The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2013-05019C � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD � �l�e��.��e� ,J ,`. � PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT `�-��-�-�^--��-�^-' STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: CASE: REQUEST: GENERAL DATA: Agent........................... Applicant/ Owner ............. July 16, 2013 F.1. FLD2013-05019 Flexible Development application to amend a previously approved Flexible Development application to permit the addition of 200 dry slips and 14 new wet slips to an existing 66 wet-slip marina (87-wet slips originally approved) including a 53,'727 square foot high and dry storage building with a height of 53 feet as measured from Base Flood Elevation (BFE) to roof deck with an additional 12 feet to rooftop architectural embellishments; 95 parking spaces (including two handicap spaces) (0.68 spaces per two slips); and a 1,000 square foot retaiUoffce building as accessory to the marina with a height of 14 feet (as measured from BFE) in the Downtown (D) District and the Old Bay Character District of the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of CommuniTy Development Code (CDC) Section 2-903.D. Richard Kelley, P.E.; AVID Group David McComas; Clearwater Basin Marina, LLC. Location .......................... 880/900 North Osceola Avenue; west side of North Osceola Avenue at the terminus of Nicholson Street, approximately 500 feet north of Seminole Street Property Size .................... 5.10 acres (3.55 acres upland and 1.55 acres submerged) Futur'e Land Use Plan...... Central Business District (CBD) and Water Zoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . Special Area Plan ............. Adjacent Zoning.... North: South: East: West: Existing Land Use ............. Proposed Land Use......... �'iP � Downtown (D) and Preservation (P) Districts Old Bay; Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) and Preservation (P) Districts Downtown (D) and Preservation (P) Districts Downtown (D) District Preservation (P) (Clearwater Harbor) Marina (66 wet slips) Marina (80 wet slips and 200 dry slips); retail/office (1,000 square feet) ., ., .r,_ . . .a.. . . Y �I AiA.�Si.a�S ,'� � — • �, � �p �� ';,� ; � � ir � : ;f7� . ��x'^`� s � � , � i�»:` ::,�. r..- i., � �� I: �u��n��i..!...,i „��-ti��n��.��w� ( 4'M►r4� �� ;� ♦yf "'' ��. , � �',. ��.i` ! � :� ` `'e J ��• e ` : ✓ � � �• � ��}�ir . - � .. . ��.�4�.1I i �1.11�1' �• �I� i i �"'ly . /' "� :i � ^ V� �—��1 � � i � �. �+� '� { ♦" . a � _ �.. a 1..,:. � � � '� .� � .5::�i iT . f � • • � L��(�1 1't �L�1 Level II Flexible Development Application Review ANALYSIS: Site Location and Existing Conditions: The 5.10-acre site (3.55 acres upland and 1.55 acres submerged) is located on the west side of North Osceola Avenue at the terminus of Nicholson Street, approximately 500 feet north of Seminole Street. The former North Ward Elementary is located across Nicholson Street, northeast of the subject property. A mix of single-family and small multi-family buildings are located along the northeast property boundary. The Seminole Street boat-launching facility and the Francis Wilson Playhouse are located to the south of the site. The subject site consists of one parcel with approximately 415 feet of frontage along North Osceola Avenue. The property is within the D and P districts, CBD and Water FLUP classifications (which correspond to the D and P Districts) and the Old Bay Character District (District) of the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan (Plan). The property is currently developed with a 66- slip marina. It should be noted that the site was approved for an 87-slip marina as discussed in detail, below. The primary access point onto the site is at the southeast corner of the site from Osceola Avenue that leads to a 50-space parking lot centrally located along the south side of the site. Emergency access is provided at the northeast corner of the site from Osceola Avenue and at the southwest corner of the site from the Seminole Street boat launching facility. Both emergency access points are gated at all times with access only from a knox box padlock. The primary access is gated when the marina is closed and also provides access from a knox box padlock when necessary. Landscaping and a six-foot wrought iron fence with columns are located along the front (east) side of the property. In suminary, the site has been developed in accordance with the site plan approved in PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION 'NMSryqu I .. - —"`� .�. W - � � 1�1 ;`�1� �, (�,,, �;: � � , % `l' } y �� E�WEI . ��J sr _ � e�o�t� _ I LLf-- : PAIM ��- .�4�'� " L BLUFF �- '� V� � . .. : � Sr I , '� : � : . ...:' CALM BLUFf.. W4 PROJECT ; �-�� _ � � �urs�eNs �Q s�re ; _ ,� _ � ,_ 4, ��_ GEQ4R ST MElTO ST �`� a �� - , i V , .. ,... . --, — : wcHasoe sr � ::� . I wc�iason _ _ --' _ � ��y, _ � ImI — r� SE _ L - :� r`�i r- � - Iy nI�'. �PLE - � I I MnC�.. F — .. LOCATION MAP ,�,o., _ ° �._� � �� a„ ..� . LMDR.�; �,� P '" $ _ � s$merc�q"r _ �i, . cQ �m y ! � �_. ...-_ .... _._.. _ K � � � ... � ie R s � �e �'s S �x � ;� :".....::Z.....'• :�� Isoo��w:��'aa��xAy: ti `8 '' �' ..,....;r:•� �'� ��` �R � ,�`p � - � • � • � +I. .�� m er. �:�ez. � � � � _ � �, � .� � R �.. "* � e'? aa" g��3 P�«�€ s51NNQ�sT • � 8�°� R�rw . �..E�.�'� ,v mi *n _ . .:.. ...: "'�' .... 'n+ �x _ ioi � _ _ �,; _ �,-,� m ZONING MAP Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 1 � C�Li1! 1'Y�LeI Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEPVEL PO MENTREVIEW DI�VIS ON u . _..a. .''..� ,., .. � association with FLD2009-08030 with the exception of the number of built wet slips (87 approved with 66 built) and the small retail/office accessory building (approved but not built) the details of which are provided below. Site History: ➢ In 2000, the site was the subject of a Level II Flexible Development application (FL 00-10- 46) which requested approval to increase the height of attached dwellings from 35 feet to 100 feet and to reduce the (north) side setback from 10 feet to three feet (to an emergency access aisle), with a Comprehensive Landscape Program. The proposal included the redevelopment of the then existing Clearwater Marina to include a 140-unit condominium, 112-slip marina, a 7,000 square foot resta.urant, a 2,000 square foot retail shop, and a 4,500 square foot office. That case was approved by the Community Development Board (CDB) on December 12, 2000 with 12 conditions. Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit was required to have been made within one year of Flexible Development approval (by December 12, 2001). In addition, all required Certificates of Occupancy were to have been obtained within three years of the date of issuance of the initial building permit. Building permits were not obtained within the required timeframe nor was a time extension requested therefore, the application expired. ➢ In 2003, the site was the subject of a Level II Flexible Development application (FLD2002- 10036) which requested approval to increase the height of a building with attached dwellings from 30 feet to 138 feet (as measured from base flood elevation), as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of (then) Section 2-903.C, in conjunction with a 120-slip marina (62 slips public; 58 slips for condo use) and to reduce the buffer width along the north property line from 10 feet to iive feet (to fre access drive), as a Comprehensive Landscape Program, under the provisions of Section 3-1202.G. That case was denied by the Community Development Board (CDB) on June 17, 2003 with the following bases: 1. The proposal does not comply with the Flexible Development criteria as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project per Section 2-704.B. 2. The proposal is not in compliance with other standards in the Code including the General Applicability Criteria per Section 3-913. 3. The development is incompatible with the surrounding area. ➢ In 2005, the site was the subject of a Level II Flexible Development application (FLD2004- 07053) which requested approval to permit 133 attached dwelling units and an increase in the permitted height from 30 feet to 100 feet (as measured from base flood elevation and the mean elevation of the site) under the provisions of (then) Section 2-903.B. That case was approved by the Community Development Board (CDB) on January 18, 2005 with 15 conditions. Pursuant to Section 4-407, an application for a building permit was required to have been made within one year of Flexible Development approval (by January 18, 2006). In addition, all required Certificates of Occupancy were to have been obtained within three years of the date of issuance of the initial building permit. Building permits were not obtained within the required timeframe nor was a time extension requested therefore, the application expired. Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 2 } C��.(�1 1!'alel Level II Flexible Develo ment A plication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P P DEVELOPMENTREV�WDIVISION 'J . . � . � �� . . ➢ In 2009, the site was the subject of a Level II Flexible Development application (FLD2009- 08030) which requested approval to permit an 87-slip marina in the Downtown (D) District with a dock master building height of 17.33 feet and 50 parking spaces, under the provisions of Community Development Code (then) Section 2-903.H. The proposal was to establish a marina with 87 boat slips, where the primary users lease dock space for private recreational boats. No commercial boats, boat rentals or jet ski rental spaces were proposed. No covered boatlifts, roof structures or vertical walls were proposed as part of this project either. Pedestrian access to the existing slips was to be provided by an onsite golf cart along a proposed cart path. A 400 square foot dock master building was proposed west of the proposed parking lot. This structure has not been constructed. The Community Development Board (CBD) approved the application on November 17, 2009 despite a recommendation of denial from Staff because the proposed marina was similar in scale and scope to the City-owned and -operated Seminole Boat Ramp facility. The CDB found that proposal would have minimal impacts on adjacent properties. To ensure that the marina would operate at the desired lower intensity of activity 23 conditions were attached to the approval of the application (as amended) including (original numbering has been retained): 15. That live aboard vessels be prohibited; 16. That there be no fueling facilities, boat launching or dry storage of boats; 17. That the slips be limited for private recreational boats, that there are no boat rentals, no jet ski rentals and that no commercial boats conduct any business at the marina; and 19. That no servicing of boats or motors is permitted other than necessary minor repairs and maintenance. ➢ In 2011, the site was the subject of a Level II Flexible Development application (FLD2011- 01001) which requested approval to amend condition of approval (#2 on Development Order FLD2009-08030 dated December 16, 2009) as follows: That, prior to the issuance of any permits, �-c�ass--u�ees��g�ee�e�-l�e—�e�--�e-��ea��e�-��—A�--b;,� i �;,�� '��-�•,�+°r'��-, "��ri�° r^+ '' the owner of the sub�ect property shall execute and record a perpetual access easement over and across the proposed easement area shown on the approved site plan, to the °�+��rbeneft of the owner of Clearwater Bay Marina Lot 1, so as to provide access to Lot 1 from Osceola Avenue e� and �Qe� a copy of the recorded easement shall be provided to the City. That case was approved by the Community Development Board (CDB) on March 15, 2011. No other changes were requested or granted. ➢ On March 13, 2013, a Business Tax Receipt (BTR-0031633) was issued for a 66-slip marina to Clearwater Basin Marina, LLC. Note that a site plan was approved by the CDB as part of application FLD2009-08030 with up to 87 wet slips. Development Proposal: The current proposal is to effectively remove one of the conditions of approval of FLD2009- 08030 and construct a 53,725 square foot building with 200 dry berths. This building will be located near the north property line just south of the existing driveway. This building will be 53 feet in height as measured from BFE to the roof deck with an additional 12 feet for architectural embellishments. A second, smaller 1,000 square foot building is proposed south of the high and Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 3 � Cl�.itil ►1 �l��l Level II Flexible Development Application Review PLANNING 8e DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION - �. , � n. ...._�..>.,.,.,... . . �.. dry building. This building will be 14 feet in height as measured from the BFE to the peak of the highest roof structure. This building will include the marina office as well as a small retail component and restrooms. This component is similar in size, scope and scale of the small building included in the original approval (FLD2009-08030). The existing access points from North Osceola Avenue at the northeast and southeast corners of the site will be maintained with the proposal as will the access point from the Seminole Boat Ramp facility to the south. Additional parking will be provided on the west and south sides of the high and dry building as well as to the south and east of the office/retail building. Where 140 spaces are required, (one space per two slips) 95 parking spaces are provided (0.68 spaces per two slips). The proposed offce/retail building is considered an accessory use and therefore does not require any dedicated parking. The proposed building can be characterized as a modern interpretation of the traditional Key West-style of architecture including a metal standing seam roof and finish treatments commonly found in tropical vernacular architecture such as stucco, wood (faux) and horizontal siding and projecting overhangs. The high and dry building has been designed to incorporate large bay doors on the west and south side. Five exterior colors are proposed including pale sand, yellow, blue, white and gray (see color samples included in the submittal packet). Perimeter landscape buffers are not required within the Downtown district per CDC Section 3- 1202.D. However, landscaping is proposed along the east and north property lines. T'he existing six-foot wrought iron-style picket fence with columns along the front (east) side of the property as well as the six-foot wooden fence along the north property line will remain with the proposal. A six-foot wrought iron-style picket fence along the south side of the site will also remain. The proposed landscape plan meets the requirements of the Plan's Design Guidelines and is discussed in detail further in this document. While perimeter landscape buffers, as mentioned, are not required within the Downtown district interior landscape requirements per CDC Section 3-1202.E must be met. The proposal includes 7,771 square feet of interior landscaped area which constitutes 13.27 percent of the vehicular use area where 10 percent (5,854 square feet) is required. This CDC Section also provides that interior islands provide a minimum dimension of eight feet from back of curb to back of curb. In addition, CDC Section 3-1202.E also limits the number of consecutive parking spaces which may be in a row to 10 although Staff may increase that number to 15 spaces in a row. The proposal meets these CDC provisions. A sidewalk, as required by CDC Section 3-1701, is not provided adjacent to the site along North Osceola Avenue. The Engineering Department has determined that extenuating circumstances make the inclusion of a sidewalk adjacent to the site is impracticable and that a payment in-lieu of providing a sidewalk is acceptable. Such payment would be required prior to the issuance of any permits and the amount of such will determined by the Engineering Department in the event of an application for a building permit. Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 4 ° p��tI� + PLANAIING & DEVELOPMENT � C�..N�l 1r �6e� Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � . ,., -Y��;�,_.<. Special Area Plan: Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan; Old Bay Character District The subject property is located within the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan area the intent of which is to provide a flexible framework for the redevelopment of Downtown into a place that attracts people to live, work, shop and play. The Plan is divided into six character districts. The subject site is located within the Old Bay character district. The Plan states that the Old Bay character district is envisioned to be a mixed-use neighborhood supporting the Downtown employment base with residential, limited neighborhood commercial and office uses. A variety of densities and housing styles are encouraged throughout the District, as well as renovations of existing older structures. While the development pattern in most of the District is expected to remain urban in character reflecting the low-rise scale (two to three stories) of the existing neighborhood, greater heights in the higher density residential area west of North Osceola Avenue may be considered. The Plan further states that this District provides an opportunity for higher-density residential uses along Clearwater Harbor west of North Osceola Avenue provided such development is sensitive to the established low-rise historic character of the District. The proposal, a significant expansion of a commercial marina, is inherently inconsistent with the Plan and condition 16 of the previous site plan approval granted by the CDB. The CDB determined that a limited-use marina fit the definition of a"limited neighborhood commercial use". Hence the inclusion of 23 conditions of approval including the prohibition of live aboard vessels, fueling facilities, boat launching and the dry storage of boats. Therefore, a marina with a 200-berth dry storage facility and 80-wet slips no longer meets the definition of a neighborhood commercial use and is therefore, inconsistent with the Vision of the Plan as well as the Vision and Function of the District. A thorough review of the Plan was conducted and a myriad of Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies were identified as applicable to the proposal and are discussed and explored in detail below. Plan Visions: The principles that guided the development of the Downtown Plan have been articulated into a series of Visions many of which are applicable to the analysis of proposal as follows: Vision: Downtown will be an integrated community with a mix of retail, residential, offace and recreational opportunities. The development of a variety of residential projects to attract new residents to Downtown is critical to the success of a revitalized Downtown. The development proposal more than doubles the intensity of use of an approved marina (87 slips) with 200 dry berths located within a 53-foot tall (65 feet including rooftop architectural features) approximately 54,000 square foot building. As stated above, a residential component in Old Bay is seen as a critical component to the success of Downtown. The proposal is not considered a retail, residential or office use. The CDB acknowledged, through their approval of the aforementioned FLD application, that a marina (along with a small office/retail building) consisting solely of wet slips fit the definition of a limited neighborhood commercial use. However, the CDB drew a sharp distinction between the approved marina and what constitutes a full-service marina facility which could include fueling and dry storage capacities by prohibiting those very activities. A dry storage facility, as proposed does not support this Vision statement. Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 5 � Clb(�i 17l�Lel Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION u e ..:. ..��.'�:�... �.. . . .. Vision: An adequate parking supply must be available coterminous with new uses. The development proposal requires one parking space per two slips. Assuming a total of 280 slips (per the application) the site will require 140 spaces (one space per two slips) where 95 are proposed (0.68 spaces per two slips). A parking demand study is included with the application which examined the actual parking demand of the subject site and a second marina located in Tarpon Springs. The marina in Tarpon Springs includes 72 wet slips and 210 dry storage berths. The overall capacity of this facility is very similar to that as proposed for the subject site. The demand for the site in Tarpon Springs was 0.21 spaces per slip (0.42 per two slips). Applying this figure to the subject site 60 spaces will be required for 80 wet slips and 200 dry berths where 95 spaces are proposed. Therefore, the proposal supports this Vision statement. Plan Goals and Obiectives: In order to guide the revitalization of Downtown, three overriding goals are established with supporting Objectives and Policies developed to aid in reaching these goals. The following Goals and Objectives are applicable to the proposal. Goal 1: Downtown shall be a place that attracts people for living, employment and recreation. The City shall encourage redevelopment that will attract residents and visitors to Downtown as a recreation, entertainment and shopping destination. The proposal is inconsistent with the vision of the district; a mixed-use neighborhood supporting the Downtown employment base with residential, limited neighborhood commercial and office uses. This project provides no provisions for living or employment which are key elements of the Old Bay district. In addition, the proposed dry dock component functionally and aesthetically is a warehouse. The proposal will not further the goal of creating a vibrant downtown. Therefore, the proposal does not support this Goal. Objective lA: All development within Downtown shall further the goals, objectives and policies of this Plan and shall be consistent with the character districts, the Downtown Design Guidelines and the Downtown zoning district. This Objective will be found to be unfulfilled as the following Goals, Objectives and Policies are explored. Objective 1G: Residential uses in Downtown are encouraged with a variety of densities, housing rypes and affordabality consistent with the character districts. The proposal includes an expansion of an existing marina with 200 dry slips housed with a 53-foot tall 54,000 square foot building. The key component of the Old Bay District is the provision of residential uses. This proposal does not provide any residential component. Therefore, the proposal does not further this Objective. Plan Policies: Policy 2: The character of each district shall be reinforced through the site plan and design review process. Projects shall be consistent with and contribute positively to the vision of the character district in which it is located. As stated above, a residential component in Old Bay is critical to the success of Downtown. While the existing marina was considered consistent with the concept of limited neighborhood commercial uses the proposed expansion with a 54,000 square foot building 65 feet in height (including rooftop features) crosses the threshold of intensity that is outside the scope of a Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 6 � C��%tl 1'1 tile� Level II Flexible Development Application Review nEVEL MENT REVIEW DI�Vlslox u �m"a.'. � . . . .. . limited neighborhood commercial use. In fact, the CDB specifically placed certain conditions of approval to ensure that the character of the site remains consistent with a limited neighborhood commercial use through the implementation of the condition (among others) that specifically prohibits the dry storage of boats on site. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with the approved Level II Flexible Development application, inconsistent with the Vision and Intent of the Old Bay character district and inconsistent with a number of the overall Visions of the Plan. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this Policy. Policy 3: The design of all projects in Downtown shall make meaningful contributions to the pedestrian environment through site and building design. � The proposed high and dry building, as inherent to its purpose, will have no meaningful relationship with the pedestrian environment. The fa�ade includes no active commercial or residential space along North Osceola Avenue. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this Policy. Policv 9: Projects located at or near the border of the Downtown Plan area shall use effective site and building design features to ensure an appropriate tf-ansition and buffer between the different areas. To mitigate possible negative impacts on properties adjacent to certain character districts of the Plan but not within the Plan area, the Design Guidelines establish a set of requirements which provide a reasonable relationship between building height and setback. With regard to the subject site, the Design Guidelines provide that buildings or portions of buildings exceeding 15 feet in height that provide a minimum setback (from the northern Plan Area Boundary) of 75 feet plus one additional foot of horizontal distance as measured from that boundary for each 2.25 feet of height above 15 feet. The proposed building is 53 feet in height which results in a required setback from the northern boundary of the Plan area (which is also the north property of the site) of 91.89 feet where a setback of 30 feet is provided. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this Policy. Based upon the above, the development proposal is found to be inconsistent with the Vision, Goals, Objectives and Policies governing development within the Old Bay character district and the Plan area as a whole. In addition, the proposed 54,000 square foot dry berth building 53 feet in height is contrary to the spirit and intent by which the current site plan was approved. That approval specifically prohibited the dry storage of boats the inclusion of which is the heart of this application. Development Parameters Intensity of Use: Pursuant to the Old Bay character district of the Plan, the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for properties within the Old Bay character district is 0.5. The proposed FAR is 0.35. The proposal is consistent with this parameter of the Plan. Maximum Building, Height.• Pursuant to the Old Bay character district of the Plan the maximum height for properties west of North Osceola Avenue between Eldridge Street and the Old Bay northern boundary is 100 feet. The proposed high and dry building will be 53 feet as measured from BFE to the roof deck with an additional 12 feet to the peak of architectural roof embellishments for a total effective height Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 7 � C�LN�l 1'1'�Lel Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION y . . � �� a; . . � of 60 feet. The proposal is consistent with the overall permitted height however; the location of the building given the proposed height is inconsistent with the Transitional requirements of the Plan's Design Guidelines. This aspect of the proposal is discussed in detail elsewhere in this document. Minimum O,�'f-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-903, there is no minimum off-street parking requirement for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. Parking standards for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects may be determined by the community development coordinator based on the specific use andlor ITE Manual standards. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2- 903, the minimum required parking for Marinas is one space per two slips is based on the specific use requirements. In this case, the proposal includes 280 slips requiring 140 parking spaces where 95 spaces (0.68 spaces per two slips) are provided. A parking demand study is included with the application that examined the actual parking demand of the subject site and a second marina located in Tarpon Springs. The marina in Tarpon Springs includes 72 wet slips and 210 dry storage berths. The overall capacity of this facility is similar to that as proposed for the subject site. The study compared occupied slips against the number of utilized parking spaces to determine actual parking demand at both sites. The actual parking demand for the subject site is 0.51 spaces per slip and the actual demand for the marina in Tarpon Springs is 0.21 spaces per slip. This suggests that dry berths require fewer parking spaces per berth than wet slips. While the parking demand study did not explore the minutia of parking demand at the Tarpon Springs facility vis-a-vis spaces occupied for wet slips versus dry berths the fact that the overall number of wet slips and dry berths is close enough to the proposal to suggest that 0.42 spaces per two slips (wet and dry combined) should be adequate to serve the site, In short, 60 spaces (0.42 spaces per two slips) would be adequate to serve the site as proposed where 95 spaces are proposed. Therefore, the proposal meets this CDC section. Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-201.D.1, all outside mechanical equipment must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. The mechanical equipment for the building will be located within the building. Therefore, the proposal meets the intent of this CDC section. Si�ht Visibili Triangl` Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the proposed driveways on North Osceola Avenue, 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. This proposal has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineering Department and been found to be acceptable. Shrubbery planted within the sight visibility triangles will need to be maintained to meet the Code requirements. Therefore, the proposal meets the intent of this CDC section. 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 Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 8 � Clual ��L�.l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT p pp DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION � �^� ��w: � is not practicable. Most utilities which serve the site are currently underground. There is some limited overhead wiring along the north and a portion of the west sides of the site which will be placed underground with this proposal. Therefore, the proposal meets the intent of this CDC section. Landscaping_; Perimeter landscape buffers are not required within the Downtown district per CDC Section 3- 1202.D however, landscaping is proposed along the east and north property lines. The existing six-foot wrought iron-style picket fence with columns along the front (east) side of the property as well as the six-foot wooden fence along the north property line will remain with the proposal. A six-foot wrought iron-style picket fence along the south side of the site will also remain. The proposed landscape plan meets the requirements of the Plan's Design Guidelines and is discussed in detail further in this document. While perimeter landscape buffers, as mentioned, are not required within the Downtown district interior landscape requirements per CDC Section 3-1202.E must be met. The proposal includes 7,771 square feet of interior landscaped area which constitutes 13.27 percent of the vehicular use area where 10 percent (5,854 square feet) is required. This CDC Section also provides that interior islands provide a minimum dimension of eight feet from back of curb to back of curb. In addition, CDC Section 3-1202.E also limits the number of consecutive parking spaces which may be in a row to 10 although Staff may increase that number to 15 spaces in a row. The proposal meets these CDC provisions. Solid Waste: An existing dumpster is located near the southeast corner of the site and this facility will remain in place. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste and Fire Departments. SiQna e: The proposal does not include signage. The applicant is aware that any proposed signage must be permitted through the Planning and Development Department and will need to meet the requirements of CDC Section 3-1807 and the Plan's Design Guidelines. Comprehensive Plan: The proposal is contrary to the following Goals, Objectives and/or Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan as follows: Future Land Use Plan Element Policy A.2.2.3 Commercial land uses shall be located at the intersection of arterial or collector streets and should be sited in such a way as to minimize the intrusion of off-site impacts into residential nefghborhoods. New plats and site plans shall discourage the creation of "strip commercial" zones by insuring that adequate lot depths are maintained and by zoning for commercial development at major intersections. The proposal includes a commercial use that is not located at the intersection of arterial or collector streets. In addition, the proposal does not meet the required transitional requirements of the Old Bay character district which were specifically designed to minimize negative impacts on adjacent residential properties. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this Policy. Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 9 � Cl�.�ll 17 Alel Level II Fle�ble Development Application Review pLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION u.. �'� �'�'�' `,. .. Objective A.S.S - Promote high quality design standards that support Clearwater's image and contribute to its identiry. Policy A.S.S.1 Development should be designed to maintain and support the existing or envisioned character of the neighborhood. As discussed, the proposal provides for the significant expansion of a marina within the Old Bay character district. The Old Bay district is envisioned to be a mixed-use neighborhood supporting the Downtown employment base with residential, limited neighborhood commercial and office uses. Specifically, higher-density residential development along Clearwater Harbor along the west side of North Osceola Avenue is the desired use. The proposal is contrary to the envisioned character of the neighborhood and contrary to the intensity of use as approved by the CDB in 2009. In addition, the placement of the proposed 53-foot tall building 30 feet from the northern property line (which is also the north edge of the Plan area) is approximately one-third as otherwise required by the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan. In short, the site design is inconsistent with the intent of the development parameters set by the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment, the Old Bay character district and the Design Guidelines. Therefore, the proposal is not in support of this Objective and Policy. Goal A.6 - The City of Clearwater shall utilize innovative and flexible Planning and engineering practices, and urban design standards in Order to protect historic resources, ensure neighborhood preservation, redevelop blighted areas, and encourage infill development; Objective A.6.2 — The City of Clearwater shall continue to support innovative planned development and mixed land use development techniques in order to promote infill development that is consistent and compatible with the surrounding environment. As mentioned previously the site was approved as part of a recent Level II Flexible Development application with 23 conditions including the prohibition of any dry storage component. The current request essentially seeks to nullify that condition by revising the site plan to more than double the intensity of use and locate a 54,000 square foot building 65 feet in height (including architectural rooftop features) 30 feet from the northern boundary of the Plan area. The proposal is contrary to the Vision and Intent of the Plan and Old Bay district, the approval for the marina use in the first place and the transitional regulations of the Design Guidelines. The area is characterized by low- to mid-rise residential uses with the notable exception of the City-owned and -operated boat launch facility on the south side of the site. The proposal is therefore inconsistent with the sort of project envisioned as an appropriate recipient of flexibility from the minimum development parameters as provided by the above Goal, and Objective. Therefore, the proposal is not in support of this Goal and Objective. Community Development Code: The proposal does not support most of the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code as follows: Section 1-103.B.1. Allowing property owners to enhance the value of their property through innovative and creative redevelopment. The proposed expansion of an existing marina with a 54,000 square foot building up to 65 feet in height located 30 feet from the northern boundary of the Plan area is inconsistent with the character of the area along North Osceola Avenue, with the intent and Vision of the Plan and the Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 10 ° (' p�� + f� PLANNING &c DEVEIAPMENT : L Li�l 1'1�Lei Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDMSION � . ��.; Old Bay character district with regard to use and location of the proposed building. In addition, the proposal is neither innovative or creative. The proposal is also inconsistent with various elements of the Comprehensive Plan, as provided above. The proposal nullifies the condition prohibiting the dry storage of boats on the site and will broaden the use of the site beyond that of a limited neighborhood commercial use. Therefore, the proposal does not support this Code section. Section 1-103.B.2. Ensuring that development and redevelopment will not have a negative impact on the value of surrounding properties and wherever practicable promoting development and redevelopment which will enhance the value of surrounding properties. Surrounding properties include a variety of residential and non-residential uses include detached dwellings to the north and the Seminole Boat Ramp facility to the south. The proposed development includes an expansion of a commercial use in an area where the preferred uses include higher density residential uses. Limited neighborhood commercial uses are also permitted within the District. The CDB determined, through their 2009 approval of the existing marina, that a limited-use marina fit the definition of a limited neighborhood commercial use. This is evidenced through the inclusion of 23 conditions including the prohibition of live aboard vessels, fueling facilities, boat launching and the dry storage of boats. The proposal includes a 54,000 square foot building 65 feet in height (including architectural embellishments) 30 feet from the northern boundary of the Plan area where the transitional requirements provide for a 90- foot setback. The transitional requirements were specifically created, with signiiicant input from representatives from the neighborhood, to ensure that adjacent and surrounding properties would not have their values negatively impacted. The intensity of use will more than double from the approved 87 boat slips to 280 wet and dry slips. As such, the characteristics of the proposed development do not meet the definition of a limited neighborhood commercial use. It is anticipated that surrounding properties will have their values negatively affected by the proposal. Therefore, the proposal does not support this Code section. Section 1-103.B.3. Strengthening the city's economy and increasing its tax base as a whole. The proposal includes the increase in intensity of an existing marina which will likely result in an increase in its value thereby positively affecting the City's tax base. However, the use is not a desired use as provided by the Plan and the Old Bay district and does not meet the transitional requirement of the Plan's Design Guidelines. The purpose of this special area plan is to recognize the existence of a unique area of the City and provide additional design and development guidance in order to realize a net improvement within the plan area vis-a-vis aesthetics and property value. Special area plans, such as this one, while resulting in additional scrutiny and design considerations, do provide a defined set of expectations with regard to the ultimate provided product whether that product be a marina, restaurant or mixed use development. They also provide assurances to neighboring property owners, whether in the Plan area or adjacent to it, with regard to what sorts of uses can be expected to be developed and the physical form those development may take and how they will fit into the fabric of the neighborhood. � The marina, as currently approved, was considered consistent with the desire to redevelop and improve the Old Bay district with, among other uses, limited neighborhood commercial development. The application was approved with the understanding that its impact on adjacent properties would the same as or less than the boat ramp to the south, which is to say minimal. Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 11 o p�1+��n } PLANNING 8c DEVELOPMENT ; C LRi ►TRl.er Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPMENT REVI&W DIVISION u.d.�:.•� _� . � . The condition that, among others, the dry storage of boats would not and could not be a component of the marina provided that vital assurance to adjacent property owners that the marina would never exceed a certain level of impact on their property(ies). Approval of the current proposal would essentially negate any assurance that the approved special area plan can and will effectively and appropriately guide development and/or redevelopment as desired by the City and its shareholders (i.e. citizens) in this or any other area of the Plan. In a broader, more holistic view, an abrupt reversal or significant change of any provided condition of approval to speciiically negate or prevent negative impacts of any development on adjacent properties and its surrounding neighborhood without any discernable cause calls into question the dedication of the City to effectively guide and foster development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, CDC and applicable special area plans. A lack of such assurances will likely lead to uncertainty which in turn can ultimately negatively affect the City's economy and its tax base as a whole. Therefore, the proposal does not support this Code section. Section 1-103.D. It is the further purpose of this Development Code to make the beautification of the ciry a matter of the highest priority and to require that existing and future uses and structures in the ciry are attractive and well-maintained to the maximum extent permitted by law. The proposal includes a new 54,000 square foot building incorporating a Key West-style of architecture. The building, when taken in isolation of the appropriateness of its use, is reasonably attractive. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section. The proposal does not support most of the General Applicability requirements of this Code as follows: Section 3-914.A.1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, densiry and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. As previously discussed in detail, the desired uses in this area of the Old Bay character district of the Plan include primarily higher-density residential development. The proposal, a significant expansion of a commercial marina, is inherently inconsistent with the Plan and the previous approval granted by the CDB. The CDB determined that a limited-use marina fit the definition of a limited neighborhood commercial use. Hence, the inclusion of 23 conditions of approval including the prohibition of live-aboard vessels, fueling facilities, boat launching and, importantly, the dry storage of boats. Therefore, a marina with a 200-berth dry storage facility and 80-wet slips no longer meets the deiinition of a limited neighborhood commercial use and is therefore, inconsistent with the Vision of the Plan as well as the Vision and Function of the District. The proposed building is also contrary to the required locational provisions of the transitional regulations for the Old Bay district. The result will be the more than doubling of the intensity of the existing marina and a building out of scale with adjacent properties to the north. Therefore, the proposal does not support this Code section. Section 3-914.A.2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. The proposal is inconsistent with the character of adjacent properties and inconsistent with the Plan and Design Guidelines. As mentioned, the Plan provides certain assurances and predictability with regard to potential development and redevelopment. Eliminating those Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 12 � C�bitil ��L�l Level II Flexible Development Application Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION u assurances and predictability will likely discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent lands and buildings. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A.3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or workdng in the neighborhood. The proposal will result in the expansion of an existing marina. The proposal will likely have no effect on the health and/or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A.4. The proposed development is designed to minimize tra�c congestion. The proposal will likely have minimal effect, negative or otherwise, on traffic congestion. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A. S. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity. As discussed in detail, the desired uses in this area of the Old Bay character district of the Plan include primarily higher-density residential development. The proposal includes an extensive expansion of an existing marina to include 200 dry berth slips within an approximately 54,000 square foot building 65 feet in height (including rooftop architectural embellishments). The proposed building is contrary to the required locational provisions of the transitional regulations for the Old Bay district. The result more than doubles the intensity of the existing marina and provides for a building out of scale with adjacent properties to the north. Therefore, the proposal does not support this Code section. Section 3-914.A.6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. The design of the proposed development should not result in any adverse olfactory, visual and acoustic impacts on adjacent properties. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. The proposal does not support most of the specific Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria of this Code as follows: Section 2-903.D. Comprehensive infill redevelopment projects. 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. The site has been effectively developed with a 66-slip marina. The primary deviations are to provide less than half the required parking, effectively establish a use not supported by the intent of the Old Bay district, eliminate a condition of approval (prohibition of dry storage of boats) which permitted the construction of the current marina and violate the transitional requirements of the Plan's Design Guidelines. It has not been effectively shown how development of the site is impractical without deviations from the development standazds set forth in the zoning district. Furthermore, deviating from the Plan with regard to the transitional requirements is simply not an option. Therefore, a reasonable conclusion is that the redevelopment of the site is and was practical without any additional deviations from the development standards as otherwise provided in the D district. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this CDC Section. Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 13 q ViVi�l n�1�� Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEPVELOpMErrr xE�w ntvi ox � _ s �w..,..;,� � 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 redevelopment of the site, as shown in detail in this document, is inconsistent with a variety of Goa1s, Objectives and Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of the CDC. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this CDC Section. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. While the marina is not a desired use as discussed in great detail earlier in this document it was approved with the understanding that its impact on adjacent properties, as approved, would the same as or less than the boat ramp to the south, which is to say minimal. The condition that, among others, the dry storage of boats would not and could not be a component of the marina provided the assurance to adjacent property owners that the marina would never exceed a certain level of impact on their property(ies). Approval of the proposal would essentially negate any assurance that the approved special area plan can and will effectively and appropriately guide development and/or redevelopment as desired by the City and its shareholders (i.e. citizens) in this or any other area of the Plan. Eliminating those assurances and predictability will likely discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent lands and buildings. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this CDC Section. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. As discussed in detail, the proposal will be inconsistent with the pattern of development in area, is inconsistent with the Plan, Design Guidelines, Comprehensive Plan and the intent of the CDC. The proposal in also inconsistent with at least one of the conditions of approval associated with the development of the site as a marina (prohibition of dry storage of boats) and violates the required transitional area setback requirements as provided for by the Design Guidelines of the Plan. Adjoining properties will likely not benefit from the proposal. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this CDC Section. S. 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 six objectives: a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standard or flexible development use; The proposed use is permitted as a Flexible Development use in the D District. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. 6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives: a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district. The proposal is inconsistent with the character of adjacent properties and inconsistent with the Plan, Old Bay character district and Design Guidelines. As mentioned, the Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 14 o (� p� 9+ PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT � 1i bta�l�Le� Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPbIENT REVIEW DIVISION s�� .. Plan provides certain assurances and predictability with regard to potential development and redevelopment. Eliminating those assurances and predictability will likely discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent lands and buildings. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this CDC Section. b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the ciry. As examined in detail previously in this report, the proposal does not comply with the Plan's Design Guidelines vis-a-vis transitional area regulations pertaining to setbacks from the northern boundary of the Plan area. The proposed 53-foot tall building (not including rooftop architectural embellishments) requires an 89.66-foot setback from the north property line where 30 feet is provided. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this CDC Section. c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area. As discussed, the proposal provides for the significant expansion of a marina within the Old Bay character district. The Old Bay district is envisioned to be a mixed-use neighborhood supporting the Downtown employment base with residential, limited neighborhood commercial and office uses. Specifically, higher-density residential development along Clearwater Harbor along the west side of North Osceola Avenue is the desired use. The proposal is contrary to the envisioned character of the neighborhood. �n addition, the placement of the proposed 60-foot tall building 30 feet from the northern property line (which is also the north edge of the Plan area) is approximately one-third as otherwise required by the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan. In short, the site design is inconsistent with the intent of the development parameters set by the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment, the Old Bay character district and the Design Guidelines. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this CDC Section. 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.; • Variery in materials, colors and textures; • Distinctive fenestration patterns; • Building stepbacks; and • Distinctive roofs forms. While, the development proposal incorporates a contemporary take on the Key West- style of architecture the building is still, in essence, a large monolithic structure devoid of horizontal building plane changes, distinctive fenestration patterns or building stepbacks. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this CDC Section. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 15 � �,r�L(ai 1'TAtel Level II Flexible Development Application Review Y � " PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION While perimeter landscape buffers are not required within the Downtown district per CDC Section 3-1202.D however, minimal landscaping is proposed along the east and north property lines. The placement of the building, as discussed in detail elsewhere in this document, violates the required setback from the north property line as provided by the Design Guidelines of the Plan. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with this CDC Section. Section 4-206.D.4: Burden of proof. The burden of proof is upon the applicant substantial competent evidence that he is entitled to the approval requested. The applicant has not adequately demonstrated through the submittal of substantia] evidence that the request is entitled to the approval requested as required by CDC 206.D.4. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property. to show by competent Section 4- COMPLIANCE WITH DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES: The following table depicts the development proposals level of inconsistency with the applicable Downtown Design Guidelines as per the Plan: Consistent Inconsistent 1. Building Placement I I Xl 1 See analysis in Sta,�'Report COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards for Marinas per CDC Table 2-903, the Old Bay character district and the Design Guidelines: Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent Floor Area Ratio 0.5 035 X Minimum Setbacks Buildings or portions of 30 feet Xl buildings exceeding 15 feet in height that provide a minimum setback (from the northern Plan Area Boundary) of 75 feet plus one additional foot of horizontal distance as measured from that boundary for each 2.25 feet of height above 15 feet (75 feet plus 14.66 = 89.66 feet). Maximum Height 100 feet 65 feet (53 feet to roof X� structure with an additional 12 feet to the top of rooftop architectural features) Minimum One space per two slips (140 0.68 spaces per two slips (95 X� Off-Street Parking spaces) spaces) � See analysis in Staff Report Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 16 r��.(41 1'1'[i�el Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review FLANNING&DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION u . .. � €�,�:' =��< � �' . COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-903.D. (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project): Consistent I 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 Xl 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 Xl development and improvement of surrounding properties. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X� development. 5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X� category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance with one or more of the following objectives: a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standazd 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. T'he proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing; e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation; or f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a working waterfront use. 6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street Xl parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives: a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district; b. 'The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City; c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and amactive 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.; 0 Variety in materials, colors and textures; ❑ Distinctive fenestration patterns; ❑ Buiiding stepbacks; and ❑ Distinctive roofs forms. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscane desigr► and appropriate distances between buildings. � See analysis in Sta�`'Report Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 17 a lil�.til 1'lr�t.el Level II Flexible Develo ment A IICa�10� RBVIEW PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT P pP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION J. ......... .._..... .... COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL APPLICABILITY STANDARDS: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level One Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A: Consistent I 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. Xl 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the X� immediate vicinity. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including X' visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. � See analysis in Sta„�'Report SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of June 6, 2013 and deemed the development proposal to be legally insufficient, based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 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 5.10 acre site (3.55 acres upland and 1.55 acres submerged) is located on the west side of North Osceola Avenue at the terminus of Nicholson Street, approximately 500 feet north of Seminole Street; 2. That the subject site is located within the D district; 3. That the subject property is located within the CBD FLUP category; 4. The subject site consists of one parcel with approximately 415 feet of frontage along North Osceola Avenue; 5. That the subject property is located in the Old Bay character district of the Clearwater Downtown Redevelopment Plan special plan area; 6. That the development proposal is inconsistent with the Visions, Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan and the Old Bay character district; 7. That the development proposal is inconsistent with the transitional area requirements of the Downtown Design Guidelines; 8. That on November 17, 2009, the CDB approved a Flexible Development application (FLD2009-08030) which requested approval to permit an 87-slip marina in the Downtown (D) District with a dock master building height of 17.33 feet and 50 parking spaces, under the provisions of Community Development Code (then) Section 2-903.H; 9. That the approved FLD application included 23 conditions including (15) That live aboard vessels be prohibited, (16) That there be no fueling facilities, boat launching or dry storage of Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 18 � C�L(�1�1 1'1 �Le� Level II Flexible Development Application Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION ya. ...€+�., ,�.�.. ��`?.. � boats, (17) That the slips be limited for private recreational boats, that there are no boat rentals, no jet ski renta.ls and that no commercial boats conduct any business at the marina and (19) That no servicing of boats or motors is permitted other than necessary minor repairs and maintenance; 10. That a BTR (BTR-0031633) was issued for a 66-slip marina to Clearwater Basin Marina, LLC on March 13, 2013; 11. That the surrounding area is dominated by a variety of residential and non-residential development; 12. That the proposal is to expand the existing marina use with 200 dry berths within a 53,725 square foot building 53 feet in height with an additional 12 feet to rooftop architectural features contrary to condition 16 of the approved application associated with FLD2009- 08030; 13. That the application also includes a 1,000 square foot marina office/retail use in a sepaxate building; and 14. That there are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property. Conclusions of Law The Planning and Development Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law: 1. That the development proposal is inconsistent with the pattern of development of the surrounding neighborhood; 2. That the proposal is inconsistent with two visions of the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan; 3. That the proposal is inconsistent with applicable Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan including Goal 1 and Objectives 1 A, and 1 G and Policies 2, 3 and 9; 4. That the proposal is inconsistent with the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan Design Guidelines specifically with regard to the transitional rules associated with the Old Bay character district; 5. That the proposal is inconsistent with applicable portions of the Comprehensive Plan including Future Land Use Plan Element Goal A.6, Objectives A.5.5, and A.6.2 and Policies A.2.2.3 and A.5.5.1; 6. That the proposal inconsistent with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of the Community Development Code Sections 1-103.B.1 — 3; 7. That the development proposal is inconsistent with the Standards as per Table 2-902 of the Community Development Code with regard to parking; 8. That the development proposal is inconsistent with the General Standards for Level One and Two Approvals as per Section 3-914.A.1, 2 and 5 of the Community Development Code; 9. That the development proposal is inconsistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2- 903.D.1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 of the Community Development Code; and 10. That the application is inconsistent with the requirement for the submittal of substantial competent evidence as per CDC Section 4-206.D.4. Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends DENIAL of the Flexible Development application to amend a previously approved Flexible Development application to permit the addition of 200 dry slips and 14 new wet slips to an existing 66 wet-slip Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 19 u p�1�I)n} 1. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT � C Litil 1'� i�i�l Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION ;, �°�� :�.�- �� marina (87-wet slips originally approved) including a 53,727 square foot high and dry storage building with a height of 53 feet as measured from Base Flood Elevation (BFE) to roof deck with an additional 12 feet to rooftop architectural embellishments; 95 parking spaces (including two handicap spaces) (0.68 spaces per two slips); and a 1,000 square foot retail/office building as accessory to the marina with a height of 14 feet (as measured from BFE) in the Downtown (D) District and the Old Bay Character District of the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Community Development Code (CDC) Section 2-903.D. �/�.----"—"_..� Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: -'' ark T. Parry, AICP, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Photographs Community Development Board July 16, 2013 FLD2013-05019 — Page 20 MARK T. PARRY 1655 Linwood Drive Tel: (727) 742.2461 Clearwater, FL 33755 E-mail: mparry@tampabay.rr.com SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS A dedicated, AICP certified professional Planner focused on contributing to the field of Urban Planning experienced in public and private sector planning. An excellent commurncator, able to effectively interact with clients, local government officials and business professionals at all levels. Experienced in various aspects of urban design and planning, zoning regulations and permitting. OBJECTIVE To secure a Planning position which will allow me to continue improving the built environment and my community through sound and innovative planning and design principals. EDUCATION COOK COLLEGE, RUTGERS UNIVERSITY, New Brunswick, NJ B.S. Landscape Architecture Major, Urban Planning Certification B.S. Environmental Planning and Design Certificate Urban Planning Golden Key National Honor Society; Sigma Lambda Alpha American Planning Association (Florida Chapter); member A/CP #020597 40-hour OSHA (Hazwoper) Training PLANNER III PLANNING DEPARTMENT, CITY OF CLEARWATER 04/12 - Present 08/98 — 04/05 . Responsible for nonresidential and single/multi-family site plan review and permitting. . Assist in the implementation and subsequent review of the Community Development Code. • Responsible for assessing and writing Community Development Code amendments. • Land Development Code development, interpretation and application. • Provide, inspect and direct landscape review/design. • Acting Development Review Manager 9/99 —11/99 and 01/05 — 03/05. • Manage and direct Associate Planners. • Review, process and present variance/conditional use, land use/zoning atlas amendment and annexation applications at in-house and public review meetings. • Principle Planner in creating and implementing Clearwater's Downtown Design Guidelines. Assisted in the implementation and application of the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan. SENIOR PLANNER DEVELOPMENT � ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, CARDNO TBE 04/05 — 04/12 . Planner of record for Cities of Indian Rocks Beach, Seminole and Clearwater and Town of Belleair. • Responsible for nonresidential and single/multi-family site plan review and permitting. • Perform site design and inspections. • Provide technical planning support for engineering department. . Provide support for Zoning Code, Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Land Use Plan amendments. • Research and write Evaluation and Appraisal Reports. • Create and update Special Area Plans/Form-based Codes. . Provide CADD support. • Assist with creating redevelopment marketing material. • Perform technical environmental services including soil and groundwater sampling. Designer/Owner GREENSCAPES-GLD, MARLBORO, NJ 9/92 - 6/98 • Founded and established a local garden and landscape business. • Plan and oversee installation of commercial and residential landscaping projects utilizing a variety of CADD and photo-manipulation programs. • Develop and implement advertising programs, brochures and graphics. • Estimate, bid and negotiate jobs. • Source and negotiate purchase of materials and equipment. • Manage, train and schedule installation crews. Program Supervisor LONGSTREET FARM, MONMOUTH COUNTY PARK SYSTEM, HOLMDEL, NJ • Assisted in formulating and running children's summer program ("Hayseed"). • Created and coordinated daily programs and schedules for 6-9 year old groups. • Supervised several other programs throughout the year. • Created a demand which was finrice the program's capacity after the first year. COMPUTER SKILLS 6/87 - 8/93 Access, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Works, ClarisWorks, MS Word, Land Designer Pro, Permit Plan, Excel, Cornerstone, AutoCADD, PowerPoint, Publisher �. �� '� GROUP' AVIDGROUP.COM June 14, 2013 Mark T. Parry, AICP, Planner III Planning and Development Department City of Clearwater 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, Florida 33756 AVID Group� 2300 Curlew Road, STE 201 Palm Harbor, Florida 34683 Phone(727)789-9500 Fau(727)784-6662 Re: Clearwater Basin Marina (FLD #2013-0519 — 900 N. Osceola Ave.) Permit Intake, The purpose of this letter is to transmit the response to DRC comments (prior to CDB only) of Site Plan Submittal for the above referenced project. With this letter the following items are submitted: • Fifteen (15) Flexible Development Applications • Fifteen (15) Site Construction Plans, inc. Landscape / Irrigation Plans • Fifteen (15) l 1x17 Color Landscape Plans • Fifteen (15) Surveys • Fifteen (15) 11x17 Color Renderings • Fifteen (15) Color Selection Sheets • Three (3) Parking Demand Studies Additionally, in response to your completeness comments, I offer the following: ENGINEERING REVIEW: Z) We are respectfu//y �equesting an exception to this requirement for the fo/%wing reasons; a) There is /imited space, none at a// in portions, between the back of curb and the R/W. b) The /ocation existing /ift station wou/d not a//ow for a sidewa/k. c) Grades are such that construction of a sidewa/k to meet ADA standards wou/d be cost prohibitive and infeasib/e, 2) This is a private faci/ity, therefore providing a pub/ic sidewa/k/bicyc% path connection wou/d not serve a purpose, The faci/ity wi// be fenced and gated, the genera/ pub/ic wi// not be permitted access. 3) This easement has been added to the aitached P/ans and Survey, 4) A note to this affect has been added to the P/ans 5) A request to vacate this easement wi// be submitted and, if necessary, a new easement wi// be granted. , �; , GROUP • AVIDGROUP.COM AVID Group� 2300 Curlew Road, STE 201 Palm Harbor, Florida 34683 Phone(727)789-9500 Fax(727)784-6662 6) A flare has been used in /ieu of the radius to avoid extending beyond the property /ine. ENVIRNMENTAL REVIEW: No comments to be addressed prior to CDB. FIRE REVIEW: 1) A note to this affect has been added to the P/ans, 2) A note to this affect has been added to the P/ans 3) A note to this affect has been added to the P/ans 4) The fire /ine and Hydrant have been moved, and is now /ess than 300 feet in /ength, 5) The FDC and Hydrant are proper/y /ocated. 6) A note to this alfect has been added to the P/ans 7) A note to this affect has been added to the P/ans 8) "No Paring - Fire Lane"signs have been added to the p/ans in that /ocation, 9) A note to this affect has been added to the P/ans 10J P/ease see the attached Fire F/ow Ca/cu/ations 11) Noted. HARBOR MASTER REVIEW: Z) The norma/ hours of operation wi// be from 7; OOAM to 8; OOPM seven days a week, The exception to this wi// be for specia/ events for examp/e (the City of C/earwater's Fourth of 1u/y Ce%bration Fireworks or Christmas Night Parades) 2) There wi// be a t/oating dock that wi// be insta//ed at the fork/ift ramp. This wi// serve the purpose of mooring boats as they are p/aced in the water by the fork/ift as we// as tying up boats for staging and parking for customers on/y. LAND RESOURCE REVIEW: 1) A Tree In ventory was not provided, and sha// not be necessary, as no trees exist on site, 2) A Tree Preservation P/an was not provided, and sha// not be necessary, as not trees exist on site. 3) Current/y we are providing 75-inches of tree rep/acement, Therefore we are 36-inches short of the required ZZZ-inches of tree rep/acement, We wi// pay into the tree fund for this deficit. PARKS AND RECREATION REVIEW: 1) Noted, r � � .' 'i 6ROUP' AVIDGROUP.COM AVID Group 2300 Curlew Road, STE 201 Palm Harbor, Florida 34683 Phone(727)789-9500 Fax(727)784-6662 PLANNING REVIEW: 1)The app/ication form and site data tab/e have been revised to inc/ude the entire parc% as per the updated survey and site p/an, 2) The app/ication form and site data tab/e have been revised to inc/ude the entire parc% as per the updated survey and site p/an, 3) Striping has been added for the existing parking spaces 4) A tota/ of 84 existing/proposed parking spaces are being provided, of which 4 are handicap sta//s as required by code, 5) The high-dry bui/ding wi// be 6i.5' above the FFE of5.5' and therefore 53' above the BFE of 14' (p/us an additiona/ 12' for architectura/ embe//ishments), The bait shop bui/ding wi// be 25' above the FFE and BFE of i4 ; 6) Up/and and submerged /and areas in SF and AC have been added to the site data tab/e, 7) Your understanding of the number of wet s/ips is correct. 8) Yes, emergency access wi// sti// be przvvided at the SWC of the site. 9) No, the 400 SF dock master bui/ding was not constructed. The 1000 SF o�ce/bait shop wi// rep/ace it functiona//y. IO) See attached information from architect about the bui/ding co%r scheme, 11) The existing perimeter fencing wi// remain. Labe/s have been added to the site p/an to ret7ect this, i2) The /ocation of inean high water /ine has been added to the site p/an, 13) The project justiFcation statement has been updated to show comp/iance with both the comp infi// and marina tlex criteria, 14) The updated project justifcation statement exp/ains the proposed activities There wi// be wet and dry boat storage and bait shop/ship's store sa/es, There wi// be no boat/engine repairs or service provided, 15 Mechanica/ equipment wi// be interna/ to the bui/ding. This wi// be depicted in the Architectura/ P/ans and/or renderings 16) A note has been added to the site p/an that "On-site uti/ities sha// be insta//ed underground, per CDC Section 3-912. " 17) The existing dumpster enc%sure (SEC of site) is now /abe%d on the site p/an. I8) See updated project justiFcation statement. 19) See updated project justiFcation statement. ZO) See attached information from architect about bui/ding materia/s, 2,i) The proposed signage wi// be permitted in comp/iance with the city's sign code. 22) Understood. SOLID WASTE REVIEW: i) The existing dumpster /ocation has been shown on the attached P/ans STORMWATER REVIEW: No comments to be addressed prior to CDB, . W ,,; . GROUP � AVIDGROUP.COM AVID Group 2300 Curlew Road, STE 201 Palm Harbor, Florida 34683 Phone(727)789-9500 Fax(727)784-6662 TRAFFIC REVIEW: 1) The plans have been revised to include all parking, proposed and existing, on site. An adequate number of accessible parking spaces are shown, and the Site Data Table has been revised. 2) The sight visibility triangle and a note have been added to the plans. 3) Per the DRC meeting, this condition is not anticipated, as boats are not expected to be coming and going from this facility. If you have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact me at your earliest convenience at 727-789-9500 x 147 or Richard.Kelle�(�u,AvidGroup.com Sincerely, AVID Gr -- -- .�_ �. _____.,,, Project Manager ti LL ° � earwater U Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application Attached Dwellings, Mixed-Uses or Non-Residential Uses IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT COMPLETE AND CORRECT INFORMATION. ANY MISLEADING, DECEPTIVE, INCOMPLETE OR INCORRECT INFORMATION MAY INVALIDATE YOUR APPLICATION. ALL APPIICAT10N5 ARE TO BE FILLED OUT COMPLETELY AND CORRECTLY, AND SUBMITTED IN PERSON (NO FAX OR DELIVERIES) TO THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY NOON ON THE SCHEDULED DEADLINE DATE. A TOTAL OF 11 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 10 COPIES) AS REQUIRED WITHIN ARE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. SUBSEQUENT SUBMITTAL FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD WILL REQUIRE 15 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 14 COPIES). PLANS AND APPLICATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE COLLATED, STAPLED AND FOLDED INTO SETS. THE APPLICANT, BY FILING THIS APPLICATION, AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. FIRE DEPT PRELIMARY SITE PLAN REVIEW FEE: $200 APPLICATION FEE: $1,205 PROPERTY OWNER (PER DEED): Cl2aM/atef BaSlll MaCllla, LLC (ATTN: David McComas) MAILING ADDRESS: PO BOX ZZ�JG, Clearwater, FL 33757-2256 PHONE NUMBER: 7Z%-7Z3-77� O EMAIL: d171CC01'YIaS U�@UI'Oj�@afl-@qUltl@S.COI'Yl AGENTORREPRESENTATIVE: A�/�D GfOUj� �ATTN: RICI1afCJ K2II@)/� MAILING ADDRESS: 2300 CUI'I@W ROaCI SUIt2 ZO'I Palm Harbor FL 34683 PHONE NUMBER: 7ZT-7H9-9�JOO, ext. 147 Ennai�: richard.kelley@avidgroup.com ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: O S@CY11t10I@ St, Clearwater, FL 33755 PARCEL NUMBER(S): 09-29-� 5-3Z� $4-OOZ-OOZO �E�a� �ESCRiPTiorv: See attached PROPOSE� usE(s): Marina with wet slips, high & dry boat storage and store/office facilities oESCRiPrioN oF REQuEST: Expansion of the existing marina facilities to add 200 dry slips within a Specifically identify the request 53,725 sq.ft. high & dry boat storage building, a 1,000 Sq.ft. Ship'S Sto�e/ (include all requested code flexibility; office building, parking and other associated site improvements. e.g., reduction in required number of parking spaces, height, seibacks, lot size, lot width, specific use, etc.): Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 1 of 8 Revised 01112 LL ° C earwater r U Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application Data Sheet PLEASE ENSURE THAT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS FILLED OUT, IN ITS ENTIRETY. FAILURE TO COMPLETE THIS FORM WILL RESULT IN YOUR APPLICATION BEING FOUND INCOMPLETE AND POSSIBLY DEFERRED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION CYCLE. ZONING DISTRICT: FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION: CB� �Centra� BUS111@SS DIStfICt� ExISTING usE (currently existing on site): Marina with wet slips Marina with wet slips, high & dry boat storage and PROPOSED USE (new use, if any; plus existing, if to remain): StOf2/OfFIC@ faCIIItIeS SITE AREA: 155.117 sq. ft. 3.56 acres GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage of all buildings): Existing: gQ sq. ft. Proposed: 54,815 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable: 77,558 sq. ft. GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage devoted to each use, if there will be multiple uses): First use: 53,725 sq. ft. Second use: 1,000 sq. ft. Third use: 90 sq. ft. FLOOR AREA RATIO (total square footage of all buildings divided by the total square footage of entire site): Existing: 0.0006 Proposed: 0.35 Maximum Allowable: 0.50 BUILDING COVERAGE/FOOTPRINT (15L floor square footage of all buildings): Existing: 90 sq. ft. ( 0.06 � of site) Proposed: 54,815 sq. ft. ( 35 � of site) Maximum Permitted: 77,558 sq. ft. ( 50 � of site) GREEN SPACE WITHIN VEHICULAR USE AREA (green space within the parking lot and interior of site; not perimeter buffer): Existing: 2,651 sq. ft. ( 1.7 9� of site) Proposed: 7, � 77 sq. ft. ( 4.6 � of site) VEHICULAR USE AREA (parking spaces, drive aisles, loading area): Existing: 22,463 sq. ft. ( 14.5 � of site) Proposed: 58,542 sq. ft. ( 37.7 % of site) Planning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 2 of 8 Revised 01112 IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO (total square footage of impervious areas divided by the totai square footage of entire site): Existing: 0.35 Proposed: 0.94 Maximum Permitted: n/a DENSITY (units, rooms or beds per acre): BUILDING HEIGHT: Existing: n/a Existing: Proposed: n/a Proposed: Maximum Permitted: 50 du/ac Maximum Permitted OFF-STREET PARKING: Existing: 50 Proposed: 84 �vtinimum Required: see attached parking demand study 0 47.5(above bfe) 100 (above bfe) WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED TOTAL VALUE OF THE PROIECT UPON COMPLETION? $ 420,000 ZONING DISTRICTS FOR ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY: rvortn: LMDR (Low Medium Density Residential District) soutn: D (Downtown District) East: D(Downtown District) & I(Institutional District) west: P (Preservation District) STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS �� I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all Sworn to and subscribed before me this ��/ day of representations made in this application are true and � � � Zc� 1� , to me and/or by C.. L r�, accurate to the best of my knowledge and authorize i� City representatives to visit and photograph the �C <<��.rZ�� Z-��' � who is personally known has property described in this application. produced +`�-��— 1�� `7`N3 ��e �� as identification. // /.�� ' r ��—� �--�� Signature c�property owner or rep Notary public, My commission expires: '� ': MY COMMISSlON # EE0475T1 �,,. .�� EXPIRES December 08, 2014 Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 3 of 8 Revised 01112 LL o Planning & Development Department � earwater Flexible Develo mentA lication p pp � Site Plan Submittal Package Check list IN ADDITION TO THE COMPLETED FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT (FLD) APPLICATION, ALL FLD APPLICATIONS SHAIL INCLUDE A SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL PACKAGE THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION AND/OR PLANS: ]� Responses to the flexibility criteria for the specific use(s) being requested as set forth in the Zoning District(s) in which the subject property is located. The attached Flexible Development Application Flexibility Criteria sheet shall be used to provide these responses. �4 Responses to the General Applicability criteria set forth in Section 3-914.A. The attached Flexible Development Application General Applicability Criteria sheet shall be used to provide these responses. � A signed and sealed survey of the property prepared by a registered land surveyor including the location of the property, dimensions, acreage, location of all current structures/improvements, location of all public and private easements including official records book and page numbers and street right(s)-of-way within and adjacent to the site. � If the application would result in the removal or relocation of mobile home owners residing in a mobile home park as provided in F.S. § 723.083, the application must provide that information required by Section 4-202.A.5. ($j If this application is being submitted for the purpose of a boatlift, catwalk, davit, dock, marina, pier, seawall or other si milar marine structure, then the application must provide detailed plans and specifications prepared by a Florida professional engineer, bearing the seal and signature of the engineer, except signed and sealed plans shall not be required for the repair or replacement of decking, stringers, railing, lower landings, tie piles, or the patching or reinforcing of existing piling on private and commercial docks. Jl11 A site plan prepared by a professional architect, engineer or landscape architect drawn to a minimum scale of one inch equals 50 feet on a sheet size not to exceed 24 inches by 36 inches that includes the following information: l�l Index sheet of the same size shall be included with individual sheet numbers referenced thereon. 1� North arrow, scale, location map and date prepared. 1$� Identification of the boundaries of phases, if development is proposed to be constructed in phases. 1$� Location of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), whether the property is located within a Special Flood Hazard Area, and the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of the property, as applicable. 1� Location, footprint and size of all existing and proposed buildings and structures on the site. 1gl Location and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems, both on-site and off-site, with proposed points of access. �j location of all existing and proposed sidewalks, curbs, water lines, sanitary sewer lines, storm drains, fire hydrants and seawalls and any proposed utility easements. � Location of onsite and offsite stormwater management facilities as well as a narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including calculations. Additional data necessary to demonstrate compliance with the City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual may be required at time of building construction permit. 1$'� Location of solid waste collection facilities, required screening and provisions for accessibility for collection. �I Location of off-street loading area, if required by Section 3-1406. 1� All adjacent right(s)-of-way, with indication of centerline and width, paved width, existing median cuts and intersections and bus shelters. � Dimensions of existing and proposed lot lines, streets, drives, building lines, setbacks, structural overhangs and building separations. ¢� Building or structure elevation drawings that depict the proposed building height and building materials. Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 4 of 8 Revised 01/12 I�) Typical floor plans, including floor plans for each floor of any parking garage. J� Demolition plan. 1� Identification and description of watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, specimen trees, and other environmentally sensitive areas. �$ If a deviation from the parking standards is requested that is greater than 50% (excluding those standards where the difference between the top and bottom of the range is one parking space), then a parking demand study will need to be provided. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not deviations to the parking standards are approved. Please see the adopted Parking Demand Study Guidelines for further information. fi� A tree survey showing the location, DBH and species of all existing trees with a DBH of four inches or more, and identifying those trees proposed to be removed, if any. ❑ A tree inventory, prepared by a certified arborist, of all trees four inches DBH or more that reflects the size, canopy, and condition of such trees may be required if deemed applicable by staff. Check with staff. ❑ A Traffic Impact Study shall be required for all proposed developments if the total generated net new trips meet one or more of the following conditions: ■ Proposal is expected to generate 100 or more new trips in any given hour (directional trips, inbound or outbound on the abutting streets) and/or 1,000 or more new trips per day; or ■ Anticipated new trip generation degrades the level of service as adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan to unacceptable levels; or ■ The study area contains a segment of roadway and/or intersection with five reportable accidents within a prior twelve month period, or the segment and/or intersection exists on the City's annual list of most hazardous locations, provided by the City of Clearwater Police Department; or ■ The Traffic Operations Manager or their designee deems it necessary to require such assessment in the plan review process. Examples include developments that are expected to negatively impact a constrained roadway or developments with unknown trip generation and/or other unknown factors. �I A landscape plan shall be provided for any project where there is a new use or a change of use; or an existing use is improved or remodeled in a value of 25% or more of the valuation of the principal structure as reflected on the property appraiser's current records, or if an amendment is required to an existing approved site plan; or a parking lot requires additional landscaping pursuant to the provisions of Article 3, Division 14. The landscape plan shall include the following information, if not otherwise required in conjunction with the application for development approval: 1$'� Location, size, description, specifications and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names. 1� Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and location, including drip line. $�I Interior landscape areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressed both in square feet, exclusive of perimeter landscaped strips, and as a percentage of the paved area coverage of the parking lot and vehicular use areas. ltil Location of existing and proposed structures and improvements, including but not limited to sidewalks, walls, fences, pools, patios, dumpster pads, pad mounted transformers, fire hydrants, overhead obstructions, curbs, water lines, sanitary sewer lines, storm drains, seawalls, utility easements, treatment of all ground surfaces, and any other features that may influence the proposed landscape. 1�1 Location of parking areas and other vehicular use areas, including parking spaces, circulation aisles, interior landscape islands and curbing. �) Drainage and retention areas, including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations. ]81 Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscaped buffers including sight triangles, if any. Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 5 of 8 Revised 01112 m LL o Planning & Development Department � earwater Flexible Develo mentA lication p PP � General Applicability Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE SIX (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA EXPLAINING HOW, IN DETAII, THE CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent froperties in which it is located. he property is already developed and operating as a marina. The proposed expansion to add 200 high and dry slips and a ship's store/office for on-site management of the marina facilit is in harmony with the dis r� . T eh aF�uffing prope y o��i is aTso a commerciaf marina��33-un� ,-s ory resi eTnfi� than the marina facilities being proposed to replace them in this application so the City has also coverage would be corripatible and in harmonious with the surrounding area. 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantl impair the value.thereof. Approval of this request will allow the site to successfully continue operating as a marina and will maintain/ enhance the property values of the property and surroundin area. The marina expansion project will improve e appearance o e prope y y_e iminafing e vis�6fig cause y pa ia y cons ruc e an owner. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The request is for expansion of the existing marina facilities. The project has no impact on health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. The project will continue to use the existing access points, no new curb cuts are proposed. Marina wet and dry slips are a very low trip generation use and the peak usage occurs during non-peak hours/days so impact on weekday traffic is almost nonexistent. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. The existing development is already consistent with the area's community character. Both this property and the adjoining property to the south are developed and operating as commercial marinas. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of ��eration.imp cts on adja, ent prQperties. ie marina �aclities wi�l provide wet and dry boat slips. There will be no marine engine or boat repairs conducted on-site and there will be no outdoor storage yards. The desiqn and placement of the proposed ui ings was purpose u-ffy cTesigne o orie- n�ac�ivi y�wa rom � �iden ia o s o e no an i�aiiows the south and west sides of the building so that it will not have adverse ei�ects on ad Planning 8� Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 6 of 8 Revised 01112 . , �, . o Planning & Development Department � C earwater Flexible Develo ment A lication p Pp � Flexibility Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO THE APPLICABLE FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA FOR THE SPECIFIC USE(S) BEING REQUESTED AS SET FORTH IN THE ZONING DISTRICT(Sj IN WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED. EXPLAIN HOW, IN DETAIL, EACH CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL (USE SEPARATE SHEETS AS NECESSARY). �. See attached iustification statement. 4. 5. 6. Planning 8� Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 7 of 8 Revised 01/12 � . .� i t. o Planning & Development Department ��rwater Flexible Develo ment A lication P pp � °�� Affidavit to Authorize Agent/Representative 1. Provide names of ali property owners on deed — PRINT full names: Clearwater Basin Marina, LLC 2. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record titie holder(s) of the following described property: Parcel ID# 09-29-15-32184-002-0020 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for (describe request): Marina expansion, to include wet siips, high & dry boat storage and storeloffice facilities 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: AVID Engineering Inc. (DBA AVID Group) as (his/their) agent(s) to execute any petitions or other documents necessary to affect such petition; 5. That this affidavit has been executed to induce the City of Clearwater, Florida to consider and act on the above described property; 6. That site visits to the property are necessary by City representatives in order to process this application and the owner authorizes City representatives to visit and photograph the property described in this application; 7. That (I/ ), the undersigned authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. �.� Property Owner Property Owner Property Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PIiVELLAS Property Owner BEFORE ME THE UNDERSIGNED, AN OFFICER DULY COMMISSIONED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ON THIS Z�'I DAYOF ��p('1� , Z-b �� , PERSONALLYAPPEARED ��("1C..\� 1"\G. U C�..�� `� WHO HAVING BEEN FIRST DULY SWORN DEPOSED AND SAYS THAT HE/SHE FULLY UNDERSTANDS THE � .� K"'„ ,IUSTINR.fLOYD ��" �,;= M7OOhN�NSSI0NA00961388 EXPIRES: Merch 3, 2014 . Bonded Tlru Nofrf' P�bYc tMdawtlM� OF TH��FIDAVIT THAT HE/SHE SIGNED. �� tary Public Signature Notary Seal/Stamp My Commission Expires: ��/z� � y Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 72T-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865 Page 8 of 8 Revised 01H2 Justification Statement for Flexible Development Application Clearwater Basin Marina (Parcel No. 09-29-15-32184-002-0020) The property is already developed and operating as a commercial marina with 80 wet slips. The proposed expansion to add 200 high and dry slips and a ship's store/office for on-site management of the marina facility is in harmony with the district and furthers numerous City of Clearwater Comprehensive Plan and Downtown Redevelopment Plan goals, objectives, and policies as identified below and the "Marinas and Marina Facilities" use is a permitted use within the D(Downtown) zoning district per the City's Community Development Code. Marinas are water dependent uses that provide valuable recreational boating and fishing opportunities for the City's residents and visitors. The proposed marina expansion will help address some of the unmet demand for additional wet and dry boat slips along the coastal waterfront. There are limited locations where marinas can be sited and this location is not only suitable for a marina but it is already operating as a marina and there is synergy created by the clustering of the three adjacent marina/launch facilities at this location with the City's Downtown and the Old Bay Character District. The abutting property to the south is also a commercial marina and immediately to the south of it is a City-owned public boat launch facility (Seminole Boat Ramp). Additional slips are needed for the City's residents and frequent visitors, who contribute ,to and enhance the local economy by visiting Clearwater's downtown and beach establishments while regularly coming to the area in pursuit of recreational boating and other outdoor activities through the connection created by mooring their boat at the marina. Whereas in contrast, when a recreational boater must bring his/her boat by trailer to a launch facility (assuming that the boat is small enough to be trailered), the boat owner and his/her guests have limited opportunity to stay and frequent area restaurants and retail shops after spending the day on the water because their mobility and options are encumbered by the troubles of navigating the city streets looking for suitable parking that can accommodate a haul vehicle with boat/trailer in tow. The marina expansion is a good fit for the neighborhood, where well maintained marina facilities are an established part of the neighborhood character. The partially constructed remains of the failed residential project (by a previous owner) will be replaced with visually attractive buildings that will have architecturally enhanced embellishments as depicted on the attached conceptual renderings so that they will blend in with the Old Bay Character District and the property's location on the harbor waterfront. There will be no marine engine or boat repairs conducted on- site and there will be no outdoor storage yards. And, the small 1,000 sq.ft. ship's store/office will provide for on-site management of the marina facility and the sale of boating accessories and convenience items during normal operating hours. The existing 90 sq.ft. ice shed near the southwest corner of the property will remain. Clearwater Basin Marina Page 1 of 10 � �Q Flex Dev Appl. Justification Statement (rev. 6/14/2013) AVID Group Project No. 637-011 The normal hours of operation will be from 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM, seven days a week, with an exception on holidays and city/county special event days and adjoining long weekends (e.g., Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Christmas Night Parade, Clearwater Super Boat & Seafood Festival, etc.) in order to accommodate returning boats. Please note that the adjacent City boat ramp is open for use by the general public on a 24 hours per day, 7 days per week year- round basis without restriction; whereas, this marina is members only wet/dry storage with no trailer launch facilities. The only abutting residential lands are located along the property's northern boundary and they are higher than the marina property and are already screened from view by an existing masonry retaining/screening wall and vegetation. The new high and dry building will further screen visibility of the marina activities since the only access to the dry slips is via entrances located on the south and west sides of the building. The high and dry building is significantly smaller than the 133-unit, 9-story residential project that was previously approved and partially constructed on the property. That project was significantly larger than the marina facilities being proposed to replace them in this application so the City has already determined through its previous issuance of construction permits that even greater scale, bulk and coverage would be compatible and in harmonious with the surrounding area. The existing marina use and proposed marina facilities expansion are compatible with the City of Clearwater's Comprehensive Plan objectives and policies, including: Future Land Use Element: Objective A.6.7 Redevelopment activities shall be sensitive to the city's waterfront and promote appropriate public access to the city's waterfront resources. Policy A.6.7.1 Encourage the preservation of recreational and commercial working waterfronts and marinas and other water-dependent facilities. Policy A.6.7.2 Work with applicants to discourage the rezoning and land use changes of recreational and commercial working waterfronts. Recreation and Open Space Element: From the Recreation and Open Space Needs Summary: * All needs of the City's diverse population will be taken into consideration when recreation provisions are being assessed. Clearwater has a variety of water-based recreation opportunities including beaches, boating and fishing which can continue to be developed for the benefit of both residents and visitors. Objective G.1.6 Develop new and enhance existing blueways, greenways and recreational trail systems throughout Clearwater. Policy G.1.6.2 The City will provide new access or enhance/maintain existing access to water bodies where possible for recreational use. Clearwater Basin Marina Page 2 of 10 �,Q Flex Dev Appl. Justification Statement (rev. 6/14/2013) AVID Group Project No. 637-011 Coastal Management Element: From the Coastal Management Needs Summary: * Land use patterns are generally compact. Water-dependent uses, which occupy a relatively small part of the overall shoreline, are defined to be marinas, beach access, boat launch areas and docks, wastewater plants, and beach concessions. Water-related uses are marine sales, marine product distribution, motels and related tourist facilities, and publisk�parking; these occupy much of the land on Clearwater Beach and Sand Key but are not as significant in other parts of the coastal storm area. Water-dependent and water-related uses need to be given an emphasis in planning and permitting shoreline development. * In recent years the City has experienced a loss of working waterfront uses such as dock slips, marinas and high and dry storage. Objective E.1.6 Redevelopment areas established in the coastal storm area should address the needs and opportunities unique to those locations. Policy E.1.6.2 The City will encourage the preservation of recreational and commercial working waterfronts and marinas and other water-dependent facilities. Policy E.1.6.3 The City discourages the rezoning of recreational and commercial working waterfronts. Policy E.1.6.4 The City will support accessory transient marina docks or slips through the Community Development Code and special area plans. Objective E.5.2 Policy E.5.2.1 Policy E.5.2.2 Policy E.5.2.3 Policy E.5.2.4 Policy E.5.2.5 Water-dependent uses such as marinas, boat launch or dock facilities shall be given a higher priority over other uses. Priorities for shoreline uses in priority order shall be water-dependent uses, water-enhanced uses and non-water dependent uses. All priorities shall be encouraged in redevelopment programming, land use planning, zoning, and infrastructure development. To insure land use compatibility, commercial marinas operated as a primary use shall not be located adjacent to residential land uses unless screening or adequate landscaped buffering is provided. Accessory use marina facilities may be located adjacent to residential land uses in accordance with the Community Development Code. Upland support services, including adequate parking, loading, and clean up and maintenance areas, shall be provided on site for new or expanded marinas. If located adjacent to residential land uses, hours of operation may be reasonably limited. Permitting for new marinas shall consider distance from grass beds, protection of water quality, need for construction and maintenance dredging, spoil disposal, protective status, and ownership of bottomlands. Marina siting and planning shall consider marinas in general to be a beneficial use, which augments the tourist and leisure facilities in Clearwater. Adequate sites and access for water-dependent uses shall be coordinated and permitted through Pinellas County, Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) and/or the Army Corps of Engineers. Clearwater Basin Marina Page 3 of 10 Flex Dev Appl. Justification Statement (rev. 6/14/2013) AVID Group Project No. 637-011 A /� The existing marina use and proposed marina facilities expansion are compatible with the City of Clearwater's Downtown Redevelopment Plan goals, objectives and policies, including: Vision of Plan * Downtown's unique and an orientation 1 waterfront location should be a focal point for revitalization efforts �r all of Downtown. Views of and access to the water must be preserved; The elimination of blighting conditions and the revitalization of the existing and expanded CRA are critical to the future health of Downtown. People Goal 1 Downtown shall be a place that attracts people for living, employment and recreation. The City shall encourage redevelopment that will attract residents and visitors to Downtown as a recreation, entertainment and shopping destination. Objective lA All development within Downtown shall further the goals, objectives and policies of this Plan and shall be consistent with the character districts, the design guidelines and the Downtown zoning district. Objective 1J Downtown shall maintain and expand parks and recreational activities that serve residents and visitors. Amenity Goa13 Create Downtown as a memorable place to be enjoyed by residents and visitors that capitalizes on Clearwater's waterfront location, natural resources, built environment and history. Objective 3D Redevelopment is encouraged to create a vibrant Downtown environment containing a variety of building forms and styles that respect Downtown's character and heritage. Policy 9 Projects located at or near the border of the Downtown Plan area shall use effective site and building design features to ensure an appropriate transition and buffer between the different areas. Justification for "Comnrehensive Infill Redevelonment Proiect" (Reduction in Parkin� Ratio) Flexible Develonment Use Criteria Review Criteria: 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district; Applicant's Response: The Code's parking requirement is a general standard applied to all marinas, without distinction behveen marine facility, service and operational differences that can impact actual demand requiremertts (e.g., this is a private marina and it does not have a boat launch or repair facilities). The applicant had a professional tra�c engineer conduct a parking demand study in order to document actual parking demand at the existing marina and a similar marina that also has dry-and-dry slips. Without an adjustment to the parking Clearwater Basin Marina Page 4 of 10 �,Q Flex Dev Appl. Justification Statement (rev. 6/14/2013) AVID Group Project No. 637-011 requirements, a significant portion of the properry would have to be dedicated to parking and vehicular use area that isn't needed to support the project. 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; Applicant's Response: The existing and proposed marina development is consistent with, and advances the purposes and intent of numerous Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives arrd policies as already identified in the above project justification statement, as well as furthering the intent and purpose of the Ciry's Code and the Downtown zoning district. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties; Applicant's Response: The requested parking ratio reduction is supported by the parking demand study and will not impede development and improvement of surrounding properties. The project will have adequate on-site parking spaces provided to support the marina's operations and thus will not adversely impact the surrounding area. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development; Applicant's Response: Approval of this request will allow the site to successfully continue operating as a marina and will maintainlenhance the property values of the properry and surrounding area. The marina expansion project will improve the appearance of the property by eliminating the visual blight caused by partially constructed and abandoned residential structures from the failed attempt at residential development on the properry by the previous properry owner. 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; Applicant's Response: The existing/proposed marina use of the properry is permitted under both the Ciry's Comprehensive Plan and Code as a flexible development use. Response to the "marinas and marina facilities " flexible development use criteria is provided further below. Clearwater Basin Marina Page 5 of 10 �,Q Flex Dev Appl. Justification Statement (rev. 6/14/2013) AVID Group Project No. 637-011 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; Applicant's Response: The marina expansion will add jobs to the economy through the addition of the employees in the on-site management office/ship's store and workers within the high-and-dry faciliry. c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic contributor; Applicant's Response: The addition will preserve an existing marina facility, which would have been lost under the previous properry owner's plans to convert the property into residential development. d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing; Applicant's Response: The marina will have neither a positive or negative impact on the provision of affordable housirrg since there is no residential component to the project. 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 Applicant's R'esponse: The use is allowed within the zoning district, is already existing on the property, and the abutting properry to the south is also a commercial marina and immediately to the south of it is a City-owned public boat launch faciliry. f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new, and/or preservation of a working waterfront use. Applicant's Response: The entire purpose of this application is to obtain approval for expansion of an existing working waterfront use. 6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives: a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district; Applicant's Response: The requested parking ratio reduction is supported by the parking demand study and will not impede development and improvement of surrounding properties. The project will have adequate on-site parking spaces provided to support the marina's operations and thus will not adversely impact the surrounding area. Clearwater Basin Marina Page 6 of 10 �,Q Flex Dev Appl. Justification Statement (rev. 6/14/2013) AVID Group Project No. 637-011 b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the city; Applicant's Response: The project complies with the design guidelines for the Old Bay Character District. The buildings will have architecturally enhanced embellishments as depicted on the attached conceptual renderings so that they will blend in with the district and the properry's location on the harbor waterfront. The existing marina use and proposed marina facilities expansion are compatible with the plan's additional requirements for character districts and special areas. The project layout is designed with the intent of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan's transitional areas in mind, which says: "Projects shall be designed so that the least intensive portion of the development (density, use and buildings) is located closest to the Plan Area boundary. The appropriate separation and orientation of a development shall be determined based on the maximum development potential/pattern of the adjacent area. " While this section of the plan then goes on to discuss providing additional setback for multistory buildings, the accompanying graphics depict midlhigh-rise buildings where residential units would be facing the northerrr boundary and thus could result in an intrusion upon the neighbors' privacy because of the inabiliry of fences, walls, arrdlor vegetation to provide adequate screening due to the additional building height. In that scenario, additional building setback could be an appropriate buffering solution. However, the physical and operational characteristics of a marina faciliry are very different from that of a high-rise residential project. The high and dry building's location provides the best possible screening solution for the neighbors because the existing masonry retaining/screening wall and vegetation along the northern boundary will be kept, the northern access drive will be gated and infrequently be used, and the windowless north side of the boat storage building will provide yet another layer of screening from the marina activities which are all focused to the south and west of the building at the farthest location away from the neighbors. All routine customer vehicular traffic and the occasional trailering of boats when they initial are delivered to the faciliry or subsequently removed from the faciliry will occur on the south side of the building. c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; Applicant's Response: The project is of an appropriate design, scale and intensiry. As discussed in the project justification statement, the previously approved residential project for the property was significantly larger than the marina facilities being proposed to replace them in this application so the Ciry has already determined through its previous issuance of construction permits that even greater scale, bulk and coverage would be compatible and in harmonious with the surrounding area. Clearvvater Basin Marina Page 7 of 10 Flex Dev Appl. Justification Statement (rev. 6/14/2013) AVID Group Project No. 637-011 A /� d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design elements: • Changes in horizontal building planes; • Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.; • Variety in materials, colors and textures; • Distinctive fenestration patterns; • Building stepbacks; and • Distinctive roofs forms. Applicant's Response: The architectural renderings provided demonstrate compliance with this requirement. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. Applicant's Response: The flexible development request only relates to a reduction in the parking ratio as supported by the parking demand study. Otherwise, the development is in compliance with the perimeter buffer, landscaping and building setback requirements. Justification for "Marinas and Marina Facilities" Flexible Development Use Criteria Review Criteria: 1. The parcel proposed for development is not located in areas identiiied in the Comprehensive Plan as areas of environmental signiiicance including: a. The north end of Clearwater Beach; b. Clearwater Harbor grass beds; c. Cooper's Point; d. Clearwater Harbor spoil islands; e. Sand Key Park; f. The southern edge of Alligator Lake. Applicant's Response: The project is not located within any of the six areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan as an area of environmental significance. 2. No commercial activities other than the mooring of boats on a rental basis shall be permitted on any paxcel of land which is contiguous to a parcel of land which is designated as residential in the Zoning Atlas, unless the marina facilities are totally screened from view from the contiguous land which is designated as residential and the hours of operation of the commercial activities are limited to the time period between sunrise and sunset; and Applicant's Response: The only commercial activity is the mooring of boats on a rental basis. There will be no marine engine or boat repairs conducted on-site and there will be no outdoor storage yards. The existing marina has 80 wet slips and the proposed expansion will add 200 dry slips and a small 1,000 sq.ft. ship's store%ffice for on-site management of the Clearvuater Basin Marina Page 8 of 10 � �Q Flex Dev Appl. Justification Statement (rev. 6/14l2013) AVID Group Project No. 637-011 marina facility and sale of boating accessories and convenience items during normal operating hours. The normal hours of operation will be from 7: 00 AM to 8: 00 PM, seven days a week, with an exception on holidays and ciry/county special event days and adjoining long weekends (e.g., Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Christmas Night Parade, Clearwater Super Boat & Seafood Festival, etc.) in order to accommodate returning boats. Please note that the adjacent Ciry boat ramp is open for use by the general public on a 24 hours per day, 7 days per week year-round basis without restriction; whereas, this marina is members only wet/dry storage with no trailer launch facilities. Furthermore, the only abutting residential lands are located higher than the marina properry and are already screened from view by an existing masonry retaining/screening wall and vegetation along the northern boundary. The new high and dry building will further screen visibiliry of the marina activities since the only access to the dry slips is via entrances located on the south and west sides of the building. 3. The design of all buildings complies with the Downtown District design guidelines in Division 5 of Article 3. Applicant's Response: The proposed buildings comply with the Downtown District design guidelines. The exterior of the buildings will have architecturally enhanced embellishments as depicted on the attached conceptual renderings so that they will blend in with the Old Bay character district arrd the properry's location on the harbor waterfront. The existing marina use and proposed marina facilities expansion are compatible with the plan's additional requirements for character districts and special areas. The project layout is designed with the intent of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan's transitional areas in mind, which says: "Projects shall be designed so that the least intensive portion of the development (densiry, use and buildings) is located closest to the Plan Area boundary. The appropriate separation and orientation of a development shall be determined based on the maximum development potential/pattern of the adjacent area. " While this section of the plan then goes on to discuss providing additional setback for multistory buildings, the accompanying graphics depict mid/high-rise buildings where residential units would be facing the northern boundary and thus could result in an intrusion upon the neighbors' privacy because of the inability of fences, walls, and/or vegetation to provide adequate screening due to the additional building height. In that scenario, additional building setback could be an appropriate buffering solution. However, the physical and operational characteristics of a marina faciliry are very different from that of a high-rise residential project. The high and dry building's location provides the best possible screening solution for the neighbors because the existing masonry retaining/screening wall and vegetation along the northern boundary will be kept, the northern access drive will be gated and infrequently be used, and the windowless north side of the boat storage building will Clearwater Basin Marina Page 9 of 10 Flex Dev Appl. Justification Statement (rev. 6/14/2013) AVID Group Project No. 637-011 A /L� provide yet another layer of screening from the marina activities which are all focused to the south and west of the building at the farthest location away from the neighbors. All routine customer vehicular traffic and the occasional trailering of boats when they initial are delivered to the faciliry or subsequently removed from the facility will occur on the south side of the building. 4. All marina facilities shall comply with the commercial dock requirements set forth in Section 3-601.C.3 and the marina and marina facilities requirements set forth in Section 3-603. Applicant's Response: The property is already developed and operating as a commercial marina. The proposed marina facilities expansion will comply with the applicable code requirements, as set forth in Sections 3-601. C. 3 and 3-603. Clearwater Basin Marina Page 10 of 10 Flex Dev Appl. Justification Statement (rev. 6/14/2013) AVID Group Project No. 637-011 A /� Job Name: �acation: Drawing Date: Contractor: Drawing Date; 6/13/2013 HYDRAULIC DESZGN INFORMATION SHEET Remote Area Number: 1 Telephone: 72�-458-4262 Deszgner: MBH Calculated By:SprinkCAD www.sprinkcad.com 451 N. Cannon Ave. Lansdale, PA 19446 Construction: N4N-COMBUSTIBLE Occupancy: CI.ASS IV Reviewing Authorities:CITY QF Clearwater SXSTEM DESIGN __ Code:NFPA 13 Hazard:CLASS IV SyStem Type:WET Area af Sprinkler Oper. sq ft1 Sprinkler or Nozzle Density (gpm/sq ft) 1.590 I Make: TYCO Area per Sprinkler 100.0 sq ft► Model: ESFR Hose Allowance Inside 0 gpm � K-Factor:25.20 Hose Allowance Outside 500 gpm � Temperature Rating: 214 CALCULATION SUMMARY 12 Flowing Outlets gpm Required: 2422.6 psi Required: 26.7 @ STATIC TEST HYDRANT WATER St7PPLY Water Flow Test � Pump Data � Date of Test 6/13/2013 � Rated Capacity 1250 gpm � Static Pressure 65.0 psi � Rated Pressure 120.0 psi � Residuai Pres 60.0 psi � Elevation Q � At a Flaw of 1126 gpm � Make: FM. � Elevation Q" � Model: � LoCation:880 N. Osceola Avenue 5ource of Tnformation: TAYLUR r�1RE PROTECTION SYST£M VOL[3ME 4102 Gallons Notes: BOAT RACK STORAGE GRID PEAKED CURRENT LOCATION REQUIRED 26.b$1 psi2422.55 gpm SHIFT LEFT(DOWN) REQUIRED 26.629 psi2422.74 gpm SHIET RIGNT{UP) REQUIRED 26.690 psi2422.71 gpm � �t -- i 1 �� --------- -- ' ' -�—'- _.'-- . .- ' � � �.�I�JiJy ��' .,� _ "�' � - _---- � _ ,� I _ _ _. , ' --' ; t�-1° �.�_� . �_ --- t � - ; g � �,`�� E �. t z =- x� � �,��Il�il� �i r��; ! '�. � ; , ,,: __ - , ; ; % �-� -� � � � � � , ii - _ � ��F;2 �. _ - _ � ---- ; � � -,- - -�– - - _ _, - � � ��-�. � - ,�. y �.. �/�^--� yt /� }r� 57�� j - ✓ .:.:-�i/-�F--�--- - �.ww�w� � � �� . _��. d1��1� �.........., � , I�� - i; 'w�� , i _ �: I L S _ i:. z= -�.. -. � .,,� , ,. .,,, � i .� �t .� s�:�t }' �t �� 4 . , , 'a �� — —� i�l ,� _. -- .�.�.__.�. 4 �_�i_ ��T�'*�;�,►��•; �:� +- 4 .^.� 3 rs...e..=..� r i I I' i -;-7r ,/� • . i i � � ._ �� f , ,, , , - 'I � . , _. i ,� , i _I ry! ��1�'✓.%'�~ �'!�,li�'� ; — ,�e --- , s� � � } �'�'; �� i i�i- - - � � '-' - _ _ _ -�+. >r _ �� ' _. _------- +�_._ . �'';r�i� .'� r, j'� = _ � �1 ; �.� - -j ; � �--= � �! _ := ` _ . _ ._ _---- _ _ _ --- -- _ ;_ . _ _ __ l_.__ } � ,�'�-_; - -�; ; ,�/ i✓-._._ . __ _._. _ : . , , .__.. o.. I �---� ; r-- ;-. • f-r- ; �_ _. T _ � . _ . _ --- ' " � � � � � �� % '?''' � Clearwater Basin Marina ARCHITECTURE E,3Q Cnes�nut Stree: � Clearwater, Florida 33750 � Tel: 727.796_8774 i- 88o N Osceola Ave. Clearwater FL --'f'��IA'r'-5... .., . ; `t _.___:.-fS�rr'� �%_ -t�,�-�'Q'�r=-� -__._ ._ . �. � s' a ` � y�_�_-�' . ' . _ _. �'.��'; � �0(�� I Z �"'°�'r .- - . ,-�� -,ti�- �, . ,�.��`��+!�, , --� ,,: . ��`��:,�.r- , �. �,� �! �� - , S1 � '`"�, .�f , - - _ _ _ - `R � �' ,l �.i_ � � " _ � � �,i�.'i ��"'ri�, ;_j. - _ � I — . • < . ,.�i,_ __ -- - _ ��S w'f'� � ��G � ARCHITECTURE f,3f1 �hFStri�, Street ( Clearwater. Finri�ia �i75r, I Tal• 77i_79fi.A77d � � u1tV�, �ui�lll��► ...A� `� �� . -- �"""� S ._. • � i _ � ��--�� _ � �n�in � � �i:�:� ` �- + � fiC',�I 1 - -_ ir �.�� . #. I�J, ��; C...�....�_... �� ei Ill�i ' i�tl!s'!' � I��:�I � v- �.; . � � ��_: - � i �.3 "_� _ _ � is . �1 !t a � _. . ,`,;. 0 ,, „ -� �� I � '..�t� .-!� ' �` � rk � �� -_ -�,. . --- u �� - - — � :t- �f'�� '-c�'`'--i�� ' �� i �� - .;-._.�__.. .'�/ I {/ .,,�—�__— — � _ _-- � u >�� , y� � � � � �-� � � - r . , i �. _. si ✓y'fs`'%� _ h �� s�" - - f�;: = ,.: ; �` � i�� 1 i �f"i-" i� �;�. �. � � '_'� i' '��-:�� '_ , .� � �T; ` ' , s_ -- _ �� ✓� ; s�.-- _ �� - — ; __�.��___ ___ _ , .��! , ._ ___ -- � A � � ��/ /�/ �� t . _ . _ . .__'_._... ....."._" ".. ..___._. ' � � Clearwater Bas�n Mar�na RRn N (1crPnla AvP ('1Par�n�atPr FT N89°31'43"W(F) 658.83' 2 ��K � bock i i oocK I I oocK �� oocK I I�K oocK I I oocK I I ,.� R 1 NCS - S89°26'34'E(C,L)��5.D7(T(C) 45 _ _-- BOAT _ _"_ 4"E(C,L) 216.00'(C,L) NCS U � w � LOA�R�o � , � � - . N � o . W � io U � v a v, aEAM ___ — _______ ___ � M.-. p _ _ _ _ " - A iT eezM � � ��im Woc.__ 0 Z N FPKD LB6539 ^ � (ON LINE) oocK WATER BASIN N88°55'00"W(L) _ -�`°-- N89°26'34"W(C) ' NCS � ___ 38.06 (C.L) � �� .�rEF r;;r ____— ` u �, � S8�ND LB7345 � � �� °°`"1' � Riq I � 9� +y e/T 9� e \c' OG�O � . �,� 9,Q} O . 9 Q, � � OD O E� F 9 Ul C.11 0 . c,9\�ir o o i r n , r.- � CITY OF CLEARWATER GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES i anOSCaO� Coniractor sM1et gre0e p en[ nB betls as repu-re0 to prov�0e posil've tlra'nage entl TM1e L o.omo�e ovn�,�m oia�� e.owm. recommentletl �rees antl plan� ma[er els wi I Oe g�adetl ea Nursery Gratle No. 1 or better es AI ad b Iha FIOrIOe �a ar�mant 1 01 A rlcul�ure a 4 Consumer Sarvicas Divlslon of P�anl 1 4 [ry'Gratles ana s�enaa.as io. Nu�ise�y Plants'. ]�h Etl'lion 1998 es rev-seC �rom t�me to f5 . All pl nt�ng s�all be Oona'n accordance w't� t�e Flor�da Nurseryman s and Grower's Assoc'atone � Oprovetl Drac�ices. CCP / � rt I xetl w-ih A r torm TO 10 5 teblets e r ihe manu�ac�urara . All pl h II E fe g s pe �CS .. . n�unct on w'tn note p 5 5. TM1 pla ' g I �all be the aDF�ox ma a propot�-ons as follows. 50% santl and SOYe organ-c "�__ t�al '' g of nat've peat wel tlecompoSeE e wdus[. leaf mo tl antl �op so- . It s�a �/ O' . p ' e g tl p leGla antl IM1Oroughly mlxetl metlium we� atlaquata ae on aralnage antl /. ^ • wa . nom�oa =epariy ic snau eiso ne aee or au e.i.a�eo�s eee.�s s��n a:.00�s s�ones '� aaaa ein - y .ss 6. All pla g �all rece a e 3" ayer o1 recycled herawuoE log mulcM1 wM1�c� 's lo be y� '4 L 315 rea � r, - :aiiat'o 'V g' � ]. Theeplant m r'al scheCUle is presentetl lor [he c en'ence of iM1e �andscape Contractor In � o�eaeEiscrepency Detween � e 0 A ntl � e plani key, t�e plen shal p�evail. <.10 8. Plan�fs sM1all meat siza ontainer, antl spacing spacif cat�ions. Any m ial n t meeting °1'� s0eclfica�lons shall be removetl entl replacetl at �he contrac�or's ezpense O�] ° R� 9 hll Iree anC sh�ub locatlons are sub�ec� to cM1ange. All locallons s�all be approveG �y [M1a Gl�y �\ Project Menager Orior to pla„[�Ing. �3 v B �0. TM1e LanOSCapo Contractor 5 1 �e responsl�le lor examining fully botM1 1 a s e and 1M1e bitl � q tlocumen�s. Discrepancies in Ihe Cocumenla or the aclual slta contli�ions sM1all be rep�o��e0 to �M1e � �Y o� bitltlin r Eiecove� . No a maCa \-- C�i[y Project Manager in wrl ing al t�e lime g o y ccouni s�all e m ane. �ooi.a�� compiei�o� m. ra�i�.e �o .epo�� sucn conaiuon, or ror e�rore o� ma oa« or .o � the Lantlsca0e Con�ractor at tne ��me o� biOCing. �P_5 18 11. The Lantlscape Gonlrac�or sM1all be res0onsl�le tor sacurinB all necassary applicable parmi�s anE r�e�ses to ce.ro.m me wo.k se� ro��n �� n�s o�a� se� a�a me so�o�nceuo�s. 12. Planl material s�all be ble as sOeclile0 unless unavallable, at wM1ICM1 �Ima �M1e Cl�y Profecl Maneger NOP ARK w I De na�if eG by �elepM1One en0 ' ' g f- t tl tl h g ��-^ 13. Any antl a Quest'ons concern"ng h ❑ e I pe f ha Ga tlirecletl lo the C-�y FTq� Projac� ManaBer a� (121) 562 4)�] ia. rne�e snau ee n aae ��o�: aei r e � n n wen avPro�a or me c��y � � I N86°49'17"VV(F) Nore: rHCac aaaEnRS ro ec nH EaROR iN r�;c oES�R�ariou raR rHC s euERCEO �EnsE N8 �10�02�WiL) NS °11'44"W 9.40'(F) � N88°53'14"W(F,L) nPPROxiMnrE �F) s.s2'(�) 119.57' F,L �ocnr�or, 151.50'(F) � � F�oOO ZONE 51.37'(L) SIR LB734 �iNEs i � \SIR LB7345 I FIR 5/8 L66539 t5'O�� 6 � 13' 1J" �4• 1 I BIOG I BLDO 6'WDF_160 p: O O SHED I L � �t � _ — - ,,. _ . . 1' 10' O ' 13' Cn -CRF�E . — — � - — �— DCGK - -� -- -- ---- _ __ - _ __ _ , E __ __ _ � - -r , - - - Q�N�Er - - _ - a , __ _ __ — �..i \ ' SP __ i >s � `� ' S89°05'15"E ;. �� \ `� .�ONE "AE"�`, ZONE "X^ 0.14'�F�� . � SB�ND LB7345 _I ZONE "VE \ \��-RE. � 12 �'-_, I� \ - _�_� . . _.. �._. B.F.E. a 14' ..�, � � � .... p'�' _..__ � rmeiuTVrnnnoie � \ `� � I \ � _ _ — _ — — — — _ __ � � _ � — — � � '�� ` �'i �A�fi�J��{Ifi�H�& DRY �, �' ��"w�� - - � !:�,,. ., c . ✓ . - ^�! .. _ ___ \��.�. bn/.� f , , \� .. (p _ � --------------�---------i .I _ _ ��, T9M A' �501 0 _ __ _ _ _ t- _ _ ..1 �, T � ( � '1 C' ,.�� ►.� t' PVC FIftEE%T � - � � � � �4 � I - �._�, — _ .. .� "r SE4WKL t= + .�- i (( _ . I Y: oocK i � --- � -- - �5 .__ . �U! DOCN �i � .. .__ . -____. ' '!. \. .. � � OOCN �K . ��N . ..�.s—"'_ _ ' s DOCK o o � TRVSPKDLB]1Si � A� � � OVERALL ,,.s��- Q �N .a�� F'�"y�e 228,830 SQ.FT �f 5.2532 ACRES 9+ O,P 6 �R �E � WATER BASIN c 's 69 J �-_ i i (EXHIBIT "A" RB 14261,PG1!49) �� 'e� 1Y913<3' � LET � � i'�// � Pro�ec� Manage�. PARK PERI 15. TM1e Lantlscape Conlrector sM1a I guaran�ee in writ�nB• P ant surv'vaD� ty for e per otl ot iwelve �iz� monms ao�, n�ai acceo�s�=a �y �ne c�ny Prolect Manager. 16. All dimenslons �o be 11eIE-cM1ecketl by tM1e Lantlscape Contrac�or prior �o lentlscepe melerial „�lFl [alla�lon. �ISC�epancles s�all be reported Immetllalely �o �M1e Clty P�ojecl Manager. ' ^,�A 1. All materiels must be as specifietl o tM1e lantlscape Dlan. If mate�ials or lebor do no� atlhere fo - �a spec��tica[ions, l�ey will be �electetl by iM1e City Project Managar wil� pro0er inatallation car�ieC out by Lantlscape Contractor at no adtlitional cost. 18. All permi�s n essary are to �e provitle� by �he installing coniraclor unless ot�erwlse speci�iceily s�tetl in the speclflcations. i9 N �e��ae��r�cauoo s�e�s snau ee pe.�,�ued o� me proj¢ct, ¢xcept 1or me o�oieci '��rorr�aaoo��ena xa e.��:��q boa n ee .emo�eo as � ssa.y �o accomodaie �ew pia�n�es. xi. nny a.�su�y soa areas me� a.e ��oe�essaruy aisw�eae a�.i�y ma ianescape ms�auauoo sM1all De sotltletl to matcM1 ex�sctor 22. T�e Lan�scape Con�ra wlll �e responsibla for tM1e collec�ion. rem vai, and Oropar CisOOSaI of any anC all tlabris yeneratetl during tha inslallation of [his projec�.� INTERIOR ISLAND CALCULATIONS PEOUIFED: (AREA OF TOTAL INTERIOR ISLANDS) /(TOTAL VEHICLE USE AfiEA) = 10%GREEN SPACE PROPOSED: 7,771 SF / 58,542 SF = 1327%GREEN SPACE Ouantity SymEOI Scientific Name Common Name Code Name Planting Size �� flaplinlepa'maica an�ewl�orn IH 3�Ga1.12'n1Y 813 �, LagernroemiaiMica �C�apemy�le LI 2'�Gal.itlHt • Magiw�iag�antliXO�a so�me,�„uq�or Mc siircai.�oNr Q Ouercusviiginiaru SoulMrn4veoaM OV 21/YCa1.10'HT � B "�"_ ..... S b I pal etlo P 1 SP B 8 B OCT _.___ _._._ _..._ . ___. ._____. 903 VOU oaorata �mumawab�ki� � A M ViEUmum AV 3�Ga12 H 36'OC � � � � Av FPKD L86539 C? FPKD L86539 p FPK L661 <P C DOCK �OCK —�=11-�Frun��F-J.1 __o°�`.�� oocK, m �NOPARNING ��'J �ET��_` p Q INLET ,---g- � 8 g 8 � i EP �—�` TRV SPNO B]3<5 MEiAL ETAI� ` ` � SIR B7 4 �E E E E E E � s, . 6',uErqi X I�IT "C 50�',�BN 52 /�O O r �,r ,a. ,r 10 �� EP 9� 6' ETAI CE SIR LB7345 '��. S ��93 55„E�F) s>>=22'SS E� �� 4 -; .�� MG �� Z -- Fi�-rfi�t ; 1,000 SF - . ICHOLSC SS EASES �, � 0 1013, P _ __.__— :IH \� \ q� o � : MG EE%1 \�\ � � � ��`�1��- v =�so n 12. IYrTi. rl. . �� g��E�_ FPKD L66113 _ _ iu�er � ;�2z�IR LJB�3�A5� BLDG SEWERLiO? 89°28' 136.63' F FIR 5/8 LB6539 R FIR 5/8 NOID � � i �n�wm � �� OP=1 7 ;�l / � � O °s :D LB043 7 � � PK LB6539-� I y� X. � ¢� w y PK NOID �"` J � _•�_. ` � h � rn ,� � �._ M �, �. IiHFICMT�ONSYSTEM OBE A K cONrvECTEOioEZSirvG aECUiMEO wn.Ea sEav cE W � � w Z � `w � � } Q Q PARK J � O " W � F �uwr U 2 � C9 � � �'nso.. , ,�, � -�� '� F $D LB6539 NICHOLSON STREE REEr '" o( o-'" FL�2 5/8 L86539 268 <�.��r.e„ _� � n� AsaHU_r �- J ACCESS Fu CONCRE?E ,� COLUM N NLET EP h2 �6 WAL c+ w O.COVER �5 ° � 5r«�a FCM 3k3 N�6�= ..-,/6'METAL FENCE S�sa Q�D � 0 S� � \99 8 �Q�E a Sp� (F, �,� �s �F) � S, ��ERHANG r9� 93 (L) wOOD WALkW YE r �M � � F�R 53a 3 N9 � [� � �: / N !m N .^- If ) � � O p � N a Z Z FI 5/8" LB6539 z 0 � O a > � oz�, o�b�� wY � aw 0 ;ok�� o . �w o iS�w f Y n 4 U ' � �� °a� 6Q a � � � O �LL e� a �� w° Z �i ^m� � ofm W'�'c' Q "a� ��'a C c� i c� w 2 oz� �Fw Z �o°� a Jsa � � Q O � � \ � � W � � U Z SPK� LB]395 � Q o� ao so� Q — SCALE:7'= 30' � O Z LL SITE LEGEND � (,`l HANDICAP PARKING Q � — � � � — SfTE BOUNDARV LINE `++ � --- CENTER LINE OF ROAD � O PPOPOSEDCURB � ,^ Q vi — — — E%ISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT � � PROPOSEO CONCRETEPAVEMENT � W rP rP�� a Z HC HANDICAP W a 11 11 PARKING SPACES � SNJ SI�EWALK RS' S' RADIUS $ LF LINEAR FEET H E 14 SF SOUAREFEET E T � Z � W a U N 0 Z � 0 _�?�;_'��_.- --- � --��!' ��'_-��',c�,�� _ __� , � _ y � fi�r Y�" t '' . __.__ � . , r . . _ ✓' _.�'/,i `� :I . _�cy�'� c`�'y�--- —�'— .�r ,��.- s _ . � fii � -= !' #�� — ' � �, � � r---- ti � _ � _ 1�'�e` � ,,,. _ . ��}�� _�y � � �,'; f� �� - — - � � �•`•—��, ``� j �' _ — _ � �� r� �� a3 T_ .r- � ��, � ��'%,l ��i-;� , � j � � :� � i _. __ e - � '""'""""'.`.�,.-�."�e�,_ �,r�--./1�.----�- - _..- �---��=� , �,�� METAL PANEL SW 6371 VANILLIN 2 METAL PANEL SW 6682 JUNE DAY : '� , � , \ �._ - -_ ' 1--� � :'� -:..;.. � _ � :a � � _ . �l„. � � , q- � ARCHITECTURE o3Q Chestnut Street � Ctearwater, F'lorida 33755 � T�i: 32�.7�b.8774 � - I_ ___ — � i I � �� -, � --_ . _" _ _ � ��y� -. . �. ,_ ; " � � 3 METAL PANEL SW 6796 BLUE PLATE 4 METAL TRIM SW 7000 IBIS WHITE 0 ' � � � �i:�rl - �'" �� ;� '° -- d - — � �.��=T, � ; -��„S. ., . _ _ �� _� _ _ : ��'-�-�--._ �i �` ,��r _ - -- �__ _---- , � r�—��_' . � i _ ..__.. � / �G� � � 5 SPLIT FACE BLOCK METAL PANEL SW 7015 REPOSE GRAY . -.. . �� . � � ,; r � f 4 � �b �. }Y� } � .�"�Y, .. '� "y� :. hi� � ��t _ �� ry Clearwater Basin Marina 88o N Osceola Ave, �learwater FL �_ ��ouo� AVIDGROUP.COM DRAINAGE NARRATIVE The proposed construction activities consist of the following: AVID Group� 2300 Curlew Road, STE 201 Palm Harbor, Florida 34683 Phone(727)789-9500 Fax (727)784-6662 • Removal of 11,121 S,F. of open impervious or semi-impervious vehicular use area. • Construction of an additional 36,079 S.F. of open impervious or semi- impervious vehicular use area. • Construction of an additional 55,306 S.F. of impervious building and sidewalk area. • Construction of two (2) separate exfiltration systems to provide water quality treatment for a volume equal to 3/4" of runoff from their respective drainage basin areas (east parking area & west parking area). � Construction of an underground, open bottom, stormwater treatment vault to provide water quality treatment fox a volume equal to 3/4" of runoff from its drainage basin area (High & Dry roof runof�, if required. Treatment of stormwater in each of the three (3) treatment systems will be achieved through natural percolation. � No attenuation shall be required and none provided, as the overflow from each of the three (3) treatment systems is directly connected to Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW) • 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. No wetlands are located in the proje�t�',�.,�''' area. No wetland impacts will result from construction of this project. � • The Operation and Maintenance Guidelines have been included . i 5�V Y . � 4 �� ._j �� • OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES Stormwater Management Systems should be inspected on a routine basis to ensure that they are functioning properiy. Inspections should be performed on a monthly and semi-annual basis fol(owing major storms. Systems that incorporate percolation are most critical since poor maintenanc� practices can soon render them ineffective. Records should be kept on all maintenance operations to help plan future work and identify faciliti�s requiring attention. Considerable damage, as well as loss of structures and effective use of the stormwater facilities can result from a failure to protect and maintain ihe drainage systems. Providing maintenance in a timely manner often saves costly repair jobs when the unusual storms occur. Remernber, the surface water management permit dictates that the system must be maintained and that the owner is responsible for system maintenance. A. GENERAL Normal maintenance requirements are as follows: a. Retention areas and swales should be mowed at regular intervals. AI! clippings should be picked up and�any accumulated debris should be removed. b. Sod should be routinely thatched. c. The bottom area of dry basins should be periodically broken with a disk to maintain design percolation rate. d. Sod cover on slopes and embankments should be inspected and repaired or replaced as necessary. e. Periodically, following a storm event, the outfall structure should be inspect�ci to cf�eck that the orific� or weir is not clogg�d and is flowing at a substantial rate. The discharge pipe(s) should be visually inspected to determine if the pipe(s) require cleaning. All debris found in the pipe should be removed. g, Inlet structures should be inspected after each storm. All debris accumulated in the sump or on the grate should be removed. h, Outlets should be inspected for clogging and erosion. Berms and other structures should be inspected for breaks. Repairs, if necessary, should be performed immediately. Page 50 B. CATCH BASINS Catch basins should be inspected after major storms and should be cieaned as often as needed. Various fechniques and equipment are available for maintenance of catch basins. Fiiter bags can be used in catch basins at street grade to reduce the frequency of cleaning catch basins and outfall pipes. C. LITTORAL ZONES (For Wet Detention Systems) The littoral shelf shall be maintained as follows: 1. Wetland topsoil, containing a suitable seed source, shall be spread over the littoral zone from the control elevation out to the waterward extent of the shelf, with a minimum thickness of four inches. 2. Littoral vegetation will become established via natural recruitment. 3. All desirable vegetation that becomes established in the littoral area must be maintained. 4. Nuisance/invasive exotic species (e.g., cattails) should be remov�d periodically. The owner should consult the water management district prior to undertaking this activity. D. UND�RDRAINS AND EFFLUENT FILTERS Underdrains and effluent filtration systems should be periodically inspected to assure that they are functioning as designed. �ailure to effectively maintain these systems will result in insufficient drawdown of deiained stormwater runoff after rainfall events. The filter media should be routinely inspected for accumulation of excess debris and silt. Debris should be removed immediately following storm events. Effluent filters are designed such that all detained runoff should discharge from the basin within a 36-hour period. Observations should be made periodically to verify that the filter is passing the runoff withi�i the design time frame. Runoff remaining in the basin longer than 72 hours is indicative of a clogged or silt laden filter. Should this event occur, the filter should be thoroughly backwashed with clean water to remove silt and other fines from the media. If backwashing does not remedy the situation, the media may need to be replaced. The owner should retain a qualified Page 51 contractor and should consult with the engineer prior to replacing filter media. E. DRY BOTTOM RETENTtON SYSTEM The retention area must become dry within 72 hours after a rainfall event. If the retention area is regularly wet, it is out of compliance with the permitted design, and the pond bottom must be scarified, or the bottom foot or so replaced with clean sands, to ensure that the permitted percolation rate is maintained. F. METHODS AND EQUIPMENT FOR SYSTEM MAINTENANCE Various types of equipment are commercially available for maintenance of sfiormwater management systems. The most frequently used equipment and techniques are listed below: 1. Vacuum Pump This device is normally used to reinove sediment from sumps and pipes. The equipment for this system is generally mounted on a vehicle. It requires a 200 to 300 gallon (0.757 to 1.136 m^3) holding tank and a vacuum pump that has a 10-inch (254 mm) diameter flexible hose with a serrated metal end for breaking up cake sediment. A two-man crew can clean a catch basin in 5 to 10 minutes. This system can remove stones, bricks, leaves, litter, and sediment deposits. Normal working depth is 0 to 20 feet (0 to 6 m). 2. Water Jet Sprav This equipment is generally mounted on a vehicle equipped with a high pressure pump and a 200 to 300 galfon (0.760 to 1.140 m"3} water supply. A 3-inch (76 mm) flexible hose line with a metal nozzle directs jets of water to loosen debris in pipes or trenches. Normal length of hose is approximately 200 feet (61 m). This system should not be used to clean erodible trench walls. 3. f=ire Hose Flushinq This equipment consists of various fittings that can be placed on the end of a fire hose such as rotating nozzles, rotating cutter, etc. When this equipment is dragged through a pipe, it can be effective in removing light material from walls. Page 52 � �� 6.�*oav G� PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION SATURDAY PEAK HOUR TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES ITE DESCRIPTION ITE Land-Use Land-Use Independent Cateaorv (Codel Variable POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION SATURDAY PEAK HOUR TRIP GENERATION DESCRIPTION ITE Land-Use Clearwater Basin Marina Marina Both Wet and Drv Slips STIMATES ITE Land-Use Independent (Code) Variable 420 ITE Rate or Rate or PM PK-HR Size 2-Way Trips (vph) ....: .. ._ < : .� ..:..:....:...::..:>... ,._,., 0 0 Size �� Clearwater Basin Marina 627-011 DAILY TRIPS WEEKDAY � 0 SAT. PK-HR II DAILY TRIP� 2-Way Trips � SATURDAY PLEASE NOTE TNAT SATURDAYS WERE USED IN LIEU OF WEEKDAYS TO CALCULATE TRIPS FOR THIS USE. USING THE WEEKDAY PM PEAK RATE WOULD RESULT IN 59 VPH AND 829 VPD 76 ��;� � ..� , _ ,,,:oeJ�; t � � - �•��\/ . . `� b�, ` ional Engineer Ric r ..l,,,.ioudre� PE #��3z. . r CLEARWATER BASI N MARI NA HIGH & DRY ADDITION CITY OF CLEARWATER PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA PARKING DEMAND STUDY PREPARED FOR: EUROPEAN EQUITIES CORPORATION ``�� 11 I I I I! I//�� `` •'" ��EN�''•. ,f��i ` ; : b � �•• i =�?i �� '_ + ; STATE OF ; . . i � �� .'cC pP,%d, ''��1��4NA1. ��\� ��11111111\ 6/13/13 Jane A. Caldera Florida P.E. # 53116 PREPARED BY: TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC 5/1/2013 0 CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA PARKING DEMAND STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Pa�e No. 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 2 2 PARKING DEMAND ........................................................................................................... 3 3 PARKING SUPPLY ........................................................................................................... 7 4 PARKING COMPARISON .................................................................................................. 7 5 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................. 9 TABLES 1 CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA - PARKING LOT SURVEY RESULTS (APRIL 13 & 14, 2013) 2 CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA - PARKING LOT SURVEY RESULTS (APRIL 25 & 26, 2013) 3 TURTLE COVE MARINA - PARKING LOT SURVEY RESULTS (APRIL 13 & 14, 2013) 4 TURTLE COVE MARINA - PARKING LOT SURVEY RESULTS (APRIL 25 & 26, 2013) FIGURES 1 CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA - PARKING LOT ZONE EXHIBIT 2 TURTLE COVE MARINA - PARKING LOT ZONE EXHIBIT 3 CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA - EXPANSION PLAN APPENDIX A PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS — RAW DATA TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC PAGE 1 May 1", 2013 CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA PARKING DEMAND STUDY 1. INTRODUCTION This Parking Demand Study was prepared to support the requested parking variance for the expansion of the existing Clearwater Basin Marina facility. The Clearwater Basin Marina is located at 800 N. Osceola Avenue in the City of Clearwater. The marina currently has 67 wet slips available at this marina. A small bait and ice shop is located within this marina. The proposed expansion will add 200 high & dry slips and increase the number of wet slips from 67 to 80. The purpose of this parking demand study to measure the existing parking demand at the Clearwater Basin Marina (currently a wet slip only marina) and to measure existing parking demand at an exisitng marina facility that is similar to the proposed expansion plan (a wet plus high & dry marina). A methodology meeting has held at the City of Clearwater on April 11, 2013 to establish the scope of the Parking Demand Study. The study methodology agreed to at the meeting is summarized below: • The existing parking demand at the following two marina sites will be measured: Marina Clearwater Basin Marina (800 N. Osceola Avenue, Clearwater) Turtle Cove Mariana (827 Roosevelt Blvd, Tarpon Springs) Wet Slips 67 72 High & Dry Slips 0 210 • Parking occupancy field surveys will be conducted for two weekends (with acceptable boating weather conditions). • The duration of the parking field surveys will be as follows: Saturday (10 am to 4 pm) Sunday (10 am to 4 pm) • A technical parking demand report will be prepared in accordance with the City of Clearwater standards. Interviews and length of stay analysis are not necessary for this study. The calculated parking demand rates for each site will be based on the actual occupancy of the wet and dry slips on the days surveyed. TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC PAGE 2 May 1��, 2013 CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA PARKING DEMAND STUDY 2. PARKING DEMAND The occupancy data for each marina during the two weekends when the parking surveys were performed are listed below: Marina Occupied Wet Slips Occupied High & Dry Slips Clearwater Basin Marina 59 0 Turtle Cove Mariana 70 205 Note: The occupancy data is based on the total number of slipped rented for the month of April, 2013. For the purpose of conducting the parking lot surveys, the parking areas were broken out into several parking zones. Figures 1 and 2 display the parking zones surveyed at each marina. The results of the parking lot surveys for the Clearwater Basin Marina are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. As indicated in these tables the overall peak parking demand occurred at 2:00 PM on all survey days. TABLE 1 CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (April 13 & 14, PARKING LOT PARKING SAT. PEAK ZONE SPACES OCCUPANCY # AVAILABLE 2:00 PM 1(paved lot) 50 16 2 (eastside field) --- 4 3 (north drive isle) --- 3 TOTAL 50 23 TABLE 2 CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (April 25 & 26, PARKING LOT PARKING SAT. PEAK ZONE SPACES OCCUPANCY # AVAILABLE 2:00 PM 1(paved lot) 50 21 2 (eastside field) --- 6 3 (north drive isle) --- 9 TOTAL 50 36 SUN. PEAK OCCUPANCY 2:00 PM 13 4 2 19 SUN. PEAK OCCUPANCY 2:00 PM 21 7 13 41 The results of the parking lot surveys for the Turtle Cove Marina are summarized in Tables 3 and 4. As indicated in these tables the overall peak parking demand occurred at 2:00 PM on the Saturday all survey days and at 1:00 PM on the Sunday survey days. TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC PAGE 3 May 1", 2013 FIGURE 1 �M, � � s �� a�'., �. � -� � " ' . a ; 'V�°�'.�� „��%� �� +�. � � .'� 4 y�'� �. � � �..` �;.,� ` `P _-�� µ � � ' ��" 1 �`.��' � „ � �^,�p a "T�. � aa�" x,�Y ��. � ., ;aA�,x �, �.,. *'.�,:3�;;" �, . M,q i� � ' ' � , ; ».„ , . �: 1 � 1 �. ;� ,� �' ' .�r , ; ,��,., .� .. »��:, �.,' ,� � �e � �� , � x „�, * x - �� ;�t . �"�� `�«. � , ,, x �� - �,��, . �`'t .+��.�: s � ��'" ' irll v k: ' I a. r ,y'�+ � '� w," -' N �.ys`.. � � �� ` �,..8 �� _ �„�, �,: �� *, ��,y"'�:.._ � �� .� '�`� t' �� t + "..-'�`,� r��.c... � � , CLEARWATER BASI N MARI NA PARKING LOT ZONE MAP North ,� � a � � • �i � . , 4 m Mw . . . ... » .., r• ;, �. � � - ., `� • . �� -. � , ,� � � � . , � . , ,. . �. �� _ , . � � �� , .. �"� e » ' g , ' � ,.. �` �_" ° . � .w, . 5 �.� < �� • �• . , ` " �� j. . ♦ „ . � � „� " m „ �; w° . ;� �- f °� ��. e , . :r „ �� x � � .�,s�^4s � . „, �� .. " � . �+ . . . �"^,p�, � . . ..�.. . � " . 7� � .A � � u � � . . ,,,,r ,, x a � �: . . * �"�s •: ; � � � � ,., � � � . - . � . '� � � . � +; �. ;'"v' �° ^ � i a � a. ' . „ ,. . � >. . � � a�, .,�, e � `., � '� � ^�� . ,, •* xr. Y`4, » R �t ,d. . �- 4 ' . �w. °" 4 ' ' ` � �b, � . " � d�."., "" � .s�. � ' �.y:_ •. °... , at '°�9on� �s��. a ' ., ta.�= . . "� ;s4� .. ��t�.. ,.r�v r c� �,„;.a,. � , 'f°' ` ... �.," ..� ��.. , ;'"" �^ � i + �',''� M�� M � � '9F'�^""`�'�„.�� 4 a, a �' �".,v«,,,, ��„ �, '�%*, .. � ". �� ,�_ �4 ," / � � . � �L � ��4� � '" y �,,.. y�, � 4 ,. � �, � �. � � �^ fL� °"��%�,�+�`" �'4 � ` .. »" � � ,� , .r " «.�. . . . , �-� -e�, r' � .r- . � r . �� . ^,� y . ,es� i '" , �. ., a . _ r r.��..# +F'. ,�r„ wN`5' �.` " ,� c � .. .w ""�!^..� . , . . . . , a "" , � � a t �.. a � . �wa. .._._ . ", . T et�*1.<. . �., ., . � . � , - .��r . � , , - " - � �. < � ,,...� '.�A �'� . •y , ��s�. . ta� .. se '" ,." �» � � �- � ��'� � .,'^�'�,� ,.+'.o �� . . -- z . - � � x�«. �. , � � 'tX � � � ��"„ si � ' '"' "4"�"" . . _ . . , ,i r ,,� � � � w �f►� .. ` � P_ # `� � ` �;�,� � , � , � . . , , � ,�, , . �: ,_ . . _ .t .. a _ .�. � � � � � .� t � ... „ � - �°` , � ...a , . }. . , , � > . 4 { A . ° ^ (_ • �a � ,� .� � � . . � . :� ..�� ,�- ,: � ' � „� � �'��., % �� . \ .� y , { � � .. � �,k ,w � . _ ' e; . , ~~""s«, , ° � ; � �, �x a � — .r� . r ,':'� ., > � ' ., . �o �. , � ` �i�.� „ .�� ,°"�*. � "��'�`�" ,� � �+, . � b � . �.<v�'°o. �., �- .., a �? '� '� � s ' � " �", * ; . . � *, . - �• �. r . ��}- �� + •TT . t��fb' ♦. .�- ..eV'r` '� .di �.� B"BNY.,� nY n . , � ' . �� • # ' �� . ,..� . . ,�.� .. � S„ a?w� . . r. � '/�f ,�y � . � „s"��W. � � � Wi=^ � � Y + , � . � , � °�.. � � . � � � E_.. �^ �+'� a �O,yMFw,., Se+�r"°b" { � .. � '� �� ` � � � 'n , �rra' ) ^ •t , � �� . , �� . ,,�y .� „ . � � � `^' ' I� �..• .,.� � , �� t . � . C j�,,,, , . p „ � ,� - e•, s,. � y�. i .,. ` '�'�C � ... ' LL' � �, � \ .✓� •k: p �� ,," �. ��. v . �� •� �'� ��,<< ,,,• •� . � ^�,�, � .._ 'r ' � . .. - . . . � �. . , - u. ,.. "��a .'.�` � . �� :'� �� . "\ � .. t �'`� � �.y '�isj • ti��as � ' %my, � , ♦ , a . .. � t , • ��a e �. ., .M � .. . : �.:w . ,., :.' . . . �'_..,,� �.�� .._� \ � . . k y� M , �i�L � � tY r � _ , . _� e . � � c,,t�l .. _ ~. �.. `"�- ° --.� . } � ` . � _; t . � ., °-. _ �; ,��.'� �� '�►� � `� ' . , . _ � �` � TU RTLE COVE �,. , . . . �. � � n ,� �� 4 �. � . �-� ,��. �a ��:.� ;:` . " � � -` 4��...i . � �� . �y ��.�R � . � �� . r MARI A �� i J- , � ;� r4,��' `� � �'`�j: � TU RTLE COVE MARI NA PARKING �OT ZONE MAP FIGURE 2 North CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA PARKING DEMAND STUDY TABLE 3 TURTLE COVE MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (April 13 & 14, PARKING LOT PARKING SAT. PEAK ZONE SPACES OCCUPANCY # AVAILABLE 2:00 PM 1 10 9 2 10 9 3 19 10 4 25 12 5 16 12 TOTAL 80 52 TABLE 4 TURTLE COVE MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (Apri) 25 & PARKING LOT PARKING SAT. PEAK ZONE SPACES OCCUPANCY # AVAILABLE 2:00 PM 1 11 11 2 10 10 3 19 17 4 25 11 5 16 10 TOTAL 81 59 SUN. PEAK OCCUPANCY 1:00 PM 10 9 9 12 15 55 SUN. PEAK OCCUPANCY 1:00 PM 11 10 19 10 15 65 The raw data sheets for the parking surveys are contained in the Appendix A of this report. The actual measured (surveyedj parking demand ratios for the existing marinas were calculated based on the occupied (rented) slips at each marina. The calculations are show below: Clearwater Basin Marina Max. (Peak) Parking Demand (over 4 days) = 30 spaces # of Wet Slips Occupied = 59 slips Max. (Peak) Parking Demand Ratio = 0.51 spaces/slip Turtle Cove Marina Max. (Peak) Parking Demand (over 4 days) = 58 spaces # of Wet + High & Dry Slips Occupied = 275 slips Max. (Peak) Parking Demand Ratio = 0.21 spaces/slip TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC PAGE 6 May 1", 2013 CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA 3. PARKING SUPPLY PARKING DEMAND STUDY The existing Clearwater Basin Marina currently provides 50 paved parking spaces. All paved parking spaces are located on the south side of the marina in private gated parking lot. There are also two other areas were vehicles currently park to access the wet slips. The first area is a grass field located on the east side of the site. This area is labeled a parking lot zone # 2 on Figure 1 and summary tables. The second area is the drive isle that is located on the north side of the marina. This area is labeled a parking lot zone # 3 on Figure 1 and summary tables. Although zones 2 and 3 do not have any designated parking spaces, these areas were included in the parking survey to ensure that all parked vehicles were included in the total demand measurements for the existing facility. The existing Turtle Cove Marina currently provides 81 paved parking spaces over five parking lots. All five parking lot zones were included in the parking survey to ensure that all parked vehicles associated with the marina were included in the total demand measurements for the Turtle Cove facility. In connection with the Clearwater Basin Marina proposed expansion plans, 45 new paved parking spaces will be added to the marina. All parking spaces will be located on the site. Upon completion on of the expansion the marina will have a total of 95 paved and designed parking spaces. Figure 3 displays the location of the additional 45 parking spaces with respect the existing parking lot and the new high & dry building. 4. PARKING COMPARISON Based on the parking ratios requirement, as contained City Code, 1 parking space is required for every 2 slips, irrespective of the type of slip (i.e. wet slip vs. a high & dry slip). The table below compares the City parking ratios to the actual measured parking demand ratios resulting from this study: Source Parking Ratio Comments City Code 0.50 spaces / slip The City code does not provide parking ratios for wet vs. high & dry marinas. Clearwater Basin 0.51 spaces / slip Maximum demand measured over 4 days for a Parking Survey wet slip marina. Turtle Cove 0.21 spaces / slip Maximum demand measured over 4 days for a Parking Survey wet slip and high & dry marina. TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC PAGE 7 May 1", 2013 nTE aCCfSS MJAU � --- m ,�.. w��FFI �OYC Od0 �%�wn.aa �TES: �.� ..._. .,.. �..�. .,.. ..... �, ,� # -- � � o-.— ., � ......� -� .,n._. �S, �A — ..._...... _.A I r_'°�---- — ' L_ u.. _ _ q_ _ __ _ —_ _ _— _ _ _ � _ — — _.n_ _ __ . _'_.. ." _ _ � �� __ '.__. . z��.wv.. � (� �.� ... ' i _.. + - ( . . . �_ � i o 4�" _; � MARINA HIGH & DRY 200 BAYS i.: _ ----------- --- ---� = �'--- ------ �. � � . I�.,,. � . . .. — +so �. +zv BUILDING HEIGH7 = 55' , iss �� ADDITIONAL ��° . � � � PAVED PARKING !� �' � --- -- --- –f– =-- _-_5317 5 S.F. = --- 1 � �„m e• �oT �� LEAR�/ATER BASIN MARINA ! �' � °:E��M ° F �� i i �,�, � �' .V ' }- '•�, — � � ,�a.. ' .�.- .__._._..., _'_ __ �� . � o „ ' ..'"_ ', o'' : "�.°L �.�..r�..-�- � . . ADDITIONAL �°� � PAVED PARKING LOT�.g..... :;;:�� . EXISTING PAVED PARKING LOT – FIGURE 3 � i 1 � � FF.E.1s0 � �� .-'� � 1.000 S.P. �; �"a"� � ��:�.� �,° _ _ _ _-�.� .�� M� � ` / ---------------------------� '° I ,..��. 0 0 0 �� —� o o °; � ..,., x; �y o �i-- �--� :°.,,,,�,�—��—��— � � , �' �; � �-� __ , .__.,� ,�, ,'�=�i ..�. : CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA EXPANSION PLAN ;J ::, �. Y� SITE LEGEND ,E. ......v.�..._�. CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA PARKING DEMAND STUDY The Turtle Cove Marina parting rate of 0.21 spaces per slip represents a blended rate for a marina with both wet and high & dry slips. Since the ratio of wet to high & dry slips at the Turtle Cove Marina and the proposed Clearwater Basin Marina are similar (i.e. 72/210 vs. 80/200) the Turtle Cove rate of 0.21 spaced per slip could be used to determine the parking requirements for the Clearwater Basin Marina. This calculation is shown below: # of Wet + High & Dry Slips Occupied = 280 slips (100% rented) Max. (Peak) Parking Demand Ratio = 0.21 spaces/slip Number of Park Spaced Required = 59 spaces However to be conservative, the required parking for the proposed/expanded marina, will be based on the measure rates for the wet slips separately. The parking demand calculations, assuming full occupancy, are shown below: # of Wet Slips Occupied = 80 slips (100% rented) Max. (Peak) Parking Demand Ratio = 0.51 spaces/slip Number of Park Spaced Required = 41 spaces # of High & Dry Slips Occupied = 200 slips (100% rented) Max. (Peak) Parking Demand Ratio = 0.21 spaces/slip Number of Park Spaced Required = 42 spaces The total number of parking spaces required to accommodate the peak parking demand for the proposed Clearwater Basin Marina Expansion is 83 spaces. 5. CONCLUSION Based results of the parking demand study, the proposed parking supply of 94 parking spaces will adequately serve the expansion plans for the Clearwater Basin Marina. TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC PAGE 9 May 1��, 2013 CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA APPENDIX A PARKING DEMAND STUDY PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS RAW DATA TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC PAGE 10 May 1, 2013 TABLE CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (Saturday, April 13, 2013) PARKING LOT PARKING ZONE SPACES �; # AVAILABLE 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12 noon 1 50 5 8 10 2 --- 2 3 3 3 --- 1 1 1 TOTAL 50 8 12 14 Weather Condtions: Mid 80's, mostly sunny, no rain. TABLE CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (Sunc PARKING LOT PARKING ZONE SPACES # AVAILABLE 10:00 AM 1 50 4 2 --- 2 3 --- 3 TOTAL 50 9 Weather Condtions: Mid 80's, parlty sunny, no rain. , April 14, 2013 11:00 AM 11 4 3 18 TIME OF COUNT 1:00 PM 15 3 3 21 2:00 PM 16 4 3 23 TIME OF COUNT 12 noon 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 11 14 13 1 1 4 1 1 2 13 16 19 3:00 PM 11 4 3 18 3:00 PM 9 2 2 13 4:00 PM 9 4 3 16 4:00 PM 4 2 2 8 TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC CBM detailed raw data 5/21/2013 TABLE CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (Saturday, April 25, 2013) Weather Condtions: Mid 80's, mostly sunny, no rain. TABLE CLEARWATER BASIN MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (Sunday, April 26, 2013) PARKING LOT PARKING ZONE SPACES TIME OF COUNT # AVAILABLE 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12 noon 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 1 10 17 19 19 20 21 20 18 2 10 4 7 7 7 7 5 5 3 19 9 8 14 14 13 9 9 TOTAL 39 30 34 40 41 41 34 32 Weather Condtions: Mid 80's, sunny, no rain. TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC CBM detailed raw data 5/21/2013 TABLE TURTLE COVE MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (Satur PARKING LOT PARKING ZONE SPACES # AVAILABLE 10:00 AM 1 11 10 2 10 9 3 19 4 4 25 3 5 16 9 TOTAL 81 35 Weather Condtions: Mid 80's, mostly sunny, no rain. y, April 13, 2013) 11:00 AM 12 noon 10 10 9 9 8 10 3 6 12 12 42 47 TABLE TURTLE COVE MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (Sunday, April 14, 2013) • � 1 �� ' 1 1�1 101 1�1 1�1 1�1 �� 2:00 PM 9 9 10 12 12 52 3:00 PM 7 8 9 4 12 40 4:00 P M 4 6 7 5 12 34 PARKING LOT PARKING ZONE SPACES TIME OF COUNT # AVAILABLE 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12 noon 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 1 11 9 8 10 10 10 8 7 2 10 9 9 9 9 9 6 S 3 19 2 4 7 9 7 3 2 4 25 5 4 4 12 13 6 3 5 16 11 14 14 15 14 15 15 TOTAL 81 36 39 44 55 53 38 32 Weather Condtions: Mid 80's, par/ty sunny, no rain. TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC TC detailed raw data PARK SURVEY DATA cbm weekend one.xlsx TABLE TURTLE COVE MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (Saturday, April 25, 2013) PARKING LOT PARKING ZONE SPACES TIME OF COUNT # AVAILABLE 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12 noon 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 1 11 10 11 11 11 11 11 10 2 10 9 10 10 10 10 9 8 3 19 3 3 8 12 17 16 15 4 25 4 5 9 10 11 11 11 5 16 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 TOTAL 81 35 38 48 53 59 57 54 Weather Condtions: Mid 80's, mostly sunny, no rain. TABLE TURTLE COVE MARINA PARKING LOT OCCUPANCY SURVEY RESULTS (Sunday, April 26, 2013) PARKING LOT PARKING ZONE SPACES TIME OF COUNT # AVAILABLE 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12 noon 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 1 10 11 11 11 11 11 10 9 2 10 10 10 9 10 10 10 9 3 19 3 15 17 19 19 19 17 4 25 5 3 4 10 7 9 6 5 16 7 10 10 15 15 15 14 TOTAL 80 36 49 51 65 62 63 55 Weather Condtions: Mid 80's, sunny, no rain. TRUCKIN TRAFFIC, LLC TC detailed raw data 5/21/2013