FLD2010-08001; 22 BAY ESPLANADE; ICE CREAM PARLORFLD2010-08001
22 BAY ESPLANADE
Date Received: 8/2/2010 11:45:21 AM
Ice Cream Parlor
ZONING DISTRICT:
LAND USE:
ATLAS PAGE: 258A
PLANNER OF RECORD: S -K
PLANNER: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III
CDB Meeting Date: October 19, 2010
Case Number: FLD2010-08001
Agenda Item: D.1.
Owner/ Applicant: Mathura Properties #5, LLC
Agent: Tuan Huynh, P.E., Regional Consulting Engineers, LLC
Address: 22 Bay Esplanade
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development application to permit a restaurant in the
Tourist (T) District with a lot area of 4,350 square feet, a lot width
of 50 feet (along Bay Esplanade), a front (south) setback of 15 feet
(to sidewalk) and 18 feet (to building), a side (west) setback of 10
feet (to building), a side (east) setback of 10 feet (to building), a
rear (north) setback of 19 feet (to building), a building height of
15.33 feet (to top of flat roof) and 17.33 feet (to top of parapet) and
zero parking spaces as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project, under the provisions of Community Development Code
Section 2-803.C and a reduction to the foundation landscape
requirement on the front (south) facade from five feet to zero feet
as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of
Community Development Code Section 3-1202.6.
CURRENT ZONING: Tourist (T) District
CURRENT LAND USE
PLAN CATEGORY: Resort Facility High (RFH) Category
PROPERTY USE: Current Use: Vacant
Proposed Use: Restaurant
EXISTING North: Tourist (T) District
SURROUNDING Attached dwellings
ZONING AND USES: South: Tourist (T) District
Government Use; and Off-Street Parking Lot
East: Tourist (T) District
Automobile Service Station; and Retail Sales
and Services
West: Tourist (T) District
Overnight Accommodations; and Restaurant
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08001 - Page 1 of 8
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 0.099 acre site is located on the north side of Bay Esplanade approximately 95 feet west of
Mandalay Avenue and has 50 feet of frontage on Bay Esplanade. The property is zoned Tourist
(T) District and is currently vacant. The site is located within the special area redevelopment
plan, Beach by Design, as part of the "Old Florida" District which is an area of transition
between resort uses to the south and the low intensity residential neighborhoods to the north of
Acacia Street. The preferred form of development is a mix of uses primarily including new
overnight accommodations and attached dwellings throughout the District with limited
retail/commercial and mixed use development fronting Mandalay Avenue between Bay
Esplanade and Somerset Street. To ensure that the scale and character of development in "Old
Florida" provides the desired transition between the adjacent tourist and residential areas,
enhanced site design performance is a priority, including greater setbacks.
The immediate vicinity is composed of an off-street parking lot, attached dwellings, retail sales
and services, restaurants, governmental uses and an automobile service station. Structures in the
area vary in height between one and three stories, and generally resemble architecture from the
1950's.
Development Proposal:
On August 3, 2010, a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project application was submitted for
a restaurant `use on the subject property. It is anticipated that the restaurant will mainly serve ice
cream, sandwiches, hot dogs, French fries and drinks. The proposed building will. contain 1,500
square feet of gross floor area with seating for approximately 24 patrons. In addition to the
patrons located inside, the restaurant will have two walk-up windows for patrons who do not
desire indoor seating. The proposed building will have a height of 17.33 feet, to top of parapet
and will have both a stone finish and sand finished stucco fagade. Additionally, as Beach by
Design requires awnings to protect pedestrians from the elements, the restaurant has proposed
brushed aluminum finished awnings at the entrance and walk-up windows{to protect patrons.
The proposal includes only a reduction to lot area for restaurants in the T District from 5,000
square feet to 4,350 square feet and a reduction to the off-street parking requirement from 23
spaces to zero spaces. On June 15, 2010, the Community Development Board denied case
FLD2010-03004 for two attached dwellings at the subject property. The previous proposal
requested setback reductions but did not provide an improved site plan, increased landscaping
and/or improved design and appearance to mitigate for the setback reduction as required by
Beach by Design. No setback reductions are proposed with this application.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules for the Resort Facilities High
(RFH) land use category and Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-801.1, the
maximum allowable FAR is 1.0. The proposed restaurant will have a FAR of 0.345.
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules for the Resort Facilities
High (RFH) land use category and CDC Section 2-801.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.95.
The proposed ISR is 0.385, which is consistent with the Code provisions.
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08001 - Page 2 of 8
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there is no minimum required lot
area or lot width for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of
comparison, the minimum lot area for restaurant use can range from 5,000 - 10,000 square feet.
Pursuant to the same Table, the minimum lot width can range from 50 - 100 feet. The lot width
along Bay Esplanade is 50 feet, which is consistent with the Code provisions for restaurants.
Pursuant to the Community Development Code, a reduction in lot area will not result in a
building which is out of scale with existing buildings in the immediate vicinity. Immediately
west of the subject parcel is the three-story Palm Pavilion Hotel which comprises the majority of
the parcel. As the subject building is only one-story in height and meets all required setbacks,
Staff has determined that the reduction in lot size will not result in a building out of scale with
existing buildings in the immediate vicinity.
Minimum Setbacks: The "Old Florida" District of Beach by Design, which supersedes those
development standards set forth in the CDC, requires a 15 foot front setback as well as 10 foot
side and rear setbacks for the subject property. The proposal includes a 15 foot front setback, 10
foot side setbacks and a 19 foot rear setback. The proposal meets the above development
standards.
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there is no maximum height for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, the
maximum height for restaurant use can range from 25 - 100 feet. The proposal includes a
building height of 15.33 feet (to top of flat roof) and 17.33 feet (to top of parapet), which is
consistent with the Code provisions.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the minimum required parking for
restaurants is 7 - 15 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. The applicant has requested
a reduction to the required off-street parking spaces from 23 spaces to zero spaces. It is
anticipated that the majority of the restaurant patrons will be walk-up customers as this is not a
destination restaurant in that it serves only ice cream products, drinks and a limited amount of
light fare. Many patrons will come from nearby hotels, the beach and other businesses which
have their own on-site parking. The parking demand study shows that there are four public
parking facilities with 294 parking spaces and 94 on-street parking spaces within 1,000 feet of
the parcel proposed for development. Staff concurs that the physical characteristics of the
proposed building are such that the use of the property will not require on-site parking as this is
not a destination restaurant.
Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-201.D.1, all outside mechanical equipment
must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. The
mechanical equipment will be located on the roof and screened with a parapet wall.
Solid Waste: The proposal will utilize a refuse dumpster located at the south side of the property
and will be screened from the right-of-way with a solid white PVC vinyl fence. The proposal has
been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste Department.
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08001 - Page 3 of 8
Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-912, for development that does not involve a subdivision,
all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground unless such
undergrounding is not practicable. The proposal includes undergrounding of all proposed
utilities.
Landscaping. Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.E.1.foundation plantings shall be provided for
100 percent of the building facade along Bay Esplanade. Additionally, the "Old Florida" District
of Beach by Design requires a 10 foot wide front landscape buffer. The proposed building has
been designed with two walk-up windows and double entry doors which limit the amount of
building facade to be planted with landscape material. Therefore, the applicant has proposed a 15
foot wide landscape buffer along the front and additional planting on both sides and rear of the
building to mitigate for the lack of foundation plantings. Staff has determined that this landscape
treatment is more attractive than landscaping otherwise required and it will enhance the
community character of the immediate vicinity.
Comprehensive Landscape Program: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.G, the landscaping
requirements contained within the Code can be waived or modified if the application contains a
Comprehensive Landscape Program satisfying certain criteria. The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with those criteria:
Consistent I Inconsistent
I.1. Architectural theme:
a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program shall be designed as a I N/A N/A
part of the architectural theme of the principle buildings proposed or developed
on the parcel proposed for development; or
b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment x
proposed in the comprehensive landscape program shall be demonstrably more
attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for
development under the minimum landscape standards.
2. Lighting: Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is x
automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed.
3. Community character: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive x
landscape program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater.
4. Property values: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape x
program will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate
vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
5. Special area or scenic corridor plan: The landscape treatment proposed in the x
comprehensive landscape program is consistent with any special area or scenic
corridor plan which the City of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in
which the parcel proposed for development is located.
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08001 - Page 4 of 8
Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no active Code Enforcement cases for the subject
property.
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards and
criteria as per CDC Sections 2-801.1 and 2-803 and the "Old Florida" District of Beach by
Design:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
FAR 1.0 0.345 X
Impervious Surface Ratio 0.95 0.385 X
Minimum Lot Area N/A 4,350 sq. ft. (0.099 acres) X1
Minimum Lot Width N/A 50 feet X
Minimum Setbacks Front: 15 feet South: 15 feet (to building) X
Rear: 10 feet North: 19 feet (to building) X
Side: 10 feet East: 10 feet (to building) X
West: 10 feet (to building) X
Maximum Height N/A 17.33 feet (to top of parapet) X
Minimum 7 - 15 spaces per 1,000 sf gfa Zero spaces X'
Off-Street Parking (23 spaces required)
I See analysis in Staff Report.
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08001 - Page 5 of 8
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility
criteria as per CDC Section 2-803.C (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from X
the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X
development.
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an
existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is
characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan amendment
and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation; or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a
working waterfront use.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development
and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning
district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted
by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the
proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design
elements:
? Changes in horizontal building planes;
? Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters,
porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
? Variety in materials, colors and textures;
? Distinctive fenestration patterns;
? Building stepbacks; and
? Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape
design and appropriate distances between buildings.
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08001 - Page 6 of 8
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General
Standards for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X
coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X
immediate vicinity.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of September 2, 2010, and deemed the development proposal to be legally
sufficient to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the
following:
Findings of Fact. The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence
submitted by the applicant and requirements, of the Community Development Code, finds that
there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:
1. That the 0.099-acre subject property is within the Tourist (T) District and the Resort Facilities
High (RFH) land use plan category;
2. That the site is located within the special area redevelopment plan, Beach by Design, as part
of the "Old Florida" District;
3. That the intent of the "Old Florida" District is to provide an area of transition between resort
uses to the south and the low intensity residential neighborhoods to the north of Acacia Street
using enhanced site design performance such as greater setbacks;
4. That adjacent uses are zoned T District developed with multi-family dwellings generally
between one and three stories in height, with the surrounding area a mixture of off-street
parking lot, attached dwellings, retail sales and services, restaurants, government uses and an
automobile service station;
5. That the subject property is vacant;
6. That the subject property has a lot area of 4,350 square feet;
7. That the proposal includes a 1,500 square foot restaurant;
8. That the proposal includes zero parking spaces; and
9. That there are no active Code Enforcement cases for the subject property.
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08001 - Page 7 of 8
Conclusions of Law. The Planning and Development Department, having made the above
findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law:
1. That the proposal complies with the "Old Florida" District of Beach by Design;
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Tables 2-801.1 and 2-
803 of the Community Development Code;
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2-
803.C of the Community Development Code; and
4. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two
Approvals as per Section 3-914.A of the Community Development Code.
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of
the Flexible Development application to permit a restaurant in the Tourist (T) District with a lot
area of 4,350 square feet, a lot width of 50 feet (along Bay Esplanade), a front (south) setback of
15 feet (to sidewalk) and 18 feet (to building), a side (west) setback of 10 feet (to building), a
side (east) setback of 10 feet (to building), a rear (north) setback of 19 feet (to building), a
building height of 15.33 feet (to top of flat roof) and 17.33 feet (to top of parapet) and zero
parking spaces as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of
Community Development Code Section 2-803.C and a reduction to the foundation landscape
requirement on the front (south) facade from five feet to zero feet as a Comprehensive Landscape
Program under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G., with the
following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That, all proposed landscaping be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy;
2. That all signage be permitted separately;
3. That any electric and communication panels, boxes, and meters located on the exterior of the
buildings be painted the same color as the building;
Prepared by: Planning and Development Department Staff:
A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS: Photographs of Site and Vicinity; Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map
Community Development Board - October 19, 2010
FLD2010-08001 - Page 8 of 8
Resume
A. Scott Kurleman
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33756
727-562-4553
scott.kurleman(a- mvclearwater.com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
• Planner III
• Planner II
August 2008 to present
June 2005 to August 2008
Regulate growth and development of the City in accordance with land resource ordinances and
regulations related to community development. Landscape plan review including: conceptual,
variance, and conditional use. Reviews and analyzes site plans and conducts field studies to
determine the integrity of development plans and their compatibility with surroundings.
Interdepartmental and zoning assistance. Respond as a City representative to citizens, City
officials, and businesses concerning ordinances and regulations. Make recommendations and
presentations at staff level at various review committees, boards, and meetings.
• Land Resource Specialist
City of Clearwater June 1996 to June 2005
Coordinates with City Legal Department to initiate legal proceedings for non-compliance with
City land resource regulations. Landscape re-inspection program. Plans and directs program to
ensure that plant material installed per the approved landscape plan remains in a healthy growing
condition in perpetuity and restores deficient landscaped with new plant material. Certificate of
Occupancy Inspection. Perform inspections with contractors, owners, and City departments to
monitor the installation of required landscape material per an approved site plan. Process tree
permits ensuring that regulations governing the removal criteria are followed. Provide technical
tree evaluations for structural defects, hazards, proper pruning, and identification for trees on
public and private properties.
• Account Manager
Cherry Lake Farms, IMG Enterprise, Inc. 1993 - 1996
Groveland, FL
Supervised and managed existing territory accounts, while handling a strategic marketing plan.
Planned and directed in-field inspection program for landscape architects, municipalities and
private corporations. Prepared technical training modules for corporate employees and customers
regarding arboricultural techniques related to trees.
• Licensed Marketing Representative
Allstate Insurance Company 1991-1993
Clearwater, FL
Field inspections of insured structures. Policy service and account maintenance.
• Store Manager
William Natorp company, Inc. 1983-1991
Cincinnati, OH
Managed a team of 20 sales people and sales associates in a landscape center. Responsible for
teams of employees including but not limited to payroll, budgeting, sales, store and equipment
maintenance, workplace safety, and advertising. Managed outdoor staff, merchandised and cared
for all outdoor products. Responsible for all indoor staff and horticultural products.
EDUCATION
GRADUATE -Certificate: Community Development, UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA,
TAMPA, FLORIDA. Currently pursuing.
BS in Sustainability Management, ST. PETERSBURG COLLEGE, FLORIDA.
Currently pursuing.
BA in Business Administration, ST. LEO UNIVERSITY, ST. LEO, FLORIDA.
Graduated July, 2002 Cum Laude. Major: Management
AA in Business Administration, ST. PETERSBURG COLLEGE, FLORIDA.
Graduated 1998. Major: Management.
AS in Ornamental Horticulture, OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, WOOSTER,
Graduated 1984 Cum Laude. Major: Horticulture Technology with emphasis in
Arboriculture.
ISA, International Society of Arboriculture, Certified Arborist, FL-0414.
114 3 10 829 Hn 5 2 MEXICO HEILWOOD ST 819 3 '- I
40 n
2
2
4
5
6 N 1 N
7 16 822
620
U)
I I - 4-
5
s t/
622 L03436 2° Z
A 1
6 1 O 60 611 60
-
-
N 1 15 1 14 1 13
tpl I 12
NN 11
N N 1
810 - - 'I I
9
7 if
Open Space
?-
57924 4
s AVALON ST I I I I sos
3 I ? ? ems-
+ N N
9
- - 4 ] 8
I -V O4
2
- -
1
16
02
u
-l
-
Att
cte
ld. :11
z
1 I Dw elin s N o
CLnl?ntal
Uses 534
532
(16)
0
? N
I 6 2 C
N
®?e f 4 - D
111 ??? ? M 3 RDO
II 2 3 m
10 5484
KENDALL ST
Q ern,sl r `° 1
t-. i-
3 ccomr m
-- -1 4 1 5 O?n 'oc?ationisN W 9 1 5
z 1 o4 v> - r
- 1a 2 e $ales,.? pill "r s I I s
eS?aUflit I 13
1 o I ?, nd 8evices}d-8ekice$ ; 441 0 I
I ! 4 "-1
80 10 60
BAY ESPLANADE L 54792 J
? r N
2 1 3 4 5
100
531
pro,
w Governmdiitat V'
Uses
Q
J
Q 521
F -I ?-
??I
Existing Surrounding Uses Map
Owner: Mathura Properties # 5 LLC Case: FLD20 1 0-0800 1
Site: 22 Bay Esplanade Property Size: 0.10 acres
PIN: 05-29-15-16362-008-0120 Atlas Page: 258A
ASTER v
a z ?
O ACACIA ST z
?OGIf RSE? 57 O IP
o Z
CAMBRIA
Q
IDLEWILD
I
GLENDALE
RDY.AL V AY
HEILWDDD
SAY
AVALON F pp
?
KE LL Jws e [a Z
G
?a ? n
m
ESPLANA83E N?
PROJECT ROCKA;VAY
Ambk3r 5?N
SITE
BAYMONT ST
SKIFF pd,
U!
4
Q
S4
1•'7rG4R
:u
GCJ
W Of
O 40?
3: Hi/y
o1N01 a
p
PAPAYA ST
>- DORY
z
°
_
z
P1er 60
/
O Cause%vW Blvd
?? yV
Location Map
Owner: Mathura Properties # 5 LLC Case: FLD2010-08001
Site: 22 Bay Esplanade Property Size: 0.10 acres
PIN: 05-29-15-16362-008-0120 Atlas Page: 258A
!9 I ?21 NI
HEILWOOD ST
n M h iN N 62620
618
r1k614
a 2 612
N N N 610
ST
? ^ ? N N N N N
604
602
6
0
?
N N N M
KENDALL SI 1
I??N M
P
o w L-1 580M
mmom
629 634
619
h h
a
i z
622 lV
611
OSIR
OSIR 605 606 N
605 D
600 m
584
603
604 I I
1602
601 ?
I I 531
534
Q
r
532 Q
2
521 P
N
a
A 1A/A ?/ AT
I? ' 01 M
T N 530 HDR
Zoning Map
Owner: Mathura Properties # 5 LLC Case: FLD20 1 0-0800 1
Site: 22 Bay Esplanade Property Size: 0.10 acres
PIN: 05-29-15-16362-008-0120 Atlas Page: 258A
•? v
a
1
z
10
Alt
Aerial Map
Owner: Mathura Properties # 5 LLC Case: FLD2010-08001
Site: 22 Bay Esplanade Property Size: 0.10 acres
PIN: 05-29-15-16362-008-0120 Atlas Page: 258A
22 Bay Esplanade
FLD2010-08001
View from south property line looking north.
View from southwest corner of property looking northeast.
View from southeast corner of the property looking northwest.
o Planning Department
Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Telephone: 727-562-4567
Fax: 727-562-4865
® SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION - Plans and
application are required to be collated, stapled, and folded into sets
a SUBMIT FIRE PRELIMARY SITE PLAN: $200.00
d SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $ 1,405.00
CASE #:
RECEIVED BY (staff initials):
DATE RECEIVED:
* NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS)
G DEPARi'MEM
CW OF CLEARWATER
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project
(Revised 07/11/2008)
- PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT
A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
APPLICANT NAME: Mathura Properties # 5, LLC
MAILING ADDRESS: 1901 South John Young Parkway, Suite 101, Kissimmee, FL 34741
PHONE NUMBER: (321) 284-4631 FAX NUMBER: (407) 518-1 134
CELL NUMBER (407) 341-5582 EMAIL: ComathuraCwhotmall.Com
PROPERTY OWNER(S): Devan Mathura, Managing Member
List ALL owners on the deed
AGENT NAME: Tuan HUynh, P.E. (Regional Consulting Engineers, LLC)
MAILING ADDRESS: 2442 Grand Central Parkway, Unit #16, Orlando, FL 32839
PHONE NUMBER: (407) 812-5480 FAX NUMBER: (407) 812-5480
CELL NUMBER: (407) 340-5713 EMAIL: tuan@FCefl.COm
B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
PROJECT NAME: Da Scoop Ice Cream Parlour PROJECT VALUATION: $250,000
STREET ADDRESS 22 Bay Esplanade, Clearwater, FL 33767
PARCEL NUMBER(S): 05-29-15-16362-008-0120
PARCEL SIZE (acres): 0,10 PARCEL SIZE (square feet): 4,350
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 12, Block 8, Plat Book 11, and Page 5 of Pinellas County
PROPOSED USE(S): Restaurant - Ice Cream Shop
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
Specifically identify the request 1
500 sq-ft (gross floor area under AC) ice cream parlour (one-story building)
(include number of units or square
footage of non-residential use and all ,
.
-
Designed mainly to serve walk-up customers from nearby beaches and resorts.
requested code deviations; e.g. Code deviation-Lot size is only 4,350 SF, which is less than 5,000 SF required.
reduction in required number of - - -- -
parking spaces, specific use, etc.)
S:\09.BAY ESPLANADE\DOCS\DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR - Comprehensive Infill Project Application (FINAL 08-02-10).doc
Page 1 of 8
DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNI
DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES - NO (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents)
C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5)
0 SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see
page 7)
D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A)
0/ 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.
Yes, the proposed 1,500 sq-ft ice cream parlour development will blend in well with surrounding uses in the Tourist (T) zoning
District.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly
impair the value thereof.
Proposed ice cream parlour will enhance the surrounding area and business by proving additional options for the locals and
tourists to eat and enjoy.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
The proposed ice cream parour development will have on-site dry retention pond, water, and sanitary sewer system so no
adverse impact is expected to occur to adjacent properties or persons.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
The proposed ice cream parlour will utilize nearby public parking facilities and no on-site parking is proposed. This development
is generally not a drive to destination shop but serves mainly pedestrian walk-ups from adjacent beaches and hotels tourist and
customers. A Parking Demand Study report has been completed to support the site development.
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
Yes, the proposed ice cream parlour is consistent with the adjacent parcel uses within the Tourist (T) District.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on
adjacent properties.
Yes, the proposed ice cream parlour is designed to minimize impact to adjacent properties and will be developed similar to other
family oriented type businesses within the tourist district (T) areas.
ORIGINAL. _
RECEivEIr'
AUG 3rdr
INN. DEPARfimf,
CMOF CLEARWATEI:r
S:\09.BAY ESPLANADE\DOCS\DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR - Comprehensive Infill Project Application (FINAL 08-02-10).doc
Page 2 of 8
WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria)
M/ Provide complete responses to the six (6) COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA - Explain how each criteria is
achieved, in detail:
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this
zoning district.
The existing lot size is only 4,350 SF and will need to be developed as a Comprehensive Infill Re-development.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general
purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning district
The proposed ice cream parlour and use are within the allowable density and is also compatible with the City of Clearwater Comp
Plan and Future Land Use.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties.
The proposed ice cream parlour will not impede the development of the surrounding properties in regard to building height,
setbacks, and site design requirements.
ORIGINAL
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. A U G s 0 2,
The adjoining properties will not be impacted adversely by the proposed ice cream parlour development.
ftANIMM DEPARTMENT
Ca OF CLEARWATER
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not
substantially alter the essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance with one or more of the following
objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating
jobs;
C. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is characterized by other similar development and where a
land use plan amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation; or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a working waterfront use.
All conditions above are met by this development. There is no re-zoning or land use change proposed on this project.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of
the following design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses
permitted in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City;
C. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of
the following design elements:
? Changes in horizontal building planes;
? Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
? Variety in materials, colors and textures;
? Distinctive fenestration patterns;
? Building stepbacks; and
? Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
All the above conditions are met thru the proposed Site Plan and Building Elevation plan. The only flexibility development code
requested is to allow development on the small lot area of 4,350 SF.
S:\09.BAY ESPLANADE\DOCS\DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR - Comprehensive Infill Project Application (FINAL 08-02-10).doc
Page 3 of 8
E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria
Manual and 4-202.A.21)
I/ A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that involve addition
or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with the City of
Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption to this requirement.
? If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt.
8 At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following;
d Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines;
®/ Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures;
W All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems;
U/ Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
C?3 A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with
the City manual.
Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
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
ca/ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF STORMWATER PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Applicant must initial one of the following):
l I? Stormwater plan as noted above is included
Stormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor
elevations shall be provided.
CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN
AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY
MAY OCCUR.
If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750.
F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A)
N7/ SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) - One original and 14 copies;
5d 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;
S TREE INVENTORY; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 4" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of
such trees;
a/ LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY;
? PARKING DEMAND STUDY in conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards lie. 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;
M GRADING PLAN, as applicable;
GI/ 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; N l A
ORIGINNk
AUG it (_
*IANNING DERARTM, ,,
(My OFCLEARWA .:;
S:\09.BAY ESPLANADE\DOCS\DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR - Comprehensive Infill Project Application (FINAL 08-02-10).doc
Page 4 of 8
G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A)
( SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"):
/ Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package;
North arrow;
v% Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared;
v/ All dimensions;
j Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures;
?j Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures;
All required setbacks;
All existing and proposed points of access;
V/ All required sight triangles;
Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including
U? description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; Location of all public and private easements;
J Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site;
Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas
t and water lines;
V/ All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas;
Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas;
Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening
,j (per Section 3-201(D)(i) and Index #7011;
Location of all landscape material;
Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities;
,f Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures;
J Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks; and
Floor plan typicals of buildings for all Level Two approvals. A floor plan of each floor is required for any parking garage requiring a
v Level Two approval.
C4 SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in written/tabular form:
EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED
Land area in square feet and acres; 4,350 SF 5,000 SF 4,350 SF
,% Number of EXISTING dwelling units; Vacant Site Vacant Site Vacant Site
/ Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; N/A N/A one
w ? Gross floor area devoted to each use; N/A N/A 1,500 SF
Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the None 7-15 per 1000 Off-site parking
number of required spaces; SF G.F.A.
Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces & driveways, 0 SF 1
700 SF
v/ ,
expressed in square feet & percentage of the paved vehicular area;
Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility N/A N/A N/A
V easement;
Building and structure heights; N/A Max. 30 feet 15.3 feet
11 Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and None Max. 95% of lot 39.1% of lot
v1 Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. None N/A 0.345 FAR
d REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale (81/2 X 11
E7 FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan: p t 1A
1
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; ORIGINAL
RECEIVED
Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms;
Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned);
c
i0 / `.
ApUC
Streets and drives (dimensioned);
NGD????€iV
Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); Ctr1r(?F CtEARWATEi<
Structural overhangs;
S:\09.BAY ESPLANADE\DOCS\DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR - Comprehensive Infill Project Application (FINAL 08-02-10).doc
Page 5 of 8
H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A)
9/ LANDSCAPE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"):
V/ All existing and proposed structures;
V Names of abutting streets;
V Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations;
?/ Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers;
,j Sight visibility triangles;
vj Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing;
Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including driplines (as indicated on required
j_/ tree survey);
Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant
V schedule;
Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all
existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names;
Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and
yf, 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.
3 REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8 %X 11);
? COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape
Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met. NI 1A
1. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23)
EY BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS - with the following information:
V/ All sides of all buildings
ORIGINAL
Dimensioned RECEIVFn
Colors (provide one full sized set of colored elevations)
f? Materials; ;j
9/ REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS -same as above to scale on 8 Yz X 11 PING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF CLEARWATER
J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS / Section 3-1806)
L9/ All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be
removed or to remain.
Q// 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). N /1
? Reduced signage proposal (8 % X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application. t,` I A
S:\09.BAY ESPLANADE\DOCS\DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR - Comprehensive Infill Project Application (FINAL 08-02-10).doc
Page 6 of 8
K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.13 and 4-801.C)
p Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or his/her designee or if the proposed development:
• Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan.
• Will generate 100 or more new vehicle directional trips per hour and/or 1000 or more new vehicle trips per day.
• Will affect a nearby roadway segment and/or intersection with five (5) reportable accidents within the prior twelve (12) month period or
that is on the City's annual list of most hazardous intersections.
Trip generation shall be based on the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip General Manual.
The Traffic Impact Study must be prepared in accordance with a "Scoping Meeting" held with the Traffic Operations Manager and the
Planning Department's Development Review Manager or their designee (727-562-4750)
Refer to Section 4-801 C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement.
Acknowledgement of traffic impact study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following):
Traffic Impact Study is included. The study must include a summary table of pre- and post-development levels of service for all
roadway legs and each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scoping Meeting.
Traffic Impact Study is not required.
CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT
STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND
SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR.
If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-
4750.
L. FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS/ WATER STUDY:
Provide Fire Flow Calculations. Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply is available and to determine if
any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this project. The water supply must be able to support the needs of any required fire
sprinkler, standpipe and/or fire pump. If a fire pump is required the water supply must be able to supply 150% of its rated capacity. Compliance with
the 2004 Florida Fire Prevention Code to include NFPA 13, MFPA 14, NFPA 20, NFPA 291, and MFPA 1142 (Annex H) is required.
N Acknowledgement of fire flow calculations/water study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following):
Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is included.
T 4 Fire Flow CalculationsfWater Study is not required.
CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A FIRE FLOW
CALCULATIONS/ WATER STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE
RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR.
If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Fire Prevention Department at (727) 562-4334.
M. SIGNATURE:
I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made
in this application are true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and
photograph the property described in this application.
V
Signature of property owner or representative
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS
Sworn to and subscribed before me this Z 2 day of
A.D. 20 1r- to me and/or by
who is personally known has
produced
as identification.
;•rav ALICEA
Notary pubcs }= `• -rl,ISSOf006,94277
My
commission expires ?; for?i?l;: ;,w,!-i?CS JUn? 1"I, ?ill l
-
`l
- /,, - [°.n/1
L (407) 396-uif, FIG n±2FI0t3 ySNrvr:E.CUm
C:\Users\CD MATH URA\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Low\Content.IE5\THZPM6SR\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) sy
p ?± 2008 07-11[1j.doc
AUG I Page 8 of 8
FIMNING DEPAwi' tEi'?.
MY OF CLEARWs\1 F:
N. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT:
1. Provide names of all property owners on deed - PRINT full names:
MATHURA PROPERTIES #5, LLC
RECEIVED
PLANNING DEPAi2TMENI
-CITY OF CLEARWATER
2. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location):
22 BAY ESPLANADE, CLEARWATER, FL 33767
3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request)
4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint:
TUAN HUYNH
as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition;
15. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property;
16. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City
representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application;
7. That (Uwe), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct.
Property Owner Property Owner
Property Owner Property Owner
STATE OF FLORIDA,
COUNTY OF PINELLAS
Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by the laws of the State ofd /Florida, on this 2 day of
Rbvq( 2p t(} personally appeared Q \J n jt.?04 V_CQ who having been first duly sworn
__DepQses and says that he/she-Mlyal"W a? e contents of the affidavit that he/she signed.
ow" BRENDALIZ ALICEA
------ ----
IMY COMMISSION 0 DD684277 -- - - -
EXPIRES June 1 t, 2011 Notary Public Signature
KFA FrodoaNNtaryServrce.com My Commission Expires: k1X _-lf foil C:\Users\CD MATHURAWppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Low\Content.IE5\THZPM6SR\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD)
2008 07 1].doc
Pag 10 f 8
Clearwater
Planning Department
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Telephone: 727-562.4567
Fax: 727-562-4865
? SUBMIT ORIGINAL SGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
? SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION -Plans and
application are required to be collated, stapled and folded into sets
CASE NUMBER:
RECEIVED BY (Staff Initials):
DATE RECEIVED:
* NOTE: A TOTAL OF 15 SETS OF THIS APPLICATION AND ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED IN
CONJUNCTION WITH A COMPLETE LEVEL ONE OR LEVEL TWO APPLICATION.
COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM
(Revised 04/24/2007)
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT-
APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER ANDj AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
APPLICANT NAME: 1 F1 r t %T - _ Z L L
1 - MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: FAX NUMBER t__
CELL NUMBER: EMAIL C c? fNc; )LtLtt_Cy_j1_ t?tR i. _, t'fvt7..
PROPERTY OWNER(S): -i FVA -----_ L?JI•I t_tLULt --f-MA t,; I?L7t tJCi_..._f_l t?'_` - --- - - - -- -
List ALL owners on the deed
AGENT NAME: L'.( tN__ ._? 1 L AL_I _t _ L_ f _-____ ( ?Z EC/1 o r. (i (? C J +! L t . T t tU C 1v??' SQL + t
MAILING ADDRESS: L_11. niP Ki FZ. 3 28 `j - ----
PHONE NUMBER: FAX NUMBER: I? CELL NUMBER:
EMAIL: -----
1. ARCHITECTURAL THEME:
a. The landscaping in a Comprehensive Landscape Program shall be designed as a part of the architectural theme of the principal buildings
proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for the development.
OR
b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall be
demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape
standards.
?CS t _T IT., 't.~;c.f) n"5r11. t .Q 1 S(..c.?_ ?t Ci EXh?1 (oaf " L tynSc 3 '? (fit )tin
1??.LL. _-?'??Y.I?t?__ ??i?t7'ttt?./Yt. ..(,./i??SCtn•tt__.f?tGZ`,c_ Tt? ?1'1Gc?:f?i-?E_i_5?!??i_7_ S?Ot ?? S:iLt?S???tt?,
f?t??? 12._CI.L!£ ?.1t
C:1Documents and Settingslderek.iergusontOesktopkWanningforms_07071Comprehensive Landscape Program 04-24-07.doc
Page 1 of 2
2. COMMUNITY CHARACTER:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater.
14.'. . j? a_t 1..._-_ ..-
?Nl rtr?_-Q-t-i._. _.-
3. PROPERTY VALUES:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will have a beneficial impact on the value of the property in the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
?/ r
-`7-. - I..__i_*11 -- I16_?%? ?% __ t _Y?`>C_.l?t?l^?(-_ .!!?72t ?? .. .-JJ?' '?'./t?6":41 T i l'? ?-"%.'.5
L'?rl?? th?t1 A _?"
_.
r ??? r?-i?z_ ?`-
?'(?'?',_C --
4. SPECIAL AREA OR SCENIC CORRIDOR PLAN:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program is consistent with any special area or scenic corridor plan which
the City of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel proposed for development is located. ?'?^?C`?-C
Lu:fr4T1T
THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 3, DIVISION 12 MAY BE WAIVED OR MODIFIED AS A PART OF A LEVEL ONE OR LEVEL
TWO APPLICATION, AS THE CASE MAY BE, IF THE APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL INCLUDES A COMPREHENSIVE
LANDSCAPE PROGRAM, WHICH SATISFIES THE ABOVE CRITERIA. THE USE OF LANDSCAPE PLANS, SECTIONS / ELEVATIONS,
RENDERINGS AND PERSPECTIVES MAY BE NECESSARY TO SUPPLEMENT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WORKSHEET.
r SIGNATURE'
I, the undersigned, acknowledge that al representations made in
this application are true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and
photograph the property described in this application.
Signature of property owner or representative
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS
Sw)m to an subscribed before me this _?ay of
A.D. 201 to me and/or by
, whq I personally known has
produced kJ
as ide
Nola ublic,
My commission expires:
aq Notary Public State of Florida
Carlos Ventura
My Commission DD821853
Expires 09110/2012
C.0ocuments and Settingslderek.fargusoniDesktopipianningforms_0707kComprehensive Landscape Program 04-24-07.doc
Page 2 of 2
GRAPWC SCALZ
V LANDSCAPE BUFFER (SIDE)
IMHWIrT
SP B Mr-r a
PROPERTY LINE (PAL)
16 LI
9 10
PROPERTY LINE (P1)
- --
SOD
SOD
SOD
?.
GROUNDCOVERSAREAS B?9A!
ONE-STORY 5' LANDSCAPE BUFFER (REAR) R... PLMNRWI o[rAR
IAA ICE CREAM PARLOUR
¢$ (1.500 SQ-FT) sar
PROPERTY LINE (P/L)
VO Soo =---
.$.. - SOD
.. .. -.!
` VO
F?
2
THREE (3) CLUSTERS OF SABAL PALM T SOD G
TREES WITHIN FRONT LANDSCAPE „
. - • -
BUFFERAREA : 1
1 _ ...
' i
LANDSCAPE BUFFER (FRONT)
10
'S' LANDSCAPE BUFFER (SIDE) -?-?
7 PROPERTY LINE (PAL) ,. •- ---
- TEN (10) PROPOSED CANOPY TREES ON-SITE; EXISTING 12' OAK TREE yC ,.
.77?SS?
TREES SHALL BE SALT TOLERANCE TYPE OR ON HESS GAS STATION
EQUIVALENT APPROX. CANOPY AREA ??--
v0 (12 FT. RADIUS)
7
-- - -- - - GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES
1. AL PLANES 10 K FLORIDA MO. 1. OR BETTER AS CURSED UNDER 'MIMES AND
STANDARDS MR NUR WIRY PLANES. PART L U03 AND PART I. STATE Di H.OroA
DEPARTMENT OF ADROLTUE. TALIAHASSEL FLORIDA. AND AMY
2. ALL TREES AMC PLAMf HMIERIAL SOLE E 11AMTED N MCOA1AaE WITH IRE
SPEOFICASOD OSSCMm N SHE STAN DPARWENT OF AOROLIM AND CONSUMER
SEIMOES. OMWIMM OF FORESTRY , 'I= PROTECTION MAIDAL FOR IN ULERS AND
oEUEUPESS'
OCECB[L 1K1
.
3, THE LANDSCAPE CCIMIRACDR
PLANT UST
SHALL AMnMS MMU ALL IM" M W= AS CALLED FOR ON THIS
nc SLIST OF PPLiM T GUANTTIiICS AOCMWAAWfM$ lK PLANE SHAD
LANDSCAPE
SE t= AS A OM ONLY. V A VADAICN OCORU KNOBS THE RAMS MD THE
OTY. SM. BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME
SIZE WATER
A ALL TRESS, EIaft OR0 RD MQU SHAE K PLANNED USING A ML -1"
ftAN` THE LL
PREPARED ACCORDINGLY (2/3 DISIMS MR. 1/3 PEAT]
TREES S KANT AND PLANIER& WEIMX DRUM THROUGH ANY =PAC= FLL W
10 U LACERSTROORA I DCA CREPE MYRTLE B': Y CAL LOW 0. ? Y AND TREE WIG R mM9?U SHALL K TOP DrAMM WITH 111[
9 SP SABAL PALMETTO SABAL PAW W; 3' CAL LOW 'o" OF
7. NO TREES TOME BE RAMMED CLO®1 THAN 3 FEET (3) FROM WE EDGE OF PMFHDIT
TO ALLOW ACEOMTN TREE IRRWI PRO7[CiDM .
a LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR WIWL K WHOLLY RESPONSIBLE f01 SAIYSY AND PUIYB
CO M M K ALL SWISS AND SHILL K M"y LUKE FOM ANY DAMAGE CASES
SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOYERS BT RE NSTAKRY OF ARE PL/NT MANORIAL
0. ALL LAW AREAS W MCON SOD SHILL K DOM 101111(1) 70 SE(ASIDTED FN MOSS ND
OIAC® W EFrARM A LEVEL /SBM CIADE. ALL OEMSS 70 K IDY
b YA IANTANA MON1L'VDEN5T5 ANTE YAiIE
18'1124'; 24' OC MODERATE IK STEEL
11 $00 OVAL K EKE K VMS AD PESTS R S1WE K LAND rAXY AND ROSED.
BO VD'-- VIBUHIIM ODO RATISAMIM SWEET VIBURNUM 30'R2C; 30' DC MODERATE WISH EIGHT MEMO JOINTS. 1K SOD SHALL CONTAIN MOW SOL WIRER DOSS NOT FALL
APART OR " WHER U11E1 AL AREAS MDT PAVED OR OIH LWM LADYiVED
. 94ILL K S0ODIOX 9M SHALL K ARGENTINE SAW OR ECM.
SOD AREA SHALL BE AROENTNE SAM 11. AL WOSI:AP[ AREAS 10 K MRDAIfn WITH AR ANOUTIC UNDERGROUND SYSIDL
WT H NODR CO ERAGL BACK1100 PIEVDI7Q a RAM SENSOR KTACE.
DIRECT WRAY HEMS AMY FROM Mn RAlUI1K AREAS AID ARMED MIREACES
72 M TREE CIL1EI1 K ILL 111EI5 !/'[Li1ED ON IRE PLAR ILSf 9NA11 K AT IEASf
IWM (3) INCHES N GAMIER WHEN LEAS MED AT TKLTE (12) NOTES ABDME GRADE
$
A W11Y MR AAPr[ D•MMD rP.A UC
EMIL M W D? R.A w M vWIeW V AYDIUM YA WI1R M! >Pr NNr
DA SCOOP ICE CFIEAM PARLOUR MAW lAm
Aw w
a DMN? "`` R'° PWAL SITE PLAN MPAP@ Ar[ AM
A Wa PRVARY LANDSCAPE PLAN
FAeWer F WI?
rM
A rAMa
*
N 4'
.R
a(
m Bra
E
?r(r?
E"'?""aT Ns
cffyOFCL.EAwATmBEACH FlAFMA FUSION ME MOS
.
i
KWi1N
[ .
w
.
SITE DATA:
GRAPMr BCC
1. SITE AREA 4,350 SF (0.10AC.)
1 MI T LANDSCAPE BUFFER (SIDE) 2. PARCEL ID'. 05-2915-16382-008-0120 (PINELLAS CO. PROPERTY APPRAISER)
.
L r 5' CLEARANCES AROUND ENTIRE BUIILDING
PERIMETER F OR FIRE DEPT. ACCESS, NO
SITE ADDRESS 22 SAY ESPLANADE. CLEARWATER. FL 3376]
3
OBSTRUCTION AL LOWED WITHIN THIS AREA PERIMETER LANDSCAPE
BUFFER LINE .
10' SIDE BUILDING SETBACK 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION' LOT 12, BLOCK 8. PLAT BOOK 11, & PAGE 5OF PINELLAS COUNTY
TO FACE OF BUILD ING)
5. LAND OWNER: MATHURA PROPERTIES YS, LLC
6' WIDE x 18' LENGTH BRICK PAVER WALKWA Y
ATER ZONING
O
C
E
R
(AREA=108 SF) F
L
A
W
)
B. EXISTING ZONING' TOURIST DISTRICT( T) (PER CITY
FLANDSCAPE BUFFER (REAR)
15'FRONT BUILDING SETBACK TO EDGE
?- - - - - T 7. PROPOSED ZONING' TOURIST DISTRICT (T)
OF BRICK PAVER WALKWAY 1 ID
18' 1 r
1 p
1
l1 8. LAND USE RESORT FACILITIES HIGH (RFH)
2'z 6' x 4' HIGH MONUMENT SIGNAGE AREA ?p ZO O . .
a MAX
(SHOWN FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSE ONLY)
SEPARATE SIGN PERMIT SHALL BE REQUIRED; ONE-STORY BUILDING
w
ICE CREAM PARLOUR ?. DRY RETENTION POND
z O TOP AREA = 978 SF o 9. PROPOSED USE: RESTAURANTICE CREAM PARLOUR
NEW SIGN SHALL NOT BE HIGHER THAN
PROPOSED BUILDING ROOF LINE 3S
S, G.F.A. = 1,500 SF F, DEPTH = 1.5 FT. 3
w
w
10. GROSS FLOOR AREA (GFA): 1,SW SF
z FIFE = 6.50
0
O MINIMUM BUILDING p )
11. FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR): 0.345 (MAX. CODE ALLOWABLE 1.
FREE STANDING SIGN SHALL BE SET
BACK m BUILDING DIMENSION ¢ INE
SETBACK L
p a
MIN. S FROM PROPERTY LINE 12. PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT' 15.33 FEET (MAX. CODE ALLOWABLE 35 FT.)
L
3' WIDE x
BRICK PAVER W ALKWAY : >a; .5•. 9'
PER OLD FLORIDA DISTRICT 'BEACH By DESIGN'
G SETBACKS
6
(AREA = 66 SF) 13. MIN. REQUIRED BUILDIN
:
FRONT(SOUTHI: 15'
10' LANDSCAPE BUFFER (FR ONT) ago SIDE (WEST): 10'
SIDE (EAST): t9
5' W IDE x 26' LENGTH CONCRETE (4'THIC K) FOR REAR (NORTH): 10,
DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE ACCESS TO STR
AREA= 130 SF EET
(
)
E
BUILDING
S
19 5' LANDSCAPE
ETBACK 19' REAR BUILDING SETBACK
(TO F
ACE OF
BUILDI
(TO F BUFFER (SIDE)
NG) (TO FACE OF BUILDING) 14. PROPOSED BUILDING SETBACKS: SETBACK TO FACE OF BUILDING
FRONT (SOUTH): 15' (BAY ESPLANADE PUBLIC RANI
' 5' CLEARANCES AROUND EN TIRE BUIILDING PERIMETER LANDSCAPE SIDE (WEST): 10' (EXISTING MOTEL)
6
HIGH PVC VINYL F ENCE WITH
PERIMETER FOR FIRE DEPT. ACCESS, NO BUFFER LINE
5' WIDE ACCESS GATE TO BUFFER
OBSTRUCTION ALLOWED WITHIN THIS AREA sioE (EAST): to' (EXISTING HESS GAS STATION)
TRASH ENCLOSURE FROM STREET REAR (NORTH): 19' (EXISTING MOTEL POOL)
3.5' x 7 "WIDE COMMERCIAL DUM TER PAD
SETBACK MIN. 6' FROM BUILDING ND PROPERTY LENGTH
CURB SIDE PICK-UP 87, 15. PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA: 1,804 SF (41.5% OF SITE) (MAX. ALLOWABLE 95%)
BUILDING: 1,50D SF
PAVEMENT 8 WALKWAY: 301 SF
SITE 100-YEAR BASE FLOOD ELEVATION = 12.0 NGVD SITE PLAN NOTES: Tam SF
PER FIRM MAP #12103CO102G (EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 3, 2003)
ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE MEASURED TO THE FACE OF CURB. UNLESS
PROPOSED OPEN SPACE AREA' 2,546 SF (58.5 %OF SITE)
16
'
OTHERWISE NOTED.
O .
2. BUILDING PLANS LAYOUT SHOWN ON THE CIVIL SITE PLANS ARE FOR REFERENCE 17. PROPOSED DRY RETENTION AREA 978 SF (22.5 %OF SITE)
PURPOSES ONLY. CONSTRUCTION LAYOUT FOR THE PROPOSED BUILDING FOUNDATION
SHALL BE PER THE ARCHITECTURAL BU KDING PLANS EXACT DIMENSIONS.
18. BASE FLOOD ELEVATION: 12 FEET (NGVD) (PER FIRM MAP 12103CO102G DATED 0903-03)
3. ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN FIELD MEASUREMENTS AND THESE CONSTRUCTION
PLANS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY.
19. PROPOSED BUILDING WILL BE FLOOD PROOF FROM FINISH FLOOR TO ELEVATION=12.0
4. FINISH CONCRETE WALKWAY AND TOP OF CURB ELEVATION SHALL BE 6• ABOVE
FINISH PAVEMENT GRADES. 20. NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES (MAX. SHIFT): 3 EMPLOYEES
5. ALL VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL CONTROLS SHOWN ARE IN REFERENCE TO NOTE: EMPLOYEES WILL USE PUBLIC PARKING AREA ADJACENT TO
SURVEY PROPERTY CORNERS AND BENCHMARKS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED BY THE SITE OR OTHER PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION METHODS
CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
21. REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: 23 SPACES (CITY CODE - 7 TO 15 SPACES PER 1.000 GFA)
- 6. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT. BUILDING PLANS MUST DEMONSTRATE
PROPOSED SEA TURT)FfRIENDLY LIGHTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY CODE (CDC
SECTION 3 M2) AND STATE LAW (F A C. 6213-55). NO LIGHT WITHIN 300 FEET SHALL BE 22. PARKING SPACES PROVIDED: 0 SPACES (PLEASE SEE PARKING DEMAND STUDY)
VISIBLE OR EXTEND IN AREAS IDENTIFIED AS SEA TURTLE NESTING AREAS DURING THE NOTE: BASED ON STUDY, PUBLIC PARKING IS AVAILABLE WITHIN 1.000 FEET OF PROJECT
NESTING SEASON OF MAY 1 TO OCTOBER 31. AREAS WHERE SECURITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY
REQUIRE LIGHTING. ALTERNATIVE LIGHT MANAGEMENT APPROACHES SHALL BE APPLIED.
23. PROPOSED SITE LIGHTING SHALL BE PROVIDED BY FIXED MOUNTED ON BUILDING
YFK a bl)rd Cry b0M LIC pIY / •rYYr r m
V
M r IIACIA w r ors
DA SCOOP ICE CFEAM PARLOUR we ?vs
R Ob
.5 rr In
FM& WE PLAN rre ? ...a.
Y?
rLL 8r'C PLAN w f-/
weir rw?
_
a
••••
?`
~
r
r I r CRY OF CL.EARWATM FLOFIDA ,`.
c
.
+
Ey
s
5' LANDSCAPE BUFFER (SIDE)
E
P
S" 16
PROPERTY LINE (P/L)
9 10
PROPERTY LINE (P k)
SOD
SOD SOD
GROUNDCOVERS AR EAS
ONE-STORY 5' LANDSCAPE BUFFER (REAR)
IL A ICE CREAM PARLOUR
4 $ (1,500 SO-FT)
PROPERTY LINE (P/L)
Q VO
8
` vo
22
THREE (3) CLUSTERS OF SABAL PALM
TREES WITHIN FRONT LANDSCAPE SOD
BUFFER AREA
10' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 1
(FRONT)
'
5
LAND SCAPE BUFFER (SIDE)
PROPERTY LINE (PAL)
7
' TEN (10) PROPOSED CANOPY TREES ONSITE
'
TREES SHALL B ; EXISTING 12
OAK TREE
E SALT TOLERANCE TYPE OR ON HESS GAS STATION
EQUIVALENT ?
APPROX. CANOPY AREA
?
/ V \ (12 FT. RADIUS)
V
:wn,wr .w
k, _nrt ?FSI
-t
Ei, aa
i6P1w -1.
PLANT UST
i
QTY. BYM. BOTANICAL NAME COMMON MANE
$1ZE
WAnR
TTEM
10 U IAOFMiRCORA BOICA CREPE MVWRL
E: Y CAL
LOW
B SP SABAL PALMETTO SAM PAIR W. T CAL LOW
SHRMS AND IROIBDCOIEW
b ILA LANTANA YONRVDDI9S ANE MME 1~: 94' OC MODMAIE
Bo M VIURNE ODO A7139AIM SWEEP VBUEUL SO•)QA•: 90. OC MODERATE
900 AREA 2 ML BE MODIIEE BANIA
aQAP= wAm
IN ism)
Lr-N a
rrlr wANr mr
lra nA1N0 ORr
a_-_ TEE RYIIRIR RRAL
GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES
1. ALL KAMM W E RmDA Na 1. OR INTER AS OVILM YNQ'aAM AMD
WFANOAIp FOR IAJREl1Y RAM1a PART 1SS7 AND FAR7 4 STA7[ E IIaEA
EPAWI INT Of Am1OLRSN. T ROEA ND AMY AY[MOET! 71EEA
i ALL 11031! AND PUNT MW7[AML !WL E M AOOOONIO: tRI 1K
M EONCADOW El00® N 7W STAIE OIPARIIEIT OF ANNOLRI E AND OSEREI
EY O', OOIOlRfC1EE1R`. '1131 PIIOICMW MANUAL FOR NSLOO AND
L IM LANDSCAPE OOIIIUCWII
IRWL E RCIPIANKE FOR ALL MARRWS AND ALL WINK AS MM FOR ON IM
LANDSCAPE KAHL IM DST W RANT WANWM AOW WAWW IM PLANS IINAIL
E LM AS AND[ ONLY. ¦ A VANAIM OCORN E7NUM M RAMS AND 1W
KANT 1111 UST W RAMS ALL O? W OMNL E RNIRD IIEN A SOL IERS[
POPAED ACLr1NR1O.l' (4/J pE1N0 p. 1/7 IGD
6 M tAIONSIPE NfIRAC161 MWL MIRC AOEOIM7[ 1RRIMYL EAMAQ N ALL
RANT EOS MD PLANNM %IRWAL MlUO ANOINT ANY CONACM FLL 10
MATTE SOL WXL E AOCON TO M DRAM AL
a ALL PLANT INIS AND 100 WAMWO RA/O OWL E IW OADIm WIN MEN
T. NO S MWL W==M0 = 3 MT (» ROM TE WK Or MIOWIT
10 ALLOW ANOMIE 7"0' I'M PR0IECINI .
a MAOOMX[ OOORAC" fNM1 IN NIOLY ROO_L FOt DMINnY AND RUN
COIp1101 K ALL 7103 MO OWL E IEa1Llr IIANL Fm ANY DAYAE CMS
M 731 IMAMM OF ANY PLANT MATOUL.
a ALL UM AEAS W I®E SOD OWL E nSBD FOIN?) 70 SOMMOIf
AIO
EAO® 70 ISTANJ•1 A WAL FINISH ORAOE. ALL OHMS 10 E M P
ME ffm
16 OW INALL E FM OF N']EINS AND PISM R NAIL E LM EMLr NO ROB,
WIH INNT RRNO A7N7a THE SOD !WL OORAM MNIT SOL ONO OES NOT /NU
APART ON WAR 1101 UFM ALL AREAS NOT PAWED OR OTCIIRE LNOSWID
OWL IN DOOOM OW OWL E AR@NMN WM ON EOML
1L ALL WpC/iPE AEAS W E ESGAIm OM m mnUMATC IIElAOIpRD SYSOL
EM lam owAxai. imanow FEWENNIL • RAN EEOI RML
EdT WRAY WAN AMY FM ANY NATURAL AWAS AND PAMU OIRACUL
1L DS THE MM OF ALL 700 WECFMD O1 Tilt KANT LWr WALL E AT MEASF
ors rrrRa eAN N^R 1?F N'NA m ??.? rn• w r
A°011F w.~o '?1' Ii• s DA SCOOP 1I•C1E CREAM PARLOUR Iro szrs rL? n r
ANA FIIAL ATE PLAN AIIleNN rrAwAE
" A PRELIufIlAW LAND9CAPE PLAN DN. ..N
_ IRAm E rrFr
Anal L~ir (i mmFa,N E~r r?rri? p1Y OF CLEAFMYATSi ?Aqi FLOMM rra
GOLOR WHEEL
SERPENT
CL 14S4M
® YESTERDAY'S THOUGHTS
CL 2014M
SPRAY RIVER
CLW 1048W
DEER FEATHER
CLW 1041W
4
L
ip F
?-ARAP
P
- 161'
20
EL
.
.
TOP ROOF 41
CANOPY
MTL
.
EL. 16'.500'
GLG. HGT.
X 0 0 EWE. 12ID00' OL
?
g' SAND FINI
94 T
_ STUCCO ON CNN
FIN. FL. EL. 6504
NORTH ELEVATION
SCALE Ye' • 1'-0'
ICE CREAM PARLOUR
CITY OF CLEARWATER FLORIDA
DEVAN MATHURA BUILDING
.'
&"-W*)
?> *2c.
194A N. JOHN YOUNG PKNI'.
KISSINIMEE. Ft. 34741
TEL 407.344-4122 FAX 407-344-1322 C 407-460-0243_,___
EMAIL kad,?Dkadbuildingdesigns.com WEBSITE www.kadbuiklingdesions.com
EL. 23833'
TOP OF P RAPET
t
TOP OF ROOF
BRUSH ALUM. FlN.
CANOPY -
16'.5 _
GLCa. I T.
MTL. CANOPY
5FE.12.000' _
10 0 FIN. FL. EL. 6.500'
COLOR WHEEL
p SERPENT
CL 14e4M
® YESTERDAY'S THOUGHTS
CL 2014M
SPRAY RIVER
CLW 1048W
O DEER FEATHER
CLW 1041W
-MTL. CANOPY
FINISH
1' SAND FINISH STUCCO
ON CMu
SOUTH ELEVATION
SCALE Ye' = 1'-0'
ICE CREAM PARLOUR
CITY OF CLEARWATER FLORIDA
DEVAN MATHURA BUILDING
zI P.OLgs' to C
1954 N. .10H\ %OUNG PK"1'.
KISSIMMEE. F'1,34741
TEL 407-344-4122 FAX 407- 344-1322 C 407460-0243
EMAIL kadlbkadbuddingdesigns com WEBSITE www.kadbuddingdesons com
COLOR WHEEL
D SERPENT
CL 14134M
® YESTERDAY'S THOUGHTS
CL 2014M
p SPRAY RIVER
CLW 1048W
E] DEER FEATHER
CLW 1041W
21.833'
' OF PARAPE
MTL. CANOPY
A, t --
16'.50
i. HCsT0
.
BFE. 12,000'
' SAND FINISH
STUCCO ON CMU
in
FIN. FL. EL. 6500
EAST ELEVATION
SCALE Ye' - I'-0'
ICE CREAM PARLOUR
CITY OF CLEARWATER FLORIDA
DEVAN MATHURA BUILDING
4.0
Z. MOM 07, c
1954 N. JOHN YOUNG PKWY.
KISSIMMIKE. Ff. 34741
TEL 407-344-4122 FAX' 407- 344-1322 C 407-460.0243
EMAIL: kadAkadbuildmgdesians com WEBSITE www kadbuildmadesians com
COLOR WHEEL
SERPENT
CL 14134M
YESTERDAY'S THOUGHTS
CL 2014M
? SPRAY RIVER
CLW 1048W
E] DEER FEATHER
CLW 1041W
EL. 21.833' _
OP OF PRAP
EL. 20.161'
YTOPOFROOF
,DEL. 16'.500' CLG.
HGT.
i
_
,L5FE.12.000'
i
i
,LFIN. FL. EL. 6500' -
WEST ELEVATION
SCALE V • I'-0'
ICE CREAM PARLOUR
CITY OF CLEARWATER FLORIDA
DEVAN MATHURA BUILDING
CANOPY
I' SAND FINISH
STUCCO ON CMU
.'4?
Z f1 c
1954 N.JOHN N'OGNC PKWl'.
KISSIM M EE. FL 34741
TEL 407-344.4122 FAX: 407-344-1322 C 407-460-0243
EMAIL kadAkadbuildingdesignscom WEBSITE www,kadbuildingdesigns.com
3or _ o?'
? J
? lU
Q ~
Uw
JLL
F?-
I
I
I
;t
MTL. CANOPY -
REFER TO ELEV.
FLOOR PLAN
SCALE Ye' • I'-0'
1,440 SP.
V Y V
BATHRM. co) co)
?zd
-
r r
co co
--d J
DINING
co) co)
/
19'-4'
9'-4'
KITCHEN
WAITING
I I
i 1 24' - ? 24'
I ?
L--------- L------- - ------- ?
2 0'-0'
30'-0'
ICE CREAM PARLOUR
CITY OF CLEARWATER FLORIDA
DEVAN MATHURA BUILDING
N
_ MTL. CANOPY
REFER TO ELEV.
_
.'4? lam
L:?e?atg+sa
1454 N. JOHN YOUNG PKWY.
KIS.SIMMEE, F1.34741
TEL. 407-3444122 FAX 407- 344-1322 C.: 407460.0243 _ _
EMAIL kadftkadbuildinadesians com WEBSITE- www.kedbuildinadesions.com
DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR
Parking Demand Study
(Revised)
PARCEL ID: 05-29-15-16362-008-0120
City of Clearwater, Florida
SUBMITTAL TO:
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Flexible Development Application
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33756
(727) 562-4567
(727) 562-4865 Fax
LAND OWNER AND A PPLICA NT.-
MATHURA PROPERTIES # 5, LLC
1901 S. John Young Parkway, Suite 101
Kissimmee, FL 34741
(321) 284-4631
CONSULTANT.-
REGIONAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LLC
2442 Grand Central Parkway, Unit 16
Orlando, Florida 32839
(407) 812-5480 (office) CEIVS • Gj- ?i?
(407) 340-5713 (mobile) Z- ,t`?.•" F''•,'fy ??
E-mail: tuan(ii),rcefl.com No 54035
? STATE OF
SEPTEMBER 10, 2010 %?? ???
?j S tOR0,,- Gs?
//i;S'ONA' '
TUAN K. HUYNH, P.E.
Florida License No. 54035
Certificate of Authorization No. 26762
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Proposed Development
1.2 Primary Impact Area
2.0 Existing Conditions
2.1 Public Parking Facilities
PAGE
1
1
1
5
2.2 Parking Analysis for Friday, July 16, 2010 5
2.3 Parking Analysis for Saturday, July 17, 2010 5-6
3.0 Project Parking Demand and Customer Use Profile 11
4.0 Summary and Conclusions 12
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
FIGURES
PAGE
1 Project Location Map 2
2 Proposed Site Plan 3
3 Primary Impact Area (within 1,000 feet) 4
4 Parking Conditions on July 16, 2010 (Graph) 8
5 Parking Conditions on July 17, 2010 (Graph) 10
TABLES
1 Parking Conditions & Data Collection for 7
Friday, July 16, 2010
2 Parking Conditions & Data Collection for 9
Saturday, July 17, 2010
APPENDIX
1 Existing City of Clearwater Beach Parking Facilities Map
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Proposed Development
Regional Consulting Engineers, LLC, has been retained to perform a Parking Demand
Study for the proposed "Da Scoop Ice Cream Parlour" development in the City of
Clearwater, Florida. The proposed site (tax parcel ID 05-29-15-16362-008-0120) is located
at 22 Bay Esplanade west of Mandalay Avenue (Figure 1). The proposed development
consists of a one-story commercial retail building totaling 1,500 sq-ft (gross floor area).
The site area is 4,350 sq-ft (50' x 87' lot). The site is developed mostly for walk-up
customers from nearby beach areas, surrounding hotels, and visiting tourists. Please see
attached site plan (Figure 2).
This report documents the methodology and analysis for the parking demand study. The
purpose of the study is to determine the potential project impacts to the existing city public
parking facilities within the primary impact area. The parking demand study is required to
support the project Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project application for DRC staff
and Community Development Board (CDB) review.
1.2 Primary Impact Area and Methodology
Per the City of Clearwater LDC and Flexible Development Application, the proposed project
will require a parking demand study within the primary impact area. The impact area is
determined to be one-thousand (1,000) feet radius of the site. All public parking spaces
(with meters) will be counted and tabulated within the impact area. For this study, the peak
demand hours are on Friday between 6:00 PM to 10:00 PM and Saturday between 10:00
AM to 10:00 PM. The parking demand analysis will be done at every one hour increment
during the peak hour period.
"Google Earth" program was used to determine the approximate 1,000 feet radius primary
impact area. The project impact area is bounded by Idlewild Street (to the north), Bay
Esplande running north-south direction (east), Baymount Street (south), and Clearwater
Beach limits (west). Please see Figure 3 for the Primary Impact Area map.
I
4ii i
S{ I ,` . ma
PARCEL IDS 05-29-15-16362-008-0120
L
PROJECT NAME: DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR
PROJECT SITE AREA: 0.10 ACRE (4,350 SO-FT)
PHYSICAL SITE ADDRESS: 22 BAY ESPLANADE, CLEARWATER, FL 33767
PROPOSED USAGE: COMMERCIAL RETAIL SERVICES - ICE CREAM PARLOUR (1,500 SQ-FT)
Re&W Cm a#Jng Engk-m LLC L,r
2442 Grad Cmtrd PknU UnR 18
Gdad% Fk rwwo 32879
H me (407) 812-5180 y
E-m& rce20050 attnet
LOCATION MAP
DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR
PARKING DEMAND STUDY
c rr of a.FAMATM FLOWA
&`m
FIGURE 1
I
J
am -a0cr"D-
GRAPHIC SCALE
(?FIQI
_10 = M x T CLEARANCES AROUND ENTIRE BUIILDING
PERIMETER FOR FIRE DEPT. ACCESS, NO
OBSTRUCTION ALLOWED WITHIN THIS AREA
10' SIDE BUILDING SETBACK
(TO FACE OF BUILDING)
6' WIDE X 18' LENGTH BRICK PAVER WALKWAY
(AREA • 100SF)
in
15. FRONT BUILDING SETBACK TO EDGE - - -
OF BRICK PAVER WALKWAY n
2' z 6' X 4' HIGH MONUMENT SIGNAGE AREA -
(SHOWN FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSE ONLY)
SEPARATE SIGN PERMIT SHALL BE REQUIRED;
NEW SIGN SHALL NOT BE HIGHER THAN
PROPOSED BUILDING ROOF LINE
jC
/V
m
N
FREE STANDING SIGN SHALL BE SET BACK
MIN. S FROM PROPERTY LINE
3' WIDE X 22' BRICK PAVER WALKWAY
(AREA = 66 SF)
10' LANDSCAPE BUFFER (FRONT)
5' WIDE X 26' LENGTH CONCRETE (4' THICK) FOR
DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE ACCESS TO STREET
(AREA = 130 SF)
10' SIDE BUILDING SETBACK
(TO FACE OF BUILDING)
6' HIGH PVC VINYL FENCE WITH
5' WIDE ACCESS GATE TO BUFFER
TRASH ENCLOSURE FROM STREET
3.5' X T WIDE COMMERCIAL DUM
SETBACK MIN. 13 FROM BUILDIN(
CURB SIDE PICK-UP
5- LANDSCAPE BUFFER (SIDE)
PERIMETER LANDSCAPE
BUFFER LINE
-S' LANDSCAPE BUFFER (REAR)
A:1 :l
4 ONE-STORY BUILDING DRY RETENTIONPOND =
i 0 TOP AREA = 9781,
w ICE CREAM PARLOUR F DEPTH=1.6 FT. 3
o G.F.A. = 1,500 SF a
BUILDING DIME SIGN I o MINIMUM BUILDING I p
SETBACK LINE 0.
PAD
i0
L- T LANDSCAPE L--19' REAR BUILDING SETBACK
BUFFER (SIDE) (TO FACE OF BUILDING)
5' CLEARANCES AROUND ENTIRE BUIILDING PERIMETER LANDSCAPE
PERIMETER FOR FIRE DEPT. ACCESS, NO BUFFER LINE
OBSTRUCTION ALLOWED WITHIN THIS AREA
PROPERTYLENGTH
SITE 100-YEAR BASE FLOOD ELEVATION = 12.0 NGVD
PER FIRM MAP 812103CO102G (EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 3, 2003)
SITE PLAN NOTES:
1. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE MEASURED TO THE FACE OF CURB. UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED.
2. BUILDING PLANS LAYOUT SHOWN W THE CALL SITE PLANS ARE FOR REFERENCE
PURPOSESONLY. CONSTRUCTION LAYOUT FOR THE PROPOSED BUILDING FOUNDATION
SHALL BE PER THE ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING PLANS EXACT DIMENSIONS.
3. ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN FIELD MEASUREMENTS AND THESE CONSTRUCTION
PLANS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY.
4. FNISH CONCRETE WALKWAY AND TOP OF CURB ELEVATION SHALL BE 6' AOOVE
FNISH PAVEMENT GRADES.
5. ALL VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL CONTROLS SHOWN ARE N REFERENCE TO
SURVEY PROPERTY CORNERS AND BENCHMARKS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED BY THE
CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
8. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT, BUILDING PLANS MUST DEMONSTRATE
PROPOSED SEA TURTLE-FRIENDLY LIGHTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY CODE (CDC
SECTION 3-1302) AND STATE LAW (FA.C. 62B-55). NO LIGHT WM N 300 FEET SHALL BE
VISIBLE OR EXTEND N MEAS IDENTIFIED AS SEA TURTLE NESTING AREAS DURING THE
NESTING SEASON OF MAY I TO OCTOBER 31. AREAS WHERE SECURITY ANO PUBLIC SAFETY
REOUIRE LIGHTING, ALTERNATIVE LIGHT MANAGEMENTAPPROACHES SHALL BE APPLIED.
SITE DATA:
1. SITE AREA: 4,350 SF (0.10 AC.)
2. PARCEL ID: 05.29-15.16362-WB-0120 (PINELLAS CO. PROPERTY APPRAISER)
3. SITE ADDRESS: 22 BAY ESPLANADE, CLEARWATER, FL 33767
4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 12, BLOCK B, PLAT BOOK I I. 6 PAGE 5 OF PINELLAS COUNTY
5. LAND OWNER: MATHURA PROPERTIES 45, LLC
fi. EXISTING ZONING: TOURIST DISTRICT( T) (PER CITY OF CLEARWATER ZONING)
7. PROPOSED ZONING: TOURIST DISTRICT 0)
8. LAND USE: RESORT FACILITIES HIGH (RFH)
9. PROPOSED USE: RESTAURANT- ICE CREAM PARLOUR
10. GROSS FLOOR AREA ( GFA): 1,50) SF
11. FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR): 0.345 (MAIL CODE ALLOWABLE 1.0)
12. PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT: 15.33 FEET (MAX. CODE ALLOWABLE 35 FT.)
13. MIN. REWIRED BUILDING SETBACKS: PER OLD FLORIDA DISTRICT -BEACH BY DESIGN'
FRONT(SOUTH), 15'
SIDE (W EST): 10'
SIDE (EAST: iv
REAR (NORTH), 10'
14. PROPOSED BUILDING SETBACKS: SETBACK TO FACE OF BUILDING
FRONT (SOUTH): IF (BAY ESPLANADE PUBLIC RAY)
SIDE (WEST): 10' (EXISTING MOTEL)
SIDE (EAST): 10 (EXISTING HESS GAS STATION)
REAR NORTH), 19' (EXISTING MOTEL POOL)
15. PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA: 1,804 SF (41.5% OF SITE) (MAX. ALLOWABLE 95%)
BUILDING: 1,500 SF
PAVEMENT 6 WALKWAY: 304 SF
1,804 SF
16. PROPOSED OPEN SPACE AREA: 2,546 SF (58.5 % OF SITE)
17. PROPOSED DRY RETENTION AREA: 978 SF (22.5 %OF SITE)
18. BASE FL000 ELEVATION: 12 FEET (NGVD) (PER FIRM MAP 12103CO102G DATED 0903-03)
19. PROPOSED BUILDING WILL BE FLOOD PROOF FROM FINISH FLOOR TO ELEVATION - 12.0
20. NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES (MAX. SHIFT), 3 EMPLOYEES
NOTE: EMPLOYEES WILL USE PUBLIC PARKING AREA ADJACENT TO
SITE OR OTHER PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION METHODS
21. REQUIRED PARKING SPACES: 23 SPACES (CITY CODE .7 TO 15 SPACES PER 1.000 GFA)
22. PARKING SPACES PROVIDED: 0 SPACES (PLEASE SEE PARKING DEMAND STUDY)
NOTE: BASED ON STUDY. PUBLIC PARKING IS AVAILABLE WITHIN 1.000 FEET OF PROJECT
23. PROPOSED SITE LIGHTING SHALL BE PROVIDED BY FIXED MOUNTED ON BUILDING
yOOspm - - .o. 0=A.N ut I'.e.r r Arrr A. inn _... - nA1B 4B7 wo wx so.l,A
?. R? M R
DATE N By bfsapIr" DA _IXIN DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR was srAw 4.A. k 51 FINAL SITE PLAN
W. I SRE PLAN NG61, s
F"0F°'L ft- (Ion FI3-91IB L p R,.. (49„ r31YST3 Isa.. CfTY OF CLPAfiWATEA FLOfiDA nB,.,x r Oro
raT [-r 1®otr rl,r [-=r 4Nm • 14 .
PROJECT NAME: DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR
PROJECT SITE AREA: 0.10 ACRE (4,350 SQ-FT)
PHYSICAL SITE ADDRESS: 22 BAY ESPLANADE, CLEARWATER, FL 33767
PROPOSED USAGE: COMMERCIAL RETAIL SERVICES - ICE CREAM PARLOUR (1,500 SQ-FT)
Regional Consulting Engineers, LLC
2442 Grand Central PlcsX Unit 16?Vj
-Tft
Orlando, Florldo 32838
Plane (407) 812-5480
E-mat nx20050 attnst
PRIMARY IMPACT AREA
DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR
PARKING DEMAND STUDY
CRY OF CLEAMATM
I L:
FIGURE 3
I
PARCEL IDS 05-29-15-16362-008-0120
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.1 Public Parking Facilities
There are four (4) public parking facilities and ninety-four (94) on-street parking spaces
(with meters) within the 1,000 feet radius primary impact area. Public Parking Facility No.
36 is located just southwest of the project site near the beach entrance and has 145 spaces
(handicap spaces are not counted). Public Parking Facility No. 37 is located northwest of
the site and has 53 spaces. Public Parking Facility No. 38 is located east of the site near
the City recreational and tennis facility and has 79 spaces. Public Parking Facility No. 39 is
located northeast of the site near the city public park and has 17 spaces. The number of
on-street public parking is 94 spaces. The total availability public parking spaces with the
project primary impact area is 388 spaces. Please see Appendix A showing the existing
Clearwater Beach Parking Facilities.
2.2 Parking Analysis for Friday, July 16, 2010
This day represent a typical peak summer time vacation period with school out and plenty
of students, locals, and tourists visiting the beach areas on the weekend. The weather was
sunny with temperatures around 95 degrees at 6:00 PM and dropping to 85 degrees at
10:00 PM. Public parking spaces occupied were counted starting at 6:00 PM and every
hour thereafter until 10:00 PM. According to the results on Table 1, the peak use occurred
at 8:00 PM with almost 79.6% (309 spaces) of the available 388 public parking spaces
being occupied. The percentage of occupied parking spaces ranges from 44.6% (173
spaces) to 79.6%. Please see Table 1 and corresponding Figure 4 graphical
representation.
2.3 Parking Analysis for Saturday, July 17, 2010
The weather was also sunny most of the day with temperatures starting at 88 degrees at
10:00 AM to near 100 degrees in the afternoon and dropping to 85 degrees at 10:00 PM.
This Saturday represent a typical busy weekend with many visiting and overnight stayed
tourists, local residents, and students enjoying the nearby beaches, restaurants, and tourist
5
areas. Public parking spaces occupied were counted starting at 10:00 AM and every hour
thereafter until 10:00 PM. According to Table 2, the parking facilities started out with a
35.1% (136 spaces) occupied at 10:00 AM and quickly increased to 89.2% (346 spaces) by
noon and peak at 97.7% (379 spaces) at 2:00 PM. The spaces occupied remained in the
mid-nineties between the hours of 1:00 PM and 4:00 PM and then dropped to 87.1% (338
spaces) occupied at 6:00 PM. It then went up again at 8:00 PM with 95.9% (372 spaces)
occupied due to the evening crowds visiting the nearby restaurants and eating
establishments after sunset. At 10:00 PM the occupied spaces went down to 60.3% (234
spaces) and the study was ended. Please see Table 2 and corresponding Figure 5
graphical representation.
6
PROJECT NAME: DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR
SUBJECT: PARKING DEMAND STUDY
DATE OF DATA: FRIDAY, JULY 16, 2010
WEATHER: SUNNY & CLEAR, 85 TO 95 DEGREES
TABLE 1
TIME PARKING LOT 36 PARKING LOT 37 PARKING LOT 38 PARKING LOT 39 ON-STREET PU BLIC SPACES PARKING DEMAND STUDY RESULTS
(HRS) NUMBER SPACES NUMBER SPACES NUMBER SPACES NUMBER SPACES NUMBER SPACES TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
SPACES OCCUPIED SPACES OCCUPIED SPACES OCCUPIED SPACES OCCUPIED SPACES OCCUPIED NUMBER SPACES SPACES PERCENT
SPACES OCCUPIED AVAILABLE OCCUPIED
6:00 PM 145 114 53 18 79 13 17 1 94 27 388 173 215 44.6
7:00 PM 145 145 53 24 79 24 17 2 94 43 388 238 150 61.3
8:00 PM 145 145 53 45 79 54 17 0 94 65 388 309 79 79.6
9:00 PM 145 125 53 27 79 43 17 0 94 54 388 249 139 64.2
10:00 PM 145 102 53 11 79 24 17 0 94 49 388 186 202 47.9
if
FIGURE 4
PARKING ANALYSIS - FRIDAY, JULY 16, 2010
NUMBER OF PUBLIC PARKING SPACES (WITHIN 1,000 FEET) = 388 SPACES
350 ---_
300
o ® Sedes1
w
a 250 ¦ Sedes2
v ? Sedes3
U
0 200 ? Sedes4
w
¦ SeriesS
v
Q
N
150
[3 Series6
¦ Sedes7
Z
Series8
13
a 100 ¦ Sedes9
a
50
0
6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM
TIME OF DAY (HOURS)
PROJECT NAME:
SUBJECT:
DATE OF DATA:
WEATHER:
DA SCOOP ICE CREAM PARLOUR
PARKING DEMAND STUDY
FRIDAY, JULY 16, 2010
SUNNY & CLEAR, 85 TO 95 DEGREES
TABLE 2
TIME PARKING LOT 36 PARKING LOT 37 PARKING LOT 38 PARKING LOT 39 ON-STREET PUBLIC SPACES PARKING DEMAND STUDY RESULTS
(HRS) NUMBER SPACES NUMBER SPACES NUMBER SPACES NUMBER SPACES NUMBER SPACES TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
SPACES OCCUPIED SPACES OCCUPIED SPACES OCCUPIED SPACES OCCUPIED SPACES OCCUPIED NUMBER SPACES SPACES PERCENT
SPACES OCCUPIED AVAILABLE OCCUPIED
10:00 AM 145 118 53 4 79 3 17 0 94 11 388 136 252 35.1
11:00 AM 145 145 53 27 79 31 17 2 94 33 388 238 150 61.3
12:00 PM 145 145 53 53 79 70 17 5 94 73 388 346 42 89.2
1:00 PM 145 142 53 53 79 78 17 17 94 85 388 375 13 96.6
2:00 PM 145 145 53 52 79 78 17 16 94 88 388 379 9 97.7
3:00 PM 145 144 53 52 79 79 17 14 94 86 388 375 13 96.6
4:00 PM 145 145 53 51 79 75 17 15 94 86 388 372 16 95.9
5:00 PM 145 140 53 47 79 78 17 8 94 72 388 345 43 88.9
6:00 PM 145 144 53 43 79 78 17 3 94 70 388 338 50 87.1
7:00 PM 145 143 53 41 79 79 17 1 94 75 388 339 49 87.4
8:00 PM 145 145 53: 52 79 78 17 17 94 80 388 372 16 95.9
9:00 PM 145 138 53 24 79 60 17 13 94 80 388 315 73 81.2
10:00 PM 145 129 53 8 79 33 17 1 94 63 388 234 154 60.3
FIGURE 5
PARKING ANALYSIS - SATURDAY, JULY 17, 2010
NUMBER OF PUBLIC PARKING SPACES (WITHIN 1,000 FEET) = 388 SPACES
400 -
---
350
- - - -- - --- - -------- - - - - -
300 - - - -- - - -- - - -
-
G - -
W
a
250 -
v - --
O
co
200 S
ri
1
a - - - ---- -_- I e
es
¦
a
N
z 150
- -- - - -
Y
Q
a 100
-
50
- - - - ---
0 1
10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM
TIME OF DAY (HOURS)
3.0 Project Parking Demand and Customer Use Profile
The proposed 1,500 sq-ft ice cream parlour is designed with no site parking facility since
most of the customers will be walk-ups from the nearby beach areas and hotels. Based on
City code for retail services and restaurant, the required number of parking spaces is
between 7 to 15 spaces per 1,000 sq-ft of gross floor area under AC. Conservatively, we
used the highest value range of 15 parking spaces per 1,000 sq-ft for this analysis.
Therefore, the proposed building area will need 23 parking spaces per City code (1,500 sq-
ft/1,000 sq-ft x 15 spaces).
However, most of the customers and tourists staying at the nearby hotels and resorts have
their own parking on-site and will not be driving to the ice cream shop. This project is not a
driving destination shop but is served mostly by pedestrian walk-by or walk-up customers.
The walk-up rate is estimated to be around 60% to 70% for a typical ice cream shop near
the beach at this location. We will use an average of 65% walk-up rate to determine the
required parking spaces needed for this development. Therefore the remaining 35% will be
calculated for the off-site parking demand. This demand equates to 8 parking spaces
needed for the proposed ice cream parlour site (0.35 x 23 spaces = 8.0 spaces).
Also, the proposed ice cream parlour will need three (3) employees at the maximum work
shift. The employees will use the existing public parking facility #36 south of the property
or public transportation (i.e. city bus) for travel to and from work.
The hours of business will be from 11:00 AM to 10:00 PM, Monday thru Sunday (open all
7days). It is estimated that delivery truck for supplies will occur twice a week on Tuesday
and Friday between the hours of 9:00 AM to 11:00 AM. Since this will be a small family
owned ice cream restaurant we anticipate that the delivery and loading time will be short.
There is an existing loading zone area (with signage) in front of the property on Bay
Esplanade. This area will be used for loading by the delivery truck. Please also note that
employees may be asked from time to time to purchase food and supplies at nearby
groceries. In such, this will reduce the need for truck delivery to the site.
4.0 Summary and Conclusion
The parking demand study report and analysis performed on Friday, July 16, 2010 and
Saturday, July 17, 2010 showed that adequate off-site public parking is available to support
this development. Also, the study was performed during a sunny and clear weekend with
lots of local residents and tourists visiting the beach areas. Furthermore, the data
collection dates above represent the peak summer vacation period when schools are
closed and many tourists are visiting the area. It can be assumed that the data collected
represent one of the peak demand period annually.
Per Table 1 and Table 2, the required eight (8) parking spaces needed for this development
are available at every peak hour increments on both Friday and Saturday. In addition, we
used a highest parking ratio of 15 spaces per 1,000 sq-ft to determine our site development
code parking requirements. Therefore, we can reasonable assume that this small
development will not cause adverse impacts to the surrounding area public parking facilities
within the 1,000 feet radius primary impact area according to the results of this report.
12
Appendix 1
Existing Clearwater Beach Parking Facilities Map
39
' 4GLE1111AL1
17 SpaceNORTH Not to Scale 37
53 Spaces RV
MELIA
PRC
145 Spaces
04
W
4i
4
V
V
CITY PARKING LOTS
Hourly Rates
Lot
Location **Sat-Sun Hours of After
No Mon-Fri & Enforcement Hours
Seasonal
MARINA
30 Marina
25 Causeway Blvd. $0.75 $1.00 ACTIVITIES
ONLY No
Charge
8am-6pm
31* Pier 60 $1.50 $2.00 7am-lam Closed
160 S. Gulfview Blvd.
32* 332 S. Gulfview Blvd. $1.50 $2.00 7am-lam Closed
33 212 Hamden Dr. $1.00 $1.25 6am-11pm Closed
34 423 Mandalay Ave. $0 075/ 0 $1.25 / 8am-6pm Charge
35 457 Mandalay Ave. $1.00 $1.25 8am-6pm No
Charge
36 4 Rockaway St. $1.00 $1.25 6am-lam Closed
37 Avalon - Kendall $1.00 $1.25 8am-30pm No
Ch
6 Avalon St. arge
Family Aquatic Center 8am-6pm
)
(M
No
38 & Recreation Center $1.00 $1.25 0pm-6
m
12:3 Charge
51 Bay Esplanade (Sun)
(Sun)
39 McKay Field
605 Mandalay Ave. $1.00 $1.25 8am-10pm No
Charge
43 Gateway
390/1 East Shore Dr. $1.00 $1.25 8am-6pm No
Charge
63* 400 E. Shore Dr. $1.00 $1.25 8am-6pm No
Charge
On Street Parking $1.00 $1.25 Varies Varies
(234 spaces)
25
O
23 Sp
?pleR 60
<139
233
a L
s
g B General Parking Information p.
rv
(727) 562-4704 =
BRIG" A DRIA Parking System Hotline v
Sr cx ?,? R W (727) 562-4892
?T_rR m
? . A S ? i T[ i 1 f} F 1 :1 A
2 BAYSIDE !- ACH WA K ''
v HA RB pR W
r
s ?a ° Clearwater 3
eeAV To Parking Lot #40 - SAND KEY (1060 GULF BLVD.) U
\ Open: Sun-Up to Sun-Down (All times park gate is open) ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ?
752 spaces; $1.00/Hour - $1.25/Hour (Seasonal) www.myclearwater.eom V
33 Spaces * Daily max rate - $10.00/$12.50
Accept - Visa/ Master Card/American Express
** Seasonal Rate - March through April everyday
43 *** Permit Parking Only
41 Spaces Note: Does not include Handicap Spaces
_ Rates & # of Spaces Subject to Change
LEGEND:
City Park (A
c 0 Public Beach
.? ® City Parking Lot
MARINA ro Private Parking Lot
?R4, ?,, Private Parking Garage
30 soI°c c On Street Parking r?
9G Oversize Vehicle Pkg. V
DEMO" 33 277/71 "•" Spaces `?wqr (23'-50' only)
EW MARINA ACTIVITIES
24 Spaces
D PRIVATE PARKING
ofd
I Open to Public
No. Location Rate Information
IRD A 301S.( ulfview Blvd. (800) 310-7275 u
? ? sr d
D (813) 770-4861 i
B r.
100 Corona
o