FLD2012-02007; 400 EAST SHORE DR; EAST RETAIL , � .
�
400 EAST SHORE DR
Date Received: 2/1/2012 1 :30:37 PM
East Retail
ZONING DISTRICT: Tourist
LAND USE: Resort Facilities High (30
du/acre)
ATLAS PAGE: 267A
PLANNER OF RECORD:
PLANNER: Matthew Jackson, Planner II
CDB Meeting Date: April 17, 2012
Case Number: FLD2012-02007
Agenda Item: E. 3.
Owner: Terrv,Anna and Dimitrios Tsafatinos
Applicant: Joseph Kokolakis
Representative: Renee Ruggiero, Senior Proiect Planner,Northside En in� eerin�
Address: 400 East Shore Drive
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit Retail Sales and Services of
22,980 square feet of floor area in the Tourist (T) District with a lot
area of 22,988 square feet, a lot width of 199.7 feet on East Shore Drive
(east) and 199.9 on Poinsettia Avenue (west), a front (east) setback of
0.2 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to pavement), a front
(west) setback of 0.2 feet (to proposed building and zero feet (to
pavement), a side (north) setback of 14.3 feet (to proposed building )
and five feet (to pavement for transformer pad), a side (south) setback
of 71.1 feet (to proposed building) and five feet (to pavement), a
building height of 40 feet (to flat roo� and 21 parking spaces, as a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of
the Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-803.C.; as well as
a reduction in the required size of interior landscaped islands from 150
to 25 squaze feet, as a Comprehensive Landscape Program under the
provisions of Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G.
ZONING DISTRICT: Tourist(T)
FUTURE LAND USE
PLAN CATEGORY: Resort Facilities High(RFH)
BEACHBYDESIGN
CHARACTER
DISTRICT: Marina District
PROPERTY USE: Current: Attached dwellings and a Parking lot
Proposed: Retail Sales and Services
EXISTING North: Tourist(T) District
SURROUNDING Overnight Accommodations
ZONING AND USES: South: Tourist(T) District and Institutional (I)District
Off-Street Parking and Clearwater Marina
East: Tourist (T) District
Attached Dwellings
West: Tourist(T) District
Retail Sales and Services
Community Development Board—April 17,2012
FLD2012-02007—Page 1 of 10
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 0.53-acre subject property is located on the west side of East Shore Drive approximately 120
feet north of Causeway Boulevard which is within the Marina District of Beach by Design. The
site is currently developed with a one-story building comprised of five attached dwellings and an
off-street parking lot with 35 off-street parking spaces.
Development Proposal:
The development proposal is to demolish the existing building and off-street parking to construct
22,988 square feet of retail sales and services floor area in a two-story building. It is proposed
that one owner occupy the entire building and a national chain is expected. The proposal
includes front, side and rear setback reductions to provide for the proposed building to have
setbacks consistent with the Marina District standards found in Beach by Design. A sidewalk on
the west side of the building connecting to existing City sidewalk will provide required building
access. The proposal also includes a sidewalk on the east side of the building providing building
access and connectivity to future development.
The proposal includes a building design consistent with a tropical modern architecture, which is
appropriate and aesthetically pleasing for this beachfront property and complements the tropical
vernacular envisioned in Beach by Design. The proposal meets the tropical vernacular
architecture guidelines through the use of large expanses of windows, sunshades providing the
windows screening from the sun, and finishes commonly found in tropical vernacular
architecture such as glass mosaic tile, limestone tile and horizontal siding.
Due to the location of the proposed building and the size and configuration of the subject
property, only limited parking is available. The proposal includes a reduction to the required
parking for retail sales and services from 115 spaces (based on 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet)to
21 spaces. The applicant has submitted a Parking Demand Study that analyzed the available
parking within 1,000 feet of the subject property.
The development proposal's compliance with the various development standards of the
Community Development Code (CDC) is discussed below.
Floor Area Ratio (FARZ Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-801.1, the
m�imum FAR for properties with a future land use plan designation of Resort Facilities High is
1.0. The proposal is for a total of 22,980 square feet of floor area at a FAR of 0.99, which is
consistent with the Code provisions.
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR� Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-
801.1, the maximum allowable ISR is 0.95. The proposed ISR is 0.88, which is consistent with
the Code provisions.
Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there is no minimum required lot
area or lot width for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of
comparison, the minimum lot area for retail sales and services in the Tourist (T) District may
range from 5,000 — 10,000 square feet. The subject lot area is 22,988 square feet (0.52 acres),
Community Development Board—April 17,2012
FLD2012-02007—Page 2 of 10
which exceeds this comparative Code provision. Pursuant to the same Table, the minimum lot
width for retail sales and services in the T District may range from 50 — 100 feet. The lot width
along East Shore Drive is 199.7 feet, while the lot width along Poinsettia Avenue is 199.9 feet
which exceeds this comparative Code provision.
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there are no minimum setback requirements
for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects. However, for a point of comparison, the
minimum setbacks for retail sales and services in the T District may be within 10 — 15 feet
(front) and zero — 10 feet (side) setbacks. It is noted that lots with double frontage have front
setback requirements on both street frontages and side setback requirements from the remaining
lot lines. The development proposal includes a front (east) setback of 0.2 feet (to proposed
building) and zero feet(to pavement), a front(west) setback of 0.2 feet (to proposed building and
zero feet (to pavement), a side (north) setback of 14.3 feet (to proposed building) and five feet
(to pavement for transformer pad), a side (south) setback of 71.1 feet (to proposed building) and
five feet(to pavement).
This proposal includes the construction of 22,988 square feet of retail sales and services use in a
two-story building and 21 off-street parking spaces. The proposed building meets or exceeds
setback standards pursuant to the Marina District guidelines of Beach by Design. Staff is
supportive of the front setback reductions for the proposed off-street parking area, as due to the
site dimensional constraints, it is anticipated that any proposed use will need setback reductions
for this vehicular use area.
M�imum Buildin�Hei� Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there is no maximum allowable
height for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects. However, for a point of comparison,
the maximum height for retail sales and services in the T District may range from 25 — 50 feet.
The proposed building height is 40 feet (to flat roo�, which is within the allowable limits of this
comparative Code provision.
Minimum Off-Street Parkin�: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the minimum off-street parking
requirements for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects shall be as determined by the
Community Development Coordinator based on the specific use andlor ITE Manual standards.
As stated previously, due to the location of the proposed building and the size and configuration
of the subject property, only limited parking is available. The proposal includes a reduction to
the required parking for retail sales and services from 115 spaces (based on 5 spaces per 1,000
square feet) to 21 spaces. Of these spaces, two will be dedicated for handicapped use. The
applicant submitted a Parking Demand Study that analyzed the available parking within 1,000
feet of the subject property. The study concluded, in accordance with a methodology established
with the City of Clearwater staff, that there are a total 1,040 available parking spaces within the
study area. A maximum of 348 of these spaces were occupied at one time during the study
period leaving 692 spaces available. As such, and as the study determined that the parking
demand would generate a maximum of 70 spaces, adequate parking is available within
reasonable walking distance of the project.
Community Development Boazd—April 17,2012
FLD2012-02007—Page 3 of 10
Mechanical Ec�uipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-903.H.1, mechanical equipment shall be
screened from any public right-of-way and adjacent properties. The proposal includes all
mechanical equipment to be roof mounted and screened from view pursuant to the
aforementioned Code Section.
Si�ht Visibilit�iangles: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at street or
driveway intersections, 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. There are two proposed points of public ingress/egress one along East Shore
Drive and one along Poinsettia Avenue. Along East Shore Drive there is one additional point of
ingress/ egress for deliveries and trash staging area. The proposal has been reviewed by the
City's Traffic Engineering Department and been 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. An electrical room is
proposed on the second floor of the building and will contain the proposed electric panels, boxes
and meters for this development.
Landscapin�: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, there are no perimeter buffers required in the
Tourist District. Pursuant to Section 3-1202.E, interior landscaping is required for vehicular use
areas greater than or equal to 4,000 square feet. As the proposal includes 6,399 square feet of
vehicular use area, at least 639 square feet of interior landscaping is required. The proposal
includes 1,217 square feet of Code compliant interior landscaping including palm and other trees
as well as shrubs and groundcover. The proposed building is being designed with a zero-foot
setback along East Shore Drive and Poinsettia Street which is consistent with the setback
standards of the Marina District guidelines of Beach by Design. As such foundation plantings
are not requested.
Solid Waste: The proposal includes an interior trash storage area containing dumpsters for trash
removal. On trash days, the dumpsters will be staged to meet the Solid Waste Department's
trash pick-up requirements.
Si na e: No freestanding or attached signage is proposed at this time. And while due to site
constraints freestanding signage is not expected, freestanding signage in the Tourist District is
restricted to a m�imum height of four feet, or six feet through a Comprehensive Sign Program.
Any approval of this application should include a condition allowing for freestanding signage,
where such future freestanding signage must be a monument-style sign meeting Code
requirements and be designed to match the exterior materials and color of the building. Any
proposed attached signage not meeting minimum Code requirements will be approved through a
Comprehensive Sign Program.
Additional Beach bv Desi�n Guidelines: Section C.1 requires buildings with a footprint of
greater than 5,000 square feet to be constructed so that no more than two of the three building
dimensions in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length. The proposed building
Community Development Board—April 17,2012
FLD2012-02007—Page 4 of 10
footprint is approximately 11,490 square feet. The project's overall horizontal plane dimensions
are approximately 115 feet along East Shore Drive (east), 105 feet along Poinsettia Avenue
(west), 116 feet on north side of the building and 114 feet along the south side of the building,
while the vertical plane is 40 feet from ground level to flat roof. To comply with this provision
the proposal includes architectural designs to change the building massing such as vertical
stepbacks, reducing uninterrupted wall planes, varying the parapet heights and changes in the
building materials and colors on the south, east and west building facades. However, further
attention to the design of the north building facade is needed to meet this provision and a
condition of approval is included in this report.
Section C.2 requires no plane or elevation to continue uninterrupted for greater than 100 feet
without an offset of more than five feet. All facades of the building are greater than 100 feet in
length and include at a minimum of one vertical stepback per facade to be consistent with this
provision.
Section C.3 requires at least 60 percent of any elevation to be covered with windows or
architectural decoration. The elevations along East Shore Drive (east), Poinsettia Street (west)
and south building facade contain windows, sunshades, column projections and changes in
materials and colors, covering the entire building elevations. As such, these elevations are
consistent with the aforementioned provision. The design of the north building facade does not
meet this provision and a condition of approval is included in this staff report.
Section C.4 requires that no more than 60 percent of the theoretical maximum building envelope
located above 45 feet be occupied by a building. As the m�imum height of the development
proposal is 40 feet to flat roof,this guideline is not applicable.
Section E.1 requires that at least sixty percent (60%) of the street level facades of buildings used
for nonresidential purposes which abut a public street or pedestrian access way, will be
transparent. The street-level windows along the west building facade fronting Poinsettia Avenue
meet this provision. The street level non-transparent windows on the east building facade
fronting East Shore Drive do not meet this provision and as such, a condition of approval is
included in this staff report that the windows be transparent for consistency with the provision.
Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no active Code Enforcement cases for the subject
property.
Community Development Boazd—April 17,2012
FLD2012-02007—Page 5 of 10
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Section 2-801.1 and
Tables 2-802 and 2-803:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
Floor Area Ratio 1.0 22,980 square feet(0.99) X
Impervious Surface Ratio 0.95 0.88 X
Minimum Lot Area N/A 22.988 sq.ft. X
Minimum Lot Width N/A 199.7 feet East Shore Drive X
199.9 feet Poinsettia Street
Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A East: Zero feet(to building) X
Zero feet(to pavement)
West: Zero feet(to building) X
Zero feet(to pavement)
Side: N/A North: 143 feet(to building) X
Five feet(to pavement
South: 71.2 feet(to building) X
Five feet(to pavement)
Maximum Height N/A 40 feet(to flat roo� X
Minimum Off-Street Parking N/A 21 pazking spaces X
Community Development Board—April 17,2012
FLD2012-02007—Page 6 of 10
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA: The following table depicts the
consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-803.0
(Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from X
the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X
development.
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neigk�borhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment
of an existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area
that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning
designation;or
a. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a
working waterfront use.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the sunounding 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
desi n and a ro riate distances between buildin s.
Community Development Board—April 17,2012
FLD2012-02007—Page 7 of 10
- — _ _
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS: The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards
for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A:
Consistent Inconsistent
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, X
coverage,density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of X
adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons X
residing or working in the neighborhood.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. X
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X
immediate vicinity.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X
visual,acoustic and olfacto and hours of o eration im acts on ad'acent ro erties.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of March O1, 2012, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient
to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following:
Findings of Fact. The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence
submitted by the applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that
there is substantial competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:
1. That the 0.53-acre subject property is located on the west side of East Shore Drive
approximately 120 feet north of Causeway Boulevaxd;
2. That the subject property is located in the Tourist (T) District and the Resort Facilities High
(RFH)future land use plan category;
3. That the subject property is located within the Marina District of Beach by Design and is
subject to all applicable requirements set forth therein;
4. That the properties are developed with five attached dwelling units and an off-street parking
lot with a total of 35 parking spaces. The building containing the attached dwelling use is to
be demolished;
5. That the proposal includes the construction of 22,980 square feet of retail sales and services
floor area and 21 parking spaces;
6. That the proposal includes a front (east) setback of 0.2 feet (to proposed building) and zero
feet (to pavement), a front (west) setback of 0.2 feet (to proposed building and zero feet (to
pavement), a side (north) setback of 14.3 feet (to proposed building) and five feet (to
pavement for transformer pad), a side (south) setback of 71.1 feet (to proposed building) and
five feet(to pavement);
7. That the proposal includes large expanses of windows, sunshades providing the windows
screening from the sun and finishes commonly found in tropical vernacular architecture such
as glass mosaic tile, limestone tile and horizontal siding; and
8. That there is no active Code Enforcement case 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:
Community Development Board—April 17,2012
FLD2012-02007—Page 8 of 10
1. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Community
Development Code Tables 2-801.1, 2-802 and 2-803;
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Community
Development Code Section 2-803.C;
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two
Approvals as per Community Development Code Section 3-914.A; and
4. That the development proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design.
Based upon the above,the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of
the Flexible Development approval to permit Retail Sales and Services of 22,980 square feet of
floor area in the Tourist (T) District with a lot area of 22,988 square feet, a lot width of 199.7
feet on East Shore Drive (east) and 199.9 on Poinsettia Avenue (west), a front (east) setback of
0.2 feet (to proposed building) and zero feet (to pavement), a front (west) setback of 0.2 feet (to
proposed building and zero feet (to pavement), a side (north) setback of 14.3 feet (to proposed
building ) and five feet (to pavement for transformer pad), a side (south) setback of 71.1 feet (to
proposed building) and five feet (to pavement), a building height of 40 feet (to flat roo fl and 21
parking spaces, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of the
Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-803.C.; as well as a reduction in the required
size of interior landscaped islands from 150 to 25 square feet, as a Comprehensive Landscape
Program under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 3-1202.G., with the
following conditions:
Conditions of A�proval:
1. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the design of the north building facade is
revised to meet the intent of Beach by Design Section C.1 that no more than two of the three
building dimensions in the horizontal plane be equal in length;
2. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the design of the north building facade is
revised to meet the intent of Beach by Design Section C.3 guideline that at least 60 percent of
building elevations must be covered with windows or architectural decoration;
3. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the street-level windows on the east
building facade are revised to meet Beach by Design Section E.1 that at least sixty percent of
the street level facades of buildings used for non-residential purposes which abut a public
street will be transparent;
4. That prior to the issuance of any permits, a Declaration of Unity of Title combining parcels
08-29-15-02592-002-0110 and 08-29-15-02592-002-0120 be recorded in the public records
and a copy of said recorded document be provided to the Planning and Development
Department;
5. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the conceptual elevations
approved by the CDB;
6. That all utilities, including individual distribution lines, must be installed underground unless
undergrounding is not practicable;
7. That any future freestanding sign be a monument-style sign and be designed to match the
exterior materials and color of the building. The maximum height shall be four feet, unless
approved at six feet high through a Comprehensive Sign Program; and
8. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the Fire Department may require the provision
of a Water Study performed by a Fire Protection Engineer in order to ensure that an adequate
Community Development Board—April 17,2012
FLD2012-02007—Page 9 of 10
water supply is available and to determine if any upgrades are required by the developer due
to the impact of the 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, then the water
supply must be able to supply 150%of its rated capacity.
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: �
Matt Jackson, Planner II
ATTACHMENTS:Location Map;Aerial Map;Zoning Map;Existing Surrounding Uses Map;and Photographs
Community Development Board—April 17,2012
FLD2012-02007—Page 10 of 10
Matthew Jackson
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater,Florida 33756
(727)562-4504
matthew.i ackson(a),mvclearwater.com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
❑ Planner II
City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida May 2011 to Present
October 2008 to June 2010
Regulate growth and development of the City in accordance with land resource ordinances and
regulations related to community development. Landscape plan review including: conceptual, and
variance. Reviews and analyzes site plans and conducts field studies to determine the integrity of
development plans and their compatibility with sunoundings. Interdepartmental and zoning
assistance. Respond as a City representative to citizens, City officials, and businesses concerning
ordinances and regulations. Make recommendations and presentations at staff level at various review
committees,boards,and meetings.
❑ Planner I
Calvin-Giordano and Associates, Fort Lauderdale, Florida May 2005 to December 2007
Project manager for various development applications such as plat, site plan, rezoning and variances.
In-depth government agency, in-house and client coordination to ensure that the projects maintained
submittal schedules stayed within budget constraints and attained approval. Schedule and lead
project kick-off ineetings, ensure municipal project conditions were resolved, produce supporting
documents and make site visits as well. Research and prepare due diligence reports including subject
matter such as zoning, land uses, densities, available public utilities and land development costs.
Member of emergency mitigation committee formed to prepare and mitigate for natural or man-made
disasters affecting Calvin,Giordano and Associates and local municipalities.
❑ Manager
Church Street Entertainment, Orlando, Florida September 1999 to February 2004
Supervised and managed daytime and nighttime operations of a bar and nightclub entertainment
complex including 100+ staff. Conducted hiring and training operations including security and
inventory control. Managed and reconciled nightly gross revenues as well as preparing and
delivering deposits. Assisted in taking inventory and preparing weekly inventory orders, marketing
and special events.
❑ Linguist
US Army, Fort Campbell, KY October 1991 to October 1995
Maintain fluency in the Arabic language and knowledge of customs and culture as well as military
readiness for possible deployments or training operations. Co-managed intelligence gathering
operation in Haiti including coordination between multiple Special Forces units and civilian
authorities. Interpreter between U.S. and Egyptian soldiers during training exercises. Liaison
between Special Forces battalions to coordinate certification training.
EDUCATION
❑ Master of Arts,Urban and Regional Planning,Florida Atlantic University,2007
❑ Bachelor of Arts,Urban and Regional Planning,Rollins College, 2004
S g
__ _4� 2 �� --� y ' �' '
713� 4 a� 432 2436 425 2 y �
430 • — — — i z
�42�Net�r� �9 3 423 3
� - - -' J ss W �s — 4 — - - -
Q 8 I- - - — �
�` �3 9 Q 429
J �p �_3B _ _ Q _ �_`5426 O 4�— — — — — —
Q �� g� — �B,)g _ — — — —
�5 12 � �� Q • —6— —
Z 413 is W
zvo, �Q 411 ia A as 2 ��? Z — 7 - - - - -
� y
a�«� ao�,s 4 � e ~ � e - - - - -
�p�,��� � W - � 9 —
q03"j g � 34 �
; ��19 — ' o—
400 ; � 399 20 33— — 10 —�—10 — — — — — �
J ' — � _32 _ _ � n �� 405— —"— — — — —
Q - � ai ��� i2
� �za - - - — s - - —a - - - - - - —
� . p 30 � : �3 : 403 13
26
�—�2� 29— — ' � — 1�� 401 14— — — — —
28-- �■���-���� .
�
(15)
� ,3� ',�Jj I ' WATER
' LOT 2
' f w
201 O 5 ^ � � e I s 61
(�s) � �y �
�
_ 1. �
� � � �
DO
,. �p.� , � ,
� 58 OQ.� � i �i r— — —�„ 'o, , , �
� G ,a +2 � �5sos � � � �
i � - - - - - -� — _ _ _ _ _I _ _ - - " _ _ _ _ y �
I
I
I
EXISTI NG CONDI TIONS
Owner: Tsafatinos Family-C.L.E.M Hospitality Case: FLD2012-02007
Site: 400 East Shore Dr Property Size; 0.53 acres
PIN; 08-29-15-02592-002-0110 Atlas Page; 267A
08-29-15-02592-002-0120
O �ESPLANADE � �� `
�i---- �
❑ ° e
z ?
ROCKAWAY Sw PP,�.
Ambler
❑
BAYMONT ST SKIFF pO�N�
�' , �
¢ Q
SAN MARCO � O
� � O�Cpti��/ pO1NT o
PAPAYA ST pROJECT
Q � � SI TE DORY �ASSA
�
Z � <
�
Pier gp °a
O ac
Causeway Blvd �
��D� WINDWA
Q DEVO
�
m
�
0
SECOND �FVO 21
ST N DR
THIRD
� sr
w �
� o° "
� Q
� z
0
�
0
V� BRIGHT yyATER DR
FIFTH ST
vi
LOCATION
Owner: Tsafatinos Family-C.L.E.M Hospitality Case: FLD2012-02007
Site: 400 East Shore Dr Property Size: 0.53 acres
PIN: 08-29-15-02592-002-0110 Atlas Page: 267A
08-29-15-02592-002-0120
435 Q � "a� v � q41
433 �2 436 �5 ° 2
431 " y
430 429 qgg ? ?
423
427Meter
; � 428
; 423 Q 429
426 41g
Q ~
415 � Q
2 473 � 422 O T
T � 4„— r
�9 � 423B Z
40� 4 423A y
4D3 � 411
A8�' 408 y
� 401 4Q1 aos
Q sss 1������
�� > 39Z
■
J395 ■ 40� 405
Q 391 �- -�
■ ■
Q �7� 400 � ■ �3
� �3g8� ■ ■ -
377 ■ 400� 401 �
�i�/�!
390 ��
OS/R
^ CA EWAY BL D 61
O�/R
�
� �
0
^
� o�D�p �,
s, -
G N �
P
ZONING
Owner: Tsafatinos Family- C.L.E.M Hospitality Case: FLD2012-02007
Site: 400 East Shore Dr Property Size: 0.53 acres
PIN; 08-29-15-02592-002-0110 Atlas Page: 267A
08-29-15-02592-002-0120
♦• - c . q? � � �- � '�.
� i� �' �� � �' � ,. � ` C
f li � � �� � � �`1 � �, �
`� � � ° � i -.,,�`7 r� '''` j.vu.i..� � ° `
0 " 1� 1 � e �,�� 4i ��� �� � € z
� ;��.�-Uaae, .�� � , . �
� �� }! � ��FJ
...�� �:� :�r • -� '���
� � • J � j � �,t"� �r�
. ,_ �i_r t t � ��y. �,�
�• ���'� �� � i � �r ' � �
�1 ,-�� � /w
._ �� �.__.... 1� R J) ' . ." rM
,
t. i
_ �� �.
� ��.r T� '��� J J=
� - �
�
; *�.,�' � c-
+� -r�
» . . '� � � �.� ��� 1)� ,�, •
, `•¢ �'��j- � � I�� ; .z eYl r. '��' �.
,'thf�;��• , .µ � ss�� J
, * � � „� . , �
'. � '»�i � `
a��`j� � �� �+ '..�° " �'!
+� ;�
"-' p� c t ' ;
,�' �'. �r�� , '"���
J ;
.� c'� a���'y�„r �� �� ,
{r,.. j � �,� • �; . _.. ...� .i .❑
1 ��.__ 2� � !`��I���� ;� � , � r.�}
� ��� )# ,� � � # � • :� � �+ i
�- �. � 1�" ; ^ � � , � �# �� .
°. e „
n r� „��`...: <k: —
t �� : ' 1
7 �
a.v ��
����. t� ...� � _
.. .., ,> � �:� -
, � � � � 1
:�. �iR�� ! � .
� " .� .
F� � �� � f � •
,� _ _ . ,_:'
� •
''� ����� e � u • i1� � f�
�r',C��. : � .. � �"� �,�,*�'J,.�� � `��i r.r <'•�a.►
� R VK :.� } � a• ,� .. �� � s :
tf.'1�!i �:.iy• �.�� yii%"� 1 �� " +.
� �/'� i a. �r .�.a � ' ..._. . . .� k '����� _
�� .��� ��£+ail� 1� M E"�� t � !�� .� � �..y i ��-_ ��, 1i. v
� � R a� y,a2'.,,,y—. �•� , 1,�
� �' �1a�1=��at�y:'_4 ��A� __7 € ii'4 , � �'�� ,
7►
� � ��I. �'y
. _- .
, . ;
,
• �_; _.-. ,
� �� � -"
x q
-
AERIAL
Owner: Tsafatinos Family- C.L.E.M Hospitality Case: FLD2012-02007
Site: 400 East Shore Dr Property Size: 0.53 acres
PIN: 08-29-15-02592-002-0110 Atlas Page; 267A
08-29-15-02592-002-0120
-,�,,,� '� �'��
i
, '
.
�� ' �rr��, �� �1i .�
_{.• � ,. > � +f'� ���� ;. .{'� e
� . . . ! r
T• _ .: � . i �• �' �; t ,� ��'p,' . :.s. p�'
� ����,�:�; 4 q � �� L- •_ � ...�~��*i •� ^" ]�,' ��J�..
�
ri�u. :'
..
"Stf� \ . .a r •� . '
� �, _ . ., �.. � ea,�a.
. _
.
.
, ��.._ . y� , _.,.
'r _. . 0--� _.,I _, .
.� ,�_.
. � '. . ;,ti . ..
9�. �`�-�`�-,�= r. ,� �
--_�_ �,,,�,,�. r
� � ;�:::�
�
.
View from the southe�st corner of the property looking View from the south side of the property looking north
northwest
`�
� .� `
, �,��,y, � I �
� T _f ' ," ;'�`� . -
�` ;�� �` ,� �."'ri _
` �.
a,. ..: ,{ �:p :� `�;�.� i M1 �� � �Cf -,-ii � � �xrr r��r�r���� ' � . .
;��`" � ` ! ;,��� � ��� �w���.� �!�'.
� .� � � �
.� �
. .. . _.. - .. o. �5 .
. K"�,' ;ay.. M''.{'_
jt r�
View from the south side of the property looking south View from southwest corner of the subject property
looking northwest
�.
I
I `;� =
I �. �
y �3 � � �� � � _ �.
��9:_ ,�,� �..;yS'k N ` ��' �
� ..
y � �
�•y� i _ . . ., � '''�.:.'��.:
-�: �.ts, -— r '��-n'� ,�y `,!� _
�� .
^�` �.,
i"" ��J� �t � � �
��k
View northeast from the subject property View southwest from the subject property
400 East Shore Drive
FLD2012-02007
��1,� �,.
�� Planning Department CASE#:
i�
100 South Myrtle Avenue RECEIVED BY (staff initials):
� ���� �� Clearwater, Florida 33756 � DATE RECEIVED:
�
�v,��`*,,.- ,.,�� Telephone: 727-562-4567
Fax: 727-562-4865
❑ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
❑ SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION-Plans and
application are required to be collated,stapled,and folded into sets
❑ SUBMIT FIRE PRELIMARY SITE PLAN:$200.00
❑ SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE$ '
'�` NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS)
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Comprehensive Infill Redeveloprrient Project
(Revised 07/11/2008) -
�PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT�
A. APPUCANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
APPLICANT NAME: Joseph Kokolakis
MAILINGADDRESS: 202 E. Center Street, Tarpon Springs, FL 34689
, PHONE NUMBER: (727) 942=2211 FAX NUMBER: (727) 937-5708
� CELLNUMBER ~ � EMAIL': joaeph@jkokolakis.com TM
PROPERTY OWNER(S): Terry Tsafatinos, A�na Tsafatinos Dimitrios Tsafatinos (Lot 11�)
. ListALLownersonthedeed C.L.E.M. Hospitality, LLC (LOt 12-14) '
oush� ovaee, E
AGENT NAME: Northside Engineering Services, Inc. Renee Ruggiero, Senior Project Planner
MAILINGADDRESS: 300 S. Belcher Road, Clearwater, FL 33765
PHONE NUMBER: (727) 443-2869 ^ � FAX NUMBER: (727) 446-8036 ` �
CELLNUMBER: (727) 235-8475 EMAIL: Renee@northsideengineering.net
B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
PROJECT NAME: East Shore Retail PROJECT VALUATION:' �
��'��974�Q4 0•��
STREETAUDRESS 400 and 406 East Shore Drive,
PARCELNUMBER(S): 08-29-15-02592-002-0110 and OB-29—,15-02592-002-0120
PARCEL SIZE(acres): 0.53 Acres ! PARCEL SIZE(square feet): y��9$Q Sq. Ft. ^T
LEGALDESCRIPTION: See Attached Legal Descriptions
PROPOSED USE(S): Retail �
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: See Attached Narrative
Specifically identify the request
(include number of units or square
footage of non-residential use and all
requested code deviations;e.g. ���
reducfion in required number of -----------=- --- �. __
parking spaces,specific use, etc.)
C:1Documents and Settings\derek.fergusonlDesktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project(FLD)2008 07-11.doc
Page 1 of 8 '
. <<'.. �.
DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR), A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNI
DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED(CERTIFIED)SITE PLAN? YES_ NO X (if yes,attach a copy of the applicable documents)
C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5)
CY SUBIVIIT A COPY OF THE TITLE INSURANCE PbLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see
page 7)
D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A) �
❑ Provide complete responses to the six(6)GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA—Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail:
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.
See Attached Narrative
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly
impair the value thereof. '
See Attached Narrative
3. The proposed development wiil not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
See Attached Narrative
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
See Attached Narrative
.____.___..._ .___.____ 1.�.�..�... ___..,��._. _._...
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
See Attached Narrative
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on
adjacent properties.
See Attached Narrative
' C:1Documents and Settingslderek.fergusonlDesktop\planning dept forms 07081Comprehensive Infill Project(FLD)2008 07-11.doc
Page 2 of 8
, �
WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria) �
Cl, Provide complete responses to the six(6)COMPREHENSIVE INFILL R�DEVELOPMENT 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 Attached Narrative �
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general
purpose,intent and basic planning objectives of this Code,and with the intent and purpose of this zoning district
See Attached Nar-rative .
�
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties.
See Attached Narrative
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development.
See Attached Narrative �
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,flexibl2 standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's economic base by.diversifying the local economy or by creating
jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an,existing economic contributor;
, d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is characterized by other similar development and where a
land use plan amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation;or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a working waterfront use.
See Attached Narrative
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 drderly 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 subsfantial number of
the following design elements:
❑ Changes in horizontal building planes; � '
❑ Use of architectural details such as columns,cornices,'stringcourses,pilasters,porticos,balconies,railings,awnings,etc.;
❑ Variety in materials,colors and textures;
❑ Distinctive fenestration patterns, � ,
❑ Building stepbacks;and
❑ Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers;enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
See Attached Narrative
C:1Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project(FLD)2008 07-11.doc
Page 3 of 8
_����,,� ; .
�, ,�;� ,r
,
'� ' ' E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria
�, �^, ` Manual and 4-202.A.21)
�
fi
�.. .,.;,„`'' [� A STORMWATER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED VHITH ALL.APPLICATIONS.All applications that involve addition
" oF 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 redu�tion in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption to this requirement.
' ❑ .If a plan is riot required,the narrative shall provide an expianation as to why the site is exempt.
,..�`: �
❑ At a minimum;the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the foilowing;
❑ Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines;
❑ Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of ali structures;
CI All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems; '
❑ Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank,toe of slo,pe and outlet control structure;
❑ A narrative describing th� 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
C�' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF STORMWATER PLAN REQUIREMENTS(Applicant must lnitfai one of the following):
_ �� Stormwater plan as nbted above is inciuded
Stormwater plan is not required and explanation n�rrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor
__� ____ elevations shall be providecl. �
CAUTION — IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE R�QUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN
AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY
� MAY OCCUR.
If you have questions regarding these cequirements,contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at(727)562-4750.
F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A)
Q SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY(inciuding 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 fhe exisfing frees;
❑ TREE INVENTORY; prepared by a "certified arborisY', of all trees 4" DBH or greater, refiecting size, canopy (drip lines and condition of
such trees; N/A — Only Palm and Magnolia Exist on Site �er 2�e1� ��
❑ LOCATION f�IAP 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 suqh,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 st�ndards are approved; Please See Provided Parking Study
❑ GRADING PLAN,as applicable;
❑ PRELIMINARY PLAT, as required(Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a finai plat is provided); N/A
Q COPY OF RECORDED PLAT,as applicable; N/A
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.fergusonlDesktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project(FLD)2008 07-11.doc
Page 4 of 8
il;. �
ii' ,
G. 51TE PLAN Sl1BMITTAL 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;
T 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;
� Ali existing and proposed points of aecess;
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 ail 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 br trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and ail 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; No Outdoor Lighting Proposed at This Time
Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks; and
• Floor plan typicais 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:
EXISTING REQUIRED PROPOSED
Land area in square feet and acres;
Number of EXISTING dwelling units; SEE SITE DATA TABLE
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 ail existing utility �
_ easement;
Building and structure heights;
^ Impermeable surface ratio(I.S.R.);and
� Floor area ratio(F.A.R.)for all nonresidential uses. ^
❑ REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale(8'/zX 11); �
Cl FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE,provide the foliowing additional information on site plan: N/A Less Than an Acre
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);
Buiiding and structural setbacks(dimensioned); ,
Structurai overliangs;
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.fergusonlDesktoplplanning dept forms 07091Comprehensive Infill Project(FLD)2008 07-11.doc
Page 5 of 8
�
, • �
H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL. REQUIREMENTS: (Secfiion 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 siopes and bottom elevations; ,
Delineation and dimensions of ali required perimeter landscape buffers;
Sight visibility triangles; �
Delirieation and dimensions of all parking areas including landscaping islands and curbing; •
Existing(rees 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(symboi or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all
_ existing and propased landscape materials,including botanical and common names;
Typical planting detaiis 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'/zX 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. N/A
I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23)
,_
❑ gUiLDING 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 Y:X 11
J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS /Section 3-1806) tyo Signage Proposed At This Time
❑ 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, materiais and drawing;
freestanding signs shall include the street address(numerals)
Will be Submitted under
❑ Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable(separate application and fee required).
separate application
Q Reduced signage proposal(8'/z X 11) (color),if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application.
C:1Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 07081Comprehensive infill Project(FLD)2008 07-11.doc
� Page 6 of 8
f •
5
[
�
K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUl7Y: (Section 4-2p2.A.'13 ancl A-8Q'1.C)
3'
'' � Cl hiciude If reqUired by Ilie l"rafiic Operallans iJl�n��er or hi�llier desiyn�e or(f llie prv�ans.ed devalopmenL•
°��;,,;,`
,,;,,
• Wlll deyrade lhe acceplable level ot servlce for any ra�elw�y as adopted(n IIiQ Com��roltensivc Plan.
* Will generale 100 or moro new vehicie ellrecUonel lrips ner hour and/or 1000 br inore new vel7iele Iti��s uer day,
' ■ WIII affecl a neprby roadway seyment and/or inlerse�li�n wilh fiv�(5)!r�porlable accidenls Wilhin lhe��eiar lwelve(�17_)month perlocl o�
lhat is on lhe Cily's�t�nual list af most I�azardaus InteraeGtions: ,
�I�rip yeneralfon shall be based on Ihe mos�reoent edillon oFlhe li�stllule nf 7ranspdriallon Ciiyineer's(fTE)Trip Gen2rel Nlanual..
��he Tr�(fic IinpacLSludy inusl be prepared in accordi�nco witli a "Scopiny MeeUng" heliJ wllli lhe T�affie Oper�al(oiis M�nayer and tiie
, f'lanniny.DeparOnent's D�velopmenl Rev(e�v Manayer or their designee(727=5G2-A.7!i0)
Refer l0 5eclion 4-801 C of lhe Communily Dovelo�ntent Co�1e for excep(ions lo Ihis requireiti�nf.
q �oknowledyemenl o(lraffic impact study renuiren7enfs(/�ppllcanf niusf hijlial one`of ihie followllig):.
T�afflc hnp�ct S�Udy is includ�d,.l�he sludy�musl include a summary(�lile of pre-andi��osl-developmenl I�vels of service for all
__1��,____ roadway legs and eaoh lurning mdvamenl 2t all htterseclions identitied in the Scopif�g Meeling.
� Traffic Impacl 51udy Is no�required:
CAUTION -� IF APPLICATION R�VI�.W f�ESUL.TS IN THL RCC2UIR�MENT FOR /fi TR�1r1=1C IMI�AC7'
STUDY AND NON� HAS pEEN SUf3N11TT�b, Af�PLICA'1`IC7N ML15T BE R�S.lIB11111`I'TED ANI�
SIGNIrICANT I�EL,AY Ml�Y OCCUI�. �
If you have quesUons reyardiny ll�ese requiremenls, conlacl lhe Clfy Publlc Works AdininlslraUon.ErtgUieeriny•vepartment a�(77_7) GG2-
47G0.
�., r-i�� r-�.ow c��.cu�.��rioNS�w,��r�� s�ru�Y:
Provide�Ire 1=1ow Celculallons.Waler Slurly by a I=1f�C PROTEC7101�I�N(31NEEI�;Io a5sure an adeyuale waler su��piy is available and lo delermfne if
�ny upyr�des aro required by Ihe developer duo lo the impacl d(lhls proj�cL.,The;waler supply miast he able to sup�zorl Ilie needs ot`any requiPed Tire
sprliikier, slandplpe and/or fire pump. If a fiPe pump ls reyuired the�v�ler supply nlusl(ie�bl�to supply 150%of fis rated capacily: Gompiianee wilh
Il�e 2004 I�lorida 1=1re I'revenqnn Code lo include NFPA 13,MFf'A i�,NI=PA 20;NFPA��1,end`M�I?A 11�42(Annex I-1)fs requireel.
l7 ACknowledgement of(lre Oow calculalionslwater study re�ulreiiienls(A��pllc�nl inusCliiiti�l one of llie foilowlny):
.._.__*._____. Fire f=1bw CalculaUonslWaler Sludy is iiicl��deii, liyciian� F�.a�•t 1'�st� R�qLt�sted, Test x�efiulLs tivi]>1 l�e
___�____ rirol=lowCalculalions/WalerStudyisnolreyuired. sitbmitiL-ed upon z�cei�aG Li�m Ul;ili:�y Dp��.
CAU'('ION — If= APf'LICA'fION i�GVIEW RG5UL'T'S IN. 'I'HE' I�EQUIREM�NT �OR A f=1R� FLOW
CAI�CUI.Al"IUNS/ WATER STUDY ANb NC3N�- FIA� B��N. �UBMITT�I], AI'PL(CATION MU��' f�C
R�SUBMITT�D./-�ND 51GNIFICANT DC.LAY MAY OCCUR.
If you have yuesUons regarding lhese requlrements,.conlactlhe Glly Fire P��veiiilon papartment.al(727)6D2-433�4,
M, SIGNATURE;
I,Ihe undersigned,aoknowledye q,tal~�11rap�resentelinns ittiede STATI=OF FLOf�IDA;COUNTY OFPINElLAS
In Ihis appllcafion 2ro lrue an��,a�cur�,Ic�to Ihe best of my Sworn lq and subscril�ed befor�me tlils...�U clay of
knowledge and aulhorize CiCy represenlalives to visil and ,tL�Gt,.,.t�,,.lN . I�.D,20�lo me antl/or by
pl7oloyraph lhe proper�iy°Uescr�l��tl In lii(s applica0on: �. �;�`e ,�. : `., c� � � ��'who is nersonelly knowii has
�✓ /� produee _
�� �',i as ieenliti��lidn.
� .«� ,r�' '�". C_....�. '''
-,�-a.^^'� ( y ".
...�...�.._.�.__._..,..
�'' `-°""'` ,,��-
.___.. ___.._._r! ...._. ......._ .: ._..__..__.___..___�___._._.___ —`�'„,��"���-�..�- �x c.� z,._._.,,
5lynalur�e1�pi opePly ov�qer or represeniaUve �olary piiblio �0'r���,����T��`��p��L��r��(�O��D)�
- "°'�'' My cornmis�ion ex{�ir�s> t ���,,,. ��1��,���1F) � �`jE1A130Xa
�
�t'f17`iiT}�9��U}��lr���� .
� , � ;" 7aX(J)1'C'A! �'��)���i�:�i����
C,lbocumenls and Sellhigsiderek.feryusonlDeskiopl��lannii7g depl forms U7081Cbm��retiPnsive Intlllq����c�j1���LPf)t���b�'u1t{1��t�locU"�+�
Page Z of 8 ,
N. AFF117AVIT TO AUTHORIZE AG�NT;
1. Provide names of ali pr�perty uwners o�deed-PRIiVT full namest
Terry Tsafatinos
Anna fiaafatinos ' '
bimitiios Tsafatinos �
i
�
2. 7hat(I am/we are)the owner(s)and resord title holder(s)of.the:(ollowing,desGribed property(addfess�.ar g.eneral location);.
406 East Shore Drive, Clearwater, Florida 3376.7 pa�'e�l: �# OE3-2.9�15-U25�2�0�.2-f1110
3. That this property constitutes the propertyfiorwfil�h a request:for.a;(d�scribe r�quest) '
Approval o� a comprehensive Infi�l IZedeval.apmertt App:1.iC��ian, foi a. new CommerC].al
�devel.opment
a
4. That the undersigned(has/have}appointed and(does/do)appQint:
�7oseph Kokola)cis
as(liis/their)agent(s)to execute any petitions ar other documenta;necessary tb affe�t:such petition;,
5. That this affidavit has been exeeuied to induce the City of Glearwater�Florid'a ta co�siderantl:act'.oq-the;a6ove desCribed propedy;
6. That site visits tq the property are necessary by City tepresentatives in orderfo processlnis application:and tfi�;owneC�uthorites Cit'y
representatives to visit and photograph the property deseribed in this appUc�tion;
7. 7nhet(I/we),t e undersigned authority,hereby certify that the foregoing is tru2 and correct,
,� /����„' _ �' i�`"'��� �o,, ."'�::
1 �
Property Owner ' PPpperiy Owne.r
� y",.��` � �,�,��-- �
`'�� �`'' t� Property Owner P�op�rfy�wrler
�TATE (�F' �LOI�IDA,.
COUNTY�C7�"FIN�L:L.AS'
� �r,� ,
Before me the undersigned,an officer duly commissioned by the I�Ws nf the State of F'lorida,on ir,is '"�{ d2y of
�y�
-�r,,;nlv.�'9�"� , ��C)�',:--� personT�all,,,�,,.�agpeared who having lieen iltst dulyswqrn.
Deposes and says that he/she fuily understands the contents oFtfie;af�idavitthat fie/she.signetl,.
�,r�Y�ue SCQ1T M:Fi�}�M � "� �,���
;�•�.,���
* * MY COMMISSION�Db 90(��60 ,,.�' �
�;r � �;� �XPIR��iApri124,201d "" � .
'�r�t�+r�� 6onded TI�n1 BudQat Nolt�y SetriC9s � , �,`�" ;�,� ' .-..__.
, �
Notary Rublic Signature:
Nolary Seai/Stamp My Commission Fscpires; ��~ ��- ;��r.�r�'���
C:1Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktoplplanning dept.fbrins 0708\��mprehensive Infill.Project(FLD)200g 07-11.dnc
1?ag�8 af 8
r i
LEGAL DESCRIPTION'S �
L(JTS11 , 12, 13AND14, BLOCKB,
BARBOUR-MORROW SUBDIVISION,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF
AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23,
PAGE 45; OF THE PUBLIC REC�RDS OF
PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA.
. CONTAINING 22,988 SQUARE FEET OR
0.53 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
PARCEL ID #:
08-29-15-02592-002-0110
08-29-'15-02592-002-0120
, .
,
�:. •�IFf�/{�!� ' •.�1'��N-'.1:(�.:'•�i' .... . . . . . .... . ' . . . . .. .. - �i:.',=-�:.�:'.."::!�'.'I..i� . -.. ._.,��...�....L!�.���.��-'i�l.�.:��:xlltt.^i'.'NJ�:�n��:��.I�
, i.... ..-.�.o....,..' :'.�, . . . • .. .",�:'..7..•.'
* , .li..
� � � r.. , ........,...,—.-� .
l, KARI.f.Ell r; OE�.fV(ER� CIEf;K OF CUIkT '
' ' :. . Rwurn io: FINELLR5 C(lUN(Yi FLGkID�t ':
� � Namc: 5TEWAFtT TITLE OF CI;�ARWA7'ER.INC. ""—'—!--------�--------
_ I r•y � .,AdJ�ae�:1290 Cuurt Sireei ' BC,�27391. �.D9-2Fr2000 15:40:��i.i� lCH
� .� Clearw�ter,Florlda a7756 51. DED-1YIY0
�� Tlils Instrumem Prepared by: LAURIE BRTEF 00�0000000 �
STEIVART TITLE OF CLEAAIYATER,INC. Iq: EM: SFIi� Ef'G:
�290 caw�siree� FECOf�Dll�i�002 Ff!GES 1 310.� �'�
CI9AfNNlff�Flarlda 3]7!6 DQC STAMP�— DFfZI9 3 52,705.00 ' ' �
as a nacessary Incldent io�hc fulpllmrni of condhlans fiE[;flkD FEES 9 S��a) �� ��
bonulnccl ln n ilde Insunncc rommhmem IasucYl6y It. '--'—' , -_ � �
Propeny Appr�iscrn Pareel iJcmiflcatlon��o�io)Number(s); T�Tf�.� 9�r2�6.5�J '- _`'� �
08-29-15,0259�-002-07.10 F� �� T.idmEkEU: f�,216.,�a-.'`` -_ •
Ornniec(s)S.S,N(s): OC1-293Q43 SPT^66-2QOp 3:39vn � �}{f�E: A.Q�?'`\j� \`�\•
FILE NO: 00090016 PIN�LLAS Ctl �K 11065 PO A�9 ��� �� /,` , / �% .�
I III�II�IIpI Glll lllll�llli blll�lln
� , ,
- . WARRANTY DEED �� •�,�,.
� . IThe krm'yarn'nd'�.a+n'Isrtln�hn h nmuud e IrcW�JI!�.►d ilM�u w �• - \� �� .
yArd N dw�snsn polrun 1
. � __ ♦
• This Wnrranty Deed Mode�lii� 25th Jayof Sflptetqbex' q,b, 2000,by i� i,/ `\����``� '
MZCHAEL R, MAYO and BARBARA A. MAYO , huaband and wife, i � � '
• � � i i
__ � . � �
' , _ ; . . �
. , .� __ .
wliosc marlmi su�us L�: � � __
hereina6er cnlled the gramor,whose past offfce address Is: � i �'�\`
i � � �
io '�ERRY TSAFA2'SN09 and ANNA TS}�FATINOS , hue�band and wi�e and � �
`,° DIMITRIOS TSAFATINOS , a singl:e man, as joi.nta tenants�wtCh��,ghts �
of survivorship „f. �--, � __-
� � wlwse�st vfllcc address Is: , . � �Y}�� �S'p-��f'���rf\
ti7 ��7'� �'Nd4 ,:j.S� CC'��o��v�✓a��CY
I �`� herelruller callcJ Uie sromce, ���z��� ^
t 3 3'7�'� �. `. � •
W�'I'NESSETH: Tha�sakl gramor,for�nJ M considera�lon of ihe sum.of 510,00 UctllnT�,ana6du{valuable co�ulJerailoits,
� raceipi whereof is hereby acknowleJgeJ,hcre6y gtanls, bargoins, SCII4�, d14a+,Y�[11I5�J��[(.'IG��C3{COqYOyS AiIII COflhfill!UIIIO,tlie
i � gramee,all U�al cenain land siNme in P.�nellag � ��'�.fio;,mw Fiadda,Vlx:
� , `` ` '/ /\1"' ,
LOT 11, BLOCK '!B", BARBOUR-MORI2C3W�SUBDI�V'�9:EON, accor.ding to Che
ma� or p1aG thereof ae recorded iR�tla����pr�k 23; Page 95,
Publi�c Recorda of Pinellae.�ouney,`�'�orit��.
�,i ' ' � ` ' .
r: �. � � � r
� � �
. � I t \ �� .
/�� 1,\1`♦ /I II �
i � Subjecr to that certai.p�hior�gage�exdbq�SdUI1ffRUST BANK, N.A,, dated Seprembex �
� 30, 1997, reeorded ip'Q;R. Bdqk�q85�'i;-Pgge 2186, Piablic R�cords o� Pinelles
County, Florida, w}�3��}Y has�@ r&pa��iing balance oE $174f530.23, arid the Grantee
� ,�j by Che acceptanc�of�this peed, �s,,s[mes and agrees to p&y the b2lance theteof. '
j � ' � `, ,' ,
�I � . , - / ' \
PAG�S --�•'•' ,•• �, `� .
� ac,��,Y D , ,
�,.:�, � �\�,� �'
I, o pF.,,..yo`��Q�r�.r,1
� � }`` -.._, , �, •
�r.�'r _ ���
� �_` .... `�. �
i ,... �
,, r���;� � ,
. J7lCJ i �
�, ° rK ,`. .. ..., ,
� � � , . :. �__ .
H � � � I
-,--� q.���
,'-K__ ',r,,;,,;` ,
e" ___Cr.Fi�.,t.. i
'�� ����OHi����vlry..—.
, � V"�
� ,�. .
. � ,
� � .
, ,\ . � `� ,
< �"{ � ..
� �
.\ `
. �� , :
.
. . . .. _ I
�
�
� �
�
+ I
Page l oF 2
?��' � . . � .
. .. -- - __ . __ _. _ .
.,..;�.:r�: N — -
�. „ ,..,�n� : �;�•. — -• --
..:;. '.�:.i��'t�'' i ,��,;'• -, ' .
• .:�:`v:�7tk•',�,s ' � :.i;;`:. . . . . .
• .. .. . . , , �'.
, , . ,
�
- .. .. ,� , � � � , s r.; a
■L3:. !J�'��i0.7W1�ih'Y�^SS��:s�n:L:°.:t,..:...... .:�� . . . ........... .S�:za.. .�.�.`.�:'i`-'.<�..i':>:;_r:L'.t�1�r�'.:?:t:;�::;p'.'.i�:Sk'..='i'.k:t�'�!.a„`":X;:.
' ,;� » • . . • . ' , , , , . .• . . .. . .
.,. � . �` � � ' � .. '� �� � . . ... . .' . . . . ,...,.,�
� 1� , 1
.�' � ` . .. . 3�
. !
PINELLR9,CQUPITY FCR. � � .
OFF,REC,BK I10651PG Q�a I
Tlils propeny���L+noQ Uit homestcod of dic Or�nmr(s), �
TOGE'I'}i�R wl�t all�he Irnemen�s,herediwmenb nnJ appurlen�nccs thcrero helonglnp or In anywisc ppperuinln�, ���
T6 Hpv�qnd t0�IOId,[he saMe In ke aimple forcver. � �
; And Ihe Sranlur hercby covcnan�wilh e�IJ granlee diat the granlor Is lawNlly sclaod nf said land in fea 5lmpie; ihat�hc g�anior � 1i ��
lias good rlghi anJ I�wNI�uihariry�a sall pnd convry said Idn�: �hn1�he gr�niar hercby fully wornnu ihe iltic to safd loncl nncl will ,,_ � �
• Jefend dm same ngeliui iLc Iawful cloime ofall persom whomsoever; anJ iha�eaid lond le frce ofall cncumbr�ncet, cxcept uxes - �'� �
_ �
OCCNIIIg NUI)S[q11Gp119 DlCGftllKf 3I,gg , reservatlona,fC51fIC1I0RS OfICI�PSlItIGfl13 O�ftCOfll,if nny. - �` ��
�� �
7 i `
�\ �� \�i
� IN WI7'NI�Sa^WI�ItEOF,Gramor has hereunm set gramar's hanJ and scal ihe dny and ycar I)rst abuvc wrinen. � � / �
��,' , i
� �� . � i
� i i
I , Sl�ned,SealrJ and Delivered in Our Presenca: � .. ,
_���Q ,..X � 1�r�— '_ '` \`�• •
; � 14imefe-Sigaature: �,e ' �'i� f5w�1.\` � �
� Wfu�esi prMinl Namo� � MIC EL R. MAYO V., �� ��\� \�i>
! � /J- � / � � � � � � �
F yJ'�(�d't.. �
� : R'itneu Siga�nrref ,t, � (Seory � �
14'Itneu Primed Na 1 BA.RBARA A. MAYO �� ` �
RONA D�.SO ERS � ,--. .�'__'','
, .
� WImn�51B���urc: �� f��.,,u�, . � I ��� \(Senl) / �
. . . Wlmc»Prinuil Name: 1YI S— '�1/I'�I� � �.� �
� � � i i
� . r i �i
� � _ , / I
� , 1VIVxsdSl�naNfe: � ♦ �_ (Seal)
Wltnc+a Primnl Nxmc; _ � �
STATE OF FLORIDA ;• �
. . CoUm�ro� Pinellas `��� ,�.
� � , ;
� � . �� , i
. The foragoing Inswment was ucknowledged beforo mc�his 2 gtih � v�.Y bf sep�mb'er , 2000,
I by MICNAEL R. MAYO and BARBARA A. MAYq`�,�'Yr�sl7and`afid wife,
. i ` \ , �. ^ , .
,�� �. ,
. � . �
' ' y(yq�f�l��qs�r}���Qpy�q�}pqpaar who haslhave producetl d�Wer ucense(�v ae idr (i�n. �
• . � . � ✓/
- . �
,' -. `
. .
� � ' \ � /
My Commission eaplres; � i <`� 2w-l/
• ;.�,� OFFICIAL NOTl�RY SEAL Pt t Nam�: (�ONALD E.SOM�RS
, Ron:)•1 r;.�nFp 3�s Ne�nry Public
C'._Ni,r;�-.i,�v;vh. B �
, . � (���, .`�;t;;'t�'?�!Z..'� �__•S�ejlabNUmher:
, �`?�.r.,�°'y �af�A9N115'�GYy�XP`-"
" ,' AIOVEMpER 7;�00�
: < �' i . >
srnT�or ,, , �� , ,, ., .
couN�nr or• ' � �, �
. ,
b�c foregoing,ifistrt�mem was�nkuo�vlhl�yd before me dtis day of . , i
� �
,_ \ �
1 , ' .--.�. . `
i � � `
� wl�o 15/arc p2rsonlly I�nown p�mc or who hanlhave produceJ dtiver Iicenac(s)ns WamificaQon.
� � -
I �� t
` \ i �
���,h(y�Gomrt�ssfon eap�Fes: I
�� � PPinled Namc;
.
,''-- Nowry Niblic
� "- �� Serlpl Number. �
� ` ` � �
� � � �^ -,�
� . .
�� . ' i
. �� �� i
.\ �`
.
� <�� � `v' ' . .
� � � �
♦ I �
� �� � 1
� ♦ / /
' _ /
I
I
�
�.. .
Page 2 of 1
,
, .. ;. . ._,. . . � _ ..:__... . .......
. . ..�,{; �,
;, .,.,.,Y��� '�;. w:r
. ,
. . .•<.:,�.. � ...,::.� .. .. .. ....
. ..., ,. � . -
. �� ,;�;, j;,,.,�`• ,::
. 'r:�n�:7�1:i[t:t�. .� . : ,
- . . :. . . . .......... .... ........,�:�=:
� .. .� _____ ' __ ' ___' ___ ' _ _`' ___ _/ _- _- -_ __ �� __''_ __'/ ___�____'� _ ''"_.�
' � $1$ .'50 'D DOC STAMP COLLECTION $5285. 00 KEt� BURKE, CLERK OF COURT PINELLAS �
COIJrTT�Y, FL BY DEPUTY CLERK: CLKDU08 � ,
----..._.... . _.. ----
;�R
, ,
, �
. „ .
. � �
, �
,__ � �
--_� �
--- .
_ -,
,`,
,� '�` �
;'.. ,,
� . �
, , , ,
, � ,
•� , , ,
Thfs Instrument Prepared By and Return ta; _- , ., ,,
,�;.- .,�, �, .,
REPKA&JENNI�iGS, P.A. , � , ,
�� 711 Pinellas Street � ' � �
i � � �
� � � I
Clearwater, FL 33756-3�426 =; '� � � �
, . „
,� . __ ,
�. OUFZ FILE NO. 1294.01 �,�� �',��--�
, , �
, , � �
, . „
, . „
WARRANTY DEED __; '
„
THISINDENTURE madethis �J��H dayaf I`1 �'�1�-=� ���008,tii�tween:COTEL,INC.,
A Florlda carporatlon, hereinafter called the Grantc►�;;wlibs@ I���t�ffice address Is: 5649
49T" STREET, NOf�TH, ST. PETERSBURG, �i.33����iid�cL.E.M� H08PITALITY, LLC,
A Florida limited liabillty company� whose-P,a�t��ffiF� Address is; 2958 KENIL.WICK
DRIVE, NORTH, CLEARWATER, FL 33�7G1,�her�lnaf�et�called the Grantee.
� , „ �
, , � �
.°, , . , ,
' That the Grantor, for and in ao��ider�tioirof�e sum of Sevsn hundred and flfty-five
, ,, . , .
thousand Dollars (�755,0OO.Oqr, anc� ot�l�r good artd valuable considerat(ons to said
Grantar in hand paid by saiSf Gi��,tde,the i'QCeipt whereof is hereby acknowledged� have
granted,bargained and�v1d tRth@�aid Grantee,and Grantee's heirs and assigns forever,
� the followfng described\p�op�erty s)tuate, lying and befng in PINELLAS County� Flvrida,
� to-wit: ,' - '', ',`,
. , . . �
,
, , �, , ,
� � . � ,
i , , �
LOTS 12, 13,'7qN[� 'I�, BLOG'�Ki 8, BARB�UR-MORROW SUBDIVISION,ACCORfaING TO THE MAP OR
PLAT THEREQF,A���OFtDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGE 45, PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS
COUN��Y�FL-ORIC�A�
, , _
;� `. _�
. �,
,�
�'�fiF,11S PROPERTY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THE HOME3TEAD OF THE GRANTOR.
, � � , •. .
. �
. � , ,
� � � Tax Assessor's Parcel Number: 08/29/15/02592/OQZ/0120 �
., _ ,
�_ �
SUBJECT ta easements, restrictions and reservations of record and taxes for the current
year and subsequent years.
., TO HAVE AND TQ HOLD the same in fee simple, forever.
• -�-y---- ----�-- -- --- - ---- --- --- • - -- ----
� AND SAID GRANTORS do hereby fUlly warrant the title ta said land, and will defend the �, ��,
same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. ,,-_,_;�,��,
-_ , .
_ ---, ..
�, .
( "Grantor" and "Gra�tee" are.used for singular or plural, as context recjaires: ; '�
. . , , ,
i' � , , . �
.. , ,
, ,
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Grantor, has caused these presents to I��ezeo�te��ir,
: their names the day and year first above written. ' � � �
i , � �
� � � �
_ . . , �
,�� ;; . � , �
,. . __ .
WITNESSES: COTEL, fNG; `,`,
, ;, � �
A Florida coip�aratiacr,'
� - �
:� �
Sign: V . .a�.�ce,� , ,
Print Name: �l�,t'y �-/-�L:��L� ,��,by: '.�-Je�xS,a'Patel, President
, �. , ,
� � � ' .�� �
„ ; '
�-..---- 1 � ,` � � , , ;�� .
V � �
. ` � .
��1 � • � �
�ign: _,� � � �
� �. �, -, �
Print name: 1 ���"� A� -��N� �o� c� � , �'„> �
- � „
� � I
� /�� \ ♦ '� I I
� ' ♦ � \ ♦� � � .
� �♦ ♦ ♦ \ .�,.� � .
STATE OF FLORIDA ,' �� �� '� ��---
, ,� • � .
, ,
,� , �, , .
, , ., , , ,
. < , .,
COUNTY OF PINELLA�S',�' �'.���
, .
, , ,. ,`,
, �, ,� �, >
., ,,, ,� ,
The foreg9in�-i�s�rNment was acknowledged before me this 30�'day of April, 2009
by Hema Patei'�s Pres�den��af Cotel, Ine, to me persdnally known or, in the altemative,
who produeed�� �,���- ; ; 1� (�-- �--<< as identification.
. , , „ �
. , .' __ , �
. .
,_, .,,,'�---' �
_ `�VIEITJ�ES�'my hand and afficiai seal, this �� day of ��'R� t-- , 2009
��, . , �
. , . . � J
�, . , r �
�
' � `�` .�-��
,, � , .
< �, � .,
, �
, , �
���� �' �' N07ARY PU� I
�� '—' ' NOTARYPUBLZG-STATEOFFLORIDA �
'- ""''° Thom�s C,Jetit�ings III
:I��+;Commission#DD879023
,,,,,, $xpires: APR,08,2013
HONIIEI)TIiRU ATI.AIvTICBOYD[NO CO.�Rr'Q
� ' ,
q .
� Planning 8� Development CASE NUMBER:
LL Department RECEIVED BY(Staff Initiais):
° C earwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue
> = Clearwater, Florida 33756 DATE RECEIVED:
Telephone: 727-562-4567
� Fax: 727-562-4865
❑ SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGIVED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
` Cl SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION-Plans and
application are required to be collated;stapled and folded into sets
i
* NOTE: A TOTAL OF 15 SETS OF THIS APPLICATION AND ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED IN
CONJUNC.TION WITH A COMPLETE LEVEL ONE OR LEVEL TWO APPLICATION. �
COMPR.EHENSIVE LANDSCAPE EROGR.AM
(Revised 11/29/2010) j �
�PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT� I
APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
APPLICANT NAME: Joseph Kokolakis
MAILINGADDRESS: 202 E. Cente'r Street, Tarpon Springs, FL 34689 � �
PHONENUMBER: 727 942 2211 'CELLNUMBER: �Z� 937 5708�T�.T__� . _
E-MAILADDRESS: 7oseph@jkokolakis.com
PROPERTY OWNER(S): Terry Tsafatinos, Anna Tsafatinos, Dimitrios Tsafatinos (Lot 11)
ListALL owners on the deed C L E M Hospitality, LLC (Lot 12-14)
Housh G ovaee, EO
AGENT NAME: Northside Engineering Services, Ihc. Renee Ruggiero, Senior Project Planner
MAILINGADDRESS: 300 S. Belcher Road, Clearwater, Florida 33765
PHONE NUMBER: 727-443-2869-`-�-----^_+.-------FAX NUMBER: �i727-446-8036 ----�yv�T-�--
CELLNUMBER: �z�-z35-8475 E-MAILADDRESS: Renee@northsideengineering.net
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, sectionslelevations, renderings and perspecti�es 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 principai buildings
proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for the development.
� See Attached Lanc�scape Narrative- �"'����� ""�"�— �
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.
See Attached Landscape�Narrative ,
Page 1 of 2
;r �, �
, . �
�Y 2. LIGHTING:
Any lighting proposed as a part of a comprehensive landscape program is automaticaliy controlled so that the lighting is turned off when the
business is closed.
See Attached Landscape Narrative ^
3. COMMUNITY CHARACTER:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community characterof the City of Clearwater.
See Attached Landscape Narrative
4. PROPERTY VALUES:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will have a ben�ficial impact on the value of the property in the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
' 5ee Attached Landscape Narrative �
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 Ciearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in which the parcel proposed for development is located.
SIGNATURE: -
I,the u de ' ned, acknowledge that ail representations made in STATE OF FLORIDA,COUNTY OF PINELLAS �^
this a cation are true and accurate to the best of my Sworn to and subscribed before me this � day of
know e and authorize City representatives to visit and A.D. 20��to me and/or by
pho g ph the property described in this application. .�1�1 iC LLqy�n ,G?" , who is personally known has
produced �t � a
as identification.
���.���� '�,�,v,,� �
Signature property owner or representahve � Notary public, ,
My commission expires:
�,�}.AY PUg(/o I�AM A.GOEL
� * �. M`i i3OMMISSION#DD 9d9832
,�, � EXPIAES;May3,201A '
°�oFF�o�'`O BondedThNBudgelNpbly$OIyIC6g
C:IDocumenls and Settingslderel�.fergusonlLocal SeftingslTemporary Infernet FileslContenf.0uflooklKPMVX8F11Comprehensive Landscape Program
11 2010.docx
Page 2 of 2
,� �� �ivil
- Land �lanning
� pue lJili�ence Reports
�.-� �„ �0-Z011111�,Land Use,I�nnexation
�.;�����-�xt"'�f✓'1�;�°�.� �����'�2� �e.�",. SL'ormwater Managernent
Utflir.y I�esign
°l i•a:F�ic
COMPIZEHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM NARIZATIVE _ ��i�StrG��eiar�ArJrrtinistratinn
I+LD2012-02007
�!; �ast Shore Retail
'
400—�ast Shoi•e llx•ive
ltaquest: - To allow eleven parking spaces within the southern row of spaces in lieu of ten
parking sliaces without providing an internal landscape island and to allow terminal island.s of
less lhau 150 sq. ft. ui area.
1. Arcliitectural Thenae:
a. T11e contempoz-azy landscape design consisting of yellows, blues and reds is
desagned to compliment the architectural theme of the Uuilding.
b. To provide a landscape plan that is demonstrably more attractive tlle Pollowing
at�e some of the measures takezi:
i. Virtually all available greezi space contains drought tolerallt plantings
and has been planted to the fiillest extent possibl�. �
ii. The design offers 3-4 levels of plantings and will greatly enhance ai�d
improve tlie streetscape.
iii. The landscaping has been designed to com�liment and. reflect the
plantings within the adjacent Public Parking Lot and tlie lush plantings
along the Causeway.
iv. Although a deviation is requested for the number and size of required
landscape islands within the parking lot, the proposal provides 19% of
landscaping within the vehicular use area where only 10% is required
meeting and exceeding the intent of the code.
v. Great care has been given to the northerri yai•d, providing nicely
landscape buffer includizlg sllade trees and layers of plantings between
tl�e developmenl site and the adjacent motel. �
2. Ligliting: No outdoor lighting is proposed at this tiine aud aily future proposed
liglrt will meei:required code. �
3. Cozninunity Character: The proposed installation of over 700 new plantings,
coz7sisting of 10 different varieties, will provide immediate visual rewards to the vicinity ,
and comillunity. Additionally, the proposed plan provides landscaping that is tolarant to
� the Florida environment. � �
4. Pro,��erty Values: The proposed landscape design, with the proposed number and
qu.ality of plantings will offer upgraded and positive value to the immediate vicinity for
inany years to coine.
5. Special Area or Scenic Corridor Plan:N/A
i
i
02.012012 RMR/rmr
I N�S ]202
I
�
:�UO So�.itli 13el�her ltoad �
Clca.rwatei;l=laricla 3:3765
C�ch(a�northsir.ltengineerings�rvices.cam a-
727�I�13 2E369 1=ax 727�I�}f, t303G
, �
Civil
l.ancl Planning
�ue �ifiger�ce Repoi•cs
��
Re-Zoning,I�and Use,A+nnexatiorr
���`�;'���('�'����;�' ��"�"f.'���'�� ����"�• Stormwater Mana�;ernene
Utility Design
March 6, 2012 Traffic
Constructian Ac�ar�inistrati�an
City of Clearwater
Planning & Development Review Department
Matthew Jackson, Planner II
100 S. Myrfle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
RE: FLD2012-02007—400 East Shore Drive -East Shore Retail
NES# 1202
Dear Mr. Jackson,
Below please find our responses to the DRC comments associated with the above referenced project:
En�ineerin� Review
Prior to Community Development Board:
1. Acknowledged, all sub-standard sidewalks and sidewalk ramps adjacent to or a part of the project
area are shown to be brought up to standards including ADA, standards with detectable tactile
surfaces or truncated domes per FDOT Index #304; please see revised plans.
2. Acicnowledged, please see revised plans, the driveway aprons have been revised to fall within the
limits of the extended property lines as per your request.
Prior to Building Construction Permit:
1. Acknowledged, prior to submission for Building Construction Permit all utility facilities existing
and proposed throughout the property served or to be served shall be shown on the
construction plans.
Parking Analysis Study Comments: Following responses provided by Robert Pergolizzi, Project Traffic
Consultant
1. As discussed at DRC on March 1, 2012, the Hyatt garage has a total of 764 spaces that are used for
guests and the public. The use of 764 in the supply has been approved by City of Clearwater in
previous studies since it is not possible to differentiate usage among guests and public, subsequent
discussions with Matt Jackson confirmed using 764 as the proper number.
2. As discussed at DRC this has been changed to six (6) on-street spaces in the report.
3. Acknowledged.
4. Employees would park either on-site or in available public spaces. Research has shown 80% of
employees take car.
300 South E3elcl�er C:oad
Clearwacei:I=1c7rid� 337G5 1
[ech�riorthsid��ei7Kii��cr•ii�gs�rvices.com
727 4�}3 286`� Fax 77_/ 4�1(� f�U3G
5. . The second floor is proposed for retail and storage.
6. OK, thank you.
7. Acknowledged
GN: #1 — Acknowledged, Sheets C1.2 to 3.1 and Sheets C5.1 to C5.2 were not reviewed; Sheets will be
reviewed prior to receipt of the building permit.
En�ineering Review Utilities Department - Prior to Building Construction Permit:
Water:
Items 1. - 8. Are hereby acknowledged and shall be satisfied prior to submission for Building
Construction Permit.
Reclaimed Water:
1. Acknowledged, reclaimed water is available on Poinsettia.
Waste Water Collection:
1. Acknowledged, coordination with Waste Water Collection Supervisor Tim Charles is required
prior to submission for Building Construction Permit.
Environmental Review
l. Acknowledged, DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional comments
may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application.
2. Acknowledged, an Asbestos Survey is usually required prior to conducting any demolition or
renovations.
Fire Review
1. Please see revised Civil Sheet C4.1 for additional hydrant for fire fighting use.
2. Please see revised Civil Sheet L1.1 providing a shell pathway within the northern yard for fire
fighting purposes.
3. As per our discussion at DRC the turning radius is shown at the largest extent possible without
projecting beyond the extended property lines.
�4. Acknowledged, DRC
2
Land Resource Review
1. Acknowledged, survey will be updated to include and correctly depict the trees near the
west side of the property prior to Building Permit.
Parks and Recreation Review
l. Please see revised Site Data Table providing Existing or Previous Square Footage 18,622 sq. ft.
and/or 42 Rental Units
Plannin� Review
l. Acknowledged, NES met with Traffic Engineering (Bennett Elbo) on Wednesday, March 07, 2012;
Traffic Engineering had no objections to the proposed design but asked that we decrease the
width of the on-street parallel spaces to 8' in width which will allow an increase to the sidewalk of
1' and to insure plantings within the sight visibility triangles are low growing and meet the
requirements of code associated with plantings within the sight visibility triangles and finally that the
most southwestern on-site parking space and the most northeastern on-site parking space be signed
"No Truck Parking"
Note: Responses 2—7 Prepared by Robert Pergolizzi, Project Traffic Consultant
2. As discussed at DRC on March 1, 2012, the Hyatt garage has a total of 764 spaces that are used
for guests and the public. The use of 764 in the supply has been approved by City of Clearwater in
previous studies since it is not possible to differentiate usage among guests and public, subsequent
discussions with Matt Jackson confirmed using 764 as the proper number.
3. The report was revised to match the new plan.
4. Based on actual count there are 152 spaces in this lot. This figure was used in past studies.
(Hooters)
5. As agreed at DRC these numbers are shown in the chart since they currently exist and are part
of the existing supply. The narrative of the report subtracts out these spaces from future
supply acknowledging that they will be removed for the building.
6. OK, thank you.
7. The employee figures were provided by the applicant to the parking consultant. We have revised
these figured to reflect 8 employees on the two larger shifts and 4 employees on the overnight
shift.
8. Please see revised Civil Sheet C3.1, Transformer relocated to northwest yard near the electrical
;
room and to meet the 5' setback requirement from the property lines.
3
9. The Architectural Elevations and renderings have been revised to address the comment
regarding varying the building lengths. As discussed in the DRC meeting with staff, altering the
overall wall lengths of the building walls for this proposed building is not achievable. At staff s
request, the building massing at the northeast corner of the building has been revised, using
architectural elements and colors/materials to diminish the scale of the east wall and, in
essence, give the impression of a shorter overall wall length. This is a similar strategy that has
been incorporated at other building wall lengths.
10. Through discussions with Planning it has been determined the proposed design provides sufficient
setbacks to the edge of right of way and sidewalk width meeting the intent of Beach by Design.
11. At staff's recommendation, the east elevation has been revised to include one additional ground
level window and one additional second level window. Of particular importance are the window
openings at the street level. These are 8'-0" wide x 12'-0" high and will be provided with
artwork/graphics (no advertisements) that are non-transparent. At these locations, there is no
visibility into the store due to conflicts with interior store functions. Immediately inside the wall at
this location are the store's Walk-in Coolers/Freezers which are 8 ft. in height.
12. Acknowledged, please see notes added to Civil Sheet C3.1 requiring all sidewalks to be
constructed of washed shell finish to match the Mandalay Streetscape Design; crosswalks are
also shown as decorative pavers.
13. Acknowledged, please see note added to Civil Sheet C3.1 stating All Awnings shall provide 8'
clearance if projecting over the Right-of Way.
14. All facades have been labeled on revised Sheet A-214B
15. All views have been shown and labeled on revised Sheet A-214B, including the north elevation.
16. Proposed Project Value $2,970,000.00
Public Art Review
1. Acknowledged, please see revised application providing a Project Valuation of$2,970,000.00.
Solid Waste Review
1. Solid Waste discussion took place at DRC and all terms are acceptable to the Developer/Applicant.
Stormwater Review Prior to Building Construction Permit:
Items 1-13 are hereby acknowledged and shall be coordinated prior to Building Construction Permit.
4
� " •
GN#l. Acknowledged, all resubmittals shall be accompanied with a response letter addressing how
each department condition has been met.
GN#2. Acknowledged, DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional comments
may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application.
Traf�c En�ineering Review Prior to Community Development Board
1. Please see note added to Civil Sheet C3.1 stating "On-street parallel parking spaces within the Right-of-
way shall meet the City Parking Division's requirements and shall be short term metered parking (30
minutes)" as per your request. Please also note as per Bennett Elbo's request the on-street parallel
parking spaces have been reduced from 9' to 8' in width resulting in an expansion of the sidewalk width
by 1' and No Truck Parking signage has been added to the most southwestern on-site parking space and
the most northeastern on-site parking space.
General Note(s):
1. Acknowledged, Applicant shall comply with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance
and fee schedule and pay prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued.
2. Acknowledged, DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional comments
may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application.
We trust this information is sufficient to respond to the DRC comments and allow the project to move
forward to the Community Development Board. Please feel free to contact us if you have questions or
require additional information and we will respond immediately.
S' ly,
�
Renee Ruggiero, Senior Project Planner
Northside Engineering Services, Inc.
East Shore Retail NES 1202—Response to DRC Comment 03.08.2012 RMR/rmr
5
�."al,�
��I1C� ����,1Tft;1"�S�
��tre [N`��I��er�r� �,x{:;�:� �:
f�e-?'���in�,�.,�n<1 �1=�,t'���r���:��,a��.r�
"i��r��-t�d�rb"'��"������"f, ��d'�"�. ��` < �CC3t`IT14?Jr�LE'i' ��7tt1�:,�y�rk�•��'
C.1tl�tt:� i�E*;r,�lt
�t'"�k��,�;
�c�;o��t°t�c.r.it,���Ac���ir�ESt�-e�r:i��,�7
� - STORMWATER REPORT �
FOR:
EAST SHORE RETAIL
� PROJECT
��:;
2�
� .
�,.
�
yµ
g,.�L�so.. .
�,
���.�. � . . �� ,
�"` ����
2# ��
*tti
�"�. ,� ��` v �.F �
�..�.�� � $� f� . '�� . : .
�,,
.ro
��y �. ( �
„ . '� �,:,
as r�
� � +1 �`
'�i�.�r
�� Ram A. �'r�el,-�.�'h=�I�.;P.E. #47431
�
��� � �
�: � 1Vlaxch 12, 2012
�
r ,
,�, � ��Project�No. 1202
��� 3f1U Sa�acf� k3elcliGr fiaac�
'' Cfearwar,�r,Fla�°ici� :33765
�����' tc�ch�M)r�aF��c.I�si�J�����g�ir��r�i�k�;.cc�rr� �
i°$� 727��3 2869 Fax 727�f�� £3t13�
r �
DRAINAGE NARRATIVE
The proposed construction activities consist of the following:
• Removal of 5,975 S.F. of open impervious vehicular use, building and
sidewallc area.
• Construction of 20,190 S.F. of open impervious vehicular use,
building and sidewalk area.
• Construction of a stormwater vault to provide water quality treatment
for a volume equal to %2" of runoff from the entire drainage basin area.
Treatment of stormwater will be achieved through ari effluent
filtration system. ,
• This vault will also provide attenuation for the pre-post design storm
event for the entire project area. The overflow will be piped to an
existing grate inlet on East Shore Drive.
• The Drainage Calculations have been prepared in accordance with the
City of Clearwater and SWFWMD Drainage Manuals.
• The project is located in an open basin. Construction of this project
will not increase the existing peak discharge rate or volume in the
design storm event.
• No wetlands are located in or adjacent to the project area. No wetland
impacts will result from construction of this project.
1 �
PROJECT NAME: EAST�Ht�RE RETAIL
PROJECT NO. : 12p2
EXISTING CONDITIONS
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA= 22,988 SF = 0.53 ACRES
IMP. AREA= 5,975 SF =. 0.14 ACRES
POND AREA= q SF = 0.00 ACRES
PERV. AREA= 17,013 SF = 0.39 ACRES
C CALCULATIONS
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA= 22,988 SF
IMP. AREA= 5,975 SF OF IMP. AREA @ C = 0.475
POND AREA= 0 SF OF POND AREA @ C = 1
PERV. AREA= 17,013 SF OF PERV. AREA @ C = 0.2
C = 0.27
T.O.C. = 6Q MINUTES
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA= �2,988 SF = 0.53 ACRES
IMP. AREA= 2Q,190 SF = 0.46 ACRES
POND AREA= 0 SF = 0.00 ACRES
PERV. AREA= 2,798 SF = 0.06 ACRES
C CALCULATIONS
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA= 22,988 SF
IMP. AREA= 20,190 SF OF IMP. AREA @ C = 0.95
POND AREA= 0 SF OF POND AREA @ C = 1
PERV. AREA= 2,798 SF OF PERV. AREA @ C = 0.2
C = 0.86
T.O.C. = 60 MINUTES
C
PROJECT NAME : EAST SHORE RETAIL
PROJECT NO. : 1202
VAULT STAGE STORAGE DATA :
STAGE AREA AREA STORAGE
ft-NGVD SF AC CF
T.O.V. EL.= 5.60 1,729 0.040 6,657
4.5Q 1,729 0.040 4,755
D.H.W. 25 EL.= 4.08 1,729 0.040 4,029
3.00 1,729 0.040 2,161
W.Q. EL.= 2.42 1,729 0.040 1,158
2.00 1,729 0.040 432
BOTTOM EL.= 1.75 1,729 0.040 0
TOTAL WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS:
DRAINAGE AREA= 22,988 SF
REQUIRED WATER QUALITY DEPTH = 0,5A IN
REQUIRED WATER QUALITY VOLUME = 958 CF
PROPOSED OUTFALL ELEVATION = 2.42 FT
AVAILABLE WATER QUALITY= 1,158 CF
�
- —
� ,
NORTHSIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES
25 YEAR STORM EVENT
PROJECT: EAST SHORE RETAIL
PROJECT NO. 1202
RUN-OFF COEFFICIENTS
PRE-CONSTRUCTION
- TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA= 22,988 SF 0.53 AC
IMP.AREA= 5,975 SF OF IMP.AREA @ C= 0.475
POND AREA= 0 SF OF POND AREA @ C= 1
� PERV.AREA= 17,013 SF OF PERV.AREA @ C= 0.2
C= 0.27
POST-CONSTRUCTION
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA= 22,988 SF 0.53 AC
IMP.AREA= 20,190 SF OF IMP.AREA @ C= 0.95
POND AREA= 0 SF OF POND AREA @ C= 1
PERV.AREA= 2,798 SF OF PERV.AREA @ C.= 0.2
C= 0.86
STORAGE CALCULATION
PRE-CONSTRUCTION
DRAINAGE AREA= 0.53 AC
TIME OF CONC.Tc= 60 MIN
I@ 1"c=60(25 YEAR EVENT)= 3.60 IN/HR
Q(out)=C x I x A= 0.52 CFS
POST-CONSTRUCTION
TIME I Q(in) INFLOW OUTFLOW STORAGE
MIN. IN/HR CFS CF CF CF
60.00 3.60 1.63 5,873 1,857 4,016
MAX. STORAGE= 4,016 CF
WEIR DESIGN
TOP. OF WEIR ELEV.= 2.75 FT
BOT. OF WEIR ELEV.= 2.42 FT
H = 0.33 FT or 4"
Q= 0.52 CFS
L=Q/3.3*H^1.5= 0.83 FT or 10"
TOTAL VOLUME REQUIRED= MAX. STORAGE REQUIRED= 4,016 CF
TOTAL VOLUME PROVIDED= MAX. STORAGE PROVIDED= 4,029 CF
�
� �
NORTHSIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES
POND DRAWDOWN ANALYSIS
PROJECT: EAST SHORE RETAIL
PROJECT NO.: 1202
VOLUME PROVIDED= 1,158 C.F.
BOTTOM OF SLOT ELEV.= 2.42 POND AREA(SF)= 1,729 S.F.
BOTTOM OF POND ELEV.= 1.75 POND AREA(SF)= 1,'129 S.F.
UNDERDRAIN INVERT ELEV.= 1.00
COEFFICIENT OF PERMEABILITY(K) = 0.09 FT/MIN
LENGTH OF UNDERDRAIN= 80 FT
SIZE OF UNDERDRAIN= 6 INCH
ELEV. AVG.HEAD INCR HEAD L(AVG) HYD.GRAD. ILTER ARE FLOW POND AREA INCR VOL. INCR TIME
FT FT FT FT FT/FT S.F. CFM S.F. C.F. MIN.
2.42 1,729
1.09 0.17 2.75 0.40 120 4.27 290 68
2.25 1,729
0.92 0.17 2.75 0.33 120 3.61 290 80
2.09 1,729
0.75 0.17 2.75 0.27 120 2.95 290 98
1.92 1,729
0.58 0.17 2.75 0.21 120 2.29 290 126
1.75 1,729
TOTAL DRAWDOWN VOLUME= 1,158 C.F.
TOTAL DRAWDOWN TIME= 6.2 HOURS
�IA
(Mivil
Lar�d C'lanning
Dus C>iligence Reporrs
Re-Zoning,Land Use,Ann�xatian
���"��`��"�t�l-� �`d'f.�+�'�- ����:'< Starrriwa.ter Manager77erac
Utility C?esigr�
NARRATIVE ����f�G
Cc�i�structian Administrati�an
EAST SHORE RETAIL
400- EAST SHO�D�uvE
FLD2012-02007
Description of Request
The Applicant Joseph Kokolakis, proposes to redevelop the site with a two story retail
development. The subject 0.53 acre site is comprised of four lots under two separate
ownerships and is bounded by Poinsettia Avenue to the west, a City of Clearwater Public
Parking Lot to the south, with East Shore Drive to the east and a two-story motel to the
north. The site is located within the Marina District of Beach by Design.
Specifically, the Applicant requests flexible development approval to allow a new two
story retail development with:
a. a Lot Area of 0.53 acres (22,988 square feet);
b. a Lot Width of 199.90' along Poinsettia Avenue and 199.70' East
Shore Drive;
c. a maximum Building Height(above BFE) of 40';
d. an F.A.R. of 0.99
e. an I.S.R. of 0.88
f. Front (West) setback along Poinsettia Avenue of 0.2' to building, 0'
to pavement, 6.5' to parking lot pavement and 0' to decorative
awnings, tower pier, sunshade and roof overhang;
g. Front (East) setback along East Shore Drive of 0.2' to building, 0' to
pavement, 7' to parking lot pavement, 0' to decorative awning and
roof overhang;
h. Side (North) interior setback of 14.3' to building and 10.3' to awning;
i. Side (South) interior setback of 71.2' to the building and 5' to parking
lot pavement;
j. Providing 21Parking Spaces;
as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-
803.0 of the Development Code of the Code with reductions to the landscape
requirements through a Comprehensive Landscape Application.
300 South Beic.her Roac�
Clearwatei�,Flor�ida 337G5 1
tecl�@northsideengineei•ir�gservices.cc�m
727�I�3 2669 f��r, 7Z7 �}qG t3036
� Existin� Conditions
The southern portion of the site (Lots 12-14) previously contained 38 Rental Units
(licensed as SF/Duplex 30 days or more) which was demolished in the recent past to
provide a temporary 35 space gravel public lot; the northern portion of the site (Lot 11)
currently contains 5 Rental Units (licensed as Apt.- 30 days or more) and will be razed as
a part of this re-development proposal.
Discussion
The Applicant proposes to redevelop the site with a new two story retail development
providing a parking area, landscaping and new on street parking public spaces. The site
is located in a highly visible location,just north of the Clearwater Beach Roundabout and
is within the Marina District of Beach by Design.
Beach by Design strongly encourages and supports redevelopment of the area to include
commercial uses, restaurants and hotels, together with residential and mixed use
developments. Beach by Design identifies this area as a prime loeation, with its close
proximity to the City's marina and to the beach making the District a particularly
desirable place for tourists and residents alike.
General Applicabilitv Cri�eria
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 adjacent properties are primarily comprised of one and two story buildings
similar in bulk, coverage, density and character of the proposed development.
The bulk, coverage and density of the properties located to the east, west and
north of the subject site are varied. The area is comprised of older one and two
story motels and efficiencies, providing minimal to no setbacks to pavement
and/or buildings and offering little landscaping. Many of the sites provide
parking which requires cars to back into the right of way.
A new retail development is located west of the project site and provides similar
scale, bulk and coverage. North of the neighboring motel a single story office
building and restaurant is located�north with minimal setbacks, little landscaping
and parking requiring cars to back into the right of way.
The proposed two story retail development will be in harmony with the scale,
bulk and coverage of the surrounding developments as the proposed development
provides similar lot coverage and density as the surrounding sites. The proposal
offers a building design of appropriate bulk and scale based upon the project area,
the character of the surrounding properties and the intent of Beach by Design.
2
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate
development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair
the value thereof.
The proposed improvements will not discourage appropriate development and use
of the adjacent land and buildings, the area is already developed and the value of
adjacent and surrounding properties will not be compromised.
The development proposal will enhance this area of the Beach in a number of
ways, including:
1. The proposed Retail Use is a preferred use within the district and will provide
new retail opportunities for visitors and residents.
2. Proposed improvements will significantly increase the value of the land,
offering benefit to the surrounding land value.
3. Updated architecture and landscaping will significantly enhance the block
which currently has very few updated buildings and sites. The proposed
updated architectural design will significantly enhance the human scale and
aesthetic appeal of the street-level facade creating a more pedestrian-friendly
environment at this highly visible parcel on the beach.
4. The construction associated with the new retail development will meet current
building codes including FEMA and ADA requirements including the
addition of new sidewalks where no sidewalks currently exist.
5. The proposed new retail development will contribute to the City's economic
base and will create jobs.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of
persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
The proposed development will comply, as required, with all applicable codes
including the Florida Building Code, the Life Safety Code and the Florida Fire
Prevention Code. The proposed use is appropriate and desired for the area. On-
site parking is provided in addition to new sidewalk installations and 6 on-street
parking spaces, offering improved conditions on site and off-site.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
Traffic impacts as a result of the proposed retail development will be minimal; it
is anticipated that nearby intersections and adjacent roadways will continue to
operate at acceptable levels of service after the proposed improvements are
completed. Ingress and egress is provided for along both Poinsettia Drive and
East Shore Drive to give ample access opportunity to visitors who may be
unfamiliar with the area, allowing a driver to go around the block to gain access to
the site without the need to go back into the round about.
Please see provided Traffic Impact Study for additional information and
discussion.
3
� 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
The community character is comprised of one and two story overnight
accommodations and efficiency units, a retail development if location to the west
and a restaurant operation just beyond the neighboring site to the north. The
proposed two-story retail development is consistent with the character of the
surrounding area and nearby uses; the design offers an appropriately scaled
development for the vicinity and will visually enhance the area.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including
visu�l, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent
properties.
The development proposal will improve the visual appeal of the property as
viewed from the adjacent street and the roundabout, offering a Modern Miami
architectural style which is appropriate and aesthetically pleasing for this highly
visible Beach location.
The proposed trash collection area is located within the enclosed receiving dock
area and will not negatively impact the passerby and neighboring site; adequate
parking is provided and is appropriately shielded from the street with landscaping.
COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT-PROJECT CRITERIA
1. The development or redevelopment of the parcel proposed for development
is otherwise impractical without deviations from the intensity and
development standards.
Redevelopment without deviations is impractical as the deviations are necessary
to meet the intent of the Design Criteria contained within Beach by Design and to
provide a viable development on a minimally sized parcel of land in the current
economy. The project is within the allowable limits associated with gross floor
area with a building coverage of 50%. Deviations associated with parking are
necessary as acknowledged by Beach by Design and is addressed within the
provided Parking Analysis. The proposed deviations are necessary to
accommodate the retail uses desired by Beach by Design and to maximize the
allowable development potential of the land. The proposed development
complies with the Beach by Design guidelines to the fullest extent possible,
providing an interesting building form along all facades. The architectural design
introduces a mixture of colors, textures and details with lush tropical landscaping
provided along street frontages where possible and within the north and south side
yards.
4
Beach by Design identifies the shallow lot'depths found in the area is as a limiting
factor associated with redevelopment opportunities. The shallow depth of the site
created some challenges in accommodating the retail development and is a major
contributing factor for the requested flexibility. The Applicant has actively
assembled land to better meet the needs of the development and the development
proposal meets the City's desire to provide retail uses within the Marina District
of Clearwater Beach.
2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose,
intent and basic planning objectives of this code, and with the intent and
purpose of this zoning district.
The proposed redevelopment will provide a preferred use which will contribute to
the city economy; retail use is also allowed in the "Resort Facilities High" land
use category and is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive plan and
Beach by Design.
Applicable Comprehensive Plan Goals/Policies/Objectives include but are not
limited to:
A.6.6 Objective - Tourism is a substantial element of the City's economic base
and as such the City shall continue to support the maintenance and enhancement
of this important economic sector.
Beach by Design Marina District lists the proposed retail use as a preferred use
within the District.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
The proposed development is compatible with the neighborhood, as is more
particularly discussed in General Applicability Criteria 1 and 2, together with
Comprehensive Infill Criteria 4 below, and will not impede other development.
The proposed redevelopment project will benefit the community as a whole and
specifically this district. The proposed retail development may encourage
additional investment and improvement to the surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the
proposed development.
Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of this
proposal. The proposed retail use is a preferred use and is appropriate within the
neighborhood and district. The proposal includes many improvements such as,
providing a new updated structure which meets current building codes, FEMA
regulations, fire and ADA requirements; the site improvements include provisions
5
for appropriate parking spaces and access which will greatly improve the safety of
motorist and pedestrians, residents and visitors alike. Responsible site drainage,
appropriate setbacks and tropical landscaping will provide further benefits to the
neighborhood and community.
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 spot land use
or zoning designation;
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or
preservation of a working waterfront use
The "Resort Facility High" land use category and the "Tourist" zoning district
both permit retail uses; the district allows retail uses as a minimum standard and
flexible standard use. The proposed retail development will be an economic
contributor to the City and will generate new jobs for the community. The
proposed retail development provides easy access and may improve and/or
promote pedestrian activity and tourism within the Marina District of Clearwater
Beach.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height, and off-
street parking are justi�ied 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;
6
Retail uses are permitted in the "Tourist" (T) zoning district without
special approval. As the surrounding properties are made up of retail,
restaurant and over-night accommodation uses, the proposed two story
development will not impede normal and orderly development and
improvements of the surrounding properties as previously discussed
within General Applicability Criteria 2. This re-development proposal
may stimulate additional redevelopment and improvements to the area.
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines
- adopted by the City; �
Through appropriate site and architectural design, the proposed
development complies with the design guidelines contained within Beach
by Design and the Marina District.
c. The design, scale, and intensity of the proposed development supports
the established or emerging character of an area;
The proposed two story retail development will continue to support the
character of the area as the area is comprised of developments of similar
scale, bulk and intensity. Please see additional discussion under General
Applicability Criteria 1.
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 of materials and colors
• Distinctive fenestration patterns
• Building stepbacks; and
• Distinctive roof forms
A variety of the above elements are incorporated into the architectural
design as shown on the building elevations. While there are flat roofs and
continuous level floors for accessibility, there are cantilevered roof
overhangs (sloped and flat), awnings / sunshades, and a variety of
congruous but varying elements such as roofs, window mullions and
reveals.
7
- , �
Columns and pier massing take a very prominent role in the design of the
primary (south) elevation. Columns are slender and extend two stories
uninterrupted to support a high roof extending from the main wall/fa�ade.
The slender columns are juxtaposed by heavy massing of the south stair
shaft and the angled piers which flank the entry tower element. These
features are accentuated by both vertical and horizontal sunshade devices
at the window and door openings.
The project uses at least three different textures (stucco, tile and metal
panel) as well as large glass surfaces. Complementary paint colors are
- used throughout. Additionally, high roof elements provide another
contrasting texture with incorporation of Aluminum Composite Material
(ACM) cladding.
There are several large vertical forms tying into a proportionately large
roof mass as well as several cantilevered roofs. All of the above elements
will result in a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers,
enhances landscape design and appropriate distances between
buildings.
The proposed landscape design and setbacks provide appropriate buffers
and distances between buildings, creating an inviting tropical appearance
along the street. The design provides for landscaping where possible, and
provides enhanced screening for the adjacent property to the north.
The proposed development provides appropriate buffers within the
concept of Beach by Design and zero building setbacks. The landscape
graceful contemporary landscape design accentuates and the landscaping
within the public parking lot to the north and the landscaping within right
of way toward the causeway. Currently the sites contain little to no
landscaping; the proposed landscape design will greatly enhance the site
and the area.
Beach bv Design
The proposed retail development is within the allowable 1.0 F.A.R and is an appropriate scale for
the surrounding area. The proposed two story structure meets the height allowance permitted by
code and provides a use that is preferred within the Marina District of Beach by Design.
The Beach by Design, Design Objectives section states the design guidelines are intended to
address and promote a list of principals and are intended to be administered in a flexible manner
to achieve the highest quality built environment for Clearwater Beach.
8
�
While the architectural design creates the desired change in the building massing as prescribed
by Beach by Design, due to site constraints the building does not meet a strict interpretation of
the guidelines associated with varying building lengths. However, to compensate for this, the
building massing has been designed to reduce uninterrupted walls planes to the fullest extent
possible so, in effect, the overall lengths are not readily distinguishable. Stepping the building
(in plan), varying the parapet heights and changes in materials/colors together with the non-
expansive building length, all contribute to meeting the intent of the Design Objectives and
Guidelines.
Tlie Design Guidelines Section of Beach by Design states "No particular architectural style is
prescYibed. However, good architecture,from a community character perspective, comes in all
shapes and styles. There is, however, in every community an established vocabulary of the
"good, " the "bad, " and the "ugly. " New buildings should respect this vocabulary and enhance
the community characte� whenever possible. The more daring the design, the more sensitive the
particular architecture is to failure. " Five quantifiable aspects of the architectural vocabulary
are provided within this Section of Beach by Design and we have taken great care to design this
project to meet each of the criteria. The design is respectful of the architectural vocabulary
within Beach by Design and the community character; the building is in scale to its height and
length and offers the desired changes to the roof form.
The development proposal will .improve the visual appeal of the property from the street and
pedestrian-level, offering a Modern Miami architectural style which is appropriate and
aesthetically pleasing for this highly visible location adjacent to the round-a-bout. Furthermore,
the scale, massing, roof elements and fenestration serve as a dramatic statement from the vista of
the causeway approach to the beach from the mainland.
There are large and inviting expanses of transparent vertical glass with several areas open for
landscaping.
The proposed development is compatible with the neighborhood, as is more particularly
discussed in General Applicability Criteria 1 and 2 together with Comprehensive Infill Criteria 4
above.
Please see architectural plans for additional illustrative evidence of compliance with the
Design Guidelines contained within Beach by Design.
�
9
PARKING ANALYSIS FOR
EAST SHORE RETAIL SITE
400 EAST SHORE DRIVE
CLEARWATER BEACH, FLORIDA
PREPARED FOR:
J KOKOLAKIS CONTRACTING
PREPARED BY:
GULF COAST CONSULTING, INC.
REVISED MARCH 2O12
PROJECT#11-052
, .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
� II. METHODOLOGY
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS
IV. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH REDEVELOPMENT
V. CONCLUSION
Robert C. Per li , AICP/PTP
AICP # 9023 /PTP #133
_ _ __ _ _ _
I. INTRODUCTION
The project site is located on the west side of East Shore Drive north of Causeway
Boulevard and currently contains a temporary gravel parking lot (Municipal Lot
#63) The site is proposed to be redeveloped as a retail project containing a 22,980
square foot pharmacy. The site is located on the west side of East Shore Drive
between the roundabout and Papaya Street on Clearwater Beach(See Figure 1).
The site is located in the Tourist (T) zoning district, and per Section.2-8Q2 of the
Community Development Code has a minimum parking requirement of 4-5
spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail space. According to strict interpretation of
the code, the proposed development would require between 92 and 115 parking
spaces. The proposed site plan shows a total of 21 spaces being provided on-site,
with three (3) on-street spaces being provided on Poinsettia Avenue and three (3)
on-street spaces being provided on East Shore Drive. This report was revised
based on agreements reached at the March 1,2012 DRC meeting.
The code provides for reducing the required number of parking spaces to
recognize the special situations that exist on Clearwater Beach. Section 2-802 of
the Community Development Code allows a reduction in parking if the property
will require fewer parking spaces per floor area than otherwise required or
adequate parking is available through existing or planned and committed parking
facilities within 1,000 feet of the property.
City of Clearwater staff has recognized the retail esta.blishments located on
Clearwater Beach, in close proximity to municipal parking lots, on-street parking
spaces, nearby hotels/motels and residential condominiums within walking
distance, have a great potential for "walk-up" customers. Staff also recognizes the
available public parking in nearby lots serves two functions, one to serve
beachgoers, and two to provide parking for beach related businesses. This parking
analysis was prepared to determine the availability of parking spaces.
II. METHODOLOGY
Prior to conducting this analysis a methodology was established with the City of
Clearwater staff which was nearly identical to that for a previous Hooters on
Clearwater Beach study. It was agreed GCC would obtain hours of operation and
employee shift data for the project. EmploXee parking demand was based on 80%
of employees requiring a parking space and 20% arriving by other modes of
transportation as has been customary for previous parking studies on Clearwater
Beach. The parking space requirement for customers was evaluated using a 50%
factor based on customer surveys conducted at Surf Style/Britts for a previous
# , f=�"r r p R r � �� e'� �� � -�^°-~�� � � t
; � � � �
'. ' :: t . � f .' � � . *}, �
� �-"-,.-m.. F�,,..e
r��l t -} G �= � �r
, - p -• �f � �
.�. . ' (
I� q.
���}� � � 1. / �t
, � '� °� � � : '�
' "� � ;._. e � F��r� ,..
�: "^ ^ Irs,sc°�..:� �� ��:
� ,n� � s . '�.
:p� ` .
�,. �
�
_,,�. � �' '���,����� , � � '
� Ne I�fy M1�'4� i `i Y' a .
' A� � r
� � �• �,. , � , �
, • , , ,
, , ��'
, r _
^�a r •. -
, \ r- :- �. - '
�� � ; ', ,�'a � ,.y �"�+�,
r_- ,gt ' ��
_ _ ; • ► . 4 ` �
. , _:
� ��{��'��t . � � �r'�� ,�� � �� i6C.�f�r 's$�rb ,`�,�, k,, ���f'��
�
� ,�� �tG.'' ,� �I �, t et�
. �( (
� ' .
i „.
�_.� .... .. ��'�� ..�j�� .u ��, .�... �� �I.�.... Ik � ZS
. .�. ...._ .... .. � .�� {� "G $'tg4$' . . R h
_ ,'—__ _- � „ .,. .. . -i S T.k . F_ �r
,y .-r--.-�. t� ... ,.�°�*,. -R= � �'
1 �i ���
;�.r'�7��- i�+�.i41'�� ,� � . � - I ' F�'�.
i .,, .
� ��
� ��di�.. r� .��Y ��S � �p. �,�T � �.� ye
(` f -�r� �� �r ��.i'� .F �!
.�,di�� �,.! t � �F �'� � �` ��.
..� 'f- .f �kGe� ,.t-. �; . . ,
i
� F� . '. �,I. ��_.l • �..
`�' A ¢ ..� . � �; �� �� ��•
. 4�. __ � . t ' �^ i
� --� Y 1 ��t� �� dry� � (� �
.:: i`m 1 �r__ - "y t � w ..
PROJECT q �., ; V_���.� �� - � �- r� ,
.� ;r - •*E_,�' ` �-
,.�,
, .
' � �.� �
_
�• � �—�
. .. , {
LOCA�IO� j � ___
k —� ��.�f��� �c,�`"��"�� � � )�-- s„�, i'��
: ; � _�— ��
, � A �, � ',� � � _.__
���� `
.� _r���x � � � � ;� �� �% f
..�� '�.,� ,^r' 'er�- � �'� �d. ' "" �¢
FF� ,r »� � c�. ��, �� �� _ �
: �;� R ` �.,, ( , � ��
",� f. LIp� � ..: �•�' t{ � ,Af. E. tf ��� : 1����
"� —. ---- _..__ .ar.» - a .. __� : 1� � �1� �e 4�t t r 11��i -�.,. : � �' z •t.;
� i' � ' � ,
,: ; �' � �, �. ��' �. 4.t� ��� t t�4 0���
, .> - _ � ,j`� ,.,, -.,.� : s
y� �.... � • , .. -
� , '"�,fi� R --
�:,�.
'; �e . a � . -
. � � � C � - �. � _ :. --
� �"+5�+ l r �` r� ,, '"w" C^ I'�� A. .__•�c, ` �.�s. ^ —_
. ': � r�' Se � r �, � t , �� I_ � : i Z'� —
...:... �* .� "�*� ��.�.`fi�.�~ I �s�, f �,r c } � � .
� i i -- ' '_�• � I
.._ .. � c p 6 �, ,.. 1!r� '�-T..s�' ,. ;' ; ' � . �'
-_.``^ . � a ** j
. - 't` ac,�ak.: t� ..��
� > ,
, • 1- `�'�� ? ������ �
�... � '4 F .. 4.... ��r* ,..E'. rPlV ..
�i _ tl 1 .���� � � '
�. _.'- i �4 L 4,� ! �" . . ..���� ,
. +' ,,�,
,� �"v � : ,: . � `tE t"•r t • �,�-
'. , � ' e 'M�'' , , .� � IP�•} � , �
� e �Fa'�`.� � .�.s� p R�+l�.._ 4+� r�E�'� .�� 1 .�. �.�� �t!�Y �.!_ __
' •�� S� q��'.��r� ��,.eet: E� � .1Al�� ,.�- i-_.-s .�E 6 F� ,� �- > �
'� '� _ -
.., ;k� . �r d
, ,, . � $ �.. �.�-.� �. Y�rt�E�E..:l�r�.!�.f - ''' - _
•� � `$��C 4'.6 s R�'k^� �-.
r�l ;� � �f«1� . f
I 4 1 I "'i
. cs. .X i� 4s. � : Aa i.. r ". I ii 1 ��,}, �r''ii I �i�I;��r�I��i�'i'i,
a �� ��f �� �`�'
m' t-7�4�"-�-� � '� '� '
� . ,g��,��.�� �4 m
� ...�' � t���.'r�s� -x-�;+, i 'Y�E ',� - �'-
� *� y i�__._.T..:� .'
� `; �' � ' .�, .
� ,
-^ - e. ,�r t i:.,.�.,.
o� " I . x f I � � '�r'
3
D - ___._ . �.,�.`��y i . — t'�u"ry+�".
i < I I a ° ���� e
p � � ��"`e"'"° �,-���: «� �Fj'
� � °�,�, f,, �, -
� ,- -�,�•
� �i ' � ��.,�� ��` �,; `�'�; �' � � <�,tr� ��
; � '� _ �...
r �, , �� __ t ���' ��. �:�.
o >
,^� „;. / ; Z� ,r. "f' .� i"` ,.t
N , ,
� � `
p � _� `t ,E��O�,�' �'� ` ���`?'� -
� t f'
- PROJECT NO:
� PROJEC�' LOCATION — 400 EAST SHORE DR 1 1 -052
3
o DATE: FIGURE:
Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc. � 2�201 1
> ��� Land Development Consulting
o � �
e
DRAWN BY:
MKC
5
z
i
TABLE 1-400 EAST SHORE DRIVE PHARMACY-PARKING DEMAND PARAMETERS
SPACES REQUIRED
FUNCTION VARIABLE NUMBER PERSON/ROOM SPACES
RETAIL STAFF SHIFT A-6 AM to 2 PM EMPLOYEES 8 80%USE CAR 6
RETAIL STAFF SHIFT B-2 PM to 10 PM EMPLOYEES 8 80%USE CAR 6
RETAIL STAFF SHIFT C-10 PM-6 AM EMPLOYEES 4 80%USE CAR 3
RETAIL CUSTOMERS CUSTOMERS 115 50%USE CAR 58
ASSUMPTIONS:
EMPLOYEE PARKING IS LIMITED TO 80%OF EMPLOYEES USING A CAR BASED ON CLEARWATER EXPECTATIONS
RETAIL CUSTOMERS PARKING BASED ON CODE REQUIREMENT OF 5 SPACES/1000 SF OF RETAIL AREA
THIS HAS A TOTAL DEMAND OF 115 SPACES
TABLE 2- TIME OF DAY PARKING DEMAND
RETAIL RETAIL RETAIL RETAIL TOTAL
TIME PERIOD SHIFT A SHIFT B SHIFT C CUSTOMERS DEMAND
12 MID-1 AM 3 20 23
1 AM-2AM 3 10 13
2AM-3AM 3 5 8
3AM-4AM 3 5 8
4AM-5AM 3 5 8
SAM-6AM B 3 5 14
BAM-7AM 6 3 10 19
7AM-BAM 6 20 26
BAM-9AM 6 30 36
9AM-10AM 6 40 46
10 AM-11 AM 6 50 56
11 AM-12 NOON 6 56 64
12 NOON-1 PM 6 58 64
1 PM-2 PM 6 B 58 70
2PM-3PM 6 6 58 70
3PM-4PM B 58 64
4 PM-5 PM B 58 64
5 PM-B PM B 58 64
6 PM-7 PM 6 58 64
7 PM-8 PM B 58 64
8 PM-9 PM 6 58 64
9PM-10PM 6 3 50 59
10 PM-11 PM 8 3 40 49
11 PM-12 MID 3 30 33
PEAK CUSTOMER PARKING DEMAND OF 58 VEHICLES PER CODE WITH 50%REDUCTION ASSUMED FOR
CORE STORE HOURS OF 11 AM-9 PM,ALL OTHER OFF-PEAK TIMES ARE ESTIMATES
parking study. The previous study confirmed 50% of the customers parking in
local hotels and condominium lots, and 50% parked in public beach lots or used
on-site parking spaces. These factors are shown in Table 1. These factors were
used in preparing a"time-of-day"matrix which is shown in Table 2.
It was agreed GCC would conduct a parking accumulation study on a Friday
between 11AM and 2 PM (lunch) and 6 PM to 9 PM, and Saturday between 10
AM and 4 PM and 6 PM — 9 PM. The study area included, Municipal Lot #31,
Municipal Lot # 34, Municipal Lot # 35, Municipal Lot #43, Municipal Lot #63
(gravel parking on subject site) and the Hyatt Aqualea parking garage which
contains public parking. These areas include a total of 1,040 parking spaces.
In addition, since the proposed use is a pharmacy, staff requested GCC conduct
parking observations of the existing Walgreens Store located at #660 South
Gulfview Boulevard to obtain parking characteristics. This data is included in the
Appendix and demonstrates the existing 13,700 square foot Walgreens had a peak
parking demand of 14 spaces (1.02 spaces per 1000 square feet) that occurred on
Saturday at 3 PM and 4 PM. This is most likely the result of customers using
alternate means of transportation and not requiring a parking spot because of the
proximity of hotels and residences.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS
Existing conditions were established by conducting parking lot counts between
the hours of 11 AM — 2 PM and 6:00 PM and 9:00 PM on Friday December 16,
2011, and Saturday December 17, 2011 between 10:00 AM and 4:00 PM and 6:00
PM and 9:00 PM. Weather conditions were warmer for mid-December with a
high temperature of 78 degrees. No rain was encountered at any time during the
study. The aforementioned parking areas were checked on the hour for the
number of spaces that were occupied. The number of occupied spaces was noted
and an hourly accumulated total was obtained for each specific parking area and
the whole study area.
The main parking facilities serving the southern part of the north beach business
district are municipal lots. Municipal Lot #31 contains 152 paxking spaces,
Municipal lot # 34 conta.ins 23 metered spaces plus 1 handicapped space and is
located south of Papaya Street. Municipal lot # 35 contains 25 metered parking
spaces plus 1 handicapped space and is located south of the CVS, Municipal Lot
#43 contains 41 metered spaces and is located both east and west of East Shore
Drive, and Municipal Lot#63 is a temporary gravel lot located between Poinsettia
Avenue and East Shore Drive and contains 33 spaces. The Hyatt hotel garage
contains 764 paxking spaces.
Friday December 16, 2011
On Friday parking demand did not vary significantly throughout the study period
with a low of 182 occupied spaces (18%) at 11 AM to a peak demand of 289
occupied spaces (28%) at 1 PM. As such, there were a minimum of 751 unused
spaces in the study area throughout the study period. Closer analysis shows
Municipal Lot #31 (Pier 60) was very heavily used, Municipal Lot #35 was
underused during the day but heavily used in the evening hours. Municipal Lot
#43 and Municipal Lot #63 were underutilized throughout. The Hyatt garage was
underutilized throughout the mid-day and evening study hours. Table 3 provides
an hourly tabulation and Figure 2 provides a graph of hourly parking space
occupancy.
Saturdav December 17, 2011
On Saturday parking demand varied significantly throughout the day from a low
of 179 occupied spaces (17%) at 10 AM to a peak demand of 348 occupied spaces
(33%) at 4 PM. As such, there were a minimum of 692 unused spaces throughout
the day. Again a closer analysis shows Municipal Lot #31 (Pier 60) was very
heavily used, Municipal Lot #35 was underused during the day but heavily used
in the evening hours. Municipal Lot #43 and Municipal Lot #63 were
underutilized throughout. The Hyatt gaxage was underutilized throughout the mid-
day and evening study hours. Table 4 provides an hourly tabulation and Figure 3
provides a graph of hourly parking space occupancy.
IV. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH REDEVELOPMENT
The proposed redevelopment as a pharmacy store would result in only 21 on-site
parking spaces plus another six (6) on-street parking spaces being provided
adjacent to the site, and must obviously rely on available public parking spaces in
the area. The redevelopment would require between 92 and 115 parking spaces
according to strict interpreta.tion of the code. A detailed hourly analysis was
completed based on the expected operating characteristics of the retail space. As
shown in Table 2, employee plus customer parking, including shift overlaps,
would result in a peak parking space demand of 68 spaces at 2 to 4 PM. Parking
demand would vary throughout the day/night, being in excess of 60 spaces for the
period of 11 AM—9 PM.
In reviewing the available spaces from Table 3 and Table 4, and assuming the
worst case, a minimum of 692 parking spaces are available to satisfy any demand,
however, the removal of Municipal Lot#63 to construct the pharmacy will reduce
the supply by 33 spaces. This must be satisfied in other existing lots therefore,
the number of excess spaces is reduced to 659 spaces.
TABLE 3
FRIDAY DECEMBER 16,20N �
MUNICIPAL LOT IF37 MUNICIPAL LOT R34 MUNICIPAL LOT A 35 MUNICIPAL LOT M3 MUNICIPAL LOT f63 HYATT HOTEL LOT TOTAL
TIME OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL 000. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL OCG TOTAL 000. TOTAL OCC. -' TOTAL XOCCUPIED
17AM 68 152 6 24 1 26 7 47 4 33 98 764 182 7040 18%
12:00 PM 152 152 8 24 1 26 7 41 5 33 101 764 274 � 1040 26%
1:00 PM 152 152 10 24 4 Z6 10 41 10 33 103 764 289 1040 28%
2:00 PM 129 152 8 24 5 26 7 41 10 33 114 764 273 1040 26%
6:00 PM 100 152 8 24 15 26 5 41 13 33 106 764 247 1040 24%
7:00 PM 88 152 7 24 21 26 8 41 9 33 99 764 232 1040 22%
8:00 PM 56 152 8 24 Z6 26 10 41 5 33 99 764 204 1040 20%
9:00 PM 39 152 12 24 25 26 11 41 7 33 97 784 797 1040 18%
INCLUDES 6 HANDICAPPED SPACES IN MUNICIPAL LOT#31
INCLUDES 7 FIANDICAPPED SPACE IN MUNICIPAL LOT#34
INCLUDES i HANDICAPPED SPACE IN MUNICIPAL l0T#35
FIGURE 2 - FRIDAY DECEMBER 16, 2011
1000 .. , �
900
800 ,
700 �
�
w
tWj 600
a
a
�
0 500 �—Series1
w
a
�
v 400
O
300 :�
�
200
100
0 _� �_ . .;,��. . , �
11AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM
TIME OF DAY
TABLE 4
SATURDAY DECEMBER 77,2071
MUNICIPAL LOT#37 MUNICIPAL LOTl�34 MUNICIPAL LOT i 35 MUNICIPAL LOT 1F43 MUNICIPAL LOT/63 HYATT HOTEL LOT TOTAL
TIME OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL OCC. TOTAL %OCCUPIED
10:00 AM 68 752 4 24 2 26 2 41 2 33 101 764 779 1040 17%
11:00 AM 138 752 1 24 7 26 4 41 5 33 98 764 247 1040 24%
12:00 PM 152 752 4 24 2 26 10 41 72 33 107 764 287 1040 28%
1:00 PM 152 152 71 24 3 26 15 41 27 33 110 764 312 1040 30%
2:OOPM 152 i52 13 24 7 26 15 41 2D 33 125 764 332 1040 32%
3:00 PM 152 152 73 24 7 26 15 41 24 33 135 764 346 1040 33%
4:OOPM 752 152 74 24 6 26 19 47 27 33 130 764 348 1040 33%
B:OOPM 105 i52 70 24 12 26 75 41 23 33 709 764 274 1040 Z6%
- 7:00 PM 98 752 20 24 15 26 74 41 72 33 126 764 283 1040 27%
8:00 PM 58 152 18 24 22 26 7 41 6 33 123 764 228 1040 22%
9:00 PM 44 152 17 24 22 26 4 41 7 33 715 764 209 1040 20%
INCLUDES 6 HANDICAPPED SPACES IN MUNICIPAL LOT#31
INCLUDES 1 HANDICAPPED SPACE IN MUNICIPAL LOT#34
INCLUDES 1 HANDICAPPED SPACE IN MUNICIPAL LOT#35
FIGURE 3 - SATURDAY DECEMBER 17, 2011
1000 _ _.._
900 '�
�
800 -�. -
700 �`
N
v 600 -�
a
a
�
W 500 �Series1
a
�
v 400 `
O
300 ' . .._ _
200 -
100 �
� w._�=,: ._. . � _
10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM
TIME OF DAY
It is important to note, the Hooters on Clearwater Beach was approved and is
expected to have a demand of up to 105 parking spaces. Since the Hooters is not
yet open for business at the time of this study, that future demand must be taken
into account. Therefore the number of excess spaces available is reduced further
to 554 spaces. The number of available s�aces is still well in excess of the peak
demand created by the proposed pharmacv.
V. CONCLUSION
This analysis was conducted in accordance with a specific methodology
established with City of Clearwater staff. This analysis demonstrates of the 1,040
total parking spaces included in the study area, a maximum of 348 were occupied
during any hour of the study period and a minimum of 692 spaces were available.
This excess supply would be partially eroded by the removal of Municipal Lot
#63, and by demand created by the approved Hooters development, such that
available parking supply at peak time would be 554 unused spaces.
A detailed analysis of time of day variations demonstrate parking demand for the
proposed pharmacy would vary from 8 spaces to 70 spaces. As such, adequate
parking is available within reasonable walking distance of the project to support
the reduction in on-site parking spaces.
' �°�"�° � CITY PARKING LOTS '
��� 5T - Hou�rty Rates
?7 S�a.ac�s a�ouF �" +�t **Sat-Sun Hours of , After
sr RWAY� � '„,��, Location Mon-Fri' & Enforceroent Hours
HEILWOOU � � Seasu�nat '.
NORTH Ri MaRINA '
NOt to S'cale `� � Marina ACTIVITIES No
o m OJ5 $1.00
��� "'-�- � ?� �, .`� 25 Causeway Bivd. $ ONLY Cfwrge'
53 Spaces �VST N � �TA _ Sam-6pm
> � w�Y � 31* Pier 60 �1.5E� �2.1T� Taree-iarn Cfuscd , �
sT Z �, 16�S.Guliview Bivd.
e�v a 32* 332 S.Gulfview Bivd. $1.50 $2.U�t 7a�s-faen Ciosed
,' ` � �_ , E 33 212 Hamdert dr. $1.0� $1.25 6am-�i�r� CFosed' ,
�, .�...
$0.75/ $f.Qa� ��
34 4C3 MandalayAve. �1.dU $1.25 8a�-� Cnang!�',
- 38 35 457 Mandalay Ave. $1.00 $1.25 8am-6� �
����;.�}� Cftarg�e
3� 4 Roauw�r 79 Spaces 36* 4 Rockaway St. $1.OU ', $I.2S 6am-1am C4CSSed' '
14a� �p�Ges� ST 37 Avalon-Kendalf �1.OA $1.25 8are�-IOpm �
6 Avalan St. C�'�''�'�
a t� Sar�-6prn
� Fami[y Aquatic Center ����_��� ��
� BAYAIONT � 38 �. &Recceatian Center $1.00 . $1.25 �Z,.����� Cha�rg��
�.,, 51 Bay EspEarsade tSuR}
�C � � McKay Fieid ��'
W � 39 6Q5 Mandalay Ave. $1.U0 $f.25 8am-16pt4s ����,
�i ` R1; 6ateway ��
��� ' M�co � Q 43 390/1 East Shore Dr. 51.60 ' $1.25 8am-fiprts Charge'
.�_.,_.__..
2�5p�i��� 1 W * Mlo
� 63 �kfi0 E.Shore Dr. $1.Q0 ' $1.25 8am-Ei�tn Charg�',
N
O ,�; �P�v� sr V � (242 spaees)ng �1.00 $1.25 Varies Vari�s
i
` :u,s j *Accepting-�saiMaster Card/Arnerican Express
4, �.��p�'FGO� } � �--' DaiFy max rate -$1a.AU/$12.50(wlnere apqtiCable)
,,,� 33 Spaces :* g��nal Rate-MarcM throug�r Apr�l euerYdaY
� a
� ***Permit Parking Only
< � � Naies: Does nat include Manckicap 9paces
� � a , �� Information SuGject to Change
41 Spaces
LEGEND: (A
I�R 60 O� cs� [_� City Park �
�--- " 1 0 Public Beach ■�
�^�"" � 0 City Parking Lot �
,���,�,�C�,� � Private Parking Lot �
M�NA`� �ro Private Parking Garage ■�
� ���'�o,��o - On Street Parking V
� ,.-� R.s°Ri �a Oversize Vehicle Pkg.
� , .. , ,l� � OJ'4l CyG �Za•-4o•oniy� �
f v5f _....4. .i-r
�evoN -� �1 2?7/71"' Spaces �i'qr
DR ' � MARINA ACTIVITIES
; � i • ,, za sQaoes ONLY(8am-6pm) RRIVATE PARKTNG =
E ���
� „ � �� o op�n ta F�ulslic ■—
� „ �_ f�' No. Locetian ' Rate TmfformsC�or► �
� � A 301 S.Gulfview Blvd'. (804j 31d-7275 LAA��!!
� �
;,w� B 100 Coronado Da (SI3y 770-486'1 ��� �
W O
: � � � cL�A 1� WA T�,R General Parking Information s
� (727) 562-4704 V'
BRIGH q7� ORIVE
Parking System Hotline �
� ST (727) 562-4892 m
L
n r � : .l a c^.• a r r : a i n a : a ,� �
#:, ,
� 9AYSIDE OR�� �3,�ACH WAL.I� �
\.�` ° H A �B 0 . �
' h' �- L
���-� ° Clearwater �
������� S�� � ��,,.��;.���✓a.� �
`�"s�� B � 7o Parking Lot#40-SAND KEY(l060 GULF BLVD.) ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT V
� Open:Sun-Up to Sun-Down(Afl times park gate is open)
y 752 space5;$1.00/Hour-$1.25/Hour(Seasonal) www.myClearwater.com
♦ � I
FRIDAY DECEMBER 76,2071 SATURDAY DECEMBER 17,2077
WALGREENS PARKING LOT WALGREENS PARKING LOT
TIME OCC. TOTAL �°h OCCUPIED TIME OCC. TOTAL °�OCCUPIED
11:00 AM 7 19 37% 10:00 AM 6 19 32%
12 NOON 6 19 32% 11'00 AM 11 19 58%
1:00 PM 6 19 32% 12 NOON 10 19 53%
2:00 PM 5 19 26% 1:00 PM 11 19 56%
6:00 PM 7 19 37% 2:00 PM 13 19 68%
7:00 PM 9 19 47% 3:00 PM 14 19 74%
8:00 PM 6 19 32% 4:00 PM 14 19 74%
9:00 PM 7 19 37% 6:00 PM 6 19 32%
7:00 PM 8 19 42%
8:00 PM 6 19 32%
9:00 PM 5 19 26%
�
+� �
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
FOR
EAST SHORE RETAIL SITE
400 EAST SHORE DRIVE �
CLEARWATER BEACH, FLORIDA
PREPARED FOR:
J. KOKOLAKIS CONTRACTING, INC.
PREPARED BY:
GULF COAST CONSULTING, INC.
REVISED MARCH 2O12
PROJECT# 11-052
Robert Pergoliz ', P, PTP
AICP #9023, PTP #133
ti
I. INTRODUCTION
The 0.53 acre project site is located along the west side of East Shore Drive north
of Causeway Boulevard and currently contains a gravel parking lot. The site is
proposed to be redeveloped as a retail project to contain a 22,980 square foot
pharmacy. The site is located on the west side of East Shore Drive between the
roundabout and Papaya Street on Clearwater Beach(See Figure 1).
The redevelopment of the property is the subject of a Comprehensive Infill
R�development in the Tourist "T" zoning district. This application requires an
� assessment of the traffic impacts of development. Prior to completing this
analysis a methodology was established with the City of Clearwater staff.
II. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
The property has frontage on East Shore Drive and poinsettia Avenue and has
access to its parking area via both roadways which axe two-lane local roads.
Mandalay Avenue is a four-lane divided collector roadway between the
roundabout and Baymont Street. Coronado Drive is four lanes between the
roundabout and S. Gulfview Boulevard, and Causeway Boulevard is a four-lane
divided arterial roadway. As agreed to by Clearwater staff,traffic counts that were
conducted for the Hooters on Clearwater Beach project were used as a basis for
this analysis. These intersection turning movement counts were conducted
between 11 AM - 2 PM and 4 - 6 PM on Friday May 20, 2011 at the following
intersections:
Causeway Boulevaxd/East Shore Drive
Mandalay Avenue/Baymont Street
Coronado Drive/ S. Gulfview Boulevard
All traffic counts were converted to annual average equivalents using FD.OT
seasonal adjustment factors. Existing traffic volumes are shown in Figure 2.
Existing intersections were analyzed using the HCS+ software. The HCS+
printouts are included in Appendix A.
At the intersection of Causeway Boulevard / East Shore Drive the primaxy
movements are eastbound-westbound, whereas the southbound approach (East
Shore Drive) is stop controlled. The HCS+ analysis shows the southbound stop-
controlled movements operate at LOS B during both the midday peak hour and
the PM peak hour.
Presently the signalized intersection at Mandalay Avenue / Baymont Street
operates at LOS A with average delay of 7.4 seconds per vehicle during the
midday peak hour, and LOS A with average delay of 7.5 seconds per vehicle
during the PM peak hour.
1
�
y+! I�e � A' y. F " �E '�+��$°'���� '�"
� . �� �'��' . + d�� �'� `T« �� �. ��� �J'�
i��� . ��� � �.f. J�� ' � �� � °�..
. ��,_ �� �,' � � I
+�j✓'.��1: . , � $�� ,�' ' I I�!
' ^ � � .E � � I
�.1�.'+.y,��r r r ,����;,.M+
G. , ` ,�„�� i 'I _- + • � � � t �i.� ��
� �, ' , I ... � �r� ,
��� F'
��r}1 �jy! . II A ' ,. �� �. �t� �1 _.r:
HF h
'k�'�7�� � � � ;J� �1 ��q �� r i� ,��� .
� :HE i j M1 �,� t �:
r 4
. ;
i I� .. . _r� ,,; , ;-x-;•,,�
' �x , ,
i , > , i' .— • , � ��""' �;
,__ „ � �
,..
, __ _. , �I ;
�' ���`� �t_.��.'��,� �-.f .� f 43 �'.y• �� � � ��, 1�9� �p�i�`����V:f i �'� :
;
.�`; �--- -- �'�''=�:"� *.�.,.-- . ,�� �. s �:.` :k`'_ �,t�� r�,,_ ..� �V��II���lil����ll'I�4�'Illr��illlllliil��I�Iy�III �lil �Vi,'i:;f� �,
i i� �N q
�' �...—. ..-.� `�_r�.,�.„s_0l�� tit � � , ` t — �
�q i
�r �,
'�.°�t 9��rg lfl•.: -� �'-" �+,� _
7 ' `'� • � c ,�f -i� �t.
i ;G C F .�. •��F` � .J'.
� :k1b• �.�I�, .�kLE � „ �,
�. ,M��,� .1 ,6 "''�� ���.
� ���' l6S' � �_ t .
. _. A�� ,, � � _ "���
t
'F ��- r ' X� �,
. � - �7�-���.�� *n
�PROJ�CT ��� ��`� '�- _��, - '�, �. ��
� . �*�► '
�- �
f`.1' - f. '_�F♦ i -. ^�a�x-�S .
< LOCA'�IO� � �� �����-�,�`� a„�';�; ;� _� �-.��
y. � . ���i �
t,c.� � � �. .. ��,�„� �a '. � -u _ ;_ # ,�' 1��......_..., -_
� , �"iv��� 'L � .j' i d k'. �,��d'C=.
�1 :�-��.� a� � -
. � �'S e `, „,
,
s � F _.. l� i � „ c ;; ,.
;Y. �. te4.y � s s: 'i �f��.. i"k,tR��� -
,� � � �'�e—,R�� o , r'x:`FS �� �� r`,r ,E�t �
23� r r'
. � . [
.�� r � �:. ._ � (l,. -
. , ���. � ��' ? µ� L_ ' .
i 'k'.'� " ..F ��. . '9Ni ':�1 WY :.T� �1. � � '—" " _ ...__. .._
'.� � y � . ' 4 +,�� , : A,} y,a� ..�j 4_ � .
M R �
n
.w; i� y., }�'!.°a,� ? �` � . ,4.'� 1 �.,�'` I c�. ��~ .���1� l,F t '� ; ' n— -- -
M ' _
,_
" _ i �� i �r��. � t � �� $ 1 w I --
;'� r r .:
n ---��.�.. ; ` � e �r ;� lk= � . _ y � -
`�
`�
,
�
-. __. �.��_� .
't-�,,� .�. � ��
� "-�:.'�'� 1'R--�_4 � �,f °'' .... t�?'. E:
y _ 'y�:� .
_._ •..; � , . T '�t��Pl�-�, '^`��� '�5�w1- � , �v , ��, �c�tt��`
� , �, fi�. ��� "�-�' , \ ° � �.s, �E 1�'d', '6�,,�i ,i $ �
I!�� t� • a ' , Z-r +. -vS �J� ��tt
' ��. {Anu.� Q �{i' .,; 1��+��'� � n; � a�i��. :._ �.� 1 .
i * �A.X R .x i +q ��� ��Z.tY
� � ,��. '� ay�,�`(/ �eeL !�i - I .�a---'3-^-t '�E i'a,- �. '� .y`
'� �"dt't °. q �,f n�R'f �� �ef�F�! f..l�,«f..!-1�+: �.�'a �-' _
- t � t t� t} '�d ��,�:��� :�" 1�;,7k= " q
� }�,�
c ���` �.r , d�s�
.I . .y .-'�, i;.-
{ ' S"� �� ' 67f
� ,N; y5,� c7 �;t �� ��q�,
a �., �y�.
� .. �7'�..•T
�� 1A� �':;���.
�f�{` �'k'
, ��.� � �-. _ _ ,�,-
«��;�, �
�
� k i.,_r,.���A
� } � ` �
� w a'/ mt�....,, .
9 • t S �Sx/`6 1'i . r � �
� �'�� � .: ��.; ' `�.
z � � �
�
o r '� �'� t ����
LL �f��� � �.� F M Fx �✓
a t� .,� �� '� +RS����3��.�s1�x � ,�
; �;�, 1 �t�� �� � 't�..�:.
��` ;t ' ��{ ►4�.
� � �� .._� s q ,
w �� ! rK 11
� �
� � ,-,,��, ' F :.,�
� � _
� ;
;
s '� `��' .t � , ��r 4' .�'�-y��i i �r � �+....� �_ '
� �;. " t< < . .
Y
' , I ..� _� t. _ , rfit�:�a ' : <'
a� .-w. .� : I�
' PROJECT LOCATION — 400 EAST SHORE DR PROJECTrro:
3 11 -052
� DATE: FIGURE:
� � Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc.
o � � ,, Land Development Consulting 1 2�201 1
o � A�
DRAWN BY:
s
MKC
Z
>
1
�
�
� ^N
N� (119)108
^� �
�� �(5)12
I I � �(19)30
--� � BAYMONT ST
,2��,� � f r
3(8)� �o a
49(41)� N"�� �
� �
�
N� �1
M N
��
� N
��
M
S�MARCO ST
J A
W
� PAPAYA ST � �
,�., O
� �� �
� � H
a W
�
M
�v �(117)130 (870)
--(753)748 878 CAUSEWAY
(e�o) (s�o) BLVD
`6��12 1106 1106
6�
� a�$�6 MARINA
� � A
a �M Q
v rn z
��
N � � �
9 � � (XX) = MID-DAY PEAK HOUR
�S�� XX = PM PEAK HOUR
z � �
'o � 285(246)
u � ,.-.
LL � 10(26)� � �
� � o �
� � �
�n
v �
� o '�
�
� � M� Ml�
s � � �
�
�
� PROJECT NO:
3 EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUME (2011) 1 1 -052
° DATE: FIGURE:
� Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc.
> � `°� Land Development Consulting 12�201 1
o �
o »� ,�
�
DRAWN BY:
< MKC
5
z
r'
4
Presently the signalized intersection at Coronado Drive / S. Gulfview Boulevard
Street operates at LOS A with average delay of 9.5 seconds per vehicle during the
midday peak hour, and LOS A with average delay of 9.7 seconds per vehicle
during the PM peak hour.
Causeway Boulevaxd is a four-lane divided arterial roadway and according to
FDOT 2009 QLOS Handbook capacity tables has a LOS D capacity of 3,560
vehicles per hour. The segment of Mandalay Avenue is a four-lane divided
collector roadway with a LOS D capacity of 2,900 vehicles per hour, and
Coronado Drive between the roundabout and S. Gulfview Boulevard is a four-
lane divided collector roadway with a LOS D capacity of 2,900 vehicles per hour,
and Coronado Drive south of S. Gulfview Boulevard is three lanes with a capacity
of 1,550 vehicles per hour.
EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS -2011
Roadwa�Se m�ent_ Midday�eak Midday LOS PM�eak PM LOS
Causeway Blvd 1740 vph LOS B 1984 vph LOS B
Mandalay Ave. 813 vph LOS C 910 vph LOS C
Coronado Dr. 1325 vph LOS C 1480 vph LOS C
' Coronado Dr(S.of Gulfview) 757 vph LOS C 929 vph LOS C
As shown above all roadway segments and intersections operate at LOS C or
better during both the midday and PM peak hours.
III. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Existing traffic was adjusted by a 4% annual growth rate to the expected build-out
year of 2012 to account for background traffic from other neaxby redevelopment
projects. In addition, expected traffic from the proposed/approved Hooters on
Clearwater Beach development was added as background traffic. Using Institute
of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 8�' Edition rates, the amount
of new trips was calculated and estimates are shown below:
TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES
Land Use ITE LUC Amount Daily Mid-Day PM Peak
Phannacy w/o Drive-in 880 22,980 sf 2070 254(127/127 194(97/97)
Based on prior studies of businesses on Clearwater Beach a substantial amount of
the customers are expected to be walk-ups from nearby hotels, the beach itself,
and condominiums in the area. The data from previous studies indicates 38% of
the customers of beach businesses are staying in nearby hotels or used another
mode of transportation other than a car such as walking, biking, or Jolly Trolley.
The gross vehicle trip generation was reduced by 38%to account for this capture,
and as a result it is estimated the actual vehicle trip generation would be 158
2
�
midday peak hour trips (79 entering/ 79 exiting), and 120 PM peak hour trips (60
entering/60 exiting). The expected distribution of vehicular trips is as follows:
10%to/from the north
30%to/from the south
60%to/from the east
PROJECT IMPACT CALCULATIONS (MIDDAY PEAK HOUR)
Proj ect
Road Se�nent Lanes Project Trips Capacitv Percent
Causeway Blvd.(Roundabout-Island way) 4LD 94 3560 2.64%
Mandalay Ave.(Roundabout—Baymont) 4LD 16 2900 0.55%
Coronado Drive(Roundabout—Gulfview) 4LD 48 2900 1.65%
Coronado Drive(Hamden.—Gulfview) 2LD 48 1550 3.10%
Background traffic and project traffic vehicular traffic were added to determine
total traffic for 2012 and the intersections and roadway segments were reanalyzed.
The future traffic volumes axe shown in Figure 3, and the HCS+ printouts are
included in Appendix B.
At the intersection of Causeway Boulevard/East Shore Drive the HCS+ analysis
shows the southbound stop-controlled movements would continue to operate at
LOS B during both the midday peak hour and the PM peak hour.
Under future conditions the signalized intersection at Mandalay Avenue /
Baymont Street would operate at LOS A with average delay of 7.4 seconds per
vehicle during the midday peak hour, and LOS A with average delay of 7.5
seconds per vehicle during the PM peak hour.
Under future conditions the signalized intersection at Coronado Drive / S.
Gulfview Boulevard would operate at LOS A with average delay of 9.6 seconds
per vehicle during the midday peak hour, and LOS A with average delay of 9.8
seconds per vehicle during the PM peak hour.
At the project driveway to Eat Shore Drive, all movements would operate at LOS
B or better with minimal delays during both the mid-day and PM peak hours.
FUTURE ROADWAY CONDITIONS - 2012
Roadway Segment Midday�eak Midday LOS PM peak PM LOS
Causeway Blvd 2001 vph LOS B 2190 vph LOS B
Mandalay Ave. 879 vph LOS C 967 vph LOS C
Coronado Dr. 1474 vph LOS C 1602 vph LOS C
Coronado Dr(S. of Gulfview) 884 vph LOS C 1029 vph LOS C
3
�
� ��
N� �(124)112
�� �
�� -�—(5)12
� � � �(20)31
BAYMONT ST
12(7)� � � I
3(g)-- �o a
51(44)� �M �
�1 � ��
o �
��
�' N
�
�
� ��
��
SANMARCO ST
j Q
W
¢ PAPAYA ST � �
,>., O
� �� �
� W
� � H
'�' �p � W
L�8� �
� 6 SITE
, � �� , MID-DAY 158 TRIPS (79/79)
PM PEAK 120 TRIPS (60/60)
3 4 �\ � �
�'�
`y, N
� N
� �
� M � 6��
�v �(169)171 (1004)
---(a35)sos 980 CAUSEWAY
(997) _ (997) _ BLVD
1210 1210
^�p� `�16$'I
`�g91
A g�h MARINA
a i. o
o� o �
N � Q
° � z
o ��
� � � o
� o
� v � �
. ti
o � � 296(256)� � I
u �
� � 10(27)� � O
� J o ,n
4 °'
y �
� � M1� ���
�
„ PRO7ECT N0:
� FUTURE PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUME (2012) 1 1 -052
3
�
° DATE: FIGURE:
� Gulf Coast Consulting, Inc.
` �� 1 /201 2
� ��► Land Development Consulting
o / � ;
a ��O 6' Y
� `��� DRAWN BY:
I 1�� I P �i
« � �� ��
° "����� M K C
P
�
Z
�
>
5
As shown above all roadway segments and intersections would continue to
operate at LOS C or better during both the midday and PM peak hours.
IV. CONCLUSION
This analysis was conducted in accordance with a specific methodology
esta.blished with City of Clearwater staff. This analysis demonstrates tr�c
operations at nearby intersections and on adjacent roadways would continue at
acceptable levels af service during both midday and PM peak hours with the
project impacts.
4
2009 Peali Season Factor Category Report - Report Type: ALL
Category: 1500 PINELLAS COUNTYWIDE
MOCF: 0.93 ,
Wee1c Dates SF PSCF
1 Ol/O1/2009 - 01/03/2009 1.10 1 18
2 O1/04/2�09 - Ol/10/2009 1.07 1.14
3 O1/11/2009 - O1/17/2009 1.05 1.12
4 O1/18/2009 - O1/24/2009 1.03 1.10
5 Ol/25/2009 - 01/31/2009 1.01 1.08
6 �02/01/2009 - 02/07/2009 0.99 1.06
7 02/08/2009 - 02/14/2009 0.97 1.04
* 8 02/15/2009 - 02/21/2009 0.95 1.02
* 9 02/22/2009. - 02/28/2009 0.94 1.01
*10 03/O1/2009 - 03/07/2009 0.93 1.00
*11 03/08/2009 - 03/14/2009 0.92 0.98
*12 03/15/2009 - 03/21/2009 0.91 0.97
*13 03/22/2009 - 03/28/2009 0.91 0.97
*14 03/29/2009 - 04/04/2009 0.92 0.98
*15 04/OS/2009 - 04/11/2009 0.92 0.98
*1G . 04/12/2009 - 04/18/2009 0.93 1.00
*17 04/19/2009 - 04/25/2009 0.94 1.01
*18 04/26/2009 - OS/02/2009 0.95 1.02
*19 OS/03/2009 - OS/09/2009 0.96 1.03
*20 OS/10/2009 - OS/16/2009 0.97 1.04
21 O5/17/2009 - OS/23/2009 0.97 1.04
22 OS/24/2009 - OS/30/2009 0.97 1.04
23 OS/31/2009 - 06/06/2009 0.97 1.04
24 06/07/2009 - 06/13/2009 0.97 1.04
25 06/14/2009 - 06/20/2009 0.97 1.04
26 06/21/2009 - 06/27/2009 0.98 1.05
27 06/28/2009 - 07/04/2009 0.98 1.05
28 07/OS/2009 - 07/11/2009 0.99 1.06
29 07/12/2009 - 07/18/2009 0.99 1.06
30 07/19/2009 - 07/25/2009 1.00 1.07
31 07/26/2009 - OB/01/2009 1.00 1.07
32 08/02/2009 - OS/OS/2009 1.01 1.08
33 OB/09/2009 - 08/15/2009 1.01 1.08
34 OB/16/2009 - OB/22/2009 1.03 1.10
35 OB/23/2009 - 08/29/2009 1.04 1.11
36 OB/30/2009 - 09/OS/2009 1.05 1.12
37 09/06/2009 - 09/12/2009 1.0G 1.13
38 09/13/2009 - 09/19/2009 1.07 1.14
39 09/20/2009 - 09/26/2009 1.06 1.13
40 09/27/2009 - 10/03/2009 1.06 1.13
41 10/04/2009 - 10/10/2009 1.05 1.12
42 10/11/2009 - 10/17/2009 1.05 1.12
43 10/16/2009 - 10/24/2009 1.05 1.12
49 10/25/2009 - 10/31/2009 1.06 1.13 .
45 11/O1/2009 - 11/07/2009 1.07 1.14
46 11/OB/2009 - 11/14/2009 1.08 1.16
47 11/15/2009 - 11/21/2009 1.08 1.16
48 11/22/2009 - 11/28/2009 1.09 1_17
99 11/29/2009 - 12/OS/2009 1.09 1.17
50 12/06/2009 - 12/12/2009 1.09 1.17
51 12/13/2009 - 12/19/2009 1.10 1.18
52 12/20/2009 - 12/26/2009 1.07 1.14
53 12/27/2009 - 12/31/2009 1.05 1.12
* Pealc Season
Page 1 of 2
,
Type of peak hour being reported:Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume
��CATIO[�: E Shore Dr--Causeway Blvd QC JOB.#: 10618702
G(TYfSTAfE: Clearwater Beach FL DATE: 5/20/2011
2a o.�z �2� Peak-Hour: 1:00 PM--2:00 PM o.o �.�
�; * I Peak 15-Min: 1:45 PM--2:00 PM �+ t �
24 0 0 I 0.0 0.0 0.0
d i b L- .� i 4
800�0 1 L 121�897 3.4 ♦O.D S :r;:,'�,t L 17�+' 3.2
0.91 897+► 0.97 �+ 776 0.94 42 .► �3;'r�e 3.5
897�►0 �i � 0.► 897 4.2 �!0.0 7 �""� �' 0.0�► 42
� h t P '� h t P
0 0 0 " J- o.o o.o o.o
a t � ��.,I�li�'�+' ��t�.lt f�.� � s t �
0 0.00 o r r� r :�-� j o.o o.o
_. 3 _�_. e�
� 2B � I 0 0 D
J .+ i �.
� o � � 0
4
0 �.l � „ � � � ��� � �
� Y 0 � � �
� � h t P
� 0 � � � 0 0 0 �
J i 4 � �
J
� �J .J i 4
� u. '� � ,� t� «
# � « 0
z r z �
�, t r h t �►
� � � � •_
R RTOR
75-Min Count E Shore Dr E Shore Dr Causeway Blvd Causeway Blvd
Period (North6ound) (Southbound) (Easffiound) estbound) Total Hourly
Beginning At Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R` Totals
11:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 212 0 0 0 0 210 22 0 0 446
11:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 203 0 0 0 D 211 22 0 0 439
11:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 5 0 0 0 183 0 0 0 0 222 26 0 0 436
11:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 175 0 0 0 0 188 37 0 0 405 1726
12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 206 0 0 0 0 205 23 0 0 436 1716
12:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 199 0 0 0 0 208 31 0 0 446 1723
12:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 169 0 0 0 0 223 33 0 0 432 1719
12:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 195 0 0 0 0 210 27 0 0 438 1752
� �1:00 PM 0�' 0 �=A 0 ` 0 �0• 0 '+ 4'. Q 0 -3 0:223=. ,D �':0 0 c .0. �19�1 r . 28, �,: 0 �0 446=����. 1782;�
; � �5 PM 0 ; 0 0 0 ` 0 0 0 ' ..9 0' 0. .`= 0 219';. , 0 0 Q :. ,0 198 41 . 0 0 467 '. 1783':
;' 1:30P.M. 0 : 0 0 0 ;`. '0 0 0 i 6 D 0' s 0 �P09: tl. .-0 0 ' .'`0:.196 .. 28 ' 0 0. 437` '17B8,
`��?'w`��'�'���.,:"��^: .D'�?"a�",D"�A"ad�0�'.�:,�D�..,..0'.,. :,0, b..''D -,. ` �� ���' . �� ..,� �� . .rD.�� r . .tl,. R�Pb..�
�1 �' i�.J,��� ,�
�If�
�-i�a�
��0 --7
Peak75-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total
Flowrates Left Thru Rt ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru RI ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R"
AlI Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 984 0 0 0 0 764 104 0 0 1872
Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 24 B 72
Pedestrians 0 12 0 0 12
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Railroad
Sto ed Buses
Comments:
Report generated on 5/25/2011 10:23 AM SOURCE:Quality Counts,LLC(http://www.qualitycounts.net)
Type of peak hour being reported:Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume
LOCATIOt�: E Shore Dr—Causeway Blvd QC JQB#: 10618701
CITYISTATE: Clearwater Beach FL DATE: 5/20/2011
az 0.75 134 Peak-Hour:4:15 PM--5:15 PM o.o o.o
�a * I Peak 15-Min:4:15 PM--4:30 PM �+ t �
az o o � o.o o.o o.o
.+ a �. �-- .� s a
813 4 0 S L. 134 N 905 2.5 �O.D ,t � 0.0� 22
0.96 1140�► 0.95 �+ 771 0.96 �g ,� ���. y,g
1140+►0 Z� * �i 0�►1140 1.8 +�O.D 'i��~*� �t 0.0�4 1.8
� 0 0 0 � II0.0 0.0 0.0
i f � �U�'�.$'�W' ��?kl�'1'�� I
_ .:r� Pc,,- ,-r -,rr. . I s * �
0 0.00 0 ' '" o.o o.o
;::.J L i-�;J' kl�.�ri::,S
I 34 � � � i 4 �
J �
o � ��� o
Z � � :�;� 0 5 ,► '�`. � 2
� �f o z r o
�► t r+
� o � � � o 0 0 �
�IJ a 4 � �
� � .� � 4
1 , !. � � '�" �
� � � ,� �� «
z � z �
h f �' '1 t P
� � � � •_
R RTOR
15-Min Count E Shore Dr E Shore Dr Causeway Bivd Causeway Blvd
Period (Northbound) (Southbound) (Eastbound) (Westbound To�� Hourly
Beginning At Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru RI ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R' Totals
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 266 0 0 0 0 182 29 0 0 489
4 3G PM �,o' 0 ',.�'�.o o�; 0 ,'D o �. 7 •d 0' a 0"����'��r 0�" ^ D n"` G�,��<�",p`� 19& 34 , 0 `��0 5"�8.
445 P�M, 0;! 0 'D 0 � 0 `0 D � 1t �;0 0�^x� OK`4 2BCt Q ; 0 4��, Q ��y 29��,i 0 '0 531 �_ ^z086
� b:00 PM, 0�< 0" ���0 0�,::� 0 ���0. �.0,,;; 7. A, � 0 �:> 0. 27.1�. 0•�:�:- 0 0,:� 9;:-�Z7,. 35�'; D� � �0 48D;:�` 2087:�
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 275 0 0 0 0 214 27 0 0 527 2066
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 268 0 0 0 0 198 33 0 0 515 2063
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 226 0 0 0 0 214 27 0 0 481 2013
`��'=C?•`�1 :�t
� '�...�{?,�
�--
_.____�, �I��d
ito�,
Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total
Flowrates Left Thru Ri ht U R"` Left Thru Ri ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru RI ht U R"
AlI Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 0 0 0 1192 0 0 0 0 788 144 0 0 2192
Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 20 0 36
Pedestrians 0 44 0 0 44
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 3
Railroad
Sto ed Buses
Commenfs:
Report generated on 5/25/2011 10:23 AM SOURCE:Quality Counts,LLC(http://www.qualitycounts.net)
.
Type of peak hour being reported:intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume
LOCATEON: Mandalay Ave--Baymont St QC JOB#: 10618704
CITYFSTATE: Clearwater Beach FL DATE: 5/20/2011
a�a o.so aa� Peak-Hour: 12:45 PM--1:45 PM
i * 5.8 4.6
13 asa 38 Peak 15-Min: 1:15 PM--1:30 PM �+ t �
23.1 5.5 2.6
•i i �• .j i 4
60 �7 � i 123�s 147 6.7 1�0.0 ,� w ; 2.4« 2.7
078 8 �11 0.94 � 5 0.76 n � �
0 0 �► �;�� 0.0
57 .►42 'L C 19.► BD 3.5 �4.B 'f �l�'''�� C 5.3�► 1.7
� '1 4 P '�, h t P
; 351 1*4� ���1���� ����4� �a 5.4 * �
430 0.95 413 ��! I :+?i ^ =�.
t.,.,i_..�. CJ'� _E.,- t;:_.:; 5.3 4.8
� 51 � � d i 4 �
� o � t Z
�
�gq �. tz 61 2 �► '(�° � 0
� .�, �. � o z r o
h t �
�
� 80 � � 0 0 0
Jd i t. L� � JJ i 4L�
at � � � � � > � t
y �;:��„ +R ��•
� � z r
ti t �► � h t �► �
� �
R"=RTOR
15-Min Count Mandalay Ave Mandalay Ave Baymont St Baymont St
Period (Northbound) (Southbound (Eastbound) (Westbound) To�� Hourly
Beginning At Left Thru Ri ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R' Left Thru Ri ht U R• Totals
11;00 AM 9 89 6 1 1 7 77 4 0 D 2 2 6 0 12 3 0 15 1 5 240
11:15 AM 5 73 10 0 0 9 78 1 0 0 0 0 6 0 3 6 1 19 0 6 217
11:30 AM 2 89 3 1 0 6 85 3 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 3 2 22 0 0 222
11:45 AM 8 79 3 0 1 7 72 2 0 0 2 0 7 0 10 4 3 23 0 1 222 901
12:00 PM 11 71 4 1 0 14 95 2 0 0 2 0 4 0 6 6 0 22 0 1 239 900
12:15 PM 8 87 1 2 0 9 75 1 0 0 3 0 8 0 2 3 2 23 0 2 226 909
12 30 PM 6 93 7 1 0 7 71 3 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 8 4 19 0 2 225 912
; 12 45 P.;M 9 100' 3 0 I 0 15 95 2 9 4 3 0; 3 °0�' 4 3 2 27 ;. '0 b 272:' 96��`
�`., 1,DD`PM - - 10,: 78. 4 2 ` 0. ,-°:;4. . 96' '-. 4�_ �.�j. . 0 ' 3 �;.3�;_, 11 �.:0,,.,„3.: , ,4^ .:1 23.s�i 0 ��2 �48.��� 97,1;�
; ; .3 . ^ ° :
1:30PM 8���� 80 �'-�4 3.'� 0' `10 . BB';':�' 3' '�D. �':0" 'i'0�` : 1� 7' ` D .4" 4 '1 �25�; 0 �0 238^`�''1031 `�
1:45 PM 4 81 8 0 0 10 104 1 0 1 3 1 3 0 B 10 3 28 0 0 265 1024
��"L
l3 �'r
SF = � .�� � � t_�
� � �i`�
�.5
Y��
�` � �iy
� � �
��
�w�a i�
Peak 75-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total
Flowrates Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R"
All Vehicles 60 372 12 4 0 36 336 12 0 0 4 16 24 0 16 32 4 148 0 16 1092
Heavy Trucks 0 24 0 0 20 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 52
Pedestrians 132 64 100 72 368
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3
Raiiroad
Sto ed Buses
Comments:
Report generated on 5/25/2011 10:23 AM SOURCE:Qualify Counts,LLC(http://www.qualitycounts.net)
.
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume
�OCATION: Mandalay Ave--Baymont St QC,�OB#: 10618703
GiTYIS�ATE: Cleanvater Beach FL DATE: 5/20/2011
e�z o.s2 ass Peak-Hour:4:30 PM--5:30 PM z.e z.s
� + * � Peak 15-Min:4:45 PM--5:00 PM �a t �
18 453 43 O.D 2.6 2.3
.� i ti► .! i �►
66 «12 ,� t 111 �.154 0.0 �8.3 j � 3.6« 3.9
0.65 3 +► 0.91 � 12 0.95 0 0 �► �';�a♦ 0.0
65 �50 'i � 31�► 60 `��-�='�
h * r � 3.1 +►2.0 Z � 6.5�► 1.7
h * r'
�43 348 14� �1 i� ������ �0.0 2.0 OA�
�������
i t i•i t' `�-i r.a':� '� t
539 0.92 403 .` 2.B 17
��V 1 Ct .I,.�:�
� 33 � J .� i 4 L�
� o s � �
o .► ��. 0
172 ' � Y''� 54 '1 � �
� o `s r o
� t c►
$-
� ��2 � � o 0 0
J i 4 � '� � e+ i �. L�
"� � '� �' � .. �_� «
� '�4 ~ (�.�i
i i. i �
'U t P h t P'
� � � � •_
R RTOR
15-Min Count Mandalay Ave Mandalay Ave Baymont St Baymont St
Period Northbound) (Southbound) (Eastbound) (Westbound) � To�� Hourly
Beginning At Left Thru Ri ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R Totals
4:00 PM 11 69 4 2 0 12 99 2 0 3 4 0 11 0 4 6 1 27 0 0 255
4.15 PM 9 71 6 2 0 15 103 4 0 0 0 2 7 0 1 7 5 32 0 0 264
'� 4.,3U..PdWI�,. . 5�,84: .3. 0•'� 0 ,�•��flr., 305K`�.,� IS, �.,;Q. .;.A1.,�,�. �;'. 6,ws.,,�'0 ..OnK;,�:4�a ,�.5,..,28,>„ , 0 '„1 .,261��d.rt. .
50A pM' 10 `' 78� 3 i 0 8 129 2 0! 0 3 9 `4r' '�� 3`u � B 3 30 ': 0 3 285� `9121,
5:15`f�M� 5 i 100 . �.`�5 1 .i 0 ,.'�13 �'105".'f.4� �0� . 0� -`��2 :0`4 , 9�`� '0` �-,a3�n�, 1D �-'��! 19 �`'� 0 ' '�0 - 277"°= 113d�:�
5:30 PM 10 77 6 2 1 10 93 2 0 0 1 B 12 0 5 7 2 21 0 0 257 1130
5:45 PM 10 87 2 0 0 4 95 2 0 0 0 2 6 0 2 7 1 18 0 1 237 1056
��� �.�1.��
i� ��� ��.
� `�' �
'2- '...� 'C—�08
�� '°'"�' �---- �z
=';�1 �, �-- ��
� � ��
�� t�
��a�
Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Totai
Flowrates Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R" Left Thru Rf ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R*
All Vehicles 72 332 12 12 0 48 456 4 0 4 24 4 48 0 52 44 12 116 0 4 1244
Heavy Trucks 0 20 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 8 0 4 48
Pedestrians 84 52 136 56 328
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Railroad
Sto ed Buses
Comments:
Report generated on 5/25/2011 10:23 AM SOURCE:Quality Counts,LLC(http://www.qualitycounts.net)
.
Type of peak hour being reported:Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume
�OCATiOh1: Coronado Dr--S Gulfview Blvd QC JOB#: 10618706
CITYISTATE: Clearwater Beach FL DATE: 5/20/2011
663 0.93 703 Peak-Hour: 12:15 PM--1:15 PM
� i * � 3.5 4.8
360 303 o Peak 15-Min: 12:15 PM--12:30 PM � a t �
2.5 4.6 0.0
� i �.
36o F 254,� L o�. o � t 4
2.5 �5 9 � ,c�} t, 0.0 f� 0.0
0.92 0 �► 0.97 �+ 0 O.OD �'�
00 �► �-;+1� 0.0
281 �27 `i i` 0�► 0 ``�s,�f�`
h * �r � 6.0 �►7.4 7 � 0.0�► 0.0
h t P
� aas o (�,�.+�J���i�'' ��3�.J€'t"�'� �o.o a.z o.o�
i * a
331 0.93 450 r.,. a u f Y f,.�-I r 1 :. •, 4
...i:,�.. ..Et..t_.��'; 4.8 42
J �j. L� J d i t. L�
� 1 t o
4 � ' F' � 0 0 �► (�;; � 0
� � y�� � J J 11 �
o 'S r o
h t r�
� 45 � � 0 1 0 �
� J i b � � � d i �. �
t L � j � � J �,.., t
� �: � •► �� «
-s r z �
� � t �► � � � t � �
R•=RTOR
15-Min Count Coronado Dr Coronado Dr S Gulfview Blvd S Gulfvfew Blvd
Period (Northbound) (Southbound) (Eastbound) estbound) Total Hourly
Beginning At Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru RI ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R" Totals
11:00 AM 0 119 0 0 0 0 85 77 0 0 72 0 3 0 2 D 0 0 0 0 358
11:15 AM 0 112 0 0 0 0 74 98 0 0 53 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 339
11:30 AM 0 101 0 0 0 0 88 87 0 0 62 0 4 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 342
11:45 AM 0 94 0 0 0 0 58 92 0 0 49 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 298 1337
12:00 PM 0 110 0 0 0 0 78 68 0 0 46 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 308 1287
;;'.'12 30 PMa '0,,.' 99 0 0 's p ;D` 64 :99 0�;; 0 61" 6, ;; 3`� ;0 fl"i � ',0 0 ;: 0 0; `326" !129'�:
;12a5P;M 0'{'113' ' '� � ` '0', 0 79. ''83 Q` 0 `„65 0.- 9 0 Z"' 0 : D ' D'- ' 0 0` 357 'fi1344;';
;` 1�00 RN( 0 '117 ?0 D ' 0 0 78 '81 0? 0. .76 tl ::. 6.' ,''0 '.'D� '` 0 0 0 ' 0 0 356' "1394"?
1:15 PM 0 106 0 0 0 0 75 84 0 0 72 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 340 1375
1:30 PM 0 107 0 0 0 0 77 76 0 0 65 0 1 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 326 1375
1:45 PM 0 117 0 D 0 0 71 63 0 0 74 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 351 1375
�'�% !;;>��4 d '"`'�`
.�,���
,
� �
���
:���� `"� �
� �3ra
Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total
Flowrates Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R"
All Vehicies 0 480 0 4 0 0 328 388 0 0 208 0 24 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1436
Heavy Trucks 0 12 0 0 16 8 8 0 4 0 0 0 48
Pedestrians 60 0 4 0 64
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Railroad
Sto ed Buses
Commenfs:
� Report generated on 5/25/2011 10:23 AM SOURCE:Qualify Counts,LLC(http://www.qualitycounts.net)
i
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume
LQCAT{QhE: Coronado Dr--S Gulfview Blvd f�C JC�B#: 10618705
GiTY1STATE: Clearwater Beach FL �RTE: 5/20/2011
652 0.93 B57 Peak-Hour:4:00 PM--5:00 PM
� ; * I Peak 15-Min:4:00 PM--4:15 PM a t
285 367 0 I 32 2.5 0.0
.7 i 4 �- J .� � 4
285 F 294 f t 0� 0
3.2 �2 4 ,t ,M1*� L 0.0« D.0
0.85 0 .► 0.93 �+ 0 0.00 0 0 �► +�;�� 0.0
304�► 10 '3 � 0�► 0 •,;>�l
h * P � 2.6 ♦14�Z ,.=,r � 0.0�► 0.0
h t P
a ss3 0 �l.it�.�9�'�' �E���'t'��
s * o.o �.a o.o
377 0.93 563 'r�r•�.;f:,-r*�=�,�i.;.. 'r..�,-e. � i }
❑ i.:�i L �... r 'r:.:��c� 2.7 1.4
� � � J .a i 4 L�
1 � t D
g r � +: � 0 �► �1� 0
� - � 0 3 P 0
� � JJ11 � ,, * ;,
� 29 � � � 9 � �
� J i 4 � � � .� i �. L�
s ; t � T T � > ..� <
.► �:, �, � ■� «
-s r � �
� '� f P' � � h t P �
R•=RTOR
15-Min Count Coronado Dr Coronado Dr S Gulfview Blvd S Gulfview Bivd
Period (Northbound) (Southbound Eastbound) estbound) To�� Hourly
Beginning At Left Thru RI ht U R• Left Thru Ri ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R• Totals
s" 4 15�M D�?152 '-'0 0 ": 0 Q` �90 °71"' U? �Q "78 D :�a 3�p�^`'0 'r��� � 0 D � D :' 0 0" 395`
` 4 30 Pf1A 0,'.137 0 0 ' A ..0 84 -'62 0<; 0 ;T65f 0 ! 2 0 (�' .: 0 A 0. ' 0 ' ' 0 350 s„
` 4.45".FM. 0' :123 0 0 _' 0 ',0. t 95, `75' 0.- 0 . 71 0 ? 2� � ;0 ^ -.1�" 0: „ 0 ` 0 0 Oi .387. ;'.1519;"
5:00 PM 0 145 0 0 0 0 92 77 0 0 76 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 392 1504
5:15 PM 0 121 0 0 0 0 80 85 1 0 93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 380 1489
5:30 PM 0 134 0 0 0 0 81 62 0 0 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 349 1488
5:45 PM 0 125 0 0 0 0 92 63 0 0 58 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 342 1463
�� _ �„�.`� ` �?4n „,—!�,
� �{/
���; .��
!D `F"'.� E� �
d
`°'1!n
Peak 15-Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total
Flowrates Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R" Left Thru Ri ht U R*
All Vehicles 0 604 0 0 0 0 392 308 0 0 320 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1628
Heavy Trucks 0 4 0 0 B 12 S 0 0 0 0 0 32
Pedestrians 8 0 4 0 12
Bicycles D 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Railroad
Sto ed Buses
Comments:
Report generated on 5/25/2011 10:23 AM SOURCE:Quality Counts,LLC(http://www.qualitycounts.net)
.
Two�Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
nal st RP Intersection CAUSEWAY/EAST
enc /Co. GCC SHORE
urisdiction CLEARWATER
Date Performed 5/25/2011 nal sis Year 2011 EXISTING
nal sis Time Period MIDDAY PEAK
Pro'ect Descri tion
East/West Street: CAUSEWAY BLVD North/South Street: EAST SHORE RT ONLY
Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25
ehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments
Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
olume veh/h 870 753 117
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.97
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR � 896 0 0 776 120
veh/h
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- --
Median Type Raised curb
RT Channelized 0 �
Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0
Confi uration T T TR
U stream Si nal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
olume veh/h 23
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 0 0 23
veh/h
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 2
Percent Grade (%) 0 �
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 1
Configuration R
Dela , Queue Len th, and Level of Service
pproach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration R
v (veh/h) 23
C (m) (veh/h) 609
v/c 0.04
95% queue length 0.12
Control Delay(s/veh) 11.1
LOS B
pproach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 11.1
pproach LOS -- -- B
Copyright O 2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved yCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 5/25/2011 .3:03 PM
file://C:\Documents and Settin�s�mer�olizzi.GULFCOAST\Local Settings\Temp\u2k43.tmp 5/25/2011
,
Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
nal st RP Intersection CAUSEWAY/EAST
enc /Co. GCC SHORE
urisdiction CLEARWATER
Date Performed 5/25/2011 nal sis Year 2011 EXISTING
nal sis Time Period PM PEAK
Pro'ect Descri tion
East/West Street: CAUSEWAY 8l.VD North/South Street: EAST SHORE RT ONLY
Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25
ehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments
Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
olume veh/h 1106 748 130
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1164 0 0 787 136
veh/h
Percent Heav Vehicfes 0 -- -- 0 -- --
Median Type Raised curb
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0
Confi uration T T TR
U stream Si nal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
olume veh/h 4�
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 0 0 42
veh/h
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 2
Percent Grade (%) 0 �
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 1
Configuration R
Dela , Queue Len th, and Level of Service
pproach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration R
v (veh/h) 42
C (m) (veh/h) 598
v/c 0.07
95% queue length 0.23
Control Delay(s/veh) 11.5
LOS B
pproach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 11.5
pproach LOS -- -- 8
Copyright OO 2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+rM Version 5.6 Generated: 5/25/2011 3:06 PM
f,le�//C'.�\T��cuments and Settin�s�roer�olizzi.GULFCOAST\Local Settin�s\Temp\u2k43.tmp 5/25/2011
.
Detailed Report Page 1 of 1
HCS+"" DETAILED REPORT
Genera/lnformafion Site lnformation
Analyst RP Intersection MANDALAY/BAYMONT
Agency or Co. GCC Area Type All other areas
Date PerFormed 5/25/2011 Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Time Period MIDDAYPEAK Analysis Year 2011 EXISTING
Project ID
Volume and Timin In ut
Eg Wg Ng SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Number of Lanes, N� 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 2 0
Lane Group LTR LTR LTR LTR
Volume,V(vph) 7 8 41 19 5 119 47 340 14 37 352 13
% Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Pretimed (P)or Actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A
Start-up Lost Time, I� 2.0 2.0 2•� 2•0
Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2•0
Arrival Type,AT 3 3 3 3
Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Filtering/Metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Initial Unmet Demand, Qt 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Ped!Bike/RTOR Volumes 94 0 15 61 0 11 80 0 0 51 0 D
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12•0
Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N
Parking Maneuvers, Nm
Buses Stopping, Ne 0 0 0 0
Min.Time for Pedestrians, GP 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.4
Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08
G= 14.0 G= G= G= G= 38.0 G = G= G=
Timing Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y=
Duration of Analysis,T= 0.25 Cycle Length, C= 60.0
Lane Grou Ca aci , Control Dela ,and LOS Determination
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Adjusted Flow Rate,v 44 140 427 427
Lane Group Capacity, c 381 372 1959 2007
v/c Ratio,X 0.12 0.38 0.22 0.21
Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.23 0.23 0.63 0.63
Uniform Delay, d� 18.1 19.3 4.7 4.7
Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1
Initial Queue Delay, d3 0.0 0.0 D.0 0.0
Control Delay 18.3 20.0 4.7 4.7
Lane Group LOS B 8 A A
Approach Delay 18.3 20.0 4.7 4.7
Approach LOS B B A A
Intersection Delay 7.4 X� = 0.26 Intersection LOS A
Copyright OO 2007 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.3 Generated: 5/25/2011 3:22 PM
�;�P•��r•�r���.,,,,-,P.,,t� a„�l �ettin�s\rner��lizzi.GULFCOAST�Local Settin�s\Temp\s2k5C.tmp 5/25/2011
Detailed Report Page 1 of 1
HCS+'" DETAILED REPORT
General Informafion Site Information
Analyst RP Intersection MANDALAY/BAYMONT
Agency or Co. GCC Area Type A!I other areas
Date Performed 5/25/2011 Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Time Period PM PEAK Analysis Year 2011 EX/STING
Project ID
Volume and Timin In ut
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Number of Lanes, N� 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 D 2 0
Lane Group LTR LTR LTR LTR
Volume,l�(vph) 12 3 49 30 12 108 42 336 14 42 439 16
% Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Pretimed (P)or Actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A
Start-up Lost Time, I� 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Arrival Type,AT 3 3 3 3
Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Filtering/Metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Ped/Bike/RTOR Volumes 172 0 15 54 0 11 112 0 0 33 0 0
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N
Parking Maneuvers, Nm
Buses Stopping, Ne 0 0 0 0
Min.Time for Pedestrians, Gp 4.0 3.4 3.7 3.3
Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08
G = 14.0 G= G= G= G= 38.0 G= G= G =
Timing Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y=
Duration of Analysis, T= 0.25 Cycle Length, C= 60.0
Lane Grou Ca aci , Control Dela ,and LOS Determinafion
Eg WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Adjusted Flow Rate,v 53 153 430 546
Lane Group Capacity, c 364 368 1946 2004
v/c Ratio,X 0.15 0.42 0.22 0.27
Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.23 0.23 0.63 0.63
Uniform Delay, d� 18.3 19.5 4.7 4.9
Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.1
Initial Queue Delay, d3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Control Delay 18.4 20.3 4.7 4.9
Lane Group LOS 8 C A A
Approach Delay 18.4 20.3 4,7 4.9
Approach LOS 8 C A A
Intersection Delay 7.5 X�=0.31 Intersection LOS A
Copyright�O 2007 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved NCS+TM Version 5.3 Generated: 5/25/2011 325 PM
flP•//r•�T��c„ment� and Settin�s�rner�olizzi.GULFCOAST�Local Settin�s\Temp\s2k5C.tmp 5/25/2011
Deta.iled Report Page 1 of 1
HCS+'� DETAILED REPORT
Genera/lnformation Site Information
Analyst RP Intersection CORONADO/GULFVIEW
Agency or Co. GCC Area Type All other areas
Date Performed 5/25/2011 Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Time Period MIDDAY PEAK Analysis Year 2011 EXISTING
Project ID
Volume and Timin In ut
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Number of Lanes, N� 2 0 0 2 2 2
Lane Group L LR LT T R
Volume, V(vph) 246 26 1 436 294 349
% Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Pretimed (P)or Actuated (A) A A A A A A
Start-up Lost Time, i� 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Arrival Type,AT 3 3 3 3 3
Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Filtering/Metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Ped/Bike/RTOR Volumes 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 92.0 12.0
Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N
Parking Maneuvers, Nm
Buses Stopping, Na 0 0 0 0 0
Min.Time for Pedestrians, GP 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.4
Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08
G= 22.0 G= G= G= G= 30.0 G= G= G=
Timing Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y=
Duration of Analysis, T= 0.25 Cycle Length, C= 60.0
Lane Grou Ca aci , Control Dela ,and LOS Defermination
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Adjusted Flow Rate,v 254 27 450 303 360
Lane Group Capacity, c 1260 580 1693 1774 1402
v/c Ratio,X 0.20 0.05 0.27 0.17 0.26
Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.50 0.50 0.50
Uniform Delay, d� 13.0 12.2 8.6 8.2 8.6
Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
Incremental Delay, dz 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1
Initial Queue Delay, d3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 D.0
Control Delay 13.1 12.3 8.7 8.2 8.7
Lane Group LOS 8 8 A A A
Approach Delay 13.0 8.7 8.5
Approach LOS B A A
Intersection Delay 9.5 X� =0•24 Intersection LOS A
Copyright O 2007 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+rM Version 5.3 Generated: 5/25/2011 3:35 PM
file://C:\Documents and Settings�rpergolizzi.GULFCOAST�Local Settings\Temp\s2k7E.tmp 5/25/2011
, Detailed Report Page 1 of 1
HCS+�' DETAILED REPORT
Genera/lnformation Site lnformation
Analyst RP Intersection CORONADO/GULFVIEW
Agency or Co. GCC Area Type A!l other areas
Date PerFormed 5/25/2019 Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Time Period PM PEAK Analysis Year 2011 EXISTING
Project ID
Volume and Timin In ut
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Number of Lanes, N� 2 0 � 2 2 2
Lane Group L LR LT T R
Volume,V(v h) 285 10 0 563 356 276
% Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Pretimed (P) or Actuated (A) A A A A A A
Start-up Lost Time, I� 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Arrival Type,AT 3 3 3 3 3
Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Filterin /Metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Ped/Bike/RTOR Volumes 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0
Lane�dth 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N
Parking Maneuvers, Nm
Buses Stopping, Na 0 0 0 0 0
Min.Time for Pedestrians, Gp 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.4
Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08
G= 22.0 G = G= G= G= 30.0 G= G= G=
Timing Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y=
Duration of Analysis, T= 0.25 Cycle Length, C= 60.0
Lane Grou Ca aci , Control Dela ,and LOS Determination
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Adjusted Flow Rate, v 306 11 605 383 297
Lane Group Capacity, c 1260 580 1774 1774 1402
v/c Ratio,X 0.24 0.02 0.34 0.22 0.21
Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.50 0.50 0.50
Uniform Delay, d� 13.2 12.1 9.0 8.4 �.4
Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Delay Calibration, k 0.19 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Initial Queue Delay, d3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Control Delay 93.3 12.1 9.2 8.5 8.5
Lane Group LOS 8 8 A A A
Approach Delay 13.3 9•2 8•5
Approach LOS 8 A A
Intersection Delay g.7 X� =0.30 Intersection LOS A
Copyright O 2007 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.3 Generated: 5/25l2011 3:38 PM
f;1P�//C'�\l�ncuments and Settin�s�rner�olizzi.GULFCOAST\Local Settin�s\Temp\s2k7E.tmp 5/25/2011
Generalized Peak Hour°�w►o-OlVay Volumes for Florida's
TABLE 4 Urbanized Areas1 �oi4iso
STATE SIGNALIZED ARTERIALS FREEWAYS
Class I(>0.00 to 1.99 signalized intersections per mile) �es B C D E
Lanes Median B C D E 4 4,000 5,500 6,770 7,300
2 Undivided 930 1,500 1 *** 6 6,000 8,320 10,150 11,290
4 Divided 2,840 3,440 3 560 *** 8 8,000 11,050 13,480 15,270
6 Divided 4,370 5,200 5,360 *** 10 10,000 13,960 16,930 19,250
8 Divided 5,900 6,970 7,160 **� 12 13,730 18,600 21,950 23,230
G4t����°`� Freeway Adjustments
CIaSS II(2.00 to 4.50 signalized intersections per mile) Auxiliary Ratnp
Lanes Median B C D � Lanes Metering
2 Undivided ** 1,020 1,4�0 1,570 +1,800 +5%
4 Divided ** 2,420 3,220 3,400
6 Divided '** 3,790 4,880 5,150 jjNINTERRUPTED FLOW HIGHWAYS
R Divided ** 5,15� 6�530 6,880
�Gt� r.���( !v'7 ���a Lanes Median B C D E
tD Crr� Zpn�.r.�a.e..^+`c� 2.�p�� Z°tOb Z Undivided 730 1,460 2,080 2,620
C1aSS III/IV(more than 4.50 signalized intersections per mile)
Lanes Median B C D E 4 Divided 3,220 4,660 6,040 6,840
2 Undivided ** 500 1,150 1,440 6 Divided 4,840 6,990 9,060 10,280
4 Divided ** 1,220 2,730 3,100 Uninterrupted Flow Highway Adjustments
6 Divided ** 1,910 4,240 4,680 �es Median Exclusive left lanes Adjustment factors
8 Divided ** 2,620 5,770 6,280 2 Divided Yes +5%
Multi Undivided Yes -5%
Multi Undivided No -25%
Non-State Signalized Roadway Adjustments BICYCLE MODEZ
(Alter corresponding state volumes by the indicated percent.) (Multiply motorized vehicle volumes shown below by number of direciional
roadway lanes to determine two-way maximum service volumes.)
Major City/County Roadways - 10% Paved Shoulder/Bicycle Lane
Other Signalized Roadways -35% coverage B C D E
0-49% ** 31� 1�18� >1�1g�
5tate&Non-State Signalized Roadway Adjustments 50-84% 240 360 >360 ***
(Alter corresponding state volumes by the indicated percent.) 85-100% 620 >620 *** ***
Divided/LTndivided&Turn Lane Adjustments pEDESTRIAN MODEZ
Exclusive Fxclusive Adjustment
Lanes Median Left Lanes Right Lanes Faato (Multiply motorized vehicle volumes shown below by number of directional
2 Divided Yes No +5°/ roadway lanes to determine two-way maximum service volumes.)
2 Undivided No No -20% Sidewalk Coverage B C D E
Multi Undivided Yes No -5% 0-49% ** ** 480 1,390
Multi Undivided No No -25% 50-84% ** ** 1,100 1,820
Yes -I-5% 85-100°/a ** 1�1�� 1�8`Z� >1>82�
One-Wa Facili Ad'ustment BUS MODE(Scheduled Fiaed Route)3
Y t3' J (Buses in peak hour in peak d'uection)
Multiply the corresponding two-directional volumes in this table by 0.6. Sidewalk Coverage B C D E
o-g4% >5 >4 >3 >2
85-100°/a >4 >3 >2 >1
� Values shown aze presented as hourly two-way volumes fnr levels of service and aze for the automohile/truck modes unless specifically stated.Although presented as peak hour two-
way volumes,they actually represent peak hour peak direction conditions with an applicable D factor applied.This table does not constitute a standard and should be used only for
general planning applications.The computer models from wluch tlus table is derived should be used for more specific planning applications.The table and deriving computer models
should not be used for corridor or inteisection design,where more refined techniques exist.Calculations are based on plan�inv applications of the Highway Capacity Manual,Bicycle
LOS Model,Pedestrian LOS Model and Transit Capaciry and Quality of Service Manual,respectively for the automobIle/truck,bicycle,pedesuian and bus modes.
Z Level of service for the bicycle and pedestrian modes in this table is based on number of motorized vehicles,not number of
bicyclists or pedestrians using the facility.
3 Buses per hois shown are only for the peak hour in the single duection of the lrigher haffic flow. .502[YCe:
**Cannot be achieved using table input value defaults. � FlOild2.D0P3itOleIlt Of Ti3IlSp0I't3tlOri
S stems Plannin O�ce
*'*Not applicable for that level of service letter grade.For the automobile mode,volumes greater than level of service D Y g
become F because intersection capacities have been reached.For the bicycle mode,the level of service letter grade(including 605 Suwannee Street,MS 19
F)is not acluevable because there is no maximum vehicle volume threshold using table input velue defiults. 'j'��73�See,FL 32399-0450
www.dot.state.fl.us/plavning/svstems/sm/los/default.shtm 2Q09 FDOT QUALITY/LEVEL OF SERVICE NANDBOOK
Pharmacy/Drugstore without Drive-Through Window
(880)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
On a: Weekday
Number of Studies: 6
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 11
Directional Disiribution: 50% entering, 50°10 exiting
Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
90.06 81.00 - 106.50 12.24
Data Plot and Equation
,,200 , ,
: ; X X
1,100 - - - - - � - � - - - - - - - - - - =- - - - - - - - - - � - - - - � -, - - - - � - - - - ,- - - - - - � - - -
X . , .
y , . . . .
'� ; ,
W , ,
o.. , - -
� 1,000 - - - - - - - -, - - - - - - - - -,- - � - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � � ,- - - - - ; - -
V ,
L , �
� . , i
� ,
� . .
m 900 - - - - - - - - - � - - - - - - � - -
Q ; ;
u ; ; : '
F,
: x ;
X ,
800 - - - - - • - - - � - - - -;- - - � - - - � � - -,- - - - - - � - - - - - � - - - - - - -
: , : �
X . .
700
i
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
X= 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ---'-' Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T)-0.99 Ln(X)+4.51 R2=0.73
Trip Generafion,8th Edition 1708 Institute of Transportation Engineers i
Pharmacy/Drugstore without Drive-Through Window
(880)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
On a: Weekday,
P.M. Peak Hour of Generator L�Nc�
�1��-t��c�f
Number of Studies: 7
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 11
Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting
Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
11.07 7.47 - 24.00 6.63
Data Plot and Equation
300 , , , •
, , X .
� . , .
� 200 " � - - - - - - - � - - - '� - - - - - - - - - - -'- - - - - - � � - � �' - - - - - - -
W .' ; ; ;
Q ,
H . , .
� ;
U , .
�
� , , _-
� , , . ; ______--_
d . , , --��
� . , _---� � •
� ; , ___--- , ,
j ; >C ___--'__--��
a , _---_ X
II 100 ' ___- : ---- - . - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - � -; - -X- � - - - - -
- - - - - - � --
�
X 'C : :
X , ,
0
g 9 10 11 12 13 14
X= 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
X Actual Data Points ------ Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Not given R2=**'`*
Trip Generation,8th Edition 1712 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Pharmacy/Drugstore without Drive-Through Window
(880)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Number of Studies: 9
Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 10
Directi�nal Distribution: 50%entering, 50% exiting
Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
8.42 6.30 - 11.70 3.48
Data Plot and Equation
130 , ,
, �
120 - - - � - - - - - - - - - - - - --- � - - - - - - -. - - - - - - -.- - - - - - - -
. X , ,
, X
y110 - - - � - - - - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - �
� ,
� ,
w , ,
� , ,
~ 100 - - - - - - - - - � - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � � - - - - - - - � - - -
�
V . , .
N . . � , �
�
Cd90 - ' - - - - - - • - " ' - ' � - -� - - - ' ' - ,- - - - ' - ' ; " - - - - - - - � - - ' - ' .
�
> ,
Q ,
II : : X
�
80 - - - - - � � - � - : - � - - - - . . _ . . . - - .- - - - - - - - - � - - - - : � - - . . . - - -
� X ; : ;X
; X ;
70 ' � - - - - - . . : - - � - - � � - - =� - � - - - -' - - - - -'- - - - - - - - '- - - - - - - - -
X ; ; ; ; ;
, X ,
60
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
X= 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
X Actual Data Points ------ Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Not given R2="*'*
Trip Generation,8th Edition 1710 Institute of Transportation Engineers
TZvo-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
�,,. ,
.
w �eral�ln or�.a�o,� � �� �
;
_ . t .
r ,
.�� d��., �. - ... �� �,�� . : , o..��� . ����..�w� _ � �
Analyst RP Intersection CAUSEWAY/EAST
SHORE
Agency/Co. GCC Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Date Performed 1/19/2012 Analysis Year FUTURE CONDITIONS
Analysis Time Period MIDDAY PEAK
Pro'ect Descri tion
East/West Street: CAUSEWAY BLVD North/South Street: EAST SHORE RT ONLY
Intersection Orientation: Easf-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25
� ���:�.cie .,�.a �e. �an . .�.. : �s�n.e�.�..� . . , :
Ma'or Street Eastbound - Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume veh/h 997 835 169
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.97
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR � 1027 0 0 860 174
veh/h
Percent Heav Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 -- --
Median T pe Raised curb
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0
Confi uration T T TR
U stream Si nal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume veh/h ��
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR � 0 0 0 0 73
(veh/h)
Percent Heav Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 2
Percent Grade (%) 0 �
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 1
Configuration R
,.,...ssr^�;'*. �:.,m-^�c ,,•:z.: y�,�.. .,. ��zz�_...�...,�rN, ,r�i,m t-�.x��s�.,t� »,.�3:" �` ���I���wS� «�"Y ^.'?� t��s�4x.; ry�,�f;'�c�,��.�"i�,' � ,�.""��r",�{��i.���^�s..�'wa .u�'l��'�s F �.�,���;.
�^',
D�Ia "�,Ql1eU@�Lell tI1�1qCI�L�@��V�I�.O�S�C1/�CB��a��,x�'�,,*fi�� � �b .�x,i�� a . ,� vo� .�Ek ,�. �� . ��u�,�� �� ��, .,,: ,..
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration R
v(veh/h) 73
C (m) (veh/h) 556
v/c � I 0.13
95% queue length 0.45
Control Delay (s/veh) 12.5
LOS 8
Approach Delay (s/veh) -- -- �2•5
Approach LOS -- -- B
Copyright O 2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+rM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/18/2012 3:18 PM
file://C:\Documents and Settings�rpergolizzi.GULFCOAST\Local Settings\Temp\u2k406.tmp 1/18/2012
.
Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
� � .. � _
e a�lnformation' � �� ` �, ,�..�.a
� r
�P .,.�:, ��. �. . �., . .
CAUSEW,4Y/EAST
Analyst RP Intersection SHORE
Agency/Co. GCC Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Date Pertormed 1/19/2012 Analysis Year FUTURE CONDITIONS
Analysis Time Period PM PEAK
Pro'ect Descri tion
EastlWest Street: CAUSEWAY BLVD North/South Street: EAST SHORE RT ONLY
Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25
�„�e,�1e e�o��..��� .� ,a:rt���. ,s�� ..�s ��.,.. � _ __ � .
Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume veh/h 1210 809 171
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR � 1273 0 0 851 180
veh/h
Percent Heav Vehicles 0 -- -- � -- -'
Median T pe Raised curb
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 �
Confi uration T T TR
U stream Si nal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume veh/h 79
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR � 0 0 0 0 83
veh/h
Percent Heav Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 2
Percent Grade (%) 0 �
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 1
Confi uration R
^",�sn. .t�t�"3 4^?:� �`�°.;,�--�-'S'r'�.*a:.cx^ v�,�,.:�ram..,.��—� "�A,uua�.``�e. r ��-- :4 s-.«��� 7r'*"°r s�'�' � z�o ��..�€� ����-r -� ,Y:�'�«Jr�.'�,�5�., �.',��,�,n",�°KK�� B
.
D'ela �Queue Len th�and�L>evel�of�Service`��,���.�-� T� �.4 . .
„�.�.
�� ��� v.��� ��=��A'� .��nb�.����.���� x r.n��a.��,�..:
Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration R
v(veh/h) 83
C (m) (veh/h) 557
v/c 0.15
95%queue length 0.52
Control Delay (s/veh) 12.6
LOS B
Approach Delay (s/veh) -- -- �2•6
Approach LOS -- -- B
Copyright O 2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+rM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/1 S/2012 3:22 PM
file://C:\Documents and Settin�s�rnergolizzi.GULFCOAST�Local Settings\Temp\u2k40B.tmp 1/18/2012
D,etailed Report Page 1 of 1
HCS+"' DETAILED REPORT
�G.en aral%rif�rmati�n���'�M , . .`��"���� � �t _�.
� �. �
�:,�. � �..� ... ��.�. ., ,� ,�<, � ,� �
_. _ _ � _.
Analyst RP Intersection MANDALAY/BAYMONT
Agency or Co. GCC Area Type AN other areas
Date Performed 1/19/2012 Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Time Period MIDDAY PEAK Analysis Year FUTURE CONDITIONS
Project ID
`<o(u�e,��na��m��� ln . ��, � � � � � � �
__ . � .� a � ,_ . �r�... � � .. o �_��
Eg Wg NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Number of Lanes, N� 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 2 0
Lane Group LTR LTR LTR LTR
Volume,V vph 7 8 44 20 5 124 49 370 14 38 382 13
% Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Pretimed P or Actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A
Start-up Lost Time, I� 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Arrival Type,AT 3 3 3 3
Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Filterin /Meterin , I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Ped/Bike/RTOR Volumes 94 0 15 61 0 11 80 0 0 51 0 0
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N
Parking Maneuvers, Nm
Buses Stopping, NB 0 0 0 0
Min.Time for Pedestrians, Gp 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.4
Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08
G= 14.0 G= G = G= G= 38.0 G= G= G=
Timing Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y=
Duration of Analysis,T= 0.25 C cle Length, C= 60.0
n .. .,.Q ., ..et:as�+sn�-. . e ,.. ,� � � .. . �r,�,�;,.
��an��6�u��Ca a�i .�Con o�`�e��aad��OS�Ue erm�r�atio�t ��:.. �:.:� w � � � . �, � . . .._ .. .. �„ ��
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Adjusted Flow Rate,v 47 146 461 460
Lane Group Capacity, c 380 � 371 1952 _J 2004
v/c Ratio,X 0.12 0.39 0.24 0.23
Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.23 0.23 0.63 0.63
Uniform Delay, di 18.2 19.4 4.7 4.7
Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1
Initial Queue Delay, d3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Control Delay 18.3 20.1 4.8 4.8
Lane Group LOS 8 C A A
Approach Delay 18.3 20.1 4.8 4.8
Approach LOS B C A A
Intersection Delay 7.4 X�=0.28 Intersection LOS A
Copyright OO 2007 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.3 Generated: 1/18/2012 3:15 PM
file://C:\Documents and Settings�rpergolizzi.GULFCOAST\Local Settings\Temp\s2k3F0.tmp 1/18/2012
Detailed Report Page 1 of 1
,
• HCS+'� DETAILED REPORT
. . �,����� �,� .�
n_, -_ �
" or a`�iar� .
�C�'iB���l%1f0�a#e' � � . �, � � �
�
� � � . � . � �� , �
Analyst RP� Intersection MANDALAY/BAYMONT
Agency or Co. GCC Area Type All other areas
Date Performed 1/19/2012 Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Time Period PM PEAK Analysis Year FUTURE CONDITIONS
Project ID
_� ��'�e�.��simin��/n .,
e
� _�.. _w � �_� �� a � �_ � � . .�. . �x � ��
Eg _ WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Number of Lanes, N� 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 2 0
Lane Group LTR LTR LTR LTR
Volume,V vph) 12 3 51 31 12 112 44 359 14 44 468 16
% Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
Pretimed P) or Actuated (A A A A A A A A A A A A A
Start-up Lost Time, I� 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Arrival Type,AT 3 3 3 3
Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Filterin /Meterin , I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Initial Unmet Demand, Qt 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Ped/Bike/RTOR Volumes 172 0 15 54 0 11 112 0 0 33 0 0
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N
Parking Maneuvers, Nm �_J
Buses Stoppin , Na 0 0 0 0
Min.Time for Pedestrians, GP 4.0 3.4 3.7 3.3
Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08
G= 14.0 G = G= G= G= 38.0 G= G= G=
Timing Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y=
Duration of Analysis, T= 0.25 Cycle Length, C= 60.0
,� � ;�Control�De a�':and L05�Determinafion� , :� ���.r. �'���� _ . .
�an�Grou Ca ac����� �� ' :, �.�...e-: v n .��ti.. ��
� �.�,.� x ,
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Adjusted Flow Rate,v 56 158 458 580
Lane Group Capacity, c 364 367 1936 1998
v/c Ratio,X 0.15 0.43 0.24 0.29
Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.23 0.23 0.63 0.63
Uniform Delay, d� 18.3 19.6 4.7 4.9
Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.1
Initial Queue Delay, d3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Control Delay 18.5 20.4 4.8 5.0
Lane Group LOS 8 C A A
Approach Delay 18.5 20.4 4.8 5.0
Approach LOS 8 C A A
Intersection Delay 7,5 X�=0.33 Intersection LOS A
Copyright O 2007 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.3 Generated: 1/18/2012 3:16 PM
file://C:\Documents and Settings�rpergolizzi.GULFCOAST\Local Settings\Temp\s2k402.tmp 1/18/2012
I�.,eeta.iled Report Page 1 of 1
.
a, rt .
HCS+'" DETAILED REPORT
'�":e�e�'a1�1 .or ation�,��� �����'��'u��. ; � ;; , �;�°�� � u. �',
� � � � �.�.��_ �i(�n � � �.. . �.�. � �,. � .�-
Analyst RP Intersection CORONADO/GULFVIEW
Agency or Co. GCC Area Type All other areas
Date Performed 1/19/2012 Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Time Period MIDDAY PEAK Analysis Year FUTURE CONDITIONS
Project ID
.. - �
�Vol[r: anql�Tim�n� �In u� �� .. , . . ., :�
u, . . � a , e �
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Number of Lanes, N1 2 0 � 2 2 2
Lane Group L LR LT T R
Volume,V(vph) 256 27 1 503 353 362
% Hea Vehicles, %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
Pretimed (P)or Actuated (A) A A A A A A
Start-up Lost Time, I� 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Arrivai Type,AT 3 3 3 3 3
Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Filtering/Meterin , I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Ped/Bike/RTOR Volumes 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N
Parking Maneuvers, Nm
Buses Stopping, Na 0 0 0 0 0
Min. Time for Pedestrians, Gp 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.4
Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08
G = 22.0 G= G= G = G= 30.0 G= G= G =
Timing Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y=
Duration of Anal sis, T= 0.25 Cycle Len th, C= 60.0
�Lane,Gror� �Ca'�aci�',�Co tro�Dea .andGO�;Deteimina6on� w,� .�"'":� � � �
,. , .-
� ��
� ����� ,a . . . .. . �,.. , ,.�. ,
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Adjusted Flow Rate, v 264 2g 520 364 373
Lane Group Capacity, c 1260 580 1693 1774 1402
v/c Ratio,X 0.21 0.05 0.31 0.21 0.27
Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.50 0.50 0.50
Uniform Delay, d� 13.0 12.3 8.9 8.4 8.7
Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Initial Queue Delay, d3 I 0.0 0.0 I I I D.0 0.0 0.0
Control Delay 13.1 12.3 9.0 8.4 8.8
Lane Group LOS 8 8 A A A
Approach Delay 13.0 9.0 8.6
Approach LOS 8 A A
Intersection Delay 9.6 x� _ �•2� Intersection LOS A
Copyright OO 2007 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.3 Generated: 1/18/2012 3:05 PM
file://C:\Documents and Settings�rpergolizzi.GULFCOAST�Local Settings\Temp\s2k373.tmp 1/18/2012
�e�'ailed Report Page 1 of 1
r
HCS+'� DETAILED REPORT
��e �ra�l�rifo"rmatiorr . . . ;: �����,��4�� � �� ��� �..� , �,
� �� .��`` � _.._ ,•.:..�t ��orma_�.oa �� ,:,� ..__ �. _, ,���,<
Analyst RP intersection CORONADO/GULFVIEW
Agency or Co. GCC Area Type All other areas
Date Performed 1/19/2012 Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Time Period PM PEAK Analysis Year FUTURE CONDITIONS
Project ID
�'V�o�m and�Tim�n TM u:. ��,
� ... . � o_ � _ . . . � . � .
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Number of Lanes, N� 2 0 0 2 2 2
Lane Group L LR LT T R
Volume,V(vph 296 10 0 619 400 287
% Heavy Vehicles; %HV 2 2 2 2 2 2
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Pretimed P or Actuated(A) A A A A A A
Start-up Lost Time, I� 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Arrival Type,AT 3 3 3 3 3
Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Filterin /Meterin , I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Ped/Bike/RTOR Volumes 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0
Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 �12.0 �
Parking/Grade/Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N
Parking Maneuvers, Nm
Buses Stopping, Ne 0 0 0 0 0
Min. Time for Pedestrians, Gp 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.4
Phasing EB Only 02 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08
G= 22.0 G = G= G= G= 30.0 G= G= G=
Timing Y= 4 Y= Y= Y= Y= 4 Y= Y= Y=
Duration of Analysis,T= 0.25 C cle Length, C= 60.0
.- . �. -��--�� .,. ���,���-����. �
�L'ane�Groa �Ca aci �Con ,.n��e/a .and�'�OS�Qeferm►nat�o�r. W�
.-. . , .�� a� .. , .�. .�.�. ,. ._ _ . ,
EB WB NB SB
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT
Adjusted Flow Rate, v 318 11 666 430 309
Lane Group Capacity, c 1260 580 � 1774 _ 1774 1402
v/c Ratio,X 0.25 0.02 0.38 0.24 0.22
Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.37 0.37 0.50 0.50 0.50
Uniform Delay, d� 13.3 12.1 9.2 8.5 8.4
Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Initial Queue Delay, d3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Control Delay 13.4 12.1 9.4 8.6 8.5
Lane Group LOS 8 8 A A A
Approach Delay 13.3 9.4 8.6
Approach LOS 8 A A
Intersection Delay g.g X�= 0.32 Intersection LOS A
Copyright O 2007 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+rM Version 5.3 Generated: 1/16/2012 3:08 PM
file://C:\Documents and Settings�rpergolizzi.GULFCOAST\Local Settings\Temp\s2k396.tmp 1/18/2012
'�,w6-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1
.
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
� � �
(� neral�ln o��a��o.n. e . .. . � - �F ���„ �� �� �� �
�.�,.��..�,�._.� ..,�.,. . m �.__ �.:� ,�, ..., _��l.��.�. .z
Analyst RP Intersection EAST SHORE/DRIVEWAY
Agency/Co. GCC Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Date Performed 1/19/2012 Anafysis Year 2012 WITH PROJECT
Analysis Time Period MID-DAY
Pro'ect Descri tion
EastlWest Street: DRIVEWAY North/South Street: EAST SHORE DR1VE
Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25
, •
� �
.�.e ���. �c�,l.�..,.r1�e. „a,.;,.. �, .s ��n��.. . �.
�
Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 . 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume veh/h 47 122 24 0
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 52 135 0 0 26 0
veh/h
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 0 -- --
Median T e Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Confi uration LT TR
U stream Si nal 0 0
Minor Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume veh/h 0 47
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 52 0 0 0
veh/h
Percent Hea Vehicles 2 0 0 0 0 0
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0
Confi uration LR
- z�s�s,�°���s,^����r'^� �sw����^'�'^�sxr�a�:y ' s� � � ;z�� � P� �se a�;�'-��'
@ a •a4 eue.Len t�l�'�OC��eVE��Oft$ePUICe,.�� t;,, .� ��x. ��a��r����u,a�a . . ..�7����� ., �-, ��,.�a`� �. � .��?. vw���'
Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LR
v(veh/h) 52 52
C (m) (veh/h) 1588 1056
v/c 0.03 0.05
95%queue length 0.10 0.16
Control Delay (s/veh) 7.3 8.6
LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 8.6
Approach LOS -- -- A
Copyright OO 2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+rM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/19/2012 9:13 AM
file://C:\Documents and Settings�rpergolizzi.GULFCOAST\Local Settings\Temp\u2k544.tmp 1/19/2012
�,Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1
.
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
� �,�� .. �I�fort�a#p�..���,. . _ . , �.�� � ����.��w_. �� d o�:�� �
�. . � �,.,. �.� w��. � _, ,
Analyst RP Intersection EAST SHORE/DRIVEWAY
Agency/Co. GCC Jurisdiction CLEARWATER
Date Pertormed 1/19/2012 Analysis Year 2012 WITH PROJECT
Analysis Time Period PM PEAK
Pro'ect Descri tion
EastlWest Street: DRIVEWAY North/South Street: EAST SHORE DRIVE
Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25
_ , I t11� 1 : _, �. d�;:..S �'1"��
;
����� .�. . �.�. � �
o . , .�.�,.�� �,, � ,�
Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 . .
L T R L T R
Volume veh/h 36 135 43 0
Peak-Hour Factor PHF 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 40 150 0 0 47 0
veh/h
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 0 -- --
Median T e Undivided
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Confi uration LT TR
U stream Si nal 0 0
Minor Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume veh/h 0 36
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 40 0 0 0
veh/h
Percent Hea Vehicles 2 0 0 0 0 0
Percent Grade (%) 0 �
Flared Approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized 0 0
Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0
Confi uration LR
�a"'� �� ��w^ "�r:�tc�s�� � �'g�— •��TM� � ����lyi'��a,'�h"'� +�`' �-� ��`a m "�� ,1'��" �„"�"re���"�� k��
Deia �t�ueueaLen th°�an �d.L�evel3of Seruice�� .�� ,;���� ��.. ���������� ,, , .�.� .�'�,���. .��� :°:���������,,.� ��'
Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration LT LR
v(veh/h) 40 40
C (m) (veh/h) 1560 1028
v/c 0.03 0.04
95% queue length 0.08 0.12
Control Delay (s/veh) 7.4 8.6
LOS A A
Approach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 8.6
Approach LOS -- -- A
Copyright O 2010 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved HCS+TM Version 5.6 Generated: 1/19/2012 9:12 AM
file://C:\Documents and Settings�rpergolizzi.GULFCOAST\Local Settings\Temp\u2k53B.tmp 1/19/2012
�* � F WN A 1 ir. ,�I c
�
..i
a�e.,�
� � "ry,f 4 �,F����nf�.e5��
Ph]ZI Eli dtl3t
iZ/.EIS.af'.'fl
-t``
a ��
n. /.� . _ �,..
�
��� ����� � ._..__ �,;r�:; =
� �� � ��
��� " �
■ �. � ��� � ,� m_ �
■���� �!� y #
: =�' � �_.. . _ -� ' 'g�'` ' � �" � � � ���4
_ _ _ i���� - � � � ' �� � } �
�■�w �l CC��� lE � � 1 z�, �", ' �- �.__ __
� �y I 1 � � � ��-.�a _ �"r
,1 � x .. .`
SOUTHWE8T VEW � � ` �� � � t
' �4� ��+ er. m� :i: � €��s6"
�;; �
� �E����'�� !
„ �`�, _ v
� � '-,. �,, .
" � ��s����� ��
° ,, soun�nsT vew "
� �f' � �� �
.m,�a=r"r� Y..�::..
k� — �
�,� s, _ � �
�; ��
=:`W�k��,,. ��"� r '��3�
eb:a �
.. 4 �� .'�"1"'a����_ �a s r °�`,�"`��. _ . . . ry .
��� ���I� � � ' 7� (:I[t� ��; � - _ ,
�- , � ��,
� � � �� ;, , :; ;
: �� ,;
� . �w ,� �----,� :
# �,� r� �
�_.
a �'° � � ° _
� � �� �
� ����' � �
� �
30UTHWE3T VEW (NC�FIn
.4. _: \ � � s
,U � ,�.
__ _ - �. ,
. ��� ;. � �� , �., . �
a
, s ._
. �^ �� � � F
' \ �
�,�,.,� � �,�„�� __ � ' i i i � � �
--�, ,�„�.� _ �� _ � ��
� _ �r �� . , — s o
-- -- -- �.� -- � _ � ��
� � �� � �z� � � �- -:� �..1.� `- � ? $�
� � � � � ;�- � o W
W �
�a�e �r� �� - �
NORTHwEST VEw � �5 �� �� �� - o
J
4 U � �
NORTFEA3T VEW � � � �
��� � ��
A-214B
,��
- �RECE55 B EcE55 t 0.cE iL� w� "" "��i��ROF 1eY�
!o ust ��E �-
w,..RE�Ex , c.,P.or�i ��---- FwH n�<n❑���.i�x.
,--
----• ;— - , 1 . —� :+aw�c���mendwn.ioz
.—_—_l ,, ' ', � w,ix�.,.r�.��m:uruu
m r.w�-*suisr.aem �-_— ; ; 1 �. ' � vi.iv.aia;wc
cw��w N�rw cuss r�.r�.vi;.:wr
' Nunwics PRwoseo ar
ror�(nr.cv al ea.c«e. .a.
" ENCLOSfD �', ; �
` RECEIVING DOCK
REGEIVING
LICXIOR :�-iixE
STOCK i�
m� _- _ ___"_____'__""""_-_____" Aew[ � , I
��v, TRlSM/TOTC I
WALKIN '-- '�?��� OoF �..
���SR � �� STORAGE ���-���E �I il�
--15 `-`�-x �___�' �I - ;
- -
�, ���..P�;,��
g I #��gV.C6o
_ �—� :�'+�f':°��' �
w 3 " � �p
3 y
' � ~6�8F•y�E3 d�d#.,.:
W �� T"'.�� �e�� 6 ( �.
e N 7a ..:' "t.�i�.^[� �;e
°a _ �u r - ;,,,
GENER4L SP1E5
� i � uQUOR °t° p ,,tu. '�'I , f� :.,
SAlPS
N�,.'"�,� 8> ��r' �� _ , ; .�
MARRFf � �(',�2
�� 3� �-�� �j� I f.�
FIRST FLOOR � � �°�, � ' �� ' �
�,
R - 11,490 SQ. FT. ����:�� ��� ��� �� �:`� `'.
PE �.E�
� � _
� f, I I� ry �
b � ___�� h, r t � .��.�'I '�'.,
` �°`"°� / � ��"'�� ��I �I
, ._
V�; ~'� I i�' �
� � �'- �"'i ' i
— — ?}'?i �
e
,_ . � � � � �
�
�
,
, ,
�
—____� � � � � �
� -_
- I I ; ��'p _________' `_____// `______ ' ..
""'______�
. � � e�es?�iicaunx�r / _____"_____'-_____
a ' ' SiDEWnLK(iia OF 3) � �
�__ __ �____________________� •• , .
. �
_____ ___"_______�_--____-_� LiNf oF t ER -_____uN________ _ ______________" Z:
���E of�ulLU BWE nniN[HiRV �� Rar�BOJE ��M�' �NSUnOF PaaJE I ~ �
aIfR.1B7J (mPR4) I � O
� 1O >O
I � 6 W�
3Y _ I �
—�_-- z� � w c: i
-- --1 n
> �
ue � W �¢
/1FIRST FLOOR PLAN M� o g Q o; I
J H •w
� � u
H
N
�
LL
� m
�M 3� W�
A-111
�j
(�r.�a aJ� vft ...�
nr+c�fo n[1u
-"""""_"""- r[nrvk[Pave� FWH ArchllecN.lr�c.
'
--' ` � :i.U6GrunAnl�a-Suxelu[
�---_ Hnitla..Ylnr�4 J14W
�, i
- __""_"""' �- � � �
YATP N
la��Li.41�.�
_ C
�
� —
� �� — — — ,'� �� � -
< 3.
� ��.�n*� d�/ „S � '•.� x
- BCAUTY DEPT. � y '� � �~. .
_ � L� .r'o� :7f3�y� �_� �jt
. ��r �.,;� � /k t,.
�� __ r,�?_ l�� 3 @����s.J _
@ ' _ __� = i.� ''ri9
,� m - GENERAL SAl£5 i --- y s�M ��
i � » +:
s • �
"n^�°�u� , ,_ 'I -
_ �� � a��� �I
, SECOND FLOOR � � �'-,� �� '���-�.
, , .�� . I ,} i —
� � air�""1!i- 'Y� � _
11,490 SQ. FT. �_ ,.�` �-r
a � , �''_
��FEa
� � �' �.�
b� ''v� i;�..:-�'-��`i
I�
� � j '
�``
,
.
�
_ i
I
_ �
-
,
s�:,,
�EaEo
� --
o �3 --- - - �AOE.�,E '
- �a�n�.o �, i w �u
, pw,�w� W
� , s,���a,,�� "�'!
0 0
� -- - ---- -- - - �" ' � '�
RIXF�B?YE _ ___�- �___��RCCV OmlE� wIN0.'�+BE1CW� Z �
� .rv.w ex,cr raaev riEC �*Y°.w") I W >o
.� n a ��
_ _ _ _ - � s Z yJj =i
—� g ; >
�SECOND FLOOR PLAN x�� o ; � W<
��A�E „a._,.-o. o � a ,s
LL F •W
C Q u
Z
O
w
�
� m
�� a� p�
A-112
E%TEMOR ELEVATIqI KEtED NOTEB
�enx�vo u.wmun u«nw.ne wrve�eo�ue�vo�,r.0 rwyreo awu.
Qenwrco au,ixw w.�iza.w ian�vco s�.+w.oE w e ,m.r.�weo rww
Q uunrce.n wvr a c.w.,ww ro n..a eexx+m kae w.�w x.mauu nu�
'e �� �' 1° .Q Eas r�xr�wex cerEx,us.ex e.se,xxwx roou ru.a.a,�x.vuo w.re• .
e�.�s•-v a r r. n
.o.rosx nER — ' is n < s F�x�w wea cEnM n.s.EV ense,earn«noa w.uc.x rr*run mar ,.._.a
_'—__...___ "_ �
� 6u amr f. _ _—_—_ .. Qs enmax sr[e�roa+aro rvu�e uw m rv.ra eExu�x rt.wE w.xu w.'ew�u�ewr FW H ArchilecL..Inc.
� — I —_ i 0 haW,cY Q� vu[.�o[a��rc m.c.wo�xnn[(aA to ivttu lM.wtM Kqre ro. Y. 3%14(:rantl blr�I.}��tle IU[
.. �. � Ia:f1G!1�
a.Vln
mLL�in�uFU NlM�ut rix MKIiLLx� H'Vh/v tl 1a.1416
_ O� u�.nnun s*atnmrt cwuc ss[n. �r.' .ql:..S[ii
u � I �3 i 1 miSUEO i ,
i
EL.3a'-0'A f f �
71 .... -' -- i 0.PaFMEt O iR[f x�SUEp wm rut Iuiorv,t c EirtR*ttw Au iNrfSO MunNA
_ _ _ p�o O9 Fwi uErert i�.9t srEEi ca xw1 T4iK YYrt rxfN
_ _ N�w_ O.4�niNUn iw[suarpti at rG, LL rYF•iFO 1u.elwn
-- _ o uEiWT I�I r1N[p[tE rcOESiai ni�iEE�[0.um,[a[f ftxW�1 Im[ � v/.D wYT!
_
_ O� i[ . Y].YrtPoUx0.unYURqowiuM.iWl. [GB�vYUOM.
—_ O uN[a wu Gx vNwR N�Wo
� _ _ __ _ _ _ _ �� O4��y�EO u�n*wYt�iN4µn•L^)•*DNU�Nnt�MLLrxfxm/L�nMA
�g p 5u�yy—-- NEAO uE Wt �� O�R rwx Rar pEU rm Pr.xnnR
' _ __B__ _ _ __ ___ __ ___ __ _�_ �� OO�'D.nflmvvEBxuxo.4e�.w.[,wEnFrucw[v
� .5'-Y n�� .� Q u wo[x u uiw�m[siwe ni[ i
�SF FioA fIEV.(ii.0') _—___ _ __ __ ___ _ _ _ _ _ —_ _ 0 (IIA O uz¢Prta nEru s .�iwfuFD YVwn
fLGW f 0') O rdriM9 ars�[r. u�xrbm 4uw�
.i .. ,. . . . , . i , ',�I ! . , . II .. . Ow'�ui.ani ..
� SOUTH ELEVATION '" °°`"°"""°""°�""°`°°` � '_��° �
3�
-o SCnLE-i/9'_� 0' .3 S'�E ��:3.�. .
_ .€ Y
_
_ .
_ d
.
` �
3
. _� .
:
-- ,� '�' s ��:�3 ��' :�
'C{ � .J� C' � Iq g4ae�, ;jj1,.
� - - --- '"",R""" Y � t'� � �
--- � � <„` " €9 I ?
� ' -_ ��� , o�� ' .. I �'� d R,�,:
J. e�.3,.� Ff. l ' � �
` �
� .o P...�c,
_. " �:
- - -
---
� -- - - - --- -- a� �, '� , ?j���. .� ', � ��•-.
��.o uF�. �,� �.ao 'G��. jl � I r � t���i. =
P'� '
.I���
�.�osE��o,�a - - � t_ � �#'�����—t !�
E�
,z.�F �
� _ .. �
� .IYaAFF. ]Vnfi r� •`•�;:� i i I
i
�G�ufW _ —_ B0•� _ .. . �
� �- ]0 9 iR. � � I ���
. �r
� wo i�cv.c.� -— — - -- - e-.a.v � ��_�;
- x�weo r �
,� ,. ., �. .� . .� , , , � � . � ,� ,� � . . �. .. . .. , F `�
enwo Z
veH,eec�n.,x ruvanw J � i o
z�EWEST ELEVATI N
Q a
�sca�E:i/e�= r-o' F n � pu
y F � W w�
O D � O n W
�' ,`�`<
F 2 „ �
QC� o F gW
W y W �
J p K
W Z
oa
�
w � m
� _� �� ;�
A-210
EXTERIOR ELEVATION KEYED NOTEf
Qenxuvo uunmun uwmo rcre iaveveo o�, u ri�wm.eunu«
�encurco uu�wun w.uw.a ianeveo wmum a+c.ror.,nu rws+en..vvnm
Qi xunm,n ua w c ,waw.a ru.a earr.x rmu xo. ,mwu xu
J•eL oaic PiEV�(eErwo) �_— �� 'Q e�vz nxiw wea c�us.EV a�s�,edunn em�w,a-a wvw rw.e
i°T Q eirs ri.iw orzvi cervxi r..snv e ,eu�u«nmx ro.wc-�5+viw.iwm ,.._a
�.4orei'-n•a sQenevwz sree woe n�'e�wv.w xue {"WH Archl�ect�Inc.
�nsa�a.�(BC�dmJ '— ,�� . sw rc.nE.raa ro ru�a�wnx roax w.
�e� - . Q� ewv.o r.����mx.,�n rx.�.rm.o�..w ewun.�m.�w , aw er��a u,��,�i�:wi�hi��
y,o.�.sc.m;`re�wo� - � ,L O.n„°, „�«�.,r,s.w��.�..���:,s E,�.�,+weo.u.���,�ena.n. �vw isi.yi:�xw
—_' -- --- - .°—`""""" � �.�o..�,�.,r,w.a,.,KE�,� „�«�ok�.w� v,.�l;. i.xu�
- - ----- _ p.,�,�,.�w..o.......��.��a�^
Ya°_�ww°o� --- -- ��a�.,E.E�...s..z,��w.�� ��m..w�.,o»«,r
�c� c r.e.� �,u,eAC..urui nu xuo.r�xo.. .rxecw un.o.�
oc.�o —__ �ur .w�w P..cr�e. .ao
� ,� � ___________ � 0�nMw�o��,.��e�..
0 4 .�rk��,.s�WEO�.�,.�.�.r�m..u,+..�
� �.�E����o..w,�w�,�.�,�s<< ou��
' � �
' � � � �'— -___ -
--- -- ���o,�,�..00�aw��o.M„�.
�.o�o __ wQ v w.�,E,Ea.�PE�....AO,�....«.E,�.,E��aEa
i �
� -'- -"' - -' -- -- -- --- -- --- -- -- -- - - -- ��..wW��ES.o�E...
m
��.
a r�. __ --- _ .- . �,�a�.r nn.�.we�m�n.�co r�.w�
�. n .�vev.o.unl_— __ __
rvw[ov��(�oJ — Qu.rtwnR� , urwuonu�nan
jl I II �il �r�n.nn _<x�.:
, . � � . . . i, I. . . , .. .. , ,. . ,. .. . .. �'��' . .
� � arevNCS� , , , . . . , . �3° �p��b
5 �
� EAST ELEVATION M*���S�n �"'�'„"�"�°�' r��"�� �
e��A�E ,�a-- o- , ;, 3 � Q��
�
.
' .
_ s �
.
_
..����',.� , �-���,�'
_ °�,��. ' '�,�ave
...w.a��.� '�`. . g .
, : \j
� r � �r
� �.� o:��.�,� � � ,
�- • r ; .� r.
�__ r�„ � �:
, e
.<<
¢ E. � 0 �
, r �
,�.�o -- -- - ---- -- -- -- - -- - ---- -- ------ �,R s ;
.,� � i,
�, i � i
{ �, I I � I x'� _
, , �,. ,� .�
��� �����'�;
��EOSE�,o,�� ���..,. 1.�.�-�� � ; ,�
I �,� I � � '�,w
�.�, � � 1i � i ��
I � i � ' �
Y � , --- `o� `-o� `o� `o� - - - - '� �
�E J, n
fvwcona�e�(�v) _
��'�. . . ., . .. I ', iI I i �i �''�, � ., .. �. I.i I II _'�'__ ' �� ., � �, .. i'', I; I� �'',, I.'',,�I I � s
�" <
� NORTH ELEVATION ° � "
`�SCAIE:1/B"=i'-� y � O p�
Z ¢ W ri
� � > n�
a � G wW
WW J u�i i
J � o;
W p F •m
O � "
�
H
w � -
�� ;� '�
A-211
ncrcmon arv�rax Kirm Mons
pa,a,ao.,w�,�.��„�,���.ff�..�.�,
��..a�.W,����,K�,��a�.n...�,.�W,...�
0 u,.,�.���.a�....�,�ti,a��.��e.�.a.o.�
Y � t
�3 O orc axiw au rser us�w us[, .OLi.Wv.�b�MP
�FL.H}� {^ F f_ � A O nrvq�rza DA w'ru�[faA t�o MTMOI tlIWN rollt TTWI MRf
..._ _.. _.._ .1 � n �
- -- -.. fF. sOeXieRVR . .YfFb�'mmWeue' {\1H\ I 1.[
_._._. -_.__ -____ Y h J� '!MIO!
EL.Af rF ._ . . It M 9 .. Osrza Y+OnunCIACRmwttNOlW1�1'CN[b.iM-C�
. f.f. w2a[�oCPUW WT !1 1
T.O.MKU Ptti �� 'I .__..___. T.a.MS'1XRT 6� �.:{.K
- I O�� Mul ru�6rqClMli 41KN4 srtrFn MLL rM1lD 4N»��MI14 fYEG14N ���1 �I G�,t5f!
II �
P
]I --"' . El.N.0'n.f F. Oe wmw�4uniNn Y�iwuT[BrtR mMl,NLL RtlNm 4NYY�
_ _'_'_
_ _��lV1T - - ���, O WLL ubWt rtCe freR vAUN YLVm 1TfILK�YAT nMW
� . ... :� i i A.fF. O4uniun
. _. SJN�J1 GE naE ai.wR�nr.uwic,11LL M6m M✓Wn
il __-... . .�_. -.
_ � e e __ �o�� ����.�.�r�:�����w���
, . _ r
o�.�n .: b�
o��p�a..���
m o s��..�
_ � .,s..F�
a.
z _. __ -� rw weo sEww ru. QQ wn w� h�.,�R r r�i..��..���.nwm.u.�n
' � . L ._ ——___
_� , _-_.. " — � �� � r�uu�e
— -- I� 1.�..:.� enao �'.�mxiw�owrviu+mn�iu
eo�=��:�_ ____ — , ._ � ____ `louYea:�F e �uxroseww.wm
J. a.ee rt. ° __ � - a a.s n�ri. A ��«oAw*Ka�er...m nu r%,r��..a�e�a
nmonrv.�'j-- _-.: �'�� . . ��.� . ��� .-_ — m- wcnnsen. � •�w .wmwn,xn
__ _ _ _y ouo�vv ,� �r.m„an.K.n,r.unrm.un�n
-- � co rima c o� O�.
� � i �� 'E�'�
�� ��`{'� �`-0 -0" .un�raumarwue�uarr.wrmurowsxcrc. p� ,����Ue�
mSOUTH ELEVATION "�"'"�`""°`°�"�`m° � � ������,� ��
Q eca�e,in•.i�-o� � '� � a
� � ti ��g� ��
�
�y��A�5�
e
/' ; ' •
n !�_ w ' . ; � � •'� ,
" \ a.n�-a e.r ,L �
rs n ie z _._ . .o.r u� f� ,' . .
�a •rr � � �
r '._____._ \ � .. . Et.�-�^ar�.F. v.. ; f.�3 j
� �' I �t.o.w� ,. �' .
� /� I� . I � .
nre
ro.r�wEt . � �� � �. �s,� �\ � � .
_ , � , __' I.��3 ''�
a.x-r.rF. . - ' - ... - � . .aY � ..
"_ __ __ _- r9 � I
��—
. {-�� :.�_� __
� �
/ �L
� .�-_ .. , q .
� � ffi °
� � �
T ' , ' �I .:'a
�
...... � I� , � . ��' 1 �l
p , i" '�
F��EO o �i — � �� �
;
,
, .
a .,, �.�
� � _ I ,
� . — J .. E�.iY4�Fi I
4E�D MflOR �—""- _ : ._ -...._. .- GQ AMJU[f �
J. a.roetr. �'-'m. � � � --. a
ntto aev.n.-tl7— - ( . ', �,
�� " 7i:.I`— - ---. .�ti.ao.rr � �
sweo ru c �F �.
g Ws
W�
' �-0 x mc S d o LL
��e.s�°v.a`�RIX1ae.:'-�o, S
e WEST ELEVATION o � � ��
ecn�E.�n•.r.n• �.. W
> � gC
w � F �s
O ¢ `�
�
� t
w � �-
s
�� � �� ��
A-212
e:r�mon euv�rar K�rm wons
pe...a,ao.,M�.,�„�.��,m�aEO�.ff,�..�,�...,
p��.�,,,»a.�«...�����..,�,.�.�,..�,�
�.,�.�,w�.a.a�,�,��..a���. n,�..,�.�
p�� a..�,�.Y.��
�� '4 a v� �� O o�rs�ww rsu+usro�e�x,eouw rou w.u�R wmun nvr' ,.�.�
T�-_-_�- --� smuvunrwe rorura pzuao,'remaeur FN'Hirchitects.lr.c.
� " u n is . n .uw muYr rme .
.. »wr anaw - 0 srtn wwe.o wuw xa wo.w��raae ro 1w.a m�ww rma in.zx.n,awu H ai. ,�.ics
a �•rr �*� n .m� u9a
.... ._.. a ec ..re ys.
rr. __
..iu»w.� rano ..., �I � ° �,�.un,wn e,wv.w.wz�«c s,s v,nu r.rum uu«n�+rv e.nram+ i.,:�.��io.�aur
�--- iF:--� '--�--� _ —__ -�$- Q��wm w,.,�w.a,.r�a,..�a wLL��W«�,
a.va+rF. , � '.- ` I' .` � . . - _- p� �w..�a..en�.,..�n.sre..�,c..mn�
r.o.n.a.rer �-- ; � : _ . - �- - ���,�.�,...„�.��..�.�,..�n
� _ —-
4
o.�,
a.z-.n r. •. — �--,— l .� — ^- - Q w�oeen rw,.�..e+m w,i«,rm.
esir.�va�ai w.ven wrr
ao�. _ e e ��� . � ---
_ o�.�n�,.r�..�����������.
�� -� . _=_ o�a�. ..� �o
. � , r
� . _ o�
a-r r e.r `� , C = - = awu�a.,�a
.1�___—._-___ _ . .�—� .. . __�. _ . . . .... a.uo.r r w,ro,mm�,.,e..r�i..�o z.F�r,mi rx.m.u.w�
Y n„s�EOw4�orw� eo�enr QQ,",� �n
. i _� -� r. —' � .. �i w.n+mw�.�w.+romc uurrn
�� e e ' }� k � _ o:�w�n���p���.�E�a
,
.(� - 3J Q�I' '
6.54/./f . ..� "•, � O ww'Yartk IK*,u.M'a nu rMqm wuMn
RQO 6N AV 11�--- - -_. . , .
a.C4�rr. . .__ _i_.. . . '' ' ' �
-'-_' � ia O wnwn u.i[.,ru�rxYO uuMn
�___._._. . .-.__ -- � O ca'a.axr
B�E
30 � � �arvKmvcccwi 5 wmn[o� � hMW1.YAl ftlAFl1M MLL![PIXF MAMm IMO lM60l0 IFA t ���5�b 8
. �PB4RSRNCTIPIY]P.P � �,���3��� ��
EAST ELEVATION ° �
xue,u.�.r-e� $ �p s a
e �. ��8����� ��
e � n�
§ ��a�a�n _
. i
�\.{`�' � �e,'`F� '
z 'j . :. i , ' . �
EL.39-1'�ri. __ " —._ ` .. . _. �_ Toera� J tg � .o . �
��..�, �� = M' , .
�.,'.o a,�r -- ___� ___� ' _
•_-
r °_�; �
� -- � � _ ------- , . �,� sA�z� �
_ ____—— .� �L�._� { ' 3 � ..
' � � �
_ . I �,
n I ' ��. ' I ob
m��r.r. - I i � � t
i
�SHEO SKtxD f�PTt --� - I �� ' � � . , I .
°� � _ �� ,
� �.
�
--
■ ■ � — �
p _. n � � � � � � �°
�, a.�.d�.F ,, � a
�"
-�e.��eas--- , � --
weo�" .._ ._. - - ,.L � � °
— -- --- i-- -�� 1-
Z 4
W
x � o
� a �:
R
eNORTH ELEVATION o � � ��
xxe,vv.r.a• ~ W ti a
C
W � _ ��
W w t 8�
Q � 'V
�
�C q
W � �
� �
3
�� � �� ��
A-213