-headed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Crown class: O dominant 13/co-dominant ? interm?edi/atg ? suppressed SERVICES Live crown ratio: /a 0 Ageclass: Oyoun9 :_ se•-ni-mature ? mature C3 over-mature/senescent CITY (")P CLFARWATER -- -- !! excessively thinned = tocced O crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced Pruning history: O crown =.1, ? none iple pruning events Approx. iazes: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historid D wildlife r_- unusual Q street tree O screen • ade ? indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH ormal Foliage color. n ? chlorotic :j necrotic Epicarmics? Y N Growth obstructions: // Foliage density: 13normal ? sparse Leaf size: C normal ? small O stakes ? wire/ties ? signs ? cables al shoot growth: ? excellent a verage ? poor Twig Dieback? Y N O curb/pavement O guards development: 6dwood elle nt V average O poor . C none or O other Vigor class: ? excellent rage a fair po Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS - Site Character. ? residence commercial C inoustnal park ? open space ? natural ?woodland\forest Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed O container ? mound Cl tdwn ? shrub border C wind break Irrigation: - Li none ? adequate C inadequate G excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y Pl O construction ? soil aist:rrbance ? grade change O line clearing . site clearing • dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50116 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ till soil: 0% .0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% t Soil problems: O drainage O shallow ? compacted O droughty O saline O alkaline O acidic ? small volume O disease center O history of fail ? clay ? expansive - slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights O signage O line-of-sight ? view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities O traffic f] adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree ? below canopy ? above canopy ? recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms ? never O seldom O regularly TARGET J 4 Under Tree: ? building l *target be m7occ ? Y N Occupancy: si onal use arking _ traffic O pedestrian ? recreation ? landscape O hardscape 01 small features ? utilitylines Can use be restricted? Y N p intermittent use ? frequent use El constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. A TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y LV Mushmam/conk/bracket present Y N 10: Exposed roots: O severe •O moderate O low Undermined: O severe Li moderate O low Root pruned: - distance from trunk Root area aff ected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: T Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEAN: deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors: Lean severity: O severe O moderate O low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poor taper Boar. sweep Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weiahl flow d bark bee hive Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high: 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other - 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 ->30" (75 cm) Hazard Rating re Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating aii Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use; u + ? + _ 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape 1 ect further. O root crown O decay 0 aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. 11..77 ??VV Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS 9' V. A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Ulzard Trees in Urban Areas r TRP HAZARD FVAL UA N FORM 2nd Edition Ldress: ocation: ,? n ?. '1215T?It N opw Owner public private unknown other Date: ?I s? Inspector:?'? 20 Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: ___++ ?-_ - Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Dead r e TREE CHARACTERISTICS Tree #: Species: U t4i 94`?_ 'S .. DBH: # of trunks: Height Spread: OEC 2 2005 Form: &/generally symmetric . ,C:? minor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprout u stag-headed Crown class: O dominant Itd?co-dominant O intermediate O suppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT semi-mature Ped?mature Gover-mature/senescent SERVICES Live crown ratio: - 60 % Age class: ? young CITY OF. CLEARWATER Pruning history: O c wn cleaned ?0 excessively thinned toeeed ? crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduce .-O flush'cuts-r cabled/braced none C multiple pruning events Approx. ?a:es: Special Value: ? specimen ? heritage/historic ? wildlife r unusual O street tree ? screen shade O indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. El/normal normal ? chlorotic D necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage.density. O sparse Leaf size: normal ? small -annual shoot growth: excelle t O average ? poor Twig Dieback? Y 101dwood devela ent ?J excellent 7 average ? poor G none Vigor class: excellent = average _ fair G poor Major pests/diseases: Growth obstructions: O stakes O wire/ties ? signs ? cables N O curb/pavement O guards ? other SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence commercial C inous;ral :: park ? open space ? natural ? woodlahd\forest Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed O container mound % awn ? shrub border C wind break Irrigation: Vinone ? adequate C inadequate C excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil cis;:.irbance ? grade change ? line clearing . site clearing % dripline paved: 000 10-25% 25-500,16 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N % dripline w/ fill soil: 0°0 .0-25=0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% % dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage O shallow ? compacted O droughty O saline O alkaline Cl acidic O small volume O disease center ? history of fail O clay O expansive . slope ° aspect: y- Obstructions: ? lights ? signage ? line-of-sight O view ? overhead lines ? underground utilities ? traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: b single tree O below canopy O above canopy ? recently exposed ? windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms ? never ? seldom ? regularly TARGET Under Tree: ? building L 16target be move . Y N Occupancy: occasional use larking _ traffic ? pedestrian O recreation O landscape O hardscape O small features O utilitylines Can use be restricted? Y N Q intermittent use O frequent use ? constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rat: Y Mushroom/conk/bracket_pres_ent: Y N ID: Exposed roots: D severe -O moderate b low Undermined: O severe (3 moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: D severe O moderate LEAN: deg. from vertical O natural D unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken 'Y N Soil cracking: Y N Lean severity: Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS. Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT TRUNK SCAFFOLDS ROOT CROWN L Bow. swe Multiple attachments Included bark Fxcessive end weioh' flow Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs When. f D low severe ? moderate D low CHES Cankers/oalls/burls I n ncnwa failure HAZARD RATING G Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm):2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >3r (75 cm) Hazarating re Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating sii Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: = u + ? + ------ _-? 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy O crown reduce D restructure O shape Inspect further. O root crown O decay 0 aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: D none O evaluate Notification: Downer O manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS PJ V- f . A "# HAZARD Guide to the Evaluation of Ugnrd Trees in Urban Areas r TR HAZARD FVAL UA N FORM 2nd Edition ' ` dress: G' IP_fS T/1NN l ovation: s / Y, G V (A-Cl- j ? Owner: public private. ? unknown. other Date: << _ ?Inspector: ? ? S?'+N?t7rJ Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: ?+ I + Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs further in Dead t : TREE CHARACTERISTICS I/ Tree #: S Species: K V G OBH: of trunks: Height Spread: ?? 1 1 DEC 2 2005 ` Form: C generally symmetric inor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprout O stag-headed Crown class: G dominant 12/co-dominant O intermediate O suppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT ?/ SERVICES Live crown ratio: • % Age class:.. L?lyoung = s: ni-mature 0 mature O over-mature/senescent CITY ° )F CLFARWATFR . Pruning history: Vnone n cleaned ?.? excessively thinned toeeed O crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced C multiple pruning events Approx. W.es: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife r unusual ? street tree O screen Lck hade O indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. Pnormal anal ? chlorotic D-ii necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: O sparse Leaf size: normal O small Annual shoot growth: ? excellent poor Twig Dieback? Y N .wood development VOe,,, elle nt ra ? average O poor G none Vigor class: O excellent rage C fair ? poor Major pests/diseases: Growth obstructions: O stakes ? wire/ties O signs ? cables O curb/pavement ? guards O other SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence commercial C inous;r;al - park ? open space O natural O woodland\forest Landscape type- 0 parkway G raised bed ? container -t mound Blawn O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: none O adequate C inadequate C excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction ? soil oisturbance ? grade change O line clearing - site clearing % dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N % dripline w/ fill soil: 0°a .0 25 0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% % dripline grade lowered: 0°a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty O saline ? alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay O expansive . -slope aspect: Obstructions: O fights O signage O line-of-sight O view ? overhead lines O underground utilities O traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree O below canopy O above canopy O recently exposed O windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms O never O seldom O regularly TARGET building I Under Tree: O building Target be move . Y N Occupancy: - occasional use larking . traffic O pedestrian D recreation ? landscape O hardscape ? small features O utility lines Can use be restricted? Y N p intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y © Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y. N 10: Exposed roots: ? severe .C moderate ? low Undermined: O severe L-1 moderate O low Root pruned: _ distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: O severe C moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEAN: - deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected . Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Lean severity: C severe O moderate O low Compounding factors: CROWN DEFECTS: indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poortaoer Boer. sweep Codominantsiforks .Multiple attachments Included bark Fxcessive end weight I Jsao flow racked bark hole/bee hil Previous failure HAZARD RATING 1Z VN AJC Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe " Tree part most likely to fail: (1545 cm): Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm):2 - 6-18 Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) =shun Pot ntial + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard Rating Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: V + I + 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT une: O remove defective part C reduce end weight O crown clean O thin P O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape r Inspect further. O root crown O decay O aerial 0 monitor Cable/Brace: Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: Downer D manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS - • V_ . . A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas 2nd Edition Tf3 f?AZADFVAL UADNl ORM C'n JOT ?iS71? HAZARD RATING: dress: ___L + ? + 40cation: s G V LLB Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Owner: public private ? unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Date: << Ir Inspector: -t "? - ( Date of last inspection: Ned? spP? , I I_ Dead a \? ?t, TREE CHARACTERISTICS. Tree: 1 (0 Species. DEC 1 ?1 1 Z"M DBH: _ J_ i# of trunks: I Height_ Spread: ` ' t ?' to -h d d ? L---?--- I Form: L!lgenerallysymmetric C. minor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprou u s g ea a PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Crown class: O dominant &t"o-dominant ? intermediate O suppressed SEgVICES Live crown ratio: tov % Age class: ?ung = semi-mature ? mature O over-mature/senescent C?.F af3W_ AjE Pruning history: C1 crown clean d M excessively thinned C tocced ? crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced O flush cuts r cabled/braced Onone Litt uItiple pruning events Approx. ?a:es: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic ? wildlife r unusual Q street tree O screen fiLstiade C indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. I2 normal ? chlorotic Di necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth. obstructions: Foliage density: ? normal M sparsee Leaf size: C normal ? small ? stakes O wire/ties O signs ? cables ? Annual shoot growth: ? excellent Lverage ? poor Twig Dieback7 Y N ? curb /pavement O guards wood development ? excellent average ? poor G none O other Vigor class: O excellent = average V /air n poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence LIJcommercial G inoustrial - park ?,o?peenn space O natural OwoodlandVorest Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed O container mound Od?awn O shrub border C wind break Irrigation: none ? adequate C inadequate C excessive O trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N 0 construction ? soil ais-zurbance ? grade change ? line clearing . site clearing % dripline paved: 0% 10-25% .25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N %dripline w/ fill soil: 0 ',0-25=0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0°a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage ? shallow O compacted ? droughty ? saline ? alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay ? expansive --slope ° aspect: Obstructions: O lights; ? signage O line-of-sight ? view O overhead lines ? underground utilities O traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree ? below canopy O above canopy ? recently exposed O windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowlice storms ? never O seldom ..O regularly TARGET it Under Tree: ? building E arget be move ? Y N Occupancy: occasional use parking _ traffic 0 pedestrian O recreation O landscape O hardscape 01 small features O utilitylines Can use be restricted? Y N . intermittent use O frequent use ? constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y © Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N 10: Exposed roots: O severe •D moderate b low Undermined: O severe n moderate D low ! distance from trunk Root area affected: % buttress wounded: Y N When: 'T Root pruned: Restricted root area: D severe (Cytfioderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate Uew LEAN. deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural D self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plarie of lean: Y N..?.. 'Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N f Compounding factors:. Lean severity* O severe O moderate O low • f ??) r l '. CROWN DEFECTS:.lndicae pretence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN Poor taoe, Bove. sweeo Codominantsiforks .,Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weioht Cracks/s fits Hangers Girdling Wounds/seam Decav Cavity Conks/mush rooms/bracket Bleedin /sao flow Looselcracked bark --------------- Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs Bore rs/termites/ants Cankers/oalls/burls Previous failure HAZARD RATING _ Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1- <6' (15 cm): 2 - 6-18' (1545 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18 30" (45 75 cm); 4 ->30" (75 cm) siiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazard ating Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: 1 + + = 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: D remove defective part D reduce end weight O crown clean O thin D raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure D shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further. D root crown O decay 0 aerial ? monitor ?,cl bob Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: D none O evaluate Notification: Downer O manager 0 governing agency Date: COMMENTS • V, . A Phot aphic Guide to the Evaluation of rd Trees in Urban Areas TREY HAZARD FVAL UA N FORM 2nd Edition dress: 1215 TIC HAZARD RATING: (Vocation: S / f?, G V O Fail + Size + Target = Hazard Owner: public private ? unknown other Potential of part Rating Rating << S I t ?-T Immediate action needed Date: nspec or: Needs further inspection Date of last inspection: Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS 10 Tree N: J 1! Species: ?/? U ?n ?` ` U CVs U jQ L I ??1 l Height Spread: 'LCD , DBH: A of trunks: _ Form: L generally symmetric ,?C minor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprout u stag-headed . Crown class: G dominant L7co-dominant /? intermediate G suppressed Live crown ratio: 60 % Age class: Vyoung = semi-mature O mature .0 over-mature/senescent Pruning history: 0 crown cleaned 011 excessively thinned = tocced ? crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced ? flush cuts C cabled/braced t?none C multiple pruning events Approx. 1z:es: Special Value: ? specimen CQ heritagelhistoric D wildlife E unusual Q street tree O screen 12'shade ? indigenous [:protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. Vormal O chlorotic Di necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: Vormal ? sparse Leaf size: C normal ? small ? stakes O wire/ties ? signs O cables Annual shoot growth: O excellent M/average ? poor Twig Dieback? Y N O curb/pavement Jedwood development: ? excellent Vverage ? poor G none O other Vigor class: ? excellent Laverage G fair n poor Major pests/diseases: I I OGU SITE CONDITIONS - Site Character. O residence commercial C inousmal C park ? open space O natural O woodlandV9U NING DEVELOPMENT Landscape type: O parkway G raised bed O container G mound LtNawn ? shrub border C [Vind break SERVICES 1/ -none OF CLFARWATFq Irrigation: 1Gnone O adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled - - - Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction ? soil aist:rrbance ? grade change O line clearing - site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0°0 0-25% 25-50% 50 75% 75-100% L dripline grade lowered: 0°0 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: ? drainage ? shallow ? compacted O droughty G saline ? alkaline O acidic ? small volume O disease center ? history of fail ? clay ? expansive - slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights ? signage ? line-of-sight O view O overhead lines ? underground utilities O traffic ? adjacent veg. ? Fxposure to wind: O single tree ? below canopy ? above canopy ? recently exposed O windward, canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms ? never ? seldom O regularly TARGET ' Under Tree: 0 building arget be mV-01ocasional ? Y N Occupancy: use larking _ traffic ? pedestrian ? recreation ? landscape O hardscape L? small features O utilitylines Can use be restricted? Y N Q intermittent use ? frequent use ? constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rat: Y N Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N !D: Exposed roots: O severe -O moderate O low Undermined: O severe C moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: i Restricted root area: O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low LEM deg. from verdeal O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors: Lean severity: O severe O moderate O low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poortaoer Bow. sweep attachments bark e end weioh flow -Looseicracxen D; Nesting hole/bee Deadwood/stubs taiinwa+ua„uu? Previous failure f ii, HAZARD RATING s Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely.to iQ: ,- Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 618" (15-45 cm); Inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18-30" (45-75 cm); 4 ->30" (75 cm) radure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Ham Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use; + t + 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use I HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean Othin O raise canopy O crown reduce O restructure O shape Cable/Brace: Inspect further. O root crown O decay 0??? monitor V v( y Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. e Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: Downer O manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS Ell r,.. . A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in UrbanAreas r TWO HAZARD. FVAL UAWN FORM 2nd Edition A dress: C IS TIC N cation: S c) 114 G 44 L) ?? 011W Owner: public private ? unknown other ??-? Date: « S Inspector: Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: r + (- + l - Failure + Size + Target = Potential of part Rating Hazard Rating . Immediate action needed t Dead a TREE CHARACTERISTICS till J??11 Tree' Species: I DBH: # of trunks: Height Spread: OEC 2 2005 L Form: C generally symmetric V /minor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprout O stag-headed I L••r Crown class: G dominant co-dominant O intermediate Osuppressed PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Live crown ratio: % Age class: ung s_ ni-mature ? mature (D over-mature/senescan? SERVICES CITY 'F.CLFARWATER -'----- Pruning history: ???//crown cleaned C excessively thinned r toeoed ? crown raised O pollarded ? crown reduced- C1 flush cuts -r cabled/braced . none C multiple pruning events Approx. dares: Special Value: ? specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife E unusual O street tree O screen Meeade D indigenous C protected by gov agency TREE HEALTH Foliage color. Vormal O chlorotic :? necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: K normal ? sparse. / Leaf size: normal ? small ? stakes ? wire/ties ? signs ? cables Annual shoot growth: ? excellent V averagee ? poor Twig Dieback? Y N ? curb/pavement ? guards wood development ??? excellent ra? t R average ? poor G none ? other Vigor class: ? excellent 1L`av'erage _ fair L poor Major pests/diseases: v SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. ? residence "Llcommercial C inoustral park ? open space ? natural ? woodland\forest Landscape type: V10 ? parkway O raised bed ? container ? mound lawn O shrub border C %vind break Irrigation: ne ? adequate C inadequate C excessive O trunk wattled Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction ? soil oisturbance ? grade change O line clearing . site clearing dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: 0% .0-25=0 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted ? droughty ? saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume ? disease center O history of fail ? clay ? expansive - slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights O signage O line-of-sight ? view O overhead tines O underground utilities O traffic ? adjacent veg. O Exposure to wind: ? single tree ? below canopy O above canopy O recently exposed ? windward. canopy edge ? area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snow/ice storms ? never O seldom ? regularly TARGET Use Under Tree: ? building L9'parking traffic ? pedestrian ? recreation O landscape ? hardscape O small features O utilitylines OY NCan use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: ccsional use O intermittent use O frequent use ? constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y 1 Mushroom/conk/bet present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: ? severe ? moderate O low Undermined: ? severe n moderate ? low Root pruned: - distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: Restricted root area: . ? severe O moderate ? low Potential for root failure: ? severe ? moderate ? low LEAN: deg. from vertical ? natural ? unnatural ? self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors: Lean severity: Q severe O moderate O low CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s severe, m = moderate, I = low) DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES Poortaoer Bow. sweep Codominantsiforks Multiple attachments Included bark Con ks/mush rooms/bracket Bleedino/sao flow hive Previous failure HAZARD RATING ?G K57 Failure potential: 1- low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (1545 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3-18-3 . T (45-75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) Faiiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating = Hazar sting Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: t_+ t + = 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight ? crown clean O thin ? raise canopy ? crown reduce O restructure O shape Cable/Brace: Insect further. O root crown O decay Oaerial c dor ?dw0W ?Ma? Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner ? manager ? goveming agency Date: COMMENTS V_. A Phot raphic Guide to the Evaluation of rd r TREY HAZARD EVAL UA N dress: ovation: Owner: public private L-**? unknown other Date: , 5_ Inspector: _920s MV 0 Date of last inspection: Trees in Urban-Areas FORM2nd Edition HAZARD RATING: Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs further inspection Dead tree TREE CHARACTERISTICS . ?,/? Tree #: _ Species: - e(( C. _4 ? OBH: #oftrunks: Height Spread: r Form: C generally symmetric C minor asymmetry C major asymmetry ? stump sprout v stag-headed D Crown class: O dominant O co-dominant ? intermediate O suppressed Live crown ratio: - % Age class: ? young = semi-mature C1 mature O over-mature/senescent DEC 22Z Pruning history: O crown cleaned ? excessively thinned G toeeed O crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced ush C cabled/braced ? none C multiple pruning events Approx. ::s: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife E unusual ?street tree O screen Cshade C indige 1!! C protect-eed?,Wjac T£q TREE HEALTH Foliage color. ? normal O chlorotic :i necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: Foliage density: Cl normal ? sparse Leaf size: normal ? small O stakes O wire/ties O signs O cables Annual shoot growth: O excellent O average O poor Twig Dieback? Y N O curbipavement O guards Odwood development: O excellent O average ? poor G none O other Vigor class: ? excellent = average _ fair 0 poor Major pests/diseases: SITE CONDITIONS Site Character. O residence O commercial C inoustral park ? open space ? natural woodlancNforest Landscape type: O parkway O raised bed ? container ? mound ? lawn O shrub border C %vind break Irrigation: 5 none O adequate C inadequate G excessive ? trunk wettled Recent site disturbance? Y N O construction O soil oiszurbance O grade change O line clearing . site clearing • dripline paved: 0010 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/ fill soil: Vo 10-250 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow ? compacted ? droughty ? saline O alkaline ? acidic O small volume ? disease center O history of fail O clay ? expansive . slope ° aspect: Obstructions: ? lights ? signage ? line-of-sight O view O overhead lines ? underground utilities ? traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: ? single tree ? below canopy O above canopy ? recently exposed D windward, canopy edge O area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms ? never ? seldom O regularly TARGET Under Tree: 0 building O parking _ traffic O pedestrian ? recreation ? landscape ? hardscape O small features ? utilitylines 46 target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: O occasional use Q intermittent use O frequent use O constant use The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS. ®ket resent: Y N ID: Suspect root rot. Y Mushroom/conk/b p Exposed roots: O severe •O moderate O low Undermined: O severe ? moderate O low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: i i Restricted root area: . O severe O moderate O low Potential for root failure: O severe O moderate O low • LEAN: deg. from vertical O natural O unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N Compounding factors: Lean severity: EI severe O.moderate O low CROWN DEFECTS. Indicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) -DgPECT---- -----r- 4 ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES- Poo p taoerL',A ? Bor?, swee Jl .- --- Codominantsiforks" bark " I I I end weight .J r47 urids/seam racked bark hole/bee hive Previous failure HAZARD RATING Failure potential: 1 -low; 2 -medium; 3 -high; 4 -seven: Tree part most likely to fail: Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-18" (15-45 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -18 30" (45 75 cm); 4 - >30" (75 cm) Failure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating =Hazard Rating Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use: = 3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use + + HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: D remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean O thin O raise canopy, O crown reduce O restructure O shape Inspect further. O root crown O decay 0 aerial O monitor Cable/Brace: Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: O none O evaluate Notification: O owner O manager O governing agency Date: COMMENTS • V-- A" AahlGuide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban-Areas TR AZARD EVAL UANN FORM 2nd Edition dress: 1'IST/)'N ?„ ocation: S D 114 C• L ,N ( w Owner public private (/ unknown other Date: << S Inspector: Date of last inspection: HAZARD RATING: + 2-+ _ Failure + Size + Target = Hazard Potential of part Rating Rating Immediate action needed Needs fu ec on Dead tre TREE CHARACTERISTICS ? Tree #: ? Species: 6 DBH: 10 # of trunks: Height J-GL + Spread: - DEC 2 2005 Form: generally symmetric C minor asymmetry C major asymmetry O stump sprout G stag-headed ?`?? Crown class: L?Idominant C3 co-dominant ? intermediate CJ suppressed PLANNING R DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Live crown ratio: % Age class: young semi-mature O mature O over-mature/senescent - r3[Ty IF CLFARWATM Pruning history: O crown cleaned ! excessively thinned C toeeed ? crown raised O pollarded O crown reduced ? flush cuts r cabled/braced alone C multiple pruning events Approx. ia!es: Special Value: O specimen O heritage/historic O wildlife r --unusual O street tree O screen Dade ? indigenous C protected by gov agency TDCC IICAIT11-1 t A la.16 a a a -- Foliage color. normal O chlorotic D necrotic Epicormics? Y N Foliage density: normal O sparse ? Leaf size: C normal ? small Annual shoot growth: ? excellent I?Savera??ge ? poor Twig Dfeback? Y N Odwood development ? excellent 4Javerage ? poor G none Vigor class: O excellent t_/-aa v erage _ fair G poor Major pests/diseases: Growth obstructions: O stakes ? wire/ties ? signs ? curbipavement O guards O other SITE CONDITIONS ?? Site Character. ? residence ? commercial C inous;ral park ? open space O natural (9' Woodland\forest Landscape type: ? parkway G raised bed O container Di mound ? lawn O shrub border C wind break O trunk wettled Irrigation: V one ? adequate C inadequate C -excessive Recent site disturbance? Y N ? construction ? soil oisturbance O grade change O line clearing . site clearing % dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted? Y N dripline w/till soil: 0°a .0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Soil problems: O drainage O shallow O compacted O droughty G saline O alkaline O acidic O small volume O disease center O history of fail O clay O expansive = slope aspect: Obstructions: O lights O signage O line-of-sight O view D overhead lines ? underground utilities O traffic O adjacent veg. ? Exposure to wind: O single tree O below canopy ? above canopy ? recently exposed O windward, canopy edge D area prone to windthrow Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowlice storms O never . O seldom ? regularly TARGET ,,__,/ Under Tree: ? building &3 parking _-traffic ? pedestrian O recreation O landscape O hardscape Q small features ? utility lines arget be mov ? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N Occupancy: occasional use C7 intermittent use O frequent use ? constant use ? cables The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form. TREE DEFECTS ROOT DEFECTS: Suspect root rot: Y Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N ID: Exposed roots: ? severe -C moderate ? low Undermined: ? severe n moderate ? low Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When: - Restricted root area: ? severe O moderate ? low Potential for root failure: O severe ? moderate O low MAN:._.-.-_ deg. from vertical O natural ? unnatural O self-corrected Soil heaving: Y N •' Decay iri; ane:ot.lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N ' • n i. l?, Lean severity: O severe O moderate O low Compounding f"ctors: .- CROWN 'DEFECTS:-trrdicate presence of individual defects and rate their severity (s = severe, m = moderate, I = low) L - Tr3t„ , DEFECT -,--n ROOT CROWN Poor taper` Bow, sweeo Codominantsiforks ------------- .Multiple attachments Included bark Excessive end weight Cracks/splits Hangers Girdling Wounds/seam Decay Cavity Conks/mushrooms/bracket Bleedin /sao flow Loose/cracked bark Nesting hole/bee hive Deadwood/stubs Borers/termites/ants Cankers/oalls/burls Previous failure HAZARD RATING v Tree part most likely to fail: Failure potential: 1 - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe Size of part: 1 - <6" (15 cm); 2 - 6-16" (15-45 cm); inspection period: annual biannual other 3 -16" (1 (c , cm); 4 - 15-4 (75 ); cm) siiure Potential + Size of Part + Target Rating =Hazard Rating Target rating: 1- occasional use; 2 intermittent use: + 2 + 3 -frequent use; 4 -constant use HAZARD ABATEMENT Prune: O remove defective part O reduce end weight O crown clean ? thin ? raise canopy, ? crown reduce O restructure O shape Cable/Brace: nInspect furtheerr. ? root crown ? decay O aerial O monitor Remove tree: © N Replace? Y N Move target: Y N Other. Effect on adjacent trees: 62 'none ? evaluate Notification: (Downer ? manager O goveming agency Date: COMMENTS • V. 0 & DEVEL' -,N W4 SERVICES S t C S O? k,• ;?,? •C PARKING c_ j N ,s drawing-3 for `Z)), tr_ M tree t V ?. ? ' proon 4 cn Y., ?... - QV draMnngs for . ` tree 4 ?E ' # r ', protect?on ? PAC E >-- ON" ?,• ' ,; • yy , 0 ?:, ? z ., ?-->' cl) dram"els for P E .. . cc S P RKI G -• ..- Nt --? protecton sec ao, ; .1: drawmg3 fJ'' 3' z OSED ASPHA NGz _ protectun QV See u r --? m N dramrm for r i? r? s; , ab w tree t _ P <_ AIX 1 .S AC ,?tirm ;ZzN 400 it ` See c-ml T- ES raw f G S P R N I' see ravel see drawings for ravongai for r I Prz1d" IN5TALL TRES M N. tin V1ae BuFeR w -f ?t..: h 8K 10K 6 1 TREE/25' O.C. 00°r6??t : - 5-5K r :K 5-4 Q l 6-- 6K `` 6K 12K12K 4- JK 8K , DEC 2 2005 i PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT rj. SERVICES cmr OF CLEA FLOW N 00'00'05" 93' D owleUMMI" - , - Aw- m %oar .j 1 d Mnn nnl . .A ';?:. QV 6 CE 15_ "S t:? xe see uwl drawings for • Arawmcp for tree tree F y lift 90! ection protection prot dra ma I. S A S red S C n see civil ,._. rawmgs for . .,.? ,.... ?...?. ,.? ,?. '?` . s tree v "' 1 0 S A S, h' p 4 SP C S G S P R N see civil 2 ? 6 drawmg5 for QV se QV 35 tree draw rote,-bon e cnnl 5 SPACES - ee "1 10 SPACES TJV 7 M PM ags few -- - ,. tre tr 1. 1 e t.. p n pr -1 )tect on n IJ ;? ?, V• 5' IDS BUFFS `g` . _ ?t.. ?? , ... mac,. rd r ?-? 5 No • Y/ LLZ P ?I DEC 2 2005 ------------ PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY OF CLFARWATER i i. l ?}{i 1 F( u 161(??l ? SE-RVIC,L.?, ?G,? d6ur?o? d Ph(gb@ 5' WIMBUEFIR V 8K WOK 6-? 10K I TREE/26 O.C. .100% 5HRUB5 5-5K K 5-•4 ( 6 6K' ' 6K 12K12K 4-3K 1? ?J U V L? 8K DEC .. 2 2005 ?r PLANNING E DEVELOPMENT N 00'0 0 05" 93 D ??` mum pr 1NI 6 CE d mn f 5 S QV see Gv?l f • d see drawngs for Ih? rawmgs or ? tree ? tree ? y protection Y QV ?` . protection se cml e L. ? dra ngs S D ree S C 1 ` see cml . ; . raw?n s for,. trey + ., . .. 1 A ES ' ` .. 4 SP C S G S P R N z 6 I dravvings for QV sea QV 35? eeti n t qa dr ? s c,I 5 SPACES °lee ""' 10 SPACES TJV o ro 75 trote t e All m ?,. tr ee n All IDE BUFFE ? T i I 75 45 NOP • • SWC r ? G PARKING N a 77 v c? .. to ? v7 'Mi drawnn 3 for ~ r or s 'protection ? 4 N drawings for QV Q pro awe #n PACE Q , N? glow Q 1 'All e for ?... - ??r dr??n? AC ti P E tc' S P KI G u '' s?t*? ` protection see cnnl drawings for OSED ASPMA NG protactsco E QV ': N dramngs for r r= r tree 1 •: S AC `` T ?rp M? K&I 750d, ?` ? ?? maw ?? r.iaarf ?? ?' ? .?i?? ?, _ ?'.!.' ,? ? ? .._.. ! ` ? ?'+ ? ,K? ? f r t •; ES cwd G S P R NG ._..I. s.. . rav!n 5 f see ? see c>,nl drawn s for rawnngs for ?. I _ protection, IN5TAU. TREE_`i M?N. tree r t, 14 AL , .. R h s `l y , 4 2 1 A a•fi • t . ?? D f r.R? ? T? ? ?f j• _ d ? > s •? a ".r '? -? ?`•' 14 I Y .i PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES r'dTl/ ? ^t c'rti f7±Ai??rC K+ ,?'? ? !?, ?+ `? ?` ? ? fi? ?. r q y r? t`L I''??• '? i ";PW-9 46 'I6.ii N • To-i I lii "fin i? !? V- . In% I --nor ? ??n? ..? ? ?? : y . ? ??'?' • ,? ?1 i ,ins Ott''; PL4NNfNG & DEVELOPMENT f • n ,? a . SERVICES. X4 e..i? ?1 1fr. _.1. •, fig ? a aS?1 ?- b .Y' .. i.. Jt uu.?i. ? 11?•Y?4µ.??. ,r - lY?'Z ?F'• ?'?` 4•[{-Ma Fit I . ?F L :: F 1, Off; ?y -.,gTER, ,,? LONG RANGE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW December 16, 2005 Gaylor Engineering 400 Douglas Avenue, Suite C Dunedin, FL 34698 C ITY OF C LEARWAT-E'R PLANNING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAX (727) 562-4576 SITE PLAN APPROVED CASE # 2 L-5 Iv n 5- 080 S c) CASE TYPE 'FL-S DRC DATE - -, 0 9.•Xq - 0 5- CDB DATE SIGNATURE DATE cl 2? ?y RE: Development Order regarding case FLS2005-08059 at 1850 McMullen Booth Road (Countryside Christian Center) Dear Mr. Gaylor: This letter constitutes a Development Order pursuant to Section 4-202.E of the Community Development Code. On September 29, 2005, the Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed your application for Flexible Standard Development to construct a 22,659 square foot addition to an existing Place of Worship, including a parking reduction from one space for every two seats to 0.66 spaces for every two seats (or one for every three seats), per Section 2-12031 The DRC recommended approval of the applications with the following bases and conditions: Bases for Approval: 1. The proposal complies with Place of Worship criteria under the provisions of Section 2-1203.I; 2. The plan complies with General Applicability Criteria under the provisions of Section 3-913; and 3. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding area. Conditions of Approval: 1. That any future changes be reviewed and approved by the Planning Staff; 2. That all signage meet the requirements of Code and be architecturally-integrated with the design of the building with regard to proportion, color, material and finish as approved by Staff prior to the issuance of any sign permits; 3. That the fire department connection be relocated to within 40-feet of a fire hydrant prior to the issuance of a building permit; 4. That the applicant obtain Pinellas County right-of-way permits for work in the McMullen Booth Road right-of-way prior to the issuance of a building permit; 5. That the wheel stops be shown to be installed where parking stalls abut a sidewalk to prevent vehicles from encroaching into the pedestrian travel way prior to the issuance of a building permit; 6. That white directional pavement arrows be installed to provide better internal flow for the parking lot prior to the issuance of a building permit; BRIAN J. AUNGS'r, MAYOR FRANK HIBBARD, VICE MAYOR HOPI' HA.MIUI*ON, COLINCIBIE\IBER BILL JONSON, COUNCILMEMBER ® CARLEN A. PETERSEN, COUNCILME\'IBER "EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRMATIVE ACPION EMPLOYER" December 16, 2005 FL?S2045-08059 r Page 2 7. That the applicant provide an agreement that no vehicles will park on City's right-of-way i.e. McMullen Booth Road prior to the issuance of a building permit; 8. That compliance with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule occur prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; and 9. That easements are required to protect access to unrestricted water mains and fire hydrants on site. The applicant shall dedicate,and record water line easements to the City of Clearwater subject to the Water Department's approval of water lines for City ownership prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. I concur with the findings of the Development Review Committee and, through this letter, approve your application for Flexible Standard Development with above 9 conditions. The approval is based on and must adhere to the application dated received, August 15, 2005 and site plans dated received, November 8, 2005. Pursuant to Section 4-303, an application for a building permit shall be made within one year of Flexible Standard Development approval (December 16, 2006). All required certificates of occupancy shall be obtained within one year of the date of issuance of the building permit. Time frames do not change with successive owners. The Community Development Coordinator may grant an extension of time for a period not to exceed one year and only within the original period of validity. The Community Development Coordinator may approve an additional extension of time not to exceed one year for good cause shown and documented in writing. The coordinator must receive the request for this extension within the one-year period of validity after the original time extension. The Community Development Coordinator may approve an additional extension of time not to exceed on year for good cause shown and documented in writing. The coordinator must receive the request for this extension within the one-year period of the validity after the original extension. The issuance of this Development Order does not relieve you of the necessity to obtain any building permits or pay any impact fees that may be required. In order to facilitate the issuance of any permit or license affected by this approval, please bring a copy of this letter with you when applying for any permits or licenses that require this prior development approval. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call John Schodder, Planner I at 727-562-4547. Sincerely, Michael Delk, A CP Planning Director SAPlanning Department) C D BIFlex Standard (FLS)Vnactive or Finished CasesU&Mullen Booth 1850- Countryside Christian Or (I) - Approved1FLS2005-08059 Development Order.doc . ~~Saoa~_o8o5 ~ ~ ~ WB4 NWH$ N,yl,a, NAWW BANrA AYYA WYAfnaA YN.1M YA9NIaxN YAY MIIW aW9XN IAOM YM NAYI.IYI gIYW eAAm uarr Ywwu rAnpx ~ aAY 0.V rA Ax10.Y IYANpIN pYE AUQIVA pWxW ~ Y0.WYA YAYryI T LOCH TION ~ PROJEC ~ anx~~ NMIAWO vuao anxa.A YA[vY.m PINELLAS Haut NqW p1FA YANAYS NWR~ L1FSU~OYk[ . xkwWn aruAa ~4 °EYa~n YWnx a,ata ~ Ig1aRY P4Y NMI YAYOAY CWkN SI T ~~9 ~ INDEX OF SHEETS CASE# ~t,s~lrys~o~os~ aAOE ® T CASE TYPE _GV3 DRC DATE oq-, a 9 - o s' SHEET N0. DESCRIPTION CORDATE - . 9 SIGNATURE 1 COVER DATE ~Zlgo~ _ 2 'EXISTING CONDITIONS PARCEL l 3 GENERAL NOTES IT/WEST 1 4 OF SECTION 4 TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, THAT PART OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOU / 4 KEY S H E ET RANGE 16 EAST, P/NELLAS COUNTY, FLOR/DA, DESCR/BED AS FOLLOWS.• 5 SITE PLAN NORTH SECTION F SA/D SECT/ON 4 FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST >/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 O , • /NE FORMED BY THE AFORESA/D •~'DUTHWEST CORNER RUN THENCE N451435 E ALONG THE D/AGDNAL L 6 SITE.PLAN SOUTH SECTION HWEST 1 4 A D/STANCE OF 373.35 F THE SOOT N THWEST 1 4 0 TH NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE OR / AND E ,Y w • UNS£T POINT ROAD S • THENCE N001254 E 242.79 FEET TO THE PO/NT 0 NNING,• THENCE S89 4706 E, 1018.59 FEET, , AS D SCR/BED. IN F MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD SR 593 E 7 DETAILS SECTIONS FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY R/GHT OF WAY LINE 0 ( A 457 OF THE PUBL/C RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ~ a O.R. BOOK 1346, P GE h ' 0 THE AFORESA/D D/AGONAL L/NE,• THENCE 5451435' 34352 FEET ALONG SITE LOCATION N89 4706'x; 775.57 FEET T ~ ~ ~ DETAILS SECTIONS TH AFORES4/D D/AGONAL L/NE TfJ THE PO/NT OF BEG/NNNG. E l HT OF WAY AS DE~'CR/BED /N O.R. LESS THAT PORT/ON CDNYEYE7J TO PINELLAS COUNTY FOR ROAD RG 9 DETAILS SECTIONS IN LLAS COUNTY FLOR/DA. ~ BOOK 6380, PAGE 723, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF P E , B N CONVEYED TO P/N£LLAS COUNTY FOR ROAD R/GHT OF WAY AS DESCR/BED o AND ALSO LESS THAT POR 0 THE PUBL/C RECORDS OF P/NELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA. m 10 ENVIRONMENTAL IN O.R. BOOK 6734 PAGE 2244, OF ~ z 0~' SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANDS:-16 EAST PARCEL /l ~ y~o 19 ~ ~ _ ~ 0P SITE DATA TABLE ~ SITE DATA REQUEtED - - -THAT PART OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 4 TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANCE 16 EAST, PINEL S ~ ~ y~ EXISTING PROPOSED MIN.ORMAX, COUNTY, FLOR/DA, DESCR/BED AS FOLLOI'YS.• ~ o~Ew srREEr PIN ; 042916OODOO3200$OD „3 ZONING DISTRICT: PUBLIC/SSME°UBLIC SAME ,NIA BEG/N AT THE SOUTHWE~'T CORNER OF 11/E NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHI~EST 1/4 OF SA/D SECT/ON ' 1 19.16 FEET THENCE S89'4706"E, 43722 F~.,xT TO A POINT ON 4, AND RUN THENCE N45 1435 E, 2 , 042916000003300300 USB: CHURCH CHURCH NIA I THE WEST R/GHT OF WAY LINE OF MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD (SR 593f,' THENCE ALONG SA/D WEST R/GHT • ~ ~ ~sEwar 4l/5£W~ ADDRESS OF SUB~CT PROPERTY ' : ioT ARBA (sQ Fr & AcRSS> Ey CAMPBELL ~ OF WAY LINE S00 >254'~l; 326.41 FEET,• THENCE N894706'~t; 1700 FEET,• THEnICE 5001254'x; cOURrN COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER, INC. 1850 McMlLLEN 8007h ~i);4D GROSS AREA (WITHING PROPERTY LINB): 19,9 19.9 I ACRH Y L/NE' THENCE N892725'~Y, 492.4A~ : ~"E,? TO THE EAST - cu~F r0 Bar B~ uo. 60 828.75 FEET ALONG ,SQ/D WEST R/GHT OF WA , CCEARWAIER, FLORIDA 869,457,6 SF 869,4s7bSF 43560 (727) 799-1818 ' T/ON AS RECORDED /N PLAT BOOK 71,' ~°AGE 2>, OF THE BOUNDARY OF SALL S LAKE PARK 3RD ADD/ LOT WIDTH; 1706 FT SAMH 100 FT THE 0,~, T R ®~r • NCE N05'45'45 E 236.01. FEET ALONG THE EAST 0 /DA ~/7 NTY FL L PUBL/C RECORDS OF P/NELLAS CDU , MUNICIPALITY LOT DEPTH: 1150FT SAME 100FT CLEARWATER FLORIDA ' N8923;~0'~Y 81A~22 FEET ALONG THE BDUNGl4RY OF SALL S LAKE PARK 3RD ADO/TION,• THENCE , DSNSTfY(BASHDONNSTACRES); N!A NIA NIA NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SALL S LAKE PARK 3RD ADD/T/ON 10 THE WEFT BOUNL??RY OF SECTION 4,• • T BOUNDARY OF SECT/ON 4 TO THE POINT OF' PROJECT LOCA ITON.' BUnDING covBRAas (sQ sT ~ 46,a2o sF 116,z99 sF APPROX 200 FT. SOUTH OF THE lN1ERSECAON OF SUNSETPO/NT RD AND GF axoss srrE): s.3s 13x7 45 °h THENCE N001919 E, 50.20 FEET ALONG THE WES BEG/NN/NG McMULLEN 800TH RD - GROS5 FLOOR AREA AND F.A.R.: .054 .13 .6s T > 4 OF SECTION 4, TOWNSH/P 29 SOUTH, LESS THAT PART OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SDUTHWES / PROPOSED USE' CHURCH BUILDING _ SHTBACKS(ALSOINCLUDEDA4ENSIONS RANGE >6 EAST, PINELLAS COUNTY, FLOR/DA, DESCR/BED AS FOLLOWS:• ON SITS PLAN DRAING) T 1 4 OF THE' SOUTHWE~'T > 4 OF SA/D SECT/ON 4, FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWE~' / / LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION.' FRONT; 38sFT SOFT 36FT • ~ ~ THW T CORNER RUN THENCE N4514 35 E ALONG THE D/AGDNAL L/NE FORMED BY THE AFORESA/D SOU E~' CURRENT LAND USE.' EXISTING SANCTUARY AND CLASS ROOj11 BLOC sros: 6oFT 6oFT z7sFT 1 4 OF THE SOUTHWE~'T 1 4 A 0/STANCE OF 37,35 NOT TO SCALE ANO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST / / FEET TO THE POINT OF BEG/NN/NG,• THENCE SB9'4706"E, 1018.59 FEET,• THENCE N00'1254'E, 24279 LOT AREA. 869,457.8 SF OR 19,96 AC 310 FT 310FT 27sFT F MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD SR 593 AS DE~"CR/BED IN FEET ALONG THE WE~'TERLY R/GHT OF WAY LINE 0 ( J . MIN/MAX BBTWEENSTRUCTURES: 35 FT 3s FT 20FT STANDARD EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL REQUIREMENT WATERFRONT SIDE: N/A NJA NIA O.R BOOK 1346, PAGE 457, OF THE PUBLIC. RECORDS OF P/NELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ' AFORE~4/D D/AGONAL LINE,• THENCE S45'14'35'~l; 34A~52 FEET ALONG N89 4706'x; 775.57 FEE? TD THE BUILDING 53.E i3¢x REAR: NIA NJA NIA THE AFORE~A/D D/AGDNAL' L/NE TO THE POINT OF BEG/NNING. DENSITY LESS THAF PORTION CONVEYED TO PINELG4S COUNTY FOR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY AS DESCR/BED IN O.R. ROOF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE xHIGHT: 3s FT soi;rMmPOmrr soFr P lC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLOR/DA. BOOK 6331, PAGE 1,958, OF THE UBL AND ALSO LESS THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO PINELLAS COUNTY FOR ROAD R/GHT OF WAY AS DESCR/BED A'!SR (TOTAL).' 10.3.r 17.3 27,6.r WiTHBONUSPROVISIONS (IF APPLICABLB): NIA NIA N/A K 6734 PAGE 2244 OF THE PUBL/C RECORDS OF P/NELLAS COUNTY, FLOR/DA. " /N 0•R 800 , BUILDING.' 46,820 SF OR 1.07 ACRES 89, 479 SF OR 1.59 ACRES 13.4$ PAVBD VBHICULAR ARHAS (SQFT & 325,142 SF 399,816 SF AND PARKING, °i° of slTS): 37.7 °k 45.9 % NIA DRIVES,ROADS J6,941 SF OR .85 ACRES 71,733 SF OR L65 ACRES i2.5~' OPEN SPACB 541,131 SF 469,582 SF SIDEWALKS 5,840 SF OR .13 ACRES 9,385 SF OR22 ACRES 1.8X TOTALFORTHBLOT 62 °i° sao °i° zs > 4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1 4 OF SECTION 4, TOWNSH/P A TRACT OF LAND LYING W/THIN THE SOUTHWE~'T / / (SQFT & % OF SITB): TOTALS 89,801 SF OR 205 ACRES 150,597 SF OR 348 ACRES 27.6A 29 SOUTH RANGE 16 EAST, P/NELLAS COUNTY, FLOR/DA ANO BE/NG MORE PARTICULARLY DESCR/BED AS 198 SF OR 5.51 ACRES 276X FOR TIIEFAONT YARD (SQFT TOTAL IMPERVIOUS 240, ~ % OF REQUIRHD FRONT YARDS): 94 °k 93 % 55 %MIN FOLLOWS• ~ N PLAT 800K 102 PAGES 20 AND M BEG/N AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF H/ODEN OAKS AS RECORDED l , PARKING SPACES' CLEAR SPACH (WATERFRONT ' PROPERTY): NIA NJA N!A 21 OF THE PUBL/C RECORDS OF P/NELLAS COUNTY, FLOR/DA; THENCE S B1 DEG 47 M/N 39 SEC W PROPOSED! EXTERIOR PERIMETER BUFFBRS; EAST, WEST, SOUTH, 1. VARIANCED REQUESIFO FROM 1 SPACE PER 2 SEATS OR .5 SPACES ISFTNORTHSFT sAt~ sAt~ F SAND HIDDEN OAKS FOR 73.21 FEE7,'• THENCE N 74 DEG 08 MlN ~ m ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY 0 , PER SEAT TO-1 SPACE PER 3 0 SPACES PARxING LoT INTERIOR 6 °io r,>ar 6 r,Err 6 ~ Ivma LANDSCAPE (SQFT& %OFPAVED - 51 SEC W, FOR 135.58 FEET,• THENCE LEAV/NG SA/D NORTHERL Y BOUNDARY N. OG OEG OD MlN 05 SEC 2. TOTAL PROPOSED SEATING 2500 oxsrrBPLA~RnwaaersPxanINa ~ > M/N 08 SEC E FOR 192.21 FEET TO 1T/E WESTERLY R/GHT E, FOR 511.93 FEET,• THENCE S. 89 DEG 3 , = OF WAY LINE OF MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD AS DESCR/BED /N OR• BOOK 6703, PAGES 1716-1718 OF 2500/3,0=8,~3 SPACES PROVIDED INCLUDING JO HANDICAP ~cROSSFV,TCI~rG): A NG SA/D R/GHT OF WAY S. Ol DEG 40 COUNTRYSIDE, CHRISTIAN CENTER, ~ THE PUBL/C RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLOR/OA; THENCE LO SETBACKS OF PROPOSED BUILDING' PARKING s73 633 I SP PER 2 SEATS M/N 47 SEC E FOR 197.43 FEE7 TO THE PO/NT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST,• INC. 1850 MCMILEN BOOTH ROAD M/N/MAX VARANCS REQUESTED 15PPER3 SEATS THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, HAYING A R40/US OF 11359.16 FEE?, A CENTRAL CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33759. EXISANG PROPOSED REQUIREMENT ANGLE OF Ol DEG 42 M/N 47 SEC, AN ARC LENGTH OF 339.60 FEET AND A Ch'C~?D BE;4RlNG S. 00 DEG N (727) 799-1618 NORTJ~I' N/A 538 FT NOTE: FOR ALL LANDSCAPING DATA SEE COPLEY DESIGN ASSOCIATES 49 M/N 24 SEC E, FOR 339.59 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEG/NN/NG. 0 0 EAST N/A 724 FT DRAWINGS CDNTA/NS 199689 ACRES, MORE OR LESS (M~ WEST.' N/A 500 FT m SOUTFL' N/A 95 FI' ~ ~ I ~ ~ e G U 1 n U 4 . ~S 1 ~ " h, °°/°1 N 400 DOUGLAS AVENUE, SUITE C . " 1;~~' DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34698 PH, (727) 785-8844 FAX {727) 736-2953 0 U k> ~ ~~C ~ y~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c m r ~ x 4. 08 2005 ~ 7 ~ ~fi. c 7 U pLANNINGDEPARTMENT ' 0 M 0 CIN OF CLEARWATER , , ~ ' m a m V C W N C REVISIONS: l6 N REV PER CITY DRC MEETING 11-3-05 ALL SHEETS L U N v .N COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER SANTUARY 03030 z, . O U a_ ~J • D~ SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE 16 EAST LEGEN . PINELLAS COUNT, FLORIDA ~ v m C CALCULATED N.C,F NO CORNER FOUND ~ E~ISEZ/NE ~J RLiNE / ~ CB CHORD BEAR/NG OHW OUERNEAO W/RE ~ CENTE / I / i O.R OFF/Cl4L RECORDS PROPERTY L/NE / / I / CH, CHORD I o0 IRON P/PE P PLAT ~ DELTA ANCLE / / \ I / C/P CAPPED ('J / 11 / UNPLATTED LANDS I ~~w C/R CAPPED IRON ROD PC PO/NT OF CURVATURE 0 FOUND MONUMENT (AS NOTED,I / / \ ' / ono PG PAGE ~ SET MONUMENT 1.B. ,{B79> / / \ / / S B.q'47os" E x37,22' (D) LYF Cf~4/N LINK FENCE U C,M, AS NOTED / / \ / 7% S 89 4658" E 295:60' (MJ , FOUND g ~NCEp4.5N CIR RLS ' CM CONCRETE MONUMENT P/ POINT OF INTERSECT/ON ? FD ND ~ J / \ p, X 4' ~tF 06 FENCE 4.5N / \ .FOUND C/R 7 e30» e4~"i_,~_._~._.yX~: pA CMP CORRUGATED METAL P/PE POB PO/NT OF BEGINNING 4J POWER POLE. / \ RLS 3.~3? p• ~ 3932 C.R. COUNTY ROAD POC POINT OF COMMENCMENT F/RE HIDRANT / / \ 22" x Z0 6 r , x.1g 13 B 1~ 6" x p, 21" > / 12 FE~iSE J3~E 1 x-tg"' ~ ~ rOB D GEED REFERENCE PK PARKER KALON NAIL / \ / 1 61 41,0 ~ ~ 1 ~ 61.- - ' 1~'Z(~ _ ~-15~- - _ _ (J POE / / \ ~ 6 7 ~ - 7 1• 1• ~ - 1~~- _TOB 1_ x10~g' 110 ~ - - L.B. LICENSED BUSINESS PP POWER POLE FLAG L _ ~ - 11011h i O EP EDGE OF PAVEMENT PT PO/NT OF TANGE GRATE` INLET / \ ~ / 1 4% x12Bp d x7 ti1 1~ 1ti ASPH4LTp1 x bh R RECORDED ® / \ ~ A 12/ 1 1 Z Z g Z 61 0(zJ POSTS $ A F.F. FlN/SHED FLOOR ~J CTR/C METER B X / / + / / 1' Z x 0• Z w/rH SIGN 0. 0•x 6g O6 g g p p~ ti 1~ d HWF HOG W/RE FENCE RCP REINFORCED CONCRETE P/PE ~ ELE 0 / \ / 6 / / /0 x Zx Z ZO 2 ZO ~0.1~x206 1p6106 p601 11yp x~2ph ( Q Q 0 TATE ROAD E- GUY W/R£ / / \ 13 \ / 1 1y / / / ~ 6h x g x Q~ /E INVERT ELEYAT/ON S.R. S / / \ 1 ~ 1f 12j /7 11 16 1~ " ~p Z0. ZO' 7 ' 9 1p0 ~ 1991691 216p11f I Z ~ F./.P. FOUND IRON P/PE TBM TEMPORARY BENCH MARK HgNOICAPPfO / / \ £v0 FENCE 1.7SE 1. 2 1/ / • 1 ~ Z Z ° 10 1g. TDB TOP OF E?ANK / / \ / ~ s" 0• b / ~h 0 0 6 /,R. IRON ROD LIGHT POLE / , ~ y (2 e~(2 7/ 72 9 0 11 p1 h y 1 ti 13 F SLOPE / / 7 x ~ ~ 7 7 y 0' 0 0• 13 ~ 1 22 I ~ ~ ~ 1g• g I~ 4s 1 f i (MJ MEASURED TOE TOED MH MANHOLE / / , \ / y ~"i ~ ry1 Z1 Z1 10 p, Z xg xZ 3s Z I ME;S. MITERED END SECT/ON LICE l/NDERCROUND ELECTRIC ~ MITERED END SECT/ON \ i ~ x 1, Z e g J 0 ~ ~ T R METER "7T MISCELLANEOUS S/GN / / \ i \ / ~ 01 1 ~ Al x x Oy 6• 6 I I WM WA E / 4 / 6g ~ ~ 70 'y, 1 77 y1 1. 1. 7 Z 0~ 2p' ~y l ~ I ~ ~ ~ x FENCE (AS NOTEDJ WATER ASSEMBLY / \ h• 'y Z h x 1• Z 1 x x Z m DAK TREE / ENO fENCE 0.3Nw / 1 ~ FORCE A14IN AT R VALVE / \ ~r / ' Z ~ h0 ~ Z x CRASS ~ of • 6 x Qp' ~ I ry p l 0~ ti of 18.169116' v W I h UN/DENT/F/ED TREE DQ W E / / Z •~2 Z Z Z, 1 1g 1 LlM/TED ACCESS ~ / \ 5 AZ x A Z Z 'h ~ c 0 PALM TREE / / ~'rd 6 6 sr . STORM DEAD TREE / \ x 7y' » 'fi'g" 7• 1g CRASS 1~ 0 6 7p GRASS ~ P/NE TREE / Q+ i / ,~I, s Z 2 1,1 Z. 10, ~ WATERLINE TREE / ~ / \ ~ / Z 15.01 x 0 0~ Z I l 6 I I ~ I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ OVERHEAD W/RE N 'ALE Q TREE AS NOTED ~ Q~ \ ~ ~ 2 / 3• ti ' ~ ; y ~ 21' 1' x pti p ~W / ~ ~ ~ ~ P~ / ti ~i ~ by .p o6 7~ ~ ~ , '..vn ~ x 7 p~2°' I I~ 10X~2p' I I~ I ~~~r o~~ I / '~Q ~ / \ 15 0\ Q / h x 'S' 7y' 60 ~ x 7 x ~P / p0 6p a~tA 0 ~ ~ h 1• x ~ I I hl~pq vJ,~ ~ N / 0 io \ ,r~'~ off' / ~ / 2y' ~ A Z 77' Z 1• ti ZO' 7 ~ 16 2010l1g~166I16 ~h~ ~ I U ~)m ~ / \ 0 / 1 GRASS b ~ " iy ~0 / \ Q~ b 10,.,..9. 7 i ~ 1• 1A ® 62 F 6(?~PD S 21 ~~0~ pip z ~n / P, ~ Q /~0 A• „ 7y' ~ 'gyp Z ~ Z p p, 02 1g 'h / 0 / \ Q 3 / ..ti ' ~ , 6 Q 3 731 ~ a ~ 1• 7 ~ o. p. ~ o Q '!~,("7 " 1 g q~ 3 Z •.1• A 7 p. x 2 7 9 ~ ° ~'m 01 p ~ I ti ~ ~ m ° 6D' D 60' 1?D' ~ W ~ 2 x1 b1IlE 1~06~ ~ ~~4 ~ ( W Z m / ~ ~ \ / A 2 A~ ~ h• '1A 7 ~ ti , 11 ® A7 2 x x IlE 2 x 1 / \ 0 'l x Z Z h b x / \ 1s /h ~ x ZZh .x 6 Z2 1 / \ 3g / ZA 61 ~ 799 x 1® ~ Z1• x 0 Ob / Y7 , A 77 g ~ ~ 1 7 10' ~ 1 111 o I SCALE.• 7" = 60' Z ~ / / \ / / x 4 g ~ d 7 ~9A Z9 ZZ 7p' ~ p~ 16' / \ / ~ Ay ~ h d gh y1 ~ 6 A9 7 Al Z ~2p'~16 ~ I ~ ro / / / / / 1 2 k~' 0' 'tic ~7~'• •Ary ~ 1• ~ 6 I / \ / / 2 ~ 7 Z 7 g Al 2 1• 0 74 9 p9 / 2 1 h, ~ , bpg I 11'~ ~ ~ I Q J~ h / h x ~ ~.0 / / \ / A• 0 7 7 cu ~ 77, 1~. ~ tii' 1. x 70' ~p I I \ A~ Ag p Ag d ~ 1 xZ g0 x Z x ~pyx°' ~I I ~i I - / /Z " A~ i• x AEI I / \ h. Gti ~ 7' / / \ 1P ~bZ A• ~ gA 0 d y 'p~ ~g 9 hyA ~ BRICK BRICK 7p 14~ pgl I I i o U 2p• Ir14~161,1~1y°~I 4 s' 116 in o FENCE 0,2NW J~• 7 1 h' k Ag ~ » 7y A h' 7~C A h$ ~ PAYERS PAYE' 0 / 0 ~ ~ 0 11,8 0 7 'S ',1 h1 / \ /3 / ~ y1 ~ h 6 A 7 37 Z 0• 1 7 9 y Z Zb h 0 / / \ / / hh~ ~ ~ ~ 96' hyx a y, A 10, 7~• 1~ 1A 6 1g 1h ,~1 lE _ , E ~ 1e~ it N 8947'D6" {Y ~ ~ ~ / / \ / ~ ti 7h Z h6 A 2 b 6 BO'h 11 6y" hA x " 19 7' hh0 Z7' 1s 1 ti •y 7 61 y1 x h 1 1 / 4 x 21x Zh yQ~o Zh h• hh1 ~ x1h 9 A~ 15 ~ Z"G' x " Z y i' .~'~2 " 1• 1• 1' » 22" 1~1' i' ~ 1 1~oD' ro~ 1 W o / \ / p / 6' 67 5' CDNC7 0' SIDEWALK ~ 2 7y6ti g 7h' 7A' 2 2y 2 B 19x1• A x7 74 13 e ti X 7 / \ y 0 x bx 1 , \ , V~ / / .19 ~ 4 . 1, 11111 211 ~"I~` 21p ~ ~ ~ x 12 1 I 0. w / / 18 \ / 6 19'/ A A 711' h ~ CURB 0.5 A' qq,,~h Zti' 1 ~ CURB 0.5 6'h 1, 10 \ A/ 0 2 ' 7 ~ ~ HIGH b'l 0 H/GH 1 • 2 i• 11, ~ 11~. 126 8 Cn / / ~ ?POSTS Ib 1 6 0 1 hg 1. ASPHQ[T 1~ \ /1. Z 6 1' p A by A' A• 1 7y' Z 1 3Z 7~ ' g1 y i '•g 1• 2 7 APf~T11~0 ~ _._x._._, 4~ / / \ / Z1 ~ Awrm SIGN ~ 1' 12 ~ A• 7 7y 9 1, 19 1., / 7 b. 1 I SIDEWALK 1' 00 1 p 7 ~ 4 b 7 . 13" p 1' r „ p 1• 0' 13y I ~ / \ / 2. ~ 1 9 1 e11 Z / ~ 1' •6.07' 7h' ( (4J AC U 0,5 RICH 71 7A. 1 Ap h2 1G ~ 111.1, 1 21' .~t-- ~ 1 11, ~ 0 12• ~ I vl a / \ pl ~ Z q 6o ZAa ZA• Z 7 77. 0 1Z / ~ \ , 1, 1.1~ A h Bur[aNC ovERHavG 1 Zh' , n x 1 g 61 Z 7 0 a: 1 ' 60,~11b a tip ~ 1 / / 19 \ 16 2e 6166 "10pb Z I A ti d 3b 77 1' 1y1 1' x 10 / \ 1~ 6 p 7 Z 76 b• ~ q0• ~ 7 CURB s.5' 7 Z 7 . 17. 16, 11ti 1~~- -~10~ 9s 1 1 g~ I I M W~ a / \ 71~' 9 Z 1 Y HICH 0 x' / / \ 1 p~ •7 " b ~ 36 d Z1' APPROX/MA L G4T/ON / / \ ° ~ ~ o•. i h b 7p 7g G I 17" 34,2z 4" X Y/MA~~ LQ~T/ON 11 ~ 0,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / , h ~ 9Z ~ ql~ G 4 e g OF FLOOD ON / \ ~ • 0/ e 13 p g 1~ e 7 6h rOD PONE I + ~ o o ~ rte, ~ ~ W Y 70N I LINES 4 ~ J ~ h ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ w / ,1A, k Z b" 2 1~ Q I +h0 7, Z TRANS/T/ON I LINE / - A , k ~ g 9 ~ 0~ , 7 Z7 18"e ° 16 6 1 ' H (SEE MAP r~OTE1,~BJ y~;~w x b AP r~OTE1,~BJ I y ~ ~ r ~ W a w ~ ~ ~ / V \ ~ ~ p " 1~y 0' !~d' n . s'ymsm mom. 4 m~ ~ ~ x / / \ p~J ,~h00 21 Oh A32g T£ b ' wrvE coNCRETE I z3", » Z1 71 0° 1 ~ I ~ l 1 ~ ~ / \ 20 1A 31 0, ti e?0 I ALK 0.5 NIGH 16 La24SS 15Ai161 ~ 2x 7 77 1b' 1' ,h v v~v ~ O i 1~~~16,1 1y1 Oa ~ ~ e Oy ~ ~ ~ 4 ti I Q o ~ ~ o \ FENCE 0.7Nw ~ h ~ ~ ( h. i• ~ b 31 7Z ~ _ / \ 9 5 ~ CON 5' w10E CONGf4ETE' e Z, A x ~ I - - - - - \ / / LIMPS R PAD 13 BUILDI " I / 7 g Q I = I I ~ 2y Q0 0~~ = 3'0 ' 9/ 0 0 9 2 SIDEWA[K 0.5 HGW 1 a I ~ I ~ 3r / A /g FENS 0' 1• b 11 aA1 y ~ hA _ _ ~ , I / \ if, h1 LbNCR E 3 "h Z 61 Z 11 1 71, 77 GROSS. 1, i~ `61 PRO RTY) L/NE- J \ \ Aza b ti Z I ~ x 7 7 x I 8 g AL WA~L.t ~ 21 FENCE 5,2iVw \ ~$h ~ X19 e 4G" PADS h 76• 1 i g ~ ~ m Q ~L WA~L.t y>~ ~W~ ~ ~a , 1 0 S CWM o ~ I ~ 6 6 I \ J -FENCE 06NW ~0 / ~ BU/LLNNC 1A 6g 5 AC UNl . ~7 7h 7 I 1 \ / A 15"Ip b BUILD/NG' OYE'RffANG X 1. A FOU~D I Four~D h' h ~ 1e ~ ~ ~ ~ o° w ~ 4 MATCHLi ~ s r• I PK D/SK ~ 0 2y chi ~ Z 'J c~ '""'~'~2» ; ~ '~'I LB x71 ~1, „ 24 i 18" Og b Z1 ~ 7 ~ ~ / \ ,(~j7' ~ 6• e20" 69 k I UGE METER ~ 9 1 ~ I RLS 932 I ~ ~ ~ ~ I J ~ it $9;3'319 W 362, 43 (MJ g 07 0 99 £ a RLS 13932 ai~~cEV = ~ 14 I ~ N 891725" iy 99293' (o I tit' I 27 ' (D&MJ b s ; q 66 , 1 A CR45S AITEA I I b 2~ 1 e 10 \ / \ y3• ~6 B" CONCRETE b b b' 1• 1 I A NSFORMER 4 7' Z' 4BcF2o" 1 • lE = 923 1~ lE _ 923 ~~h ®l 1f = 1B.B5 I I V , 51 FOUND qi 1s~B9'T1 oB" Ey y» 1192. 1' (oJ F ND ~ 1'~ ~ 2'~ \ 1 ~ ~ ,A 13" l IN wAt[ 1' I i b. 7 2 Z 4 1 I PO/Nl OF BEG/ LNG PARCEL /CpyrRpL\gTRVCTURE ; J8 1 " RETAN C 73 - I 7 , 7, 6 61 2 10"~ x . 7 11' 16 p 1y. 1 ~ 1 ~ 2 ' C/R 0, s 9^4!".8" .16" 1.~" 111 Cl~ ~ h ~ 1' / / ~E,_CDRN_FR F THE NW 9/4 \ 0 ~,i ° 12 .CURB 05 - I 1 1h b yy 36 ASPP60[T 0g 1p 1p C] 3 71 ib 1 I I 1' +,6~.,e 5 ~ 0 1D" RR T/E H/CH 1. b 7h• 7A• 7Z~ Z Z, g0 71 / Of THEW SW 9/4 SECT/ON 4 •;f, ~ 1x,1 y1 • e 1B" '1g' h6• RETAIN/NG WALLS 1 ~ 7 Zh~ Z Z 71 B" coNCRErE ~ 0~,0' 19~'~ 1 p°19".9"•°,~sa,102y~1as~12~%~1 111ry 1 ,-gy 1 14 h Z 1 1 / \ 22 7~~j 2, S 89'4706" E 101Lt5 ' D ~ 0 Ay'l6 75 WALL S/CN E7ASE 7 7r PETE 1 ~1 ~ . 3y 2y .91,tg' sa,1~ a 131o>I' I ~I x 3 ;N BASE1 1' ~ ro 1 x 1, -v ~7T, 1~ ~ 9 Z ~•UNDERCRGUNOG4S~NE1ER e,23 " , " h g 0, g 29 x 1. 6 / ~ 13 i 3 ~ g11 3 0' 6 - hg ~ „ e " Z 1 B ~ 19" ld" I ~ ~ r / e ~ 1 9 I { ,4REA - 99.9689 ACRESf ez9 \ / A B"RCP ,~3" 19 3 gAHK,~I 112 2 A A ~ 26 1 26 ' 221 6 Z 1 i 8' 1411" 1g 11,19 I p I p I 26 21 tit' 2 ~ I I p~ x1" # I 11' ~ a o v / •y1' I£ 35 B / ~ phlg I VVI 1 13' 16 Zb• 2h• 1 7Z, ZZ, Z W \ p 0 ~ 6' b• 2' b _ ~ A• 0 63 „ ~ 30y ~ I 1 7 x x 0 Z 77• lE - 1a.B7 1E2= I e.86 6~ 1g'I 3 I I 2 1s .~e ~I i ~ 11~ rnl I ~ E~ 0/ ~ y /8,4 . AA 1& GROSS 1 ~ 6~~ 0 0 A~ 7"1• x x I 6 6~ 4/ 1B" RGY° 0,1~ ~ 166 1 G S Z1 ~ A 6, g 1~ G ~I ~ 2 x 1y 1 \ / Ap = ~ a 1 6 3 y 41~ 'S vd ~ x e3s" I G>~' / Q I lE 36?8 8 15 1~ , I 161 I ~I - I I W W ~ v 111hc>~-,y hp 101 ~ s:°!a 1?" . r5" I I I ~.I r~ g6 / / r 1 ~g ~ 1~~ 1113" ~ ~ I ~h 0 6 y/ " bb ~ 0 E ~i b ~ ( / / (3J4 ti A H4 T 9 1• h D~ 67 7' I ~ ~ 0~ i,~~" 1174,6 iD" .17"1118 111'2 I 1~I h ~ ~ ~ fENCE 0,5NW 1 / A /h2 79 g Sp [ ~ p0.01• I 1' A bg x I y 9 I '~gp 41 1 I a = h 3p 13" ~ 11' ~ ~ 36 M Y ° ~ m ~ gg / ><y 0 8 ~4" yg A4~ ~ / K ~ 62 7 1g A ~ xZ " 0 1 `C 0 29 '71 / / 00 OA' 1 A r FORMER A 11 "SDEWAL 1 • ~0 Zb• 61 1 e 32" e 40 ~j? 29 7.3' ~ I I l w 0 0 / Q g. ~ 05 HrcH 7 I g1 Z M1 e 34" 7 x 2 h' I 1 I y~1 g m ti ~ 1 x20 » 1116 I ~ 119,1 0 1' ~ \ ai M r y ~ o / / X . 6" b 19" l,YTA v ~i 1 I d g x x ~77 1 ~ ~ / / /wM OZ a0 A h Q STAIRS { A A~ e24" ~ 0 .~21' 11 ~1~ I g o 'p 1 .19"2 ~ I I 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ m~~ h 16 A A bb p pig" / 6 4 6. Z A4C" •.I 9 =ti I ~ W 'S•3/ 11'/ / 0~ AOpO~ AO'1 A 60 68 >1 AC LINTS 17 10 4 7' x 7.1 1 9 =1~ ~ f 1 23' ~ 4~ h I 11 1 1 2 11° I rri W c~ o ''~21 I~ 0 ,10• ~ CS ~ I ^ p . x 11~ 11 2 1 1 ~ Q w d ~ ~ ~ W Q 1 A p ~1h/ / A 1 0 1~ 1' 3h 6 110 b h x h I ~ ~ ti 1119"~ 1 yh0/ 1 19 Ap Ai•1, A .II.D.t7 h h d b• 7• 9 I ~~W n~+/ 1"10' h~A 13~ ASPHALT AO• 31 A 76' 6° x7 e~C"" Z kp. h/ e Apt ~~y hb/ ~A O~AOAp~ A1'~y 12". ~ 4'CLF b7 2 ~ 33 A x .I 'h ~ Al ~ p $ 6~ 3• 11~ kpg 2 1' x ~ ~ v ~ fig, ?o" .20".1?" e 1e" ~2 g \1~~ 22~ ~ 4 = Q p2' ~ 0 r> ¢ .14" ,1k/ g 1• y1 1 i~ Ap A1k Al Al 0 90 g Z x~ h~ :I 19 :I ag I Iy ~ 2 p ~ e ~ ~ I .22" 0 1p 219 22'9 SET C/R a ° m ~ cn --x 1• ~ L8 x711 = ~ fl m ~ y/ 1h 1x.. AO'iB" 1• b 1~ 1' Z hg 9 xZ ' Z A ~ SFCRMER ~ 1" 7 b 7 p• 1 c / Ao' ~ GRASS ~ x , x 1• x 2 ~ h• ~ • 21y1 ~~2~16 2~~1 e a ~ ~ ~ 0 .9., x 11' x 2 1 10"-' -~'~`21' o; 0 ~ ~ m d ~ e " C[kYCRErE FLUME 16 017 [7 7b . S d C[F 7 01 01 p A X 1 1 7 / 181713 ~ A ~6 ~ X A 1 O/NT OF BEG/NN/NC A30" a 15" ,~y Ai' AZ 2 „ ~ p P40YGROUN 71 2 0' Z6 1 I' 1~ 2~,1' I 0 a ~ p i o , ti ~ ry i 1~• 1D„ 11• ~ 1 o ~ ~ Y z I, ~I 1 I 1' ,1' ^o° 4a" 9"" 1 1A 204 I ~ m o~ Q w r m w PARCEL / e 17 A7• Q V 1a h ZT I , : -~s ~ v a I w a g".5" . B ~2 ~ 20' I ~o ~ ~I ~ ~ T Q U ~ I ~ AO x b~ x POINT OF COMMENCEMENT " P A ~ 1 ~ Z~ 0 x 7 0 I ti " 13A " X1016 ASPHa[r A~ h bi v 1 h A 1' 19 ;w ~ ~ ~ , A• 6 I b hl '2p 1 0 4.4' p ~ 4 ~ ~ y ~ .~7" ~1.~~14b 10 111' I ` J ~ ~ U d ~ ~ PARCEL / I e 17,20 15 1A A A7 Z• 6 9 7 7 ~ 6 Z h' 1 A A I 7 e18" 0 1° e13" ~ 30 7~ 2 ti ~ 1 x 1 SW CORNER OF p Ai• A7' Z Z Zh A~ x TBM,¢~1 ' 1 ~ ~ 1h' 6 a ~ I w 196 7 11 1 • 1 ' ~ I 1 z .J ~ 1 ~ 29' 1~' e° a 2.10 ~sX2 x ~ ~ ! ~ ~ THE NW 7/4 OF ,gyp Z6 13 y1 A H~JR 6,4 4'CLF ph hg x x7 G/ TOP Z~. 3 7 1g 3 1' 2 ~ Oti ~e ~w ti° 2~~ 19 19 h R~ ~ THE SW 9/4 SECTION 4 y AZ ~ e 12" Ah' 1 19" 7 Z 2 L 4,39' \ •Z~1 ' 1 A2 CROSS ~ '~~jq Al 6 x E E'V 2 7 1B"RCP 9 50 A~6 AO. 90 ~ h A3" CURB 0.5' UGE ER " ~ y A~ A8 0 . 1 p0 " ~ ti " 1 i M~T /E 4?6?~,, A7 y s 1 6 4 " 0 '1 H1CH 0 • FDUND FENCE Gf7RNER1(2f21 16 Al AO• h9 6y 29 p 7 A4 1 6 p 6 97' A~ A~ A~ g1 ~ UG~~7E~R16``j i~ ~yb I 2X1$ e14 112 l ~ I ~ ~ W 4 X4" CM 1.4E, f•7S b ASPH4LT A~ 3 1• 0' 9 b ~0 0 A9 r~A• 7 Z g 7 A 7 _ _ 6 1 40 ACRE LINE q1 1 g y 7 7h h h h Z 1 1 113"~~ 1 2 ~ ~ ( I ~1~~x 11 x 11~ I~12 I I I F`~ I~" 1 1719 A ~ A"' 3' - 7'- nor--:- 7- 2 7 a c~~ 9 A19 ~ g1 " A A 1h 1y 7 1 0 G ZA ~ 3' 2 7 2 ~~6~ I ~ „ - S£ CDRN£R 2 1 y6 x2 x { I J ~ U I A AA NORTH BOUNDARY "SAl1 S LAKE y Z' h 61 ASPH4LT h t g~ ~ 01 1 . " ~-18"RCP ~ 71 Z 7y 7y ZA A' h A A' A 6 1 1 ~ . _ L~= 13321 (M~ ~ OF TH£ Nly 11h I z 1 16 ~ Z iM1 y 'h~ 3 R = 1155916 1/9 OF THE y x~ 1 6 ° 1g' A W N 00 9.28 E ~ 1~ " e13" _ ~ PARK 3RD ADDITION AS RECORDED 574" ti A 1 7 g ~ 7 0 50.29r M 1' 9~1'A1' e22" h6 e 17 ~ /E 429427" 1 /N PLAT BOOK 7f PAGE 29 (DJ ~ 1 p 9 A9 h ~2 S 0 2 1J 1 2~ py L = 5B2.BS' ~M~ SW 1/9 11' ~ 1~9 21~ 2 xJ11' a 6~ ~ W Q (J 4 ClF " e " h• A6 " Ale f1 67 " 2 ° 2" 1 1 AZ 6 A 7. 16 N GC'f9 ~9 E (2)164• F 24 A A 2z" 17" ~ 19. H F A 67WGiGD FENCE Ay' ' H~F a 18 A6 A 15" (2)3s,3 ~Z• 14" 30• g4 7 q 7 7A 7 Z'h• Z Z~' p 11,h ~ 1 is" ~ 1h' CH = S00'15'17E I SECT/ON 9 ~ x21' 0 1g' I I a Q ; 1- 11• 582.80' (M) 1x 2 { 11' I W EL U) 30.20' OJ A 7 - ~6. - - x ~.x 0 SE Cl " `R ` x x - AO• LB 6719 ~E'NCE 1,3N NCE 1.1 N N 2329" W 81 , 32 rMJ FENCE END 1.3N s" 5 FOUND 42" 1 • _1 ~ :b 6 ~h2-` ~ _ ~ 12' 1 ~2~~ 11ti ~ I a = 14247" (D&Mf ~ ~ ~ f~ I Ft7YCE 0,9N I I 7YZA ~ i N ~923:T0 w 8132' (D) I I ~ I 4'X4" CM e e32" e27" ? 14" 'l7' ~ W FENCE RBN NSf//GN ANS/T/ON e C STR z ib' 11 27" - s' ~1' mss; p 2 I 11..7'~1g, 1 I o R= 11359.16' U I TRANS/ZION f ~ NO /D L (J ,1' S A40" lE _ 19.14 ys 1 > a; I TRANSIT/GN ( I ( I l I ( I s f9" lE = 1653 ~ d' FENCE END ~ » ,p 1X97 1 11 ~1~~~ 12~`~c1 ~ 1 TDP f[EY = ?314 11 X 10 8" 118 I b2p~ 1~ L = .~39.s0' (D&M~ ~ W ~`~x I ~ r I G.3~; 25'w I I I I ! I ( I I r 0~ 3 14 e e" " 1 15 » A ~7 1' hl ~''i 4 10 ~ 7g 4 2 q e21 17 e ~ ti 1' 1 1 ' 1 ~ 4 12»,~ 5~ ` 1g, 5" CH = 500'4929 E (0) 1' y l 1' W /E _ ?0.57 11' B 9"B» x~ '~7;~ 6 1 ~ W w~ t I 2 ( ~ I a I s I s I ~ I s s I ~ x 1, 7h 7~ I ti I I ~ ~ I l x " 2 . x x l 15' 1 I S0031,34 E (M~ Z o I I I I 1 1 ~ e24" a 1s x e 13" x I I $ALL S LAKE IbARK 3 RD ADbiTION I I ` e W~ I I I I f ~ r ~ p i 1B .1,~"2?" 5 e23" ? I ~ 111 I Iwo 2 g ~1g~''. I ~ 21.7" ~1~p 11~ I I 33x59' ~D&M) N ~ Q I ~ ti I .9 1• ~ 6 I CC V F m I a = PER PLAT BOOK 71, PAGE 121 ( I ~ ` 1• Zg' 20 E 11~ 3~ I 1 I I 1 I ( 1 ~ x e 11" ~ 29" $I 1 u~, I 11 p e ~ I s" ~17ti, p~ py d Q I a~ I I I ~ o p~h9 13" p ~ 1' ~I y~ 11'13a ~ ~ I X19 ~ss"s 10" "i4 ~1 21~'~1 !15 2by ~ ~ ~ 0- J. 1 1 I I i 1 1 I 164" O x e 11 " F iA 7~• I h 1 I I I i I o x 1 1~ 1• f v e X, ~ 1 7 / 7 ~J H t0 --_---~-._.__...~.__._....-I-._-_.._.L..-_.--1 ~ i I PuaWCPARK ~ry GE y 7i A27 ~ ~11' f I~~~ ~1~1g~; ~ 14" 2*~?)h~OiY/R~e D[~ ~ 0. ~ (A _..,.-_...._..,.,__-L_._..._1__......-J._-_. TpACi2 w ~ ~ 1B p e 30" I o s h h I I b t n,a 2 1 oP 112" I Ih loll ~ ~1p f ~ ,x.13" .a" ~x~p,Ry i1 Q I I I U I I U lq ~ N ~ ~ ~ I I : ° 1 ~ f 5 y~ 10 &5 U 11 11• 1y 111 ail ~ • e. 01 7g' 17" 70, 1B ~ ~ ti, 66 e " A ~ I h 1 I I ;rh xe2s" ex ~ 1E0 Z ee13 7 1• I1. I ST. CROIX DRIVE h ~IPt 9 xe 13„2o x I Z 1 Z- f1 a BOUNLZ4RY OF ~ d ~ ' 1 ~1 11 ~ o ~ ~ 186 SET C/R 2 y , H/ADEN OAKS ~Of ~ Z © ~ I ~ ~ hV e25" V°R Gx17s " T 11 ~ 60 RIGHT-OF-WAY (P) EAST BOUNDARY SALL S LAKE ~ e2a" 1pP~~p PP 2024 s21" e27 1 ~ ~ PARK 3RD ADD/TION"AS RECORDED ~ p~ p 1g' I I I I I Iv~I ~ 9: ~ I LB 6711 N ~~roBS~„ " ~ Q,,, ( X41>p~„ ~ l,~5~~• S 8f'91'~9 W SE7 C/R 0 0 LL ~ ~ /N P1AT BOOK 71, PACE 29 (DJ 9 g1 ,~q Pa i1 I r , .24kg 7 G1 pV• h 1 I x x 4eex 6 00 71• Z6• .z1" g~ 16 I I {e Z S H' 201: 2.~U6 ~ 73 /off 7221 (D) V ~ F.. I { 0 0~ x x 7 17 1 1 1• " y p 24"e x ~ ~ I 1~,~` ' 2°~ ~ I s`~~'~~~ 45" 8528" y, LB s7~1 p I tit W ~ ~ C/R'~ ~i. 1' (M) ~ 3 4s " ~ { 1~ I 1 p e24 1 11' ~ 111 ~ 11 ~ ~ ( ' ~ LB x71 f 2 NORTHEAST CDRNER ~ I I ~S~ C/RI ~ 1 6 ~ r ~ OF HIDDEN QAKS (OJ ~ 9' x"34'"" " B 67, 1 I FOUND 7 s 1 N 8933 99" W 362.43 ~Mfi~4TCf~ ~l ~~,`~~B s~ i D~' D44" E I HIDDEN OAKS W I 1 2" lR x 71• N 892723 w 492.43' (D 2i / 1 2.7 (D&M~ ~ PLAT BOOK i 02, PAGES 20 & 21 ~ 6 ? 7B; I35" h1 FOUND e 74 93148" Ey g» 192, 1' (D) / I t o, " 9 9" 191, 1' (oJ F ND 1~ 1 I Q- N 893319 W 97022 (MJ Z C/R 0. ~ „e8" a 18" 13 I 1 1 L I I , e" e» e 9is,1o"h " 0 11 I 111 ~ C//~ y ; 12 I I 0 14 9 e,A,6" T B 1QB'~ 7' I 6, A9,1 A51Q"1$10 7 f 2 Sc B ~ 1as~ 11a ~ 111 1 2 ~ - 99 r31o ~ I I x7 I ~ + ~ UNPLATTED LANDS 99"erA10" I n d o i ~i ~ . LEGAL DESCRIPTION ~ ~ ~ .,"..ee SHEET N0. I Of 2 of ~ ~ ~Iti~a a . 3 ~ I ~1 LANDS OF AB o p CITY OF CLEARWATER +.I I $ NOV 0 8 2005 of 2 A A, A? A PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF CLEARWATER WATER SYSTEMS GGENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES: GRADING NOTES: 1. SANITARY SEWERS, FORCE MAINS, AND STORP FDOT STANDARD NOTES: 1. ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM (1988). 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING EXCAVATIONS AGAINST COLLAPSE AND WILL PROVIDE BRACING VS, AND STORM SEWERS CROSSING WATER MAIN SHALL BE LAID TO PROVIDE 1. ALL MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE FDOT RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL CONFORM TO THE FDOT ROADWAY AND ~F 18 INCHES BETWEEN THE INVERT OF THE UPPER PI PE AND THE CROWN OF TRAFFIC DESIGN STANDARDS (LATEST EDITION). STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS (LATEST EDITION) AND THE SUPPLEMENTS SHEETING OR SHORING AS NECESSARY. TRENCHES SHALL BE KEPT DRY WHILE PIPE AND APPURTENANCES ARE BEING PLACED, A MINIMUM VERTICAL DISTANCE OF 18 INCHES BI SI BLE. 2. LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS, AND DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES, STRUCTURES, AND OTHER FEATURESARE DEWATERING SHALL BE USED AS REQUIRED, THE LOWER PIPE WHENEVER POSSIBLE. - SHOWN ACCORDING TO THE BEST INFORMATION AVAI LABLE AT THE TIME OF PREPARATION OF THESE PLANS, THERETO. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS, AND DIMENSIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES, 2. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING THE NECESSARY DEWATERING PERMITS FROM THE APPLICABLE FLORIDA WATER WHERE SANITARY SEWERS, FORCE MAINS, RECL ~E MAINS, RECLAIMED WATER MAINS AND STORM SEWERS MUST CROSS A 2. THE APPLICANT'S ENGINEER RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SHALL INSURE THAT THE MAINTENANCE OF STRUCTURES AND OTHER FEATURES AFFECTING THIS WORK PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. MANAGEMENT DISTRICT OR OTHER REGULATORY AGENCY, POTABLE WATER MAIN WITH LESS THAN 18 INCHI THAN 18 INCHES VERTICAL DISTANCE: (1) BOTH THE SEWER AND THE WATER TRAFFIC PLAN (MOT) FOR THE PROJECT 15 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE FDOT INDEX NUMBERS (600 SERIES) AND MAIN SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF DUCTILE TROP 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECK PLANS FOR CONFLICTS AND DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3, CONTRACTOR IS TO PROVIDE EROSION CONTROUSEDIMENTATION BARRIER (HAY BALES OR SILTATION CURTAIN) TO PREVENT STORM SEWERS IF IT IS NOT AVAILABLE IN THE DUCTILE IRON PIPE (DIP) AT THE CROSSING. (DIP IS NOT REQUIRED FOR THESE DOCUMENTS: THE MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR STREETS AND HIGHWAYS (U. S, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE OWNER'S ENGINEER OF ANY CONFLICT BEFORE PERFORMING ANY WORK SILTATION OF ADJACENT PROPERTY, STREETS, STORM SEWERS, WATERWAYS, AND EXISTING WETLANDS PER THE CONSTRUCTION MAYBE C900 PVC AT THE GROSSING SUFFICIEN' iJ~1BLE IN THE SIZE PROPOSED / ALSO, A SANITARY SEWER OR FORCE MAIN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FHWA), VG) SUFFICIENT LENGTHS OF DIP MUST BE USED TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM U D I AR S WHERE ) INTHE AFFECTED AREA, DRAWINGS. IN ADDITION, CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE STRAW, MULCH, OR OTHER SUITABLE MATERIAL ON GRO N N EA SEPAFATION OF 10 FEET BETWEEN ANY TWO JOI NANY TWO JOINTS (2) ALTERNATIVELY, ONE OF THE CROSSING MAINS SHALL 3. AT THE END OF EACH WORK PERIOD, ANY DROP-OFF IN THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE TRAVEL WAY OF THE STATE ROAD CONSTRUCTION RELATED TRAFFIC IS TO ENTER AND EXIT THE SITE. IF, INTHE OPINION OF THE ENGINEER AND/OR FLORIDA DEPARTMENT CLOS D 0 OF F NG STEEL OF PVC CAST NG CENTERED ON THE CROSSING. WHERE WATER SHALL BE BACKFILLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD INDEX 600 OR SHALL BE OTHERWISE PROTECTED VNTH 4, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE EXTREME CAUTION IN AREAS OF BURIED UTILITIES AND SHALL PROVIDE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND10R CITY OF CLEARWATER, EXCESSIVE QUANTITIES OF EARTH ARE TRANSPORTED OFF-SITE BE EN E WITH A 2 FOOT LONG STEEL AT LEAST 48 HOURS NOTICE TO THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES IN ORDER TO PERMIT MARKING THE EITHER BY NATURAL DRAI NAGE OR BY VEHICULAR TRAFFIC, THE CONTRACTOR 15 TO REMOVE SAID EARTH TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE MAIN CROSSES BELOW SEWER MAIN, ENCASEME SIN, ENCASEMENT OF BOTH MAINS IS MANDATORY, TEMPORARY BARRIER WALL AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE, LOC TIONS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES IN ADVANCE OF CONSTRUCTION, BY CALLING FLORIDA ENGINEER AND/OR CITY OF CLEARWATER OFFICIALS. A 4, IF THE PERMITTED WORK IS ON A ROADWAY THAT HAS BEEN SELECTED AS A HURRICANE OR DISASTER EVACUATION E of FLORIDA INC. AT 1-eoo-432.4770 ALL JOINTS ON THE WATER MAIN WITHIN 20 FEE1 SUNSHINE STATE ONE CALL CENT R , MTHIN 20 FEET OF THE CROSSING MUST BE LEAK FREE AND MECHANICALLY ROUTE, THE APPLICANT, AT THE PRE-CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE IS REQUIRED TO PRESENT, AS PART OF THE WORK 4. IF WIND EROSION BECOMES SIGNIFICANT DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STABILIZE THE EFFECTED AREA USING RESTRAINED. A MINIMUM VERTICAL CLEARANCE 4L CLEARANCE OF 6 INCHES MUST BE MAI NTAINED AT THE CROSSING. PLAN, AN EMERGENCY FUNCTIONAL RESTORATION PLAN TO ADDRESS EUENTUALITIES SUCH AS HURRICANES, 5, THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REPAIRING ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING FACILITIES, ABOVE OR BELOW SPRINKLING IRRIGATION OR OTHER ACCEPTABLE METHODS. , E CONTRACTOR, GROUND, THAT MAY OCCUR AS A RESULT OF THE WORK PERFORMED BY TH ALL CROSSING SHALL 6E ARRANGED SO THAT TI QED SO THAT THE SEWER PIPE JOINTS AND THE WATER MAIN JOINTS ARE 5, THE CONTRACTOR MUST CALL THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION, HAVING JURISDICTION OVER 5. THERE IS TO BE NO DISCHARGE (I.E. PUMPING, SHEET FLOW, SWALE, DITCH, ETC,) INTO EXISTING DITCHES OR CANALS WITHOUT THE EQUIDISTANT FROM THE POINT OF CROSSING (P CROSSING (PIPES CENTERED ON THE CROSSING). THE PROJECT AT LEAST 48 HOURS, BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION WITHIN THE FDOTRIGHT-OF-WAY TO DETERMINE THE 6, ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES MUST BE IN PLACE AND TESTED OR INSPECTED PRIOR TO ROADWAY BASE AND USE OF SETTLING PONDS. IF THE CONTRACTOR DESIRES TO DISCHARGE INTO THE EXISTING DITCHES OR CANALS A SETTLING POND LOCATION OF THE EXISTI NG TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECT CABLE. SURFACE CONSTRUCTION. PLAN PREPARED BYTHE CONTRACTOR MUST. BE SUBMITTED TO AND APPROVED BYTHE ENGINEER OF RECORD AND SOUTH FLORIDA G MENT DISTRICT AND/OR FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. WHERE A NEW PIPE CONFLICTS WITH AN EXISTII' tITH AN EXISTING PIPE, THE NEW PIPE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF DIP AND 6. THE LOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN IS APPROXIMATE ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT TAND INSPECTION MANA E THE CROSSING SHALL BE ARRANGED TO MEET T 7, IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THE PERMI QED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS ABOVE: LOCATION DURING CONSTRUCTION, RELOCATION OF UTILITIES SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH UTILITY COMPANIES AFTER REQUIREMENTS OF THE VARIOUS GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL 6. ANY FILL TO BE PLACED WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN SHALL BE COMPACTED ACCORDING TO FEMA REQUIREMENTS TO PREVENT IDENTIFICATION OF CONFLICT BY CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR WILL NOTIFY ENGINEER IN ADVANCE BEFORE ANY NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, AND SCHEDULE INSPECTIONS ACCORDING TO AGENCY SETTLEMENT BELOW THE 100 YEAR FLOOD AND AN ENGINEER SHALL CERTIFY THAT ALL FEMA REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET, PARALLEL INSTALLATIONS INSTRUCTION. RELOCATION, 2. A MINIMUM OF 10 FOOT HORIZONTAL SEPARAI NTALSEPARATION SHALL BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN ANY TYPE OF SEWER AND 7, BEFORE PERMIT APPROVAL AND CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT, THE APPLICANT MUST CONTACT THE FLORIDA 8. ALL SPECIFICATIONS AND DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO SHALL BE OF LATEST REVISIONS AND/0R LATEST SANITARY SEWER NOTES: 1. A HORIZONTAL SEPARATION OF 10 FEET SHALL BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN WATER MAINS AND SANITARY SEWER. MAINTAIN 18"VERTICAL WATER MAIN IN PARALLEL INSTALLATIONS WHEP CATIONS WHENEVER POSSIBLE, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LOCAL MAINTENANCE OFFICE TO SCHEDULE APRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING. EDITION, SEPARATION BETWEEN WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM, INCASES WHERE IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO MAINTE 9, ALL WORK PERFORMED SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES OF THE VARIOUS 2, ALL SANITARY SEWER MAINS & SERVICE LATERALS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PIPE, C-900, MUST BE LAID IN A SEPARATE TRENCH OR ON AP BLE TO MAINTAIN A 10 FOOT HORIZONTAL SEPARATION, THE WATER MAIN 8. THE APPLICANT AT THE EARLIEST CONVENIENT TIME SHALL NOTIFY IN WRITING ALL RIGHT-OF-WAY USERS AFFECTED BY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE WORK, ALL WATER AND WASTE WATER SYSTEMS, :NCH OR ON AN UNDISTURBED EARTH SHELF LOCATED ON ONE SIDE OF THE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT. AN ELEVATION THAT THE BOTTOM OF THE WATER MAIN IS AT LEAST 18 INCHES g, ALL CURB CUT RAMPS MUST FACE IN THE DIRECTION OF PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL. U NOT LIMITED TO THESE SYSTEMS ARE TO BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTEDACCORDING TO THE LOCAL SEWER OR FORCE MAIN AT SUCH AN ELEVATlOA B T 3, ALL SANITARY SEWER WORK SHALL CONFORM WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION STANDARDS AND GOVERNING AGENCY STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. INTHE EVENT OF A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ABOVE THE TOP OF THE SEWER. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND THE LOCAL GOVERNING AGENCY STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS, THE LOCAL SPECIFICATIONS. 10. SPECIFY THE ALPHANUMERIC IDENTIFICATION FOR THE CURB CUT RAMPS PER STANDARD INDEX 304. A COPY GOVERNING AGENCY STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHALL CONTROL. WHERE IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO MAINTAIN A VER- 4. ALL SANITARY SEWER COVERS SHALL BE U.S. FOUNDRY 170-W OR APPROVED EQUAL, IN DOT RIGHT-OF-WAY, FRAME AND LID TO BE ~INTAIN A VERTICAL DISTANCE OF 18 INCHES IN PARALLEL INSTALLATION, THE OF THE APPROPRIATE DETAIL(S) MUST BE SHOWN ON THE PLANS, WATER MAIN SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF DIP A CTED OF DIP AND THE SEWER OR THE FORCE MAIN SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED 10, CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT FOR APPROVAL TO THE OWNER'S ENGINEER SHOP DRAWINGS ON ALL PRECAST 170-BJ (U.S. FOUNDRY), LT IN REMOVAL OF DIP (IF AVAILABLE IN THE SIZE PROPOSED) W AND MANUFACTURED ITEMS, FAILURE TO OBTAIN APPROVAL BEFORE INSTALLATION MAY RESU 5. SANITARY SEWER MAINS AND LATERALS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM COVER OF THREE (3) FEET AND SHALL BE INSTALLED ACCOMPANIED BY MAIN SHOULD ALWAYS BE ABOVE THE SEWER. PROPOSED) WITH A MINIMUM VERTICAL DISTANCE OF 6 INCHES, THE WATER 11. AT THE END OF EACH WORK PERIOD, ANY DROP-OFF IN THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE TRAVEL WAY OF THE AND REPLACEMENT AT CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE, THE SEWER. JOINTS ON THE WATER MAIN SHALL BE LOCATED AS FAR APART STATE ROAD SMALL BE BACKFILLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD INDEX 600 OR SHALL BE OTHERWISE )N THE SEWER OR FORCE MAIN (STAGGERED JOINTS) PROTECTED WITH TEMPORARY BARRIER WALL AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. A METAL TAPE SIMILAR TO "TERRATAPE" COLORED GREEN AND LAID ONE FOOT ABOVE THE PIPE. A5 POSSIBLE FROM THE JOINTS ON THE SEWER 11, AT LEASE 3 WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER AND D SUPPLY THEM WITH ALL APPROVED SHOP DRAWINGS THE CONTRACTOR'S NAME, 6. ALL PIPING SHALL BE COLOR CODED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF CLEARWATER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STANDARDS; 3. ALL WATER MAINS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF APPROPRIATE AGENCIES AN AMINIMUM OF 36 INCHES OF COVER, 12. ALL M07 LANE CLOSURE SIGNS SHALL BE COVERED WHEN LANES ARE NOT CLOSED. NO LANES ARE TO BE STARTING DATE PROJECTED SCHEDULE AND OTHER INFORMATION AS REQUIRED, ANY WORK PERFORMED GREEN -RAW SEWAGE PURPLE - EFFLUENT BLUE -POTABLE WATER , CLOSED BEFORE 9:00 AM AND ALL LANES ARE TO BE OPENED BY 4:00 PM. PRIOR TO NOTIFYING THE ENGINEER OR WITHOUT AGENCY INSPECTOR PRESENT MAY BE SUBJECT TO REMOVAL 4, ALL ON-SITE PVC WATER MAINS 4-12 INCHES S 4-12 INCHES SHALL BE ACCORDANCE WITH AWWA C-900 STANDARDS DR18 AND REPLACEMENT AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. 7. PIPE AND FITTINGS FOR P.V.C. GRAVITY SEWER PIPE SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF A.S.T,M, SPECIFICATION D-3034 SDR 35 OR CLASS 150 AND HAVE THE O.D. DUCTILE IRON. SDR 26 AS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. ALL FORCE MAINS TO BE C900 DR 25, ( ) DUCTILE IRON. ALL ON-SITE PVC WATER MAINS 2-3 INCHES SHALL BE CLASS 13. THE PAVEMENT SPECIFICATION SHOULD READ: MATCH EXISTING TYPE AND DEPTH OF ASPHALT TO 3 Yz" 1120 OR 1220 SDR 21 AND MEET REQUIREMENT' ( TH OTHER WORK BEING 12, WORK PERFORMED UNDER THIS CONTRACT SHALL INTERFACE SMOOTHLY IM SHALL BE P.E. MEETING AWINA C-901. IPE SHALL REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM D-2241. WATER MAINS SMALLER THAN 2 INCHES MAXIMUM, INCLUDING FRICTION COURSE, B. MIN SCHEDULE 40 PVC SEWER PIPE FOR 4" OR SMALLER SEWER PIPE, PERFORMED ON SITE BY OTHER CONTRACTORS AND UTILITY COMPANIES. IT WILL BE NECESSARY FOR THE ENDOT OR APPROVED EQUAL. PIPE SHALL BE EI 901. IPE SHALL BE POLY-E DRISCO PIPE 5100 ULTRACINE OR ENDOPURE BY ~E SHALL BE ENCLOSED IN BLUE SLEEVE. WATER MAINS 14" THRU 36"SHALL 14. PLANT MIX BASE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 12"AND COMPACTED IN 6" LIFTS TO 98% MAXIMUM DENSITY CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE AND SCHEDULE HIS ACTIVITIES, WHERE NECESSARY WITH OTHER CONTRACTOR AND UTILITY COMPANIES, 9. SEWER DEEPER THAN 10 FT REQUIRED TO BE MIN OF SDR 26 PVC PIPE, BE AWWA C-905 DR21. ACCORDING TO AASHTO-T180. CONSTRUCTION TO CONFORM TO SECTION 200. BASE TO BE PRIMED AFTER COMPACTION. 10. SANITARY SEWER LOCATOR TAPE REQUIRED T BE 18"ABOVE ALL PVC MAINS, FORCE MAIN LOCATOR TAPE REQUIREDABOVE ALL 5. ALL DUCTILE IRON PIPE SHALL CONFORM TO 1 13. ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY ARE TO BE RESTORED TO ORIGINAL CONDITION OR CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI STANDARDS A21.51, MINIMUM BETTER. FORCE MAINS. CLASS 50. 14. STABILIZED SUBGRADE -MINIMUM 12"THICK AND COMPACTED TO 98% MAXIMUM DENSITY ACCORDING TO 11. ALL SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAINS REQUIRED TO HAVE LOCATOR WIRE INSTALLED DIRECTLY ON TOP OF PIPE, AASHTO-180. MATERIAL TO HAVE MINIMUM L.B.R. OF 40 AND CONFORM TO SECTION 160. 14, REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT OF ALL PRIVATE AND PUBLIC PROPERTY AFFECTED BY THIS WORK SHALL BE 6. CONFLICTS BETWEEN WATER AND STORM OR RESTORED TO A CONDITION EQUAL TO OR BETTER THAN EXISTING CONDITIONS BEFORE COMMENCING LINES AS NECESSARY. AND STORM OR SANITARY SEWER TO BE RESOLVED BY ADJUSTING THE WATER UC ION WORK UNLESS SPECIFICALLY EXEMPTED BYTHE PLANS. ADDITIONAL COSTS ARE INCIDENTAL 12. ANY PIPE I N PAVED AREAS AND OTHER AREAS HAVING LESS THAN 36 OF COVER WHICH MUST SUPPORT VEHICLE WEIGHT, SHALL BE CONSTR T APPROVED DUCTILE IRON PIPE, SCHEDULE 80 PVC OR SDR 18 (C-900) BELL AND SPIGOT PVC. 15. REMOVE ALL MUCK, OVERBURDEN, AND ROOT MATERIAL TO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, AND BACKFILL TO THE TO OTHER CONSTRUCTION AND NO EXTRA COMPENSATION IS TO BE ALLOWED. 7. CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL TEMPORARY BLOW REQUIRED SUBGRADE WITH CLEAN, GRANULAR MATERIAL IN MAXIMUM 6" LIFTS COMPACTED T0100% OF PORARY BLOW-0FFS AT THE END OF WATER SERVICE LATERALS TO ASSURE MAXIMUM DENSITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH AASHTO T99-C SPECIFICATIONS, AND EACH LIFT TESTED BEFORE 13, ANY PIPE WITH LESS THAN 12" OF COVER TO REAPPROVED DUCTILE IRON PIPE. ADEQUATE FLUSHING AND DISINFECTION. ~ECTION. PLACING NEXT LIFT. 15. ALL DISTURBED AREAS ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION, WHICH ARE NOT TO BE SODDED ARE TO BE SEEDED AND MULCHED TO LOCAL GOVERNING AGENCY STANDARDS AND MAINTAINED UNTIL A SATISFACTORY ' CEPTABLE TO THE REGULATORY AGENCY AND ENGINEER OF RECORD HAVE BEEN 14,SEWER MAINS AND MANHOLES MUST BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO ANY CONNECTION OF SERVICE LINES TO THE MAINS. 8. RESTRAINTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT ALL FITT STAND OF GRASS AC ED AT ALL FITTINGS AND HYDRANTS AS SHOWN ON DETAILS. 16. SODDING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 575. OBTAINED. ANY WASHOUTS, REGRADING, RESEEDING, AND GRASSING WORK, AND OTHER EROSION WORK IUGH 12" SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWWA C-900, PIPE SHALL BE CLASS 17. FLAGGERS MUST BE PRESENT DURING THE INGRESSAND EGRESS OF CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES TO AND FROM THE CONTRACTOR/SUBCONTRACTOR UNTIL THE SYSTEM IS ACCEPTED FOR 15, MANHOLE COVERS IN PAVED AREAS ARE TO BE FLUSH WITH THE TOP OF PAVEMENT. MANHOLES INNON-PAVED AREAS ARE TO BE g, ALL PCV WATER MAINS 4"THROUGH 12"SHALL REQUIRED, WILL BE PERFORMED BY „ MAINTENANCE BYTHE REGULATORY AGENCY AND ENGINEER OF RECORD. EXACTLY 3 ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. 150 AND MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SDR 18 II ~S OF SDR 18 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-2241, THE PROJECT SITE. WARNING SIGNS MUST BE ERECTED ADVISING MOTORIST OF TRUCKS ENTERING THE HIGHWAY. 16, NO FREE DROP OVER EIGHTEEN INCHES IS PERMITTED IN MANHOLES, 16, CHAPTER 77-153 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES REQUIRES THAT AN EXCAVATOR NOTIFY ALL GAS UTILITIES A 10. MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION METHODS F DN METHODS FOR WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE MINIMUM OF TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO EXCAVATING, MAPS SHOW ONLY THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF _ SOUND CONCRETE SURFACES, THE SURFACE PREPARATION WITH THE CITY OF CLEARWATER CODES PLANS CODES, PLANS, AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION, LATEST REVISION GAS MAINS AND DO NOT SHOW SERVICE LINES. THE ONLY SAFE AND PROPER WAY TO LOCATE EITHER MAINS J 17. COATINGS SHALL BE APPLIED TO CLEAN, DRY, STRUCTURALLY , OR SERVICE LINES IS BY AN ON-SITE INSPECTION BY THE RESPECTIVE GAS COMPANY TWO WORKING DAYS APPLICATION, AND CURING PROCEDURES FOR THE COATING TO BE APPLIED SHALL BE IN STRICTACCORDANCE WITH THE THEREOF AND SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIFICATION SEC?FICATIONS THERETO, APPROVAL AND CONSTRUCTION OF ALL POTABLE LNG A CONSTRUCTION AREA, MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS, ALL GROUTED AREAS IN MANHOLES SHALL BE COATED. WATER SERVICE MAIN EXTENSIONS AND CONNE BEFORE ENTER GOVERNING AGENCY VS AND CONNECTIONS MUST BE COORDINATED THROUGH THE LOCAL MANHOLES INTO WHICH A FORCE MAIN DISCHARGES SHALL BE LINED. Interior Liner (New Pre-Cast Concrete Structures} 17. AS-BUILT DRAWINGS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RECORDING INFORMATION ON A SET Interior liner shall be "Dura Plate 100" PVC Ifner as manufactured by A-Loc, Inc,; "AGRU Sure Grlp" PP-R (Polypropylene Random Copolymer) liner as OF THE APPROVED PLANS CONCURRENTLY WITH CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS. WITHIN TWO (2) WEEKS 11. ALL WATER SERVICES TO BE COORDINATED' ;OORDINATED WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL /MECHANICAL /FIRE PREVENTION manufactured b Alois Gruber GmbH, or approved equal, as specified on the design drawings. FOLLOWING FINAL INSPECTION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT ONE (1) SET OF AS-BUILT DRAWINGS TO THE y DRAWINGS AND OR ENGINEERS RESPONSIBLE F ESPONSIBLE FOR THE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY ENGINEER. THE FINAL RECORD DRAWINGS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS. OF THE CONTRACTOR TO ASSURE THE COORDII Interior surfaces of pre-cast structures receiving forcemain discharge shall be proteted from physical and chemical deterioration, The liner shall cover all :THE COORDINATION OF THE WATER SERVICE AND THE REQUIRED FIRE interior wall and to surfaces and shall be formed into the concrete surface during the pre-casting process and held in place by imbedded ribs, PROTECTION SERVICES TO THE BUILDINGS, UNI' 1, DRAWINGS TO BE THREE-MIL BLACK LINE MYLAR, p BUILDINGS, UNITS OR FACILITIES INCLUDED IN THIS CONSTRUCTION. GENERAL NOTES FOR WORK WITHIN FDOT RIGHT OF WAY 2. DRAWINGS TO BE LEGIBLY MARKED TO RECORD ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION, OCAT ON OF ALL WATER AND WASTE WATER PIPING AND RELATED The liner shall be installed in accordance v~ith the specific instructions of the manufacturer, STORMWATER POND AND UTILITY CLEARING AP 3, DRAWINGS SHALL SHOWACTUAL L I f CLEARING AND SITE PREPARATION NOTES 1. SEE GOVERNING STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. APPURTENANCES BOTH ABOVE AND BELOW GROUND. ALL CHANGES TO PIPING LOCATION INCLUDING The connector for pipe ingressJegress through the pre-cast structure shall be "A Lok" as manufactured by A-Loc, Inc.; specific recommendation of Alois 1. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO PREPARE THE SITE F , HORIZONTAL & VERTICAL LOCATIONS OF UTILITIES AND APPURTENANCES SHALL BE CLEARLY SHOWN AND Gruber GmbH, or approved equal, ACCORDANCE, WITH SOILS TESTING REPORT. C IRE THE SITE PRIOR TO BEGINNING INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION IN ROADWAY. AND TRAFFIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, GATED JANUARY 2004, AND FOOT STANDARD NG REPORT. COPIES OF THE SOILS REPORTARE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE SPF~IFICATIONS FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION, DATED 2004. REFERENCED TO PERMANENT SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS, DRAWINGS SHALLALSO SHOWACTUAL INSTALLED l Reference Wastewater Division Policies, Standards and Specifications for Subdivisions and Commercial Developments, Section 7.5.3, OWNER OR THE SOILS TESTING COMPANY, OMPANY, 2. CONSTRUCTION OF MITERED ENO SECTIONS PER FOOT STANDARD INDEX 273. - PIPE MATERIAL, CLASS, ETC, - 4, DRAWINGS SHALL CLEARLY SHOW ALL FIELD CHANGES OF DIMENSION AND DETAIL INCLUDING CHANGES 18. CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING FORCE MAIN 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAR AND GRUB ONLY !D GRUB ONLY THOSE PORTIONS OF THE SITE NECESSARY FOR 3. CONSTRUCTION OF DRAINAGE CONNEC110NS PER FOOT STANDARD INDEX 280. MADE BY FIELD ORDER OR BY CHANGE ORDER. E U S S FORA CO E 0 T E IST NG FORCE MAIN SHOULD BE MADE TO WATER UTILITIES ENGINEERING. SUCH REQUEST CONSTRUCTION. DISTURBED AREAS WILL BE S 5. DRAWINGS SHALL CLEARLY SHOW ALL DETAILS NOT ON ORIGINAL CONTRACT DRAV~INGS BUT CONSTRUCTED R Q E T NN CTI N 0 AN X I LEAS WILL BE SEEDED, MULCHED, OR PLANTED WITH OTHER APPROVED INTHE FIELD. ALL EQUIPMENT AND PIPING RELOCATION SHALL BE CLEARLY SHOWN. SHOULD INCLUDE PLANS AND ESTIMATES OF WASTEWATER GENERATION VOLUME, PRIOR TOAPPROVAL OF PLANS, AN FDEP LANDSCAPE MATERIAL IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWIN ELY FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION... 4, CONSTRUCTION OF TYPE E OR TYPE F OR DROP CURB PER FDOT STANDARD INDEX 300. 6. LOCATIONS OF ALL MANHOLES HYDRANTS VALVES & VALVE BOXES SHALL BE SHOWN. ALL VALVES SHALL WASTEWATER APPLICATION IS REQUIRED, WHEN THE APPROVED CONNECTION TO EXISTING FORCE MAIN, CONTRACTORS USING A HOT EMOVED DURING CLEARING AND GRUBBING SHALL BE STOCKPILED AT A SITE 5. MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC PER FDOT STANDARD INDEX #613 DURING CONSTRUCTION OF E CE FRO AT LEAST TWO 2 AND PREFERABLY THREE 3 PERMANENT POINTS, TAP METHOD INTO A STAINLESS STEEL SLEEVE SHALL MAKE THE CONNECTION, 3. THE TOP 4" TO 6" OF GROUND REMOVED DURI BE REFER N D M ( ) 7. DRAWINGS TO BE SIGNED AND SEALED BY PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. ENGINEER OF RECORD REQUIRED TO DESIGNATED BY THE OWNER TO BE USED FOR L 3E USED FOR LANDSCAPING PURPOSES, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY WESTBOUND LANE, DRIVEWAY AND ADJACENT DITCHWORK. MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC PER FDOT INSPECT AS NEEDED TO PROVIDE AS-BUILTS TO CITY OF CLEARWATER REQUIREMENTS.. THE PERSON REQUESTING THE CONNECTION SHALL OBTAIN RIGHTS•OF-WAY PERMITS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY RESTORATION THE OWNER, STANDARD INDEX # 617 DURING CONSTRUCTION ADJACENT OITCHWORK. COSTS IMPOSED BY THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AGENT. ' AS-BUILT DRAWINGS: 4. ALL CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AND OTHER WAS !D OTHER WASTE MATERIAL SHALL BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH 6. THE DRIVEWAY CONNECTION MUST BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH AND CONSTRUCTED TO THE FDOT ' A SET OF DRAWINGS, NUMBER AND MEDIA AS SPECIFIED IN OTHER SECTIONS OF THIS MANUAL, STAMPED APPLICABLE REGULATIONS. 'AS-BUILT DRAWINGS', AND SIGNED AND SEALED BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD. THE ENGINEER OF RECORD LANDSCAPE NOTES DESIGN STANDARDS INDEX 515. SHALL BE LICENSED TO PRACTICE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. THE DRAWINGSARE TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY lCESSARY PERMITS AND APPROVALS PRIOR TO REMOVING ANY EXISTING 7, .ALL AREAS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION MUST BE RESTORED, COMPLETE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED PLANS AND DETAILS, ANY DEVIATIONS FROM THE 1. ALL STREETS; TREES SHALL BE INCORPORATED INTO EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD LOCAL STREET, PLANTED IN STRAIGHT LINES, 5. CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PE APPROVED PLANS AND DETAILS SHALL BE CLEARLY ANNOTATED ON THESE DRAWINGS. THE'AS-BUILTS' BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE CURB, OR IN INFORMAL GROUPINGS THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD CIRCULATOR, OR STRUCTURES. DRAWINGS SHALL PRESENT A COMPLETE AND ACCURATE VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE LOCATION OF ANY FORMAL ROWS OF PALM TREES THE LENGTH OF THE COLLECTOR BOULEVARD. COMPACTED, SODDED ANO WATERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD. AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION, SECTION 981 ANO DESIGN STANDARDS INDEX 105. AND ALL FACILITIES INSTALLED FOR USE BY, OR CONNECTED TO THE LOCAL GOVERNING AGENCY, WATER 6. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO ONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY ALL UTILITY COMPANIES TO DISCONNECT OR REMOVE UTILITIES DEPARTMENT. THIS INCLUDES ALL FACILITIES FROM THE END CUSTOMER'S POINT OF SERVICE 2. TREE TYPES: DURABLE TREES, SUCH AS OAKS, SHALL BE PREDOMINANTLY USED. SYCAMORESAND OTHER SHADE TREES MAY THEIR FACILITIES PRIOR TO REMOVING OR DEMO )VING OR DEMOLISHING ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES FROM THE SITE. 8. TRAFFIC SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS MUST BE IN CONFORMANCE ANO BE CONSTRUCTED TO (TYPICALLY THE RIGHT-OF-WAY CLEAN OUT) TO THE POINT OF CONNECTION OF THE NEW FACILITIES TO THE SELECTIVELY BE USED TO CREATE A UNIQUE CHARACTER, RIO-BARRIERS SHALL BE REQUIRED, PALM TRESS ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE CiTY'S EXISTING WASTEWATER-SYSTEM, - - - STREET TREES, EXCEPT FOR THE COLLECTOR BOULEVARD. 7. THE LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES SH THE VISUAL REPRESENTATION SHALL BEBLUE-LINES, REPRODUCIBLE MYLAR, OR ELECTRONIC MEDIAAS INFORMATION AVAILABLE AND ARE GIVEN FOR 1 3 UTILITIES SHOWN ON THE PLANS HAVE BEEN DETERMINED FROM THE BEST THE FOOT DESIGN STANDARDS INDEX SERIES 11000 AND 17000. '.E GIVEN FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE CONTRACTORI5UBCONTRACTOR. 9. SIGNS AND MARKINGS MUST BE CONSTRUCTED IN COMPLIANCE WITH FDOT DESIGN STANDARDS SPECIFI ED BY THE DEPARTMENT. 3, CONSISTENT APPLICATION: ONLY ONE (1) TYPE OF TREE SHALL BE PLACED ON BOTH SIDES OF RESIDENTIAL STREETS, WITHIN A IPONSIBILITY FOR ACCURACY PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY CONSTRUCTION INDEX SERIES 11000 AND 17000 AND DISTRICT 4 TRAFFIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, ALL TURN LANES SINGLE BLOCK, THE ENGINEER ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY F ' SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT NOTES ACTIVITY. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTORISUBC 'RACTORISUBCONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY THE VARIOUS AND TURN LANE TRANSITIONS MUST BE IN CONFORMANCE ANO BE CONSTRUCTED TO THE FOOT ~ D TIONS 4. ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREETS; STREET TREES ALONG ARTERIAL, AND MAJOR AND MINOR COLLECTORS SHALL BE PLANTED UTILITIES AND TO MAKE THE NECESSARY ARRAI ESSARY ARRANGEMENTS FOR ANY RELOCATIONS OF THESE UTILITIES WITH DESIGN STANDARDS INDEX 301 AND 526. ° 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FAMILIARIZING HIMSELF WITH THE TERMS & CON I , AND HAVE AVAILABLE ON THE JOB SITE. IN EITHER FORMAL ROWS, OR INFORMAL GROUPS AT A RATE EQUAL TO FIFTY (50) FEET ON CENTER. THE OWNER OF THE UTILITY. THE CONTRACTOI CONTRACTORISUBCONTRACTOR SHACLEXERCISE CAUTION WHEN CROSSING ANY UNDERGROUND UTILITY, WHETHER SHOWP ETHER SHOWN ON THE PLANS OR LOCATED BY THE UTILITY COMPANY. ALL 10. EROSION CONTROL, SILT FENCES, TURBIDITY BARRIERS ETC. MUST BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH ~ 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING. A SCHEDULE OF 5. VILLAGE PATHWAYS: PATHWAYS THAT ARE NOT LOCATED ON ROADWAYS SHALL BE PLANTED WITH TREES MEETING STREET TREE UTILITIES WHICH I NTERFACE WITH THE PROPOS -I THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RELOCATED BY THE RESPECTIVE THE FDOT DESIGN STANDARDS INDEX-100 SERIES. ANTICIPATED STARTING AND COMPLETION DATES FOR EACH SEQUENCE OF LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY SHALL REQUIREMENTS AT A RATE EQUAL TO FORTY (40) FEET APART IN INFORMAL GROUPINGS TO EACH SIDE OF THE PATHWAY, UTILITY COMPANIES AND THE CONTRACTORISUI BE COMPANIES DURING RELOCATION OPERATIONS NTRACTORISUBCONTRACTORSHACL COOPERATE WITH THE UTILITY J OPERATIONS. ANY DELAY OR INCONVENIENCE CAUSED TO THE 11. THE FOOT MUST BE NOTIFIED 48 -HOURS PRIOR TO STARTING CONSTRUCTION ANO THE i REQUIRED PROVIDED TO THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. 6, QUALITY: ALL PLANTS SHALL BE FLORIDA N0,1 GRADE OR BETTER IN ACCORDANCE UNTH'GRADES AND STANDARDS FOR CONTRACTOR/SUBCONTRACTOR BYTHE VARIOi BY THE VARIOUS UTILITIES SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO THE CONTRACT AND NO CONTRACTOR MUST SCHEDULE APRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING PRIOR TO STARTING CONSTRUCTION. I ~ NURSERY PLANTS" PUBLISHED BYTHE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. EXTRA COMPENSATION WILL BE ALLOWED, ALLOWED, 3. ANY AND ALL SILT LEAVING THE SITE IS THE COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. I ~ 7. SIZE: STREET TREES SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 3" CALIPER DBH,14 FEET IN HEIGHT, VNTH A SIX (5) FEET SPREADWHEN PLANTED. CERTIFICATION NOTE' °0 4. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND INSPECTED PRIOR TO ANY GRADING 8. ALTHOUGH NOT ANTICIPATED, THE LOCATION THE LOCATION OF ANY EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES, WELLS OR THE CERTIFING ENGINEER HAS DESIGNED THE /MPRO~EMENTS AND ON SITE. 8. MEDIAN PLANTINGS; MEDIAN LANDSCAPE PLANTING AT THE COLLECTOR BOULEVARD WILL BE CONSISTENTVUITH THE FORMAL OTHER BURIED PIPING OR STRUCTURES ASSOC ~TURES ASSOCIATED WITH PAST SITE USE WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION AREA FEATURES OF THE PROJECT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE FDOT o ROWS OF PALM TREES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE STREET. SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO CONSTRUC TO CONSTRUCTION. PROVISIONS SHOULD THEN BE MADE TO RELOCATE ANY NMANUAL OF UNIFORM MINIMUM .STANDARDS FOR DESIGN, IIN THE CONSTRUCTION AREA TO APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS. IN THIS REGARD, CONSTRUCTION, AND MAINTENANCE FOR STREETS AND HIGHWAYS" ~ 5. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES. ADDITIONAL ER0510N CONTROL INTERFERING UTILITY LINES WITHIN THE CONST i ~ DEVICES MUST BE USED AS REQUIRED. 9, ENTRANCE FEATURES: CLOSELY SPACED TREES, SHRUBS AND ORNAMENTAL TREES SHALL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE DESIGN IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT IF ABANDONED UND ANDONED UNDERGROUND PIPES ARE NOT PROPERLY REMOVED OR PLUGGED, CURRENT EDITIONS 2004 OF ENTRANCE FEATURES THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY. THEY MAY SERVE AS CONDUITS FOR SUBSURF~ =0R SUBSURFACE EROSION, WHICH SUBSEQUENTLY MAY RESULT IN 6. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SITE WILL INITIATE WITH THE INSTALLATION OF EROSION CONTROL MEASURES EXCESSIVE SE ~ 10. SIGHT LINES: INTERSECTION PLANTINGS AT MATURITY WILL PROVIDE A CLEAR ZONE FROM INTERSECTIONS AND MID BLOCK TTLEMENTS. = SUFFICIENT TO CONTROL SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AND EROSION. ALL SEDIMENT CONTROL WILL BE MAINTAINED , N UNTIL ALL UPSTREAM GROUND WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION AREA HAS BEEN COMPLETELY STABILIZED WITH CROSSINGS TO MINIMIZE PEDESTRIAN AND DRIVE 51GHT LINE CONFLICTS. 9. SITE CLE TIO W E T VEGETATION AND ALL ROADSIDRIVEWAYS HAVE BEEN PAVED. ARING, GRUBBING AND DEMOLI N F PERMAN N )DEMOLITION SHALL INCLUDE THE REMOVAL OF TREES, GROUND BRUSH, ~ ' , , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .0~~ ,•r ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~J r`r, t 0 SPECIFIC TREE REQUIREMENTS ORGANIC SOILS, ROOT MATS, EXISTING STRUCI STING STRUCTURES, PAVEMENT, UTILITIES OR OTHER DELETERIOUS m L Z 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ACCUMULATED SILT WHEN THE SILT 15 WITHIN 12" OF THE TOP OF THE 51LT MATERIALS ENCOUNTERED. CLEARING AND GR ARVNG AND GRUBBING SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER PRIOR TO 5 ~'S ~ ~ c1 ~ ' HE SITE. AS A MINIMUM, THE CLEARING OPERATIONS SHALL EXTEND AT LEAST ~ , , ~ , ~ FENCE UTILIZED FOR EROSION CONTROL. 1. COMMUNITY ENTRANCES AT STATE ROAD 33: TREES SHALL BE PLANTED IN INFORMAL! NATURAL GROUPINGS LOCATED TO FRAME BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION AT THE SITE. AS A ~ THE ENTRANCE QUADRANT AND ACCENTUATE VIEWS OF THE COMMUNITY, 5 FEET BEYOND THE BUILDING PERIMETERS. AI :RIMETERS. ANY EXCAVATIONS OR CAVITIES FORMED BY THE REMOVAL OF 4 ~ ~ ~ ! ii 8. SEDIMENTlEROSION CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE CHECKED AFTER EACH STORM EVENT. EACH DEVICE SHALL ORGANIC MATERIAL, GROUND BRUSH OR STUMI USH OR STUMPS SHOULD BE FILLED WITH CLEAN, COMPACTED STRUCTURAL 3 ~ ~ ? ~ "'*`1 . ` 4 ~ } ~ BE MAINTAINED OR REPLACED IF SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION HAS REACHED ON HALF THE CAPACITY OF THE 2, COLLECTOR BOULEVARD: TREES SHALL BE PLANTED AT FIFTY (50) FEET ON CENTER, TWO (2) ON EACH SIDE OF THE STREET AND FILL 5 ~~PE DEVICE. ONE (1) IN THE MEDIAN. 0 10. "POND" SIDE SLOPES AND BOTTOM MUST BE ro 9. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES WILL BE CHECKED DAILY AND ANY DEFICIENCIES NOTED 3. NEIGHBORHOOD CIRCULATOR: TREES SHALL BE PLANTED IN INFORMAL ARRANGEMENTS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET IN ~ rfOMMUSTBESODDED(AREAOVERSIDEDRAINSMUSTBESEEDED& r+ol tAITp~/t+IDC ('~LIpI~+TIAAI`~"+EA1T~~~ WILL BE CORRECTED BY THE END OF EACH DAY. ADDITIONAL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES QUANTITIES EQUAL TO ONE (1) TREE PER FIFTY (50) LINEAR FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE STREET. MULCHED OR HAVE A MINIMUM 4 BLANKET OF , ' BLANKET OF STONE.) V V I V I I~ i ~7 G v 11 R ti7 ~'1~W V I V I ° WILL BE INSTALLED IF DEEMED NECESSARY BY ON-SITE INSPECTION BY THE ISSUING AUTHORITY. ADA SIDEWALK NOTE 4. NEIGHBORHOOD LOCAL WITH DRIVEWAY ACCESS; TREES SHALL BE PLANTED AT A RATE OF ONE (1) TREE PER LOT FRONTAGE ~ AND TWO (2) TREES PER END LOT SIDEYARD, CT LE IRON PIPE A D TTINGS SHALL RECEII ~ DU I N FI I SHALL RECEIVE AN EXTERIOR BITUMINOUS COATING AS ~ ~ ,9 o A `m 1. ALL SIDEWALKS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT ADA REGULATIONS AND SPECIFIED IN AWWA C 104, C 150, OR C 151 ANC OR C 151 AND SHALL BE EPOXY LINED WITH A CHEMICALLY 400 DOUGLAS AVENUE, SUITE C ) STANDARDS. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO ASSURE THAT ALL 5. NEIGHBORHOOD LOCAL WITH ALLEY; TREES SHALL BE PLANTED AT A RATE OF ONE (1) TREE PER LOT FRONTAGE AND TWO (2) CURED TWO COMPONENT EPOXY MATERIAL Hi TREES PER END LOT SIDEYARD. ' (MATERIAL, HAVING A MINIMUM 24 MILS DRY THICKNESS AS DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34696 N ASPECTS OF THE SIDEWALK CONFIGURATION IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPECIFIED IN A WW A C550 AND/OR A WW A C21( R A WW A C210, PERMEABILITY SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE PH. (727) 785-8844 FAX (727) 736-2M CURRENT LOCAL, STATE AND NATIONAL ADA CODE RELATIVE TO SIDEWALKS, ROAD 6. NEIGHBORHOOD LOCAL WITH PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR; TREES SHALL BE PLANTED IN FORMAL ROWS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE WITH ASTM D1653. ALTERNATELY, DUCTILE IROP DUCTILE IRON PIPE AND FITTING LINER MAY BE OF DATE: 4-14-05 CROSSINGS, AND OTHER PEDESTRIAN AREAS. STREET AT FIFTY (50) FEET ON CENTER AND IN INFORMAL GROUPINGS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE PEDESTRIAN WALKATA RATE EQUAL FUSION-BONDED POLYETHYLENE, HAVING A NOI d HAVING A NOMINAL THICKNESS OF 40 MILS, AND A MINIMUM SHEET 3 OF 10 y 2. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO ASSURE THAT ALL ASPECTS TO ONE (1) TREE PER FORTY (40) LINEAR FEET IN THE PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR. THICKNESS OF 35 MILS. THE POLYETHYLENE LIP OF THE SIDEWALK CONFIGURATION IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT DOT ASTM D1238. CEMENT LINED AND COAL TAR EPC (ETHYLENE LINING SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF PROJECT No. 03030 COAL TAR EPOXY LINED DUCTILE IRON PIPE AND FITTINGS TITLE: n SIDEWALK STANDARDS AS DESCRIBED IN FDOT INDEX 304. ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE FOR WASTEWATER APPI. 0 rEWATER APPLICATIONS, GENERAL NOTES U a ~ i ~ N 60 0 30 60 120 .a A 'p (IN FEET ) 4i!' A ~ ~ i _ I 1 Inch = 60 ft, ? ~I , PROPOSED ELEVATIONS ro LEGEND: NORTH s ~ C ~a y \ - - - w ? / AREA NOT UNDER CONSTRUCTION ~ ~ / / W ~ \ yy TREE LEGEND y \ r a \ EXISTING ELEV. ti~ = OAK - ~ r y , \ PROPOSED ELEV. ~ ~ = PALM , \ _ CONTOUR LINE C CITRUS y / A / / ~ \ PROP. CURB a \ y / PROP. PAVEMENT A \ i y S1 A -N' ~ \ EXIST. TREES ? RELOCATED GAS METER I (p' \ CONNECT TOIXISTINGWATERLINES ICI r • / \ ~ TREES TO BE REMOVED ~r WITH2"BLOW OFFAND3I4" I / \ PRESSURElCHLORINETAP aI ~dl ay ~ o \ ~ FLOW DIRECTION I Iii / / ~ \ 45°BENDS ~ ~ - lo n \ ~oQ~ \ l\ 2 SEPERATION \ / \ ~~2'SEPERATION o- ~ •n~ yr N II D~ ~ -cC vn e ~ / \ \ ti ~m 5~ y ° m 1 , ~ ~ \ / ~ N 9~~`~~\~ 45°BENDS o - z m / \ \ 5'NBNSEPERATION I ? \ \ EXISTING GAS MAIN TO BE O ~ r ~ ~ RELOCATED BYCLEARWATERGAS n 2"GAS LINEBYCLEARWATERGAS N ~w ? y r / \ V ~ ~ W 1 'a a~ m D ~ N v J ? ~p~S`,/ ~ / \ og \ 6'MINSEPERATION / \ n NAINELECTRICAL r7 ,~~,r 45°BENDS O i yy Z V 19 ~ POWERSERVICE ~P~~/~ v ~ w ? ~ \ \ / ~ ~~~o \ PROPOSEDB"WM ~ ~ ~D V \ y PVC CWD SDR 18 1 • \ ~ S~ii I y W ~ ~ p ~ / ~J \ ~ /~p'~Q~ 2 2" POTABLE WATER \ / \ N / ~ SERMCE PVC OR HDPE ~ r ~ , .W ? 1 ~ ? ' w am a `9 .p V- ~ ~ \ ~j~ ~I,r PROPOSEDB'WM ? o~ ~ N~o~ ~ ~ ti ~P/I/~ PVCCWOSDRIB m - o o •a E E TI P KI \ / 1 . .a ~ ~ 6, 0 a ' 6' STIN IRE / \ ~`-45° BENDS a ~ ~ \ / H IIII EXISTQ •2' WATERLINES Q II~ ~ N ALON SIDE IXIST, 8" W.M. G k N EXI ING 5 0 °'u` 'aa, A ND NOU HA N° a'o \ N ~ N IIII X • x o aRv • ~ X09 / ~ I IIII N III - - - _ HEI T=2 r 7,82 F .~•}Q a r„'~ IIII 833 PARKING SPACE AS SHOWN INCLUDING 30 HANDICAP SPACES ~ q sEC D F DA =ai•T c' N~ o N OQ 260 PROPOSED GRASSED AND PAVED ADDITIONAL PARKING PLUS ;o Q, A E TIN ANC ARY ~ q ~ N ~ F '4 ' UTILITY RELOCATION DETAIL 573 EXISTING GRASSED AND PAVED PARKING=833 TOTAL PROPOSED ~ x , E H T 1 0 A FF 28.0 ' ~o ~c ',r wtA \ / SIN EST Y ~ k _i 0 t GTH FT ~ ~ \ / 28 OSF an ~ ~ , , ~ ai d' a~ ~ q Y I ~ E TIN `ir . \ / ~ E TIN RE rn ° ` w W \ ~ r ~ MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT 'O ;ti• r'° 'x ~ 'rn SEE SHEET 6 FOR 1 "=30' SCALE ° ~ ~ ,~~r;, LI R 0 I ~ ~ ~ N' N I' g,2 PROPOSE ' A P T PAVING , ~ n ~ i ~ -J D r 1 I. 2 `6' ~i v, gyp.,„ ( CO AI R ~ aN ~ ~ -I D •a ~ Nrn 4r~ N ~ s •W ~ ~ ~ -\~-OHW / A - ~ MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT ~ 44 U,~?~, E A MA EX G o J~y+ / \ ~ k' r , T r r' 236. ~ 05r Ol + P • LI:fR • . Rl~• . • ED.FDC: ~ r~ y r ~ ? ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ u~ of IN paG'~'':: . ~ .i° LANdS` '~SLANC ' DS EIS D ~ N , ~ e ~ see cE • • . . ~ ti 'A } . ~ ~ ' ~ ~ n N N cfi N! ' CR WA N , a, ,o \ ~ ~ s ? u "3~~ A ~ 's~ a ~ ° 'v as ~ 38,5' ~ s' I', `y I S I o R A D " ~ ? Az ~ a,~ ? 3SPACES ~ _ _ ti w I, f;• o - : PROPOSED SANCTU Y` LDG 2500 SEAT s•••••• `.~I r O ~ r0 , ~ , ,'0~;:.r. ' l ~i~'f~ A d~,Y ;~~k0 rAY II -D ~I o ,~7 N ~ my o ?1 ? b N C A PARKI G° P N ''c. s ? u y~ a ~ II a N CITY OF CLEARWATER PROPERTY ~3 g Z ? ? ClPC~SE kA 1? ~L~'~?A~ NG, '2~, r" it. , y i~~'.a r ~ :'€a ~ ~ ~t ~ - •,9 • I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; D8 E I ND x ~ a . o r • ....7 m to r 4 P E . 4 P . . wr.ffl .A~ P ~ ~ ~ ? b v ~ ..b::: • 7, 00 g~ 3 ~x' D EI D T A ~ ? \ I m? ~ o s R P SED FFE=26,5 :N • t~ ? RAILRDAO nfs STACKED I I ~ ~ y ~ ? ~ Ly' fl ',B v •D , If,',. ~ ;:fir' ? ~ \ 16HEfL STA°S TYP EACH AND SPIKED TD CREATE a _ _ _ y _ _ N ro - PARKING SPOT lER Dl6ERS/DN Z N y r- {y~ TYP LAND PE ISLAND` N.. b ° , " N _ A A ~ aN N - \ i~4` fp ~ `A S A N , ti 4 P E I. 0 o w 'o 1 ~ ~ a ~ f„ O AI ~ " ~ E ING ADS PE ND B DA PA NJr ? y ate, a a • p~ ~ •.a•.:•: 0. ~ - y - - - - - POSE ""S~`~~~~IIN'~ 2~. N ~ y v a ' ~ o ~ \ I ~ ~ a M ~ 8 P C 5S S ~ ? , S C ~A N ? h' f. , r N , . .~1 N, cA ~ N 4' 2,r N B a . ~ ~ N ORIGI~I~IL ~ ~ ~ ! ~ \ C y~ Y, x4,i, 3+~ r, y~ t fr ,9 c, •fh (s>• e P; a.. 1. w 3.. ~''NY. b r ~ m. " . 3 N T'a`t. t,.~„ f. 'i• a .,FSM,,.,~!^. rF`~7 N ~u,3 I is ~ t~ ,r ~ xv.' ~ ; " ..:y~,~~1+c,v r, ~ y,y t 7; k Y A K Q ~ Y ~ \ Yr ~ ~ h~v $ii j,.~~~ "b~j,~ 04: . ^r' _ ~ 9k~ g< ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I•- i~Nr e Try A'~r .r:,. ,5~y g t ~ •y • .N'.. . ~7, e, .13. SED'.'.. 1'•HAIrT`-. r r .T~ ? i;~: " ' N r ~ ~ ;,w'°k ~S ~1~,~•;~ N r r~"°, xi;,t~r vrR;'''u c~~}4G ,f r ;s'~~ ~ "'s ~ 1 •r rnS~v ~ r ~ ~ . ~ , . , . -a ?r ? Ui ? ~ SAES 5 ~ ~ 7 P r SAC r r , N tir ? y b ? ? ? a XIS ING LANDSCAPE ISL,4NDS•T•0• . , • ~ i a ~ o ° ~ \ o_ ~ ? N q~ '.~N A 5 P R I ~ q _ ? - - - - ~ 0 N - i I ' ~Ra•.ti sroR~. _ - , ~ p, 1 '0 r alo5 A ES N r 5 P CE ~ C S ~ a' ~h ? ~ c S ~ cE y ~ 1 s E5 A S R IN ~ ~I , ~ z G. r a r A S P R l G N J: a P of ? D ~ - - s^' Z E~ •O i - i^?!, ~ 4 'ti: °A~1', 1 ~ D y ? z y z , i . , . r wad<~-,. ,n:: I~, ,~,E a E. •Ch r , ~ ; • y ~ PR ~~RCIS ~ ASPHALT : •'UI G .s ,4',~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E~D , P~ N ~ a ° w ?,we ,b ROPOSEDASPHALTPAVING p ~OSED•ASpH AVING _ ~4 ~ rac.,'l ~ ~ -s ~ ~ ~ r:~~ ~ ? , 24 x, ~ ~ ~ ~s~, ~ 2d • ~ ~ ~E'1'ds 2••2 - ism `2,~ a Z \ w . ' . ? ~ ° , a ~ , ~ ~ a a ~,r, ,~°~I ~ ~ • • r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~o r. :a..~' ~ ~1 ~ ~ n , . ~ + ~ ~ ALONG s,IOE..6XIS ~ ~ r Y,r r,. i a „ ~ ~9~S~x ~'q - - - - D °rn R~)POSED ASF' ~!"ra~~ „ N:ONC 5106 EXIST,:B ~ ~ ~ N - --QRC~asE swttlaA'r'1 ~ ; p ALT PAVING O 61 ti ?~~i r 55P CE 1D P E r;-^ ~ eJ:, u _ ,.,L .r A ' t:,,, ~ MATS ING VE '~r a a°~ * r CONCRETE WALKWAY Q a~ A N N " ap 'CAW ° \ ~ ~ - h EXIS G LANt55CAPE LS NDS TO BE REMOVED AND ~ ~ ~ STOP BAR ' - 0 OS I P ~ ADA STq~ING • w. - O e~j PRCI°DSEO LLH. /1 Ri-1 STOP ~ PR P ED P LLWAY q~ ~ A PROPOSED SPILLWAY ~t° ~ ~ RIM •?~0 8' PVC-18~ LF ~ ~ - PR01 1 - INK N + 15~ 15 O a l$' $LQpf 20' 0' SIGTH SI5IUTYTRIANGLE N - R3.2 N0 LEFT TURN ~j ~F -F~~ i r, X ADAACCESS FdOM ROW C - - ~ ~a O O R1.1 STOP ~ ~ ~AACCESS FdOM ROW 5' WIDE COyDRETE SIDEWALK ~ i~p 20' ' SI M LI r ~ ` ~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT \ i i; hha r - ~ s ,bs~ ~ , ~ ~ ° CfTY OF CLEARWATER ~ E~.. 'Y U ~ Y U I ~ A~ A - N a, Nom, 'N ~ U B4 LF OF 24" ACP W MES EACH END MATCH EXISTING DITCH STOP BAR 20k20' SIGTH VISIBIUTYTRIANGLE ~ w A -..ter.,. ~ N"' O! ~ N" u 'U + ~G` r r I ~ ~ ~ , aW b c y y PROPOSEDRIGHTINRIGHTOUTACCESS s W 24'PROPOPSEDACCESS p ' ~ _ _ _ - - W CROSS WALK r'~,. ~a . N N~ NN ~ ~ N ~ - r~~ ~ Cry ~ ~...ctU I- W~ W 'w m a 4n' PROPOSED FIRE HYD• cA ao a i O aN~ Nt?' ~aa'ON~ 4 - (q l~{' ~ 1.~, , ~ i".. a N P PRCPDSED MH. c ~ R/A1 ~1.~1 ~ ~ t (3' !NV S ~ 1,91 ~ Z /N~ W ¦ 1801 U ~ ° to 1 REV PER CITY DRC 11-3-05 ; M o MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD G.R, 611 W ~ 1 , EXISTING 12 SS COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CEI~T~ RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES ASPHALT WIDTH VARIES v c ~o~ ~ C v v 6! C 400 DOUGLAS AVENUE, SUITE C DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34898 N PH. (727) 785.8844 FAX (727) 730.2953 U d DATE: 1.04.05 p MCMULLEN B01 MULLEN BOOTH ROAD (S.R. 593) PROJECT No. 03030 SHEET 4 OF 1 RIGHT-OF-4 RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES TITLE: PROPOSED SANCTUARY WITH ASPHALT U ASPHALT WIDTH VARIES a ADDITIONAL PARKING SITE PLAN KEY SHEET I v\ \ V v \ V / / \ 30 0 15 30 60 ® ` ' \ Q V ti\ / ~ / \ , / \ ~ .~N , ® p). Op 4 / (IN FEET ) ~ O O 'i9 E STIN FIRE D \ \ / \ 1 inch = 30 ft. ` N ~ N`S\ / \ ~ \ / \ NORTH - - - - - - - ~ <s / / \ / ~ / \ x x x x x EXI ING SS OOM ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / \ .q ND NQU HA ~ ~ ~ N<o 0 WO ORY X X ~ \ A~ / HEI T=2 T , F~ / 7,92 F \ ~ ~ k SEC D F OR =41,7 ~ \ ~o / ~ V1 N \ oL •A~ 'cA ~ X a ~ ~ E TIN ANC ARY ` ~ 'o \ ,1 ~ ~ ~ ND C RC FFI S ~ \ ~ Aq ~ ~ ~ FF 28.0 ~ \ ~qj, SIN EST Y ~ -~c 1 ti ~ \ ~s / p x GTH 8 FT ~ X ter' ~ ® ® ' 28 0 SF ~ \ / ~ N W ~ ~ V 'W i N~\ / V ~ ~ ~ ' V \ / R~ -~c E TIN IRE D ~ \ / w / v rR mw'~: ~ ' ¢ X--.~..~. ( v ~N ~ / . I I I f \ \ \ / F, 6~ D f t F, I ,I _ Ri.,i. ~ I ~ \ \ \ / N / \ ~ 0 / / \ H W O W W 4H OHW OHW OHW \ ® ~ 'I. / A ~ ~ ~ . . V, . r , ~ k X NG A E N ~ C \ / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t.~r. ~ A t,. of . ® ~ ~ \ / \ ~ - _ PROPOS d~~ti~',ti,'. 3~'Rltil.'.. ~ . ~ED.FDC.'.'.' . . LANDSCAPE ISLAND. `f - _ ~ 1 DS EIS D - 26.0 V'..'.E.,.. 97,'1.x... ~ 0 X \ / \ ~ 2 v s ~ • t~ TIE IN E IS l%NG' ~ ~ • ~ s ~e ;,gin . N \ / SERI/lCE , . ~ ~ ° CO CRE WA AY ~ AY N ` \ / ~ ti nsa ;a~ ~ s~ ~ ~9 ~~~m _ ~ ~ ~ '3 ~F . ti~ \ ~ ~ 43,0 36.5. ~ v I LA CA IS S T B R V ND A E ~ ® \ , . , I ~ ,,x 2 ~ _ 62.0 - \ Q- r ~ I I °p CRETE LKWAY ~ ~ ~ ;j ~ r. w W \ r X ~ . I I ~ tlp F,, ~ I I ( ~ NF. v o \ \ ~ _ ~ . ~ ' _~q' r::~ 5 k II >,y ll. a o ®ti \ PEI ND . v, I I w ~ ~ ~x. ~ 3~ NDS APE I ND W ...U7 ~ , 1~1 AD AMP P P P \ X G D~ _ _ . , Z ~ N ~ a. ~ d ~ Q ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~T ~ . .1 . Y 1 0 0 3 i`ii '.3 t' 2 G D A E ND T R M D D P D 1 ® \ ~1 ~ \ I'...... V1 ~U U ~ „s r pR _ k~~ . I``'re ~ \ C " f~a~ 'n V' D Gn~ ~ k - yy.~ I`` ~ f~ ;F i z 4 r"' ~ > ~ ~ ~ - ~T .~0. , ~i • ~ ~ \ ® ~ ~ - 4 ~ II 1,~ IIV \ x ~ ~ I I w ~ .r ~ ~ NCR KWA II ~3 rN KWA ~ 'c \ - b., 4 ~ 0; ~ ~T > , a ~~I ~ ~,t, EXI ING NDS . . . . ~ ',7 f JG NDS APE I ND T4 B REM ED D PA D ` ® \ s r;' . . . . . . . . t, ,.t ~ t ~ ~ , t k a . C'~ 0 0 \ I vs~: ,s, . ~ w. ~ } u~ ti ;.J. 4„ ~ M z ~ ~ ~t ~ n I I ~ ~I~ ~ A 0.~ ~ ~ 9.0 ~ X X ~ d0 C > > a ~ C W Z O . t9 O ~ ~ soh .f ~ ~ ~ tc' .r~u P w ~ .8..PI/C X60• LF / ~~=i ~ .ice........ h ~ ~ t. > ~ ~ :~4~~ ~OP a o S~ E 1 ~ 1 V ~ Q ~ ~ . ~ ~ . ~ ~ ' ~'~,.nY ~ t ;x ~ ? - r~s m a XIS ~IN~ ~NDS~T , G LANDSCAPE ISLA w I ~ ~ ~b 7 ~ ~ ~w R1.1 Stbp............ a ~ 7 ORIGINAL - ~~P. ~ U I~ r-, ~ - x ~ 4A SIDEV~IALK q~;~ 3 / ~ v to fr;- n, .r, ~ ~ - p z ~ X offs ~ ~ ~ Z ~ I I-~ ° V O ~ V~ ~ 9"j I N R I 5 l am,a ~ I , I~; m ~ ~ ~ 24;0 frI i' fAy .5:: , Yt~ ~y~. ~ 11 ~.~,tiZ ~ I ~ ti o ~ E~ f ,n. ~ EXI5T. 2-.2 RUNES _ . O g ~ q ! rfn; r~ , i; k V ~ o ~ ~ .-.tau . , ~ //ALONG 51DE EXIST:.,8 .W.M. ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ , >.9~ PROPOSED A F ALT:PAVIr~G ~ 7r i.~'i, n~ _ 9~~. i..l.. S. tana~y'~~ viLC~...:..~~~. 1 ~c ~ 24 24 ~ rw . MAT HEX iNG A~ f Gl y~ N 5 at'~Y.:d Y.4SwSx"Fe. ~.'6Ya K,..-. W ir+~'.i+L-mn. 4.~.. Y~.~W+i~Y.'~+Utta°.'~.~ ING AVE NT I ~ o NOV 081005 o _ _ - ~9' CONCRETE WALKWAY r° N ~ EXI I QI1V BE RE1~6~ED AN a. = ~ ' ~ ~ ~ MANNING DEPARTMENT G ' ROPOSED SPIL WA1G v ADA STF#PING ' ~ - - a ` I ~ ~ o ` CtiYOF CIEARWATER;=_„ , .4 _ ~ 'N - ~ - - - ' ~ PROPOSED SPILLWAY ' z ~C d M` ~pS r.r~ ~ r, 20'x 0' SIGTH ISIBIL TRIANGLE'" s .a y^~ ~h r 6 r, . ~ A~ ~ y+ 0 0 ~ ~ v ~ ~ ADA ACCESS F M ROW 5 WIDE CO CRETE SIDEWALK j I ~ FAO III o 20. x,20' 0'SI ILT A E~~ , 5 - ~ ~ o <s ~ • > ~s ~s v - lIIYYY ~ k~S Q - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ - - - - T' ~ 3 t ~ ~ o . ocA o•~, ~ rn~6 ~--BALL ` ~ ~ 2 REV PER CITY COMMENTS ORC MEETING ~ ~ ~ ~ o - i u N~ 'j N S, ~ 1 REV PER CITY COMMENTS 9-28-05 2„ ,'4i ,>`'~~,.,~„r' ate' 0 M N ~ N o ~ ~ o H H ~ COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER CJ.y ~ R/GHT- - x 4F IyQY TAK/NG PER O, F x PROPOSED M. H, #2 x ® Q •A ~ T o,,, _ ~ 7 ~ _ B00/( 67~~ PAGE 2244 o~ v~ R/GHT-OF-GyAY TAK/NG v 400 DOUGLAS AVENUE, SUITE C ~ INV. S = 15 91 lNV W = 16.01 DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34808 0. R. BOOK 6734, PAGE 2244 PH. (727) 785.8844 FAX (727) 736-2853 ~ CROSS WALK PAGE 19 OF 36~ DATE: 01-0405 SHEET 5 OF 10 PROJECT No. 03030 , PROPOSED FIRE HYD. TITLE: PROPOSED SANCTUARY WITH U a ADDITIONAL PARKING SITE PLAN NORTH SIDE i ~ 30 0 15 30 80 ~ x x (IN FEET ) ' 7 Inch = 30 h. / ~ / ~ ~c.r~ ' ~ j - i ~ ~ ~ X X NORTH ~ X X X X r C MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT o ~ ~ ~ f • ~ w ~ 262 m ~ ~~2`+ t R~ - 16K 12K ti C ~ N~ - - - - 27K 24K - - - - - 4K- 2 KK _ _ - _ ~ N MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT ~ ~ ass • • 05°~ , N o ,236 ~6' ~~il ~ a PROPOS d.'r~'r~,'•;~~,'R~M...... . ~ 4K "o 0 5 45 ~ ~ , 45 E ~ Wo ~ ~ = 26.0 V',.•.F.~.'.1,7, . / 12K 6 CAMPH 26K A ~ • rn ® ~ ~ ~ U TlE IN E /STING,•6". ; . a ~ ~ X~~" ~ SERVICE . 6K 15K 13K C ~ ~ ~ ® ~ ~ o 15K 42K 4K ~ Z Q W Z Q ~ V ~ x ® ~ ti . 5~ l/ 4KK 9-18K 32K O r W ~ ~ ~ , . . 6K SK 13K qK 6P ~ a D ~ ~ O X ® ti h ~ 3 SPACES • 6 SK 5K 20K 20K 6-fOK 42K ~ m q~ ~ O ~ r~~ -i R ~ ~ W ~ ap SP ~ ~ , . . ~ 4K 40K 7K a N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ' G A P,~RK/ G~' ~ ® ~ ~K CITY ?F CLEARWATER PR?PERTY 5KK r Z`p~o~`~, ® ~ o ~ ~ P 4F'~SE ASi'HALT P`AVII~G z4' J ~ . / BKBK 4K ~K a Z ~ ° ~ ° ~ G 4 Z IV ~n ti~ ~Q 2g„ l 5-SK 8K ~~K 6-fOK 6K ffl N D O O ~ ~ fir`°' ~ 4 PCE ®4 PCE ~ ~ ~ 7K 5-5K SK ~ ~ O ~ / 6-6K 6K 12K 4-3K SK W Q O 8K 12K 9-9K 28-30K m O y RAILROAD TIES STACKED try 24 ~ ~ WHEEL STOPS TYP EACH ANO SPIKED TO CREATE PARKING SPOT N OO OZ OE Gli 57 7.9.3 ~ ~MJ WA TER Dl IiERS/ON TYP LANDS PE /SLAND`~ .AND`~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ® S AC ~ ® ~ . 4 P C w . ~ F~-0 °~~L~W '~~OW ao . ~ G S A IN ~ \ N as c' ? ~ _ N ~ ~ - ~r ~ ~ u ~ / - - - +~x - N ~ ~ ° A 5S P R l pq pG ~ 'q ~j\ ~ 6SPC 5S LSD N ~ r ~ SACS T ~F " ~ .s ~ v 10 P CE 5 P CE ~ ~ 23.,3 ~~`W Xr ~r ` ~s._~ " , ~5 5` "~"s~.'~' ~k°~ n ~ C • F- . ~ . . R S A K ^V1~ RC~OSED SPHALT RAVI ~O O ~ Vl ~ V1 ~ a ~ ~ y , - a.. ~w ~A a y~°: a X * z~, K ,t~~ , ~Y. . N _ , O ~ OC~~V~ Cq = ~ 7SA ES S ° 7 P ~ SACS e v ~ ® 0~ o. XIS ~INC~LAND~CARE~ISLANDS•' ~ A SPRI = k~< r o ~ " rZ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O 4 i ~ y~° - r' - - '.~10 8 A ES - - x > ~ 5 P CE 1 S A ES a cn I ~ o~ ~R ~ ~ Do N u c s G A S P R l G N A S P R l ~ ti t$s V ~ ~ ~ ~ ios ES G A S P R IN ~ C S ~ ~~~~4~ ~o~ ~ x~ 24' PROPOSED ASPHALT P~AVLNG 23.4 ~ d ~ I ~ ~ ~ w z~, o '/p ~iOPOS~D ASPHAL~`l" P VING P POSED ASPH PAVING ~ ' ~ ` . ~ A, t ~ l of ~ aw - , . ~ - - - ~ -roal~o~esE~-sw~ ~ r ~ PR ~ N ~I ~ ~e ~ ? j ~~V: ~ ~5SP C 10 P CE • ,cS 21,8 ~ J, _ TOB~N - ~ I` G A N ~ ~ j~ ~ ~ j TOE STOP BAR ~ XIS ND~4PE IS NDS T~~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'j Rl PROPOSED M.H #1 POND R1-1 STO D ~ 'POSED P LI~IY~~( ` ~ y R1M =23.0 8" PVC-184 LF P ~ ~--~`--~F- ~ j~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ TOE m POND I 1 ~O PO~I/O j ~ ~ ~ n INV. N = 15.15 _ _ ` ~ 0.49; SLOPE_ ~ `~20'x 0' SIGTH ISIBIU~TY~TR v ~ ~-o - - - - l~3~10 LEFT TURN s~ a ' TOE ,1 ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~r - ~ - ~E° ~R1-1 STOP ~ ~I~ - - - - ~E- - - - N ~ IE=15.0 ~ ~ ¢ - O O 9 O _ ~ ~ ~j " ~ 8' WlD . ONC TE SIDEWAL N N 'cr a oc N j ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , S1yALE ~y, o x -~'`s~ ~ c~~ ~ ~ , j ;t • 8' CON FrE O LK S 07 4258" E 797.43' M x x ~ x ~ ~ p ~ ~ 'fir 84 LF OF 24" RCP W/ MES EACH END MATCH EXISTING DITCH STOPGBAR o 20'x20' SIQ~VISIBILITY TRIANGLE ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ PROPOSED RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ACCESS v ~ 24' PROPOPSED ACCESS ~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ V O - - EP EP W CROSS WALK ~ -~~l-o- ~ 35'R ~5~R~ - ~ ~ ~ D ~N ~ ~ ~ `til ~ ~ ~ 477 _ II I I ' PROPOSED FIRE HYD. ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I II PROPOSED .M.f a, ~O I~j li ~ p cv~ ti ~ ti oRi~i~A~ f~,M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q~ V ~ INV ~5~~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-v ~ ~ V Z , ~ I~ _ ' 8 ' ~ ' ~ ~ 5 - Mil ~f,, ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ W ` ~ ~ MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD (C.R. 61~) S ~ EXISTING 12 S ~ - ~ ~'~.1 't~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a? ~ RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES ~ 1 R V P R ITY R 11-3- 5 Y ~ ~ ~ ~~y ASPHALT WIDTH VARIES COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN\~CENTE~~ z 3 _ ~?9 .9 IW o 400 DOUGLAS AVENUE, SUITE C v c ro N ~C L nL n' DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34698 p~INING DEpARllVlENT PH. (727) 78"844 FAX (727) 736.2853 U d ~ofR DATE: 01-04-05 SHEET 6' OF 10 v PROJECT No. 03030 Y ~ C TITLE: PROPOSED SANCTUARY WITH U ADDITIONAL PARKING SITE PLAN SOUTH SIDE 6• 1-1/2`R Min, z8 2s PROJ CT CENTER INE 27 27 6 SHLDR MIN 6 SHDLR IN NOTE, ALL SIDEWALKS, LANDSCAPE ISLANDS, AND PaveMent • 26 26 PEDESTRIAN ISLANDS TO HAVE FACE AT z ~ • e•; ; ,Q . 25 25 . 24 PAVE ENT WIDTH PAVEMENT MIN OF 9" BELOW PAVEMENT. Bas 24 24 23 EXISTI G GRADE 23 22 , - - ~ 22 EXISTING BADE 21 , 21 ~ 4• 20 _ _ _ _ ~ 20 19 - ~ ~ 19 DETAIL SIEWALK AT PAVEMENT 18 ~ ~ 18 17 - - - - 17 0 20 40 0 60 80 100 120 140 SECTION 1 7 zs 28 6' WALKWAY 15.5' CONCRETE COURT YARD z7 27 PROPO ED ACCESS 26 26 CENTERLINE OF DRIVEWAY EXISTING GRADE o 25 25 EXISTI G GRADE > FFE= 24 0 - 24 FFE 6.5 26,38. 2588 ?S.SD 25'88 2~ 25'85 25 .39 i-*-12' S 23 ~ ° 23 Za~.2 22 - - - - 22 25' 54' 1 2 21 19' PARKING SPACE 20 Z 20 g 19 ~ 19 7 ~ ~ 18 18 N N W 17 17 0 20 40 60 80 100. 120 140 SECTION 2 7 OVERHEAD COVERED WALKWAY 28 28 27 PROJ CT CENTER INE 27 Z6 ~ W 26 24 PAVE ENT WIDTH ~ 25 25 24 - - 24 EXISTI GGRADE ~ 23 - - - 23 10.5 2.0% 2.0% a. 22 ~ ~ 22 21 ~ 21 EXISTING EL=27.2 20 20 19 ' 19 1$ ' 18 FRONT OF EXISTING BLDG 17 17 0 20 40 0 60 SO 100 120 140 19.5 SECTION 3 ~ , 24 PAVEMENT WIDTH 15.5 15.0 30 _ _ _ 30 EXISTING GRADE - - - - 29 29 28 _ - 28 FFE-26.5 FFE=26.5 28,38 •28 2600 2550 2651 EXISTING EL=27.2 27 _ 27 26 _ 26 L~ 31' 25 _ 25 24 24 23 23 10 22 22 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 16'J 7 SECTION 4 30 30 30 29 ~ EXISTING ORVEWAY ~ 29 2s TYP AROUND PROPOSED TREEED/LANDSCAPE ISLANDS 28 - - 28 za 27 w 27 27 5" 1' 2s 2s 26 1-1/2'R Wearing Surface 25 Z 25 25 X MATCH CURB LINE AND ' ' 24 _ 24 23 23 _ _ _ 24 PAVING EL o ' 23 ~ ~ w 22 22 :~a;:d: 22 6x6 10/10 WWF s 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 200 2500 PSI DIMENSIONS Y j '~P'~::;~ SECTION s Base CONCRETE Y 12,_0„ a ~ .';P~,.~:, 7 w . HALF OF X Z 4'-0" ~ ~ ' . 30 30 30 •a~•''~'~• • CoMpacted . . 29 29 EXISTING DR EWAY 29 4.. ~ . fir. Subgrade . . . 28 28 Y 4 27 Z 27 26 w 26 I11AL ~ 25 24 - - - - 24 - 24 STRAIGHT CURB AT LANDSCAPE ISLAND 23 _ _ _ 23 LANDSCAPE ISLA DS TO 8E EMOVED 23 4" 22 22 22 rYP sECnoN 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 .140 160 180 200 0 200 SECTION 6 7 8' IF NOTED RIP RAP 2" S 8" LIMEROCK BASE COMPACTED TO 98~' 1-1/2'R Min, v D/SCHA~RGE uX" WIDE ASPHAL AC CONCRETE DENSITY AS PER AASHTO T-180 a Z ALAN MINx `Y LONG M!N ~ Pavement _CONCRETE SPILL WA Y DETAIL ~ Z ~ ' a .Q ~ iri . / / i / m o~ Bas .•a' N O ~ ~ Subgrada • ' -*'14' I"'-• ~ 12" STABILIZED SUB-BASE COMPACTED 98%DENSITYPER AASNTO T-180 2 (LBR=40) m PA I/EMENT SECTION IN DETAIL SIDEWALK AT P AVEMENT r r/4° rrPE S ~ RIGHT OF WA Y U ASPHAL r1C CONCRETE 8" ~ N. LS ~'""'i~~+" ' ~y 1, ,y++ U m O.OZFT/1'T MIN 8 `n , p N NOTE: 6 TYP - ~ w`, z ALL SIDEWALKS, LANDSCAPE ISLANDS, AND PEDESTRIAN ISLANDS TO HAVE FACE AT PAVEMENT MIN OF 9" BELOW PAV M NT E E 4 ~ < a tr* a a 6' 6' WALKWAY 9" STABILIZED SUB-BASE ~ ~ , ,C~`~ 6' CRUSHED CONCRETE PAVEMENT BASE COMPACTED 2 - Q ~ 15.5 15' LANDSCAPE BUFFER IO 98~ DENSITY AS PER AASHTO T-180 TO LBR=40 ~ ~ , ~ 1 REV PER CI TY ORC 11-3-05 ~ ~ r ~ . o , o ~ 22 0 22 20' COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN C N~f~R'~~ ~V 1. SURFACE COURSE TO BE TYPE °S" ASPHAL AC CONCRETE MEETING CURRENT F.D.O. T. STANDARD SPECIFICA 110NS 25 2 z 25 ~ ~s 25,5 S.s _ 2 a3 0 8 ~ 26.38 FFE-26.5 FFE= S, 4 Z5, 5 FOR ROAD & BRIDGE CONSTRUCAON, HAVING A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 1 1/4". ~ ~J~ 26.38 1 1 ~ ~ ~3 2. BASE COURSE TO 8E COMPACTED CRUSHED CONCRETE MEETING CURRENT F.D.O. T. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS ~ ~ ,9 . _ _ I ~ ~YicTinir_ r_oen~ ~nwnnv vnnv~ ~-+-1~•0-y I In 0 FOR ROAD & BRIDGE CONSIRUCTION, HAVING A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 6' 400 DOUGLAS AVENU0.01 E, SUITE O si ~~II STABILIZED SUBGRADE TO MEET CURRENT FD.O. T. STANDARD SPEGYF/CATIONS FOR ROAD & BRID DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34808 ~~[E~~~~ PH. (727) 785.8844 FAX (727) 738.2053 N CONSTRUCAON, HAVJNO A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 9" G . DATE: 01-0405 v 8 TYPICAL DRI VEWA Y SECTION NOV 08 2005 PROJECT No. 03030 SHEET 7 OF 1 O a+ C NOT TO SCALE TITLE: 0 U 11NINGDEPARTME DETAILS AND SECTIONS .Q e 1' at All 1' Drop at 4' CONC. SIDEWALK e~ti ~ 3' Tranettton NOTE: Win a onl if Mi Grass Piantin ar Other F ~~d'er ~ side sT e~ R ~ire• Remove Curb if Existing h, Match Existing if o~ .y 1r~, Drives All Drives ~ Wearing Surface 5' Res Non-Walking Surface Q yY Exist Conc Drive , iris Existing Sidewalk l " Wearing 3/4'R ~ X14, htl ` 12 " 12 • v Surface - q al S A u< A Back of Curb Max Slope ©t t t~ Max Siope Seri t' Nan-slip surface require- ~ / ~ / ~ Qi Grass Planting or Other S mints eee Nate 8, , „R Non-Welkin Surface ~ ~ " 4 9 ~ " 4 " - S+ / 1/2" Exp. Joint ' ~ . 6 6 6 Vertical Curb •S t/2 Exp, Joint • ' ~ ' ~ • ~ • • . ~~•~a: ~ Base \ . .D•~• .A;••;°;.•;.4; ~ .q..:: • ~.:6"• • • ' ~ 18" • • ' ~ ~ ;'G::~;~P::;: ;:,p:~:4~:::~: Base RAMP CURB _ 6" ~ ' :6". In Transition \ ~ , . . ' ~ v .Pro art R.o.w. une TYPICAL DRIVEWAY CROSS SECTION , R ~ ~ \ . - - - 3 r / , • ' • Coripacted Subgrade. • ' . • ' 6" ' 'iz' ' •12' • • ' ' `D' - - - d Conc. Sidewalk r~r~i~i~ . . Cam' ~~~~~~~C~• 'Subgrade ~ ~ ~'sr'"r. '~F - - - - - - - o PLAN VIEW 2 ~o i ~ os ~~y,, , c?i Flow Line NOTES! 4 d~ Exist. Type I Curb Remove Sack of Curb I: { N MODIFIED CURB ' GALLEY GUTTER CURB m~~AC~,~a if Existing ~ ~ ~ ~ ,y o~ ce, 4 c o o 4 Min Residential Street t Cit R W 1, There shall be a 1/2 seal ,Joint between ~ N CURB RAMPS Remove Back of Curb on State ar Vertical Curbs with a vertical Saw cut ~ ~ a 5' Min Arterial Street ' RETUR ED , , o z CountyR/ If "x" is less than 48" then or Remove entire Curb and Replace as Part of Sidewalk Ramp, M N i- 5" 1' back of .curb and driveway, the slope of the flared side 1 4" er Foot 1-1/2'R 2. Concrete in curbs shall 1-3/4'R shall not exceed 12: L Modified and Valley Gutter Curbs /r, Join exist back of curb #3 Bar #3 Bar be 3000 psi, with fiber 3/4'R 9' 9' ISOMETRIC VIEW Cont, Cont. • , rlesh reinforcing, Wearing Wearing ~ Surface 12" Textured Surface . 3000 psi cone 4" thick. Constr, 6" VALLEY GUTTER CURB t~~c,~.-Max Siope '•~•:'~;~•:r••: Back of Curb ' thick at driveways with 6x6 #t0 ~4• ;a Surface ~ CURB DROP CURB CDNC, RAMP ~ welded wire mesh, See note 7. p.::;:. ' Remove to an TRANSITION CURB TRANSITION BACK OF 51DEWALK t/2" Expansion Joint evon oint or sawcut , Textured Surface ~ • _ _ , ~ SECTION A A SECTION B B i~~ .d~.:~;~•: Base ----#3 Bar, 10' Long, • 4„ NOTES. / ( r ~ 6' 36'O.C. ~..6. ~ ' • 1. Provide tooled Joints at distances matching the width. Also B. Ramps shall have a tactDe surface, textured to a depth not y \ 12:1 MAX. lace ex ansian tote at drivewa exceedin 1 8" b use of tam or roller In canfonnonce with Base r~ ' ' Corlpacted Subgrade FLOW LINE p P ~ ~ r la In q / y R wa P n Traffic Deei n 5tandarde / 2, If same phyalcal obstruction e><ists which p events the p c g requirements of FOOT oad y a d g / A-A of eldewolks as shown, contact the Engineering Division for Deta9 304 or moat recent modiflcatione, \ ELEVATION _ altemata location. SECTION B B j MEDIAN CURB 3. Wooden and other spacers will not be permitted in sidewalks a / NOTES: driveways, h 4. No cootinga of any kind will be permitted on concrete CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA , 1. Ramps are designed tote CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA sidewalks or driveways without apaclflc approval of the City / • Compacted Subgrade• . ' CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION Engineer. ~ 4 ~ a PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION \ 1 111 I A a ENGINEERING ~ \ to complyy with the Americans with D sob t es ct ENGINEERING 5. All concrete shall be 3000 psi min. ®2B days, with Boer sY oA ' PUBLIC MfORKS ADMINISTRATION 2. Ram s Sflall Have a Tactile Surface, Textured to a AwN eY oAre mash roinforcin . pp 1 uiv9s fete vier,•edrem TYPICAL SIDEWALK g 2 t/es added note TYPICAL SIDEWALK t s3 ~w+ eY ENGINEERING ogre YELLOW REFLECTIVE De th Not E%ceedin 1 8" b use of Tam or roller P.w.D, t 3 6. Controls surface to be li ht broom flnlah. p • g / ~ y p CURB CUT RAMPS 9 ' CNEGaiD BY CONSTRUCTION AND INt>E% Na P In Conformance with Requirements of FOOT ~ u9s Add1d atEaao sr INODi Na 7. Concrete driveway construction shall be 8 thick w 8x6/10x10 t n/as modtned a~b at T.C.J. 1O9 a PIN / D D W E L L E D CURB , 4/!1/C! qev Nota R,a 9Y TYPICAL CURB INS No, TAPE 3" WIDE Roadwa and Traffic Desi n Standards, Detail 304 T•c•d. PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED 109 welded wire mesh relnfac~nent. Y RAMP DETAIL y n i i a Ions. REV, DALE DE~tsP110N APP, oESGNW BY 2 ~ 3 i~V. DATE oESasPnoN APP. B 1 OF 3 oEa~ eY CROSS-SECTIONS tot b tev. oatE ~saeanal rtrar. C.N,H. 2 OF 2 Or Most Rece t Mod f c t aM,H. 4' Dro at All Drives 4" Dro at All Drives p ~ e' Varies Varies p 8 ~ ~ 2'R 1-1/2'R Min, i-1/2'R Min, 2 2' 5 1 ~ ~ 1' per foot - M Wearln Surface 6 2 N Wearing cross slope 1 1/2 R 9 3'R Surface Max, 6 6 • ~ I , , .b; . n Pavement Pavement , c ; ~ 4: •o J / :p: ~0 ~o• \ 9~°'. 'r ~ i ••6•'~ ~ \ N 31 9\Q gl '•a:••: Bas a' Bas ~ c / \ - ~ :D .3/4 R d Y :~p::;::4 ~ ~ 'd' o i / N ~ Base ; ' , ~ ~ d ~ Base :a:~~:~'::~•:~:~;:~;~~':G•;:.c;. Subgrade• '-*~'4, • Stibgrade• •6 , 42" 3" PVC PIPE ~ tL ~ :~P~::~~: r ~ #4 Bar 12' D,C, t r P t ' ' ~ / ; ••4•• / Mee os 1~~~ ~ ~ / Y N ~ Sleeve When r, \ ~ 24 \ / •6' tied Required 'a'~~'~~' act.ed . Colnpa . Corte • ~ ode % ~ / ~ • Sub~rdd'e \ • ; • • • •Subgr ~\~/\/\~j'\ DETAIL CONSTRUCTION ALTERNATE DETAIL DF SIDEWALK ~ . \ ~\\.~\/~\/~\r\\i\ \ \ 4° SCH 40 PVC r / N ONLY PARKINGOESIDE N~TEI Concrete to be 3,000 psi, with fiber mesh reinforcing, \ \ \ ~ hl h side of raadwa s the ~ / . NOTE When used on g y , / c cross slope of the gutter shall match the ~ ~ I 2-1/2' Min 2' Min ~I I I-) I I- I I-III-) I I- I I ~ I I 1=1 I I I I 1=1 I I i 1 cross slope of the adjacent pavement and , NOTES 1, Meter post sleeve shall be 4' i,d, P,V,C, N STRAIGHT CURB nl the thickness of the tip shall be 6 , u ass tans, cut to 12' lengths, otherwise shown on p , • • 2, Contractor shall select method of construction, a ~ ~ N I-III-I I I-III-I ~ There shall be no variation of unit price bids, i TYPE I CURB ~ • ®I I I I ill-III III-~ I I .•'a. • . -1 ~ -1111 3, Meter. ost locations shall be marked b an "x' 3' p r t y in the cone a e, ~ ~ -III= Back of Curb a \ ~ ~ -I 1 I-I I NOTESi 4, Concrete to be 3,000 P,S,I„ with fiber mesh reinforcln cln ~ COalE7c~lAlYAY,UGf4BLf SOILARD SYSTE'NI51NY of USE ' rTrT tricot ~ Construction Sy a 1, There shall be a 1/2' seal oint J ~ ~ 7-3/4' -?I #3 .Bar 7-1/2' #3 Bar xtnl n;EE,tvaROl~t of nvE cnYavD 7NE ENDINEfe Typical Typical tD About Drivewa C / YL between \ back of curb and driveway, Sand 2, Concrete in curbs shall be 3000 psi, TYPE A TYPE C N Wearing \ / Face of ~ with , Curb ~ Surface er es re n IryC ~CLE RW 4 I.D, P,V,C, Pipe CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA q t~9 A ATER, FLORIDA PUBLIC WORK PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION S ADMINISTRATION / ENGINEERING PARKING METER POST ENGINEERING PU UCFwORKS ADMINISTROATION LANDSCAPE BOLLARD DETAIL ENGINEERING TRANSITION AT DRIVES AwllaY DAre AwNaY CDNC SIDEWALKS & ogre 3 ~ovo 2/9l ~avo 8/9E ~c o eY ogre 7/9E TYPICAL CURB CRASS SLEEVE DETAIL alEacEDBY METER PASTS CKECkED BY INDEx N0. 1 4/9/O:! pay, Notes pa INDEx N0, i 4/9/02 pe"' Note p•D• w,~s, SECTIONS tot IN PARKING T tta la 1 {/Q/02 qev, None R.a CHEdfEO 0Y WHEEL STOPS INOE% N0. G~L.B. REINFORCED CONCRETE tt7 REV. DAre DESCRIPTION App, OE9GNE0 BY pEk -DALE 110N APP, OE9rAiE0 BY C.M.H, 1 OF 2 C~N,H, 1 OF t t pEy, p~~ p~gpnpt oER~m er t aF t 6" WHITE STRIPE 6" CURB ALL AROUND HANDICAPPED SIGN HANdCAPPEO SIGNS m (•r+- 24' MIN m m o: /'SEE INOE% No. 119 ~-SEE INDE% Na, i18 / ~ U U 1'-0" ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 CONa wAIK RAMP OOMN CONa wAIK CDNC, WAUt RAMP DOWN RAMP GOWN .CONC. w:J.K STANDARD PRE-PLANTED ~ ~ ~ J SEE INOE N%NOE A 10A SEE INDEX N0. 109 SEE INDE% N0. 109 DISABLED PARKING SIGN ~ 9 TYP 9 MIN Q WHITE BORDER ON 1/8" THICK SHEET 0 W & SYMBOL m ALUMINUM U) ~ ' WIDE TAAFFlC GLUE 8' W2)E 1RAFFIC WHITE _ _ ~DiIPE (TYPICAL) SiAIPE (TYPICAL) _ _ _ - BLUE BACKGROUND ~ U) c PARKING BY 19' TYP TYP LANDSCAPE ISLAND BLACK BORDER DISABLED M 'WIDE iRAFFlC BLUE v. TRAFFIC WHITE STfaPE (TYPICAL) TRAFFlC WHRE & LETTERS PERMIT TYPICAL PAVED PARKING SPACE 'c WHITE BACKGROUND ONLY PAVMNT ~ e' W10E TRAFFIC WNITE STRIPE (TYPICAL) I ¢ STROKE ~ ' (TYPIE ei (TYPICAL) t1 0 BLACK BORDER X255 FINE- 24' MIN WHEEL STOP5 EACH SPACE & LETTERS F.S. 318.14 0, ~ 2 To m WHITE BACKGROUND ' ~ I- ~ I ~ a s~, sp, rn Z ~ > ~ TYP LANDSCAPE ISLAND v ALL ELETTER C° ~ W TYP i o 5'-0' S-0 ri O O 0 2" HGT DIPPED GALVANIZED ~ W O R I G I N A L o NOTE: I ~ All pavement markings to be thermoplostia STANDARD WEIGHT STEEL PIPE W i ~ 3" PVC BOLLARD AT 42" HIGH 2' TYPICAL + 2' (TYPICAL) m " ( ) ' °'•I I 19' TYP OVER GRADE IN 4" SCH 40 PVC 2A'-0' ~ tr-o' u; a:~`•'•• ` I It ° SLEEVES 16" LG AT 6' CENTERS 0 I •I" I a: a: ;-~I I ~I ' MAX SEE DETAIL I h , 8"X2'-6" CONCRETE MASS. TYPICAL GRASSED PARKING SPACE a e FINISH TOP OF MASS LEVEL i~~~1"~~~~~~+r i U U -III ' . •I III N WITH A SLIGHT RAISED WASH 8 - ,A;~, s~, ~*w ,,q a . I . I' APPROXIMATELY 1 2" ABOVE ~ ~j~+ t,C~', ~ ~ ~ NOTE; I - ; I h . I ~ LEVEL OF TURF/SOD. ~ _ ~ ~ , ' ~ 'a~ I I a. 6 - ~ , , ~`7 ~ i ~ All pavement markings to be thermoplastic, 'i o CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION ro ENGINEERING ENGINEERING p, REO%wN BY 5% 9 R A I~wN BY S% 9 ~A G~ sY TYPICAL SINGLE INOE% Na q{~p gY TYPICAL DOUBLE p~oEx No, M,D, its M,a, ANDICAPPED STALL its HANDICAPPED STALL oESaNED ar REV. DAiS OEStXSPOON App. DE9GNE0 BY REY. OAre 110N APP, B" 1 REV PER CITY ORC 11-3-05 2~ r,'~ . ' E ~ ~ , 6 M.G, l DF 2 M,G. 2 DF 2 m 0 o ' COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN C~EI~T~ ~ ; ~ HANDICAPPED SIGN DETAIL 3 U ~?9 9 C NOV 0 .6 ZU05 v 400 DOUGLAS AVENUE, SUITE C C f6 DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 348 H ,C NING DEPARTMENT PH. (727) 785.8844 FAX (727) 738-2953 .C U CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA Cjff FC LEWAjE R DATE: 01-04.05 SHEET $ OF 1 O PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION ~~dd ENGINEERING PROJECT No. 03030 ~N DAlE wN By C 7 O TYPICAL HANDICAPPED g/99 TITLE: 12 °°d°`°d`"" "A rHMp°aY SIGN DETAIL iNDDEEX NO. DETAILS AND SECTIONS U n: v Rev. otin oaaaanaN oeS NA. a~o By i DF i Pick Hale N 1-1/4' 9 5/8" 5/8" Min. 4 Required ° p ° Cleanout Plug _ 2Non-Penetrating ° p ° p ° RW • P q Pick Holes ? p ° p ° p ? ~ ? ? ? p p p p v ~ pp° p °pp SANITARY U 7Ci p ?p?p? p Non Skid ° p ° p ° p ° S E W E R? ? p? p a Concrete Pad 4" 10 5/8` Thick x 1'-6' Sq. 9 7/8' RING -HALF PLAN I d Pattern ° ° Requ re ? ? ? ? ? p Required N ? ~P 6 6" or 8"- 1/8 Bend--? , L ~r ° 36' M ~ 23' 24' Plug M 21' SLID OVER SLID OVER (See Note) Machined Surfac ~ ~ ~ 8" ~N 0~ I~ L ~ 22-3/4' ° 5 3/4' 25 1/2` a i 2 ? Sewer Maln 13 1/2" ~ 29 1/2' - T N CLEAN~UT PLUG DETAIL RING SEC ID Machined Surface RING - SECTION CLEAN~UT DETAIL Weight 85 lbs. N,T,S, Minirluth Weight 7' 232 lbs. SGLID CGVER SECTIaN SOLID CGVER SECTIGN N.T.S. N~TE~ Cleanout plug to be 9' 278 lbs. Wei ht 120 lbs. Minirhuro Weight 128 lbs. NOTES g U.S. Foundry 7621 1, U.S. Foundry No, 117 Ring And BL Cover, Or Equal NOTES or equal, 1. Where roadway base is 8' or thicker use 9' tin , CITY ~F CLEARWATER, FLORIDA CITY ~F CLEARWATER, FLORIDA CITY GF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA all other cases 7' ring is perrhissible. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT VT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 2. Manufacturers rlodel of storrh ring and covert f~alA o BY DATE a BY SANITARY SEWER ~qs A STANDARD 11%07/95 pp y y g CHEfA(ED BY MANHOLE COVER uD~K be a roved b Cit En ineer~ fV BY SANITARY SEWER ~~X t eizer~ as ~,e.t: z e v,as~ y,~,s, MANHOLE COVER 301 R.c.s, CAST IRON 301 a, Ser CLEAN GUT ~~U~°' REV. DATE DESp!?PT1011 APP. DESIGNED BY REV, DATE ~SCAIPT1011 ppp, DESICAEO BY ~ 2 1 Df 2 U.S,Foundr an ary 2 ~a nAre n~satmrt~ T~vJ er 1~1 See Index No. 301 R/W 3' P.U.C. .PIPE. RESTRAINT Finish rode to THE FGLLOWING JOINTS MUST BE RESTRAINED IN ALL APPLICATIGNS~ 9 ~ allow 0.4' thin„ 1.0` 1 4 layers of brick 1, BEND -INLET AND GUTLET Varies rhax, fall froth 18' Chin, 2. TEE -GUTLET BRANCH 3. OFFSETS -INLET AND GUTLET property line to 24' than 4. CAPS z ~ Approved barrel ,Joint seals Concentric cone (Flat cover 5, PLUGS 6. DEAD ENDS sldewal are 'U-Rin s" and 'Rath-Necks', ~ ~ - g on shallow manholes 0 to 7, HYDRANT RUNGUTS SHALL BE RESTRAINED AS DEAD ENDS Two continuous rings at all 4 de th) ~ ~ p cleanout ,Joints. 8" Brick ~ Steel reinforcethent L ~ Megalug Restrainer (TypJ M A 30 -36 or as 5' rein, wall thickness Directed by ' the Cit type II acid resistant Y 4' Min, ~ cerhent 4000 p,s~i, ~D 2'/ft Min, Grout fill opening with C non-shrink Mortar .e' Ebba 1500 Series (Typ, W CITY 0 NED HUMEUWNER UWNED AND A NTAINED "a' AND M I Poured Encaserlent • ;.A.,;.;p., , MAINTAINED .B: GN ALL TEES, A MININUM GF 5' SHALL BE 2' olnt in i entr ON ALt - - ~ P Pe Y RESTR~ RESTRAINED GN EACH RUN LEG (T IcaU L = M1 YP L =MINIMUM LENGTH TG BE 6' Service Lateral RESTRE RESTRAINED GN EACH SIDE GF FITTING (ft,) FIGURES BASED GN 30' DEPTH BURY, 150 PSI TEST PRESSURE, Grout flow channel FIGURE P.V.C. pipe requires Manhole 8' Pvc H' PVC MAXIMUM SIZE USED IN SYSTEM NGTE~ THRUST RESTRAINT AT FITTINGS AND VALVES SHALL BE ado ter cou lin b Flo Main p p g Y BY USE GF EBHA IRGN MEGALUG RESTRAINERS, THRUST RESTRAINT Control, Inc„ or approved ANY VARIANCE MUST HAVE NGTES water sto cou lin , NUM. N~M~ ELBOWS Cdeg,) VALVE BETWEEN PIPE JGINTS SHALL BE BY EBBA IRGN SERIES 1500 SECTION p p 9 WRITTEN AFPRUVAL OF THE CITY PIPE PIPE TEES DEAD RESTRAINERS. 1. Precast rlanhole drop Clay be approved by City ENGINEER, SIZE _ Engineer. Shop drawing subrhittal required, SIZE 11.25 22,50 45 90 BRANCH END CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 2, Dro re ulred when 2' or over, CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 4 4 2 4 9 21 28 46 CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA NUTEI PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION p q ENGINEERING 3, Manholes shalt have an interior and exterior co tl ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 6 NT PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION 6 3 6 12 29 47 65 ENGINEERING All lateral Materials, Including rM Br ogre f t t ast 15 ails dr thickness PRULO EP214- 51 BY PRECAST Dam B.V.D. 5/22/00 O a e y I~oAVO g/gl 8 8 4 8 16 38 66 85 v a r 9%02/99 approved cleanout hardware, are aY .STREET LATERAL - ti r K ers biturhastic black solutio aA¢acED BY SANITARY MANHOLE t th R/W or to the ~ Epoxl Masco opp w,~s. o'3ozN0' to extend o e Via. DETA ~ DETAIL ~Na g1EGtED BY THRUST ~~~~o, A n oE~a+ED BY IL 3O0M, REV. DATE DESCRIPTDIN APP. SIGNED DY easerhent line as noted, ~ ore DESaOP aN APP. R.Q.M. t or 2 r. auTSIDE DROP z ~ 3 RESTRAINING 3 ITV, OAtE ~~RtION APP, G ~H Y 10~ 2 TAIL FF E WD BLS n,t.s, THE FOLLOWING JOINTS MUST BE RESTRAINED IN ALL APPLICATIONS - AN T ET Meter Box 1. BEND INLET D DU L 2. TEE -ALL BRANCHES ~ 3. OFFSETS -INLET AND OUTLET ~ 4. CAPS 5, PLUGS _ _ _ 6. DEAD ENDS Water 7. HYDRANT RUNOUTS SHALL BE RESTRAINED AS DEAD ENDS Valve Box c 0 Restralnln Gasket (T g Thrust Restraint (T J L Yp .N ~ 4' D.I. a ~ 4' Gate Vatv a w ~ ON ALL TEES, A MINIMUM GF 5' SHALL BE RESTRAINED ON EACH RUN LEG. DU NUT USE FUR DRIGI~IAL ~ L =MINIMUM LENGTH TD BE VERTICAL OFFSET °o RESTRAINED ON EACH SIDE OF FITTING (ft,) N ~t =CONTACT ENGINEER FOR VALUES v FIGURES BASED ON 30' BURY DEPTH, 150 PSI TEST PRESSURE Water Main ~ FIGURES DON'T APPLY TG PGLY WRAPPED PIPE o 0 NOV a 8 2005 o NUM. ELBUWS (deg,) VALVE DEAD NOTES THRUST RESTRAINT GN SLIPJOINT DUCTILE IRON PIPE SHALL BE U.. PIPE TEES PIPE FIELD LOCK GASKETS FOR TYTON JOINT PIPE or AMERICAN FAST-G IP PI`ANNINGDEPARTME ~~g~ ~ 11.25 22,50 45 90 BRANCH END GASKETS FOR AMERICAN FASTITE PIPE. THRUST RESTRAINT ON DUCTILE e ~ SIZE e e 90 Bend R ~ IRON FITTINGS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE USE OF MEGALUG RETAINERS MJ X SLIP 4 2 3 7 17 i8 30 AND MECHANICAL JOINT FITTINGS N V.: SN: 6 6 2 5 LO 23 30 42 s - ~ ~ ; ~ ~r M w ~ 0 4 4 CITY OF CLEARWATER FLORIDA 0 8 3 6 12 3 2 5 CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 5 - ~ j ~ e; 12 4 8 17 42 ~k 76 PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION _ro ENGINEERING ENGINEERING a 16~ 5 10 22 53 ~ 97 xN BY DATE FffDRAYM BY DATE e.V.D. 9/02/99 B,V,D. 09/16/99 p+EaaD er THRUST ND, ~~0 Br BLOWOFF x~x Na v 20 6 13 26 63 'k 117 G.G.H. 404 4a 2 _ c1~,;; ~ . BY RESTRAINING 03 oES~cNED er DETAIL ~1+. DATE BL~9PTBDII APP. 2 DF 2 REV. OAre DESpBPTA>tl APP. A.S.B. i aF 1 U G.C.N. 1 1 _ 2 ~ 0 m 0 M O COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CANTER W 7 ~ ~?9 .9 L v v v 400 DOUGLAS AVENUE, SUITE C C l0 DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34888 N 'C PH. (727) 7858844 FAX (727) 738.2053 L U DATE: 01.0405 SHEET 9 OF 10 m v ~N PROJECT No. 03030 C TITLE: 7 O DETAILS AND SECTIONS U a A Disturbed Earth • STAKE (2" X 2'ib1IN.) 60 0 30 60 120 Positive Grade to Collection Area ~ SILT SCREEN (12 MIL) ~I1 Upslope Toe 2 Min. 5'MAX (IN FEET ) w 2:1 Slope or Flatter a 1 inch = 60 ft, ' 1 \ N ~ q 'a\ NORTH GRADE LINE Edge of Channels, Ditches, Swales, Roads Side Slope, Etc. ~ ~ \ PLAN VIEW - - - w ? A z' \ . Min. w Earth Dlke Disturbed Earth \ 6, u ' ~ ~ COMPACTED BACKFILL 18" e " \ Edge of Channels, Ditches, - - - ~ Swales, Road Slde Slopes, ~ Etc., Undisturbed II SILT SCREEN EROSION CONTROL DETAIL 2:1 Slops ' NOTE. DO NOT TRENCH SILT FENCE. WHERE ADJACENT TO or Flatter ° ~ TREES TO REMAIN, SECURE THROUGH THE PLACEMENT ~ / OF FILL Ol/ER THE LOWER LIP OF THE BARRICADE. N SECTION A-A - - _ \ 1 N 1 CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 1 ~ LEGEND RN N ~ \ ENGINEE I G DEPARTME T ~ o N / REFERS TO SILT FENCE PLACEMENT T.L.M. 10/18/94 ~ -1 a~accn aY TEMPORARY EROSION s'6o2~. ~ n aaraaveo ar CONTROL DIVERSION ~ ~ - fA- - acv. narc ~scamrroN Ara. BERM 1 a~ 2 I p rD, / ° x r ;v \ Ip my I ~ • 3'Mln, ~r m I ' \ { _ v C a ~ ~m 5~ ,1~ m ? - z a / ~ \\V// m Construction o A 1 ? i ' / 1.0' Site Entrance ~ ~ `0 Gravel .I ~ ? , ' i ' Paved Stre w ~j y w 1 Y / Xstj9 1,0' m a £ 3d Slope or Flatt _ . ~ - N ~ ~ 'o Y z u CROSS SECTION a w~ ~ q \ i Y ~ V ~ / - - - r I . O ? N N \ / ? ~ ! ~ 1 ~ 'w ? r m w ,Y ~ ~ Y ~ Nrn N \ / rn N' O x Y •O \ / ~ ~ ~ ? 0' Construction ~ 0 p • ~ Paved Stree Site Entrance - ' ~ ~ • Q ,o ~ \ ® N ~ Q ~ N ~1 \ / 6~ N N ~ a a ~ N ~ ND NOU HA Gravel ~ X• x 0 ORY 6+ pN v\ HEI T= ~ N F~ ~ p N ~ ! ~ 1 7,8 F SEC D F OR =41,7 ~ I \ x v A \~/Fs~~ p. ~ TOP ISOMETRIC VIEW I s O ~O x i, \ ~ N~ ~y\ N 6' Ni7~ ~ CIT9~ OF CLEARWATER FLORIDA ~ , N ~ .w ~ ~ ~ 1 1 a ~ ~ \ / i • ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ~ ~ O p~ r••W ~ ~ w / TEMPORARY EROSION nAn: - ~ ~ T.L.M. 9/6/94 o er CONTROL GRAVEL n+~x Na 'a 'o Y,.A.. L ' ~ Nu' o ~ Y ~ aN " a: N N T 601 ~ ~ ~ aaaaavcn er INTERCEPTOR BERM ~ W 3 acv, nnrc acsalmr~a+ Aar. ~ ' ' 1arL ~ - 9 O~ a+ or~ NN / Wr• N ~ i ~S ~ O+ ~Y.. :YI ~f,9' N N p -~j~ OH W 'W ? ? r........ A (~a~, 236, ~ ' w N O5• Ol 0 45 45 w ~ ~ ~ •a• N N N O aa~ / ti - ~ ~ ? •w b ~ N ~ \ 1 ~ ''s d' h ~ q ~,r ` ~ N ~ ~ e ~ 7 tr • ~ W ~S r ?1 1 ti ? u, r, .v N ? ? ~ ~N t~ ? •AW,.. ~ r+ ~ J;~ • y W N C+ ~O cA ~ ~ ~ ~a ~~r ,a; ~ . 1 .44r~', I: ~ N ~ ~ ~ ! ' J J ' t ~ r r \ 4 1 1? 1 ,..y;~, ~ ~ ~ ~ a$. I ~ ~ r ?1 ~ ~X N ti 1iv' ~ - 1 ~ N'Sh~ f ~ S CA N ~ r ~ rt.. !b aE V ~j, ~ ~ 'O C v V ~ ~ i N N ~ ~ > > ,u;r E ~r^rn~ r, ~ ai'~ + 'ri x., ,,~.;~;'.r ~ Y ;i v t_-_~ ~ ~o' fir,. . . V a , ~s~ a ~ ~ - •G 1 ~ ~,}5;+~.£4~~ t r rf'.+;1. f: s*, .y' -'GZ ? P'.s ` era ; Y o ,o .p 9 M 0 NC%_G~ sy+~ d S •:~S ~~.y~ i°~ .wP~ .r! . ~w. ' ~ ? ~iryt sy, a ~ , * ~ Tle'ai ~ My m~r~ E ~ . S 1 Nr . , . r . y N ~ ~ ~ ~ c a ~ • ! S~' ~ Nd N' O O Y ~ 7: N~ tam N R• 00 O •CP ~ ~ m N O _ r• ~ ~ N . a . ? ti i ` ? ~ ~,,R ,a~..<~.,.. <w ad f~ r~ 4s ~~:~i~~~` a. R ~ ~ ~1~ ~ r y •`~m •W 9 ~ ORI~I~AL V ?1 'Q r ? ~ ;,;t ~x s~ ;i 3L;" =Y ~y N er; 5 N 4 - w3 Aa 1 v rvv~ g , ~3. Ji. A" v` r, py . .a a 'rr v* ~ r N f~ t z.Y ~ , O `4,,. I c. , ~ tN rx i ~ - S% v1 y' r . xd• _ (y.; N ~`•''~n~, fis A.._~ to ~ ~ ~ ~ ors c'•~ • ~ a `'o ~ N ~ O W N N aN0 N~~NOp I ~ ,fi ~ ~.TJ v r - ,,t . ~ w~ m lS W W W O W QI Y i --rte 1 x 6 ~ NOV 0 8 2005 o ~ ~ ~ s ,6e~ ~ = o • ° pIANNiNGDEPARTMENT w~~'`'`` ~ U ~ U Y b v R A - i ~ ~ ~q 'i',+ ~?I 1 ~ ~ V a V, a N d _ _ ~ ~ ~ N ~r a ~ N N v Nn ~ 6 _ ~ ~ < V ~9 N W ~U* Na ~v' N O N Nom, 5 _ ~1~ ~ j^^ ~'J ~W Ors, cA0 - N j a N•6+ Na ~Nc' NN 4 ~ ~ • ! '1 {~f \ c ~ m N ~ w 3 - ~ , d N t` Ni.« C 2 - , ° ~ 4 'p~ N 7 1 - "Z ~ F ~ U 0 M O COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER~~~ • o MCMULLEN BOOTH ROAD (C.R, 611) ' RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES ~ ASPHALT WIDTH VARIES -1 ~I2A1~7~ lIJZA U C ro N 400 DOUGLAS AVENUE, SUITE C DUNEDIN, FLORIDA 34e28 C ro PH. (727) 7858844 FAX (727) 738.2853 N t ' DATE: 1.04.05 10 U n~ MCMULLEN B00 1ULLEN BOOTH ROAD (S,R. 593) PROJECT No. 03030 SHEET 1 O OF RIGHT-OF-WA RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH VARIES TITLE: PROPOSED SANCTUARY o ASPHALT 1 U ASPHALT WIDTH VARIES ENVIRONMENTAL DETAILS a ' i . ADS N-12®WT IB PIPE SPE T IB PIPE SPECIFICATION FwISHCRADE MANHOLE OPENING FINISH GRADE SCOPE OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF HDPE PIPE - RD-17=0.12 CFS 51 LF 15"ADS@0.4% SLOPE(FLOW LINE 7) THIS sPECIFICaTION DESCRIBES 15 11.2 B D WT AD INV. EL-22.48 FOR USE INGRAVITY-FLOW TION DESCRIBES 4-THROUGH 60-INCH (100 T01500 MM) ADS N-12 WT IB PIPE , LVITY-FLOW • 64LF 15" ADS 0 4% S OPE FL W LINE 6 D- = 12 APPLICATIONS. @ ( ) R 18 0. CFS •P' MANHOLEISTRUCTUREWALL 15 11.25 BEND WT ADS INV. EL=22 27 ~ PIPE REQUIREMENTS ENTS FIRST COUPLER SHOULD BE •.,4':~ ' 18" (045m) FROM WALL OR BE ' " " _ „ „ EXISTING POND N-12 WT IB PIPE SHALL HAVE A SI 15x8 ADS E &4 EL INV 2.53 4-THROUGH 10-INCH (100T025 SHALL HAVE A SMOOTH INTERIOR AND ANNULAR EXTERIOR CORRUGATIONS. a ENCASeD IN FLOwABLE FILL )-INCH (100 TO 250 MM) SHALL MEETAASHTO M252, TYPES. , 15x12 RED. WT ADS 12-THROUGH 60-INCH (300 T01 • ~:ti•. Y. i0-INCH (300 T01500 MM) SHALL MEET AASHTO M294, TYPE S OR ASTM F2308. , y.~; .y ~i MANNING'S "N"VALUE FOR USE VALUE FOR USE IN DESIGN SHALL BE 0.012. vAwES , JOINT PERFORMANCE CB-5 TRAFFIC BEARING G TE CO RD-5-0.86 CFS ° ~i „ - 175LF 15 S@22 / SL PE(FLOW LINE 8) PIPE SHALL BE JOINED WITH THE IOINED WITH THE N-12 WT IB JOINT MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OFAASHTO ' ' 2x3 C BOX RIM=25.81NV= 2.7 M252,AASHTOM294,OR 4294, OR ~..r:' ASTM F2306. e ••a. ~ /,,,q BEDDING ,•'v!: 24.0' (',O 4-THROUGH 60-INCH (100 T0150 REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM D3212. INCH (100 T01500 MM) SHALL BE WATERTIGHTACCORDING TO THE ~ i:,•- ' OFASTM D3212. GASKETS ~ ' ~ • SHALL BE MADE OF POLYISOPRE ~ • a ~ 1.., 1•.~•i..;;;Y,; UNDISTURBED OF POLYISOPRENE MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM F477. GASKETS EARTH ' , INV. EL= 8.4 SHALL BE INSTALLED BY THE PIPI 19.5 ,LLED BY THE PIPE INSURE BACKFlLUS ~ 1z" (o.3m) 0 A MANUFACTURERANDCOVERED' GASKET IS FREE FROM DEBRIS. P t AND COVERED WITH A REMOVABLE PROTECTIVE WRAP TO ENSURE THE PLACeD UNDER PIPE NAnvE soa MIN. ~ AND PROPERLY CLASS I OR II BACKFILL PER FROM DEBRIS, JOINT COMPACTED ASTM D2321, COMPACTED IN CO ILABLE FROM THE MANUFACTURER SHALL BE USED ON THE GASKETAND BELL ~ t 1!2 LD. 11!21.0. 6° (0.2m) MAX. LIFTSTOA 15° F EL CUT LUBRICANT AVAILABLEFROM THI LF 4 D INV. EL=19.45 DURING ASSEMBLY. SUITABLE FOUNDATION MIN. MIN. MIN. OF 9D%MAX.STANDARD 3LY. PROCTOR DENSITY MES R O 12-THROUGH 60-INCH (300 T015i I-INCH (300 T01500 MM) DIAMETERS SHALL HAVE A REINFORCED BELL WITH A " ;E DEVICE. THE BELL 3 F " RD-6=0.90 CFS BELL TOLERANCE DEVICE. THE BI EXIS IN BOX TOLERANCE DEVICE SHALL BE IN VICE SHALL BE INSTALLED BY THE MANUFACTURER. g_1 38LF 10 S L N 5 CO FITTINGS NOTES: F BUILDI G 0 TLINE FITTINGS SHALL CONFORM TO AI 2x3 C BOX Q $ FIELD PIPE AND JOINT PERFORM CONFORM TO AASHTO M252, AASHTO M294, OR ASTM F23O8. 1. MAXIMUM INSERTION ANGLE SHALL NOT EXCEED REQUIREMENTS AS SPECIFIED BY THE MANUFACTURER. JOINT PERFORMANCE RIM; 2 ~ .10 - 0 5 \ TO ASSURE WATERTIGHTNESS, F ~ERTIGHTNESS, FIELD PERFORMANCE VERIFICATION MAY BE ACCOMPLISHED 2. SEE STANDARD DETAILS STD-202 (A-B) THROUGH STD-204 (A-E) FOR STRUCTURE CONNECTIONS, PRODUCT INFORMATIONAND _3 ~ ~ - BY TESTING IN ACCORDANCE WIl INV= 4. -4 0 6 ATM DIMENSIONAL PIPE DATA. INSTALLATION RECOMMENDATIONS ARE ALSO SPECIFIED IN TECHNICAL NOTE 5.04: HDPE CONNECTIONS ICCORDANCE WITH TO MANHOLES AND STRUCTURES. S C969. APPROPRIATE SAFEI -7-0 0 F PIPE MATERIAL. IROPRIATE SAFETY PRECAUTIONS MUST BE USED WHEN FIELD-TESTING ANY 3. PERFORMANCE HIGHLY DEPENDENT ON INSTALLATION. CONTRACTOR MUST INSURE MANHOLE GASKET IS UNIFORMLY SEATED n _ _ _ _ _ MATERIAL PROPERTIES AROUNDSTRUCTUREADAPTER. EXTRA PRECAUTIONSMUSTBETAKENTDPREVENTDIFFERENTIALSETTLEMENTBETWEENTHE 1ERTIES PIPE AND MANHOLE, ' 6 8 ADS = VIRGIN MATERIAL FOR PIPE AND I T D V D I POLYETHYLENE CONFORMING W IL FOR PIPE AND FITTING PRODUCTION SHALL BEHIGH-DENSITY CONFORMING WITH THE MINIMUM S A I P C O X REQUIREMENTS OF CELL CLASSI 32. ~ , , ~ DIAMETERS, AND 4354000 FOR OF CELL CLASSIFICATION 424420C FOR 4-THROUGH 10-INCH (100 TO 250 MM) , uPOATEDDpAM,NO rJR oa~mro~ cNs 4354000 FOR 030°TADB, INC. pEV. DESCRIPTION BY MwOOMf CHH'0 16.4 ~ - O 12-THROUGH 60-INCH 300T0151 CO ( I-INCH (300 T01500MM) DIAMETERS, AS DEFINED AND DESCRIBED IN THE a 7ilea<v ro ~cr~ir,~'"s~~rha A ~~r as~a~av W" °H5 SL~RIK23' fAP 7kS P/XYELT, Apo N4C ARC AL1~0.9VRY JhF /4'[NXN/K3Y SUWS'kR !hl i16/KL11XlV Ltl7ACS STEUCTUEE CONNBCTION 4890 TRUEMAN BLVD - 1011N08 CB-1 1. 4 CFS o - . 3 F z LATESTVERSION OFASTM D3350 1 S 0 5 S P (F 0 1 EXCEPT THAT CARBON BLACK C( N OF ASTM D3350, aroNemhE7~3YAffc~u,stzraLnroln+raxs.,d~A4f,TVrstzx~x'T[JPnesAlftAAfCr. ne'ame»'aw.+,ut~x,~wtt Ers7uuTtON Dann HIUTARD,oxlo4sose ~Tr n~ ass Raaa ro ceNSn~rav. ~a n~avav traHmes' ~r ro nYr ta<rAts " NTS (300 T01500MM) VIRGIN PIPE ARBON BLACK CONTENT SHOULD NOT EXCEED 5%. THE 12-THROUGH 60-INCH ~ ~~+~'EK+~a ~ +a~ ro aar++e' nr+r na ,e.,~ Nw~ °,ND., N°. IVIRGINPIPE ~'Tf'S'~''~T'1%EfG9n~f'HiYtfCT. DpnwINCNUMBEp: SIO-2D1 - 1oF1 MATERIAL SHALL COMPLY WITH 1 L COMPLY WITH THE NOTCHED CONSTANT LIGAMENT-STRESS (NCLS) TEST AS I 2 F " INV. EL 21.1 SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.5 AND 5. :CTION 9.5 AND 5.1 OF 8"ADS FI LD CUT AASHTO M294 AND ASTM F2306 R 12"x4" S WYE & 5 L L S B F O INSTALLATION ND ASTM F2308 RESPECTIVELY. I RECOMMENDED MINIMUM TRENCH W10THS O MES I V. EL=18.4 INSTALLATION SHALL BE IN ACCC P HALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D2321 AND ADS'S PUBLISHED PIPE OIAM. MIN. TRENCH WIDTH 33LF 4 ADS _1 S INSTALLATION GUIDELINES, WITH I - 4 + EXCEPTION THAT MINIMUM COVE IUIDELINES, WITH THE ~ FINAL BACKFILL 4" 21" CO 1200 MM) DIAMETERS SHALL BE C T MINIMUM COVER IN TRAFFICKED AREAS FOR 4-THROUGH 48-INCH (100 TO s" 23" TERS SHALL BE ONE MIN.covERro MIN.covERro 8 ADS FI LD CUT FOOT. {0.3 M) AND FOR 60-INCH (1 . RIGID PAVEMENT,H FLEXIBLEPAVEMENT,H ~ 8" 26" ID FOR 60-INCH (1500 MM) DIAMETERS, THE MINIMUM COVER SHALL BE 2 FT. 2" 6" D E 4 _ (0.6 M) IN SINGLE RUN RD-27= . 7 CFS MES I . EL-18.5 .RUN to" zs° CO (',O = .0 APPLICATIONS. CONTACT YOUR I WWWADS-PIPE.COM FORACOP` CONTACT YOUR LOCAL ADS REPRESENTATIVE OR VISIT OUR WEBSITE AT ~ : 7 r 1z' 3D' COM FOR A COPY OF THE ~ ; - 15" 34" LATEST INSTALLATION GUIDELINE ATION GUIDELINES. ' ' INITIAL 5L 4"ADS N . = ADD 36LF 8" A S SPRINGLINE BACKFILL 18" 39" - 24" 48" = NOTE: RD-23 0.05 FS _ .8 I L D V D A S O E S ~~f ; L ` , HAUNCH 30" 56" 1. ROOF DRAIN COLLECT (RAIN COLLECTION PLAN WAS ORIGINALLY PERMITTED UNDER THE BEDDING 36" 64" RD-24=0.04 FS BUILDING PLANS FOR THIS f (NS FOR THIS PROJECT. ORIGINAL ROOF DRAIN PLAN WAS A'FDRDD•ED"PIPE ~I I 42" 72" RD-25=0.04 F$ ~ DRAWING RD1.0 BY MARSHF 1.0 BY MARSHALL ENGINEERING CORP. I MIN.rRENCHwIDrH l suIrABLE NOTES: III~~~ (SEETABLE) FOUNDATION 48" 80" RD-26-0.02 FS 1 F ALL FLOW RATES FROM MAI - - 0- . C S 6" ADS I LD CUT .PIPE SIZE. TES FROM MARSHALL WERE USED TO CALCULATE ROOF DRAIN - 54" ea" 1. ALL PIPE SYSTEMS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D2321, "STANDARD PRACTICE - 38LF DS 1 x A FDR 60" 96" UNDERGROUND INSTALLATION OFTHERMOPLASTIC PIPE FOR SEWERS AND OTHER GRAVITY FLOW MES I . EL=18.5 2. THIS DESIGN INCLUDE APPLICATIONS", LATEST ADDITION MINIMUM RECDMMENDED COVER BASED ON :SIGN INCLUDES ONLY THE "IN GROUND SYSTEM" AND DOES NOT VECHICLE LOADING CONDITIONS 0 ( I U I INCLUDE ANY OF THE SYSTE 2. MEASURES SHOULD BE TAKEN TO PREVENT MIGRATION OF NATIVE FINES INTO BACKFILL MATERIAL, SURFACE LIVE LOADING CONDITION OF THE SYSTEM THAT IS ATTACHED TO THE BUILDING OR IS USED WHEN REQUIRED. HEAVVCONSrRUCnoN IN THE BUILDING STRUCTUF NG STRUCTURE. THIS SYSTEM IS FOR THE CIVIL SITE ROOF 3. FOUNDATION: WHERETHETRENCHBOTTOMISUNSTABLE,THECONTRACTORSHALLEXCAVATETOA PIPEDIAM. H-25 (75TAXLELOAD)' CS s DRAIN/ TORMWATER COLLE IWATERCOLLECTIONONLY. DEPTH REQUIRED BY THE ENGINEER AND REPLACEVv1THSUITABLEMATERIALASSPECIFIEDBYTHE 12"-48" 12" 48" ENGINEER. AS ANALTERNATIVEANDATTHEDISCRETIONOFTHEDESIGNENGINEER,THETRENCH 54"-60" 24" 60" BOTTOM MAY BE STABILIZED USING A GEOTEXTILE MATERIAL. 12"X6" ADS WYE 3. ALL STORMWATER CC )RMWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT PONDS HAVE BEEN 4. BEDDNG: suITABLEMATERIALSHALLBECLASSI,IIORIILTHECONTRACTORSHALLPROVIDE 'VEHICLES IN EXCESS OF75TMAYREQUIREADDITIONALCOVER DOCUMENTATION FOR MATERIAL SPECIFICATION TO ENGINEER. UNLESS OTHERIMSE NOTED BY THE MINIMUM RECOMMENDED COVER BASED D 6 6" AD PERMITTED USING THE PRO &45 EL INV S Q ~ PLANS. ALL ORIGINAL PLAN: SING THE PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AS SHOWN ON THE CIVIL SITE ENGINEER, MINIMUM BEDDINGTHICKNESSSHALLBE4"(100mm)FOR4"-24"(100mmSWmm);6"(150mm) ON RAILWAY LOADINGCONOITIONS RIGINAL PLANS INCLUDES THE RUN OFF FROM THE PROPOSED FoR3o°-6D°pSDmm-9Wmm). COOPER EL.=23.61 BUILD N OUTLINE STRUCTURE AND PAVING. PIPE DIAM. E-B0~ AND PAVING. 5. INITIAL BACKFILL: SUITABLEMATERIALSHALLBECLASSI,IIORIIIINTHEPIPEZONEEXTENDINGNOT UPT024" 24" LESS THAN 6"ABOVE CROWN OF PIPE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION FOR MATERIAL SPECIFICATION TO ENGINEER. MATERIAL SHALL BE INSTALLEDAS REQUIRED IN ASTM D2321, 3D"36" 36" 6 " 4. PORTIONS OF THE PR INS OF THE PREVIOUS MARSHALL SYSTEM HAS BEEN INSTALLED ~ LaresreDlrloN. ' 42°•sa' ae° CB-2 L I # .AND HAS PASSED INSPECTIi ~SEDINSPECTIONANDISUSABLEASNOTEDONTHISPLAN, 6, MINIMUM COVER: MINIMUMCOVER,H,INNON-TRAFFICAPPLICATIONS(GRASSORLANDSCAPEAREAS) "COVER IS MEASURED FROM TOP OF PIPE TO BOTTOM 2x3 BOX - ~ - ~ VARIOUS CLEANQUTS AND ~ -1 - 0 0 F ANQUTS AND 4" COLLECTION SYSTEMS FROM THE PORTE Is,z"FROMTHETOPOFPIPETOGROUNDSURFACE. ADDITIONAcCOVERMAYBEREQUIREDTO PREVENTFLOATION. FOR TRAFFIC APPLICATIONS, MINIMUMCOV~R,.H, IS IT UPT048"DIAMETERPIPE - OF RAILWAY TIE. f AND 24" OF COVER FOR 54"FO"DIAMETER PIPE; MEASURED FROM TOP OF PIPE TO BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE ESO COVER REQUIREMENTS, ARE ONLYAPPLICABLE RIM-26.0 D- 3 S _ COCHERE MAY BE USED AF- - .6 C .Y BE USED AFTER INSPECTION AND APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER. ;I PAVEMENTORTOTOPOFRIGIDPAVEMENT. TO ASTMF2306PIPE. 2 ADDED EAD INFORMATION TJR O8~AIOT D 1 0. S INV=2325 D 4 0. S 0f0°TRDB, INC, REV. DESCRIPTION BV MMNOIYY CHMO A01l14YED L!'dIFlK1~'SYSlC.Y$ ,M1L^ (AQS'J N(C RPEPAkYD 7MS CYTAC BlA'D AY MfA01NlR1Y RR7MYD ro AGC nu' CN8 . D -.9C STO STORM STRUCTURE SCHEDULE ' C4eFeFnD'aevr><,xmrot~,e'TmecaLrsAS~rcrrEU ACtCHICnnrf>~d'ABtI'DAVYEM~ImDM1CC14C1'SgV ' ~RHCES fAP!!16'flpECl, ApP H1SADS AICYF>7K17Vl1Y IOBF.FD Jl,ENfABIN1XW SYMTRR TYPICL, 'L'NaNCH 4870 TRUEMAN BLVD RR7NCtD<l7rYe'CAft~[YRtlBI'h1227MlLlIW/A?'a A10 Aff M7Y,SYiL1FA^R1P 714f'AR:1ESl U6T~ °HILLIARD, OHIOd70P0 1 S EXISTING POND . rffNEiY IAESC' A'7AlS A19g4 ro CYMDihCC'/A,1ti' ?a n,E [r!sex' f7K,A1RRS m ro fA(fY,0. 71~F Ckz4(S NTB /•W1711[lDlfRCAV AEE7S LYP CXCYFZtS' !!e*A9gMAd'F NIIXIWl, S7A!$ L7P CR:IC NL'iXNiYltl/a,WD ro CMAei!- JlNT !JA ai4cm °nw4c mmS ~a sr~ucruRE DESCRIPTION RlM INV TOP aT~'~''~''~°r'~'~~'r ORAWINONUMBER: STO-1O1 toFt CO sr No, CB1 CO CO 0 \ 12 ADS 26.10 24.3 GI 8611 • 1YFE I C CB-3 TRAFFIC G gp° ~ sizE 2x3 BEARING GRATE 48LF "ADS 48LF 6" AD 10 F NorE 6 WALL 2x3 C BOX RIM=26.4 24 x10 A WYE &4 EL(INV. EL=21. ) sr No. CB 2 26,0 23.25 GI8811 • 15 ADS ~ 12 ADS INV=22.75 BUILDING OUTLINE 15 ADS 48LF 10 DS RD-22=0.12 rrPE GI C a- _ _ s~zE 2x3 90' RD 21-0.12 CFS 90° 90° .4. NorE 6" WALL sr No. CB 3 15ADS 26.4 22.75 GI 6611 ~ G/ ® CO CO CB-4 T FF C BEARING GRATE APE CO GI C 90° NONSHRINKGROUT (SOIL-TIGHT) 3x4 "D" OX s~zE 2x3 24x10 ADS WYE &45 330LF 24"ADS 0.63% SLOPE FLOW LINE#3 2 90' ' ' HDPE PIPE @ ( ) (RIM= 3.4I V=20.65) NorE 6 WALL 24 ADS ' sr No. CB 4 24 AD 24 ADS ~ 23.4 20,65 G18825 24"x6"ADS WYE &45 EL IN - 70LF 2 DS SLOPE TO ( V. EL-21.98) IYFE GI D 90° 90° 24x6 ADS WY &45 EL(INV. EL=21.63) EXISTIN FLOW LINE#4 ( ) sizE 3x4 90° I !„IL 24 x4 ADS WYE &45 EL(INV. EL=21.64) a 9 2 NorE 6 WALL 24 ADS ' 10LF 4 ADS . ~ sr NO. CB5 toAo LOADS 25.8 22,7 GI8811 ' r ' 24"x4" A S WYE 45 EL 1~ ® IYFE G I C I,,,~ \ s~zE 2x3 y'.. ~ 22° . NOTE " 1 ` 6 WALL 15 ADS :}.•,1 ~.7~, ~ ~Irll~ U DISCH RGE TNT EXISTING BOX STRUC URE Nom'-; . j ~ h can TYPE1:SOIL-TIGHT USINGNONSHRINK ~~~„„~T ~ ~ 'L~ 7 ~~'r ~ ~ GROUTANDCORRUGATEDPIPE ~ "QA9°°"Qc° III"„~ ~d~ Z = II : R:.;~ W U ~~Vi o ~ ~~i~~ III i~ A~q~ o p It,~~~ 4a4) Z N SEESTANOARODETAILSTD•201ANDTECHNICAL Nr i~"""~ W } NOTE:5.04 HDPE CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES AND STRUCTURES I) S V F. L O W M L'tti° I I;~J ~ ~ - NEI N Of~H000 uEA~~CE9 ~I I'I~'I~ ~ Q I- FOR INSTALLATION RECOMMENDATIONS. C~T ~ O C L E A S W A S ! III i/~")~ Z z C1 ' 030°TADS, INC. 4" ADS CLEAN OUT 0474 AG REV. UPDEBCRIPfI0NN0 BY MMAM'Y CHMD NOTE:ALL DIMENBIONB I'll a O fp ARE l1(l FOOT. ,I,'a j AoYAx><o aenNC•~s7s>ACS eL>^ PAas7 H4s'r,~rAffn ner a'rAr e,.¢n cw ne°aBwrxevv roAQS ndTS• DUt OET/REf STSTEM BRV aw~u+caaro~arot~ae'rn>~aara~n,waAS,au.~sreu AGCU,s'nnrfYh~A9MCDM7fM~E~lf'.'A4A:9gV ' S1~RI/CYS fAP/H5 AR1/fCT, Aq4 fNS ARC AIVILY LfIBYkD 7JEAPC1AllVXW SA9~fZ! lAE'IV57KUJXW [CTACC 80BrT1GET STRUCTURE 4840 TRUEMAN BLVD BN54)6 . 4" ADS NT-WT .`a,'.• 45° ADS ELBOW FORMED OR FABRICATED ~ ~ , ~HILLIARO,OHI04SDY8 " CONNECTION TYPE 1 DETAn PLAN AMENDMENT TO BCP 2005 08;4 12"NOM 4.. ADS COUPLING TYP J ~j ~ A~ NAEL'J ~GAYL"ORi a`, 'p,E, N~0,13096 PART#XX13AA OR XX11AA AS REQUIRED CUT ADS PIPE TO MATCH BANK SLOPE B ~ ~ ~ a~. ALL PIPE TO BEADS N-12 WTI IB 3" N-1 , ~ N-12 FABRICATED 45° WYE ~ ~ • ' , 10" T012" BENCH N-12 FABRICATED WYE ALl ALL FITTINGS WT ~ ~ ~/0~0 FOR CLEAN OUTS ALL WT 12"; 12"x4" 1280AN (4 READ) ~ W' ' ~ ~ ' 4x4 0422AA (4 READ) 12": 2~ - • 12"x6" 1283AN (2 READ) N-12 FABRICATED 11.25° BENDS ~ ~ L / . "'A.,,' " ; ' 6x4 0622AA (4 READ) 15"x4" 1580AN (2 READ) 15" 1591AN (2 READ) ' 8x4 0822AA 3 RE D 15 , ADS WYE 3.. r.;~ ~ . ; , ~ 15"x8" 1582AN (3REQD) CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY COUNTRYSIDE CHRISTIAN CENTER'` , ~ ~ ~ ' 10x4 1091AG 3 READ ADS N-12 ADAP E ( ) T R WITH SCH 40 BELL 15X4 1580AN (2 READ) 24 , 24"x4" 2480AN (2 READ) QUANTITIES _ PART# 24x4 2480AN 3 READ 24". 24"x6" 2481AN (2 READ) N-1245° BENDS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e~~_nd~°er- TYP FIELD FABRICATED MES DETAIL 3 T04 ( ) 14"X1U" 2483AN (z KtUu) 4" 0494AN (8 READ) G L PVC SCH 40 PIPE FROM 6"0679AG CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY CO. BUILDING ROOF DRAIN 8 -0879AG QUANTITIES CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY 6" 0694AN (4 READ) QU, SYASTEM EXISTING 10"-1079AG QUANTITIES 8" 0894AN 3 REQD CERTIFICATE OF OSPREY COVE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE PARK ( ) AUTHORIZATION NO. 21764 STATE ROAD 54, LUTZ, FL 33549 MICHAEL J. GAYLOR 10" 1094AN (2 REQD) 26186 PH. (813) 949.5599 FAX (813) 949-0616 P.E. NO. 13098 CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY DATE: 4/28/08 QUANTITIES SHEET 1 TY P CLEAN OUT AND CONNECTION DETAIL PROJECT No. 03030 TITLE: DETAIL OF ROOF DRAIN COLLECTION SYSTEM ai o a D c C ~ ~ 6 n C av N a 16K , 12K 5 WIDE BUFFER BUFFER ~ THE 25' O.C E1 ~ o 5' O.C. .a 100% SHRUBS 1RUB5 ~ c 26K ~ p a 27K 24K 20K 4K 236, 01 4K 5°~5 45" E 23 01 ' 26K H 6 CAMP 12K n . ? TRI ~ TREE # C ~ ti 15K 13K 4K f ~A 6K Z 42K 15K -p ~ ~ 5K ~ „ _ 32 ~ r' ~ o 5 9 18K K 4K r D ? 6K 5K 13K 6P ~ 4K ~ ` ~ ' _ 5 SPAC S Z _ n 6K 5/( 6 lOK ~ 42K r p m ~ 5K 20K 4 SP , v'4 5K 20K 40K m N ? 7K ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G PARKING ~ - . ' I a ? I-- _ -9 ~~t 4K 5K 0 r ` see ciwl 0' uJ 'o ; , ~ 5K 7K D drawin s for ~ _ d ..l ~ + , 3 ~ . tree ~ . ti ~lJ _ , N a _ , ` 5' WIDE BUFFER 8K 8K 7K Z SHRUBS 30 o.c. 4K ~ protection ` ~ W p N drawings for drawings for ~ 4 N Z ~ ' ~ tree 375 I 0 -I FE 6K tion 5 WIDE BUF R lOK - N E# r tree QV 4 ' i a protection P CE ~ 4~ CE z, ~ ~ , vo QV 5-5K 8K 6 1 oK m TREEJ25 O.C. ? 5-5K ~ 8 ~ , QPG ~ a r - - ~ 100% SHRUBS 5K 7K 5-4 5K QV ~ W ~ Q 6-6K 12K 6K 4-3K ~ ~ ~ 12K 9-9K 28-30K 8K cn w ? ~ o Q Z ~ z see cml ° N drawings for see ciNl 0 ~ . e~ ~ ~ F.. ' .rawmgs for ~ ~ AC ti . (A W tree rV P CE x * , ~ rotecbo pow N 00°00 05 5 93 D stow p t'r t action GR S P RKI G ~ W ` V . ~ see civil ~ . . ~ ~ V ~ dravnngs for 3 P 'see a; See MI ' 'Q 7 PA E. 5~ ~ ? drawings for OSED ASPHA NG tree see a, n - protection drawings for , V V I In d win fo 5 S S ACS c''^ tree; 6 P ~E tre ~ ~ dra ngs or ~ tree: QV protectia protectio 1 SAC v P .o ~ ` ~ see cm ~ Ion ~ see cwll drawln s for ~ QV R ~ S C z ' rawln s for ~ g ~ g ~ I tree ~ ~ ' V ,ti - ` tree - PROP ED ASP PAVING V ` . protection ~ ` ~ protection QV ~ V ° ~ T ? ~Tr,~E Q. 'Q` ~ Z ,v 6 R6 see cml ~ ~ - ~ ? ~ dra ins r ~ ~ ~ V ~ ? ~ g r~ ~ # • ~ ree S C 7 P CE SACS ` ~ ~ S A 1<S ~ ~ti ~ ` _ ~ , ~ See CINi r~ I's ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ dW A~ ~e.n iarre ~ e r~ ti¦ . p ~s - - ` ti _ _ ~ n..... _ _ , ".s~-. ~ r ' s r~vin 5 for 5 P CE 1 S A vl 2 , ~ ~ tree r - ~ 10 S A ES ~ P CE : r, gee cnnl ? prorecao ; c. 7 0 ES gWe cy f G S P RK NG S _ w 4 SP C S wi s f. GAS P R IN ."1 ree ' ree see civ~l,..,.~-- see v~l see ~ ~ P'rotectlo see evil 2 sx ciwl ~ ~ I Protection. drawings for ~ rawmgs for 6 s, drawings for see avd s for ~ PROPOSEb ASf QV ~ I ~ ~ Q ~POSEb ASPHALT PAVING tree INSTALL TREES IJ,t,: tree : ------'protection 10' FROM ALL Plr~S protection ~ ~ ~ tree V drawings for tree : V r ` QV 35 ~ C~ ~ W rotectlon ~0 tree f'^~0Lti0" QV protection , ~W ~ ~ ~ TJV ` roteCbon ? ~ ~4 see ciwl ES see c,vll 10 SPACES o 75 p t _ , t . tree M ire ti y y: ~ ~ ~ 0 ote n ~ pr test n , ' ~ p , ? ~ , ~ tV ? ~ ~ ~r ~ ~s ..b K..: .•r a i..~5~ •.i ru• aA• ~ V ~ ~ L 0 ~ 15+ 5 WIDE BUFFER ZFU 100 Q ~ ~ ~ ~ FU ~ I T~ TREEl35' O.C. ~ ~ ~ V (d 0 ° ~ ~ ~ ~ 45 I2 I3 85 175 85 15 WIDE BUFFS ~ 100 00% SHRUBS 85 335 45 IAM ~ ~ 5 L i V RI VS THY ~ NOP Q RI LOS NO ~ V ~ T L I 75 ZFU SHRUBS 30' O.C. R ~ ~ 10% SHRUBS LAM ~ PERPETUAL ` „ 45 ~RPETUAL CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE O ~ 6 , sEMENr . 2' a aSEMENT PER 0. R. BOOK 34, PAG ; 0 pp U , EA 45 8 I00 NOP , ~ ~ _ N ~ - _ ~ V ~ - 197.43 D Q Los S 0140 47 E . NOP ~ L to W -f W ~ N ~ / SIG VISIBIU1YiRIAN 1E5. ~ R. B00%( , A HRUB 0 BE MAINTAINED U ER 30" Hi. ' ~ ' TVI ILfiYTRIANGIfS N Q crrP,? X w 85 85 PAGE• 1716-171 ALL ~HRU BE MAIMAINED UND R ~ FIT. Z RI T BAR VS ~ V D. C SHRUBS 30" O.C. ~ f~ Q Q . ~ II ~ ~ ~R I Gl f~AL J ~ a ria c e u e an e ~ 0 mmon Name ecification S acin .Quantity Code Botanical Name Co p p g TREE CLA551FICATION 2 I B Ilex cornuta Burford Holl 3 al., 24" ht. x 24" 5 r. 30" o.c. 0 C Y 9 p TREE RATING; 450 LAM Lantana camera Yellow Lantana i gai., 12" ht, x 12"spr. 18" o.c. ;0'ht.x5'S r. I 2 2 2 42 L I LagerStroemia indica Crape Myrtle p ' . " al. ' 3 2 23 LS Li uidambar styraciflua Sweet Gum ~ 2 ht. x 4 spr , 2 5 c 35 o.c. a ' 2 4 435 L05 Lonicera 5em erviriens Hone Suckle :"3 al., 12" ht. x 18" s r. 30" o.c. p Y g p 24 MG Ma noha randiflora Ma noha 12' ht. x 4' s r., 2.5" cal. 5 2 NOV O S LOOS COPLEYDESIGN AS50CIATES, WC. g 9 9 p ii ii ii o.c: 6 4 LANDSCAPE 1 ~ 4 270 NOP Nerium oleander etite Dwarf Oleander .gal., 24 ht. x 24 spr. 30 p PlANNINGDEPARTMENT ARCHITECT S 8 PSY Phoenix dact Ilfera Med aol Palm `0' C.T. Y J F 8 4 CIiY01` ClEARWATER ' 2' . x r. 2. "cal. ' 103 QV Quercus vir miana Llve Oak ht 4 sp 5 35 o.c. g 9 4 1666 Laney Drive.. n ian Hawthorn ;3 al. 18" ht. x I8" s r. 30" o.c. . 540 RI Raphiolepis ,indica I d g p 0 4 Palm Harbor, Florida 34683 a t. x 2 " r. 0" o.c. 4 Phone 727 787-2840 85 THY Gal himia lauca Thryalhs .gal., 24 h 4 sp 3 p 9 W Fax 727 785-4017 I , ALL OTHER TREES 3 Jasmine :3 al. 12" ht. x 18" s r. 30" o.c. 375 TJV Trachelospermum Jasminoides Var. Confederate g p SEE t10RTICULTURIST REPORT PREPARED f3Y SAMNIK AND Landscape Architecture n ~ al. " ht. X 12° 5 r. 18" O.C. 3600 TJN Trachelospermum asiaticum minima Dwarf Confederate Jasmine g , 6 p A550CIATES, LLC EXPERT TRITE CONSULTANTS, DATED ~ ^ ~ Site Planning a m C.T.' 2 VM Adollidia merrelhi Christmas p FEBRUARY 22, 2005 I V Contract Administration Viburnum .:i 24" ht. x 24" 519r. 30 " O.C. 375. VO Viburnum odoratissimum Sweet cal., r. O.C. JOB NO. 250,43 0 30' 60' E 1 20. 718 V5 Viburnum suspensum Sandankwa Viburnum gal., 24" ht. x 24 sp 30 0 48 ZFU Zamia furfuracea Cardboard Palm ;gal., 30" x 30 5 o. c. SHEET SEE SHEET 2 FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES AND DETAILS 5cale 1it 3 ~ 40'-0II ~ I r G i ~ W Plant Key ~ o ~o. ~ v oa Code Common Name - a 2 2 ~ o0 LI LI y ICB Burford Holly 30 00 RI ` 3 IX Nora Grant Ixora VS RI LAM Yellow Lantana . .00 9 s DEr L sHEEr -2 FoR L I Crape Myrtle TJN RBING D AIL LS Sweet Gum LOS Honeysuckle 4 THE ` MG Magnolia a NOP Dwarf Oleander PSY Med~ool Palm o ~ • • . • . , ICB QL Laurel Oak , I TJV QV Llve Oak - , 6 CURB V k • •t,. Qv j` RI Indian- Hawthorn ~ THY. Thryalh5 4. 6 C 50D 300 TJN 3 SEED AIL SHE L-z TJV Var. Confederate Jasmine cuR.BIN ETAiL ti TJN Dwarf Confederate Jasmine o ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' - PROVIDEWH T MG ~ VM Christmas palm ~ - ':~r~ FOR EACH S C is '•i'' DE WHEEL STOPS VO Sweet Viburnum ~ EACH SPACE •.:a.;.• • FOR SOD Sandankwa Viburnum 4 `°`•N PSY 'I I ZF Cardboard Palm 6 ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M N ~ _ PSY G}' s D ~ D r- 2 -o .s SEED IL 5HE -2 FOR ' ~j o LI D ......i,...... UR61 G AIL ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~1 V ~ ~ .tia s :~iu. ~ ~N ,,rl . v ~ IC ~ v V a rn . a 30 C, ~W I ~ VS TJV PSY QV 1200 _ SOD ~ Z D JN ~ ~ 5 5 C~ETAIL EET L-2 R W a ~ o # • • 1200 35 V CU ~ G DET r I :n~~ ~t}t°: ;x;, Y . , TJN N ~ a TJV i aY E I' f . o ~ r.~- 30 -o Z in v ai ~ -1 D i_ Q L o ' • ~ 2 ~ • 30• • N s.:.fit r . ~CJ' art r'la..: ~ ~ -8EE ETAIL S L-2 F CURBI DETAIL a QV ` ~ _ -v ^ti~ 'w :e s~ ;,.i~i'S::t ~"yyr;a rtr fit` .-.1 ~i Y~r ~,a,. r~ "Yy r .v~t,r :..4i +.ia. 4 j ~y G _ . p ~ ~ i} ~ I I ~ MG ~ ~ az PSY 5oD - - ~ ~ W ~ VM VM - ~ s; 6°~ 2 L - - ti ~ 25 5 ZFU ? 16 T V TJV ZFU- ` , 190 ~ 0 ca 15 ZFU I TJV c,,, S D>=fAIL L- ~ ~ ~ O VS V5 MG I PROVIDE WHEEL STOPS ' ALT PAVING P Y ACE SED ASPH i 6'CURB - 15' IDE FFE l 0 cu ~ ~ m ~ 5 FoR EAC P ° cuRB . _ _ - -REF/ ~ 5' 40. . 100 SHR S ~ ~ FU z- Z ~ ~ ~ O o ~ ~ ~ PRO . o ' ~ ° z- - p 80 ~ ~ 56 .68 GYALL . o ~ u 3- y ~ U ~ u ~u o lQ/G - - HT OF lyAY TA/(/NG PER 0. R 6 ~ B00/( 6734, PAGE 2244 D ~ I o0 ~ ~ 45 ~ ~ -f0 REMAIN ~ LAM ZFU ~ ~5 ~ 8 85 100 45 ~ I QO ZFU nn II ~ ~ EXISTING PLANTINGS ~ I ~ ~ NOP LI OP LI QV RI V5 NOP ~ ~R~~~~~lL D. IAM cd SHRUBS 30" O.C, ~ I V15101 TRIANGIfS 5 GHT UTY f11YJ ALL SHRllB5 TD BE MAINTAINED UNDER 3D' HL SIGHT VI51B (IYP.) GHTVIBIBIUTYTRIANGLEB V O !n'PJ ALL SHRUBS TO BE MAINTAINED UNDER 30' HT. r AU. BHRU85 TO BE MNNiNNED UNDER 3D' HT. J N I I ~ ~ TREE CLA551FICATION 213 Tree driplme o ~ ~ ~ Set shrub ! 5. All re airs and/or re lacer and/or replacements Shall be made by the landscape Contractor within 10 worlung-days upon TREE RATING: set tree lamb, ~ i ~ lamb, with to I . All plant matenals shall be Florida # I or better and Installed to highest nursery standards. Plants_shall be f P o ~o with to of • ~ ~ of rootball I ° p y ny deficiencies by the owner or their representative. I 2 p z f'.aulcn o ~ health ,free of est and disease, notification of an deficiencies b ~ rootball 1112" ~ above Bmsh y p a o 2. All lants shall be contalher rown e><ce t as noted on Ian. 16. All questions regarding th ins regarding the Landscape Plans and Specihcations shall be directed to the Landscape 2 2 ~ `above finish- ~ ~ grade p g p P Existing Free to ~ o finl5h Grade o AfChlteCt at (~27~ 787-Z84O. grade ~ ~ i 3. All palms and trees shall have straight trunks with no twists, knotting or other defective characteristics, '7) 787-2840. 3 2 remain o Root bau 4. Mulch shall be 100% Plne Bark, installed to a minimum thickness of 2". 4 2 NOV 0 8 2005 • Rubber hos , ~ -Existing native . # 12 au a wire Natl~e sod soil o W d free St, Au ustine 'Floratam" Installed with tl ht omts, „ 9 9 " ~ 5. .Sod shall be 95% ee g g ~ ~ 2 Mulch I 12 length red backfiq 6. All dimensions shall be field checked by the landscape Contractor prior to construction with any ZATION 5 2 6 4 p~ANNING DEPARTMENT COPLflY DESIGN ASSOCIATflS, INC. 3" Tree wei plastic Hag rad tape dl5crepancles reported to the landscape Architect. Ix4 pt rails P'n'g" g SI1RU6 PLANTING DETAIL Shrubs and Trees 7 4 CIi11 OF CLEA~WATER L A N D S C A P E 48" Height 2x4 pt post ~ 7. All materials shall be as specified on the plans. If materials, labor or installation techniques do not adhere "reel 8 4 ARCHITECTS 2x4 pt sta `*`:;r~a" g to the specifications, they wdl be rejected by the Landscape Architect with speclfled materials and installation All trees and shrubs shall be fer rrL,"I:,h.• Fxistm natroe rubs shall be fertilized with "Agriform" 20-15-5 planting tablets at time of planting and prior to 24" Depth Pxistm -rase Root ball sod cari'Ied out the landsca a Contractor at no additional cost, Installation of lant It backfdl. g g Natwe sod p: P P ant pit backfdl. Tablets shall be placed uniformly around the root ball at a depth that is between 9 4 1666 Laney Drive backflo 8, No substitutions of matenals or than es to the drawings or specrflcabons shall be made, the middle and bottom of the rc ~ 6° "WOOD g bottom of the root ball. I 0 4 Pahn Harbor, Florida 34683 4 Phone 727 787-2840 TIM eRS 3' 9. All required permits are to be provided by the Installing contractor unless specifically stated otherwise m i TREE PROTECTION DETAIL TREE PLANTING DETAIL 6"x6°~~~ D thespeclficatlons, A Ilcatlon Rate. PA I'P TIMBe,,.' srA 10. Contractor Identification signs shall not be allowed on the project, I Gallon Container: I - 2 I ate: ALL OTHER TREES 3 ~ Fax 727 785-4017 ner: I - 2 I gram tablet SEE HORTICULTURIST REPORT PREPARED BY SAMNIK AND Landscape Architecture I I . Contractor shall be res onslble for all Items as shown or described on this Ian and s eafications. - 2 s>:cuRe wI p f f 3 Gallon Container: 2 ner: 2 - 2 I gram tablets ASSOCIATES, LLC EXPERT TREE CONSULTANTS, DATED 9 ^ I Site Planning 18° #5 R~BAR 12. All proposed landscape and sod areas containing turf or weeds shall be treated with "Round-up" per 5 Gallon Container: 3 = 2 I ner: 3 = 2 I gram tablets. FE6RUARY 22, 2005 I V Contract Administration j manUfaCtUrer'S 5peCIflCatl0n5. 7 Gallon Container: 4 - 2 ner: 4 - 2 I cram tablets _ 13. Landscape Contractor shall provide all necessary site preparation required to ready the site for planting as Trees: 3 tat PROPOSeI) 3 tablets per each 112" caliper of trunk PARK G TREE 5 eclfled. 0 30' 60' 120' JOB NO. 25043 STALLS p 14. The landscape Contractor shall warranty and guarantee all materials and labor fora period of 90 days for Gr0undCOVeC Areas Areas SHEET ' I . ?%Mi M%= I . areas shall receive fertilization with "Ozmocote" time release fertilizer per manufacturer's TREE CURBING DETAIL shrubs and groundcover, palms and trees. Warranty and guarantee period shall begin upon date of completion, All 9roundcover areas shall rece SEE SHEET I FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES AND DETAILS specifications. n _ n L 2 5cal e 1 30i_0 u7 o 0 C n 16K Na - 12K 0 a 26K • 27K 'Q v ~ N C 24K 20K 4K O5¢ 236,01 ~ o a 4K - 26K ° 5 ~5" E 236 p . 6 CAMPH 1 ' ~p~ 12K . ? C 15K 13K 4K -I ti fiK Z ~ ~A 15K 42K 5K ~ ~ ~ 5 4K 9-18K 32K 0 r 6K 5K 'fl D ? 0 13K 6P ~ 4K ? ~ ~ - 6K n Z 5K 6-10K -I ~ 5.SPAC S ~ ~ a` ~ - - ~A _ ti 5K 2oK 42K ~ ~ 5K 20K rn 40K . 7K 111.- V1 ` v ? ~ ~ G PARKING 4 P ~ z, o D 4K ~ o 5K Q r 7K 5K ~ 8K D 8K 7K ~ 4K ~ Z I ~ ~ A~ c0 N a~ U D O 6K ~ 5-5K 8K 10K 6-10K m N ~ ~ 5-5K 5K ~ ~K P~ ~ ~ P CE ~ 4~ GE --T.,,.~.. , , e ' Q ~ a 5=4 5K 6-6K ~ 12K fiK 4-3K 12K _ 28-30K 1 , W ~ ~ 8K 9 9K N ~ o ~ W ~ ~ ~ Q Z Z .N ~ s ~ ti ~ AC ti PCE 2' ~ N W F~~w N 00 00 05 5 93 D Fcow ~~l ` G S P RKI G ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ v o ~ ~ w ~ ~ w ~ ~I P ~ 7 PA E ~ OSED ASPHA NG ~ Q 5 S ~ SACS ~ N 6 P CE ~ a u a., a ti 1 SAC ~ ~A ~ ~ V R~ P S C 2' h S H `PAVING ~ ti ~ . PROP ED A P ti - - ` ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ ? W ~ti - ~ ~ ~ ES S C P CE ~ ~ 7SA 7 ~ SACS' ` ~ ~R ~ ~ ti ~ti ~ V ` ~ ~ GAS P~iIN ~ ~ O ~ - ti O 10 S A ES z - ~ ~ P CE P E w ? 7 C 4 SP C S , _ 0 ES GR S P RK NG S - V ~ GAS PRIN - - i ~ o' p~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ i ~ POSED ASI ~ ~ ~ PRO )POSED ASPHALT PAVING , Q ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,G, ~ S 10 SPACES o~ r 5 SPACE ~ _ Q c~ ~ o~D w ~ r r V ~ V ? ~ I V V ,.^a/ ; ~ y - _ o o., o o ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s.: 4 Q 1 ~ p ~ N ~ ~ u c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ co Q ~ PERPETUAL '~RPETU,9L CONSTRUCT/ON ' M,4/NTEN,4NCE O cd .6 EASE N z~ Q o ~SEMENT PER o.R. BOOK .34, P c o ~ . D 1 - 0 47 E 197.43 D ~ S 014 ~ ~ - U - o - k SIG VISIBIUiY1RIAN lE9 O.R. BO 0/( , Q~O~S~A~ I ` VI ILITYTRIANGlfS ~ HRU 0 BE MNNTAINED U ER 30" HT. \ , mP.f 'x ~ ~ PAGE 1716-171 T BAR ALL 511RJB BE MAINTAINED UND R ~ HT. O ~ ~o- ~ o. r, _ G I~ o MENTJ I IRRIGATION. LEGEND I . Shallow wells. o en surface water bodies or reclaime wa r m p d to ust be usE Symbol specification NOTE: IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL NETAFIM :r must be used as a source of UNDERGROUND DRIP AT Tt1E EASE OF EACI1 INSTALLED im anon water.' The distribution s stem for irri anon must not be connecter 9 Y g be connected to county or ~ I OF Toro 10' Radius Pull Grcle 5prayhead TREE. PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 6 EMITTERS PER TREE. PLANTING AREAS: 0-5 GPM 1/2 PVC PIPP municipal water sources, unless it can be demonstrated that these sources a ~se sources are not available. ? I o'TQ Toro la Radius Three Quarter Grcle Sprayhead INSTALL TREE IRRIGATION ON SEPARATE IRRIGATION ZONE INSTALL 4" BELOW GRADE ~ I off Toro I0' Radius Half Circle sprayhead AT CONTROLLER. 5EE SHEET L- I FOR TREE LOCATIONS. 6- I 0 GPM 3/4N PVC PIPE. 2. Irri anon s terns must utilize low volumed 5i n such a I a e g ys e g s ow tr ~ ctory h N tra~eCtOry heads Or soaker ? I oQ Toro 10' Radius Quarter Grcle 5prayhead - hoses to rovide direct a hcati a TECIILINE SPACING - 12 O.C. p pp on rid low evaporation. Systems that over, ;ms that overspray areas that do Q f 5P Toro 15' Radius Fuli Grcle Sprayhead I -15 GPM I PVC PIPE not reduire irrigation, such as axed areas will not be acre table. NI h irri p p 9 9 fie. Nlgh Irrlgatlon need areas 015TQ Toro 15' Radus Three Quarter Crccle Sprayhead • EMITTER SPACING = 12" O.C. must not overspray low need areas. o15H Toro 15' Radius Half Grcle SprayBead NOTE: NATURAL TREE AREAS AND GRASS PARKING AREAS COPLBYDESIGNASSOCIATES, INC. s OI5Q Toro 15' Radius Quarter Grcle 5prayhead SHALL NOT BE IRRIGATED. L A N D S C A P E 6-25 GPM 1114" PVC PIPE 3. Ni h water deman Ian g d dscape areas such as turf must be served by a sel ;rued by a separate Irrlgatlon ~ O I-25~ Hunter PuII Grcle Gear onven Head s GPM ARCHITECT S 26- 35 GPM 1112" PVC PIPE zone than low water need areas, such as planter beds, or mulched areas witf led areas with trees. In no case, . shall an lanted ve etation'area be more than om a a I h Y p 9 50 fr w ter supp y ose r supply hose blb. ` O I-25ADJ Hunter Adjustable Radus Gear Dnven Head 3 GPM 1666 Laney Drive Palm Harbor, Florida 34683 36-50 GPM 2 PVC PIPE o I-25 Hunter AdjJFull Radius Gear Dnven Head -Alternate PhOne 727 787-2S4O I 4. Automatic irri anon s + t m g ~s e s must operate by an irrigation controller cap; 50+ GPM 2 112° PVC PIPE :ontroller capable of p q W Fax 727 785-4017 differentiating between schedules of high. and low water demands areas. Col ~s areas. Controllers must have ( water source - E~nstmg - venty NOV 4 8 2005 multiple cycle start ca aci~ and a flexible calendar ro ram able to be set tc P Y p 9 to be set to compl y with local 0 5°°rte location Landscape Architecture or water mana ement district im osed restrictions. 9 p I Netafim Underground Dnp Irrigation PtANNlNG DEPA N Site Planning 1 Emitter Now = .9 GPH ~`tN11G PN Allure CUnhaet AdministratlOn 5. Automatic irri ation s!stems must beeauipt'ed with a ram sensor device Emitter spacing - 12" 'wn I vE l?Lr-MKVV/i 9 override the irri9ation cycle of the sprinkler system when adequate rainfall ha en5or device or 5wltch which will . Techlme spacing - 16" late rainfall has occurred. i Bunal depth = 4' p 30' .60' 120' JOB NO. 25043 Application Rate = 1.1 17hour I ® Toro Solid State Dual Program Controller SHEET SEE 5HEEV2 FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES AND Di TAILS " - - IR' 5cale 1 30'-0" .1 V W C V ~ C `V V ~ y o a ~ u ~ ` " N ~ V v Q 15Q 15Q 15H H 15F 5Q ~ 15Q 15 • • H 15Ho V C 0. • ~ I • • I FO N c • off ~~i 1 I I H 15H ~ n` „4 M1.. a ~ ~ ~ t I 15 off ~ Q Q • w ' ~ Q; ii o cy ~ 1 vo I V OH c N ~ t~,, `U ~`Q I Q 15Q U off 15H 15H Z • •4 ~ I F . o W ~ I H i~ ~ I r 15F ~ 0 15Q 15(k . ~ 4 15Q 15Q Z 15P o Q 0 lu " o ~ _ 15H 15n ~ IsF I ~ o ti ~ 15H 15H o~ ' Q a W 15F Z Q J _ Is. 15H 15H ~ `~FF .4 i~ Q ~1° J v ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ti Q x-20 v ~ F O j ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ rV W m •L 1 ~ ~ o. ~ a, ~ V v Z ~ . ti O PRO . o~ ~ ~ ~ 3 0 - ~ - 0 o~ g ~ ~n a~ 56 168 D y ~ _ - GYALL a z-- ~ R/GHT-OF- GyAY TA/(/NG PER 0. R. moo, o y ~ B00/( 6734, PAGE 224 D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~IG~~~L .o~~ SIGHT VISIBILITYTRIANGLES a~ (IYP,) AU. SHRUBS TO BE MAINTAINED UNDER 36' HT. SIGHT VI51B U (IYP.) sNr wsiBamrlwaNCUs ao0- mPa • ~ ALL SHRUBS TO BE MAlNTANED UNDER 30' HT. ALL 9NRUB5 TO BE MAINfNNED UNDER 30 MT. ~ Finish Grade finish Grade ~ Concrete donut ~ ~ " Pap-ilp fixed spray head I , Repair and Install a new automatic irrigation system to provide 100% coverage of all landsca a areas. 12, All sleeves Shall SEE SHEET I FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES AND DETAILS 'e installed a minimum off 4" below grade. Sleeves shall be used only Concrete donut at edch head P " be schedule 40 pipe Installed a mm at each head 2 Shrub risers shall only be used m hedges or mass plantings. Posers shall not extend more than 2 above the to instal{ lateral Irrl ation hues throw h. Sleeves shall not ;°p-uh~ardrrven p°ydl P~'~e° mstalled hel ht of the lant. All risers shall be sch ul g g ileeves shall not be used as a method to convey water through the PnY g p ed a 40 pipe, painted black. In no case shall shrub risers be system. Palyeo 18~p°y""~P` installed adJacent to walkways, driveways or other areas where the ma be dams ed. Y Y 9 13. AdJust all heads to provide maximum coverage and t i coverage and efficiency and minimize overthrow. Irrigation heads shall 18~poyAexp~pe 3. All heads installed m planting areas along walks, drives and parking lots shall be 1.2" pop-up fused spray not s ra over walks drives or an other non-irri aced arl non-irrigated areas. h pY Y 9 eads. All heads Shall be mstalled with the top of the spray body flush with finish grade. All groundcover areas 14. P ul ent shall be manufactured b "Toro" °Ramblr~ "Toro", °Rambird" or "hunter" or as otherunse stated on the plans. PVCfittrng P°lycll " ~ ~ Y~ ~ shall be irrigated with 12 pop-up flied spray heads and extensions as required. 15, Contractor shall field verl water source to deliver " ~urce to deliver the pro er ressure, ounds er s uare inch (PSI) and COPLIIYD&SIGNAS50CIATBS,INC. P P f p q 4. All sodded areas shall be Irrigated with 4 pop-up spray heads or pop-up gear driven heads unless water flow, allons er minute GPM as re wired the.lr 9 P ~ 1 q by squired by the.imgat~on system. Notify the Landscape Architect if there ~ ~OV O 8 2~~5 L A N D S C A P E Pvc Iatenl line pipe P~-c F~tt~n9 otherwise specified.. Is an dlscre anc . 5. PI a valves and other irri anon e m m t m y p Y rvc~atc~inRe~Pe p , g q p en ay be shown m drives, walks or buildings for clarity only. Install 16. All ermits re wired for installation shalt be rovidec I q p ARCHITECTS hall be provided by the contractor. IRRIGATION GEA IRRIGATION SPRAY HEAD DETAIL all valves and other equipment m landscape beds for best accessibility and concealment. 17. Refer to the Landsca a Plans when locator all irri a R DRIVEN HEAD DETAIL I 9 9 locating all irrigation equipment. Allow ample room near irrigation PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1666 Laney Drive 6. Valves shall be mstalled m a manifold within a valve box of sufficient size to sernce all valves within the box. a ui merit for the ro er mstallatlon of trees shrubs and „ 9 f f p Valve box shall be free from any debris which may cover valves. Provide, a 3 depth gravel sump at the bottom of 18. All wires shall be mstalled In wire sleeves, ees, shrubs and other work shown on drawings to be installed. C~-O~ CL~IRWATER Palm Harbor, Florida 34683 the valve it. ;eves. Phone 727 787-2840 p 19. Contractor shall be responsible for all Items on the 7. All Irrlgatlon equipment and mstallatlon techniques shall meet federal, state and local codes, re ulations and 20. Contractor shall instruct the owner on th f II o era all items on the plan and irrigation specification. W Fax 727 785-4017 9 eu p ordinances, 21. Contractor shall be res onsible for all final re airs o on the full operation and maintenance of the imgation system. Landscape Architecture 8. II r riven hea s a a I h a I P P A gea d d rid I e ds a ong walks, curbs, doves and parking areas shall be mstalled on flexible land5ca a areas. all final repairs or adjustments to provide proper coverage to all S N Site Planning P polyethylene swing Joints. 22. All /,uestions re ardor (rrl anon s eciflcatlons shall Contract Adlnminisstration AIl1TC:. IDDIl~ATI/l\1 !`/lA1TDAl`T11D CIJA11 IIIf~TAI l a.rr~~.a. _ A A A A p ecificat~ons shall be directed to the landscape Architect at (7271. IVVI L: IMILWAI It-/IV kiVIV I IV1l,I VIC VI INLL IIV?1HLL IVEIf1FIM 9. Gear driven heads and fixed spray heads shall be installed on separate zoneswhere possible, Precipitation 787-2840. UNDERGROUND DRIP AT THE BASE OF EACH INSTALLED rates and head tYpa should be compatible within each zone. 0 30' 60' 120' JOB NO. 25043 TREE. PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF G EMITTERS 'PEP, TREE. 10, Gear driven heads shall not be installed in shrub area INSTALL TREE s or be installed on risers where possible, IRRIGATION ON SEPARATE IRRIGATION ZONE 1 1. Controller shall be mounted a AT CONTROLLER. SEE SHEET L- I FOR TREE as LOCATIONS. SHEET Scale I 30'-0" IR - 2