Loading...
FLD2011-04018; 2165 GULF TO BAY BLVD; LAKESIDE AT CLEARWATERFLD2O1 1-04018 2165 GULF TO BAY BLVD Date Received: 4/29/2011 3:04:46 PM Lakeside at Clearwater ZONING DISTRICT: Commercial LAND USE: Residential /Office /Retail ATLAS PAGE: 298B PLANNER OF RECORD: PLANNER: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III CDB Meeting Date: Case Number: Agenda Item: Owners /Applicant: Representative: Address: July 19, 2011 FLD2011- 04018/ PLT2011 -04002 (Related to DVA2011- 04001) D. 1. (Related to E. 1.) Nickel Plate Properties, Inc. and Lakeside Enterprises, LLC E. D. Armstrong III, Esquire, Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP 2165 Gulf to Bay Boulevard CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT GENERAL INFORMATION: REQUEST: (1) Flexible Development application to permit 40,000 square feet of retail sales and service use, 5,559 square feet of automobile service station use, 4,200 square feet of office use (bank) and 9,400 square feet of restaurant uses (total commercial floor area of 59,159 square feet) in the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 506,892 square feet (11.637 acres), a lot width along Gulf to Bay Blvd. of 820 feet and 617 feet along S. Belcher Road, a front (north) setback (Gulf to Bay Blvd.) of 61.8 feet (to building) and 25 feet (to pavement), a front (east) setback (S. Belcher Road) of 79.3 feet (to building) and 25.5 feet (to pavement), a side (south) setback of 90.8 feet (to building) and two feet (to sidewalk), a west setback of 20 feet (to building) and 19.4 feet (to pavement), a maximum building height of 35 feet, and 409 parking spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Section 2- 704.C, and a two year development order as well as a reduction to the side (south) perimeter landscape buffer from 10 feet to two feet as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 3- 1202.G.; and (2) Preliminary Plat approval for a 4 -lot subdivision for retail sales and service, office, restaurants, automobile service station and attached dwellings. Commercial (C) District ZONING DISTRICT: FUTURE LAND USE PLAN CATEGORY: PROPERTY USE: Residential /Office /Retail (R/O/R) Current: Vacant (former mobile home parks) Proposed: Retail Sales and Services uses (40,000 square feet), Automobile Service Station use (5,559 square feet), Office use (4,200 square feet) and Restaurant uses (9,400 square feet) - total commercial floor area of 59,159 square feet Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 1 of 12 EXISTING North: Commercial (C) District SURROUNDING Retail Sales uses and Automobile Service Station ZONING AND USES: South: Medium Density Residential (MDR) District Vacant (former mobile home park) East: Commercial (C) District Retail Sales uses West: Commercial (C) and Medium Density Residential (MDR) Districts Automobile Sales ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 11.637 acres is located at the southwest corner of Gulf to Bay Boulevard and S. Belcher Road. The subject property was previously developed with 102 mobile homes, which was part of a large mobile home park and a smaller mobile home park with a total of 295 mobile homes (all mobile homes and common facilities have been removed or demolished). The former mobile home park property has been divided into two parts. Under LUZ2009 -12003 the applicant amended the land use designation for this northern portion (Parcel 1) from Residential Low Medium (RLM) to Residential /Office/Retail (R/O/R) and rezoned it from Mobile Home Park (MHP) to Commercial (C) District. Additionally, the applicant amended the land use designation for the southern portion (Parcel 2) from Residential Low Medium (RLM) to Residential Medium (RM) and rezoned it from Mobile Home Park (MHP) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) District. At the same time FLD2009- 12045, for the southern portion, and FLD200- 12046, for the northern portion (the subject property) were approved. FLD2009 -12045 for the southern portion approved 243 attached dwelling units and remains as approved. FLD2009 -12046 for the subject northern portion will be voided if this proposal is approved. The subject property has approximately 820 feet of frontage along Gulf to Bay Boulevard and approximately 617 feet of frontage along S. Belcher Road. Properties to the north are zoned Commercial (C) District and are developed with retail sales uses and an automobile service station. Property to the east across S. Belcher Road are zoned Commercial (C) District and is developed with retail sales uses (Publix shopping center). Property to the south is zoned Medium Density Residential (MDR) District and is the southern portion of the larger former mobile home park that is now vacant. Property to the west of the subject property is zoned Commercial (C) District and Medium Density Residential (MDR) District and is developed with an automobile sales dealership. Development Proposal: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc. proposes to plat both the northern and southern portion with a four lot subdivision per the companion preliminary plat. There is also an amended companion Development Agreement (DVA2011- 04001). This flexible development application proposes a total commercial floor area of 59,159 square feet (Retail Sales and Services use of 40,000 square feet, Automobile Service Station use of 5,559 square feet, Office use of 4,200 square feet and Restaurant uses of 9,400 square feet). The Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD201 1 -0401 8 — Page 2 of 12 previous flexible development proposal, FLD2009- 12046, was approved to be developed with a total commercial floor area of 82,999 square feet (Retail Sales and Services uses of 70,212 square feet and Restaurant uses of 12,787 square feet), this proposal is 23,840 square feet less commercial floor area. The proposal meets and/or exceeds required front and side setbacks for buildings and parking. The only setback reduction requested is the side (south) setback from 10 feet to two feet (to sidewalk). There are six commercial buildings proposed. Buildings 10 is proposed for retail sales and service, buildings 11, 12 and 13 are proposed for restaurant uses, building 14 is proposed for automobile service station use and building 15 is proposed for office use (bank). (Note: Buildings 1 — 9 are located on the approved residential development to the south of this subject site). Building 10 contains 40,000 square feet and is proposed as a WalMart Neighborhood Market, building 11 is proposed as a full service restaurant and buildings 12 and 13 are proposed to be fast food restaurants. Building 14 is proposed to be an automobile service station and building 15 is proposed to be a bank. The only building with a known tenant (Walmart Neighborhood Market) proposes exterior finishes of stucco (colors: camel and meadowlark), cultured stone (color: chardonnay), cornices (color: dromedary camel), metal canopies (color: pantone) and columns (colors: dromedary camel and meadowlark). Exterior finishes of all other commercial buildings are a combination of split face block, stucco, clapboard siding, cultured stone, metal canopies, cornices and columns. Specific colors and other architectural features will be reviewed upon securing tenants. The proposal includes the provision of an open space area at the northeast corner of the site for the purpose of a small park area to display public art. Details regarding such small park have not been outlined on the plans submitted. Prior to the issuance of any permits, details regarding the small park to display public art will need to be provided. A recent Code amendment added Section 3- 1910.D, which states "When new subdivisions are being developed at locations where reclaimed water will be available within seven (7) years from the issuance of the development order, the developer shall provide internal reclaimed water systems that are constructed to City specifications." Reclaimed water is presently not available but a reclaimed water main extension from Hercules Avenue may be provided by the City. This application includes a condition requiring such reclaimed water system. The applicant is requesting a two -year development order due to market conditions. Community Development Code (CDC) Section 4 -407 specifies that an application for a building permit must be submitted within one year of the date the CDB approves the project, unless otherwise specified under this approval. Also on this CDB agenda is a companion Development Agreement amendment (DVA2011- 04001) that must be approved by City Council, which provides for general and specific parameters of the project and other design considerations. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2- 701.1, the maximum FAR for properties with a designation of Residential /Office/Retail is 0.40. The Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD201 1 -0401 8 — Page 3 of 12 proposal is for a total of 59,159 square feet of commercial floor area at a FAR of 0.117, which is consistent with the Code provisions. It is noted that the Development Agreement (DVA2011- 00005) provides for a maximum of 90,000 square feet of commercial floor area at a maximum FAR of 0.20. Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2- 701.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.85. The proposed ISR is 0.76, which is consistent with the Code provisions. Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2 -704, 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 retail sales, restaurant and office uses can range from 3,500 — 10,000 square feet and for automobile service stations the minimum lot area is 10,000 square feet. The proposed lot area is 506,892 square feet (11.637 acres). Pursuant to the same Table, the minimum lot width for retail sales and office uses can range from 30 — 100 feet, restaurant uses can range from 35 — 100 feet and automobile service stations are 100 feet. The lot width along Gulf to Bay Boulevard is approximately 820 feet and the lot width along S. Belcher Road is approximately 617 feet. The proposal exceeds these comparative Code provisions for retail sales and restaurant uses. Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2 -704, there are no minimum required setbacks for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, the minimum front setbacks for retail sales, offices and restaurant uses can range between 15 — 25 feet and for automobile service stations the minimum front setback is 25 feet. The minimum side setbacks for retail sales, offices and restaurant uses can range between 0 — 10 feet and for automobile service stations the minimum side setback is 10 feet (corner lots have only front and side setback requirements). The proposal includes a front (north) setback (Gulf to Bay Blvd.) of 61.8 feet (to building) and 25 feet (to pavement), a front (east) setback (S. Belcher Road) of 79.3 feet (to building) and 25.5 feet (to pavement), a side (south) setback of 90.8 feet (to building) and two feet (to sidewalk), a west setback of 20 feet (to building) and 19.4 feet (to pavement). The proposal does not request any setback reductions to buildings and parking. The only setback reduction requested is the side (south) setback from 10 feet to two feet (to sidewalk). This sidewalk is required for building entrances and is proposed to be five feet wide. Pursuant to CDC Section 3- 903.A. sidewalks are permitted in the setback area provided they are no wider than 42 inches, since this sidewalk is five feet wide flexibility must be requested. Staff supports this request as it is adjacent to property owned by the applicant and due to the size of the site, a 42 inch wide sidewalk may not be of an adequate width. Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Table 2 -704, there is no maximum height for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, the maximum height for retail sales, offices and restaurant uses can range from 25 — 50 feet and for automobile service stations the maximum height is 25 feet. The proposal has been advertised with a maximum building height of 35 feet. There are six proposed buildings. Buildings 10 and 15 have proposed building heights of 28 (to top of parapet), building 11 has a proposed height of 30 (top of flat roof), buildings 12 and 13 have proposed heights of 25 feet (to top of flat roof) and building 14 has a proposed building height of 33 feet (to top of pitched roof). As five of the six Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD201 1 -0401 8 — Page 4 of 12 tenants are unknown at this time the advertised height of 35 feet provides some flexibility. The heights for the six buildings proposed are comparable to, and compatible with, the existing commercial buildings within the surrounding area and compatible with the approved residential buildings to the south. Minimum Off - Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Table 2 -704, the minimum required parking for retail sales uses can range between 4 — 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet, restaurants can range between 7 — 15 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet, offices can range between 3 — 4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet and automobile service stations require 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet. When there are two or more uses proposed on the same property or in the same building, CDC Section 3 -1405 requires parking to be determined using a shared use calculation. The shared parking table does not specifically identf a category for the automobile service station use. As such, the retail sales /service category is used for automobile service stations due to their similar hours of operation impacts on off-street parking. The shared parking use calculation indicates that 348 parking spaces are required. The proposal provides 409 parking spaces. The site is also served by bus transit, with bus stops located adjacent to this commercial site on Gulf to Bay Boulevard and S. Belcher Road. The reason this application is being processed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, rather than as "retail sales and services" and "restaurants" uses is for two reasons. The first is due to the inability for the proposal to comply with Flexibility criteria for these uses, which states: "The use of the parcel proposed for development fronts on but will not involve direct access to a major arterial street." This property fronts on both Gulf to Bay Boulevard and S. Belcher Road, both major arterial streets, and does not have any frontage on a collector or local roadway. To mitigate this criteria concern, access for this commercial development has been minimized by providing only one driveway on each roadway. The driveway located on Gulf to Bay Boulevard has been aligned with the intersection of S. Main Avenue. There are Developer transportation obligations outlined in the original Development Agreement to effect this driveway connection. The driveway located on S. Belcher Road has been aligned with the existing traffic light that accesses the Publix shopping center on the east side of S. Belcher Road. The original Development Agreement also outlines the Developer transportation obligations for this roadway, including a southbound right turn lane. At this driveway intersection, new mast arms and traffic signal equipment will be installed when this proposed driveway is constructed. This driveway on S. Belcher Road will also provide access to the approved residential development south of the subject site. Existing driveways no longer being used will need to be removed and upright curbing and sidewalk restoration constructed in their place. The second reason this application is being processed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project is the inability for the proposal to comply with the Flexibility criteria for automobile service stations which states: "The Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 5 of 12 WEEKDAY WEEKEND Use: Midnight 9 A.M. 6 P.M. 9 A.M. 6 P.M. 6A.M. 4 P.M. Midnight 4 P.M. Midnight Office (17) 5 %= 0.85 100 % = 17 10 %= 1.7 10 %= 1.7 5 %= 0.85 Retail (200) 5% = 10 70% = 140 90% = 180 100 % = 200 70% = 140 Restaurant (141) 10 %= 14.1 50 %= 70.5 100 % = 141 50 %= 70.5 100 % = 141 Retail (28) 1 5 %= 1.4 70 %= 19.6 90 %= 25.2 100 % = 28 70 %= 19.6 Totals: 26.35 247.1 347.9 300.2 301.45 The shared parking table does not specifically identf a category for the automobile service station use. As such, the retail sales /service category is used for automobile service stations due to their similar hours of operation impacts on off-street parking. The shared parking use calculation indicates that 348 parking spaces are required. The proposal provides 409 parking spaces. The site is also served by bus transit, with bus stops located adjacent to this commercial site on Gulf to Bay Boulevard and S. Belcher Road. The reason this application is being processed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, rather than as "retail sales and services" and "restaurants" uses is for two reasons. The first is due to the inability for the proposal to comply with Flexibility criteria for these uses, which states: "The use of the parcel proposed for development fronts on but will not involve direct access to a major arterial street." This property fronts on both Gulf to Bay Boulevard and S. Belcher Road, both major arterial streets, and does not have any frontage on a collector or local roadway. To mitigate this criteria concern, access for this commercial development has been minimized by providing only one driveway on each roadway. The driveway located on Gulf to Bay Boulevard has been aligned with the intersection of S. Main Avenue. There are Developer transportation obligations outlined in the original Development Agreement to effect this driveway connection. The driveway located on S. Belcher Road has been aligned with the existing traffic light that accesses the Publix shopping center on the east side of S. Belcher Road. The original Development Agreement also outlines the Developer transportation obligations for this roadway, including a southbound right turn lane. At this driveway intersection, new mast arms and traffic signal equipment will be installed when this proposed driveway is constructed. This driveway on S. Belcher Road will also provide access to the approved residential development south of the subject site. Existing driveways no longer being used will need to be removed and upright curbing and sidewalk restoration constructed in their place. The second reason this application is being processed as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project is the inability for the proposal to comply with the Flexibility criteria for automobile service stations which states: "The Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 5 of 12 parcel proposed for development is not contiguous to a parcel of land which is designated as residential in the Zoning Atlas." This 11.637 acre property is contiguous to residentially zoned land on both the west and south. The residentially zoned property to the south is owned by the same owner as this application and is over 4,000 feet south of the proposed automobile service station. Likewise, the residentially zoned property to the west is over 4,000 feet west of the proposed automobile service station and that land is currently used for an automobile sales dealership. Staff supports the deviation as no impacts will occur at residentially zoned property located over 4,000 feet from the automobile service station. 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 proposal locates exterior mechanical equipment on the roof of the commercial buildings. Screening of this rooftop mechanical equipment will be reviewed at time of building permit submission to determine if parapets surrounding the roof are sufficient to screen the mechanical equipment. Sight Visibility Triangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3- 904.A, to minimize hazards at the proposed driveways on Gulf to Bay Boulevard and S. Belcher Road, as well as at the intersection of these roadways, no structures or landscaping may be installed which will obstruct views at a level between 30 inches above grade and eight feet above grade within 20 -foot sight visibility triangles. The proposal was reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineering Department and found to be acceptable. 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. Electric and communication lines for this development will be installed underground on -site in compliance with this requirement. There exist overhead utilities on the west side of the adjacent right -of -way of S. Belcher Road. Due to the length of the site frontages on this roadway, the existing overhead utilities should also be placed underground as part of this development. Additionally, there exist two power distribution easements on the subject property (14 feet wide and six feet wide) within blanket easements that will need to be vacated. Evidence of such easement vacations will need to be provided prior to the issuance of the site development building permit. Exterior electric equipment (electric panels, boxes and meters) located on the outside of the buildings should be painted the same color as the buildings they are affixed to reduce their visibility. The location and visibility of such exterior electric equipment will be reviewed at time of building permits. It is noted that the drainage retention pond located south of the subject property contains the drainage facility for both this commercial site and the approved residential site to the south. Additionally, potable water and sanitary sewer systems are interconnected between the commercial and residential sites. Easements for drainage, water and sewer lines and vehicular access are necessary. Any approval of this application should include a condition requiring such easements to be recorded in the public records, with copies to the City, prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 6 of 12 Landscaping: Pursuant to CDC Section 3- 1202.D, there are 15 -foot wide perimeter buffers required along Gulf to Bay Boulevard and S. Belcher Road, a 10 -foot wide perimeter buffer required along the south side adjacent to the residential development and a five -foot wide perimeter buffer along the west side. The proposal complies with these required perimeter buffers except for the south buffer which has been requested to be reduced from 10 feet wide to two feet wide in some areas. This reduction to two feet is due to a required sidewalk and it is adjacent to the southern portion which is owned by the applicant. The proposal provides for increased perimeter buffers along the street frontages of 25 feet to coincide with the required structure setbacks. The proposal also exceeds the requirement for interior landscape area within the parking lot. A minimum of 10 percent of the vehicular use area is required as interior landscaping and the proposal provides 20.6 percent. Required foundation landscape area five feet in depth is provided for all commercial buildings. This application proposes over 340 trees, 3,400 shrubs and 6,350 ground cover plants. To mitigate for the reduced south perimeter landscape buffer, the applicant has proposed to increase the buffer width along both Gulf to Bay Boulevard and Belcher Road from 15 feet to 25 feet and increased the interior landscape requirements from 10 percent to 20.6 percent. Although the application provides increased buffers along the street frontages of Gulf to Bay Boulevard and Belcher Road, some of the buffers only include the minimum shrub and tree requirements. Pursuant to the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan both Gulf to Bay Boulevard and Belcher Road are identified as Scenic Corridors and as such a condition is attached that the buffers along those corridors be augmented with additional landscape material to provide a tiered effect. 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: Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 7 of 12 Consistent Inconsistent 1. Architectural theme: a. The landscaping in a comprehensive landscape program shall be designed as 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 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. N/A X N/A 2. Lighting: Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is automatically controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the business is closed. N/A N/A 3. Community character: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. X 4. Property values: The landscape treatment proposed in the comprehensive landscape program will have a beneficial impact on the value of property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. X 5. 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. N/A N/A Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 7 of 12 Solid Waste: The proposal provides dumpster enclosures at each of the proposed six buildings. Prior to the issuance of any permits for this project, details for these dumpster enclosures will need to be provided on the plans showing compliance with City standards, including the requirement to be consistent with the exterior materials and color of the buildings. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste Department. Signage: The proposal does not include any freestanding sign. Any proposed signage will be required to meet Code provisions. Landscape design and plantings need to coordinate with any such signage, so as to not shield the signage from view. The original Development Agreement requires proposed signage to be approved through a Comprehensive Sign Program, in accordance with the flexibility criteria of CDC Section 2- 803.I.3. 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 as per CDC Section 2 -701.1 and Table 2 -704: ' See analysis in Staff Repor 2 Based on a shared use calculation; See analysis in Staff Report Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 8 of 12 Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent Floor Area Ratio 0.4 (maximum of 202,756 sf) 0.117 (59,159 sf proposed) X Impervious Surface Ratio 0.85 0.76 X Minimum Lot Area N/A 506,892 sq. ft. (11.637 acres) X Minimum Lot Width N/A Gulf to Bay Blvd: 817 feet X S. Belcher Road: 617 feet Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A North: 61.8 feet (to building) X 25 feet (to pavement) East: 79.3 feet (to building) 25.5 feet (to pavement) Side: N/A West: 20 feet (to building) X' 19.4 feet (to pavement) South: 90.8 feet (to building) 2 feet (to sidewalk) Maximum Height N/A 35 feet (to top of decorative building features) X' Minimum Determined by the Community 409 parking spaces X2 Off - Street Parking Development Coordinator based on the specific use and/or ITE Manual standards (Required parking: 348 spaces)2 ' See analysis in Staff Repor 2 Based on a shared use calculation; See analysis in Staff Report Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 8 of 12 COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2 -704.0 (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project): Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 9 of 12 Consistent Inconsistent 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. X 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. X 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. X 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. X 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: X 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 parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives: X 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 step backs; and ❑ Distinctive roofs forms. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 9 of 12 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.: SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of June 2, 2011, 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. The 11.637 acres is located at the southwest corner of Gulf to Bay Boulevard and S. Belcher Road; 2. The subject property has approximately 820 feet of frontage along Gulf to Bay Boulevard and approximately 617 feet of frontage along S. Belcher Road; 3. An amended Development Agreement (DVA2011- 04001) must be approved by City Council, which provides for general and specific parameters of the project and other design considerations; 4. This property is proposed to be developed with a total commercial floor area of 59,159 square feet (Retail Sales and Services uses of 40,000 square feet, Automobile Service Station use of 5,559 square feet, Office use of 4,200 square feet and Restaurant uses of 9,400 square feet); 5. The proposal meets and /or exceeds required setbacks for buildings and parking; 6. The proposal includes a side (south) setback reduction from 10 feet to two feet (to sidewalk); 7. The proposal includes a reduction to the side (south) perimeter landscape buffer 10 feet to two feet; 8. The proposal includes 409 parking spaces; 9. There are six commercial buildings proposed with a maximum height of 35 feet; 10. The proposal includes the provision of an open space area at the northeast corner of the site for the purpose of a small park area to display public art; Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 10 of 12 Consistent Inconsistent I. 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. X 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. X 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. X 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity. X 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. X SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of June 2, 2011, 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. The 11.637 acres is located at the southwest corner of Gulf to Bay Boulevard and S. Belcher Road; 2. The subject property has approximately 820 feet of frontage along Gulf to Bay Boulevard and approximately 617 feet of frontage along S. Belcher Road; 3. An amended Development Agreement (DVA2011- 04001) must be approved by City Council, which provides for general and specific parameters of the project and other design considerations; 4. This property is proposed to be developed with a total commercial floor area of 59,159 square feet (Retail Sales and Services uses of 40,000 square feet, Automobile Service Station use of 5,559 square feet, Office use of 4,200 square feet and Restaurant uses of 9,400 square feet); 5. The proposal meets and /or exceeds required setbacks for buildings and parking; 6. The proposal includes a side (south) setback reduction from 10 feet to two feet (to sidewalk); 7. The proposal includes a reduction to the side (south) perimeter landscape buffer 10 feet to two feet; 8. The proposal includes 409 parking spaces; 9. There are six commercial buildings proposed with a maximum height of 35 feet; 10. The proposal includes the provision of an open space area at the northeast corner of the site for the purpose of a small park area to display public art; Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 10 of 12 11. Access for this commercial development has been minimized to only providing one driveway on each roadway; and 12. There are no active Code Enforcement cases for the subject property. Conclusions of Law. The Planning and Development Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law: 1. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Tables 2 -701.1 and 2- 704 of the Community Development Code; 2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2- 704.0 of the Community Development Code; 3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as per Section 3 -913 of the Community Development Code; and 4. The development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 3- 1202.G of Community Development Code. Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development application to permit 40,000 square feet of retail sales and service use, 5,559 square feet of automobile service station use, 4,200 square feet of office use (bank) and 9,400 square feet of restaurant uses (total commercial floor area of 59,159 square feet) in the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 506,892 square feet (11.637 acres), a lot width along Gulf to Bay Blvd. of 820 feet and 617 feet along S. Belcher Road, a front (north) setback (Gulf to Bay Blvd.) of 61.8 feet (to building) and 25 feet (to pavement), a front (east) setback (S. Belcher Road) of 79.3 feet (to building) and 25.5 feet (to pavement), a side (south) setback of 90.8 feet (to building) and two feet (to sidewalk), a west setback of 20 feet (to building) and 19.4 feet (to pavement), a maximum building height of 35 feet, and 409 parking spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project under the provisions of Section 2- 704.C, and a two year development order as well as a reduction to the side (south) perimeter landscape buffer from 10 feet to two feet as part of a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 3- 1202.G.; and (2) Preliminary Plat approval for a 4 -lot subdivision for retail sales and service, office, restaurants, automobile service station and attached dwellings, subject to the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. That approval of this Flexible Development case is subject to the approval of an amended Development Agreement with the City (Case DVA2011- 04001); 2. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the elevations approved by the CDB; 3. That retail sales and service uses not exceed square footage 40,000 square feet, restaurant uses not exceed 9,400 square feet, office use not exceed 4,200 square feet and automobile service station use not exceed 5,559 square feet (total maximum commercial floor area of 59,159 square feet at a maximum floor area ratio of 0.117). Square footage flexibility may be granted as a Minor Revision prior to issuance of the site development building permit so long as the square footage increase and its resultant increase to required parking do not exceed the 409 parking spaces provided and approved under this application; Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD201 1 -0401 8 — Page 11 of 12 4. That, prior to issuance of permits, a revised landscape plan be submitted showing a tiered effect on both Gulf to Bay Blvd. and Belcher Road; 5. That, prior to the issuance of permits, the site plan data table be corrected to reflect the revised shared parking calculation and the correct side (west) setback; 6. That, prior to the issuance of building permits for each building, building heights conform to the elevations approved by the CDB, with the maximum height of 35 feet; 7. That, prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, easements for access, drainage, sanitary sewer and potable water between Parcels 1 and 2 be recorded in the public records, with copies provided to the City; 8. That, prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, existing overhead utility lines along S. Belcher Road be undergrounded; 9. That proposed signage be approved through a Comprehensive Sign Program; 10. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, site development plans indicate where existing driveways on Gulf to Bay Boulevard are no longer being used, such driveways be removed and upright curbing and sidewalk restoration constructed in their place; 11. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, dumpster enclosure details be provided on the plans showing compliance with City standards, including consistency with the exterior materials and color of the buildings; 12. That, prior to the issuance of any permits, details regarding the small park to display public art at the northeast corner of this Parcel 1 be provided; 13. That, prior to the issuance of the building permit, screening of rooftop outside mechanical equipment comply with Code provisions; 14. That, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for each building, exterior electric equipment (electric panels, boxes and meters) be painted the same color as the building; 15. That the subject property comply with the provisions of Section 3- 1910.D. regarding the installation of an internal reclaimed water systems constructed to City specifications; 16. That open space /recreational impact fees be paid prior to the issuance of the building permit; 17. That any applicable Public Art and Design Impact Fee be paid prior to the issuance of any permits; and 18. That, prior to the issuance of any permit, all requirements of the General Engineering, Stormwater Engineering, Traffic Engineering and Fire Departments be addressed. Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: ATTACHMENTS: ❑ Location Map ❑ Aerial Map ❑ Zoning Map ❑ Existing Surrounding Uses Map ❑ Photographs of Site and Vicinity A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III Community Development Board— July 19, 2011 FLD2011 -04018 — Page 12 of 12 A. Scott Kurleman 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 727 -562 -4553 scott.kurlemanAmyclearwater.com PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE • Planner III City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida August 2008 to Present Duties include performing the technical review and preparation of staff reports for various land development applications, assist public customers at the Zoning Counter, the organization of data and its display in order to track information and provide status reports and making presentations to various City Boards and Committees. • Planner II City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida June 2005 to August 2008 Duties include performing the technical review and preparation of staff reports for various land development applications, the organization of data and its display in order to track information and provide status reports. Assist public customers at the Zoning Counter. Review Building Permits, Sign Permits, Business Tax Receipts, and Landscape Plans as well as Comprehensive Sign Program Applications. • Land Resource Specialist City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida 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. Groveland, Florida June 1993 to June 1996 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, Clearwater, Florida June 1991 to June 1993 Field inspections of insured structures. Policy service and account maintenance. • Store Manager William Natorp Company, Inc. Cincinnati Ohio June 1983 to June 1991 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 LEED Green Associate, Currently pursuing MOTIVATIONAL Mentor Award, December 2010 View looking W from S. Belcher Rd close to Gulf to Bay Blvd at subject property View looking SW from S. Belcher Rd close to Gulf to Bay Blvd at subject property View looking W from S. Belcher Rd at Druid Rd at subject property View looking NW from Druid Rd at the W side of the residential portion of the subject property with adjacent detached dwellings View looking W along Druid Rd from S. Belcher Rd (subject property on right; detached dwelling subdivision on left) View looking E along Druid Rd from W side of subject property (subject property on left; detached dwelling subdivision on right) 2165 Gulf to Bay Boulevard Case Numbers FLD2011- 04018/PLT2011 -04002 and DVA2011 -04001 Page 1 of 3 View looking N from intersection of Gulf to Bay Blvd and S. Belcher Rd at retail sales on NE corner View looking N at retail sales at 2170 Gulf to Bay Blvd. N of subject property View looking S at E side of adjacent automobile sales on Gulf to Bay Blvd W of commercial portion of subject property View looking NW from intersection of Gulf to Bay Blvd and S. Belcher Rd at automobile service station on NW corner View looking N at E side of adjacent automobile sales on Gulf to Bay Blvd W of commercial portion of subject property View looking S near southern terminus of Bamboo Lane N of residential portion of subject property 2165 Gulf to Bay Boulevard Case Numbers FLD2011- 04018/PLT2011 -04002 and DVA2011 -04001 Page 2 of 3 View looking S along S. Belcher Rd close to Gulf to Bay Blvd (Publix shopping center on left; subject property on right) View looking W from Publix shopping center at driveway intersection with traffic light on S. Belcher Rd View looking E at offices at 715 S. Belcher Rd across from residential portion of subject property View looking E at Publix shopping center on SE corner of Gulf to Bay Blvd and S. Belcher Rd E of subject property View looking S at bank at 655 S. Belcher Rd across from residential portion of subject property View looking N along S. Belcher Rd from Druid Rd (subject property on left; commercial uses on right) 2165 Gulf to Bay Boulevard Case Numbers FLD2011- 04018[PLT2011 -04002 and DVA2011 -04001 Page 3 of 3 1=- 711 -L /41 LLIVL' AERIAL MAP Owner: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc. and Lakeside Enterprises, LLC Site: 2165 Gulf to Bay Boulevard Case: FLD201 1 -0401 8 Property Size: 11.637 acres PIN: 13- 29 -15- 00000 - 410 -0100 13-29-15-00000-410-0200 13-29-15-00000-410-0300 Atlas Page: 298B Fl w p. o, /� '9 • I. ST ,- / 9 c • • COMET AURORA HERCULES CIRUS co D 2 D CJ c W Z STARCREST 2 i W Q `i WHITMAN ST z CHAUCER S DR ---1 I r- PROJECT SITE CORNELL SHELLEY S BLVD C BLVD GULF- TO-BAY C'J lb - _ v Ir— ,._f r ROGERS r-r--7 ,_ A irrer rCruitl Park OrN ��1. ^f / -7, -•== 1. m W Q r l r g N DRUID OR = S DRUID CIR RD v= a 3 rDAu ❑ Q ❑ m z L O C CAMPUS l l !' . l . :. JAFFA PL CROYDON o l DR o� o > ACADEMY ~ KENMOORE BASCOM WAY ❑ L O 4 x I lLj CO` S E GE DR u O r// MI > j MAGNOLJA 7 DR I z RD II z — p z :::c g RD I UNIVERSITY DR S ST ' . ..&U_kNI CE a ' -� • () DR REBECCA .. _ ' ' f 1 ( GLENMOOR RD 1 . ti - . - l U 4 GLOW GLOW DOR LOCATION MAP Owner: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc. and Lakeside Enterprises, LLC Case: FLD201 1 -0401 8 Site: 2165 Gulf to Bay Boulevard Property Size: 11.637 acres PIN: 13- 29 -15- 00000 -410 -0100 13- 29 -15- 00000 -410 -0200 13- 29 -15- 00000 - 410 -0300 Atlas Page: 298B Q O Z M N Q e y z O O O O , N v/ N N N GULF -TO -BAY BLVD GULF -TO -BAY BLVD -. a■■■ I■■■■ fc ■ ■- as ■■■■$a■■■■■p■■afua■■••■a.y- ■ Q a �• ■ N N • ,4 N N • • • • • • CU • • 511 ■ • ■ • • • o 519 • • ■ ■ Ir ■ II W • ■ t ■ V ■ J • W 525 ■ m • CO • • L /DR • III 533 • 533_ ■ • • • 537 III MDR I- I_ 0) 0) yCl) I— 1 655 CO CO to ti a M N co ZONING MAP Owner: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc. and Case: FLD201 1 -0401 8 Lakeside Enterprises, LLC Site: 2165 Gulf to Bay Boulevard Property Size: 11.637 acres PIN: 13-29-15-00000-410-0100 Atlas Page: 298B 13- 29 -15- 00000 -410 -0200 13- 29 -15- 00000 - 410 -0300 S MAIN AVE I 5.33 A c cc) `'� 14/031 >-- VACANT o BANK , c4 ,:2 RETAILSALES AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION �� o N319000 - 50 -J30 3f1 II 33 9 N � RETAIL SALES h O 27.6 • BLVD GULF -TO -BAY BLVD S 2 BLVD GULF -TO -BAY BLVD Ili - o o CO Q533 m N 511 5199 I,. 5�51 3103 * q Co •• N �' AUTOMOBILE N N • SALES • ■ is ■ •_ • • ■ ■ • : 0 r o d: 2.4 Ac(c) .t. In '■ N 111 • ,�z 25 ce O CX Z W m N 40 0 CC RETAIL SALES 533 12 I ry DETACHED DWELLINGS ■ • • • ■ 14 *537 72 m ■ ■ III ■ 78.5 ■ a■■■■■ u■■■ ■■■■■III*4a*.■II■■■■■.■■■■■■■u■■■■ VACANT I— 27.23 A c )c) (0 6. I— y (n y 6. y �Z Cl) co 6. 250 BANK L 92650 655 2w Et 31::.0 Z "M, 10 I- cn EXISTING SURROUNDING USES MAP Owner: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc. and Lakeside Enterprises, LLC Case: FLD201 1 -0401 8 Site: 2165 Gulf to Bay Boulevard Property Size: 11.637 acres PIN: 13- 29 -15- 00000 - 410 -0100 13- 29 -15- 00000 -410 -0200 13- 29 -15- 00000 - 410 -0300 Atlas Page: 298B Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727 - 562 -4567 Fax: 727 - 562 -4865 ❑ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ❑ SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION - Plans and application are required to be collated, stapled, and folded into sets CI SUBMIT FIRE PRELIMARY SITE PLAN: $200.00 ❑ SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $ CASE #: RECEIVED BY (staff initials): DATE RECEIVED: * NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS) FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project (Revised 07/11/2008) —PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT- A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4- 202.A) APPLICANT NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: CELL NUMBER PROPERTY OWNER(S): List ALL owners on the deed AGENT NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: CELL NUMBER: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc. 1414 West Swann, Suite 150, Tampa, FL 33606 (813) 579 -2014 FAX NUMBER: (813) 835-4197 EMAIL: eda (, jpfirm.com Nickel Plate Properties, Inc., a Florida corporation Lakeside Enterprises, L.L.C., a Florida limited liability company E. D. AuusL.Lwny III, Esquire, and Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, T,TP 911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756 (727) 461 -1818 FAX NUMBER: (727) 462 -0365 EMAIL: eda V' jpfirrn. com B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4- 202.A) PROJECT NAME: STREET ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER(S): PARCEL SIZE (acres): LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PROPOSED USE(S): Lakeside at Clearwater 2165 Gulf- to-Bay Boulevard PROJECT VALUATION: $11.3 million Cincl. land and site work) 13- 29 -15- 00000 -410 -0100, 13- 29 -15- 00000 -410 -0200 & 13- 29 -15- 00000 -410 -0300 11.637 acres See Exhibit "A" attached. PARCEL SIZE (square feet): 506,892 sq. ft. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: See Exhibit "B" attached. Specifically identify the request (include number of units or square footage of non - residential use and all requested code deviations; e.g. reduction in required number of parking spaces, specific use, etc.) C: \Documents and Settings \derek.ferguson \Desktop \planning dept forms 0708 \Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc Page 1 of 8 DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGTS (TDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, OR A ERF.p01 sus AI?PRDVFgIC RTIFIEDI IlTE ,PLAN? YES _ NO _ (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents) C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4- 202.A.5) ❑ SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see page 7) D. ❑ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3- 913.A) Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA — Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. See Exhibit "B" attached for responses to General Applicability Criteria 1 through 6. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. C: \Documents and Settings \derek.ferguson \Desktop \planning dept forms 0708 \Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc Page 2 of 8 WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria) ❑ Provide complete responses to the six (6) COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA — Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail: 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and /or development standards set forth in this zoning district. See Exhibit "B" attached for responses to Comp. Infill Criteria 1 through 6. 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 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. 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. 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, comices, 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. C: \Documents and Settings \derek.ferguson\Desktop \planning dept forms 0708 \Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc Page 3 of 8 E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual and 4- 202.A.21) ❑ A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that involve addition or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with the City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption to this requirement. ❑ If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt. ❑ At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following; ❑ Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines; ❑ Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures; O All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; O Proposed stormwater detention /retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure; D 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 ❑ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF STORMWATER PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Applicant must initial one of the following): Stormwater plan as noted above is included tormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor elevations shall be provided. CAUTION — IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562 -4750. F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4- 202.A) ❑ SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) — One original and 14 copies; ❑ TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and location, including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) — please design around the existing trees; ❑ TREE INVENTORY; prepared by a "certified arborist ", of all trees 4" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of such trees; O LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY; ❑ PARKING DEMAND STUDY in conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (ie. Reduce number of spaces). Prior to the submittal of this application, the methodology of such study shall be approved by the Community Development Coordinator and shall be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to the parking standards are approved; ❑ GRADING PLAN, as applicable; ❑ PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided); ❑ COPY OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable; C: \Documents and Settings \derek.ferguson\ Desktop \planning dept forms 0708 \Comprehensive Infrll Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.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; Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared; All dimensions; Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures; Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures; All required setbacks; All existing and proposed points of access; All required sight triangles; Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; Location of all public and private easements; Location of all street rights -of -way within and adjacent to the site; Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas and water lines; All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas; Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas; Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening {per Section 3- 201(D)(i) and Index #701 }; Location of all landscape material; Location of all onsite and offsite storm -water management facilities; Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures; Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks; and Floor plan typicals of buildings for all Level Two approvals. A floor plan of each floor is required for any parking garage requiring a Level Two approval. ❑ SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in written/tabular form: Land area in square feet and acres; Number of EXISTING dwelling units; Number of PROPOSED dwelling units; Gross floor area devoted to each use; Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the number of required spaces; Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces & driveways, expressed in square feet & percentage of the paved vehicular area; Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility easement; Building and structure heights; Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses. EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED ❑ REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale (8'/2 X 11); ❑ FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan: One -foot contours or spot elevations on site; Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel; All open space areas; Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms; Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned); Streets and drives (dimensioned); Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned); Structural overhangs; C: \Documents and Settings \derek.ferguson \Desktop \planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc Page 5 of 8 H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4- 1102.A) ❑ LANDSCAPE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"): All existing and proposed structures; Names of abutting streets; Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations; Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers; Sight visibility triangles; Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing; Existing trees on -site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, including driplines (as indicated on required tree survey); Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant schedule; Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names; Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants including instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and protective measures; Interior landscaping areas hatched and /or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and percentage covered; Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board); Irrigation notes. ❑ REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8 % X 11); ❑ COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met. I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4- 202.A.23) ❑ BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS — with the following information: All sides of all buildings Dimensioned Colors (provide one full sized set of colored elevations) Materials ❑ REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS — same as above to scale on 8 % X 11 J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS / Section 3 -1806) ❑ All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be removed or to remain. ❑ All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details including location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing; freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals) ❑ Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required). ❑ Reduced signage proposal (8 % X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application. C: \Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson \Desktop \planning dept forms 0708 \Comprehensive lnfill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc Page 6 of 8 K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4- 202.A.13 and 4- 801.C) ❑ Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or his/her designee or if the proposed development: • WII 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 tuming 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. ❑ Ackno ledgement of fire flow calculations/water study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following): Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is included. X Fire Flow Calculations/Water Study is not required. CAUTION — IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS/ WATER STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR. If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Fire Prevention Department at (727) 562 -4334. M. SIGNATURE: I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in this application are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application. E. Signature of property owner or representative. E. D. Armstrong II, Esquire STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Swom to ancj subscribed before me this27 4—day of Aprll A.D. 20 11 to me and /or by D. Arms onq III who is personally known pgrix tary ublic, My commission expires: ;���. JAYNE E. SEARS .. ;, . Commission # 00 90704) 3 Bonded TMu Troy Fain Insraanoe800- 385 -IOt9 C: \Documents and Settings \derek.ferguson \Desktop\ planning dept forms 07081Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc Page 7 of 8 N. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: 1. Provide names of all property owners on deed — PRINT full names: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc., a Florida corporation 2. That (1 amhwe are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address a general location): Parcel No. 13- 29 -15- 00000 -410 -0100 3. That this property constitutes the properly for which a request for a: (describe request) Flexible development approval of a carprehensive infill redevelopment project and catprehensive landscape program 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: E. D. Armstrong-III, Esquire, and 3ohnsoln, Pope, Bckor, .Ru pe1 & Burns, LLP 911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756 as (his/heir) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 5. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 8. 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. Nickel Plate • ••- - • Inc. Property Owner p • r>er iiiie By: Property Owner .::" • ' , President STATE OF FLORID COUNTY OF PINELLAS 9 Before me the undersigned. an officer duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this of S day of April 2011 personally appeared Andrew B. Ingers011* who having been first duly sworn Deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/she signed. *as President of Nickel Plate Properties, Inc., a Florida corporation, on behalf of the corporation M. UM DQNNAN Notary Public Signature Notary Sea _: • *- MY COMMISSION # 0C965551 My Commission Expires: (400398 -0153 F lorida NotarySe rvice. com C:\Documents and Settingskierek .ieryusoMDesMoplplanntng dept forms 07081Comprehensiive midi Project (FLO) 2008 07- 11.doc Page 8of8 N. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: 1. Provide names of all property owners on deed – PRINT full names: Lakeside Enterprises, L.L.C., a Florida ]±iited liability company 2. That (I an/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location): Parcel Nos. 13- 29 -15- 00000- 410 - 0.200 and 13 -29 -15 -00000 -410 -0300 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request) Flexible development approval of a oat>prehensive infill redevelop ent project and oatprehensive landscape program. 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: E. D. Armstrong III, Esquire, and Johnscn, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP, 911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756 as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affei:t such petition; 5. That this affidavit has been executed to Induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 6. 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. Lakeside ' teip - , L.L.C. Property Owner / / P ' . =rty Owner By: �,/ ✓- Before me the undersigned, April Property Owner Property Owner • • - B. Ingersoll, Manager STATE OF FLORI 0 A, COUNTY OF PINELLAS an officer duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this ..S.-- day of 2011 personally appeared B. Ingersoll* who having been first duly swom . Deposes and says *as Manager of L.L.C., a Florida company, on Notary Seat/Stam that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/she signed. Lakeside Enterprises, ` limited liability / "� behalf of the company c S -� — Notary Public Signature My Commission Expires: ij' ` (. M PO NAH 1 "c MY COMMISSION # DD965551 EXPIRES February 24. 2014 (407) 398 -0153 FiondallotaryService.com C:1Documents and Settings derek.ferguson Desktoplpianning dept forms 07081Comprehensive Infill Project (FLO) 2008 07.11.doc Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A parcel of land being a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Seoflon 13, Township 29 South, Range 15 Eost, Pinellas County, Florida, being more particularly described os follows: COMMENCE at the Northeast corner of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 13, Township 29 South, Range 15 Eost, Pinellas County, Florida; thence SO0 °09'08 "E, along the East line of said Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 13 (being the basis of bearings for this legal description), for 667.81 feet to the point of intersection with an Easterly extension the West Right -of -Way of BELCHER ROAD according to Official Records Book 4564, Page 155 of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida; thence leaving said East line of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 13, N89 °17'51 "W, along said Easterly extension of the West Right -of -Woy of BELCHER ROAD, and said West Right -of -Way of BELCHER ROAD, respectively, for 50.01 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence the following two courses along sold West Right -of -Way of BELCHER ROAD: (1) thence N00 °09'08 "W, along a line 50.00 feet West of and parallel with said East line of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 13, for 577.05 feet; (2) thence leaving said line 50.00 feet West of and parallel with the East line of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 13, N48 °38'29'W, tor 62.35 feat to the point of intersection with the South Right -of -Way of STATE ROAD 60 according to Florida Deportment of Transportation Right -of -Way Map 15040 -2501, dated February 23, 1960; thence leaving said West Right -of -Woy of BELCHER ROAD, N89 °22'20 "W. along said South Right -of -Way of STATE ROAD 60, same being a line 50.00 test South of and parallel with tha North line of sold Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 13, for 770.94 feet to the point of intersection with the East line of that certain property as described in Deed Book 1016, Page 329 of the Public Records of Plnellos County, Florida; thence leaving said South Right -of -Way of STATE ROAD 60, S00 °40'59 "W, along said East line of that certain property as described In Deed Book 1016, Page 329, for 616.65 feet to the Southeast corner of said certain properly as described In Deed Book 1016, Poge 329; thence leaving sold East line of that certain property as described in Deed Book 10)6, Page 329, S89 °l8'02'E, for 826.64 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. EXHIBIT "B" TO FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Lakeside at Clearwater 2165 Gulf -to -Bay Boulevard Section B. Description of Request The applicant, Nickel Plate Properties, Inc., proposes to redevelop the property described on Exhibit "A" attached ( "Parcel 1 ") with a Walmart neighborhood grocery store (with pharmacy and drive - thru), a sit -down restaurant, two fast food restaurants (with drive - thru), a bank (with drive -thru) and a convenience market with gas pumps, as shown on the proposed site plan (Sheet 1A). Specifically, the applicant requests flexible development approval of a comprehensive infill redevelopment project to permit 40,000 square feet of retail sales and service, 5,559 square feet of automobile service station, 4,200 square feet of office (bank) and 9,400 square feet of restaurant in the Commercial (C) District, with a. a Lot Area of 11.637 acres (506,892 square feet), where 10,000 square feet is required; b. a Lot Width of 820', where 100' is required; c. a maximum height (above BFE) of 35', where 25' is allowed; d. a front (north) setback along Gulf -to -Bay Boulevard of 61.8' to building and 25.3' to other structures, where 25' is required; e. a front (east) setback along Belcher Road of 79.3' to building and 25.5' to other structures, where 25' is required; f. a side (south) setback of 90.8' to building and 2' to other structures, where 10' is required; g. a side (west) setback of 65.4' to building and 20' to other structures, where 10' is required; h. 409 parking spaces, where 386 spaces are required per Shared Parking Calculation; i. direct access to two arterial streets (Gulf to Bay Boulevard and Belcher Road); and j. approval of a two -year development order; under the provisions of Section 2- 704(C) of the Clearwater Community Development Code ( "Code "). Simultaneously with this request, the applicant has submitted applications seeking approval of (i) a Comprehensive Landscape Program; (ii) amendment of the existing Development Agreement (DVA2011- 04001), dated March 25, 2010, recorded in O.R. Book 16874, Page 2344, Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida ( "Development Agreement ") that sets forth the terms of the development of Parcel 1 and the adjoining parcel to the south ( "Parcel 2 ") which is approved to be redeveloped as a 243 -unit multi- family residential project (FLD2009- 12045); and (iii) a preliminary plat of Parcels 1 and 2 (PLT2011- 04002). The applicant previously received site plan approval for Parcel 1 for 70,212 square feet of retail sales and service use and 12,787 square feet of restaurant use (FLD2009- 12046). This request represents a reduction of 23,840 square feet of building area. Section D. Written Submittal Requirements General Applicability Criteria: 1) The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The FAR of the proposed project is 0.117, where an FAR of 0.40 is allowed in the R /O /R district. The proposed ISR is 76.22 percent where the maximum allowed is 85 percent. The other three corners of the intersection of Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher are also developed with established retail uses — Albertson's, CVS and Publix; however, these three parcels have a land use designation of Commercial General, which allows an FAR of .55 and an ISR of .90 such that the proposed development of Parcel 1 is less intense than its neighbors. The proposed height of 35' is reasonable given the increased setbacks to building, low floor area ratio and increased landscape buffers that are proposed on both Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher. The following are the parcels adjacent to Parcel 1: 2 Location Zoning Land Use Designation Actual Use North (across Gulf -to- Bay) Commercial (C) Commercial General Albertson's Gas station East (across Belcher Road) Commercial (C) Commercial General Publix /Office Depot Shopping Center and Chase Bank South (Parcel 2) MDR Residential Medium Currently vacant Owned by the applicant and approved for 243 - unit multi - family residential project (FLD2009- 12045) West C MDR Commercial General Residential Urban Ancillary parking for car dealership The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 comprise the former Lakeside Mobile Home Park, which was occupied by 295 mobile homes in existence since the 1950s. Parcel 1 was occupied by 102 mobile homes. The owner took the necessary steps to close the mobile home park and the property is now vacant. As a result of redevelopment of a former mobile home park site, the vacant land is located amid established neighborhoods to the south and west, the established office uses at the northeast corner of Belcher and Druid and the recently redeveloped commercial parcel at the southeast corner of Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher. Applicant received an approved site plan for Parcel 1 for 70,212 square feet of retail sales and service use and 12,787 square feet of restaurant use (FLD2009- 12046). Approval of this request will reduce the proposed development by 23,840 square feet. The proposed redevelopment will provide 25' perimeter landscape buffers on Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher, where 15' buffers are required, which will visually enhance this corner of the intersection. The site plan depicts an open space area at the northeast corner of the site, which the applicant intends to develop as a small park area to display public art. 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 applicant has submitted a Traffic Study, described in detail in Response 4 below which confirms that the proposed project will not impact the roadway network, with certain improvements being made by the applicant that are provided for in the Development Agreement. The adjacent neighborhoods and parcels will also benefit from the improved traffic flow provided by these improvements. The proposed project will share an entrance drive on Belcher with Parcel 2, to be located on the Parcel 1 property and provided for by a recorded easement in favor of Parcel 2. 4) The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. A traffic study prepared by Roy E. Chapman, P.E., Florida Design Consultants, Inc., dated April 8, 2011 ( "Traffic Study ") is included in this submittal. The Traffic Study confirms that the proposed project, with the addition of certain improvements to be made by the applicant, including the dedication of necessary right -of -way for Gulf -to -Bay turn lane, will not impact the level of service of the roadway network. The proposed improvements and dedication of right -of -way are required to be made by the applicant in accordance with the terms of the Development Agreement. The proposed amendment to the Development Agreement does not alter the required improvements. The required Gulf -to -Bay Boulevard improvements have been reviewed, approved and permitted by FDOT. The required Belcher Road improvements have been reviewed, approved and permitted by Pinellas County. These approvals include driveway permits. The proposed entrance driveways provide adequate stacking length to prevent a backlog of traffic into the roadways. There are adequate turn around areas at all drives to insure smooth traffic flow within the project. The proposed plan provides 23 excess parking spaces above Code requirements. 5) The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. Parcel 1 is now an undeveloped site at the southwest corner of Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher. This intersection is clearly of a commercial character with retail located on the three developed corners —a Publix and Office Depot shopping center on the southeast corner, a CVS on the northeast corner and an Albertson's and gas station /convenience mart on the northwest corner. The proposed uses as retail and restaurant are similar to the existing uses at the intersection. 4 6) The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. The proposed redevelopment project will improve the visual appeal of the property as viewed on Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher with 25' perimeter landscape buffers on the roadways and a pocket park, including a public art feature, at the corner of Parcel 1. Traffic will enter and exit on Gulf -to -Bay or Belcher. The proposed residential development to the south on Parcel 2 will be gated so customers visiting Parcel 1 will not be able to cut through Parcel 2 to access Druid Road. The proposed trash collection areas are screened at the grade level so as not to impact passersby. Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria: 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and /or development standards set forth in this zoning district. The proposed deviations from Code, which are discussed in detail below, are necessary and minimal in order to redevelop the site. Setbacks and Landscape Buffers Although the property has two front setbacks, the project is designed to meet the 25' required setbacks on Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher and the site plans provide for 25' perimeter landscape buffers on these two frontages, where a 15' landscape buffer is required by Code. The relief sought from setbacks is on the southerly boundary- -a 2' setback to a sidewalk which provides circulation between Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 and to cross Belcher Road at the signal. (The approved Parcel 2 plan is included for reference — see Sheets 1B and 1 D.) This 2' setback is at one location at the entrance drive to the residential project to the south. This will not be discernable to view. The project meets the 10' required setback for the remainder of the southerly property line and the proposed setback from the southerly property line to building is 90.8'. 5 Access to Arterial Flexible Development Criteria 2- 704E.N.2 and 2- 704.0.2 provides that restaurants and retail sales and service uses shall not involve access to a major arterial street; however, both streets on which the development fronts are arterial streets. Therefore, the only direct access available to the property is via an arterial. The applicant has provided the minimum driveways possible for the project including the elimination of two existing driveways on Gulf -to -Bay and aligning the new driveway with Main Avenue. The project's proposed access to Belcher is limited to only one driveway which is aligned with the existing traffic signal at the Publix shopping center. All driveway permits for the project have been approved. Two -Year Development Order The Applicant requests a two -year development order due to market conditions. 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. Retail sales and service and restaurant uses are permitted uses in the "Commercial" zoning district. The R /O /R land use category on Parcel 1 is a mixed use plan category that allows the retail, restaurant and personal services that are proposed. The proposed project is the logical fill in as this is the only corner of the Belcher /Gulf -to -Bay intersection that is not developed with retail. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. The proposed project is compatible with the neighborhood, as is more particularly discussed in General Applicability Criteria 1 and Comprehensive Infill Criteria 4 below, and will not impede redevelopment of surrounding properties. The redevelopment of the site, accompanied by the redevelopment of Parcel 2, will revitalize this area. The uses proposed will provide convenient services to the residential areas to the south and west of the project. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. As a result of redevelopment of a former mobile home park site, the vacant land is located amid established neighborhoods to the south and west, the established office uses at the northeast corner of Belcher and Druid and the recently redeveloped Publix shopping center at the southeast corner of Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher. The following are the parcels adjacent to Parcel 1: 6 Location Zoning Land Use Designation Actual Use North (across Gulf -to- Bay) Commercial (C) Commercial General Albertson's Gas station East (across Belcher Road) Commercial (C) Commercial General Publix /Office Depot Shopping Center and Chase Bank South (Parcel 2) MDR Residential Medium Currently vacant Owned by the applicant and approved for 243 - unit multi- family residential project (FLD2009- 12045) West C MDR Commercial General Residential Urban Ancillary parking for car dealership The proposed redevelopment will include 25' perimeter landscape buffers on Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher which will enhance this corner of the intersection as viewed from the surrounding commercial neighbors. The proposed building setback is 90.8' from the southerly property line which adjoins the proposed residential development on Parcel 2 to the south. The majority of the southerly boundary includes a 10' landscape buffer which adjoins the proposed 6' high PVC fence on the Parcel 2 property line (see fence on Sheets 1B and 1D). 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. Retail sales and service, automobile service station, office and restaurant uses are permitted by the "Residential /Office /Retail" land use category and in the "Commercial" zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standard and flexible use. The proposed new uses at this intersection will provide additional jobs. The provision of additional right -of -way and turn lanes will improve traffic flow and the increased perimeter landscape buffers will visually enhance the intersection. As previously discussed in General Applicability Criteria 1 and Comprehensive Infill Criteria 4 the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding uses. The height of 35' will not impact surrounding parcels given the northerly, westerly and easterly building setbacks. The height of the approved multi - family development on Parcel 2 is 41' so the buildings will not appear tall as viewed from Parcel 2 to the south. 6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off - street parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives: a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district. The proposed uses as retail sales and service and restaurant are uses permitted in the Commercial zoning district, which are also allowed at the other three corners of this intersection. As previously discussed in detail in General Applicability Criteria 1, the proposed project will not impede the surrounding properties. b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City. There are no applicable design guidelines at this location. The proposed project complies with Code with regard to height and landscape buffer requirements. See the Comprehensive Landscape Program application for additional discussion of landscaping. 8 c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; The character of this area is well- established as commercial /retail. Please see the response to General Applicability Criteria 1 which describes how the bulk, scale and coverage of the project fits in with surrounding 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. These elements are incorporated into the design as shown on building elevations. The buildings on the site have been arranged to form a visually interesting appearance through site design, landscaping and architectural variety within a consistent theme. For each building, the architectural design employs a variety of materials, colors, and fenestration patterns. The use of colors, modern flat awnings and stonework columns provide continuity among the buildings. Due to the commercial nature of the buildings, all buildings are planned to be one story but a variety of roof heights and forms will be utilized to create an attractive appearance for the project. Column and window details where added to the proposed grocery store as suggested by staff. 9 e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. As shown on the proposed site plan there is a generous distance between all buildings and excessive setbacks from the buildings to the rights -of- way and the property lines. The landscape plan provides a 25' landscape buffer along Gulf -to -Bay (north) and Belcher (east) where only a 15' buffer is required by Code. A proposed landscape island to the west of Building 11 will help to buffer the grocery store parking area as viewed from Belcher Road. The proposed landscape plan exceeds the amount of landscaping required for the vehicular use area. 6/13/2011 10:30 AM 45497.116337 #560001 v1 - Nickel Plate /Ex to Comp Infill 2011 10 ELEVATION #3 - FRIGHT 7'\ ELFY - LEFT Cacao' &aeisan. Architects Engineers Planners 4/44, Pt I 407-661-9100 I ia.w.e-7'iswe RETAIL 5UILIDINGS - PARCEL #1 @ Belcher Rd. (CR 27) & Gulf To Bay Blvd (SR 60) - Clearwater, FL • C&P Project #2110212 • 04/27/11 OWE R C ERC. 26. 0" TO PARAP,T APROARD niNC TO POOF MAY ; BP ,1 (NIGP PT. C? LING HT B.C. :ANOPv 9' 0" TR - CON IRO( JO . t PRE-MiS-iED METAL CANOPY FRONT ELEVATION PRFFINISHF0 MFIAI TRIM Parcel #2 TRIM Cut [LIRE[) S IONE SILL CULTURED STONE Metal Door Benjamin Moore Sweet Innocence BM 2125-50 C APBOARD SIDINT Fiber Cement Siding James Hardie Harris Cream Metal Roof Atas #23 23 Coppertone 2C-C .0. 'MAX.'' OF (MAX ROOF BRG. (HIGH PT 17.- rC CR a ,g‘. itLei-san Architects Engineers Planners OrlonPl I 407-661-9100 I oval. e-7!eak 13.-6" CEILING H B4O. CANOPY Trim James Hardie Arctic White JH10-20 Stucco Senergy Meringue #3085 LEFT ELEVATION Parcel #2 v■ Trim James Hardie Arctic White JH10-20 1PIPPROMMIPPOO Stucco Senergy Meringue #3085 Cultured St Metal Door Benjamin Moore Sweet Innocence BM 2125-50 Fiber Cement Siding James Hardie Metal Roof Atas #23 23 Coppertone PREFINISHED METAL PORCH OVERHANG ‘1, o'-o" FRONT ELEVATION W/ PUMPS PREFINISHED METAL TRIM STUCCO TRIM CULTURED STONE ‘7. OVER ROOF 1 CULTURED STONE SILL CULTURED STONE CLAPBOARD SIDING W/ PUMPS *Actual distance between building and canopy vary. Architects Engineers Planners 0.44. fz. I 407-661-9100 I wow. e-A'asti TO. ROOF (MAX.) j11,17-.3" ROOF SRC (mt0-1 vik mik RIGHT ELEVATION W/ PUMPS • k-,14 !OW BL;42111111.. AIL CLAPBOARD SIDING CUL I URED STONE SILL CE TO 9 = - . cJ REAR ELEVATION ST_ CC Parcel #2 • 21. 4- TO. PARAPET 17'-'11 1./2' TOE ROOF (MAX.) 17' -3- ROOF BRG (HIGH PT ) B.O. CANOPY 0.-0• 4 Metal Door Benjamin Moore Sweet Innocence BM 2125-50 Fiber Cement Siding James Hardie Harris Cream -...•••=wompopirememiew• Metal Roof Atas #23 STAND NG SEAR - MI- IA1 ROOEING A.411111H1111111111111b■ P.Of Trim James Hardie Arctic White JH10-20 ‘Giktel R.c.etrah Architects Engineers Planners Of/Anob 407-661-9100 I mii.40.e-7'enk Stucco Senergy Meringue #3085 ter Cultur St 1671-41.' • 1 . 1r-3" ROOF BRG. (HIGH PT)$ 111111.4= • § eL I L I 1A111-2 PRE-FINISHED METAL POSTS & FRAME CULTURED STONE Parcel #2 RIGHT ELEvATION IS-6" CEILING HT. B.O. CANOPY 4 4 RWONT OV i E N ONLY ACCESS TOM AS W CdwERCu PRO. RION. TURN LINE Sul TO SLY BLVD. WtO OAST WOE PROP RONT O0 WAY S vSELLER lIO�T. rlRwn�S i v \� KEY PLAN !fo'Mink SREPL CDO TO RE � R�UEO ELEVATION #1 - FRONT flnn ELEVATION #3 - LEFT ELEVATION #2 - REAR Ca_aci & tefersak Architects Engineers Planners Or�aka�+ 1 407 -661 -9100 I www.C-7'awE rrc ELEVATION #4 - RIGHT RETAIL 5UILIDINGS - PARCEL #3 @ Belcher Rd. (CR 27) & Gulf To Bay Blvd (SR 60) - Clearwater, FL • C &P Project #2110212 • 04/27/11 I I I N WRi OUT LEFT N ONLY ACCESS \ oRRIPERT /W CONO[RCiu PR OP RWMT� Q4T. O! WAY IPA. DEO�CAttOM '*"AL EY SELLER PROP RIOMT T4RM LANE \ OW TOUT ELW.SRO OW, 10031 ;1 KEY PLAN ELIST TREPtA AC /PAPAL S TEFL Of PRO►. RIGHT 7WM LAM ELEVATION #1 - FRONT ELEYATIUN #3 - LEFT Cam/ & tefersoh Architects Engineers Planners alowi,, ft 1 407 -66t -9100 I muw.0 -A'ask RETAIL 5UILDINGS - PARCEL #4 @ Belcher Rd. (CR 27) & Gulf To Bay Blvd (SR 60) - Clearwater, FL • C &P Project #2110212 • 04/27/11 30' ELEVATION #3 - REAR Architects Engineers Planners O.�axab ft 1 407-661 -9100 I www.0 Sao RETAIL 5UILIDINGS - PARCEL #5 @ Belcher Rd. (CR 27) & Gulf To Bay Blvd (SR 60) - Clearwater, FL • C &P Project #2110212 • 04/27/11 ELEVATION #4 - RIGHT ELEVATION #1 - FRONT PROP WONT IN RIGHT OUT LEFT IN ONLY ACCEES /OMER COMPRICAL COMEIRCAL I POOP. MEW TURK LABOR PROP MONT OF WAY DEDICATION EY SELLER EXIST TRAFFIC INORAI PROP RIGHT TURN LANF KEY PLAN • .,•■ '' • AMIUMMEFFI arra mom. TORE PONE REPLACED SWIM A Cam/ ,g‘.aLersak Architects Engineers Planners ausoiwct I 407-661-9100 I moor.eqi'astit EF'" RETAIL IBULDINGS - PARCEL 4* @ Belcher Rd. (CR 27) & Gulf To Bay Blvd (SR 60) - Clearwater, FL • C&P Project #2110212 • 04/27/11 PROP. RIGHT IN/RIGHT OUT / LEFT IN ONLY ACCESS ZONING CONAMICLAL FLU: COVMERCIAL 1 PROP. RIGHT TURN LANE GOLF TO BAY IMMO., SO INA/IT 59400) X 32 .3 0 S OS PROP. RIGHT EXIST. DBEYODIF:2LEATIY4r TRAFFIC SIGNAL SSP :24 L E PROP. XL. LANE tsar PROP. 0 PAASTE POND SIGNAL TO REPLACED 11 PARCEL #3 - FRONT ELEVATION CAfkleistLetsakt Architects Engineers Planners Or 144, FZ. I 407-661-9100 I wiew.e-7! eon RETAIL 15LIILDINGS @ Belcher Rd. (CR 27) & Gulf To Bay Blvd (SR 60) - Clearwater, FL • C&P Project #2110212 • 04/25/11 SIGN?6E• PROP. RIGHT IN I RIGHT OUT I LEFT IN ONLY ACCESS ZONAL, COMMFACIA; FLU COMVFRCIAL PROP. RIGHT EXIST OF WAY [PROP TRAFFIC . RIGHT DEDICATION L_ TURN LANE `BY SELLER . SIGNAL . KEY PLAN PROP. 0 MASTS POND EXIST. T 1 SIGNAL TO REPLACED i I Architects Engineers Planners aPhhO1,FL 1 407- 661 -9100 I *ww.G7!coon RETAIL E3UILDINGS @ Belcher Rd. (CR 27) & Gulf To Bay Blvd (SR 60) - Clearwater, FL • C &P Project #2110212 • 04/25/11 -EIFS painted -Split face CMU painted "EXT. Dromedary Camel" SW 7694 "EXT. Dromedary Camel" SW 7694 Metal parapet coping painted EIFS painted EIFS cornice painted -EIFS cornice painted "Meadowlark" SW 7522 "Cobble Brown" SW 6082 "Cobble Brown" SW 6082 "EXT. Dromedary Camel" SW 7694 Front Elevation (N/5 /E/W) T.O.M. 22' -0" -EIFS painted "Meadowlark" SW 7522 -Split face CMU painted "Meadowlark" SW 7522 Pro -Fit Alpine Ledgestone -EIFS painted "Chardonnay" by Cultured Stone "Meadowlark" SW 7522 -Metal parapet coping painted "Meadowlark" SW 7522 Metal canopy to match Pantone PMS 368c - Metal door painted "Meadowlark" SW 7522 T.O.M. 22' -0" Rear Elevation (N /S /E/W) T.O.M. EIFS cornice painted EXT. Dromedary Ca 24' -0" Camel" SW 7694 Split face CMU painted "EXT. Dromedary Camel" SW 7694 -Metal parapet coping painted "Meadowlark" SW 7522 T.O.M. AEI 22' -0" Right Elevation (N /S /E /W) Pro -Fit Alpine Ledgestone -Split face CMU painted "Chardonnay" by Cultured Stone "Meadowlark" SW 7522 -Split face CMU painted "Meadowlark" SW 7522 - Metal parapet coping painted "Meadowlark" SW 7522 -Metal door painted "Meadowlark" SW 7522 EIFS cornice painted "EXT. Dromedary Camel" SW 7694 Left Elevation (N /S /E/W) Walmart :;: - EIFS painted "EXT. Dromedary Camel" SW 7694 Split face CMU painted "EXT. Dromedary Camel" SW 7694 EIFS painted "Meadowlark" SW 7522 Sign Qty. Height Area (S.F.) Total S.F. Walmart: 1 1 7' -11" 186.84 186.84 Market Pharmacy 1 2' -0" 8.37 8.37 Pharmacy Drive -Thru 1 1' -6" 17.72 17.72 Total Building Signage 215.93 B R R architecture June 08, 2011 Clearwater (Belcher), FL #5670 - New Store Elevations 1 DESIGN REPRESENTATION ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION The building images shown are a representation of the current design intent only. The building images may not reflect variations in color, tone, hue, tint. shading, ambient light intensity, materials, texture, contrast, font style, construction variations requ ed by building codes or inspectors, material availability or final design detailing iL_L_ 0 3 0 41 Walmart 1 :111 EI • I I r--1 AL rn _0 L J ■E'RE■111 : - 111...11.11.11.1=111.1.MIEMI isim•wormionsizinummuminTiiiirmaillIMI MIIIMMENII111111111111111111M1111111111 .111111111111111111111111E .111111.111.11.111 111.1111.1 111.1 0 41 mop B 1-1 June 08, 2011 architecture Clearwater (Belcher), FL #5670 - New Store Floor Plan DESIGN REPRESENTATION ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION r ,r rrrr'rr .r rr- rr. FLORIDA DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC. • • • • • • • • • • • Lakeside at Clearwater • Traffic Study • • • • • • Submitted to: City of Clearwater • • • • • Prepared for: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc. • P.O. Box 5008 • Clearwater, FL 33758 • • • • Prepared by: Roy E. Chapman, P.E. • FL P.E. No. 34438 • Florida Design Consultants, Inc. • 3030 Starkey Boulevard • New Port Richey, FL 34655 • • • Date: April 8, 2011 • • Project No.: 2009- 0007 -40.06 • • • • • • • • • • 1.0 Introduction • The Lakeside of Clearwater project is located in the southwest quadrant of the S.R. 60 (Gulf to Bay • Boulevard) and Belcher Road intersection; see Figure 1, Project Location Map. The project is to • replace the previous land use, 295 dwelling units of mobile home park, with a multi -use • development that was originally studied to include 92,500 square feet (sq. ft.) of shopping center and 260 dwelling units (DU) of apartment land use. At that time, the shopping center was • projected to contain an 8,000 sq. ft. high- turnover sit -down restaurant, a 4,500 sq. ft. bank with • drive through, a 40,000 sq. ft. supermarket with pharmacy and drive through, and 40,000 sq. ft. of retail space. A study was prepared to review the traffic impact on the surrounding transportation • network as a result of the project that was subsequently approved by the City of Clearwater. The • property owner now proposes to revise the land use mix on the property to include a 5,000 sq. ft. • high - turnover sit -down restaurant; a 4,200 sq. ft. bank with drive -thru; a 40,000 sq. ft. supermarket • with pharmacy and drive -thru; two fast food restaurants with drive thru, one at 2,500 sq. ft. and the other at 1,900 sq. ft., a 5,500 sq. ft. convenience market with gas pumps, and 260 DUs of • apartments. The convenience market would have twelve gas pump stations (6 pumps with a • fueling station on both sides). • 2.0 Traffic Methodology • • A traffic methodology meeting was held on April 1, 2011 to discuss the revision to the original • traffic study. In addition to the methodology used in the original traffic study it was agreed that the • project trips would consist of three Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation classifications. These would include a 5,500 convenience market with gas pumps, the 260 DUs of • apartments, and shopping center for the remaining land uses. While the remaining land uses total • 53,600 sq. ft., a total of 55,000 sq. ft. will be included in the traffic study. It was requested that • trips from the convenience market with gas pumps be calculated using the independent variables of square footage and number of gas pump stations. The higher of these two calculations will be used • in the study. • A traffic methodology meeting also preceded the original traffic study for this project. It was held on March 16, 2009. The agreement reached at both of these meetings have been used in the • preparation of this study. • • 3.0 Project Traffic • The following procedure was used to determine the new net external trips that will be generated by • the project. Trips generated by the 295 DU of mobile home park land use that previously occupied • this site were determined and subtracted from the new external trips for the proposed development. • Trips for mobile home park and the proposed land uses on the site were determined based on information from the ITE informational report Trip Generation, Eighth Edition, 2008. Table 1 • indicates the trip generation for the land uses proposed for the site. Trips for the convenience • market with gas pumps were calculated using two variables; the 5,500 sq. ft. building would • generate 328 p.m. peak hour trips, while the 12 fueling positions would generate 229 p.m. peak hour trips (see the Note at the bottom of Table 1). Since the building size generates a higher • number of trips, this independent variable was used in the analysis. The total trips generated by • • • • • the proposed land uses is 478 inbound and 437 outbound trips in the p.m. peak hour, the analysis • period for this study. The mobile home park would generate 170 trips in the p.m. peak hour. Internal capture between the shopping center, apartment, and convenience market with gas pumps • land uses on site have been estimated using the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, Second Edition, • June 2004, procedures. As indicated in Table 2 attached, the apartment, convenience market with gas pumps, and shopping center land uses would have an internal capture of 31.7 percent or 290 • p.m. peak hour trips. Since this is higher than the limit on internal capture of no more than 20% of • the trips generated, the internal capture for the project was limited to 20% of the trips generated. • Pass -by capture to the shopping center and convenience market with gas pumps will reduce the • new trips being generated by diverting traffic already on the adjacent roads into this land use. The • pass -by capture to the shopping center land uses has been based on the fitted curve equation in • Figure 5.5 contained in the above cited ITE Trip Generation Handbook. The calculation for 55,000 • sq. ft. of shopping center land use results in a pass -by capture of 46.4 percent, or 158 p.m. peak hour trips. The average pass -by trips of 66% indicated in Table 5.13 of the ITE Trip Generation • Handbook was used for the convenience market with gas pumps. This results in a reduction of 173 • external trips. The sum of the pass -by trips for these two land uses is 332 p.m. peak hour trips. • This number was checked to deteunine whether it exceeded 10% of the traffic on the adjacent roadways. The commercial portion of the project will be connected to the external road network • by driveways to S.R. 60 and to Belcher Road. The background traffic on S.R. 60 is 4,113 and for • Belcher Road is 2,195 resulting in a total background traffic of 6,308 vehicles in the p.m. peak • hour. The calculated pass -by of 332 vehicles is 5.3% of the background traffic which is lower than the 10% maximum. Therefore, the calculated pass -by capture was used in the analysis. These trips were subtracted from the external trips. The pass -by traffic will be assigned at the project • drives, but will not be identified at other locations because it is part of the background traffic • stream. • Including reductions for internal capture and pass -by capture results in a net external assignment of • 221 inbound and 180 outbound trips in the p.m. peak hour. These net external trips were further • reduced by the trips from the mobile home park that previously occupied the site. The new trips • impacting the adjacent roadway network are 115 inbound and 115 outbound trips in the p.m. peak hour. Please note that this is one fewer inbound trip and five fewer outbound trips than the original • traffic study. • • 4.0 Study Area • Based on discussions at the original methodology meeting the following intersections and highway • links were included in the study area: • Intersections: S.R. 60 at Belcher Road • S.R. 60 at Hercules Avenue • Druid Road at Belcher Road Druid Road at Hercules Avenue • Project driveways including the Belcher Road at Publix signalized intersection • • • 2 • • • • • • • • Highway Links: S.R. 60 (Hercules Avenue to Old Coachman Road) • Druid Road (Hercules Avenue to Edenville Avenue) • Belcher Road (Harn Boulevard to Cleveland Street) • 5.0 Background Traffic • • Background traffic has been established using the following procedure, which is the same as used in • the original study. Traffic counts from a previous study were obtained from the City of Clearwater staff for the intersections of Hercules Avenue with S.R. 60 and Druid Road. New turning • movement counts were taken at the intersections of S.R. 60 at Belcher Road, Druid Road at Belcher • Road, Belcher Road at Cleveland Street, and S.R. 60 at Old Coachman Road. The counts were • taken from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. with subtotals every 15 minutes. The highest four consecutive • 15- minute periods are the p.m. peak hour. The peak hour counts were adjusted to annual average operating conditions. • • The change in background traffic on roadways impacted by project traffic has been reviewed on a • daily basis for the last several years. A review was completed on the changes in traffic volumes on S.R. 60 and Belcher road near the project site. The review concluded that the traffic volumes have • not significantly changed for several years. The volumes were reviewed at the traffic methodology • meeting. Based on review of these traffic counts it was concluded that traffic in this portion of • Clearwater has stabilized. A zero percent growth rate was therefore agreed upon for use in this study. • • 6.0 Project Traffic Distribution • Project traffic distribution is estimated to be very diverse based on the access drives to be • constructed for the project and the extensive development surrounding the project. Figure 2 • indicates the percentage of project traffic distributed to the highway network for the new trips from • the project. The new project will have one driveway to S.R. 60, one driveway to Belcher Road, and • three driveways to Druid Road. The project will construct a new entrance drive on Belcher Road opposite the existing driveway to the Publix shopping center located on the east side of the road. • This intersection is currently signalized and will remain signalized in the future. There is an • existing driveway to S.R. 60, which is proposed to be relocated further west to be opposite South • Main Avenue. This will allow right turns in and out of the driveway and left turns into the driveway. Three driveways are proposed to Druid Road. The west and middle drives will have full • access and the east drive will only allow right turns exiting it. • • 7.0 Future Traffic Volumes and Analysis • The assignment of trips to the project drives for the 2020 buildout year is shown in Figure 3. This • identifies the background traffic, additional traffic that would have been on the road due to the • previous mobile home park, new project trips, and pass -by trips to the shopping center land use. • The trips were identified for the previous mobile home park because this land use was closed at the time of the traffic counts. The traffic volumes at the study intersections surrounding the project are • • • 3 • • • • • • shown in Figure 4. Table 3 shows the breakdown of turning movements and total volumes at • intersections surrounding the project site. • • Analysis has been conducted to deteulrine the operation of intersections in the study area in the • 2020 buildout year. The Synchro program was used for signalized intersections and the Highway • Capacity Software was use for the unsignalized project driveways. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 4, with copies of the computer output provided in the Appendix and electronic • copies of the analysis provided on CD. The acceptable operation on roads surrounding the project • is Level of Service D (LOS D). As is indicated in Table 4, all intersections analyzed are projected • to operate at acceptable levels of service with the exception of S.R. 60 at Belcher Road. This intersection is projected to operate at LOS E with the future background traffic volumes. With • project traffic, the intersection will remain at LOS E. In order to determine the operating • parameters of the intersection, the volume to capacity ratio (V /C ratio) and the delay in terms of • seconds per vehicle have been reported in Table 4. For the S.R. 60 intersection with Belcher Road, the background traffic in the year 2020 is projected to have a maximum V/C ratio of 1.05 and a • delay of 66.3 seconds per vehicle. With project traffic, these intersection measures are estimated to • increase to a V/C ratio of 1.06 and a delay of 69.9 seconds per vehicle. An improvement has been • identified to mitigate for the degradation of the level of service at this intersection. That • improvement is to add an eastbound right turn lane. With this improvement, the intersection operation will remain at LOS E, but the V/C ratio will decrease to 1.00 and the delay will be • reduced to 64.6 seconds per vehicle, resulting in a lower delay than with background traffic. A • right turn lane is also proposed to be installed at the Belcher Road and Publix driveway intersection • for southbound traffic. LOS B operation is expected at this intersection with the proposed improvement. • • The highway links have also been reviewed to determine their existing operation and future • operation with the proposed project. The section of Druid Road from Edenville Avenue to Hercules Avenue was examined using the FDOT's Artplan analysis software. The 2010 version of this • software only provides a level of service determination for the peak direction of travel. The results • of the analysis are that this section of Druid is projected to operate at an acceptable LOS C in the • peak, wetland, direction. S.R. 60 and Belcher Road were analyzed using the Synchro program's arterial analysis function and the Artplan program. The Synchro analysis indicated that S.R. 60 • (from Hercules Avenue to Old Coachman Road) with total traffic, would operate at LOS D in both • the eastbound and westbound directions. With the improvement proposed at the S.R. 60 and • Belcher Road intersection, the operation would improve to LOS C in the eastbound direction and remain at LOS D for westbound traffic. The Florida Department of Transportation's Artplan • program has also been run for the segment of S.R. 60 analyzed. This resulted in LOS C operation • for the eastbound direction of travel. • Belcher Road has also been analyzed with both of the above indicated programs to establish link • operation. Using the Synchro program LOS E operation was noted for the northbound and • southbound directions both with total traffic in the year 2020 and with the proposed improvements • at the S.R. 60 and Publix Drive intersections. Reviewing the total travel time in both directions for • the Total Traffic and Total Traffic with Improvements scenarios, it was determined that the with improvement scenario would have lower travel times in the northbound and southbound directions. • Artplan analysis of Belcher Road with Improvements scenario indicates that the future traffic would • • • 4 • • • • • • operate at LOS D in the northbound direction. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 5, copies of the computer printouts are provided in the Appendix, and electronic copies are being • provided on CD. • • 8.0 Driveway Access • City code requires that no more than one driveway be provided to each of the adjacent roads and • that any additional driveways would require City approval. The project has frontage along S.R. 60, • Belcher Road and Druid Road. The project would have one driveway to S.R. 60 that would be • located opposite South Main Avenue. This connection would be approximately 290 feet west of Belcher Road. This section of S.R. 60 is a Class 7 roadway, which could have a connection spacing • of 125 feet. The proposed location for this driveway should be acceptable. • Along Belcher Road, one driveway connection is proposed. This would be located at the existing signalized Publix driveway, which is approximately 700 feet south of S.R. 60. Belcher Road is • under Pinellas County jurisdiction and carries an Access Management Classification of 5. This • classification would allow driveways to be spaced 245 feet apart for roads with less than a 45 mph • posted speed limit. Since the driveway meets this spacing, it should be approved and it is located at • an existing signalized intersection. • Along Druid Road, three driveways are being proposed. The first would be located opposite • University Drive West, the second would be approximately 800 feet east, and the third drive would • be located approximately 310 feet east of the second driveway and 240 feet west of Belcher Road. - The west and middle driveways would allow turning movements in all directions to and from Druid • Road and the east drive would only allow right turns to exit from it. For Druid Road, with a posted • speed limit of 30 miles per hour, the driveway spacing needs to be 125 feet apart to meet access • management standards. Since each of these driveways would be greater than 125 feet apart, they should be approved. • • 9.0 Conclusion • Based on the analysis conducted in the traffic study and following discussions with Pinellas County • and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) staff the following improvements are proposed: • A. Along S.R. 60, Gulf -to -Bay Boulevard make the following changes: • 1. Install a project driveway located opposite South Main Avenue that will allow • right turns in, right turns out, and left turns in. • 2. Add a directional median separator on S.R. 60 between the project entrance and • South Main Avenue. This will prohibit left and through movements from the • project entrance and South Main Avenue. • 3. Restripe the southbound exit from South Main Avenue to a right turn only lane. • • • • • 5 • • • • 4. Revise the median on S.R. 60 between South Main Avenue and Belcher Road to • provide raised concrete separators allowing a left turn lane into the project drive and increasing the left turn storage lane approaching Belcher Road. • • 5. Provide additional right -of -way along the south side of S.R. 60 to allow an • eastbound right turn lane at the Belcher Road intersection. • 6. Please note that these improvements are the same as indicated in the original • study and have been permitted by the Florida Department of • Transportation. • B. At the Belcher Road and project drive /Publix intersection: • • 1. Construct a southbound right turn lane into the project. • 2. Install a new mast aun signal with pedestrian signals on all four legs of the • intersection. • 3. Provide an easement at the southwest corner of the intersection for the signal • control equipment. • • 4. Provide a project driveway to have two exiting lanes, one for left turns and the other for through movements and right turns. • 5. Please note that these are the same improvements as indicated in the original • study and have been permitted by Pinellas County. • C. Along Druid Road: • • 1. Provide three project driveways. • D. The project should be approved to have a buildout date for its completion in the year • 2020. • With the above - indicated improvements, the analysis has demonstrated that the project • would not degrade the operation of the highway network and it should, therefore, be approved. • • :es - k:\lakeside at clearwater\reports \traffic study 4- 2011.docx • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •` •g 0 to • 6n • B- A a O • n :i.+ •� •¢ ti • U • - • �I DESCRIPTION, CLEVELAND ST. S.R. 60 GULF TO BAY BLVD. OLD COACHMAN RD. HERCULES AVE. PROJECT SITE BELCHER RD. EDENVILLE AVE. • • • DRUID RD. NOT TO SCALE HARN BLVD PROJECT LOCATION MAP FLORIDA DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC. ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS, SURVEYORS B PLANNERS 3030 Starkey Blvd, New Port Richey FL 34655 Tel, (727) 849 -7588 - Fox: (727) 848 -3648 7 PROJECT No. 2009 -07 DATE: 1 -7 -10 DRAWN BY RAH EPN, 329 FIGURE, 1 J ©Copyright 2011 Florida Design Consultants, Inc. Drawings and concepts may not be used or reproduced without written permission. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ° • E 0 • • • N o • n • • - 3 • m • W 0 L • • L L • / • Q • / N • • • • 15% M N J GULF TO BAY BOULEVARD (SR 60) PROJECT SITE N.T.S. 15% 3% 10% DRUID ROAD S BELCHER ROAD N 10% DESCRIPTION, PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION PROJECT No. 2009 -07 EP N, 329 FLORIDA DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC. ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS. SURVEYORS 8 PLANNERS 3030 Starkey Blvd, New Port Richey FL 34655 Tel. (727) 849 -7588 - Fax. (727) 848 -3648 8 DATE, 1 -7 -10 DRAWN BY. RAH FIGURE, 2 @Copyright 2011 Florida Design Consultants, Inc. Drawings and concepts may not be used or reproduced without written permission. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • -F- 1 •E 0 • of • N • 0 O • 6 • In • 3 o. • o • _o • % s • w • rn N • a • i • • ' N • ' • • • �- 1,955 (( -14)) [8] (8) ((14)) S.R. 60 T GULF TO BAY BLVD. E m L 2,158 (( -84))-- [16] (17) ((84))---i m PROJECT SITE L L 67 _'- [3] (3) 145 [18] (50) ((34))1 [2] (3) —' [13] (23) ((34))_1 CJ M � > W > W o p 0 L [7] (7) 442 [3] (6) N tD L L [7] (8) 442 [7] (7) 442 [14] (15) PUBUX -� f [6] (6)1 305 [5] (6)-"-- LEGEND DRUID RD. XX — BACKGROUND TRAFFIC [XX] — MOBILE HOME PARK (XX) — NEW PROJECT TRIPS ((XX)) — PASS BY TRIPS [5] (6) 1 305 [4] (9) N NOT TO SCALE 305 [9] (16) -� BELCHER RD. DESCRIPTION: 2020 SITE DISTRIBUTION MAP PROJECT No. 2009 -07 EPN: 329 FLORIDA DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS, SURVEYORS 8 PLANNERS 3030 Starkey Blvd, New Port Richey FL 34655 Tel, (727) 849 -7588 - Fax, (727) 848 -3648 9 DATE, 4 -6 -11 DRAWN BY. RAH FIGURE, 3 @Copyright 2011 Florida Design Consultants, Inc. Drawings and concepts may not be used or reproduced without written permission. J • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • r • •M of • • ° N • m 0 • • • � • • c • .q • �I •o, N • a r • x i • a • o • ' N • • • CLEVELAND ST. L139 Fi f- 1,722 [10] (19) 1L r99 S.R. 60 N N 671 6 86 L18 �- 5 r 24 CD 10 a rn m L154 40 m --- 1,699 [8] (7) 155 [8] (7) GULF TO BAY BLVD:`) OLD COACHMAN RD. L 295 1,741 [16] (14) r 54 154 1 1,875 [16] (17) — - 53 HERCULES AVE co co to m 98 1 313 [11] (12)—.— 21 —1 LEGEND -qtr N CO L 143 f 289 [7] (12) r 41 (8156 1,872 [8] (11) — 130 PROJECT SITE 0 a N :n BELCHER RD. L92 [6] (6) f 178 [5] (6) r 94 194 1 2,038 [10] (18) -- 91 T$r n °a O1 vi EDENVILLE AVE. t r DRUID RD. XX — BACKGROUND TRAFFIC [XX] — MOBILE HOME PARK (xx) — NEW PROJECT TRIPS ((XX)) — PASS BY TRIPS 75 1 123 [3] (5) 107 [6] (10)-1 NOT TO SCALE TtT 0:. a m HARN BLVD DESCRIPTION: 2020 PROJECT DISTRIBUTION MAP PROJECT No. 2009 -07 EPN, 329 FLORIDA DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC. ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS, SURVEYORS 8 PLANNERS 3030 Starkey Blvd, New Port Richey FL 34655 Tel: (727) 849 -7588 - Fax: (727) 848 -3648 10 DATE, 4 -6 -11 DRAWN BY: RAH FIGURE: 4 J @Copyright 2011 Florida Design Consultants, Inc. Drawings and concepts may not be used or reproduced without written permission. •••••.•.••.•• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Table 1. Lakeside at Clearwater - Revised Trip Generation Summary Land Use Shopping Center Convenience Mkt w /Gas Pumps Apartment Shopping Center Convenience Mkt w /Gas Pumps ITE LUC 820 853 220 Size Units 55,000 Sq. Ft. 5,500 Sq. Ft. 260 DU Trips Generated Internal Capture External Size 55,000 Sq. Ft. 5,500 Sq. Ft. Note: Land Use ITE LUC Convenience Mkt w /Gas Pumps 853 Daily 4,604 4,651 1,699 10,954 46.4 Percent 66.0 Percent Size Units 12 Fuel Positions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Outbound 217 164 56 437 92 346 Inbound Outbound Total 63 41 104 121 120 241 26 105 131 210 266 476 Calculated Pass -by Calculated Pass -by Total Calc Pass -by Net External Less Existing Mobile Home Park New Trips AM Peak Hour Inbound 209 164 105 478 92 387 79 87 166 221 106 115 79 87 166 Total 426 328 161 915 183 732 180 65 115 PM Peak Hour 158 173 332 401 170 230 Daily Inbound Outbound Total Inbound Outbound Total 6,511 100 99 Date: 4/4/2011 T: \2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 3 \[Lakeside Tables 04042011.xls]Revised Trip Gen 199 114 114 229 • Table 2. Internal Capture Summary Center (A) Land Use: Shopping Size: 55,000 Sq. Ft Total Total Internal External Enter 209 52 157 Exit 217 59 158 Total 426 111 315 100 100 26 74 43 33 33 42 33 33 Land Use: Convience Mkt w /Pumps (B) Size: 5,500 Sq. ft B Total Internal External Enter 164 48 117 Exit 164 53 112 Total 328 100 228 % 100 31 70 Net External Trips 19 19 30 15 26 26 33 15 20 20 30 33 T: \2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 3 \[Lakeside Tables 04042011.xls]Rev Internal 12 Land Use: Apartment (C) A B C Total Internal Enter 157 117 59 333 % Exit 158 112 22 292 82 Total 315 228 82 625 ITE Trips 426 328 161 915 31.7 T: \2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 3 \[Lakeside Tables 04042011.xls]Rev Internal 12 Land Use: Apartment (C) Size: 260 DU Total Internal External Enter 105 46 59 Exit 56 34 22 Total 161 79 82 100 49 51 w Table 3. Intersection Turning Movements Belcher Road and Gulf to Bay (SR60) Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru 1 Right Background Traffic 171 762 121 175 601 85 156 1,872 130 155 1,699 154 Mobile Home Park 2 14 2 24 32 10 8 13 8 8 Subtotal Subtotal 173 776 123 175 625 85 156 1,880 130 163 1,707 154 New Project Trips New Project Trips New Project Trips 17 26 7 28 35 8 11 23 7 7 Total Total 190 802 130 175 653 85 164 1,891 130 170 1,714 154 Old Coachman at Gulf to Bay (SR60) Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Background Traffic 74 40 59 166 42 109 194 2,038 91 54 1,741 295 Mobile Home Park Mobile Home Park 22 0 9 0 32 10 2 13 16 3 Subtotal 74 40 59 166 42 109 194 2,048 91 54 1,757 295 67 New Project Trips New Project Trips New Project Trips 25 0 17 0 35 18 3 23 14 3 Total 74 40 59 166 42 109 194 2,066 91 54 1,771 295 Belcher Road at Publix Entrance Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Background Traffic 105 987 109 56 830 123 107 94 178 145 Mobile Home Park 67 Mobile Home Park 22 0 9 0 32 18 2 13 6 3 159 Subtotal 22 987 109 56 830 32 18 2 13 145 3 67 New Project Trips 9 New Project Trips 25 0 17 0 35 50 3 23 6 3 168 Pass -by Trips 34 -34 779 114 -34 34 34 94 34 104 Total 81 953 109 56 796 101 102 5 70 145 6 67 Belcher Road at Druid Road Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Background Traffic 150 943 105 51 753 114 75 123 107 94 178 92 Mobile Home Park 9 16 4 9 3 6 5 6 Subtotal 159 959 105 55 762 114 75 126 113 94 183 98 New Project Trips 9 19 6 17 5 10 6 6 Total 168 978 105 61 779 114 75 131 123 94 189 104 I .A Table 3 (Cont'd.). Intersection Turning Movements Belcher Road at Cleveland Street Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Background Traffic 6 995 35 15 767 70 67 6 86 24 5 18 Mobile Home Park 14 16 24 16 11 10 8 Subtotal 63 Subtotal 6 1,009 35 15 791 70 67 6 86 24 5 18 New Project Trips New Project Trips 26 11 28 17 12 19 8 Total 63 Total 6 1,035 35 15 819 70 67 6 86 24 5 18 Gulf to Bay (SR60) at Hercules Avenue Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru [_ Right Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru Right Background Traffic 63 248 108 136 211 144 154 1,875 53 99 1,722 139 Mobile Home Park 143 Mobile Home Park 16 16 11 10 8 Subtotal 63 248 108 136 211 144 154 1,891 53 99 1,732 139 296 143 New Project Trips New Project Trips 11 17 12 19 8 Total 63 248 108 136 211 144 154 1,908 53 99 1,751 139 Hercules Avenue at Druid Road Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru Right Background Traffic 16 181 50 87 165 148 98 313 21 41 289 143 Mobile Home Park 16 11 16 8 7 Subtotal 16 181 50 87 165 148 98 324 21 41 296 143 New Project Trips 11 12 17 8 12 Total 16 181 50 87 165 148 98 336 21 41 308 143 Gulf to Bay (SR 60) and Drive 1 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru Right Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru 1 Right Background Traffic 2,158 1,955 Mobile Home Park 16 16 8 Subtotal 16 2,158 16 8 1,955 New Project Trips 11 17 8 Pass -by Trips 98 -84 84 14 -14 Total 125 2,074 117 30 1,941 40 41 40 40 fP 40 40 40 40 IP 41 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 41 40 40 40 40 IP 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 IP 40 40 40 40 40 fP 40 40 40 Table 3 (Cont'd.). Intersection Turning Movements Druid Road and Drive 2 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru 1 Right Left 1 Thru 1 Right Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru Right Background Traffic 305 442 Mobile Home Park 4 5 6 5 3 7 Subtotal 4 5 6 310 445 7 New Project Trips 8 6 6 6 6 7 Total 12 11 12 316 451 14 Druid Road and Drive 3 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru Right Left 1 Thru 1 Right Left Thru 1 Right Background Traffic 305 442 Mobile Home Park 5 3 5 4 7 7 Subtotal 5 3 5 309 449 7 New Project Trips 8 5 6 9 7 8 Total 13 8 11 318 456 15 Druid Road at Drive 4 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru 1 Right Left Thru I Right Background Traffic 305 442 Mobile Home Park 0 9 14 Subtotal 0 314 456 New Project Trips 1 16 15 Total 1 330 471 Source: FDC Date: 4/5/2011 T:\2009- 0007\Traffic Study Rev 3 \[Lakeside Tables 04042011.xls]Int Turn Movements ••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Table 4. Intersection Operation Summary Intersection Future Background Traffic Future Total Traffic Future Total Traffic With Improvement LOS Max V/C Delay LOS Max V/C Delay LOS Max V/C Delay Improvement Druid at Hercules B 0.72 18.9 B 0.70 16.9 Druid at Belcher C 0.80 20.3 C 0.82 20.9 S.R. 60 at Hercules C 0.95 34.0 C 0.95 34.1 S.R. 60 at Belcher E 1.05 66.3 E 1.06 69.9 E 1.00 64.6 EB Rt Lane S.R.60 at Old Coachman C 0.95 29.9 C 0.96 29.9 Belcher at Cleveland B 0.62 11.3 B 0.58 10.4 Belcher at Publix B 0.75 16.8 C 0.87 20.6 B 0.79 17.3 SB Rt Lane S.R. 60 at Drive 1 C 0.36 20 Druid at Drive 2 B 0.04 16.2 Druid at Drive 3 B 0.04 16.3 Druid at Drive 4 B 0 11.3 Note: Delay in Seconds/Vehicle Source: FDC Date: 4/5/2011 T:\2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 3 \[Lakeside Tables 04042011.xls]Int Operation rn IP II ID IP IP ID 10 II 10 Table 5. Link Operation Roadway Limits Existing Lanes Direction Existing Operation Volume LOS Future Synchro Arterial Analysis Future Artplan Analysis* Total Traffic Total Traffic w /Impr. Total Traffic w /Impr. LOS Travel Time LOS Travel Time LOS Druid Edenville to Hercules 2LU EB 314 C NA NA NA 2LU WB 456 C NA NA C S.R. 60 (Gulf to Bay) Hercules to Old Coachman 6LD EB 2,166 C D 294.2 C 278.5 C 6LD WB 1,965 C D 283.0 D 283.9 NA Belcher Harn to Cleveland 4LD NB 1,072 C E 224.1 E 216.1 D 4LD SB 931 D E 182.1 E 179.0 NA Note: D = Divided, U = Undivided * Artplan 2009 only provides analysis in the peak direction. Source: FDC Date: 4/6/11 T:\2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 3 \[Lakeside Tables 04042011.xls]Link Operation APPENDIX Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: State Road 60 & Hercules Ave. 2020 Background Traffic 4/5/2011 Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles (%) Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic ( %) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split ( %) Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All -Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) Act Effct Green (s) 154 1891 53 99 1732 139 63 248 108 136 211 144 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.996 0.989 0.850 0.850 0.950 1787 5115 0.103 194 5115 0.95 1% 162 6 30 1008 22.9 0.95 1% 1991 162 2047 No No Left 1.00 15 pm +pt 7 Left 12 0 16 1.00 4.0 4.0 10.1 22.3 13.0 44.6 14.4% 49.6% 6.9 38.3 3.2 3.9 2.9 2.4 0.0 0.0 6.1 6.3 Lead Lag Yes Min 3.0 Min 0 0.95 1% 56 0 No Right 0.950 1787 5079 0.109 205 5079 0.95 1% 104 104 17 30 2685 61.0 0.95 1% 1823 1969 No No Left 12 0 16 Left 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 15 pm +pt 3 0.950 0.950 1787 1881 1599 1787 1881 1599 0.620 0.285 0 1166 1881 1599 536 1881 1599 Yes Yes 114 119 0.95 0.95 1% 1% 146 66 0 66 No No Right Left 1.00 9 4.0 4.0 10.1 22.3 0.0 10.4 42.0 0.0 0.0% 11.6% 46.7% 0.0% 4.3 35.7 3.2 3.9 2.9 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 : 0.0 4.0 6.1 6.3 Lead Lag Yes Yes Min Min 4.0 1.00 15 Perm 30 1302 29.6 0.95 0.95 1% 1% 261 114 261 No No Left Right 12 0 16 114 0.95 1% 143 143 No Left 30 994 22.6 0.95 1% 222 222 0.95 1% 152 152 No No Left Right 12 0 16 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 15 Perm pm +pt 1 6 1.00 9 Perm 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 22.9 22.9 22.9 9.9 22.9 22.9 24.8 24.8 24.8 10.2 35.0 35.0 27.6% 27.6% 27.6% 11.3% 38.9% 38.9% 17.9 17.9 17.9 4.3 28.1 28.1 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.7 3.7 3.7 2.9 3.7 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.9 6.9 6.9 5.9 6.9 6.9 Lag Lag Lag Lead Yes Yes Yes Yes 3.0 3.0. C -Min C -Min C -Min 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 46.5 38.9 42.1 36.7 Min C -Min 3.0 C -Min 5.0 11.0 11.0 0 16.1 16.1 16.1 27.6 26.6 26.6 Baseline T:12009- 00071Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: State Road 60 & Hercules Ave. 2020 Background Traffic 4/5/2011 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Queue Length 50th (ft) Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 231 2213 187 2081 232 374 409 228 587 581 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.70 0.92 0.56 0.95 0.28 0.70 0.28 0.63 0.38 0.26 0.52 0.43 0.47 0.41 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.31 0.30 0.30 0.70 0.92 0.56 0.95 0.32 0.77 0.30 0.63 0.40 0.27 32.4 33.0 24.5 37.2 35.7 51.3 8.5 37.5 27.4 8.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.4 33.0 24.5 37.2 35.7 51.3 8.5 37.5 27.4 8.4 C C C D D D A DC A 33.0 36.5 37.9 24.6 C D D C 43 395 27 391 32 139 0 59 98 13 #135 #515 #74 #513 71 #238 43 #110 161 56 928 2605 1222 914 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.95 Intersection Signal Delay: 34.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.7% Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Intersection LOS: C ICU Level of Service E nd Phases: 1: State Road 60 & Hercules Ave. of I 02 1. m3 04 0.21 11 L� 24.8s 1 [''10.41; r > ;44.5s • 06 m7 - 08 35s 13s 1 142s 1 1_ • Baseline T:12009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: State Road 60 & Belcher Road • • • 2020 Background Traffic 4/5/2011 4\ • Lane Configurations Volume (vph) • Ideal Flow (vphpl) • Lane Util Factor Frt • Flt Protected • Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted • Satd. Flow (perm) • Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) • Link Speed (mph) • Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) • Peak Hour Factor • Heavy Vehicles (%) Adj. Flow (vph) • Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection • Lane Alignment • Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) • Crosswalk Width(ft). • Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor • Turning Speed (mph) • Turn Type Protected Phases • Permitted Phases • Detector Phase Switch Phase • Minimum Initial (s) • Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) • Total Split ( %) • Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) • All -Red Time (s) • Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) • Lead /Lag • Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) • Recall Mode • Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) I Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) Act Effct Green (s) 156 1880 130 163 1707 154 173 776 123 175 625 85 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.990 0.988 0.980 0.982 0.950 1787 5084 0.072 135 5084 9 45 2685 40.7 0.95 0.95 1% 1% 164 1979 164 2116 No Left 1.00 15 pm +pt 7 0 Yes 0.95 1% 137 0 No No Left Right 12 0 16 0.950 1787 5074 0.072 135 5074 0.95 1% 172 172 No Left 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 15 12 45 3917 59.3 0.95 1% 1797 1959 No Left 12 0 16 0 Yes 0.950 1787 3503 0.140 263 3503 0.950 1787 3510 0.109 0 205 3510 0 Yes Yes 12 10 35 35 622 1744 12.1 34.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 162 182 817 129 184 658 89 0 No Right 182 No Left 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 pm +pt 5 9 946 No Left 12 0 16. 0 No Right 184 No Left 747 0 No No Left Right 12 0 16 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 15 pm +pt 1 6 9 • 4.0 12.0 9.7 21.9 16.5 61.4 0.0 11.8% 43.9% 0.0% 10.8 55.5 3.5 4.0 2.2 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 5.9 Lead Lag Yes Yes 3.0' Min Min 11.0 66.4 55.5 4.0 4.0 12.0 9.7 21.9 16.5 61.4 11.8% 43.9% 10.8 55.5 3.5 4.0 2.2 1.9 0.0 0.0 5.7 5.9 Lead Lag Yes Yes 3.0 Min Min 11.0 66.6 55.6 5.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 11.2 22.5 11.2 22.5 0.0 19.4 44.1 0.0 18.0 42.7 0.0 0.0% 13.9% 31.5% 0.0 %! 12.9% 30.5% 0.0% 13.2 37.6 11.8 36.2 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 2.7 2.5 2.7 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 6.2 6.5 4.0 6.2 6.5 Lead Lag Lead Lag Yes Yes Yes Yes 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0` Min C -Min Min C -Min 11.0 50.6 37.6 11.0 48.8 36.7 4.0 • Baseline • T:12009- 00071Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 A�3 • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Background Traffic 2: State Road 60 & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 II • Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR • Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.40 0.48 0.40 0.36 0.27 0.35 0.26 v/c Ratio 0.86 1.05 0.90 0.97 0.78 1.00 0.90 0.81 • Control Delay 69.5 74.4 76.2 55.0 52.2 78.4 76.1 55.6 • Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 69.5 74.4 76.2 55.0 52.2 78.4 76.1 55.6 • LOS E E E D D E E E • Approach Delay 74.1 56.7 74.1 59.7 Approach LOS E E E E • Queue Length 50th (ft) 97 -764 105 633 110 450 116 334 • Queue Length 95th (ft) #229 #858 #247 #749 #208 #602 #262 413 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2605 3837 542 1664 • Turn Bay Length (ft) • Base Capacity (vph) 192 2021 192 2023 240 950 205 927 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.85 1.05 0.90 0.97 0.76 1.00 0.90 0.81 • Intersection Summary • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 140 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 140 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.05 Intersection Signal Delay: 66.3 Intersection LOS: E Intersection Capacity Utilization 103.6% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. nd Phases: 2: State Road 60 & Belcher Road 01 02 03 -0'o4 18s 1 r 44.1s 1 f *'16.5s 1 fi 61.4 s' •., ) Fi 4\ 05 • 06 ! ■ o7 -4- - 08 19.4s 1 1(42.7 s 1 k 16.5s 1 t461.4 s 1 14 • Baseline • T: \2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis\2020 Background Traffic.syn • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Background Traffic • 3: State Road 60 & Old Coachman 4/5/2011 • -►- 4" 1 l • Lane Group `'EBC" - EBT EBR WBL ° WBT WBR - I I '" .7 NBT ' 1BR 'SBL SBT `SB' • Lane Configurations 'I if1. r '9 141 '9 I '1 1 Volume (vph) 194 2048 91 54 1757 295 74 40 59 166 42 109 • Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.978 0.911 0.892 • Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 • Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 5136 1599 1787 5023 0 1787 1714 0 1787 1678 0 Flt Permitted 0.091 0.099 0.656 0.482 • Satd. Flow (perm) 171 5136 1599 186 5023 0 1234 1714 0 907 1678 0 • Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 96 44 62 110 • Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 • Link Distance (ft) 3917 1000 1004 998 Travel Time (s) 89.0 22.7 22.8 22.7 • Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 • Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 204 2156 96 57 1849 311 78 42 62 175 44 115 • Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow (vph) 204 2156 96 57 2160 0 78 104 0 175 159 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No • Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right • Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 • Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 • Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 • Turn Type pm +pt Perm pm +pt Perm pm +pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 1 6 • Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 • Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 2 2 1 6 Switch Phase • Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • Minimum Split (s) 10.3 21.6 21.6 10.3 20.9 24.5 24.5 8.7 24.5 Total Split (s) 14.2 45.9 45.9 10.3 42.0 0.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 8.8 33.8 0.0 • Total Split ( %) 15.8% 51.0% 51.0% 11.4% 46.7% 0.0% 27.8% 27.8% 0.0% 9.8% 37.6% 0.0% • Maximum Green (s) 7.9 40.3 40.3 4.0 37.1 16.5 16.5 4.1 25.3 Yellow Time (s) 3.2 3.9 3.9 3.2 3.2 3.6 3.6 3.0 3.6 • All -Red Time (s) 3.1 1.7 1.7 3.1 1.7 4.9 4.9 1.7 4.9 • Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0, 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.3 5.6 5.6 6.3 4.9 4.0 8.5 8.5 4.0 4.7 8.5 4.0 • Lead /Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead • Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 • Recall Mode Min Min Min Min Min C -Min C -Min Min C -Min • Waik Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 • Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Act Effct Green (s) 53.5 43.9 43.9 44.8 40.2 11.0 11.0 23.6 19.8 • Baseline • T:12009- 00071Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Background Traffic 3: State Road 60 & Old Coachman • • Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR ,. NBL .. NBT NBR' SBL"SBT • Actuated g/C Ratio 0.59 0.49 0.49 0.50 0.45 0.12 0.12 0.26 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.71 0.86 0.12 0.29 0.95 0.52 0.40 0.63 0.35 • Control Delay 32.4 25.8 3.6 12.9 35.8 48.2 20.8 38.1 12.2 • Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 32.4 25.8 3.6 12.9 35.8 48.2 20.8 38.1 12.2 • LOS C C A B D D C D B • Approach Delay 25.5 35.2 32.6 25.8 Approach LOS C D C C • Queue Length 50th (ft) 58 385 0 12 -435 42 22 82 23 • Queue Length 95th (ft) #191 #536 26 31 #579 83 65 129 68 Internal Link Dist (ft) 3837 920 924 918 • Turn Bay Length (ft) • Base Capacity (vph) 287 2504 829 199 2269 226 365 278 551 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.71 0.86 0.12 0.29 0.95 0.35 0.28 0.63 0.29 4/5/2011 • Intersection Summary • Area Type: Other • Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 • Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green • Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated • Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.95 • Intersection Signal Delay: 29.9 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.8% ICU Level of Service E • Analysis Period (min) 15 • - Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. • # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. • Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. • • • • • • • • • • • • Baseline • T:12009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn Splits and Phases: 3: State Road 60 & Old Coachman 01 03 8.8 4 25s 06 10.31s -1' 04 M45.9 i's0t,14/0,4 33.8 s 07 14.2,s' 4" I 424 08 I PIN Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings • 4: Cleveland Street & Belcher Road • 4\ • 2020 Background Traffic 4/5/2011 • Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL j° WBT ''" WBR .. NBL ' NBT' - f BR ' SBL t1377- SBA • Lane Configurations 4 r 4 r# 4f. r 4t Volume (vph) 67 6 86 24 5 18 6 1009 35 15 791 70 • Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.988 • Flt Protected 0.956 0.960 0.999 • Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1798 1599 0 1806 1599 0 3574 1599 0 3528 0 Flt Permitted 0.721 0.709 0.949 0.926 • Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1356 1599 0 1334 1599 0 3392 1599 0 3270 0 • Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 39 15 37 20 • Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 • Link Distance (ft) 504 504 1744 504 Travel Time (s) 11.5 11.5 39.6 11.5 • Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 • Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 71 6 91 25 5 19 6 1062 37 16 833 74 • Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 77 91 0 30 19 0 1068 37 0 923 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No • Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right • Median Width(ft) 0 0 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 • Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 • Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 • Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 • Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 • Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 8 2 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase • Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • Minimum Split (s) 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s) 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 0.0 • Total Split ( %) 53.1% 53.1% 53.1% 53.1% 53.1% 53.1% 46.9% 46.9% 46.9% 46.9% 46.9% 0.0% • Maximum Green (s) 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • All -Red Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 • Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 4.0 • Lead /Lag • Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 • Recall Mode Min Min Min Min Min Min C -Min C -Min C -Min C -Min C -Min • Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 • Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Act Effct Green (s) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 24.8 24.8 24.8 • Baseline • T: \2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 4: Cleveland Street & Belcher Road • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2020 Background Traffic 4/5/2011 Lane Group EBL EBT _..' EBR- WBL7WBTT WBR'R' ' NBL NBT 'NBR T SBL ;, E '� �SBR Actuated g /CRatio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.51 0.51 0.51 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.30 0.13 0.07 0.62 0.04 0.56 Control Delay 21.2 13.7 17.4 10.3 11.4 3.4 10.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 21.2 13.7 17.4 10.3 11.4 3.4 10.3 LOS C B B B B A B Approach Delay 17.1 14.7 11.1 10.3 Approach LOS B B B B Queue Length 50th (ft) 20 13 7 1 103 0 82 Queue Length 95th (ft) 46 40 23 13 181 12 148 Internal Link Dist (ft) 424 424 1664 424 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 457 564 449 548 1714 826 1662 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.17 0.16 0.07 0.03 0.62 0.04 0.56 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 49 Actuated Cycle Length: 49 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.62 Intersection Signal Delay: 11.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% Analysis Period (min) 15 4' Cleveland Street & Belcher Road Intersection LOS: B ICU Level of Service B vN l v m2.. , ,,...,.,... I---�► 04 23s 08 a8 23 s 2 • Baseline • T:\2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis \2020 Background Traffic.syn • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 A S • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Background Traffic • 5: Shopping Center Driveway & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 • Lane Group '' EBL -' EB E T BR m tY WBL ' WBT WBR `» a NBL- NB1---7-N BR SBL SBT -5BR • Lane Configurations 4 f 4 r fr. 'I tt' Volume (vph) 18 2 13 145 3 67 22 987 109 56 830 32 • Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.985 0.994 • Flt Protected 0.957 0.953 0.999 0.950 • Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1783 1583 0 1792 1599 0 3516 0 1787 3551 0 Flt Permitted 0.777 0.714 0.930 0.239 • Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1447 1583 0 1343 1599 0 3274 0 450 3551 0 • Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 14 35 23 8 • Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 • Link Distance (ft) 499 476 714 622 Travel Time (s) 11.3 10.8 16.2 14.1 • Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.95 0.92 0.95 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.92 • Heavy Vehicles ( %) 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 20 2 14 153 3 71 24 1039 115 59 874 35 • Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 22 14 0 156 71 0 1178 0 59 909 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No • Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right • Median Width(ft) 0 0 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 • Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 ID Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 • Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm pm +pt pm +pt Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 • Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 • Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 8 5 2 1 6 Switch Phase • Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 20.0 23.2 23.2 23.2 8.0 22.1 Total Split (s) 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 8.0 28.8 • Total Split ( %) 38.7% 38.7% 38.7% 38.7% 38.7% 38.7% 13.3% 48.0 %' • Maximum Green (s) 19.2 19.2 19.2 16.0 16.0 16.0 4.0 22.7 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 • All -Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 3.7 3.7 3.7 0.5 2.1 • Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 7.2 7.2 7.2 4.0 6.1 • Lead /Lag Lead Lag • Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 • Recall Mode Min Min Min Min Min Min Min C -Min • Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 • Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; 0 • Act Effct Green (s) 15.0 15.0 11.8 11.8 28.5 33.2 25.8 • Baseline • T:12009- 00071Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn 4.0 4.0 8.0 22.0 0.0 8.0 28.8 0.0 0.0% 13.3% 48.0% 0.0% 4.0 22.8 3.5 3.5 0.5 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 Lead Lag Yes Yes 3.0 3.0 Min C -Min 5.0 11.0 • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Shopping Center Driveway & Belcher Road • • • Lane Group • Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio • Control Delay • Queue Delay Total Delay • LOS • Approach Delay Approach LOS • Queue Length 50th (ft) • Queue Length 95th (ft) Internal Link Dist (ft) • Turn Bay Length (ft) • Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn • Spillback Cap Reductn • Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2020 Background Traffic 4/5/2011 ---► r 'fr 4- -EBL 'tiff EBR WBE F WBT '` WBR7 - ' NBE ' NBT'a NBR SBL 47SBT 7 M>SB( 0.25 0.25 0.20 0.20 0.48 0.55 0.43 0.06 0.03 0.59 0.21 0.75 0.16 0.59 15.6 8.2 30.4 12.5 16,8 6.8 15.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.6 8.2 30.4 12.5 16.8 6.8 15.7 B A C B B A B 12.7 24.8 16.8 15.2 B C B B 6 0 51 11 123 7 127 19 10 95 36 #241 23 196 419 396 634 542 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 60 Actuated Cycle Length: 60 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.75 Intersection Signal Delay: 16.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.6% Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 463 516 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 0.03 358 452 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.44 0.16 1581 0 0 0 0.75 370 1529 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.16 0.59 Intersection LOS: B ICU Level of Service C its and Phases 5' Shopping Center Driveway &Belcher Road 01 02 04 8s , [ 28.8s v , . l 23.2s 05 ir 06 8s, -t- I k28.8s . x,. . M.R, .,. N I 23.2s.8 ,, ,. '. '. _'i • Baseline • T:12009- 00071Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Background Traffic 18: Druid Road & Hercules Ave. 4/5/2011 • .fr -0. -', , ' +- t \* Ily 'd • Lane Group 'EBL� o EBT �T ' EBR WBL WBT WBR '' NB BT L ' -N NBR SBL SBT SBR • Lane Configurations li 1, r ) + r vi + r ) it r Volume (vph) 98 324 21 41 296 143 16 181 50 87 165 148 • Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 • Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 • Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1881 1599 1787 1881 1599 1787 1881 1599 1787 1881 1599 Flt Permitted 0.464 0.459 0.647 - 0.637 • Satd. Flow (perm) 873 1881 1599 863 1881 1599 1217 1881 1599 1198 1881 1599 • Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 22 151 54 156 • Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 • Link Distance (ft) 504 2688 504 1302 Travel Time (s) 11.5 61.1 11.5 29.6 • Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.95 • Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 103 341 22 43 312 151 17 191 54 92 174 156 • Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow (vph) 103 341 22 43 312 151 17 191 54 92 174 156 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No • Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right • Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 • Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 • Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 • Turn Type pm +pt Perm pm +pt Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 • Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 • Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 8 2 2 2 6 6 6 Switch Phase • Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • Minimum Split (s) 11.0 23.0 23.0 11.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Total Split (s) 11.0 23.0 23.0 11.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 • Total Split ( %) 19.3% 40.4% 40.4% 19.3% 40.4% 40.4% 40.4% 40.4% 40.4% 40.4% 40.4% 40.4% • Maximum Green (s) 4.0 16.0 16.0 4.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • All -Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 • Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 • Lead /Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag • Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 • Recall Mode Min Min Min Min Min Min C -Min C -Min C -Min C -Min C -Min C -Min • Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 • Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Act Effct Green (s) 20.5 14.3 14.3 19.5 13.7 13.7 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 • Baseline Synchro 7 - Report • T:\2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn Page 1 • A- --/ • • • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 18: Druid Road & Hercules Ave. 2020 Background Traffic 4/5/2011 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT BR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Actuated g/C Ratio 0.36 0.25 0.25 0.34 0.24 0.24 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 v/c Ratio 0.25 0.72 0.05 0.11 0.69 0.30 0.05 0.36 0.11 0.27 0.33 0.28 Control Delay 9.7 28.8 7.7 8.6 27.8 5.3 16.9 19.8 6.5 19.9 19.4 5.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.7 28.8 7.7 8.6 27.8 5.3 16.9 19.8 6.5 19.9 19.4 5.2 LOS A C A A C A B B A B B A Approach Delay 23.6 19.5 16.9 14.2 Approach LOS C B B B Queue Length 50th (ft) 17 103 0 7 95 0 4 54 0 25 49 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 39 177 13 20 161 34 17 101 21 58 93 36 Internal Link Dist (ft) 424 2608 424 1222 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity(vph) 415 533 469 388 528 557 366 566 519 360 566 590 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.25 0.64 0.05 0.11 0.59 0.27 0.05 0.34 0.10 0.26 0.31 0.26 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 57 Actuated Cycle Length: 57 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.72 Intersection Signal Delay: 18.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.7% Analysis Period (min) 15 • 18: Druid Road & Hercules Ave. Intersection LOS: B ICU Level of Service B Baseline • T: \2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 m2 lr 03 m4 "' 23s 1 11's l 23s m6 m7 m8 23 s .1 11's 1 23 s ... Baseline • T: \2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Background Traffic 4/5/2011 13: Druid Road & Belcher Road Lane Group Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles ( %) Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic ( %) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split ( %) Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All -Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead /Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) Act Effct Green (s) EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR -N-BL NBT r r 141 75 126 113 94 183 98 159 959 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.850 0.850 0.985 0.950 0.950 0.950 1787 1881 1599 1787 1881 1599 1787 3521 0.636 0.441 0.349 1196 1881 1599 830 1881 1599 657 3521 Yes Yes 123 103 17 30 30 30 2688 504 504 61.1 11.5 11.5 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 79 133 123 99 193 103 167 1009 79 133 123 99 193 103 167 1120 No No No No No No No No Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left 12 12 12 0 0 0 16 16 16 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 9 15 Perm Perm pm +pt 4 3 8 4 4 8 4 4 4 3 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 15 Perm Perm 4.0 4.0 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 29.6% 29.6% 16.0 16.0 3.5 2.7 0.0 6.2 Lag Yes 3.0 Min 5.0 11.0 0 10.8 3.5 2.7 0.0 6.2 Lag Yes 3.0 Min 5.0 11.0 0 10.8 8 2 8 8 2 2 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 22.2 9.7 22.2 22.2 22.9 22.9 22.2 9.8 22.2 22.2 32.8 32.8 29.6% 13.1% 29.6% 29.6% 43.7% 43.7% 16.0 4.1 16.0 16.0 26.5 26.5 3.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.3 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 5.7 6.2 6.2 6.3 6.3 Lag Lead Lag Lag Yes Yes Yes Yes 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Min Min Min Min C -Min C -Min 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 0 0 0 0 10.8 21.5 21.0 21.0 29.5 29.5 0 NBR SBL SBT SBR r 105 1900 0.95 55 1900 1.00 762 1900 0.95 114 1900 1.00 0.850 0.950 0 1787 3574 1599 0.112 211 3574 1599 Yes 120 0 Yes 0.95 0.95 1% 1% 111 58 0 58 No No Right Left 1.00 1.00 9 15 pm +pt 1 6 1 30 714 16.2 0.95 1% 802 802 No Left 12 0 16 1.00 0.95 1% 120 120 No Right 1.00 9 Perm 6 6 6 4.0 4.0 4.0 10.1 22.3 22.3 0.0 10.2 43.0 43.0 0.0% 13.6% 57.3% 57.3% 4.1 36.7 36.7 3.2 4.0 4.0 2.9 2.3 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 6.1 6.3 6.3 Lead Yes 3.0 3.0 3.0 Min C -Min C -Min 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 0 0 41.7 41.5 41.5 Baseline T:12009- 00071Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Background Traffic • 13: Druid Road & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Lane Group EBL- EBT' EBR WBL WBT WBR ?Y' NBL ' NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.39 0.39 0.56 0.55 0.55 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.49 0.37 0.34 0.37 0.20 0.65 0.80 0.24 0.41 0.13 Control Delay 36.9 34.8 8.8 22.6 23.2 5.2 34.7 26.4 11.1 10.9 2.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 36.9 34.8 8.8 22.6 23.2 5.2 34.7 26.4 11.1 10.9 2.5 LOS D C A C C A C C B B A Approach Delay 25.8 18.4 27.5 9.9 Approach LOS C B C A Queue Length 50th (ft) 34 58 0 35 73 0 62 233 11 102 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 69 101 40 64 114 30 #165 #374 31 166 24 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2608 424 424 634 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 255 401 438 294 647 618 258 1396 242 1978 939 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.31 0.33 0.28 0.34 0.30 0.17 0.65 0.80 0.24 0.41 0.13 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 75 Actuated Cycle Length: 75 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.80 Intersection Signal Delay: 20.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.6% Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Intersection LOS: C ICU Level of Service C Phases: 13: Druid Road & Belcher Road 01 02 03 04 10.24 32.8s ( 9.8s 1 En 222s @s 4* 43 s .. K , ,, � . a . , . s .r . �, I 22.2 e",,' r8 q4-, v.,.P ., • Baseline • T:12009- 00071Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 /1--/1-( • • • Arterial Level of Service • • 2020 Background Traffic 4/5/2011 Arterial Level of Service: NB Belcher Road • Arterial Flow Running Signal 'Travel Dist Arterial Arterial • Cross Street . '' Class ° Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) ;Speed LOS Druid Road 111 30 13.5 26.4 39.9 0.10 8.6 F • Shopping Center Driv III 30 18.1 16.8 34.9 0.14 13.9 E • State Road 60 III 35 15.9 78.4 94.3 0.12 4.5 F Cleveland Street III 30 41.9 11.4 53.3 0.33 22.3 C • Total III 89.4 133.0 222.4 0.68 11.0 E • Arterial Level of Service: SB Belcher Road • Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial • Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS • Cleveland Street III 30 13.5 10.3 23.8 0.10 14.4 D • State Road 60 III 35 39.6 55.6 95.2 0.33 12.5 E III 30 16.6 15.7 32.3 0.12 13.1 E • 111 30 18.1 10.9 29.0 0.14 16.8 D • Total III 87.8 92.5 180.3 0.68 13.6 E • Arterial Level of Service: EB State Road 60 • • Cross Street • Hercules Ave. • Belcher Road Old Coachman • Total • • Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) III 30 24.2 33.0 57.2 III 45 44.8 74.4 119.2 III 30 89.0 25.8 114.8 111 158.0 133.2 291.2 Arterial Level of Service: WB State Road 60 Dist Arterial Arterial, (mi) Speed LOS 0.19 12.0 E 0.51 15.4 D 0.74 23.3 C 1.44 17.8 D • Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist - Arterial Arterial Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS • Old Coachman II 30 24.1 35.8 59.9 0.19 11.4 F • Belcher Road II 45 59.3 55.0 114.3 0.74 23.4 C Hercules Ave. II 30 64.6 37.2 101.8 0.51 18.0 D • Total II 148.0 128.0 276.0 1.44 18.8 D • • • • • • • • • • • Baseline Synchro 7 - Report • T: \2009- 0007 \Traffic Study Rev 31Analysis12020 Background Traffic.syn Page 1 • /4--r�" • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\rchapman \Local Settings \Temp \u2k25.tmp • Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst REC Intersection SR 60 at Drive 1 Jurisdiction City of Clearwater Agency /Co. Analysis Year Date Performed 4/5/2011 Analysis Time Period Project Description SR 60 at Drive 1- Future Total East/West Street: State Road 60 North /South Street: Drive 1 Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume (veh /h) 1382 117 30 1294 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh /h) 0 1454 123 31 1362 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 1 — — Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume (veh /h) 125 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh /h) 0 0 131 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 1 0 1 0 _ 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service • pproach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L R v (veh /h) 31 131 C (m) (veh /h) 418 369 v/c 0.07 0.36 95% queue length 0.24 1.57 Control Delay (s /veh) 14.3 20.0 LOS B C • pproach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 20.0 • pproach LOS -- -- C Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.21 Generated: 4/5/2011 10:29 AM 4/5/2011 • • • • file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\rchapman\Local Settings \Temp \u2k38.tmp • Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst REC Intersection Agency /Co. Jurisdiction City of Clearwater Date Performed 4/5/2011 Analysis Year Analysis Time Period Project Description Druid at Drive 2- Future Total East/West Street: Druid Road North /South Street: Drive 2 Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume (veh /h) 12 316 451 14 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh /h) 12 332 0 0 474 14 Percent Heavy Vehicles 1 — -- 0 -- — Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume (veh /h) 12 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh /h) 0 0 0 12 0 10 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 1 0 1 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service • pproach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT L R v (veh /h) 12 12 10 C (m) (veh /h) 1080 334 587 v/c 0.01 0.04 0.02 95% queue length 0.03 0.11 0.05 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.4 16.2 11.2 LOS A C _ B • pproach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 13.9 • pproach LOS -- -- B Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.21 Generated: 4/5/2011 10:47 AM - I 7 4/5/2011 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst REC Intersection Druid at Drive 3 Agency /Co. Jurisdiction City of Clearwater Date Performed 4/5/2011 Analysis Year Analysis Time Period Project Description Druid at Drive 3- Future Total East/West Street: Druid Road North /South Street: Drive 3 Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume (veh /h) 11 318 456 15 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh /h) 11 334 0 0 480 15 Percent Heavy Vehicles 1 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume (veh /h) 13 8 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh /h) 0 0 0 13 0 8 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 1 0 1 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service ■ pproach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT L R v (veh /h) 11 13 8 C (m) (veh /h) 1074 332 582 v/c 0.01 0.04 0.01 95% queue length 0.03 0.12 0.04 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.4 16.3 11.3 LOS A C 8 pproach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 14.4 pproach LOS -- -- B Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.21 • file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rchapman\Local Settings \Temp \u2k61.tmp • Generated: 4/5/2011 1:08 PM 4 4/5/2011 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\rchapman\Local Settings \Temp \u2k58.tmp Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst REC Intersection Druid at Drive 4 Agency /Co. Jurisdiction City of Clearwater Date Performed 4/5/2011 Analysis Year Analysis Time Period Project Description Druid at Drive 4- Future Total EastNVest Street: Druid Road North /South Street: Drive 4 Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume (veh /h) 330 471 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh /h) 0 347 0 0 495 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 1 -- — 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration T T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume (veh /h) 1 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh /h) 0 0 0 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 1 0 1 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 1 Configuration R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service •pproach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration R v (veh /h) 1 C (m) (veh /h) 577 v/c 0.00 95% queue length 0.01 Control Delay (s /veh) 11.3 LOS _ B • pproach Delay (s /veh) -- -- _ 11.3 • pproach LOS -- -- B Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.21 Generated: 4/5/2011 1:05 PM -�q 4/5/2011 • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic • 1: State Road 60 & Hercules Ave. 4/5/2011 • • • Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT - -WBR NBL" NET NBR` SBL SBT SBR • Lane Configurations 'j ttiii, ¶1 44 ) it r 11 Volume (vph) 154 1908 53 99 1751 139 63 248 108 136 211 144 • Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.996 0.989 0.850 0.850 • Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 • Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 5115 0 1787 5079 0 1787 1881 1599 1787 1881 1599 Flt Permitted 0.102 0.108 0.620 0.285 • Satd. Flow (perm) 192 5115 0 203 5079 0 1166 1881 1599 536 1881 1599 • Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 6 17 114 119 • Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 • Link Distance (ft) 1008 2685 1302 994 Travel Time (s) 22.9 61.0 29.6 22.6 • Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 • Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 162 2008 56 104 1843 146 66 261 114 143 222 152 • Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow (vph) 162 2064 0 104 1989 0 66 261 114 143 222 152 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No • Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right • Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 • Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 • Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 • Turn Type pm +pt pm +pt Perm Perm pm +pt Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 1 6 • Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 6 • Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 2 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase • Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • Minimum Split (s) 10.1 22.3 10.1 22.3 22.9 22.9 22.9 9.9 22.9 22.9 Total Split (s) 13.0 44.6 0.0 10.4 42.0 0.0 24.8 24.8 24.8 10.2 35.0 35.0 • Total Split ( %) 14.4% 49.6% 0.0% 11.6% 46.7% 0.0% 27.6% 27.6% 27.6% 11.3% 38.9% 38.9% • Maximum Green (s) 6.9 38.3 4.3 35.7 17.9 17.9 17.9 4.3 28.1 28.1 Yellow Time (s) 3.2 3.9 3.2 3.9 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.0 3.2 3.2 • All -Red Time (s) 2.9 2.4 2.9 2.4 3.7 3.7 3.7 2.9 3.7 3.7 • Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 6.1 6.3 4.0 6.1 6.3 4.0 6.9 6.9 6.9 5.9 6.9 6.9 • Lead /Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lag Lead • Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 • Recall Mode Min Min Min Min C -Min C -Min C -Min Min C -Min C -Min • Waik Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 • Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Act Effct Green (s) 46.8 39.2 42.4 37.0 16.1 16.1 16.1 27.3 26.3 26.3 • • • • • Baseline Synchro 7 - Report %user_name% Page 1 -io • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic 1: State Road 60 & Hercules Ave. 4/5/2011 • • • Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT 4 NI-BR- SBL SEft---S-BR • Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.44 0.47 0.41 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.30 0.29 0.29 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.93 0.56 0.95 0.32 0.77 0.30 0.64 0.40 0.28 • Control Delay 32.6 33.0 24.7 37.3 35.7 51.3 8.5 38.7 27.6 8.5 • Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 32.6 33.0 24.7 37.3 35.7 51.3 8.5 38.7 27.6 8.5 • LOS C C C D D D A D C A • Approach Delay 33.0 36.7 37.9 25.0 Approach LOS C D D C • Queue Length 50th (ft) 43 401 27 398 32 139 0 59 98 13 • Queue Length 95th (ft) #136 #522 #75 #522 71 #238 43 #110 161 56 Internal Link Dist (ft) 928 2605 1222 914 • Turn Bay Length (ft) • Base Capacity (vph) 230 2230 187 2098 232 374 409 222 587 581 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.70 0.93 0.56 0.95 0.28 0.70 0.28 0.64 0.38 0.26 • Intersection Summary • Area Type: Other • Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 • Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green • Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated • Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.95 • Intersection Signal Delay: 34.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.0% • Analysis Period (min) 15 • # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. • Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Intersection LOS: C ICU Level of Service E • • • • • • • • • • • • Baseline %user_name% • • • Solits and Phases: 1: State Road 60 & Hercules Ave. 01 t o2 03 X 04 10.2 � 24:8 s l "' .�;' F 10:4 � .� . 44.5 s 07 08 Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic • 2: State Road 60 & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 • • Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT r SBR • Lane Configurations ill +14 'I + I +% +I Volume (vph) 164 1891 130 170 1714 154 190 802 130 175 653 85 • Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.990 0.988 0.979 0.983 • Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 • Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 5084 0 1787 5074 0 1787 3499 0 1787 3513 0 Flt Permitted 0.073 0.073 0.136 0.105 Satd. Flow (perm) 137 5084 0 137 5074 0 256 3499 0 198 3513 0 • Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 9 12 13 10 • Link Speed (mph) 45 45 35 35 • Link Distance (ft) 2685 3917 622 1744 Travel Time (s) 40.7 59.3 12.1 34.0 • Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 • Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 173 1991 137 179 1804 162 200 844 137 184 687 89 O Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow (vph) 173 2128 0 179 1966 0 200 981 0 184 776 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No • Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right • Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 • Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 • Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 • Turn Type pm +pt pm +pt pm +pt pm +pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 • Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 • Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Switch Phase III Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 12.0 4.0 12.0 5.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 • Minimum Split (s) 9.7 21.9 9.7 21.9 11.2 22.5 11.2 22.5 Total Split (s) 16.5 61.0 0.0 16.4 60.9 0.0 18.0 45.2 0.0 17.4 44.6 0.0 • Total Split ( %) 11.8% 43.6% 0.0% 11.7% 43.5% 0.0% 12.9% 32.3% 0.0% 12.4% 31.9% 0.0% • Maximum Green (s) 10.8 55.1 10.7 55.0 11.8 38.7 11.2 38.1 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 • All -Red Time (s) 2.2 1.9 2.2 1.9 2.7 2.5 2.7 2.5 • Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.7 5.9 4.0 5.7 5.9 4.0 6.2 6.5 4.0 6.2 6.5 4.0 O Lead /Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag • Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 • Recall Mode Min Min Min Min Min C -Min Min C -Min • Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 • Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) 0 0 0 0 • Act Effct Green (s) 66.1 55.1 65.9 55.0 50.8 38.7 49.6 38.1 • Baseline Synchro 7 - Report • %user_name% /4 -11-- Page 1 • • • • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic 2: State Road 60 & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 • •i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • - -► i- 4- 4\ t p \* 4/ Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NIL NBT NBR SBL ` SBT SBR Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.39 0.47 0.39 0.36 0.28 0.35 0.27 v/c Ratio 0.90 1.06 0.94 0.98 0.90 1.00 0.93 0.81 Control Delay 77.1 79.2 85.1 58.1 70.6 79.3 83.7 54.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 77.1 79.2 85.1 58.1 70.6 79.3 83.7 54.4 LOS E E F E E E F D Approach Delay 79.0 60.3 77.8 60.1 Approach LOS E E E E Queue Length 50th (ft) 106 -777 112 641 121 -471 116 344 Queue Length 95th (ft) #250 #871 #264 #760 #263 #623 #267 423 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2605 3837 542 1664 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 192 2006 191 2001 222 977 197 963 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.90 1.06 0.94 0.98 0.90 1.00 0.93 0.81 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 140 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 140 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.06 Intersection Signal Delay: 69.9 Intersection LOS: E Intersection Capacity Utilization 105.1 % ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 - Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. : State Road 60 & Belcher Road 01 .t o2 03 04 174si:'l 45.2s k,. 1 16.4s< 0I N611sk - I N 05 i''`' m6 ,fr 07 08 18."t1-4',`,.1 N44.6 s ... 4„ 1 I16.5 s. i iN6O.9 s L . , n ?;, } � , 2 7_ 1 ( Baseline • %user_name% • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic 4/5/2011 3: State Road 60 & Old Coachman Lane Group Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles ( %) Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic ( %) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split ( %) Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All -Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead /Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) Act Effct Green (s) 1-- EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBTA NBR SBLSBT SBF r to 194 2066 91 54 1771 295 74 40 59 166 42 109 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.850 0.979 0.911 0.892 0.950 1787 0.087 164 0.95 1% 204 204 No Left 0.950 5136 1599 1787 0.097 5136 1599 182 Yes 96 30 3917 89.0 0.95 1% 2175 2175 No Left 12 0 16 0.95 1% 96 96 No Right 0.95 1% 57 57 No Left 0.950 5028 0 1787 0.656 5028 0 1234 Yes 44 30 1000 22.7 0.95 1% 1864 2175 No Left 12 0 16 0.95 1% 311 0 No Right 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 9 15 pm +pt Perm pm +pt 7 4 3 8 4 4 8 7 4 4 3 8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 10.3 21.6 21.6 10.3 20.9 14.0 45.7 45.7 10.3 42.0 15.6% 50.8% 50.8% 11.4% 46.7% 7.7 40.1 40.1 4.0 37.1 3.2 3.9 3.9 3.2 3.2 3.1 1.7 1.7 3.1 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 5.6 5.6 6.3 4.9 Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Min Min Min None Min 5.0 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 0 0 0 54.1 46.2 46.2 44.5 39.9 0.95 1% 78 78 No Left 1.00 9 15 Perm 0.950 1714 0 1787 1678 0 0.465 1714 0 875 1678 0 Yes Yes 62 110 30 30 1004 998 22.8 22.7 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 42 62 175 44 115 104 No Left 12 0 16 0 No Right 175 No Left 159 No Left 12 0 16 0 No Right 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 15 9 pm +pt 2 1 6 2 6 2 2 1 6 4.0 4.0 24.5 24.5 0.0 25.2 25.2 0.0% 28.0% 28.0% 16.7 16.7 0.0 4.0 3.6 4.9 0.0 8.5 Lag Yes 3.0 3.6 4.9 0.0 8.5 Lag Yes 3.0 C -Min C -Min 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 0 0 11.0 11.0 4.0 4.0 8.7 24.5 0.0 8.8 34.0 0.0 0.0% 9.8% 37.8% 0.0% 4.1 25.5 3.0 3.6 1.7 4.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.7 8.5 4.0 Lead Yes 3.0 3.0 None C -Min 5.0 11.0 0 23.6 19.8 Baseline %user_name% Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 • � Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic 3: State Road 60 & Old Coachman 4/5/2011 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Lane Group EBL.__ EBT EBR WBL WBT.._ WBR ' NBL>+ NBT 'NBA- SBL - SBT . `SBR Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.51 0.51 0.49 0.44 0.12 0.12 0.26 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.83 0.11 0.29 0.96 0.52 0.40 0.65 0.35 Control Delay 32.5 23.8 3.6 13.0 37.7 48.2 20.8 39.2 12.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 32.5 23.8 3.6 13.0 37.7 48.2 20.8 39.2 12.2 LOS C C A B D D C D B Approach Delay 23.8 37.1 32.6 26.3 Approach LOS C D C C Queue Length 50th (ft) 60 391 0 12 -449 42 22 82 23 Queue Length 95th (ft) #195 #547 26 31 #585 83 65 129 68 Internal Link Dist (ft) 3837 920 924 918 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 290 2636 868 197 2256 229 369 271 554 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.70 0.83 0.11 0.29 0.96 0.34 0.28 0.65 0.29 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.96 Intersection Signal Delay: 29.9 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.1 % ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 - Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 60 & Old Coachman 01 m2 m3 o4 --,:o.... ' 8,8s 25.2s ®x_ 10 3s '4574s * I ..- --- 8 �� 84 m7 14 s 42 TM ,. _ . • Baseline • %user_name% • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic 4: Cleveland Street & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 • • • Lane Group T EBL - - -EBT r 'EBR WBL WBT WBR" NBC- f BT. ' ' 'NBR - SBL SBT BBR • Lane Configurations 4 rf 4 r 4 rf 4 Volume (vph) 67 6 86 24 5 18 6 1035 35 15 819 70 • Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.988 • Flt Protected 0.956 0.960 0.999 • Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1798 1599 0 1806 1599 0 3574 1599 0 3528 0 Fit Permitted 0.721 0.709 0.949 0.927 • Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1356 1599 0 1334 1599 0 3392 1599 0 3274 0 • Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 70 19 37 19 • Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 • Link Distance (ft) 504 504 1744 504 Travel Time (s) 11.5 11.5 39.6 11.5 • Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 • Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 71 6 91 25 5 19 6 1089 37 16 862 74 • Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 77 91 0 30 19 0 1095 37 0 952 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No • Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right • Median Width(ft) 0 0 0 0 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 • Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 • Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 • Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 4 8 2 6 • Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 • Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 8 2 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase • Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • Minimum Split (s) 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s) 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 0.0 • Total Split ( %) 46.4% 46.4% 46.4% 46.4% 46.4% 46.4% 53.6% 53.6% 53.6% 53.6% 53.6% 0.0% • Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • All -Red Time (s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 • Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 4.0 • Lead /Lag • Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 • Recall Mode Min Min Min Min Min Min C -Min C -Min C -Min C -Min C -Min • Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 • Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Act Effct Green (s) 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 30.4 30.4 30.4 • • • • • Baseline Synchro 7 - Report %user_name% Page 1 4 - • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic 4: Cleveland Street & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 • • k` 41\ t 'I' 4i • LaneGroup EBL EBT EBR WIL WBT WBR '1\1B-17 NBT NBR " -SBL SBT-v-SBR • Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.55 0.55 0.55 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.30 0.14 0.07 0.58 0.04 0.52 • Control Delay 24.8 10.6 20.3 9.9 10.2 3.1 9.4 • Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 24.8 10.6 20.3 9.9 10.2 3.1 9.4 • LOS C B C A B A A • Approach Delay 17.1 16.3 10.0 9.4 Approach LOS B B B A • Queue Length 50th (ft) 23 6 9 0 108 0 88 • Queue Length 95th (ft) 52 35 26 13 187 11 155 Internal Link Dist (ft) 424 424 1664 424 • Turn Bay Length (ft) • Base Capacity (vph) 394 515 388 479 1877 901 1821 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.18 0.08 0.04 0.58 0.04 0.52 • Intersection Summary • Area Type: Other • Cycle Length: 55 Actuated Cycle Length: 55 • Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green • Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated • Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.58 • Intersection Signal Delay: 10.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.7% • Analysis Period (min) 15 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Baseline Synchro 7 - Report • %user_name% Page 2 • • • 4: Cleveland Street & Belcher Road Intersection LOS: B ICU Level of Service B -.- - to2 -:711'' 04 29.5 s ' , ,'" -- ' 1 P25.5 s '.. -- - 1 7/ 06 09 29.5s 25.5 i .,",;',, ' '..:'-',- " 1 • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic 5: Shopping Center Driveway & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 • • -) -► -N. ir .- 4\ t P \* 4' 4i EBL' EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR TT NBL ` NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR • Lane Group • Lane Configurations 4 r 4 f 'f` ) `i' Volume (vph) 102 5 70 145 6 67 81 953 109 56 796 101 • Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 • Frt 0.850 0.850 0.986 Flt Protected 0.954 0.954 0.996 0.950 0.983 • Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1795 1599 0 1795 1599 0 3510 0 1787 3513 0 Flt Permitted 0.625 0.654 0.740 0.228 • Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1176 1599 0 1230 1599 0 2608 0 429 3513 0 • Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes • Satd. Flow (RTOR) 74 60 22 25 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 • Link Distance (ft) 421 476 714 622 Travel Time (s) 9.6 10.8 16.2 14.1 • Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.99 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 • Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% • Adj. Flow (vph) 107 5 74 153 6 71 88 1003 115 59 838 106 Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 112 74 0 159 71 0 1206 0 59 944 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No • Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right • Median Width(ft) 0 0 12 12 • Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 • Two way Left Turn Lane • Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 • Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm pm +pt pm +pt Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 • 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 • Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 8 5 2 1 6 Switch Phase • Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • Minimum Split (s) 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 10.0 22.1 10.0 22.5 • Total Split (s) 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 10.0 31.8 0.0 10.0 31.8 0.0 Total Split ( %) 35.7% 35.7% 35.7% 35.7% 35.7% 35.7% 15.4% 48.9% 0.0% 15.4% 48.9% 0.0% • Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 4.0 25.7 4.0 25.7 • Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 2.5 2.1 2.5 2.1 • Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 6.0 6.1 4.0 6.0 6.1 4.0 • Lead /Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag • Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes 110 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Min Min Min Min Min Min Min C -Min Min C -Min • Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 • Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Act Effct Green (s) 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.8 32.6 33.3 28.0 • Baseline • %user_name% • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 • • 2020 Total Traffic • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: Shopping Center Driveway & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR 'NBL NBT '''' NBR SBL SBT SBR Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.50 0.51 0.43 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.20 0.66 0.20 0.87 0.18 0.62 Control Delay 29.5 7.1 36.7 9.0 22.9 8.1 16.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 29.5 7.1 36.7 9.0 22.9 8.1 16.7 LOS C A D A C A B Approach Delay 20.6 28.2 22.9 16.2 Approach LOS C C C B Queue Length 50th (ft) 39 0 58 4 136 9 147 Queue Length 95th (ft) 80 27 109 31 #298 24 213 Internal Link Dist (ft) 341 396 634 542 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 289 449 303 439 1385 327 1529 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.16 0.52 0.16 0.87 0.18 0.62 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 65 Actuated Cycle Length: 65 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.87 Intersection Signal Delay: 20.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization 88.6% Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Intersection LOS: C ICU Level of Service E • 5: Shopping Center Driveway & Belcher Road 01 IO2 04 10 "s '1 L<._ 131.8 s �. 1 23.2 s -,,, _ .; .�� 1 4\ 05 * 06 08 10s.1 M 31.8s�'' x t �..w I 23.2si-',.,,_ ,� .:; • Baseline • %user_name% • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 -2-9 • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic • 18: Druid Road & Hercules Ave. 4/5/2011 • .., . Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR • Lane Configurations it rf ) + r vi 4, r vi + r • Volume (vph) 98 336 21 41 308 143 16 181 50 87 165 148 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 • Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 • Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 1881 1599 1787 1881 1599 1787 1881 1599 1787 1881 1599 Flt Permitted 0.405 0.549 0.647 0.637 • Satd. Flow (perm) 762 1881 1599 1033 1881 1599 1217 1881 1599 1198 1881 1599 • Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes • Satd. Flow (RTOR) 22 151 54 156 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 • Link Distance (ft) 504 2688 504 1302 • Travel Time (s) 11.5 61.1 11.5 29.6 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.95 • Heavy Vehicles ( %) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% • Adj. Flow (vph) 103 354 22 43 324 151 17 191 54 92 174 156 Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow (vph) 103 354 22 43 324 151 17 191 54 92 174 156 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No • Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right • Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 • Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 • Two way Left Turn Lane • Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 • Turn Type pm +pt Perm pm +pt Perm Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 • Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 • Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 8 2 2 2 6 6 6 Switch Phase • Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • Minimum Split (s) 11.0 23.0 23.0 11.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 Total Split (s) 12.0 26.0 26.0 11.0 25.0 25.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 • Total Split ( %) 20.0% 43.3% 43.3% 18.3% 41.7% 41.7% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% • Maximum Green (s) 5.0 19.0 19.0 4.0 18.0 18.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 • Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 • Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 • Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Lead /Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag • Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes • Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Min Min Min None None None C -Min C -Min C -Min C -Min C -Min C -Min • Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 • Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls ( #/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Act Effct Green (s) 26.3 23,7 23.7 20.5 14.8 14.8 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.3 • Baseline Synchro 7 - Report • %user_name% Page 1 • • • • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic • # 18: Druid Road & Hercules Ave. 4/5/2011 • Lane Group ' EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBC' NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR • Actuated g/C Ratio 0.44 0.40 0.40 0.34 0.25 0.25 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 v/c Ratio 0.23 0.48 0.03 0.10 0.70 0.30 0.05 0.35 0.11 0.27 0.32 0.27 • Control Delay 9.3 17.3 7.1 8.5 28.6 5.1 17.8 20.5 6.7 20.7 20.1 5.2 • Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.3 17.3 7.1 8.5 28.6 5.1 17.8 20.5 6.7 20.7 20.1 5.2 • LOS A B A A C A BC A CC A • Approach Delay 15.1 20.1 17.5 14.7 Approach LOS B C B B • Queue Length 50th (ft) 18 70 0 7 105 0 5 57 0 27 52 0 • Queue Length 95th (ft) 39 182 13 20 169 34 18 107 22 61 98 37 Internal Link Dist (ft) 424 2608 424 1222 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 451 743 645 425 564 585 366 566 519 360 566 590 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.23 0.48 0.03 0.10 0.57 0.26 0.05 0.34 0.10 0.26 0.31 0.26 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 60 Actuated Cycle Length: 60 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.70 Intersection Signal Delay: 16.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.3% Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 18: Druid Road & Hercules Ave. Intersection LOS: B ICU Level of Service B • Baseline • %user_name% • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 02 03 "* 04 23 s 1 11 s 1 ( 26i m6 f 07 08 23 s I r ." . 12 s < < I , :' 25 s ` ' ..d. • Baseline • %user_name% • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic 4/5/2011 13: Druid Road & Belcher Road Lane Group Lane Configurations Volume (vph) Ideal Flow (vphpl) Lane Util. Factor Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Right Turn on Red Satd. Flow (RTOR) Link Speed (mph) Link Distance (ft) Travel Time (s) Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles ( %) Adj. Flow (vph) Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) Enter Blocked Intersection Lane Alignment Median Width(ft) Link Offset(ft) Crosswalk Width(ft) Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor Turning Speed (mph) Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) Minimum Split (s) Total Split (s) Total Split ( %) Maximum Green (s) Yellow Time (s) All -Red Time (s) Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead /Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Vehicle Extension (s) Recall Mode Walk Time (s) Flash Dont Walk (s) Pedestrian Calls ( # /hr) Act Effct Green (s) EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT r 75 131 123 94 189 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.850 0.950 0.950 1787 1881 1599 1787 1881 0.633 0.441 1191 1881 1599 830 1881 Yes 134 0.95 1% 79 79 No Left 30 2688 61.1 0.95 1% 138 138 No Left 12 0 16 1.00 1.00 15 Perm 4 4.0 22.2 22.2 29.6% 16.0 3.5 2.7 0.0 6.2 Lag Yes 3.0 None 5.0 11.0 0 11.0 0.92 0.95 1% 1% 134 99 134 99 No No Right Left 30 504 11.5 0.95 1% 199 199 No Left 12 0 16 WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR r vi tit r 104 168 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 0.850 0.950 1599 1787 0.343 1599 645 Yes 109 0.95 0.95 1% 1% 109 177 109 177 No No Right Left 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 15 9 15 Perm pm +pt Perm Perm 4 3 8 4 8 4 4 3 4.0 4.0 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 29.6% 29.6% 16.0 16.0 3.5 3.5 2.7 0.0 6.2 Lag Yes 3.0 None 5.0 11.0 2.7 0.0 6.2 Lag Yes 3.0 None 5.0 11.0 0 0 11.0 11.0 8 2 8 8 2 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 9.7 22.2 22.2 22.9 9.7 31.9 31.9 33.0 12.9% 42.5% 42.5% 44.0% 4.0 25.7 25,7 26.7 3.0 3.5 3,5 4.0 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 6.2 6.2 6.3 Lead Lag Yes Yes 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Min Min Min C -Min 5.0 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 0 0 0 21.6 21.1 21.1 29.4 978 105 61 779 114 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.985 0.850 0.950 3521 0 1787 3574 1599 0.113 3521 0 213 3574 1599 Yes Yes 17 120 30 30 504 714 11.5 16.2 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1029 111 64 820 120 1140 No Left 12 0 16 0 No Right 64 No Left 820 No Left 12 0 16 120 No Right 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 15 9 pm +pt Perm 2 1 6 6 6 2 1 6 6 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 22.9 10.1 22.3 22.3 33.0 0.0 10.1 43.1 43.1 44.0% 0.0% 13.5% 57.5% 57.5% 26.7 4.0 36.8 36.8 4.0 3.2 4.0 4.0 2.3 2.9 2.3 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 4.0 6.1 6.3 6.3 Lag Lead Yes Yes 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 C -Min Min C -Min C -Min 5.0 5.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 0 0 0 29.4 41.6 41.4 41.4 Baseline %user_name% Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 3 2 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic 13: Druid Road & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.39 0.39 0.55 0.55 0.55 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.50 0.38 0.34 0.38 0.21 0.70 0.82 0.26 0.42 0.13 Control Delay 36.5 35.0 8.7 22.6 23.3 5.2 38.7 27.3 11.4 11.0 2.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 36.5 35.0 8.7 22.6 23.3 5.2 38.7 27.3 11.4 11.0 2.5 LOS DC A CC A DC B B A Approach Delay 25.3 18.3 28.8 10.0 Approach LOS C B C B Queue Length 50th (ft) 34 60 0 35 75 0 68 241 12 105 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 69 104 41 64 118 31 #179 #383 34 170 24 Internal Link Dist (ft) 2608 424 424 634 Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) 254 401 447 294 645 620 253 1390 243 1974 937 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.31 0.34 0.30 0.34 0.31 0.18 0.70 0.82 0.26 0.42 0.13 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 75 Actuated Cycle Length: 75 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.82 Intersection Signal Delay: 20.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 68.5% Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Intersection LOS: C ICU Level of Service C Splits and Phases: 13: Druid Road & Belcher Road 01 02 'f- 03 '-► 04 10.1 s{ 33 .. .;_ l F. 9,7 is 22:2 s o, ' 4, 06 08 43.1 s ,.:.,. 31.5 s,,,' ' • Baseline • %user_name% • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 • • • Arterial Level of Service 2020 Total Traffic 4/5/2011 • • Arterial Level of Service: NB Belcher Road • Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arlene, • Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS Druid Road 111 30 13.5 27.3 40.8 0.10 8.4 F • Shopping Center Driv 111 30 18.1 22.9 41.0 0.14 11.9 E • State Road 60 III 35 15.9 79.3 95.2 0.12 4.5 F Cleveland Street 111 30 41.9 10.3 52.2 0.33 22.8 C • Total III 89.4 139.8 229.2 0.68 10.7 E • Arterial Level of Service: SB Belcher Road • • Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS • Cleveland Street III 30 13.5 9.4 22.9 0.10 15.0 D • State Road 60 HI 35 39.6 54.4 94.0 0.33 12.6 E 111 30 16.6 16.7 33.3 0.12 12.7 E • 111 30 18.1 11.0 29.1 0.14 16.7 D • Total 111 87.8 91.5 179.3 0.68 13.6 E • Arterial Level of Service: EB State Road 60 • • Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial, Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS • Hercules Ave. 111 30 24.2 33.0 57.2 0.19 12.0 E • Belcher Road 111 45 44.8 79.2 124.0 0.51 14.8 D Old Coachman 111 30 89.0 23.8 112.8 0.74 23.7 C • Total III 158.0 136.0 294.0 1.44 17.6 D • • Arterial Level of Service: WB State Road 60 • Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS • Old Coachman ll 30 24.1 37.7 61.8 0.19 11.0 F • Belcher Road 11 45 59.3 58.1 117.4 0.74 22.7 C Hercules Ave. II 30 64.6 37.3 101.9 0.51 18.0 D • Total 11 148.0 133.1 281.1 1.44 18.4 D • • • • • • • • • • • Baseline Synchro 7 - Report • %user_name %a Page 1 • 3-t • • • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic w /Impr 2: State Road 60 & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 • • - -� -. *� t * d • Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL w WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR • Lane Configurations 'Pi 1 MM r ) to vi +I "I Volume (vph) 164 1891 130 170 1714 154 190 802 130 175 653 85 • Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.988 0.979 0.983 • Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 • Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 5136 1599 1787 5074 0 1787 3499 0 1787 3513 0 Flt Permitted 0.072 0.072 0.142 0.101 • Satd. Flow (perm) 135 5136 1599 135 5074 0 267 3499 0 190 3513 0 • Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 85 12 13 10 • Link Speed (mph) 45 45 35 35 • Link Distance (ft) 2685 3917 622 1744 Travel Time (s) 40.7 59.3 12.1 34.0 • Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 • Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 173 1991 137 179 1804 162 200 844 137 184 687 89 • Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow(vph) 173 1991 137 179 1966 0 200 981 0 184 776 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No • Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right • Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 • Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 • Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 • Turn Type pm +pt Perm pm +pt pm +pt pm +pt Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 • Permitted Phases 4 4 8 2 6 • Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Switch Phase • Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 12.0 12.0 4.0 12.0 5.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 • Minimum Split (s) 9.7 21.9 21.9 9.7 21.9 11.2 22.5 11.2 22.5 Total Split (s) 16.4 61.2 61.2 16.6 61.4 0.0 19.0 46.0 0.0 19.0 46.0 0.0 • Total Split ( %) 11.5% 42.9% 42.9% 11.6% 43.0% 0.0% 13.3% 32.2% 0.0% 13.3% 32.2% 0.0% • Maximum Green (s) 10.7 55.3 55.3 10.9 55.5 12.8 39.5 12.8 39.5 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 • All -Red Time (s) 2.2 1.9 1.9 2.2 1.9 2.7 2.5 2.7 2.5 • Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.7 5.9 5.9 5.7 5.9 4.0 6.2 6.5 4.0 6.2 6.5 4.0 • Lead /Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag • Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 • Recall Mode Min Min Min Min Min Min C -Min Min C -Min • Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 • Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 • Act Effct Green (s) 66.2 55.3 55.3 66.6 55.5 52.7 39.6 52.5 39.5 • • • • • Baseline Synchro 7 - Report %user_name% Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic w /Impr 4/5/2011 2: State Road 60 & Belcher Road Lane Group Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay Queue Delay Total Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Queue Length 50th (ft) 110 Queue Length 95th (ft) 4260 Internal Link Dist (ft) Turn Bay Length (ft) Base Capacity (vph) Starvation Cap Reductn Spillback Cap Reductn Storage Cap Reductn Reduced v/c Ratio EBL 0.46 0.93 85.0 0.0 85.0 F Intersection Summary EBT EBR WBL' WBT WBR`c NIL ' NIT ''iBR SBL tl' SBT ' SBR 0.39 0.39 0.47 0.39 0.37 0.28 0.37 0.28 1.00 0.20 0.95 0.99 0.85 1.00 0.87 0.79 63.9 12.5 88.6 61.7 61.1 79.3 70.9 54.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 63.9 12.5 88.6 61.7 61.1 79.3 70.9 54.1 E B F E E E E D 62.4 63.9 76.2 57.3 E E E E -675 30 116 659 122 -481 118 349 4797 78 #271 #782 4251 #633 4256 428 2605 3837 542 1664 186 1989 671 189 1979 235 980 213 980 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.93 1.00 0.20 0.95 0.99 0.85 1.00 0.86 0.79 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 142.8 Actuated Cycle Length: 142.8 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 140 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.00 Intersection Signal Delay: 64.6 Intersection LOS: E Intersection Capacity Utilization 102.2% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 - Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 2: State Road 60 & Belcher Road 01 I o2 r o3 -9' 04 19s ' l 466 • . l 16.6611 N61.2S tc.Y ° , E, {;. s ,,+ §.;[ 0 4\ 05 II * 06 ''* 07 . 08 19i--" ; .I 466 I 16:484 M61.4. ? r�,,, ,;I Pi • Baseline • %user_name% • • • Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 #-36 • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic w /Impr 5: Shopping Center Driveway & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 • • • Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL` WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR • Lane Configurations 4 r 4 r* ti ) +4 r Volume (vph) 102 5 70 145 6 67 81 953 109 56 796 101 • Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 • Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.986 0.850 • Flt Protected 0.954 0.954 0.996 0.950 • Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1795 1599 0 1795 1599 0 3510 0 1787 3574 1599 Flt Permitted 0.625 0.654 0.789 0.228 • Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1176 1599 0 1230 1599 0 2781 0 429 3574 1599 • Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 74 71 22 106 • Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 • Link Distance (ft) 421 476 714 622 Travel Time (s) 9.6 10.8 16.2 14.1 • Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.99 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 • Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 107 5 74 153 6 71 88 1003 115 59 838 106 • Shared Lane Traffic ( %) • Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 112 74 0 159 71 0 1206 0 59 838 106 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No • Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right • Median Width(ft) 0 0 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 0 • Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 16 • Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 • Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 • Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm pm +pt pm +pt Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 • Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6 6 • Detector Phase 4 4 4 8 8 8 5 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 • Minimum Split (s) 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 10.0 22.1 10.0 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s) 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 10.0 36.0 0.0 10.0 36.0 36.0 • Total Split ( %) 33.5% 33.5% 33.5% 33.5% 33.5% 33.5% 14.5% 52.0% 0.0% 14.5% 52.0% 52.0% • Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 4.0 29.9 4.0 29.9 29.9 Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 • All -Red Time (s) 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 2.5 2.1 2.5 2.1 2.1 • Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 6.0 6.1 4.0 6.0 6.1 6.1 • Lead /Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag • Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 • Recall Mode Min Min Min Min Min Min Min C -Min Min C -Min C -Min • Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 _ 5.0 - 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 • Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Act Effct Green (s) 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 36.6 • • • • • 37.1 31.9 31.9 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report %user name% Page 1 • • • Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2020 Total Traffic w /Impr • 5: Shopping Center Driveway & Belcher Road 4/5/2011 • ') - -r C 4- A' 4\ t t \. 1 • Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL' WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR • Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.53 0.54 0.46 0.46 • v/c Ratio 0.50 0.20 0.69 0.20 0.79 0.18 0.51 0.13 Control Delay 32.5 7.7 41.0 7.7 17.1 7.7 15.0 3.3 • Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 • Total Delay 32.5 7.7 41.0 7.7 17.1 7.7 15.0 3.3 LOS C A D A B A B A • Approach Delay 22.6 30.7 17.1 13.3 • Approach LOS C C B B Queue Length 50th (ft) 42 0 62 0 141 9 132 0 • Queue Length 95th (ft) 86 29 118 29 #227 23 184 24 • Internal Link Dist (ft) 341 396 634 542 Turn Bay Length (ft) • Base Capacity (vph) 272 427 284 424 1531 329 1649 795 • Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Reduced v/c Ratio 0.41 0.17 0.56 0.17 0.79 0.18 0.51 0.13 • Intersection Summary Other • Area Type: Cycle Length: 69.2 Actuated Cycle Length: 69.2 Offset: 0 (0 %), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated - Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.79 Intersection Signal Delay: 17.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.4% Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Baseline • %user_name% • • • Intersection LOS: B ICU Level of Service E Splits and Phases: 5: Shopping Center Driveway & Belcher Road 01 t m2 04 10s '1 _ 36s 23.2s`' 1 4\ 05 * ' 06 08 16 s :.,1 36 s 2a21 ` 4.' v\., Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 • • • Arterial Level of Service • • • Arterial Flow Running Signai ` ' Tra el ''' Dist Arteril' "''Arte `a Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS • Druid Road III 30 13.5 27.3 40.8 0.10 8.4 F • Shopping Center Driv III 30 18.1 17.1 35.2 0.14 13.8 E State Road 60 III 35 15.9 79.3 95.2 0.12 4.5 F • Cleveland Street III 30 41.9 10.2 52.1 0.33 22.8 C • Total III 89.4 133.9 223.3 0.68 10.9 E • Arterial Level of Service: SB Belcher Road • Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial • Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS • Cleveland Street III 30 13.5 9.4 22.9 0.10 15.0 D • State Road 60 III 35 39.6 54.1 93.7 0.33 12.7 E III 30 16.6 15.0 31.6 0.12 13.4 E • Ill 30 18.1 11.0 29.1 0.14 16.7 D • Total III 87.8 89.5 177.3 0.68 13.8 E • Arterial Level of Service: EB State Road 60 • Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial • Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS • Hercules Ave. III 30 24.2 33.0 57.2 0.19 12.0 E Belcher Road III 45 44.8 63.9 108.7 0.51 16.8 D • Old Coachman III 30 89.0 23.9 112.9 0.74 23.7 C • Total 111 158.0 120.8 278.8 1.44 18.6 C 2020 Total Traffic w /Impr 4/5/2011 Arterial Level of Service: NB Belcher Road • Arterial Level of Service: WB State Road 60 • • Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Artena� Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS • Old Coachman II 30 24.1 37.7 61.8 0.19 11.0 F • Belcher Road 11 45 59.3 61.7 121.0 0.74 22.1 C Hercules Ave. II 30 64.6 37.3 101.9 0.51 18.0 D • Total II 148.0 136.7 284.7 1.44 18.2 D • • • • • • • • • • • Baseline Synchro 7 - Report • %user_name% Page 1 • • 4- - ?? • Page 1 of 2 ARTPLAN 2009 Conceptual Planning Analysis Proiect Information Analyst REC Arterial Name Druid Road Study Period K100 Date Prepared 4/6/2011 12:00:00 AM From Edenville Road Modal Analysis Auto Only Agency AADT To SEG # Dir.Lanes Program ARTPLAN 2009 Area Type Large Urbanized Peak Direction Westbound Version Date 12/12/10 Arterial Class 3 1 File Name C: \WINDOWS \TEMP \preview.xml User Notes Arterial Data K 0.1 PHF 0.95 Control Type Actuated D 0.54 % Heavy Vehicles 2 Base Sat. Flow Rate 1950 Automobile Intersection and Segment Data Segment # Cycle Length Thru g/C Arr. Type INT # Dir.Lanes % Left Turns % Right Turns Left Turn Lanes # Left Turn Lanes LT Storage Length Left g/C Right Turn Lanes Length AADT Hourly Vol. SEG # Dir.Lanes FFS Median Type 1 (to Belcher Road) 75 0.26 4 1 25 26 Yes 1 200 0.09 No 2650 7170 387 1 35 None 2 (to Hercules) 57 0.35 4 1 9 30 Yes 1 100 0.14 No 2970 9100 491 1 35 None Automobile LOS 1 (to Belcher Road) 2 (to Hercules) Arterial Length 1.0644 306 470 Weighted g/C 1484 1485 0.31 FFS Delay 0.792 0.905 file: / /C: \WINDOWS \Temp \preview.xml 32.05 28.01 68.79 C C Threshold Delay 0.00 0.30 0.17 Auto Speed 20.69 22.26 21.49 C C Auto LOS C 4/6/2011 Thru Mvmt Adj. Sat. Control Int. Approach Speed Segment Segment # Flow Rate Flow Rate v/c Delay LOS Queue Ratio (mph) LOS 1 (to Belcher Road) 2 (to Hercules) Arterial Length 1.0644 306 470 Weighted g/C 1484 1485 0.31 FFS Delay 0.792 0.905 file: / /C: \WINDOWS \Temp \preview.xml 32.05 28.01 68.79 C C Threshold Delay 0.00 0.30 0.17 Auto Speed 20.69 22.26 21.49 C C Auto LOS C 4/6/2011 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • file: / /C: \WINDOWS \Temp \preview.xml 4/6/2011 • Page 2 of 2 Automobile Service Volumes Note: The maximum normally acceptable directional service volume for LOS E in Florida for this facility type and area type is 1000 * Service Volumes for the specific facility being analyzed, based on # of lanes from the intersection and segment data screens. ** Cannot be achieved based on input data provided. * ** Not applicable for that level of service letter grade. See generalized tables notes for more details. # Under the given conditions, left turn lane storage is highly likely to overflow. The number of directional thru lanes should be reduced accordingly. ## Facility weighted g/C exceeds normally acceptable upper range (0.5); verify that g/C inputs are correct. # ## Intersection capacity (ies) are exceeded for the full hour; an operational level analysis tool is more appropriate for this situation. A B I C D E Lanes Hourly Volume In Peak Direction 1 I ** 320 520 * ** * ** 2 ** 700 1060 1 * ** * ** 3 I ** 1100 1580 * ** * ** 4 ** 1510 2120 * ** * ** * ** 320 520 * ** * ** Lanes I Hourly Volume In Both Directions 2 ** 600 960 1 * ** * ** 4 ** 1300 1950 * ** I * ** 6 ** 2040 2940 * ** * ** 8 ** 2800 3930 * ** * ** * 1 ** 600 960 * ** * ** Lanes Annual Average Daily Traffic 2 ** 6000 9600 * ** * ** 4 ** 13000 19500 * ** * ** 6 ** 20400 I 29400 * ** * ** 8 ** 28000 39300 * ** * ** * ** 6000 9600 I * ** * ** * Service Volumes for the specific facility being analyzed, based on # of lanes from the intersection and segment data screens. ** Cannot be achieved based on input data provided. * ** Not applicable for that level of service letter grade. See generalized tables notes for more details. # Under the given conditions, left turn lane storage is highly likely to overflow. The number of directional thru lanes should be reduced accordingly. ## Facility weighted g/C exceeds normally acceptable upper range (0.5); verify that g/C inputs are correct. # ## Intersection capacity (ies) are exceeded for the full hour; an operational level analysis tool is more appropriate for this situation. Page 1 of 2 ARTPLAN 2009 Conceptual Planning Analysis Project Information Analyst REC Arterial Name S.R. 60 Study Period K100 Date Prepared 4/6/2011 3:35:38 PM From Hercules Modal Analysis Auto Only Agency FDC To Old Coachman Program ARTPLAN 2009 Area Type Large Urbanized Peak Direction Eastbound Version Date 12/12/10 Arterial Class 1 1 File Name C: \Documents and Settings \rchapman \Local Settings \Temp \preview.xml User Notes 2690 Arterial Data K D 0.097 0.55 PHF Heavy Vehicles. 0.95 2 Control Type Base Sat. Flow Rate Semiactuated 1950 Automobile Intersection and Segment Data Segment # Cycle Length Thru g/C Arr. Type INT # Dir.Lanes % Left Turns % Right Turns Left Turn Lanes # Left Turn Lanes LT Storage Length Left g/C Right Turn Lanes Length AADT Hourly Vol SEG # Dir.Lanes FFS Median Type 1 (to Belcher) 143 0.41 4 3 8 6 Yes 1 400 0.09 No 2690 41000 2187 3 45 Restrictive 2 (to Old Coachman) 90 0.48 4 3 8 4 Yes 1 230 0.12 No 3840 39800 2123 3 45 Restrictive Automobile LOS 11 (to Belcher) 2118 5513 0.937 38.28 D 0.70 21.85 D 2 (to Old Coachman) 2056 5329 0.804 Arterial Length 1.2367 Weighted g/C 0.45 FFS Delay 65.53 16.45 B 0.52 32.50 Threshold Delay 0.00 Auto Speed 27.07 Auto LOS C C file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\rchapman\Local Settings \Temp \preview.xml 4/6/2011 Thru Mvmt Adj. Sat. Control Int. Approach Speed Segment Segment # Flow Rate Flow Rate v/c Delay LOS Queue Ratio (mph) LOS 11 (to Belcher) 2118 5513 0.937 38.28 D 0.70 21.85 D 2 (to Old Coachman) 2056 5329 0.804 Arterial Length 1.2367 Weighted g/C 0.45 FFS Delay 65.53 16.45 B 0.52 32.50 Threshold Delay 0.00 Auto Speed 27.07 Auto LOS C C file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\rchapman\Local Settings \Temp \preview.xml 4/6/2011 Page 2 of 2 Automobile Service Volumes Note: The maximum normally acceptable directional service volume for LOS E in Florida for this facility type and area type is 1000 * Service Volumes for the specific facility being analyzed, based on # of lanes from the intersection and segment data screens. ** Cannot be achieved based on input data provided. * ** Not applicable for that level of service letter grade. See generalized tables notes for more details. # Under the given conditions, left turn lane storage is highly likely to overflow. The number of directional thru lanes should be reduced accordingly. ## Facility weighted g/C exceeds normally acceptable upper range (0.5); verify that g/C inputs are correct. # ## Intersection capacity (ies) are exceeded for the full hour; an operational level analysis tool is more appropriate for this situation. file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\rchapman\Local Settings \Temp \preview.xml 4/6/2011 A B C D E Lanes I Hourly Volume In Peak Direction I 1 ** ** 630 800 * ** 2 ** ** 1400 1640 * ** 3 II ** 50 2170 2480 * ** 4 ** 70 2950 3300 * ** * ** 50 2170 I 2480 * ** Lanes Hourly Volume In Both Directions I 2 ** ** 1150 1480 * ** 4 ** ** 2550 2990 * ** 6 ** 100 3950 4500 * ** 8 ** 130 I 5370 I 6010 * ** * I ** 100 3950 I 4500 * ** Lanes Annual Average Daily Traffic 2 ** ** 11900 I 15200 I * ** 4 ** ** 26300 30800 * ** 6 1 ** 1000 40700 46400 * ** 8 ** 1400 55300 62000 * ** * I ** II 1000 40700 46400 * ** * Service Volumes for the specific facility being analyzed, based on # of lanes from the intersection and segment data screens. ** Cannot be achieved based on input data provided. * ** Not applicable for that level of service letter grade. See generalized tables notes for more details. # Under the given conditions, left turn lane storage is highly likely to overflow. The number of directional thru lanes should be reduced accordingly. ## Facility weighted g/C exceeds normally acceptable upper range (0.5); verify that g/C inputs are correct. # ## Intersection capacity (ies) are exceeded for the full hour; an operational level analysis tool is more appropriate for this situation. file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\rchapman\Local Settings \Temp \preview.xml 4/6/2011 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\rchapman\Local Settings \Temp \preview.xml 4/6/2011 • Page 1 of 2 ARTPLAN 2009 Conceptual Planning Analysis Project Information Analyst REC Arterial Name Belcher Road Study Period K100 Date Prepared 4/6/2011 3:11:10 PM From Harn Modal Analysis Auto Only Agency AADT 23500 To Cleveland Program ARTPLAN 2009 Area Type Large Urbanized Peak Direction Northbound Version Date 12/12/10 Arterial Class 2 1 File Name C: \Documents and Settings \rchapman \Local Settings \Temp \preview.xml User Notes Arterial Data K 0.097 PHF 0,95 Control Type Actuated D 0.55 % Heavy Vehicles 2 Base Sat. Flow Rate 1950 Automobile Intersection and Segment Data Se ment g # Cycle Len th g Thru g /C Arr. T e yp INT # Dir.Lanes % Left Turns % Right Turns Left Turn Lanes # Left Turn Lanes LT Storage Length Left g/C Right Turn Lanes Length AADT 23500 Hourly Vol. SEG # Dir.Lanes FFS Median Type 1 (to Druid) 75 0.43 4 2 13 8 Yes 1 370 0,25 No 2440 1254 2 40 Restrictive 2 (to Publix) 69 0.47 4 2 7 10 Yes 1 235 0.25 No 706 19600 1046 2 40 Restrictive 3 (to S.R. 60) 143 0.3 4 2 17 12 Yes 1 350 0.25 No 640 21000 1120 2 40 Restrictive 4 (to Cleveland) 55 0.48 4 2 1 3 No No 1800 20100 1072 2 40 Restrictive Automobile LOS Segment # Thru Mvmt Flow Rate Adj. Sat. Flow Rate v/c Control Delay Int. Approach LOS Queue Ratio Speed (mph) Segment LOS 1 (to Druid) 1148 3365 0.794 17.56 B 0.21 25.88 C 2 (to Publix) 1024 3338 0.653 11.83 B 0.13 19.02 D 3 (to S.R. 60) 979 3435 0.949 61.77 E 0.51 5.89 F 4 (to Cleveland) 1128 2673 0.879 11.93 B 0.00 26.72 C Arterial Length 1.0580 Weighted g/C 0.38 FFS Delay 114.40 Threshold Delay 0.00 Auto Speed 18.17 Auto LOS D - Lief • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Page 2 of 2 Automobile Service Volumes Note: The maximum normally acceptable directional service volume for LOS E in Florida for this facility type and area type is 1000 veh /h /In. * Service Volumes for the specific facility being analyzed, based on # of lanes from the intersection and segment data screens. ** Cannot be achieved based on input data provided. * ** Not applicable for that level of service letter grade. See generalized tables notes for more details. # Under the given conditions, left turn lane storage is highly likely to overflow. The number of directional thru lanes should be reduced accordingly. ## Facility weighted g/C exceeds normally acceptable upper range (0.5); verify that g/C inputs are correct. # ## Intersection capacity (ies) are exceeded for the full hour; an operational level analysis tool is more appropriate for this situation. • file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\rchapman \Local Settings \Temp \preview.xml 4/6/2011 A B C D E Lanes Hourly Volume In Peak Direction 1 ** ** 270 550 620 2 ** ** 580 1190 1260 3 ** ** 890 1820 1880 4 ** ** 1200 2450 2520 * ** ** 580 1190 1260 Lanes Hourly Volume In Both Directions 2 ** ** 500 1000 1120 4 ** ** 1060 2170 2280 6 ** ** 1620 3310 3430 8 ** ** 2190 4460 4590 * ** ** 1060 2170 2280 Lanes Annual Average Daily Traffic 2 ** ** 5100 10400 11600 4 ** ** 10900 22400 23500 6 ** ** 16700 34200 35400 8 ** ** 22500 46000 47300 ** ** 10900 22400 23500 * Service Volumes for the specific facility being analyzed, based on # of lanes from the intersection and segment data screens. ** Cannot be achieved based on input data provided. * ** Not applicable for that level of service letter grade. See generalized tables notes for more details. # Under the given conditions, left turn lane storage is highly likely to overflow. The number of directional thru lanes should be reduced accordingly. ## Facility weighted g/C exceeds normally acceptable upper range (0.5); verify that g/C inputs are correct. # ## Intersection capacity (ies) are exceeded for the full hour; an operational level analysis tool is more appropriate for this situation. • file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\rchapman \Local Settings \Temp \preview.xml 4/6/2011 • Ckarwater Planning & Development Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727- 562 -4567 Fax: 727 - 562 -4865 ❑ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION ❑ SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION - Plans and application are required to be collated, stapled and folded into sets * 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 11/29/2010) CASE NUMBER: RECEIVED BY (Staff Initials): DATE RECEIVED: -PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT- APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4- 202.A) APPLICANT NAME: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc. 1414 West Swann, Suite 150, Tampa, FL 33606 MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: (813) 579 -2014 CELL NUMBER: (813) 835-4197 E -MAIL ADDRESS: eda ejpfirm. can PROPERTY OWNER(S): List ALL owners on the deed AGENT NAME: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc., a Florida corporation Lakeside Enterprises, L.L.C., A Florida limited liability company E. D. Armstrong III, Esquire, and Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, T,TP MAILING ADDRESS: 911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756 FAX NUMBER: (727) 462 -0365 PHONE NUMBER: CELL NUMBER: (727)461 -1818 E -MAIL ADDRESS: eda@ jpfirm. com The landscaping requirements of Article 3, Division 12, may be modified or waived as part of a Level One (Flexible Standard) or Level Two (Flexible Development) application, as the case may be, if the application for development approval includes a Comprehensive Landscape Program, which satisfies the following criteria. The use of landscape plans, sections /elevations, renderings and perspectives may be necessary to supplement the information provided on this worksheet. Landscaping associated with the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met. 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. See Exhibit "A" attached for responses to all criteria. 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. Page 1 of 2 2. LIGHTING: Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is automatically controlled so that the lighting is tumed off when the business is closed. 3. COMMUNITY CHARACTER: The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. 4. 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. 5. 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. 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. Signature of property owner or representative E. D. Armstrong III, Esquire STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Swom to and subscribed before me t i ��' day of Apri s � l A.D. 20 11 to me and /or , who is personally known motagt i 1. otary dYublic, My commission expires: yo;:nY'rsiF; JAYNE E. SEARS .: a Commission # DD 907040 '"'' Ex ires September 2, 2013 •'f,-,PF ,,P. Bonded Thru Troy Fan Insurance 800-385-7019 C:IDocuments and Settingslderek.fergusonlLocal Settings\Temporary Internet Files\ Content .OutlookIKPMVX8F11Comprehensive Landscape Program 11 2010.docx Page 2 of 2 N. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: 1. Provide names of all property owners on deed — PRINT full names: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc., a Florida corporation 2. That (1 am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location): Parcel No. 13- 29 -15- 00000 -410 -0100 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request) . Flexible development approval. of a ccoprehensive in€ill redeve].optrent project and cat>prehensive landscape program 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint E. D. Armsstrong -III, Esquire, and Johnson, Pope, Bokor,,Ruppe1 & Burns, LLP 911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756 as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 5. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property: 6. 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. Nickel Plate • ••- - , Inc. Property Owner Pro = ' "• nor By: il Property Owner , • ,._ . �j;,- n : , President STATE OF FLORID • , COUNTY OF PINELLAS Before me the undersigned. an officer duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this of S day of April , 2011 personally appeared Andrew B. Ingersoll* who having been first duly swom Deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he/she signed. *as President of Nickel Plate Properties, Inc., a Florida corporation, on behalf of the cOrporation -, '`- + Notary Public Signature My Commission Expires: Notary Sea trim. � „ '+ my CC)fu1MI ; IQN # DD965551 (407)1388 -0153 reoruary L4. 2014 Floridallota ryService. com C :\Documents and Settings derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc Page 8 of 8 N. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: 1. Provide names of all property owners on deed — PRINT full names: Lakeside Enterprises, L.L.C., a Florida limited liability company 2. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(a) of the following described property (address or general location): Parcel Nos. 13 -29 -15 -00000 -410 0200 and 13 -29 -15 -00000 -410 -0300 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request) Flexible development approval of a ccuprehensive infill redevelopment project and comprehensive landscape program. 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does /do) appoint: E. D. Armstrong III, Esquire, and Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Rappel & Burns, LIP, 911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florida 33756 as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 5. That this affidavit has been executed to Induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 6. 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 thls application; 7. That (Uwe), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Lakeside terp ' - , L.L.C. /rty Property Owner / / Pr • Owner t, Property Owner ' Property Owner ' • - B. Ingersoll, Manager STATE OF FLORM ' A, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Before me the undersigned, an officer duly commissioned by the laws of the State of Florida, on this pj .S day of April 2011 Andrew B. Ingersoll* , personally appeared who having been first duly sworn Deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he /she signed. *as Manager of Lakeside Enterprises, / L.L.C., a Florida limited liability / ` _ _J may, cm behalf of the canpany Notary Public Signature Notary Seal/Stamp My Commission Expires: 1 ,, �,Rr soQ . M e: /i= mrekckew kt.. —e• MY COMMISSION # DD965551 (407) 398 -0153 EXPIRES February 24. 2014 F loada NotaryService. com C:1Documents and Settingslderek .ferguson1Desktop1planning dept forms 07081Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07- 11.doc Page8of8 EXHIBIT "A" TO COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM APPLICATION Lakeside at Clearwater 2165 Gulf -to -Bay Boulevard This application is submitted in conjunction with an application for flexible development approval of a comprehensive infill redevelopment project to allow the redevelopment of this site with 40,000 square feet of retail sales and service, 5,559 square feet of automobile service station, 4,200 square feet of office (bank) and 9,400 square feet of restaurant. Written Submittal Requirements 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. The reason for this request is to provide relief from the foundation landscaping requirement along the easterly building facade of the proposed Walmart grocery store. The project site fronts on both Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher so there are two building facades for the grocery store. The building meets the foundation landscaping on the northerly facade facing Gulf -to -Bay. As to the easterly facade, the applicant proposes a landscape planter of 474 square feet in lieu of landscaping along the foundation. The project meets the Criteria (b) above, as the overall landscape treatment of the site exceeds the minimum standards of the Code. As shown on the landscape plans, the vehicular use area landscaping is 20 percent where 10 percent is required and 25' landscape buffers are provided on Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher where 15' landscape buffers are required. 2) Community Character. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater. The proposed landscape treatments will beautify this highly visible site at the southwest corner of Gulf -to -Bay and Belcher. The proposed 25' landscape buffers on the two roadways, excessive VUA landscaping and pocket park area will enhance this corner. A proposed landscape island to the west of Building 11 will help to buffer the grocery store parking area as viewed from Belcher Road. The proposed landscape plan exceeds the amount of landscaping required for the vehicular use area. 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. Although the plan does not meet the specific foundation landscaping requirement on the easterly facade of Building 10, the overall landscape treatment proposed exceeds the Code minimum standards. The encroachments to the foundation planting do not minimize property values in the immediate vicinity. Rather, the increased plantings in the vehicular use area and perimeter will beneficially impact the value of the properties in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. 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. There is no specific plan for this area of Gulf -to -Bay which is a scenic corridor. The landscaping proposed on Gulf -to -Bay, such as the Washingtonia palms, is similar to other landscaping currently used on the scenic corridor. 6/13/2011 9:55 AM .116337 #560061 v2 - Nickel Plate /Ex to Comp Landscape 2 2 LAKESIDE AT CLEARWATER CLEARWATER, FLORIDA LimalliiiiteismiLLIMII: AWL flo.Amelle LAKESIDE ENTERPRISES, LLC naia.0 TO lAYBLVD. CLIAIIIV*1111, FLCRICA mow • OM ,c0 111■1111111.011.....1.1.0■111 111111111/0/111.10 MONO MI lump amp Canal. Inn orerortLit sr. Rallormi Reawree Grow, LLC .01•1111, LarglocycholitsmarAIWIFAIWOmkeby Monk mu um Rm. P.X.,rak nom MO NNW Ilta.b...11•100011.1.0 111.1.111.1114•1 Clearwater Planning Department 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 Telephone: 727-562-4567 Fax: 727 - 562 -4865 CI SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION Li SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION (Plans and application are required to be collated, stapled, and folded into sets) CI SUBMIT FIRE PRELIMARY SITE PLAN FEE: $200.00 (Not required if submitted as part of an FLS or FLD application) CI SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE OF $600.00 CASE #: RECEIVED BY: (Staff Initials) DATE RECEIVED: * NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS) A. APPLICANT, PR APPLICANT NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: CELL NUMBER: PROPERTY OWNER(S): List ALL owners on the deed AGENT NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: CELL NUMBER: PLAT PREPARER: MAILING ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: CELL NUMBER: PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION (REVISED 04/24/07) -PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT- )1'tK I Y OWNER, AGENT AND PLAT PREPARER INFORMATION: (Code Section 4 -202.A and 4- 703.A.) Nickel Plate Properties, Inc. 1414 West Swann, Suite 150, Tama, FL 33606 (813) 579 -2014 FAX NUMBER: (813) 835 -4197 EMAIL: eda e jpfirm. com Nickel Plate Properties, Inc., a Florida corporation Lakeside Enterprises, L.L.C., a Florida limited liability company E. D. Armstrong III, Esquire, and Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, TLP 911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756 (727) 461 -1818 FAx NUMBER: (727) 462 -0365 EMAIL: eda ]Pf irm. comp eslgn Consultan ts, Inc. 3030 Starkey Boulevard, New Port Richey, FL 34655 (727) 849 -7588 FAX NUMBER: (727) 848 -3648 EMAIL: C: (Documents and Settingslderekferguson1Derktoplplanningforms 07071Preliminary Plat 04- 24- 07.doc Page 1 of 7 B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202A) PROJECT NAME: Lakeside at Clearwater PROJECT VALUATION: $ 31.5 million STREET ADDRESS 2165 Gulf -to-Bay Boulevard (incl. land and site work) PARCEL NUMBER(S):13- 29 -15- 00000 - 410-0100, 13- 29 -15- 00000 - 410 -0200 & 13- 29 -15- 00000 - 410 -C PARCEL SIZE (acres): 30.07 acres LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Ebthibit "A" attached. PARCEL SIZE (square feet): 1 309 , 850 sq. ft. PROPOSEDUSE(S): 49,753 sq. ft. retail, 9,400 sa. ft. restaurant & 243 multi- family Du C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4- 202.A.5) CI SUBMIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see page 3) Fourteen (14) copies of the preliminary plat shall be submitted. The preliminary plat shall be prepared by a surveyor, architect, landscape architect or engineer drawn to a scale not smaller than one inch equals 100 feet (1:100), shall not exceed 24" X 36" and include the following information: TITLE UNDER WHICH THE PROPOSED PLAT IS TO BE RECORDED; NAME, ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF THE PERSON PREPARING THE PLAT; IDENTIFICATION CLEARLY STATING THAT THE DRAWING IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT; LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY, U.S. SURVEY SECTION, TOWNSHIP AND RANGE LINES; EXISTING AND PROPOSED RIGHTS -OF -WAY AND EASEMENTS; PROPOSED STREET NAMES; NAMES, APPROPRIATELY POSITIONED, OF ADJOINING PLATS; DIMENSIONS AND AREA OF THE FOLLOWING: THE OVERALL PLAT; EACH LOT; STREET RIGHTS -OF -WAY, INCLUDING RADII OF CUL -DE -SACS; COMMON OPEN SPACE OR OTHER LAND TO BE DEDICATED FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE IF ANY; NORTH ARROW, SCALE AND DATE. D. 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. Signature of property owner or representative E. D. Armstrong Ill, Esquire STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINE,L1AS Swom to and subscribed before me this it.- day of r1 A.D. 20 11 to me and /or by E. Dfi . trong 111 who is personally known txxx otary blic, My commission expires: ey. CommE slon # DD 907040 '' lint <; Expires September 2, 2013 P.fr e•' Bid Ths *try Fain inguran a00485-7019 C: I Documents and Settings\derek. fergnson I Desktop) planning forms_07071 Preliminary Plat 04- 24 -07. doc Page 2 of 7 300 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcel 1 That part of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 13, Township 29 South, Range 15 East, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the North boundary of said quarter section, located 475.6 feet along said boundary, from the Northwest corner of said NE 1/4 of SE 1/4 thence continuing East along said boundary, 195.07 feet more or less to the NE corner of NW 1/4 of NE 1/4 of SE 1/4; thence South along the East boundary of the NW 1/4 of NE 1/4 of SE 1/4, 667.98 feet, more or less to the Southeast corner of said NW 1/4 of NE 1/4 of SE 1/4; thence run West along the South boundary of said NW 1/4 of NE 1/4 of SE 1/4, 206.1 feet, more or less to the Southeast corner of a tract conveyed to C.D. Walker and Wife Grace F. Walker, by deed recorded in Deed Record 1016, Page 329, public records of Pinellas County, Florida and thence North along the East boundary of said Walker tract, 667.6 feet more or less to the Point of Beginning. Parcel 2 The Northeast quarter (NE 1/4) of the Northeast quarter (NE 1/4) of the Southeast quarter (SE 1/4) and the South one -half (S 1/2) of the Northeast quarter (NE 1/4) of the Southeast quarter (SE 1/4) of Section 13, Township 29 South, Range 15 East, SUBJECT HOWEVER to the right of way of the public thoroughfare known as Gulf to Bay Boulevard over the North fifty (50) feet of said Northeast quarter (NE 1/4) of the Northeast quarter (NE 1/4) of Southeast quarter (SE 1/4) and the South fifty (50) feet of said Northeast quarter (NE 1/4) of said Southeast quarter (SE 1/4) and the South fifty (50) feet of said Northeast quarter (NE 1/4) of said Southeast quarter (SE 1/4) for right of way of Druid Road (County Road No. 28) and that part of said Northeast quarter (NE 1/4) of Southeast quarter (SE 1/4) described in O.R. Book 4564, Pages 154, 155 and 156, for right of way of Belcher Road (County Road No. 28), all lying and being in Pinellas County, Florida. L. AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: Nickel Plate Properties, Inc., a Florida corporation (Names of all property owners) 1. That (1 amlwe are) the owner(s) and record title hokfer(s) of the following described property (address or general location): Parcel No. 13- 29 -15- 00000 -410 -0100 2. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a (desaibe request) Application to mend development agreement and application for plat approval 3. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (doeskio) appoint E. D. Armstrong III, Esquire and Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP, 911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756 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; 5. That ( Uwe), the undersigned authority. hereby certify that the foregoing isSwe,andlcocruq_to corporation BPrroperty Owner Property Owner COUNTY OF PINELLAS Before me the underst n April , 2011 Deposes and says that ha My Commission Expires: a Florida .S f B. Ingersoll STATE OF FLORIDA, President ate of Florida, on this ersoll* ',? o d EXPIRES February 24. 2014 (407) 398 -0153 FloridallotaryService.com t he/she signed. day of who having been first duty swam *as President of Nickel Plate Properties, Inc., a Florida corporation, on behalf 6f-the corporation S:IPlanning DopartmentlApplication Fomrswawropment revtewidevelopment agreement appfication3.doc Page 5 of 5 — Development Agreement Application — City of Clearwater L AFFIDAVIT TO AUTHORIZE AGENT: Lakeside Enteiptises, L.L.C., a Florida limited liability company (Names of all property owners) 1. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property (address or general location): Parcel Nos. 13- 29 -15- 00000 - 410 -0200 and 13- 29 -15- 00000 -410 -0300 2. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for a: (describe request) Application to amend development agreement and application for plat approval 3. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and tdoesrdo appoint; E. D. Armstrong III, Esquire re and Johnson, Pope, Bakor, .Euppel & Burns, LLP, 911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, Florid& as (his/ heir) 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 (Uwe), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Lakeside En/- �•r' (- -s, L. Pr•artyOwner `/ r Property Owner • ... B. In..- • 11, Manager STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS $Be>:forq me the undecs6aed, an officer duty commissions w$of th r , on this � day of 31 L .11 personally appeared who having been first duly sworn Deposes and says that he/she fully understands the contents of the affidavit that he /she signed. / *as Manager of Lakeside Enterprises, L.L.C., Florida limited liability - -' —_�-�- a company, art Notary Public My Commission Expires: behalf of the.. aarpany :.' MY COMMISSION # op055551 "'FO.:� , EXPIRES February 24. 2014 t 407) 398 -015:r FlonrtallotarySerV ce.corr S:V'landng DepartmentlAppfrcation Fo, r ievelopment revierAdevelopment agreement appfrvcation3.doc Page 5 of 5- Development Agreement Appticatlon - City of Clearwater