The URL can be used to link to this page

FLD2013-08028� Clear�vat�r J MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: CASE: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT December 17, 2013 E.l. FLD2013-08028 REQUEST: Flexible Development approval to permit a 202-room overnight accommodation use (67 units from base density; 43 units obtained through a Termination of Status of Non- conformity under FLD2005-06057/TDR2005-07023 and 92 rooms obtained from the Hotel Density Reserve under HDA2013-08001 in the Tourist (T) District with a lot area of 1377 acres (134 acres zoned T District and 0.03 acres zoned Open SpacelRecreation District), a lot width of 240.64 feet, a front (north) setback of 15.02 feet (to building), a side (east) setback of 13.16 (to balcony) and 15 feet (to building), a side (west) setback of 13.17 (to balcony) and 15.2 feet (to building), a rear (south) setback of 20 feet (to building), a building height of 150 feet above Base Flood Elevation to top of roof deck; 244 parking spaces at 1.2 parking spaces per hotel room; and approval of a two year development order, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.D. GENERAL DATA: Agent........................... Applicant / Owner. ... . ....... Location . . . . . . . . . . . ............... Property Size .................... Future Land Use Plan...... Zoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... Special Area Plan .............. Adjacent Zoning.... North: South: East: West: Existing Land Use ............. Ed Hooper Enchantment, LLC 691 S. Gulfview Boulevard; southwest corner of Parkway Drive and South Gulfview Boulevard 1.377 acres (134 acres Tourist District; 0.03 acres Open Space/Recreation District) Resort Facilities High (RFH), Water and Preservation (P) Tourist (T) District and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) District Beach by Design (South Beach/Clearwater Pass District) Tourist (T) District Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) District Tourist (T) District Tourist (T) District Overnight Accommodations (110 units) � Lll�al 1� alel Level II Flexible Development Application Review . _ _ ��'.w,,. _ . .. . � � � ANALYSIS: Location and Existing Conditions: The 1.377-acre subject property is located at the southwest corner of Parkway Drive and South Gulfview Boulevard with 240.64 feet of frontage along Gulf Boulevard and 240 feet of frontage along the Gulf of Mexico. The property spans two zoning districts including Tourist (T) and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) and three corresponding Future Land Use Plan (FLUP} classifications; Resort Facilities High (RFH), Water and Preservation (P). The portion of the site within the T District correlates with the RFH classification. The portion of the site within the OS/R District correlates with the P and Water classifications. The portion of the site within the T District is 1.34 acres and the remainder of the site is 0.03 acres zoned OS/R District. It should be noted that only the land zoned T District is considered toward development potential such as density. The subject property is also located within the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design. The property currently consists of a 110-room overnight accommodation use known as the Wyndam Garden on Clearwater Beach. The immediate area is characterized by a variety of uses including overnight accommodations, retail sales and services, outdoor recreation, restaurant and attached dwelling uses. The Continental Towers with a building height of 103 feet from Base Flood Elevation is located to the west of the subject property. The abutting property to the east is currently vacant land. Clearwater Pass and the Gulf of Mexico are located to the south and west of the property, respectively. Site History: The Community Development Board (CDB) has taken the following actions in regards to development projects at 691 S. Gulfview Avenue: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVfEW DIVISION � SECONpST � � � � T�MROSi. OEVONDR . � � � �C BRiC:HiWATFR OR � � V L � 2 � ppYS�OF. DR I s� Fyew �� . '�.,. -.,TF �A PROJEGT S/�E '�'r � � LOCATION MAP Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 1 ' p pn� +p r PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT = C l��l 1t �tl.l Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION , ^� �� ➢ On September 20, 2005, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved with 18 conditions Case Nos. FLD2005-06057/TDR2005-07023 for the (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density to allow the continuation of an existing 110-room/unit hotel (where 53 rooms/units were permitted at that time) to be converted to 82 attached dwellings (where 40 dwelling units were permitted at that time); (2) Flexible Development approval to permit a 90-room/unit attached dwelling use with reductions to setbacks, an increase to building height from 35 feet to 150 feet (to roof deck), a deviation to allow a building within visibility triangles, and a deviation to allow direct access to an arterial street, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project; (3) Transfer of Development Rights (TDR2005-07023) of three dwelling units from 125 Brightwater Drive, four dwelling units from 161 Brightwater Drive and one dwelling unit from 321 Coronado Drive, under provisions of Section 4-1402. The above site plan approval has since expired. It is important to note that the Termination of Status of Nonconformity (TSN) request for density and the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) run with the land irrespective of the status of any associated site plan approvals. In other words, the density has been approved and no further request for that density is required however, the method (or means) of using that density has expired and must be resubmitted for approval. ➢ On October 16, 2013, the City Council (CC) approved a Development Agreement between Enchantment, LLC (the subject property owner) and the City of Clearwater, providing far the allocation of 92 units from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design (HDA2013- 08001). The CC determined that the location, conceptual design and height of the building complied with criteria for hotels receiving units from the Hotel Density Reserve, and a Development Agreement for the allocation of 92 rooms from the Hotel Density Reserve (HDA2013-08001) was approved by the CC under Resolution 13-27. Therefore, the applicant is, indeed, proposing 202 units by using 67 units allowed from the base density, 43 units obtained through the Termination of Status of Nonconformity for Density, and 92 units obtained from the hotel density reserve. Development Proposal: The proposal is to demolish the existing hotel and its associated parking lot to redevelop the property with a 202-unit overnight accommodation use. The building will be fourteen stories (150 feet as measured from BFE; note that all height measurements are from BFE) with a base foot print of 36,710 square feet. The building will be of a coastal contemporary architectural style, which includes finish materials and colors that compliment the coastal vernacular envisioned by Beach by Design. The site is designed with two driveways on South Gulfview Boulevard. The western driveway will function as the main ingress/egress and provides access to the parking spaces on Level 2 as well as accessing the parking area under the grand portico and the drop-off area. The eastern entrance will also be a two-way driveway, but will primarily function as an exit for vehicles utilizing the drop-off zone. The western driveway has been designed to facilitate access for service, delivery and solid waste vehicles. The portion of the driveway to be utilized by service vehicles will be striped and curbed to differentiate the service driveway from the hotel guest entrance. Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 2 ° p�]1� nT PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT _ C l.c�l �T a�er Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION . , � ;� • The hotel main entrance will be set under a grand portico. The entrance leads to the main lobby and a reservation desk. The majority of Level 1 consists of the hotel's accessory uses which include 6,450 square feet of ineeting rooms that lead out to a terrace facing Clearwater Pass, a hotel kitchen, a 2,400 square foot dining area, and coffee/gift shop. The administrative offices, trash and loading area, and mechanical room are also located within Level 1. The area under the grand portico also includes a driveway for guest drop-off and a parking area with ten parking spaces. Levels 2 through 6 consist of the parking garage and fifty-five hotel guest rooms with waterfront views. The garage is designed as one ground level area under the grand portico and five elevated levels providing a total of 244 parking spaces on six levels. Level 6 also has 8,080 square feet of area dedicated to meeting rooms, spa, lounge, kids play area, exercise room and a bar. The outdoor terrace is on Level 6, with views south and west, which includes an entertainment deck and pool. There is condition in the approved development agreement that limits outdoor amplified music. The seventh through tenth levels consist of hotel rooms. An observation deck is proposed on Level 10 at a height of 98 feet. The remaining levels (11 through 14) consist of hotel guest rooms. The proposed hotel essentially consists of two rooftop levels ranging between approximately 98 feet (top of podium/garage tower) to 150 feet (top of the tower). The portion of the building exceeding 100 feet in height is separated from the Continental Towers condominium building by approximately 148 feet, exceeding the Beach by Design minimum requirement of a 100-foot separation. The building architectural style, finish materials and colors present a coastal contemporary architecture. The primary massing of the building consists of a five-story base with a"C" shaped hotel consisting of two towers. The first tower has a height of 98 feet; the second tower, located on the east side of the building, has a height of 150 feet. The building facades are articulated and stepped, vertically and horizontally, which allows for color articulation and various balcony projections that will have differentiating window and door designs. The balconies will also have varying railing types that include solid, rail, and glass. The northwest and northeast corners of the building have been recessed to further articulate the north, east and west facades. The building has been capped with a thin, planar wing-like roof element. The elements are designed to articulate and break up the long expanses of balconies. Also, the use of the planar wing-like elements draws attention to the west side of the primary tower as it will be a glass fa�ade on the north, east, and south side. The colors of the building will be stucco light blue, light grey, white, and light green that complement the surrounding natural environment. The site will include landscaping along the north, west, south and east sides of the site as well as foundation landscaping along the front (north) fa�ade of the building through the provision of a variety of plant material including specimen sabal palms, foxtail palms, chaste tree, sea grape and areca palm. As mentioned, all parking for the hotel guests and employees is provided within the iirst six floors of the building. A total of 244 spaces are provided which results in a ratio of 1.2 parking spaces per hotel room. All levels that include parking will be serviced by a central elevator and stairways that has access to the interior lobby and reception desk area on the first level. All guest room floors and activity floors we be accessed through the same central elevator and stairways. Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 3 ' +p t� PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT : C��ll.l Levei II Flexib�e Development Application Review DevELOrMENr xEV�w Divis�oN < »a�rr,� , The applicant is requesting a two-year development order due to market conditions. Section 4- 407 specifies that an application for a building permit must be submitted within one year of the date the CDB approves the project, unless otherwise specified under this approval. The subject development proposal is located in the Clearwater Pass character district established in Beach by Design. Beach by Design anticipates that properties located in the Clearwater Pass District will renovate and revitalize in response to improving conditions on Clearwater Beach. This project is consistent with the Vision for the district. The development of a hotel on the subject property is also consistent with surrounding development in this character district. The building design provides most of the hotel units with water views and provides easy access for all guests to access the public beach and nearby businesses. The proposed hotel will not impede the future redevelopment of properties in the area. It should be noted that the density, height and design of the hotel is consistent with the emerging character for hotels in the area as encouraged by the design guidelines of Beach by Design. Recently the Community Development Board approved the 171-room Hampton Inn/Quality Inn hotel project located at 655 S. Gulfview Boulevard (FLD2013-03011) and a 230-room overnight accommodation located at 430 S. Gulfview Boulevard (FLD2013-04015). The Hampton Inn was approved at a height 134 feet (from BFE) while the 430 S. Gulfview project was approved at a height of 150 feet (from BFE). These buildings include a similar design as the subject building in that the design generally includes one or more towers sitting atop a parking garage base. Both hotels offer hotel amenities such as a pool terrace, meeting rooms, lounges, bars, restaurants, and gyms. Special Area Plan: Beach by DesiQn: South Beach/Clearwater Pass District The City has demonstrated through the creation of Beach by Design and subsequent amendments to this plan that it recognizes the need for pedestrian-friendly development in order to create a vibrant active resort and waterfront destination serving tourists and locals alike. It is understood that a broad range of uses including retail sales and service, hotels and motels and restaurants contribute to the creation of the unique character and atmosphere that is Clearwater Beach. The vision of the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design recognizes that this district is a distinctive area of mixed use, high-rise condominiums, low- to mid-rise hotels, outdoor recreation and tourist- and neighborhood-serving retail uses. The document acknowledges that development within the District may be inhibited by though the lack of availability of off-street parking. This development would further the trend of quality redevelopment and/or improvements of properties along South Gulfview Boulevard within the District including the Harborview Grande, the Entrada and Shephard's. Beach by Design: Section VII. Design Guidelines: The design guidelines are intended to address and promote the following principles and are intended to be administered in a flexible manner to achieve the highest quality built environment for Clearwater Beach. They are not intended to serve as regulations requiring specific relief except with regard to building height and spacing between buildings exceeding 100 feet in height. Section A: specifically addresses the issue of density. The property is within the T and OS/R Districts. As noted, only the 1.34 acres within the T District provides any development potential. Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 4 ° r�1 + r PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT : C��l 1� �l�l Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPMENT REV�W DIVIS[ON �� ... .. _ � The portion of the site within the T District property, as noted, has a FLUP designation of RFH which allows for 50 overnight accommodation units per acre. The 1.34 acres would permit a maximum of 67 units per acre where the existing hotel includes 110 rooms. The existing density is considered conforming because of the approved Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density. In addition, the CC approved a development agreement on October 16, 2013 allocating 92 units from the hotel density reserve. The 67 base density units plus the 43 units obtained from the Termination of Status for Nonconformity for density plus the 92 units obtained from the hotel density reserve result in a total of 202 units or 150 units per acre. Beach by Design guidelines allows for a maximum of 150 units per acre for projects that obtain units from the hotel density reserve; therefore, the proposed density is consistent with the development criteria set forth in Section V.B.2 of the guidelines. Section B: specifically addresses height. Section B.1: The proposal provides for a building l50 feet in height as measured from BFE where a height of up to 150 feet is permitted where additional density is allocated to a development via the Hotel Density Reserve as long as the subject property is located between South Gulfview Boulevard and the Gulf of Mexico or on the west side of Coronado Drive. The subject property is located between South Gulfview Boulevard and the Gulf of Mexico and the property was the recipient of density from the Reserve. Therefore, the proposed height complies with the design guidelines. Section 8.2: This section requires that any portions of any structures which exceed 100 feet are spaced at least 100 feet apart. Continental Towers to the west of the subject property is 103 feet in height. The proposed building elevations show the 150 foot tower to be massed on the east side of the building 148 feet from Continental Towers. The west fa�ade of the proposed building nearest Continental Towers is 98 feet in height above BFE and is exempt from this separation requirement. There is no building to the east of the property that exceeds 100 feet. This section also includes overall separation requirements for structures over 100 feet in height as two options: (1) no more than two structures which exceed 100 feet within 500 feet; or (2) no more than four structures which exceed 100 feet within 800 feet. The applicant has demonstrated that there are no more than four structures which exceed 100 feet within 800 feet thereby fulfilling the requirements of Option 2, above. Section B.3: This section provides that the floorplate of any portion of a building that exceeds 45 feet in height is limited as follows: a) Between 45 feet and 100 feet the floorplate will be no greater than 25,000 square feet except for parking structures open to the public; and b) Between 100 feet and 150 feet, the floorplate will be no greater than 10,000 square feet; and c) Deviations to the above floorplate requirements may be approved provided the mass and scale of the design creates a tiered effect and complies with the m�imum building envelop allowance above 45 feet as described in Section C.l .4 of the Design Guidelines. The majority of the proposed floorplates between 45 feet and 100 feet comply with the above limitation with the exceptions of level 4(33,600 square feet) and level 5(25,875 square feet). The design guidelines allow for deviations to these limitations provided the mass and scale of the Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 -- Page 5 � C��a��tl.l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review P��G & DEV�LOPMENT p pP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION - ��,.,� ;�� design creates a tiered effect and complies with the maximum building envelope allowance above 45 feet. As discussed further below, the proposed development will comply with theoretical maximum building envelope. The mass and scale of the building are such that a tiered effect will occur at level 6 and again at level 10. Further, while levels 4 and 5 are primarily for the off-street parking required by the hotel, the added floor space (level 4: 8,600 square feet; level 5: 875 square feet) will accommodate hotel guest rooms that will aid in screening this parking garage from view. In effect, floor space has been theoretically moved from higher levels of the building to lower levels to create a larger base and create the desired tiered effect. Section C: addresses issues relating to design, scale and building mass. These topics are quantified in six parts as follows: Section C.1: requires buildings with a footprint of greater than 5,000 square feet or a single dimension greater than 100 feet to be constructed so that no more than two of the three building dimensions in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length. The proposed building footprint is 36,701 square feet. Given the massing of the tower on the east side of the building and the variety of building stepbacks, no two building dimensions are equal in length. Section C.2: requires no plane or elevation to continue uninterrupted for greater than 100 feet without an offset of more than five feet. The development plans clearly depict that each of the building fa�ades will provide offsets equal to or greater than this requirement. Section C.3: requires at least 60 percent of any elevation (with elevation being defined as that portion of a building that is visible from a particular point outside the parcel proposed for development) to be covered with windows or architectural decoration. The application indicates compliance with this requirement using windows, doors, stucco reveals, eyebrows, and balconies. Coverage ranges between 61 and 70 percent of any given fa�ade. Section C.4: provides that no more than 70 percent of the theoretical maximum building envelope located above 45 feet will be occupied by a building. The applicant has demonstrated that the overall building mass between 45 and 150 feet constitutes 38 percent of the theoretical maximum building envelope. Section C.S: requires that the height and mass of buildings will be correlated to: (1) the dimensional aspects of the parcel proposed for development and (2) adjacent public spaces such as streets and parks. The property has a front (north) and rear (south) lot width of 241 feet. The lot also has a side (west) depth of 260 feet and a side (east) depth of 227 feet. The site plan shows that the building will be massed in the center of the property as it will have a 15.02 foot front setback that increases to 31 feet, a 15 foot side (east) setback, a side setback of 15.17 feet, and a rear (south) setback of 20 feet. The location and dimensions of the building as well as it setbacks reciprocate and relates to the actual property dimensions. Also, the adjacent South Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way is 60 feet in width. The closest point of the building to the east (front) property line is 15.02 feet; however, this setback dimension increases as the west side of the front fa�ade is 31 feet from the property line. The building has a stepback at the sixth level on all sides that is 14.9 feet which results in a distance of 29 feet from the bulk of the towers north fa�ade to the property line. The resulting effect is that the bulk of the building is setback approximately 60 feet from the street right-of-way. Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 6 '_ C��l 1� Rll.� Level II Flexibie Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT p pP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION ��. ,:��t.,,� �_ � Section D.1: The area between the building and the edge of the pavement as existing and planned should be sufficiently wide to create a pedestrian-friendly environment. The distances from structures to the edge of the right-of-way should be 15 feet. The building is 26 feet from South Gulfview Boulevard and 16.5 feet from the sidewalk. The area between the building and the pedestrian on the sidewalk will be landscaped in a tiered effect with a tropical theme. The pedestrian will also see a living green wall and decorative artwork on the parking garages north fa�ade. These design elements will provide a pedestrian friendly environment rather than a sidewalk experience that feels restrictive. Section E: The human scale and aesthetic appeal of street-level facades, and their relationship to the sidewalk, are essential to a pedestrian-friendly environment. A minimum of 60 percent of the street-level fa�ade must be transparent with windows and doors from the ground level to a height of twelve feet. The applicant has provided evidence that the opening percentages are 76 percent from grades to 12 feet and 72 percent from grade to the top of the actual street level fa�ade openings. Both areas are well above the minimum 60 percent that is required. Additionally, Section E.l.a defines the street level fa�ade, but Section E.l.b discusses that 60 percent transparency and what pedestrians must be able to see into; as such the proposed building is set back typically greater than the 15 feet from the sidewalk, up to 34 feet on the northwest corner and the view into the front court is 100 percent open. Section F: All parking spaces will be provided within the structure. The parking garage will have decorative art screening as well as a planters creating the effect of a living green wall. The entrances to the building, driveway, and garage will be paved with various paving material to distinguish the potential automobile-pedestrian contact points from portions of the sidewalk deemed safe from automobiles. Section G: addresses issues related to signage. A sign package has not been included with the submittal. Any proposed signage will be required to meet the requirements of this section of Beach by Design and any applicable portions of the Community Development Code. Section H.� addresses issues related to sidewalks (also addressed in part by Section D, above) and provides that all sidewalks along arterials and retail streets should be at least 10 feet in width. South Gulfview is an arterial street and the sidewalk along the subject property is currently eight feet wide. The applicant proposes to expand the sidewalk along its front property line to comply with the above. In addition, a minimum of four additional palm trees shall be incorporated into the front landscape material. These trees shall be planted along the sidewalk in suitable areas within the landscaped area. These trees shall be spaced apart a minimum of 35 feet on centers or an appropriate distance based on the provided landscape sections within the front perimeter landscape buffer. Acceptable trees include sabal palms, medjool palms, and canary island date palms. The trees shall be a minimum clear truck of not less than eight feet. Section I.• addresses issues related to street furniture and bicycle racks. Street furniture, bicycle racks and the like are not proposed with this development. However, should street furniture be proposed at a later date it shall be reviewed for compliance at that time. Section L: addresses issues related to materials and colors and requires finish materials and building colors to reflect Florida or coastal vernacular themes. The proposed hotel building has a Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page '7 ° pr� t��T + r PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT _ C l.[�1 /� �l�l Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVaLOPMENT xEV�w ntvistoN ; , a� � ��+„ _. . � distinctive contemporary design that will make it an attractive landmark at this location. The materials and color of the building support the coastal modern architecture and its natural surroundings. The proposed blue, grey, green, and white colors are within the sample palate in Beach by Design, and the finish materials will include balconies with varying railing types. The balconies will also vary in their projection distance from the wall. The design of the building walls, windows and doors will be varied in a similar manner to the balconies. The center portion of the building between to the two towers will be a glass farade. The base of the building (parking garage) will include living green wall and decorative artwork that will add additional color to the north building fa�ade. The proposed color scheme and material schedule meets the requirements of this section. Community Development Code ➢ Pur�ose, Intent and Basic Plannin� Objectives The proposal is supported by the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code as follows: Section 2-401. l lntent of the T District and RFH FL UP classification. The CDC provides that it is the intent of the T District that development be consistent with the Countywide Future Land Use Plan as required by state law. The uses and development potential of a parcel of land within the T District shall be determined by the standards found in this Development Code as well as the Countywide Future Land Use Designation of the property, including any acreage or floor area restrictions set forth in the Rules Concerning the Administration of the Countywide Future Land Use Plan, as amended from time to time. For those parcels within the T District that have an area within the boundaries of and governed by a special area plan approved by the City Council and the countywide planning authority, maximum development potential shall be as set forth for each classification of use and location in the approved plan. Section 2.3.3.4.6 of the Countywide Plan Rules provides that the purpose of the RFH FLUP classification is to depict those areas of the County that are now developed, or appropriate to be developed, with high density residential and resort, tourist facility uses, and to recognize such areas as well-suited for the combination of residential and temporary lodging use consistent with their location, surrounding uses, transportation facilities and natural resource characteristics of such areas. The site is proposed to be with an overnight accommodation use permitted by the RFH FLUP classification. Section 1-103.B.1. Allowing properry owners to enhance the value of their property through innovative and creative redevelopment. The property owner will redevelop the subject property with a new attractive building and a vibrant use (overnight accommodations). The development is considered innovative by the use of a living green wa11 and decorative artwork to screen the garage and the use of density through a previously-approved Termination of Status of Nonconformity. It also includes a targeted desired use within the Beach by Design planning area. Therefore, the proposal supports this CDC Section. Commimity Development Board — December l7, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 8 ' pq �] } f� PLANNING & DEVELOPI�NT : C l�N�[il�l Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION ��:�n<<-� z � 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 are developed with a myriad of uses indicative of a tourist destination including overnight accommodations, retail sales and services, outdoor recreation/entertainment, restaurants and attached dwellings. The proposed hotel will constitute an appropriate use for the neighborhood and is a targeted desired use within the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design. Surrounding properties will be enhanced through the addition of a use which will contribute to an active and vibrant street life. Section 1-103.B.3. Strengthening the ciry's economy and increasing its ta� base as a whole. The proposal includes the redevelopment of an existing overnight accommodation use in one of the more valuable areas of the City. The new hotel is expected to create approximately 125 to 150 new jobs and will be a positive contributor to the City's economy and its tax base. Section 1-103.D. It is the further purpose of this Development Code to make the beautification of the city a matter of the highest priority and to require that existing and future uses and structures in the city are attractive and well-maintained to the maximum extent permitted by law. The proposal includes a new attractive building characterized by a modern style and crisp, clean lines. The applicant has provided front, side and rear setbacks that will allow for perimeter plantings within a 15 foot wide landscape perimeter buffer. The property will have a front 15 foot wide perimeter landscape buffer along South Gulfview Boulevard. The landscape design incorporates native and/or naturalized and salt tolerant plant material, while providing visual interest. Foxtail palms, sabal palms, areca palms are proposed along the front of the site to provide height and scale to the building. The pedestrian scale along South Gulfview Boulevard will be enhanced with accent shrubs and dense groundcover beds. The north and south sides of the building will be enhanced with sabal palms and other salt tolerant vegetation to create a landscape that will contribute to the overall sense of place. The site will also be planted with sea grape and chaste trees. Section 1-103.E. S. Preserve the natural resources and aesthetic character of the community for both the resident and tourist population consistent with the city's economic underpinnings. The proposal will support both the resident and tourist populations with a new hotel along South Gulfview Boulevard. The proposal will be consistent with regard to the desired form and function of the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design and meets the Design Guidelines of that document. ➢ Development Parameters Densi : Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section 2-801.1, the maximum density for properties with a designation of RFH is 50 overnight accommodation units per acre. Beach by Design permits a maximum density of 150 units per acre. Based on the 1.34 acres zoned T District, a maximum of 67 overnight accommodation units would normally be permissible under current regulations. The existing hotel has 110 units, which was nonconforming based on current regulations. The applicant requested, and was granted approval of, a Termination of Status of Nonconformity with regard to density. Beach by Design allows 150 units per acre if a project obtains units from the hotel density reserve. The proposed 202 units constitute a density of 150 units per acre and is consistent with Beach by Design. Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FI,D2013-08028 — Page 9 ' p�lt� nt�l + PLANNING & DEVELOPIvtENT : C l.c�l ►1 Ltte� Level II Flexible Development Application Review navELOPn�rir �v�w DivisioN , � �»a�_ � .. �� Impervious Sur ace Ratio (ISR): Pursuant to the Countywide Plan Rules and CDC Section Z-801.1, the maximutn allowable ISR is 0.95. The overall proposed ISR is 0.68, which is consistent with the Plan and this Code provision. Minimum Lot Area and Width: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there is no minimum required lot area or lot width for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-803 the minimum lot area for overnight accommodations is 20,000 square feet. The subject property is 59,987.7 square feet. Pursuant to the same Table, the minimum lot width for overnight accommodations can range between 100 and 150 feet. The lot width of this site along South Gulfview Boulevard is 240.65 feet. The proposal is consistent with these Code provisions. Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there are no minimum required setbacks for a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2- 803, the minimum front setback for overnight accommodation uses can range between zero and 15 feet, minimum side setback between zero and 10 feet and minimum rear setback between zero and 20 feet. The proposal includes a front (north) setback of 15.02 feet (to building), a side (east) setback of 15 feet (to building), a side (west) setback of 15.2 feet (to building), a rear (south) setback of 20 feet (to building). The proposed balconies project 24 inches into the setback which is allowable by code pursuant to CDC Section 3-908.C. The proposed setbacks meet the requirements of CDC Table 2-802 for overnight accommodations. Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the maximum allowable height for overnight accommodations can range between 35 and 100 feet. The proposed building is 150 feet in height to the flat roof, which is above the Code maximum; however, as this property is located within the Clearwater Pass character district of Beach by Design and the owners have already obtained 92 hotel rooms from the Hotel Density Reserve, as set forth in Beach by Design Section B.2, the maximum height of the hotel can be up to150 feet provided that there is no more than four buildings more than 100 feet in height within 800 feet of the buildings east and west fa�ade. The applicant has provided substantial competent evidence that there are no more than three buildings over 100 feet to the east (subject building, Continual Towers, and proposed Hampton Inn) and that there are no more than four buildings within 800 feet of the building to the west which consists of the vacant property adjacent to the subject property. As mentioned, Beach by Design allows for a height of 150 feet from BFE if units have been obtained from the Hotel Density Reserve, the project complies with the applicable design guidelines, and that the building is between the Gulf of Mexico and South Gulfview Boulevard. The development proposal meets each of these criteria; therefore the building height is consistent with the CDC and Beach by Design with regard to height. Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 10 � C��l 11 �l�l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review P�� DEVeLOPMENT p pP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIV[SION _ �r:=�-„�;� : Minimum O�f-street Parking_ Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, the number of parking spaces shall be determined by the community development coordinator based on the specific use and or ITE manual standards. Pursuant to CDC Table 2-802 the minimum required parking for overnight accommodations is 1.2 parking spaces per unit, or a minimum of 242 parking spaces for the hotel with 202 hotel rooms. The floor plans show that 244 parking spaces will be provided within the building. Therefore, the proposal is compliant with this Code provision. The proposal includes a total of 22,255 square feet of amenities located in the hotel on the iirst and sixth levels consisting of ineeting rooms, gift shop, exercise, bar, and a kids play area. CDC Section 2-803.J.11 requires that additional parking spaces be provided when the area of interior accessory uses exceeds 15 percent of the overall gross floor area of the building. The square footage of the interior amenities constitutes 11.25 of the overall gross floor area of the hotel. Therefore, no additional parking spaces are necessary. Mechanical Equipment: Pursuant to CDC Sections 3-201.D.1 and 3-903.I, all outside mechanical equipment must be screened so as not to be visible from public streets and/or abutting properties. There will be mechanical equipment located within and on the roof of the building. All mechanical equipment will be adequately screened from view from adjacent properties and rights-of-way by solid screening. This screening of the mechanical equipment will also be reviewed at time of the building permit submission in order to fully ensure compliance with the above. SiQht Visibili Trian les: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the intersection of streets and/or driveways, 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 does not include any structures within the required sight visibility triangles and landscaping within them will be limited to groundcovers and low shrubs, complying with this provision. This proposal has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineering Department and been found to be acceptable. Landscaping located within the sight visibility triangles will need to be maintained to meet the Code requirements. Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-912, for development that does not involve a subdivision, all utilities including individual distribution lines must be installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. There are no existing overhead utility lines, serving this development, within the rights-of-way along the west side of South Gulfview Boulevard. All utilities that will serve the site will be placed underground. Landscaping.• Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, there are no perimeter buffers required in the Tourist District for this site. This proposal meets the required minimum five-foot wide foundation planting along the north side of the building. The proposal also includes a perimeter landscape buffer between 15 and 30 feet in width along the north side of the site along South Gulfview Boulevard. A 15 foot wide buffer along the east and west sides of the site and 20 foot wide buffer along the south side of the site. The landscape design incorporates plant material that is native and/or naturalized and salt tolerant, while providing visual interest. Cabbage palms, foxtail palms and areca palms are Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD20 1 3-08028 — Page 1 1 � �l +pr PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT : C��[ill.l Level II Flexible Development Application Review nEVELOrMENT �v�w nivts�oN . . . . �-A �_ � V'Y� 3�Yt � �::�� . � proposed along the front of the site to provide height and scale to the building. The pedestrian scale along South Gulfview Boulevard will be enhanced with accent shrubs and dense groundcover beds. The east and west sides of the building will be enhanced with cabbage palms and bermuda grass to create a landscape that will contribute to the overall sense of place. The site will also be planted with chaste trees and sea grape. Solid Waste: The trash room and loading room is proposed to be located on the west side of the first level of the building. The height of the trash room opening will be 16 feet minimum and the approach at around 35 feet off of the road way for a compactor. The western driveway has been signed to accommodate solid waste vehicles. The portion of the driveway to be utilized y service vehicles will be striped and curbed to differentiate the service driveway from the otel guest entrance. Staff would recommend that the curb shown on the plan that separates the guest driveway from the service driveway be eliminated to prevent a potential traffic h ard. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste Department. Signage: The development proposal does not include a sign package. However, any future signage must meet Code requirements. All signage will be required to meet the applicable portions of the Community Development Code and the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design. ➢ General Applicability Criteria Requirements The proposal supports 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. The proposal consists of a 202-unit hotel within a 14-story building and 244 off-street parking spaces. The building will have two heights where the main tower is 150 feet in height and the lower tower is 98 feet in height. The adjacent property to the west consists of a 103 foot high condominium building known as Continental Towers. Recently, the Community Development Board approved the Hampton Inn hotel that, when constructed, will be 134 feet in height from BFE and consist of 171 hotel rooms. The Hampton Inn property is located approximately 229 feet from the subject property. Otherwise, the immediate vicinity is typified by buildings between two and nine floors. The immediate area consists of uses indicative of a tourist destination including overnight accommodations, retail sales and services, restaurants, outdoor recreation and entertainment, and attached dwellings. The proposed hotel will constitute an appropriate use for the neighborhood and is a targeted desired use within the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design. The proposal includes lush landscaping which exceeds the intent of the CDC and will complement and enhance surrounding properties. Section 3-914.A.2. The proposed developmerat will not hinder or discourage development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. The proposal is, as discussed in relation to CDC Section 3-914.A.1, above, consistent with the character of adjacent properties and with the intent and vision of Beach by Design, the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District. The applicant has shown through substantial competent evidence that the proposal is similar in fortn and function to adjacent and nearby properties. This redevelopment of the subject property will not discourage or hinder future development on adjacent properties. This was the primary discussion at the City Council meeting regarding the Community Development Board — December 17, 20] 3 FLD2013-08028 — Page ] 2 _ C��l /� �l�l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review P��G & DEV�LOPMENT P pp DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � � �� . �e . �; , � development agreement. The property owner to the east believed that this development would discourage or hinder development on his property that has been vacant for a number of years. However, it was determined by Staff, that this development would not hinder the adjacent property owner from developing a project similar in scope and scale. Redevelopment of the vacant property was encouraged by the City CounciL It was determined by the City Council that a new, modern, limited-service hotel would improve the value of adjacent property and not impair the value of adjacent properties. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A.3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. The proposal will likely have no effect, negative or otherwise, on the health 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 traffic congestion. The proposal has been designed to have a minimal effect on traffic congestion. Naturally, the development of a hotel will increase the amount of traffic in the area. However, this expected increase in traffic has been mitigated with adequate on-site parking spaces and loading areas. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 3-914.A.5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate viciniry. As previously discussed, the community character consists of a variety of uses including attached dwellings, outdoor recreation and entertainment, retail sales and service, hotels and motels and restaurants within buildings between two and 15 stories in height. The proposal is for a 202-unit hotel within a 14-story building with on-site parking located within the first six levels of the hotel. This type of development is consistent with the emerging character within the Clearwater Pass District and with the recently approved nearby projects including the Hampton Inn (171 rooms) and Salt Block (230 rooms) properties with buildings over 100 feet in height. The modern architectural style of the building combined with lush landscaping will complement and enhance adjacent properties. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC 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 minimizes adverse visual and acoustic impacts on adjacent properties. There should be no olfactory impacts of any kind. The bulk of the building will be situated along the east side of the site with structured parking located within the first six levels of the building. The primary active use area of the proposal will be the pool and patio area located on the sixth level with a lookout on the tenth level and available to all guests. A condition included in the approved development agreement limits the hours of outdoor amplified music. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. ➢ Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria Requirements The proposal supports the specific Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria pursuant to CDC Section 2-803.D as follows: Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 13 ' pnT + 1� PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT _ C eal t� alet Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVFLOrn�xT xEV�w nivisiox � �,�: �-, .. 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. In order to create a viable hotel the requested level of flexibility is needed for the proposed height. Therefore, the proposed 14-story building with 202 hotel units and associated accessory uses is a reasonably expected design solution. The proposed use is consistent with established uses on adjacent properties and with the intent and purpose of Beach by Design; therefore a reasonable conclusion is that the redevelopment of the site is otherwise impractical without deviations from the height development standards as provided in the T District. Based upon the above, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. 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 will be consistent with a variety of Goals, Objectives and Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of the CDC as examined in detail previously in this document. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. As mentioned, all surrounding properties are developed with a variety of tourist destination uses including overnight accommodations, restaurants, outdoor recreation/entertainment, retail and attached dwellings between two- and 15-stories. The proposal includes 202 hotel units within a 14-story building. The proposal should have no impact on the ability of adjacent properties to redevelop or otherwise be improved. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. �. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. As discussed in detail, the proposal is similar to and will support adjacent uses. The proposed height is consistent with the adjacent building to the west and comparable to other recently approved hotel development proposals in the area. In addition, the placement of the building, accessory uses and parking is similar to adjacent properties. Therefore, the proposal is consistent 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; 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; As mentioned previously, the T district permits overnight accommodations as a minimum development use and the proposed use would redevelop a hotel property that will add 125 to 150 jobs. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 14 ° p pn� } PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT _ C l,�l /t �t�r Level II Flexible Development Application Review nEVFLOrn�rrr �v�w niv�s�oN . ,� �� -� � � 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. Flexibility is not being requested for lot area, lot width, setbacks or the number of parking spaces. With regard to these development standards the proposal is in compliance with CDC Table 2-802 and would otherwise be reviewed as a Level I Flexible Standard Development application. The proposed height of 150 feet requires that the proposal be reviewed as a Level II Flexible Development application as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects. The request is to allow a height of 150 feet for a 202-room hotel. Properties to the north and west are developed. It has been determined that the proposal will have no substantial effect in future development on the adjacent vacant property to the east. As mentioned, surrounding properties are developed with a variety of uses typical of a tourist destination including hotels, retail, restaurants, outdoor recreation and entertainment and attached dwellings. The proposed hotel will support and complement surrounding uses with regard to form and function. b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the Clly. As discussed in this document, the proposal is consistent with all applicable portions of the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design. c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area. The proposal is similar in scope in scale to two recently approved hotel projects within the Clearwater Pass District. The building designs encouraged in Beach by Design through redevelopment projects is the emerging character in the district. The proposed hotel is a desired use on the Beach and will support surrounding uses such as retail, restaurants and outdoor recreation/entertainment. 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. The building is vertically segmented through the use of stepbacks, fenestration, material and color changes on all four sides. The parking garage is shielded and treated as an art element that includes a living green wall. The view of the garage openings are shielded with a projected decorative screen; a combination of the green living wall and colored glass screenings. At the base of the building, the entry and lobby areas are treated as a grand portico, by opening the view of the inner entry fa�ade out to the street. The building is capped with thin, planar, wing-like roof elements, which articulate and break up the otherwise long expanse of balconies. A glass fa�ade is proposed for the portion of Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 —Page 15 ��l.�l 1� (il�l Level II Flexibie Develo ment A lication Review pLn��rr� � oEV�LOpMENT p Pp DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION fi, ��_� � � � the building in-between the two towers. Based upon all of the above, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. The proposal includes a front (north) setback of 15.02 feet (to building), a side (east) setback of 13.16 (to balcony) and 15 feet (to building), a side (west) setback of 13.17 (to balcony) and 15.2 feet (to building), a rear (south) setback of 20 feet (to building). These setbacks comply with the development standards for overnight accommodations in the pursuant to CDC Table 2-802. Furthermore, the setbacks allow for corresponding perimeter landscape buffers that exceed the landscape buffer requirement of the CDC. The landscape buffers allow for more landscaping material than required in the CDC. That portion of the building greater than 100 feet has a distance of 148 feet from the nearest building that is over 100 feet in height. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section. Section 4-206.D.4: Burden of proof. The burden of proof is upon the applicant to show by substantial competent evidence that he is entitled to the approval requested. The applicant has adequately demonstrated through the submittal of substantial competent evidence that the request, as conditioned, is entitled to the approval requested as required by CDC Section 4-206.D.4. Comprehensive Plan: The proposal is supported by applicable various Goals, Objectives and/or Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan as follows: Future Land Use Plan Element Policy A.1.2.1 - The City shall require new or redeveloped overnight accommodations uses located within the Ciry's coastal storm area to have a hurricane evacuation plan, approved by the City, for all guests. This plan shall require the commencement of evacuation of hotel guests as soon as a hurricane watch is posted for the City. A Hurricane Evacuation Plan will be submitted to and approved by the City prior to the issuance of any permits. Therefore, the proposal will support this Policy Policy A. 3.2.1 - All new development or redevelopment of property within the Ciry of Clearwater shall meet all landscape requirements of the Community Development Code. The proposal, as discussed, meets the requirements of the CDC providing foundation planting along the north fa�ade of the building and perimeter landscaping along the west, south and east sides of the site and supports this Policy. Objective A.S.S - Promote high qualiry design standards that support Clearwater's image and contribute to its identity. The proposal includes the demolition of an older building to be replaced by a new attractive overnight accommodation use. The proposed hotel is consistent with the Design Guidelines as set forth within Beach by Design, is supported by the vision of the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District and supports this Objective. Policy A.5.5.1 - Development should be designed to maintain and support the existing or envisioned charczcter of the neighborhood. Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD20 l 3-08028 — Page 16 � C1Lt�l �(ill.l Level II Flexible Oevelo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPIv�NT p PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW D[VISION " �.�>: . As mentioned above, the proposal is consistent with the vision of Beach by Design, the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District and is consistent with the Design Guidelines and supports this Policy. Objective A.6.1 - The redevelopment of blighted, substandard, ineffrcient and/or obsolete areas shall be a high priority and promoted through the implementation of redevelopment and special area plans, the construction of catalytic private projects, ciry investment, and continued emphasis on property maintenance standards. In adopting Beach by Design the City recognized that large portions of the Beach could be classified as blighted, substandard and suffered from "obsolescence and age". One of the goals of Beach by Design is to reverse this trend of disinvestment. This goal is well on the way to being met in many areas of the Beach. The South Beach/Clearwater Pass District is one area that has seen a great deal of redevelopment activity. Policy A.6.6.1 - The City supports and encourages the continued development and redevelopment of overnight accommodation uses. The proposed redevelopment includes an overnight accommodation use which will serve tourists and locals alike contributing to a vibrant successful resort destination and supports this Objective and Policy. Code Enforcement Analysis: There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards as per CDC Tables 2-801.1 and 2-803: Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent Density 110 overnight 202 ovemight accommodation X accommodation units units (150 units per acre) (based upon the approved Termination of Status of Nonconformity) Impervious Surface Ratio 0.95 0.68 X Minimum Lot Area N/A 58,671 square feet (T District) X 1,317 square feet (OS/R District) Minimum Lot Width N/A 240.64 feet X Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A North: 15.02 feet (to building) X Side: N/A East: I S feet (to building) X 13.16 feet (to balcony) West: 15.2 feet (to building) X 13.17 feet (to pavement) Rear: N/A South: 20 feet (to building) X Maximum Height N/A 150 feet X� Minimum N/A 244 parking spaces X Off-Street Parkin 1.2 arkin s aces er room � See analysis rn Staff Report. Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 17 � Cll.til I� �1�� Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PL^rrc�� & DEV�LOrngxT P PP DEVELOPMENT REVffiW DIVISION � �: � � COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as per CDC Section 2-803.D (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project): Consistent I Inconsistent l. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. 2. The development or redevelopment will be consistent with the goals and policies of X' the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning district. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly X� development and improvement of surrounding properties. 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X� development. 5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underiying 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. T'he proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard, flexible standard or flexible development use; b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs; c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic contributor; d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing; e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation; or f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or preservation of a working waterfront use. 6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X' parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives: a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district; b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City; - c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design elements: ❑ Changes in horizontal building planes; ❑ Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.; ❑ Variety in materials, colors and textures; ❑ Distinctive fenestration patterns; ❑ Building stepbacks; and ❑ Distinctive roofs forms. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscaue design and appropriate distances between buildings. � See analysis in Staff Report. Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 18 ' li�l.�l ��ll.l Level II Flexible Development Application Review ��^_"=", PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL APPLICABILITY STANDARDS: The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-914.A: 1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. 2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity. 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactorv and hours of operation imaacts on adiacent nronerties. � See analysis in sta�report. Consistent Inconsistent X X' X' X' X� X' COMPLIANCE WITH BEACH BY DESIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES 1. Section A: Density. 2. Section B: Height. 3. Section C: Design, Scale and Mass of Buildings. 4. Section D: Setbacks. 5. Section E: Street-Level Fa�ades. 6. Section F: Parking Areas. 7. Section G: Signage. 8. Section H: Sidewalks. 9. Section I: Street Furniture and Bicycle Racks. 10. Section J: Street Lighting. 11. Section K: Fountains. 12. Section L: Materials and Colors. � See analysis in Staf'f Report. Consistent X� X' X� X� X� X� N/A1 X� N/A1 N/A' N/A' X' Inconsistent N/A' N/A' N/A' N/A� SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its meeting of October 3, 2013, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the following iindings 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: Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 19 � C�l��l�� Level II Flexible Develo ment A IICat10f1 R2VIQW PLANNm'G & DEVELOPI�NT p PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION � v _ .�^�ss�%,.... . � 1. The 1377-acre subject property is located at the southwest corner of Parkway Drive and South Gulfview Boulevard which is within the "Clearwater Pass District" of Beach by Design and is subject to all applicable requirements set forth therein; 2. The property has two zoning designations which are Tourist (T) District and Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) District; 3. That the Tourist (T) District land area has a future land use designation of Resort High Facilities (RFH); 4. That the Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) District land area has a future land use designation of Preservation (P); 5. The land area zoned Tourist (T) District is 1.34 acres (58,671 square feet); 6. The land area zoned Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) District is 0.03 acres (1,317 square feet); 7. That only the land area zoned Tourist (T) District may be used to calculate the density; 8. The subject property is currently developed with a 110-room hotel (Wyndam) and its associated parking lot; 9. That the subject property was approved for a Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density in 2005 allowing for 110 units (67 units from base density and 43 units obtain through the Termination of Status if Nonconforming for density; 10. That the subject property obtained 92 units from the Hotel Density Reserve in Beach by Design from the City Council on October 16, 2013; 11. The proposal is to construct a 202-unit overnight accommodation use at a density of 150 units/acre, which includes the 67 units allowed by base density, 43 units obtained through the Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density, and the 92 units allocated from the Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design; 12. The hotel is proposed at a height of 150 feet from the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) to the flat roof; 13. That the hotel is allowed a height of 150 from BFE because the property is located between the Gulf of Mexico and South Gulfview Boulevard and that the project was approved for 92 units from the Hotel Density Reserve; 14. That the hotel will be one of three buildings within 800 feet of the project site with a height of 100 feet to the west and the only building within 800 feet of the project site with a height of 100 feet to the east as set forth in Beach by Design guidelines; 15. That the building tower over 100 feet is 148 feet from the nearest building (Continental Towers) 100 feet or more; 16. That no more than two of three building dimensions of the hotel in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length as set forth in Beach by Design guidelines; 17. That the amount of building within the theoretical maximum building envelope above 45 feet of the hotel will be 38 percent; 18. That 60 percent of each building elevation will be covered with windows or architectural elements; 19. That the proposal includes large expanses of windows, balconies, railings and finishes commonly found in the contemporary coastal architectural design elements; 20. The 244 parking spaces will be provided within the first six levels of the hotel; 21. That the project proposes to expand the public sidewalk in front of the building from eight feet in width to ten feet in width as set forth in Beach by Design; Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD20 1 3-08028 — Page 20 ° Clearwater Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT P pp DEVELOPMME,NTREVIEWDIVISION � �� 22. That the applicant has demonstrated with competent substantial evidence that a minimum of 60 percent of the street-level fa�ade will be transparent from ground level to a height of twelve feet as set forth in Beach by Design; 23. The proposal includes a front (north) setback of 15.02 feet (to building), a side (east) setback of 15 feet (to building), a side (west) setback of 15.2 feet (to building), a rear (south) setback of 20 feet (to building); 24. That the maximum allowable ISR is 0.95, and the proposed ISR is 0.68; and 25. There is no outstanding Code Enforcement issues associated with the subject property. Conclusions of Law The Planning and Development Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the following conclusions of law: 1. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards as per Tables 2-801.1 and 2- 803 of the Community Development Code; 2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria as per Section 2- 803.D of the Community Development Code; 3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level Two Approvals as per Section 3-914.A of the Community Development Code; 4. That the development is consistent with the General Purposes of the Community Development including Sections 1-103.B, D and E.S; 5. That the development is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan including Policies A.1.2.1, A.3.2.1, A.5.5.1, and A.6.6.1 and Objectives A.5.5, and A.6.1; 6. That the development is consistent with the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design; and 7. That the development proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design. Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development application for a 202-room overnight accommodation use (67 units from base density; 43 units obtained through a Termination of Status of Non-conformity under FLD2005-06057/TDR2005-07023 and 92 rooms obtained from the Hotel Density Reserve under HDA2013-08001) in the Tourist (T) District with a lot area of 1.377 acres (134 acres zoned T District and 0.03 acres zoned Open Space/Recreation District), a lot width of 240.64 feet, a front (north) setback of 15.02 feet (to building), a side (east) setback of 13.16 (to balcony) and 15 feet (to building), a side (west) setback of 13.17 (to balcony) and 15.2 feet (to building), a rear (south) setback of 20 feet (to building), a building height of 1 SO feet above Base Flood Elevation to top of roof deck; 244 parking spaces at 1.2 parking spaces per hotel room; and approval of a two year development order, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.D., subject to the following conditions: Conditions of A�proval: l. That an application for a building permit be submitted no later than December 17, 2015, unless time extensions are granted pursuant to CDC Section 4-407; 2. That the final design and color of the building be consistent with the elevations approved by the CDB; 3. That the fit, finish, materials and installation methodology of the sidewalk and any associated sidewalk amenities (such as benches, trash receptacles, trees, lighting), as the case may be, be coordinated with and approved by City Staff prior to the issuance of any permits; Community Development Board— December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 21 � C�eal 1� t�1�1 Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT P PP DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION � ��fir, 4. That an easement be granted for the portion of the sidewalk along South Gulfview Boulevard which extends onto the subject site; 5. That the final location of the sidewalk along South Gulfview Boulevard be consistent with the plans approved by the CDB or as otherwise determined/required by City Staff; 6. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the landscape plan shall be revised to depict a minimum of an additional four palm trees that shall be incorporated into the front landscape material. These trees shall be planted along the sidewalk in suitable areas within the landscaped area. These trees shall be spaced apart a minimum of 35 feet on centers or an appropriate distance based on the provided landscape sections within the front perimeter landscape buffer. Acceptable trees include sabal palms, medjool palms, and canary island date palms. The trees shall be a minimum clear truck of not less than eight feet. The revised plan shall be reviewed and approved by Staff; 7. That any future freestanding signage must be monument-style meeting Code requirements and be designed to match exterior materials and color of the building. Any proposed signage for the hotel shall be reviewed and approved by Staff through a separate sign permit; 8. That all landscaping plants and trees shall be Florida Grade # 1 plant material with an automatic irrigation system; 9. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the location and visibility of electric equipment (electric panels, boxes and meters) be reviewed and, if located exterior to the building where visible from any street frontage, be painted the same color as the portion of the building to which such features are attached; 10. That prior to the issuance of any building permit, the curb that separates the guest driveway from the service driveway be eliminated to prevent a potential traffic hazard; 1 l. That prior to the issuance of any building permits all Parks and Recreation fees be paid; 12. That prior to the issuance of a building permit all Transportation Impact fees be paid; 13. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, all requirements of General Engineering, Stormwater Engineering, and Traffic Engineering shall be addressed; 14. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, all comments from the Fire Department shall be addressed; 15. That prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, all utilities, including individual distribution lines serving this development within the right-of-way along the east side of South Gulfview Boulevard, as applicable, must be installed underground unless undergrounding is not practicable; 16. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, the Fire Department may require the provision of a Water Study performed by a Fire Protection Engineer in order to ensure that an adequate water supply is available and to determine if any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of the project. The water supply must be able to support the needs of any required fire sprinkler, standpipe and/or fire pump. If a fire pump is required, then the water supply must be able to supply 150% of its rated capacity. 17. That the books and records pertaining to use of each hotel room be open for inspection by authorized representatives of the City, upon reasonable notice, in order to confirm compliance with the Hotel Density Reserve criteria of Beach by Design as allowed by general law; 18. That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a hurricane evacuation plan for the hotel be submitted and approved by the City for all Guests; Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 22 � C�ecar�atl.r Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review P��c & nEVeLOrMErrr p PP DEVELOPMENT REViEW DIVISION � � �� 19. That issuance of a development permit by the City of Clearwater does not in any way create any right on the part of an applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the City for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law; 20. That all irrigation systems be connected to the City reclaimed water system where available per Clearwater Code of Ordinances, Article IX., Reclaimed Water System, Section 32.376. Reclaimed water lines are available in the Gulfview Blvd rights-of-way; 21. That all other applicable local, state and/or federal permits be obtained before commencement of the development; 22. That sea-turtle friendly light fixtures be employed with the site design, with compliance demonstrated on plans acceptable to the Environmental Engineering Division, prior to the issuance of building permits; and 23. That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all landscaping shall be installed as approved by the CDB. _ , �� Prepared by Planning and Development Department Staff: Kevin W. Nurnberger, Planner III ATTACHMENTS: Photographs Community Development Board — December 17, 2013 FLD2013-08028 — Page 23 Kevin W. Nurnberger 100 S Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 727-562-4567ext2502 kevin.nurnber er .mYclearwater.com PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Planner III March 2011 to present Planner II October 2010 to March 2011 City of Cleanvater, Clearwater, Florida Duties include performing the technical review and preparation of staff reports for various land development applications, the organization of data and its display in order to track information and provide status reports, and making presentations to various City Boards and Committees. Planner County of York, Yorktown, Virginia 2007 to 2009 Reviewed residential, commercial and mixed use development site plans to ensure compliance with planning, zoning, subdivision, historic preservation, and environmental standards as well as design criteria, specifications, regulations, codes and ordinances. Led pre-application meetings with residents, neighborhood organizations, contractors, and developers regarding future projects which included state and local government agencies. Site Assistant Gahan and Long Ltd, Belfast, Northern Ireland 2006 to 2007 Enforced Article 3 of the Planning Order (NI) with land owners, developers and district councils on procedures relating to archaeological and built heritage remains on proposed development sites. On site assistant to project manager during the archeological process throughout the pre-development stage. Development Planner Versar Inc, Fort Story/Fort Eustis, Virginia 2005 to 2006 Developed survey strategies for the Cultural Resource Manager by reviewing local and state planning documents, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Preservation Planning on Federal installations, the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, the Virginia Department of Transportation plan, and Virginia Power's public utility plan in the predevelopment stages of new development and building expansion projects to ensure protection of historic properties. City Planner City Planning Commission, New Orleans, Louisiana 2000 to 2005 Primary subdivision planner assisting applicants throughout the subdivision process in accordance with the zoning and subdivision regulations of the City of New Orleans. Reviewed various zoning and conditional use applications. Prepared and presented staff reports to the City Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Adjustments. EDUCATION University of New Orleans, LA MA Urban and Regional Planning (2004) State University of New York at Buffalo, NY BA Anthropology (1999) t M 691 S GULFVIEW BLVD FLD2013-08028 1 Enchantment LLC Z ornng. Tounst ° �lear�at�� % Atlas #: 285A ` � : Development Department Fiexible llevelopment Applicat�on . Attached Dwellinys, Mixed-Uses or Nfln-Residential Uses IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT COMPLETE AND CORRECT INFORMATION. `ANY,MI�LEA,DING,�U,EGEPTIy�, .. .. . .... � .:... __....:..,_:.f INCOMPLETE OR INCORRECT INFORMATION MAY INVALIDATE YOUR APPLICATION. ALL APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE FILLED OUT C05APLETELY AND CORRECTLY, AND SUBMITTED IN PERSGN (NO FAX OR DELIVERIES) TO TNE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY NOON ON THE SCHEDULED DEADLINE DATE. A TOTAL OF il COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 10 COPIES) AS REQUIRED WITHIN ARE TO BE SUBMIiTED FOR REVIEW BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMM(TTEE. SUBSEqUENT SUBMITTAL FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD WILI 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 tNTO SETS. THE APPLICANT, BY FILING THIS APPLICATION, AGREES TO COMPLY 4AFITH ALL APPIiCABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. FIRE DEPT PRELIMARY SITE PLAN REVIEW FEE: �200 APPLICATION FEE: $�,2(N"j PROPERTY OWNER (PER DEEDj: ENCHANTMENT LLc MAILiNG ADDRESS: ��1 '�ULFVIEW BLVD. S. , CLEARWATER, FL 33?6 i PHONE NUMBER: ��z" 4zi-i2=.o EMAIL: U�Ai LELE <liGAYL@ENCHANTI�;ENTRESIDENCES.CONI> AGENT OR REPRESENTATIVE: �v ��FE� MAILINGADDRESS: Po Box Y25e, cTE��vpzeR FL 33�sG PHONENUMBER: r727> 458-95'71 EMAIL: ED HOOPER <EHOOPERl@AOL.COM? ADDRESS Of SUBJECT PROPERTY: ngl GvL�'IEw aLV�. �. , �LE%+RGIAT�F, e� �s�6� PARCEL NUMBER(S): �?-29-15-05004-003-01G0 LEGALDESCRIPTION: BpYSroE SUB NO. 5 BLK C, LOTS 16 THRU 19 & RIF RTS & Li;t1D GN S OF iOT 39 PROPOSED USE(S): °�'�kh��riT acc�ro�AT�oras tv� 2oz ur:zTs DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: sEE �x:�ieiT "F•' Specifically idenfify ihe request (include a!f requesied code flexibi(ity,• e.g., �educ[ron in required number of parking spaces, height setbacks, loi size, lot width, spedfic use, etc.): Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727�62�-0567; Fax: 727562-4865 Page 1 of 8 Revised 01/12 t ti ° Clearwa ter 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. ZC1t�ING DlSTRiCT: F�ruR� t.�rvr� �s� �t.��v ��s��arioru: TGJkZST ^T", OPc,N SP�=.��E1kECRE=.TIOrd "GSi ii" RESORT FA.CILITY HIGH EXISTING USE (currently exisHng on site): Ho�EL PROPOSED USE tnew use, if any; plus existing, if to remainj: HoTEL SITEAREA: Sa,E�i ..T,� i,sl� ��osia^ Sq ft 1.3-,? GROSS fLOOR AREA (total square footage of all buildings): Existing: s3, s�6 sq. ft. Proposed: 153,1b9 sq.ft. Maximum Allowable: ��/R sq, ft. acres GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage devoted to each use, if there will be multiple uses): First use: i�o, 9i4 sq.ft. Ko�al Secand use: 22.z5� Sq ft;,��E�,o,; Third use: sq, ft. FLOOR AREA RATIO jtotal square footage of all 6uildings divided by the total square footage of enHre site): Existing: • �3� Proposed: 3.�2 Maximum Allowable: ��/A BUILDING COVERAGE/FOOTPRINT (1�` floor square footage of ail buildings): Existing: e,976 s ft. is.Qs 9• ( % of site) Proposed: 3G,15� s ft. �E.�� q• ( /o of site) Maximum Permitted: N!H sq. ft. ( rj/� % of site) GREEN SPACE WITHIN VEHICULAR USE AREA (green space within the parking lot and interior of site; not perimeter buffer): Existin 1� a'- s ft. '• r' g" q• � `'' %of site) Proposed: ° sq. ft. (° % of site) VEHICULAR USE AREA {parking spaces, drive aisles, loading area): Existing: 3� ^^' - sq. ft. � 4�.?G Proposed: i1,55o Sq ft � 1-,.aG, % of site) % of site) Planning 8, Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562�567; Fax: 727�562-4865 Page 2 of 8 Revised 01/12 � ti IMPERVIOUS $URFACE RATIO (total square footage of impervious areas divided hy the total square footage of entire sitef : Existing: . na5 Proposed: "'�'""` D� � '�� Maximum Permitted: • �- DENSI'tY (units, rooms or beds per acrej: Existing: il�' ��zzs Proposed: �!'� ur�zTs Maximum Permitted: 1F�'/��=203 ur�IT` OFF-STREET PARKING: Existing: Proposed: Minimum Required: e5 2-}4 2a� BUILDING HEIGHT: Existing: Proposed: Maximum Permitted: 69. , 150�' ABOVE BcE 1� 15C� WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED TOTAL VALUE OF THE PROIECT UPON COMPLETION? $�Li" 20NING DISTRICTS FOR ALLADJACENT PROPERTY: North: T & os/r� South: ° East: T � os/R West: T � os/R STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all Sworn to an subscribed before me this �� / � day of representations made in this application are true and accurate to the best of my knowiedge and authorize G�- to me and/or by City representatives to visit and photograph the . who is personally known has property described in thi ap ication. / �� 1� ^� �� produced _/h� �; .� s`t iM s�s identification. w��`�� _ Signature property owner or representative ry pubiic, My cammission expires: , �� fyY f� a�o`P �a�;;, USA CODY `2 " ``' Notary Public - State ot Florida :N,: :,; My Comm. Expires Nov 9, 2014 %9 � : ''-;;oFF��,•� Commission # EE 41036 Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtte Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727 562�567; Fax: 727562-4865 Page 3 of 8 Revised 01J12 ' ��n��T��nN Planning & Development Department = C 1 hr CI Flexible Development Application " Si�te Plan Submittal Package Check list IN ADDITION TO THE COMPLETED FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT (FLD) APPLICATION, ALL FLD APPLICATIONS SHALL INCLUDE A SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL PACKAGE THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLnWING 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 Fiexibie Development Application Flexibility Criteria sheet shall be used to provide these responses. �' Responses to the General Applicability criteria set forth in Section 3-914.A. The attached Flexible Development Applicatiori General Applicability Criteria sheet shall 6e 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, �F' 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. ❑ If this application is being submitted for the purpose of a boatlift, catwalk, davit, dock, marina, pier, seawall or other similar marine structure, then the appiication 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. � A site plan prepared by a professional architect, engineer or landscape architect drawn to a minimum scale of one inch equals SO feet on a sheet size not to exceed 24 inches by 36 inches that includes the following information: � Index sheet of the same size sha�i be inciuded with individual sheet numbers referenced thereon. � North arrow, scale, location map and date prepared. ❑ Identification of the boundaries of phases, if development is proposed to be constructed in phases. � Location of the Coastal Construction Control Line {CCCL), whether the property is located within a Special Flood Hazard Area, and the Base fiood Elevation (BFE) of the property, as applica6le. � Location, footprint and size of all existing and proposed buildings and structures on the site. � Location and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems, both on-site and off-site, with proposed points of aecess. � 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. � Location of solid waste collection facilities, required screening and provisions for accessibility for collection. � Location of off-street loading area, if required by Section 3-1406. � 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 8� Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727�562-4567; Fax: 727562�4865 Page 4 of 8 Revised 01/12 � Typical floor plans, including floor plans for each floor of any parking garage. � Demolition plan. � 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 SO% (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. � 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 (evel of service as adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan to unacceptable leve�s; 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 annuai 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 indude developments that are expected to negatively impact a constrained roadway or developments with unknown trip generation and/or other unknown factors. � A landscape plan shail be provided for any project where there is a new use or a change of use; or an existing use is improved or remodeted in a vatue 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: � Location, size, description, specifications and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, including botanical and common names. � Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and location, including drip line. 0 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. � Location of existing and proposed structures and improvements, incfuding 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. �J 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. � Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscaped buffers including sight triangles, if any. Planning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727�62-4567; Fax: 727562.qg65 Page 5 of 8 Revised 01/12 . ? �lear�a ter U Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application General_Applicability Criteria PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE SIX (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA EXPLAINING HOW, IN DETAIL, TNE 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 properties in which it is located. CF� Ei�:HIBIT 'rp.r 2. The proposed development wiil not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantiy impair the value thereof. SEE EXHIBIT "B" 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. SEE Ea;HIEIT "B" 4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. SEE EXHIHIT "B" 5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. SEE EXHIBI, '•H'• 6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, inciuding visuai, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties. SEE EXi?SBIT "&" Planning & Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727.562�d567; Fax: 727�562-4865 Page 6 of 8 Revised 01/12 ° Clearwater Planning & Development Department Flexible Development Application U Affidavit to Atlthorize Agent/Representative 1. Provid� names of all property owners on deed — PRINT full names: erJCx�rrTrrEr:m zLC. 2. That (I amJwe are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the following described property: 5°1 SGUTH GU:,FVIEW BLVD., CLEAR�n.ATER, FL 33?6"' 3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for (describe request): CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOTEL 4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint: � � 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/we), the undersig d authority, hereby certify that the foregoing is krue and correct. Property Owner Property Owner Property Owner STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS Property Owner BEFORE ME THE UNDERSIGNED, AN OFFI R DULY COMMISSIONED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ON THIS �� DAY OF ,�O/ 3 , PERSONALLY APPEARED �1/.. I � DEP Notary YS THAT HE/SHE FULLY UNDERSTANDS THE CO ``,��rP�� - ; o'P `a,�'�. LISA CODY '? � �`�� Notary Public - State of Florida - ' ' = :�,� +ov; My Comm. Expires Nov 9, 2014 �°%;;oFF��;•'� Commission � EE 41036 „��,,,,� . mp WHO HAVING BEEN FIRST DULY SWORN THE AFFIDAVIT THAT HE/SHE SIGNED. � Notary Public Signature My Commission Expires: ��y �% � Q l� Planning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Ciearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-d567; Fax: 727562-4865 Page S of 8 Revised 01/12 `o Planning & Development Department }��rwater 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(S) 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 EXHIBIT "C" 1. 4. 6. 8. 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 EXHIBIT "A" TO FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Description of The subject property is the Wyndham Hotel, located at 691 South Gulfview Boulevard. The applicant and property owner, Enchantment LLC, proposes to redevelop the property with 202 overnight accommodation units. Specifically, the Applicant requests: 1. Flexible Development approval to pernut 202 overnight accommodation units in the Tourist (T) District, with a. a building height of 150 feet; b. requested 92 units from the hotel density reserve; c. a Lot Area (zoned T) of 58,671 square feet; d. a Lot Width of 241 feet; e. a maximum height of 150 feet; f. a front (north) setback of 15 feet to building and zero feet to driveway; g. a side (west) setback of 15 feet to building and zero feet to privacy fence; h. a side (east) setback of 15 feet to building; i. a rear (south) setback of 20 feet to the building j. 244 parking spaces k. approval of a two year development order; as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Proj ect, under the provisions of Section 2-803.0 of the Code; Existing Use The property is the site of the existing Wyndham Hotel which was built in 1973. The hotel currently has 110 overnight accommodation units. Proposed Use The Applicant proposes to redevelop the site with a 202-room hotel that will attract tourists to Clearwater Beach. The property will include amenities, such as meeting rooms, spa, pool, restaurant and bar, all accessory uses to the hotel use. Parking for hotel guests and employees will be in a 3-story on-site parking garage, containing 244 parking spaces. EXHIBIT "B" GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA: 1) The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located. The use, the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of the proposed use is homogenous to the surrounding and abutting uses. The site is comparable in height and matches the surrounding developments. "Beach by Design" Design Guidelines are met for all the above characteristics. North: The adjacent property to the north is City right-of-way and an area of smaller mixed uses including condominium, retail and restaurants. South: The property is bounded on the south by Clearwater Pass. East: The adjacent property to the east is currently vacant land, but previous proposals have been for hotels and residential condominiums of similar scale to this proposal. West: The adjacent property to west is occupied by Continental Towers condominium, a two building 12- story tall, 103+/- high residential development. The scale, bulk, coverage and density of the proposed project are in keeping with the Design Guidelines set forth in Beach by Design for projects including approvals of transfers of density and increased building height. 2) The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof. The proposed proj ect will enhance this area of the beach in a number of ways, including: (1) Superior architectural design and lush landscaping which will visually enhance the neighborhood; (2) Construction which meets current Land Development Codes and the goal of Beach by Design to provide lu�cury resorts on the beach; (3) Adequate parking and adequate stacking space and loading area, in order to eliminate any traffic congestion at the site and eliminate potential off-site parking in public lots. The parking is designed to accommodate hotel guests and staff, as well as provide adequate holding space for taxis and airport shuttles awaiting fares; (4) Property value will significantly increase; (5) The hotel guests are potential clientele of nearby restaurants and other Clearwater Beach businesses; and (6) Design locates guest activity portions of the hotel toward the public beach to increase activity around the site. 3) The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. The proposed development will be the same use as currently exists and will connect to the recently constructed concrete sidewalk in front of the hotel. Pedestrian flow and safety along South Gulfview will be maintained. Driveway stacking space is adequately provided at the hotel entrance so that vehicles do not back up into South Gulfview, thereby minimizing traffic congestion and avoids blocking the sidewalk. With regard to health, safety and welfare, the proposed development and structure will comply as required with applicable codes including the Florida Building Code, the Life Safety Code and the Florida Fire Prevention Code. Fire Department Access shall comply with NFPA 1 Chapter 18 with Gulf View Boulevard serving as the access road, and more specifically that the access road will extend to within 50' of a single exterior door per 18.222, an approved route around the exterior of the structure measures not more than 450' from the access road and the building is equipped with sprinklers per 18.2.2.2.3.1 and 18.2.2.3.2. 4) The proposed development is designed to minimize traffc congestion. The proposed development has many on-site amenities and direct access to Clearwater Pass which will reduce the amount of off-site trips. The parking garage will contain 244 parking spaces, exceeding the minimum Code required for overnight accommodation use. There are a number of ways in which the project has been designed to minimize traffic congestion on South Gulfview Boulevard: (1) The driveway under the Porte Cochere will have a one-way north to south traffic flow. Vehicles will enter the two-lane driveway on the north side and drive in front of the hotel. The Porte Cochere driveway provides stacking space for 14 vehicles. (2) The parking garage will contain 244 parking spaces, including 1 space in excess of the minimum Code requirement for overnight accommodation as the Applicant desires to insure that all parking demands of the project can be accommodated on site. 5) The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. The use, the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of the proposed use is homogenous to the surrounding and abutting uses. The site is comparable in height and matches the surrounding developments. "Beach by Design" Design Guidelines are met for all the above characteristics. The proposed hotel has a distinctive design that will make it an attractive landmark at this location. The project is also consistent with the community character of the "Clearwater Pass District" which Beach by Design describes as an area of mixed uses including high rise condos and resort hotels. The property is located within the "Clearwater Pass District" giving it a very visible location at the south end of Clearwater Beach. The proposed hotel has a distinctive design that will make it an attractive landmark at this location. The project is also consistent with the community character of the "Clearwater Pass District" which Beach by Design describes as an area of mixed uses including high rise condos and resort hotels. As to the immediate vicinity, to the south is the Gulf of Mexico and the parcels to the north include mixed use developments, including restaurants, retail, and condominiums, the parcel to the east is vacant land(but available for development), and the parcel to the west are high-rise condominiums. 6) The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acousNc and olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adjacent properties. The building includes design elements as required by Beach by Design to enhance the visual aesthetics of the site. Acoustics are minimized by providing parking in a partially enclosed and screened parking garage. Hours of operation are consistent with the surrounding properties. The proposed redevelopment project will improve the visual appeal at this south end of the public beach. The architectural style is a contemporary design which is appropriate and aesthetically pleasing for this beachfront property. As described in detail in General Applicability Criteria 4, the entrance driveways and parking garage design will keep vehicles off of South Gulfview Blvd. This will enhance and encourage the flow of pedestrians from the beach to the site or other properties in all directions. EXHIBIT "C" COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA: 1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district. The proposed deviations from Code, which are discussed in detail below, are necessary and minimal deviations to Code without which the project cannot be constructed at this location. The Applicant has designed the proposed redevelopment project to comply with Beach by Design guidelines to the fullest extent possible. The proposed redevelopment of this site will be an integral part of the City's vision of Clearwater Beach as set forth in Beach by Design as it provides overnight accommodation units, a luxury resort and incorporates the design guidelines. Hei t The request for a height of 150 feet is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design which provide for increased height in the event of a transfer of development rights to the property. Hotel Densitv Reserve Transfer 92 units are being requested from the hotel density reserve. These units are needed to make this project economically feasible. Two-Year Development Order The Applicant requests a two-year development order due to market conditions and the extensive amount of time necessary to complete detailed construction drawings for the hotel. 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. Overnight accommodations are allowed in the "Tourist" zoning district. Primary uses in the "Resort Facilities High" land use category are "11 high density residential/overnight accommodations". The site is located in the Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design which is characterized as "mixed use - high rise condominiums, resort hotels, recreation and tourist and neighborhood serving uses." The Comprehensive Plan specifically incorporates Beach by Design and as stated previously, this application is consistent with and advances the obj ectives of Beach by Design. 3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties. The proposed project is compatible with the neighborhood, as is more particularly discussed in General Applicability Criteria 1 and Comprehensive Infill Criteria 4 below, and will not impede other development. The current owner/operator of the existing hotel will be the developer and operator of the proposed hotel 4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development. North: The adjacent property to the north is City right-of-way and an area of smaller mixed uses including condominium, retail and restaurants. South: The property is bounded on the south by Clearwater Pass. East: The adjacent property to the east is currently vacant land. West: The adjacent property to west is occupied by Continental Towers condominiums, a 12-story high rise which has existed in harmony with the existing Wyndham hotel for the last 30 years. The portion of the proposed building, immediately adjacent to Continental towers is less than 100' in height and is offset from the adjacent building, maintaining view corridors of the residential portions of both buildings. 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, flea�ible standard or flexible development use; b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs; c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment of an existing economic contributor; d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing; e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning designation; or f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new, and/or preservation of a worldng waterfront use. The proposed use meets several of these criteria. Overnight accommodations are pernutted by the "Resort Facilities High" land use category and in the "Tourist" zoning district. Redevelopment of Clearwater Beach is a significant economic contributor to the City. This proposed use is an economic contributor by increasing the number of tourists to Clearwater Beach and encouraging patronization of local businesses. The proposed project will generate new jobs in the City of Clearwater which will include service and management jobs. The proposed use as overnight accommodations is characteristic of the neighborhood. As previously discussed in General Applicability Criteria 1 and Comprehensive Infill Criteria 4 the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding uses. 6. Fleacibility 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. Flexibility is not being requested for lot width, setbacks or off street parking. The proposed use is a use pernutted in the Tourist zoning district without this approval. Surrounding properties to the west and north are already developed. b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City. The location of the units on the site provides many units in the project with water views and provides easy access for all guests to the public beach and nearby businesses. This project furthers the City's beach revitalization objective by providing tourist accommodations. The project's architecture and landscaping compliments the tropical vernacular envisioned in Beach by Design. Beach by Design VII A. Densitv The proposed hotel is consistent with the vested rights of density plus transferred development rights. All units are overnight accommodation units. Beach by Design VII B. Hei�ht and Tower Separation The project consists of a five-story base structure (58-6" in height) under one tower which is 150' high measured from FEMA to the top of the main roof deck. Per Beach by Design VII B: "...the height may be increased, however to one hundred fifty feet (150') if': Additional density is allocated to the development by transferred development rights as discussed previously (See Item 1 page 6). • B.2 (a) Tower separation: All "portions of the building structures which exceed one hundred feet (100') (in height) are spaced at least 100' apart." The podium/ garage of the proposed building and the portion of the new building closest to Continental Towers, is 54' tall, the lower wing of the tower nearest to Continental Towers is 98' high, and the 150' high portion of the proposed building is 144' away from Continental towers. "500' rule": and the 800' Rule: The proposed development complies with both Option 1 and Option 2 of B2 as "...no more than two (2) structures which exceed one hundred feet (100') are within five hundred (500')..., and no more than four (4) structures are within eight hundred (800')..." for this project The floor plate of any portion of a building that exceeds forty-five feet in height is limited as follows: a) between 45' and 100', the floor plate will be no greater than 25,000 square feet except for parking structures open to the public; and b) between 100' and 150', the floor plate will be no greater than 10,000 square feet; and c) deviations to the above floor plate requirements may be approved provided the mass and scale of the design creates a tiered effect and complies with the maa�imum building envelope allowance above 45' as described in Section C.1.4. The typical floor plate between 45' and 100' is 21,600 square feet of a possible 43,790 square feet; and the floor plate between 100' and 150' is 10,000 square feet. The setbacks, stepbacks and the thin nature of the tower reduces the overall mass and scale of the building and complies with the maximum building envelope of 60 percent, as only 35 percent of the buildable volume, above 45feet, is actually occupied by the tower. See also responses to follow. Beach by Design VII C. Design, Scale and Mass of Buildin� The concept of the building design is generated by the site and the opportunity to maximize waterfront views to the majority of the guestrooms. The materials and color of the building will support the streamline language of the architecture and its natural surroundings. Lush landscaping is included at the entire project perimeter to soften the architecture, and to provide shade at pedestrian walkways and to enhance the beachfront character at all sides of the project. By placing all automobile parking internal to the project, automobiles are not seen and the goal of a pedestrian oriented beach community is realized. The quantifiable aspects of the architectural vocabulary are as follows per Beach by Design: • Buildings with a footprint of greater than 5,000 square feet...will be constructed so that no more than two of the three building dimensions in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length. The building footprint is 39,190 square feet. The building dimensions vary considerably so that no more two of the three building dimensions in the vertical or horizontal planes are equal in length. The project's overall horizontal plane dimensions are approximately: 212' wide along Gulf View Blvd, 300' deep along the north side, and 160' high from grade to the flat roof deck of the tower; none of these dimensions are "equal" (or vary by less than 40% of the shorter two lengths). In addition to these overall dimensions, the building's modulated massing provides considerable dimensional variation. • No plane (or elevation) of the project "...continue(s) uninterrupted for greater than one hundred (100). All facades of the building are provided with breaks such that no wall surface runs longer than 100' without a break. • At least sixty percent (60%) of any elevation will be covered with windows or architectural decoration. All of the elevations are provided with large windows and architectural decoration, including: decorative railings, stucco reveals, and concrete eyebrows. The percentages of windows and decoration on each of the exterior elevations are as follows, all exceeding the minimum requirement of 60°/0: • North elevation- 68% • East elevation - 61 % • South elevation- 62% • West elevation - 70% These percentages are noted on the architectural plans. • No more than sixty percent (60%) of the theoretical ma�mum building envelope located above 45' will be occupied by a building. The typical floor plate between 45' and 100' is 21,600 square feet of a possible 43,790 square feet; and the floor plate between 100' and 150' is 10,000 square feet. The setbacks, stepbacks and the thin nature of the tower reduces the overall mass and scale of the building and complies with the maximum building envelope of 60 percent, as only 35 percent of the buildable volume, above 45feet, is actually occupied by the tower. • The height and mass of buildings will be correlated to: (1) the dimensional aspects of the parcel proposed for development and (2) adjacent public spaces such as streets and parks. The height and mass of the building are correlated to the parcel and adjacent public spaces as described above. • The guideline for mixed use is not applicable. Beach by Design VII D. Setbacks. The proposed design meets all setback requirements. Beach by Design VII E. Street Level Facades The site is nonresidential and the drop off aisle is street level with entry to the hotel. The design of the building is meant to "see through" as it primarily has glass accents throughout. Beach by Design VII F. Parkin� The parking is internal to a parking garage and is shielded and not visible from the street. Beach by Design VII G. Sig�na�e The applicant will present a sign plan subsequent to this approval. Beach by Design VII H. Sidewalks See response to setbacks, above. Beach by Design VII I. Street Furniture The luxury resort will provide appropriate furniture and streetscaping for its guests. Beach by Design VII J. Street li ting � The plans do not currently include street lighting. Beach by Design VII K. Fountains The plan does not include a fountain. Beach by Design VII L. Materials and Colors The proposed development reflects a modern Florida design and incorporates materials as defined in Beach by Design with shell sidewalks, soft colors, and large windows. c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging character of an area; The proposed project is of a scale consistent with that of existing hotel resorts. The architectural style and compliance with design guidelines will support the emerging character of the area as envisioned by Beach by Design. The project's "contemporary coastal architecture" compliments the tropical vernacular envisioned in Beach by Design. d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design elements: w � • 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. Many of these elements have been incorporated into the design as discussed in detail in response to Criteria 6.b. above. e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings. Landscaping Overall Landscapin� The landscape plan is in accordance with design guidelines set forth in Beach by Design and also Division 12 of the Landscape Development Standards. A Comprehensive Landscape Program is required and included as part of this application. All sight triangles have been indicated and will only contain low shrubs or groundcover. Gulfview Boulevard: Compliance with the Beach by Design criteria has been noted on the planting plan to include specialty paving and street furniture as requested. South Propert.v Line: The south property line is adjacent to the existing beach. All plantings consist of native species. A row of Sea Grape, clusters of Cabbage Palms, and Beach Sunflowers are proposed along this property line to soften the southern edge of the project and provide a natural experience. East and West Property Lines: Clusters of 12" Cabbage Palms have been added where space allows along the western and eastern property line to soften that portion of the proposed building. DRAINAGE NARRATIVE WYNDHAM GARDENS HOTEL CLEARWATER BEACH, FL PRESENTED TO: THE CITY OF CLEARWATER FROM: DEUEL & ASSOCIATES 565 S. HERCULES AVE. CLEARWATER, FL 33764 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NO: 26320 BRIAN A. BARKER, P.E. #56728 August 29, 2013 WYNDHAM GARDENS HOTEL PROJECT NARRATIVE 1.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS The site currently consists of a 1.38 acre parcel of land consisting of a Wyndham Gardens Hotel. The existing site contains 52,556 sf of impervious surface. The majority of the site drains to the City of Clearwater Right of Way (South Gulfview Blvd.) 2.0 PROPOSED CONDITIONS The proposed project is to demolish the existing hotel and construct a new hotel. The proposed site will contain 40,776sf of impervious surface. This will result in a net decrease of 11,780sf of impervious surface. To meet the City of Clearwater drainage criteria, we are proposing to construct a stormwater vault to provide attenuation and treatment of approximately S,OOOcf of stormwater runoff. See attached calculations. A stage/storage computation, geotechnical report and construction details for the vault will be provided prior to the Building Construction Permit being issued. As an alternate to this proposal, it has been suggested by City staff that it may be possible to pay-in-lieu of this treatment requirement. This payment could offset the cost of replacing the existing stormwater outfall to the east of the site. We are certainly amenable to the option and further discussions can take place prior to Building Construction Permitting. c WYNDHAM GARDEN WEIGHTED "C" CALCULATIONS Cover Building Paved Area Pond Green Area ��C�� _ PRE— "C"P�= 0.44 Cover Building Paved Area Pond Green Area �� ros� nCnPOST— O.%1 PREDEVELOPED"C" Area (SF) 4,488 SF ' 21,790 SF ' 0 SF 7,433 SF ��C�� 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.20 �4,488+21,790Z(0.95)+(L7,433�(0.20) 59,988 SF POSTDEVELOPED"C" Area (SF) 36,710 SF 4,066 SF 0 SF 19,212 SF ��C�� 0.95 0.95 1.00 020 (3 6,710+4,066�(0.95 )+(�+(19,212)(0.20� 59,988 SF Treatment Volume Required (3/4")(59,988SF)(1'/12") = 3,749 CF City of Clearwater Attenuation Volume Required RUNOFF RATE(PRE) 25YR-1HR STORM RAINFALL INTENSITY(I) 3.72 IN/HR OQ = (CPOSr — �rns)(i)(A) _ (0.71-0.44)(3.72)(59988/43560) = 1.38 CFS V= ToC * Q= 3600 SEC*1.38 CFS= " 1 /2 Actual Area 4959 CF TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR WYNDHAM GARDEN 691 SOUTH GULFVIEW BOULEVARD CLEARWATER, FLORIDA PREPARED FOR: WYNDHAM GARDEN CLEARWATER BEACH PREPARED BY: DEUEL & ASSOCIATES 565 S. HERCULES AVE CLEARWATER, FL 33764 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NO: 26320 ALBERT P. CARRIER, PE #53990 NLY 2013 I. INTRODUCTION The applicant is proposing to redevelop the 110 room Wyndham Garden Hotel to a 203 room hotel located at 691 S. Gulfview Boulevard, Clearwater, Florida. The redevelopment of the property is the subject of a Development Agreement Application and lies in the Tourist "T" zoning district. This application requires an assessment of the traffic impacts of development. Prior to completing this analysis a methodology was established with the City of Clearwater staff. II. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The property has frontage on S. Gulfview Boulevard east of Hamden Drive. South Gulfview Boulevard was reconstructed as a two-lane collector roadway with on-street parking running along Clearwater Beach. Coronado Drive was reconstructed as a three-lane collector roadway with on-street parking. Hamden Drive intersects with S. Gulfview Boulevard at a signalized intersection. The adjacent segment of S. Gulfview Boulevard between Hamden Drive and the Clearwater Pass Bridge is three lanes. Per the approved methodology traffic counts that were conducted on June 21, 2012 at the following intersections during the weekday PM peak period of 4-6 PM were used as a basis for this study: S. Gulfview Blvd. / Hamden Drive S. Gulfview Blvd. / Coronado Drive Coronado Drive / Hamden Drive All traffic counts were converted to annual average equivalents using FDOT seasonal adjustment factors. Existing traffic volumes are shown in Figure 2. Existing intersections were analyzed using the HCS software and the count data printouts are included in Appendix A. Presently the signalized intersection at S. Gulfview Boulevard / Coronado Drive operates at LOS A with average delay being 9.9 seconds per vehicle. Presently the signalized intersection at S. Gulfview Boulevard / Hamden Drive operates at LOS B with average delay being 16.5 seconds per vehicle. At the intersection of Hamden Drive / Coronado Drive the primary movements are eastbound-to-southbound and northbound-to-westbound, whereas the southbound approach (Hamden Drive) is stop controlled. The HCS analysis shows the primary movements operate at LOS A with delay of 8.1 seconds per vehicle and the southbound stop- controlled movements operate at LOS B with delay of 13.8 seconds per vehicle. The existing site is serviced by a western and eastern driveway. The westbound left turns entering the site operate at LOS A with an average delay of 8.4 seconds. The northbound approach exiting the site operates at LOS C with an average delay of 15.5 seconds. South Gulfview Boulevard functions as collector roadway and according to FDOT 2012 QLOS Handbook capacity tables has a LOS D capacity of 2628 vehicles per hour on the undivided segment. The segment of Gulfview Boulevard east of Hamden Drive and Coronado Drive are both three-lane collector roads with a LOS D capacity of 1197 vehicles per hour. The existing PM peak hour LOS for areas roadway segments is shown below: �� EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS (2012) pM LOS D Posted Roadway Segment Lanes Peak LOS Table 4 Adjustments Speed Volume Capacity Limit S. Gulfview Blvd. - 3 Undivided 874 1197 C usea�2�i�e�aha�ra a��y�ai��ia��o�s 25 (East of Bayway Blvd.) S. Gulfview Blvd. - N�,-S�a�eS��R�d.�Ys-�°% (Bayway Blvd. to Hamden Dr.) 4 Undivided 1080 2628 >C MW�+-��d+hded�Ex<��s;�e�e�le��>-5� 25 Exclusive RigM Lanes -+5 % S. Gulfview Blvd. - 2 Undivided 493 931 C Noex�`;�s;Se�'o�;g„�;,;�;e°Z5, 20 (Hamden Dr. to Sth St.) S. Gulfview Blvd. - "�-S�a�eS;�'��R�dwa�s-,°' (Sth St. to Coronado Dr.) 2 Undivided 611 1197 C MWti-Undivided(ExclusiveLeftlanes)-5% 20 E.��usrvr Ri�hi Lenes -.5 i Coronado Dr. - 2 Divided 650 1264 C NonSia�eSig�elizedRoadways-10°o 25 (Hamden Dr. to Sth St.) Two-Divided(ExalusiveLeftLanns)+5% Coronado Dr. - (Devon Dr. to S. Gulfview 4 Undivided 967 1840 C Noex�;�s;�e; ft''or°,��„� �, s°�s� 25 Blvd.) Coronado Dr. - (S. Gulfview Blvd. to Causeway 4 Divided 1556 2628 C Non-State SipializedRoadwa}s-]0% 25 Blvd. Roundabout) Hamden Dr. - No�-s��es��,�eaa�a.�ys-ioi (S. Gulfview Blvd. to Coronado 3 Undivided 732 1197 C E �';;�-°�a�;� ;�,es'°�5; e"`e"�,-5' 25 Blvd.) •Us� � ��e �d;�� f �a��«,. �a��wa�o�s Presently all roadway segments operate at LOS C or better. III. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Existing traffic was adjusted by a 2% annual growth rate to the expected build-out year of 2017 to account for background traffic from other nearby redevelopment projects. In addition, traffic from this proposed Wyndham Garden Hotel, Clearwater Resort hotel complex (500 rooms), Hampton Inn (ll6 rooms), and Shephard's Resort (64 rooms) were added. The site will be developed from a 110 room to a 203 room hotel with associated parking and amenities. Using Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 8th Edition rates, the amount of new trips was calculated and estimates are shown below: TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES Land Use Amount Dailv Trips PM Peak Trips (North/South� Hote1310 (Existing) 110 Rooms 899 65 (34/31) Hotel 310 (Future) 203 Rooms 1,659 120 (63/56) Difference 93 Rooms 760 55 (29/26) The vehicular access will be taken from S. Gulfview Boulevard at the existing eastern driveway and western driveways. The expected distribution is as follows: 60%to / from the north (33) 40% to / from the south (22) PROJECT IMPACT CALCULATIONS Roadway Segment Lanes Project Trips LOS D project Percent Ca aci S. Gulfview Blvd. - 3 22 1197 1.84% (East of Site) S. Gulfview Blvd. - 4 33 2628 0.91% (Site to Hamden Blvd.) S. Gulfview Blvd. - 2 12 931 1.29% (Hamden Dr. to Coronado Dr.) Coronado Dr. - 2 21 1264 1.66% (Hamden Dr. to Sth St.) Coronado Dr. - 4 21 1840 1.14 % (Sth St. to S. Gulfview Blvd.) Coronado Dr. - 4 33 2628 1.26% (S. Gulfview Blvd. to Causeway Blvd. Roundabout) Hamden Dr. - 3 21 1197 1.75% (S. Gulfview Blvd. to Coronado Blvd.) Project traffic impacts will be primarily to Coronado Drive and S. Gulfview Boulevard. All intersections, roadway segments and project driveways were analyzed for future conditions. Future traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3, and the HCS printouts are included in Appendix B. The signalized intersection at S. Gulfview Boulevard / Coronado Drive would continue to operate at LOS B with average delay of 10.3 seconds per vehicle. The signalized intersection at S. Gulfview Boulevard / Hamden Drive would continue to operate at LOS C with average delay being 22.3 seconds per vehicle. At the intersection of Hamden Drive / Coronado Drive, the HCS analysis shows the primary movements operate at LOS A with delay of 8.5 seconds per vehicle and the southbound stop-controlled movements operate at LOS C with delay of 15.9 seconds per vehicle. The proposed site will also be serviced by a western and eastern driveway. The westbound left turns entering the site operate at LOS A with an average delay of 9.0 seconds. The northbound approach exiting the site operates at LOS C with an average delay of 21.8 seconds. • S FiJTURE ROADWAY CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT PM LOS D Posted Roadway Segment Lanes Peak Capacity LOS Table 4 Adjustments Speed Volume Limit S. Gulfview Blvd. - 3 Undivided 1141 1197 C NonStateSignaGzedRoedways-10% 25 Used 2 �anr �mdi�ded fm capa�rc� �e,�Wetio�s (East of Baywa Blvd.) Non-S�ate SiLmalized Roedways -10% S. Gulfview Blvd. - 4 Uttdivided 1373 2628 C Multi-Undivided(ExclusiveLeftLanes)-5% 25 Ba a Blvd. to Hamden Dr. E«��eR��e�e5-+5� S. Gulfview Blvd. - 2 Undivided 580 931 C Noe �';�s;�e�ft ��;a��e°Z5, 20 Hamden Dr. to Sth St.) Non-S�ate SianaGzed Roadways d0% S. Gulfview Blvd. - 2 Undivided 725 1197 C M��+-�a��d�c�x��:�e�e��a�es>-5� 20 Sth St. to Coronado Dr.) Ex��;�e��l��es-�5� Coronado Dr. - 2 Divided 806 1264 C Two-p�-,e;� ��;�Re�eft� �e°;�5, 25 (Hamden Dr. to Sth St.) Coronado Dr. - (Devon Dr. to S. Gulfview 4 Undivided 1249 1840 C NOe%s'�,`,se;se�f;�oia�;a,,,�i�e�zsi 25 BIVd.� Coronado Dr. - (S. Gulfview Blvd. to Causeway 4 Divided 1952 2628 C No�-S��eS+�,a�,=�R�d��a>5-�o� 25 Blvd. Roundabout Hamden Dr. - x„�-s�m s��ei�� d a�a.�ys -ioi (S. Gulfview Blvd. to Coronado 3 Undivided 943 1197 C �"�;;�- ��;�,�� '°:s; �ft''s"e6>-�' 25 BIvd. •�s� ��a�e w��,ded f� �a,��,�, �a��wa�o�s All roadway segments would continue to operate at LOS C or better. IV. CONCLUSION A summary of intersections that compares the LOS and delay of existing conditions versus future conditions using HCS software is depicted in the following table: Existin Future Intersection LOS Dela LOS Dela S. Gulfview Blvd. / Hamden Drive A 9.9 sec B 10.3 sec S. Gulfview Blvd. / Coronado Drive B 16.5 sec C 22.3 sec Coronado Drive / Hamden Drive B 13.8 sec C 15.9 sec S. Gulfview Blvd / Site Drivewav A 8.4 sec A 9.0 sec A summary of the roadway segment LOS of existing conditions versus future conditions using the FDOT 2012 QLOS Handbook capacity tables is depicted in the following table: Existing Future Roadway Segment LOS D PM Peak LOS pM Peak LOS Capacity Volume Volume S. Gulfview Blvd. - 1197 874 C 1141 C (East of Bayway Blvd.) S. Gulfview Blvd. - 2628 1080 >C 1373 C (Ba ay Blvd. to Hamden Dr.) S. Gulfview Blvd. - 931 493 C 580 C Hamden Dr. to Sth St. S. Gulfview Blvd. - 1197 611 C 725 C Sth St. to Coronado Dr. Coronado Dr.- 1264 650 C 806 C (Hamden Dr. to Sth St.) Coronado Dr.- 1840 967 C 1249 C (Devon Dr. to S. Gulfview Blvd.) Coronado Dr. - (S. Gulfview Blvd. to Causeway Blvd. 2628 1556 C 1952 C Roundabout) Hamden Dr. - 1197 732 C 943 C S. Gulfview Blvd. to Coronado Blvd. This analysis was conducted in accordance with a specific methodology established with City of Clearwater staff. The project will generate 760 daily trips and 55 PM peak hour trips. This analysis demonstrates traffic operations at nearby intersections and on adjacent roadways would continue at acceptable levels of service with or without the project impacts. � , c#p�a�'F��tir b�in� rep�cted: lr�fersecti�� '��k ;.A"TEi?M1t: Gc�r€snad�a �r -- S Gulfttiew �Evc! 7�� Ii� t ,� � ��a c �J ,� � 4 �---�---.. :�sa a z�s ,t c. � +� � �' � 1 0�9a : � � � a� , � � �° � � ;� � t �* � � a"C=3 � � �s� �a� � az � <��'`` ,7 � �.�` ,1A ``;'s"' � �� . e�� +� de! � � y � � a:�. �' x w � �.� � '� �� ` Mr '� t �* � � "s,� t � Rer�e�d `: �innin .At � +�:Oq ?� : C 4:15 PP�I I�r�th�d fs�t det�:rmir.ing p�ak hsur; i 4C JCJ� F'�ak-E-tour: 4:4� FM -- �:45 PM F'eak ��-Min: �;3�} I'IVI -- 5.�5 PtiA �t��l°�� t��t�� - �..�.� � . � , ., , 'f' � ..s;�' � -_ � � � � . � t� e' d. � .�� .. ....... _.._� 3 ( 1�tc�It�r�t� �.� �;a �� s �.� t.� s� z�,t : k u.� ��:1 �n.��. ��« �� . e.e � � � °'� � r �.� � ��.c �'1 f t* i.�1 �.2 u6� f� t ;.2 2? �� t7 � e#' 7� tt. � dt � t,. � Q +6` �` f+ � u � � � � �s t � � 1 2 � � M1�� X Y s� t. �."��x =4' '� .:�f4 'i ,� C ^^^^—�i � t r► 1 •�n � �" = �TC3� �do L�r ( Comnedo C+r , S Gu[#viesv Blvd ; S CuBPview 8tvd � G srsund � {StsuChbaund �� Lastbctur�d � �k"Yi�sttscrund � � ' Hourt � t�_ U Rk : LefE i'hru Ri ht �! R°_ L�eft ThQ Rl ht � R; 4� Thr�u Fti �� { "", To4aY '�atals � _ i �. . . _...� .............. ._..�._ �. 9 '�� t� .1�a �4 � 0 � C ; �t0 i �; � � Q :'. 0 84 $$ � fi , 59 D S {l J i � � �S � � i 3�5 € � �1 � i (t '; �7 82 � G i 71 J � D 'J I fi �J 9 � s� ? 37� ` � 11° � �e 0 ��= i.�i � �� z �� r�� —��r <-�� ° �� a°�5$V} �i'3'i7C�5 ( �� 0 ?cdestria�s ( 98 8€�ycP�3 � �, � �sc�raad �too e� sHs�� GGt7!'Y7°�i�S.' ROp�€t �et?@��fvd 6i1 i3'2ta1i`�(91;� 92:f3a �t� 0 0 4 � 3 � c� i� 8 � � : t� � Q � �7 � � U � 'S � Fi i7 �- U £i U � � � ( � � � "3 "<:�v � f� +� . € 0 t7 � � �� 7�� ;;�W�` e� "32 i SiiU�G�: �uaiity Gount�, LLC (htlp:,°t�s.vur.�t;a6leycr�u,�4s.r.�;j 9ai377»��t]-2�"E2 ._ . o# �ea� h�car a�3� rep�rieti: 3ts?ers�c�ion P�ak �AT1�C�s S Etar�eim�a t�r-- S��:�fvies�� 9�ac asa an� � � � � z� � ��a � � �. �s r� a� .t t �:� t. �y� �� 0.94 ; � �•-"s 2��a �► � ir � � w e53 °1 #' Cf � f � # � � u � �� .a.......,. � �'�'�`,r � �� zH � �� r� .t s c. � ti:A +R ,�: � ?��? � e► '7F a' �„ .. M� '`1 % t* �# M1`A *� t1�ETho� Tc�i' Pe�k-Ho�€r; �:Q4i PM -° £,�i0 FM Peak 'iS-flF1in: �:15 FM -- �;3t? �fVl ��1��.I'�� i�� "��t3�(',�"t"",� i�^,�.Y �.rs'a'�`�k r _.f_£:��:-r7 ?,,.':t��;�j � ._.�.,� `�' v --"� -_-#. � ,-- �,. �k hz��g� T�ta! Er�les@ng �r'al€�me � QG Jt�B #. � �777�5�� u:� ,�� _____�� * � �.� �.� � � .s # 4w �.2 +� � o i � �, �;.s � �:� 22 + �* �� t.x �^ .G � � i` P w a#' '.,�� a# t tn �� ;u !�$� 'J."z "s,t3 n a ._......�1 a% Y 11. G 3 .��-: t^ " , +t� F�, .: p t � "� �` � *� t � �� : :�� n �.t t �.� , L Un �► � « t�tA� � � h � f � �� i�e�od Narthbaund Scruthbounr3� i Eastbountl ' . j!t�sttrQUa�) �� Tofal lnntn At �. � ru R hf ii R' € La#C `fF�ru R1 #�f U R'" < Left "t°isru Rt F�t U Ft" L,e� 7ttn� F21 ht U �" i �43°� ��ya� �1 � u � , ? � 1 I ry� �J/y ��8y #��S Ei� �.>�a �ry�3q +.�+y.,;.j�yEa� Pe'01 S'� i^F 'U� .7 � : .'�T�L J .7 t� �4 3 �111. v�.� .� v `yJ� � `�Jry �J'.i �`FU � �{�. &.��e Y.�N�F �'��E � +�S «� �} ii � ' {�� u�� ' �`.i i�� V 1? � N %! .'9f� Q J� ."R4i�� A�d.F PA![. ;� i4 0 :9 3' H2 � 1 6 �.3 ? 1� 33 'J J Q� ��0� 43 3s� 4� 29 267 `,�j'r= t.t)k ' � 3T�� '��-�r �t� c �d� N�s:,� 7r��r�s � o � a �ec�aslr}arts r�iD BsCVa'es Q 0 � Re�ts�i c�t��rat�a �n 6t2�iI20�2 92.�6 ��.9 �uw¢�.u�uuu i ��asivaaur�u ma,uvuuu '6`STf�I ft 7hru RE4ht iJ �_�LefE Thru RPt�ht .. U R° L¢� T3�ru Rlah# U R" Ci � � 2�}�� " 65 ��fi �-- 0 D � �'3< � ��2'�4 '��6 `� 152 424Q �3 ti i� � � €J 8 � � ( 3 8 � 28 ��tr �2� . j � � � � z�� s� 4 4 � :i � 3 s� � � � �J S} �� . I . .. .. . � . E i �G�uoziCE: �U�Eity GAttt�f�, I�LC �I"tltp'/J+tJt'Yt'J.c�i1�3llyG�t�"�t6.11e$} ?'371-��Q^22i� k � Fyp� csf p�ak ;�ouc �e�ng :�pcarEed: ir�4��Eian Pe�k LG�GATtCrN: � i-;�mde� �r -- G�ronado Dr ;�a aa a ! � s � �s � J a s. >�t M � .% °S: 59 #!� �a�'a ?� �^ ? Q.@9� 4r 2�"� 3�� N� 6 i i" � M� �4 M *4 $ Y� � � 4 � � � � � � � M1x;: � �,� �`�� `9 � �� ', � $ � � ?3fi, aJ #� t« M �f a;� �. +�" � o, ... hJ "� � ^ 4A Nd1 .r 'i #` N� "t } f°' �i �� $ � Periad �Jfetha� ��r clet�rmic�i�� peak l�our: Tet�i �nf�a�r� V�alume QG Jt3� #; i077$�t?� �sak-Hour. �:00 Pt�i -• S.Ot} E�M Pe�k 15-t�fr�. �:15 �M ». 4:�0 FM ----r ��a��.i� �� - ...rt.,s°a .��.. . �°�r �� _! .,., < _f.- ._.� r' 4 # � x�-- � �a ,.�, �� a� a.� ,J 4 ;. �.d� *M �C ,� .� L `.7 4:� .�.3 t.� M "+., ,. � " Q� � 4 �; ?.� d� {?,fl °#F � � �" ��.� � f,A *� } � �� .�• �:� � y� �' � 3.� � 4 ..�.,� a1 � � ia. �.�,....�.... "a .,P � �. 3 » �� 0 '� 6° � '9 �- t+ � 3 � � � .�.�J si !# t� �..�..�., � � %dk •t� �� A "� �" 't � l' �"""" � R�s ( ( �" � �.,rJE2 G"t7r491i8dQ L7P z n � {Y�esfbouad) ��.�.� Toial ; Fio��(; 5:£�t3 Pii9 � 0 � � � +� ; 7 � ? � �7 ' � '74 +J � Q I 0 63 "� � 0 i t�i 7i3 o, 9 5 Pa�i � B � `J t3 Q j t Ct � u a 0' 3 9Y3 �J D Q 'J +'?� ', t f7 '� c 19�+ ?A9 5:3�J FtaA � t7 3 � II � � � A 9 fl 1 63 0 � �! ti 8i 3 Ci D':. i�� 7C�2 5:.SS Fl�A � G � i} ti 0 6 0 a � J. J ?!i i? 3 Lt i i; 73 12 a ii -;G5 ?i}a^ E ��= �.�y ! { � �� € E � � � 3 E �� ' I �� a� � € � } € � € � �� #-fea�jsTnicks � Q � � Ped�s�xiar:s =t 2� BEcyta`es � a � � #�a;lr�aci SE�� d Bus�s GcaRirr3etl!s; �E.'�`SCDI'f `�£Y11�C2$.�'.ii CS#181��:ci'i2'�2:Q6 i��';� t< 4 � i i3 B 0 fi ?�i � �� 9 � cS j � 0 J f � J 2 � � � � � � p SgL'F2CE: �?�aiify Caunfs, LLC i�rfip:ll�.h��rt.�uali�c �� 9� 5g 2 � � 2012•PEAK 3EASON FACTOR CATEGORY REPORT - REPORT TYPE: ALL CATEGORY: 1500 PINELLAS COUNTYWIDE MOCF: 0.93 WEEK DATES SF PSCF -------------------------------------------------------------------------- i oi/oi/zoia - oi/o�/aoia i.o� i.i5 2 oi/os/zoi2 - oi/i4/aoia i.os i.ia 3 O1/15/2012 - O1/21/2012 i.o3 i.io 4 oi/aa/zoi2 - oi/a8/aoia i.oi i.os 5 O1/29/2012 - 02/04/2012 0.99 1.06 * 6 02/05/2012 - 02/11/2012 0.97 1.04 * � o2/i2/2oia - oa/is/zoi2 0.95 i.oa * 8 02/19/2012 - 02/25/2012 0.94 1.01 * 9 02/26/2012 - 03/03/2012 0.93 1.00 *10 03/04/2012 - 03/10/2012 0.91 0.97 *11 03/11/2012 - 03/17/2012 0.90 0.96 *12 03/18/2012 - 03/24/2012 0.91 0.97 *13 03/25/2012 - 03/31/2012 0.92 0.99 *14 04/O1/2012 - 04/07/2012 0.93 1.00 *15 04/08/2012 - 04/14/2012 0.93 1.00 *16 04/15/2012 - 04/21/2012 0.94 1.01 *17 04/22/2012 - 04/28/2012 0.95 1.02 *18 04/29/2012 - 05/05/2012 0.96 1.03 19 05/06/2012 - 05/12/2012 0.98 1.05 20 05/13/2012 - 05/19/2012 0.99 1.06 21 05/20/2012 - 05/26/2012 0.99 1.06 22 05/27/2012 - 06/02/2012 0.99 1.06 23 06/03/2012 - 06/09/2012 0.99 1.06 24 06/10/2012 - 06/16/2012 1.00 1.07 25 06/17/2012 - 06/23/2012 1.00 1.07 26 06/24/2012 - 06/30/2012 1.00 1.07 a� o�/oi/2oia - o�/o�/2oiz 0.99 i.o6 28 07/08/2012 - 07/14/2012 0.99 1.06 29 07/15/2012 - 07/21/2012 0.99 1.06 30 0�/22/aoia - o�/as/aoia i.oi i.oa 31 07/29/2012 - OS/04/2012 1.02 1.09 3a os/o5/zoiz - os/ii/aola i.o4 i.li 33 os/ia/aoia - os/is/aoia i.os i.ia 34 08/19/2012 - 08/25/2012 1.05 1.12 35 08/26/2012 - 09/O1/2012 1.05 1.12 36 09/02/2012 - 09/08/2012 1.06 1.14 37 09/09/2012 - 09/15/2012 1.06 1.14 38 09/16/2012 - 09/22/2012 1.05 1.12 39 09/23/2012 - 09/29/2012 1.05 1.12 40 09/30/2012 - 10/06/2012 1.04 1.11 4i io/o�/zoia - io/i3/zoia i.o4 i.ii 4a io/i4/2oi2 - io/ao/aoia i.o3 i.io 43 io/ai/aoia - io/a�/aoia i.o3 i.io 44 10/28/2012 - 11/03/2012 1.04 1.11 45 11/04/2012 - 11/10/2012 1.04 1.11 46 ii/ii/2oi2 - ii/i�/aoia i.os i.ia 4� ii/ia/aoia - ii/a4/aoia i.os i.iz 4s ii/as/aoia - ia/oi/aoia i.o6 i.i4 49 12/02/2012 - 12/08/2012 1.06 1.14 50 12/09/2012 - 12/15/2012 1.07 1.15 si iz/i6/zoiz - iz/zz/2oi2 i.os i.i2 52 12/23/2012 - 12/29/2012 1.04 1.11 53 12/30/2012 - 12/31/2012 1.03 1.10 * PEAK SEASON 08-FEB-2013 12:29:10 830UPD [1,0,0,1) 7 1500 PKSEASON.TXT r � Generalized Peak Hour Two-Way Volumes for Florida's TABLE 4 Urbanized Areas1 STATE SIGNALIZED ARTERIALS Class I(40 mph or higher posted speed limit) Lanes Median B C D E 2 Undivided * 1,510 1,600 ** 4 Divided * 3,420 3,580 ** 6 Divided * 5,250 5,390 ** 8 Divided * 7,090 7,210 ** FREEWAYS Lanes B C D 4 4,120 5,540 6,700 6 6,130 8,370 10,060 8 8,230 11,100 13,390 10 10, 3 3 0 14, 040 16, 8 40 12 14,450 18,880 22,030 Class II(35 mph or slower posted speed limit) Freeway Adjustments Lanes Median B C D E Auxiliary Lanes Ramp 2 Undivided * 660 1,330 1,410 Present in Both Directions Metering 4 Divided * 1,310 2,920 3,040 + 1,800 + 5% 6 Divided * 2,090 4,500 4,590 8 Divided * 2,880 6,060 6,130 Non-State Signalized Roadway Adjustments (Alter corresponding state volumes by the indicated percent.) Non-State Signalized Roadways - 10% Median & Turn Lane Adjustments Exclusive Exclusive Adjushnent Lanes Median Left Lanes Right Lanes Factors 2 Divided Yes No +5% 2 Undivided No No -20% Multi Undivided Yes No -5% Multi Undivided No No -25% - - - Yes + 5% One-Way Facility Adjustment Multiply the corresponding two-directional volumes in this table by 0.6 BICYCLE MODEZ (Multiply motorized vehicle volumes shown below by number of directional roadway lanes to determine two-way maximum service volumes.) Paved Shoulder/Bicycle Lane Coverage B C D E 0-49% * 260 680 1,770 50-84% 190 600 1,770 >1,770 85-100% 830 1,770 >1,770 ** PEDESTRIAN MODEZ (Multiply motorized vehicle volumes shown below by number of directional roadway lanes to determine two-way maatimum service volumes.) Sidewalk Coverage B C D E 0-49% * * 250 850 50-84% * 150 780 1,420 85-100% 340 960 1,560 >1,770 BUS MODE (Scheduled Fized Route)3 (Buses in peak hour in peak direction) Sidewalk Coverage B C D E 0-84% >5 >4 >3 >2 85-100% > 4 > 3 > 2 > 1 � E 7,190 11,100 15,010 18,930 22,860 UNINTERRUPTED FLOW HIGHWAYS Lanes Median B C D E 2 Undivided 770 1,530 2,170 2,990 4 Divided 3,300 4,660 5,900 6,530 6 Divided 4,950 6,990 8,840 9,790 Uninterrupted Flow Highway Adjustments Lanes Median Exclusive left lanes Adjustment factors 2 Divided Yes +5% Multi Undivided Yes -5% Multi Undivided No -25% 2012 FbOT QUALITY/LEVEL �F SERVICE HANDBOOK TABLES Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000�' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst CC Intersection S GULFVlEW BLVD / Agency or Co. DEUEL CORONADO DR Date Performed 7/12/2013 Area Type All other areas Time Period PM PEAK EXISTING Jurisdiction CLEARWi4TER Analysis Year 2092 Pro'ect ID 2013-153 Volume and Timin !n ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N� 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 Lane group L LR T TR R Volume, V(vph) 278 �� 513 443 322 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 1 9 1 1 9 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.99 0.91 0.91 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrivai type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 17 0 0 0 ?7 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasin EB Onl 02 03 04 Thru & RT 06 07 08 G= 20.0 G= 0.0 G= G= G= 30.0 G= 0.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis, T= 0.25 C cle Len th, C= 60.0 Lane Group Capacity, Contro/ Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 305 12 564 487 354 Lane group capacity, c 1956 525 1787 1787 1407 v/c ratio, X 0.26 0.02 0.32 0.27 0.25 Total green ratio, g/C 0.33 0.33 0.50 0.50 0.50 Uniform delay, d� 14.6 13.4 8.9 8.7 8.6 file:///C:/Users/christopher/AppData/Loca1/Temp/s2kBCA2.tmp 7/12/2013 Detailed Report � � Progression factor, PF Delay calibration, k Incremental delay, dz Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay Lane group LOS Approach delay Approach LOS Intersection delay HCS2000TI`'I 9. 000 1. 000 0.11 0.11 0.1 0.0 9. 000 0.11 0.1 14.7 13.5 9.0 B 8 A 94.7 9.0 B A 9.9 Intersection LOS Copyright � 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Page 2 of 2 1.000 1.000 0.11 0.11 0.9 0.1 8. 8 8. 7 A A 8. 7 A A Version 4. ] c file:/UC:/LJsers/christopher/AppData/Loca1/Temp/s2kBCA2.tmp 7/12/2013 Detailed Report � 1 Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'� DETAILED REPORT General Information Site lnformation Analyst CC Intersection S GULFVIEW BLVD / Agency or Co. DEUEL HAMDEN DR Date Performed 7/12/2013 Area Type All other areas Time Period PM PEAK EXISTING Jurisdiction CLEARWi4TER Analysis Year 2012 Pro�ect ID 2013-153 Volume and Timin !n ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N� 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Lane group LT T R L LR Volume, V(vph) 39 225 203 308 331 20 % Heavy vehicles, %HV � 1 1 1 1 9 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 9.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 82 0 5 6 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 92.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.3 3.2 3.2 Phasin EB Onl EW Perm 03 04 SB Onl 06 07 08 G= 5.1 G= 24.8 G= G= G= 15.8 G= G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis, T= 0.25 C cle Len th, C= 60.7 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 290 223 338 364 22 Lane group capacity, c 1667 769 653 465 416 v/c ratio, X 0.97 0.29 0.52 0.78 0.05 Total green ratio, g/C 0.57 0.41 0.41 0.26 0.26 Uniform delay, d� 6.1 12.0 13.5 20.9 16.8 file:/UC:/IJsers/christopher/AppData/Local/Temp/s2kBCA2.tmp 7/12/2013 Detailed Report , � Progression factor, PF Delay calibration, k Incremental delay, d2 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay Lane group LOS Approach delay Approach LOS Intersection delay HCS2000rM 1.000 0.11 0.1 1. 000 1. 000 0.11 0. 92 0.2 0. 7 6.1 12.3 14.2 A 8 B 6.1 93.4 A B 16.5 Intersection LOS Copyright � 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Page 2 of 2 1.000 1.000 0.33 0.1 ? 8. 5 0.1 29.3 96.9 C B 28. 6 C B Version 4.1 c file:///C:/LTsers/christopher/AppData/LocaUTemp/s2kBCA2.tmp 7/12/2013 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Generai Information Site Infvrmation nal st CC Intersection CORONADO DR/ enc /Co. DEUEL HAMDEN DR Date Performed 7/12/2013 urisdiction CLEARWATER nal sis Time Period PM PEAK EXISTING nal sis Year 012 Pro ect Descri tion 2012-153 East/West Street: CORONADO DR North/South Street: HAMDEN DR Intersection Orientation: East-Wesf Stud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 4 349 0 0 294 61 Peak-Hour Factor PHF 0.91 0.91 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 4 383 0 0 323 67 Percent Heav Vehicles 1 — — 0 -- -- Median Type Two Way Left Tum Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT T TR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 0 0 D 0 28 3 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF ?.DO 9.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR D 0 0 0 30 3 Percent Hea Vehicles 0 0 0 0 9 1 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 onfi uration TR Dela , Queue Len th, and Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 � 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT TR (vph) 4 33 C (m) (vph) 1154 442 /c 0.00 0.07 95% queue length 0.01 0.24 Control Delay 8.1 13.8 LOS A B pproach Delay -- -- 93.8 pproach LOS -- -- B HCS2000T�"� Copyright � 2000 Universiry of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 c file:///C:/Users/christopher/AppData/Loca1/Temp/u2kB21 C.tmp 7/12/2013 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY eneral Information ite Information nal st CC Intersection S. GULFVIEW BLVD /W enc /Co. EUEL DRlVEWAY Date Performed 7/15/2013 urisdiction CLEARWATER nal sis Time Period PM PEAK EXISTING nal sis Year 2012 Pro�ect Descri tion 2013-153 East/West Street: S GULFVIEW BLVD North/South Street: WEST DRIVEWAY Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 0 428 18 1 421 0 Peak-Hour Factor PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 0 470 19 1 462 0 Percent Hea Vehicles 0 -- -- 1 -- -- Median T pe Undivided RT Channelized 0 � Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration TR LT U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 10 0 6 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 10 D 6 D 0 0 Percent Hea Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Confi uration LR Dela , Queue Len th, and Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 1 16 C (m) (vph) 1079 361 !c 0.00 0.04 95% queue length 0.00 0.14 ontrol Delay 8.3 15.4 LOS A C pproach Delay -- -- 95.4 pproach LOS -- -- C HCS2000TM Copyright � 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file:///C:/LTsers/christopher/AppDatalLocal/Temp/u2kD7B7.tmp 7/18/2013 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nal st CC Intersection S. GULFVIEW B�VD /E RI VEWAY enc /Co. EUEL urisdiction CLEARWATER Date Performed 7/15/2013 nal sis Year 2012 nal sis Time Period PM PEAK EXlSTING Pro'ect Descri tion 2013-153 East/West Street: S GULFVIEW BLVD North/South Street: EAST DRIVEWAY Intersection Orientation: East-West tud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westkiound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 0 432 2 13 413 0 Peak-Hour Factor PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.99 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 0 474 2 14 453 0 Percent Hea Vehicles 0 -- -- 9 -- -- Median T pe Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 9 0 0 7 0 onfi uration TR LT U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 9 0 6 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 9 0 6 0 0 0 Percent Hea Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Confi uration LR Dela Queue Len th, and Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 14 15 C (m) (vph) 1091 360 lc 0.01 0.04 95% queue length 0.04 0.13 Control Delay 8.3 15.4 LOS A C pproach Delay -- -- 15.4 pproach LOS -- -- C HCS2000TM Copyright � 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file:/UC:/Users/christopher/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k7125.tmp 7/ 18/2013 1 � � � � . . � � � � ��. � � w h�urnb�rc�f �St�€�lies; 1t� Av�rag� N�m��r ca� R�c�ms; �7� C3�r��firnal_ Qisirik�uiie�i�; SQ�f� ��t�r�t�t�, 50°% ��ifiir�g Gen�ratic�n p�r �a�rrn Av�ra�� R�t� ._.� " 8.�17 �~.. i. � , , : �,�•� � �.�� ,�; ��; � �r�{ � ��.�� `�.COd 1 �,^vtf{ it,��. t �,r,e�N �,� �,��o �;�:�f� �,cc=� �:�� =�,�� .o� �,�� f,n^vC} a c�f F3�te� ��ari�ard i��e�iafic�t� �.38 ,W�� :�� ra �or� a�� c�� a�� °�� ,ac�' r�� a�� °�ra� is�� jFu� {�� t�� X = Numk��r of Rc�o�s3s a'� Ac#u�! �at� P�ints �-----� Ftite�3�Curv� ,-_ __ �y�r�� fa �ftt�� G��rve �quaft�tn: 'T - $.95(J�) - 373,9 B 'ir1� G�rrpra�rc?rr, Sti� Er,iation 5�ti � �•: fnsti2ut� at ;'r�,Rs�acar��ti��7 Ei°��neer� Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT Genera! Information Site lnformation Analyst CC Intersection S GULFVIEW BLVD / Agency or Co. DEUEL CORONADO DR Date PerFormed 7/12/2013 Area Type AI! other areas Time Period PM PEAK FUTURE Jurisdiction CLEARWATER Analysis Year 2017 Pro'ect ID 2013-153 Volume and Timin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N� 2 D 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 Lane group L LR T TR R Volume, V(vph) 336 11 671 567 378 % Heavy vehicles, %HV � 1 1 1 1 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.99 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped I Bike / RTOR volumes 33 0 0 0 25 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 ?2.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasin EB Onl 02 03 04 Thru & RT 06 07 08 G= 20.0 G= 0.0 G= G= G= 30.0 G= 0.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis, T= 0.25 C cle Len th, C= 60.0 Lane Group Capacity, Contro! Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 369 12 737 623 415 Lane group capacity, c 9156 517 1787 9787 1407 v/c ratio, X 0.32 0.02 0.41 0.35 0.29 Total green ratio, g/C 0.33 0.33 0.50 0.50 0.50 Uniform delay, d� 14.9 13.4 9.4 9.1 8.8 file:///C:/Users/christopher/AppData/Local/Temp/s2kB917.tmp 7/12/2013 Detailed Report Progression factor, PF 1.000 9.000 Delay calibration, k 0.11 0.91 Incremental delay, d2 0.2 0.0 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 95.1 13.5 9.6 Lane group LOS B e A Approach delay 15.0 9.6 Approach LOS g A Intersection delay 10.3 Intersection LOS HCS2000TI`'1 Copyright � 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved 1. 000 0.11 0.2 Page 2 of 2 9.000 1.000 0.11 0. 91 0.1 0.1 9.2 A 9. 9 A 8 :• e Version 4.1 c file:///C:/LTsers/christopher/AppData/Local/Temp/s2kB917.tmp 7/12/2013 .. Detailed Report Page 1 of 2 HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General lnformation Site lnformation Analyst CC Intersection S GULFVIEW BLVD / Agency or Co. DEUEL HAMDEN DR Date Performed 7/12/2013 Area Type All other areas Time Period PM PEAK FUTURE Jurisdiction CLEARWATER Analysis Year 2017 Pro'ect ID 2013-153 Volume and Timin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N� 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Lane group LT T R L LR Volume, V(vph) 43 269 245 4?3 446 23 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 1 1 1 1 1 1 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) A A A A A A Start-up lost time, I, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1:000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 95 0 5 10 0 Lane width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 Min. time for pedestrians, G 3.4 3.2 3.2 Phasin EB Onl EW Perm 03 04 SB Onl 06 07 08 Timing G= 5.0 G= 30.2 G= G= G= 32.3 G= G= G= Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis, T= 0.25 C cle Len th, C= 82.5 � Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 343 269 454 490 25 Lane group capacity, c 9335 689 585 700 626 v/c ratio, X 0.26 0.39 0. 78 0.70 0.04 Total green ratio, g/C 0.49 0.37 0.37 0.39 0.39 Uniform delay, d� 12.4 19.3 23.2 21.0 15.5 file:///C:/Users/christopher/AppData/Local/Temp/s2kBCA2.tmp 7/ 12/2013 Detailed Report f / Progression factor, PF Delay calibration, k Incremental delay, d2 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay Lane group LOS Approach delay Approach LOS Intersection delay HCS2000T`�'� 1. 000 0.19 0.1 1. 000 1. 000 0.11 0.33 0.4 6.5 92.5 19.7 29.7 8 8 C 12.5 26.0 B C 22.3 Intersection LOS Copyright � 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Page 2 of 2 1.000 1.000 0.27 0.19 3.1 0. 0 24. 2 15. 5 C 8 23. 7 C C Version 4.1c file:///C:lLTsers/christopher/AppData/Local/Temp/s2kBCA2.tmp 7/12/2013 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ite Information nal st CC Intersection CORONADO DR/ enc /Co. DEUEL HAMDEN DR Date Performed 7/12/2093 Jurisdiction CLEARWATER nal sis Time Period PM PEAK FUTURE nal sis Year 2097 Pro'ect Descri tion 2012-153 East/West Street: CORONADO DR North/South Street: HAMDEN DR Intersection Orientation: East-West tud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 4 433 0 0 366 908 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 9.00 1.00 0.99 0.91 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 4 475 0 0 402 118 Percent Hea Vehicles 1 -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Two Way Left Turn Lane RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT T TR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 0 0 0 0 40 3 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.91 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 0 43 3 Percent Heav Vehicles 0 0 0 0 1 1 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 D 0 0 1 0 Confi uration TR Dela , Queue Len th, and Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT TR (vph) 4 46 C (m) (vph) 1033 376 lc 0.00 0. 92 5% queue length 0.01 0.41 ontrol Delay 8.5 15.9 LOS A C pproach Delay -- -- 95.9 pproach LOS -- -- C HCS2000TM Copyright � 2000 University of Fbrida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1c file:///C:/IJsers/christopher/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kB21 C.tmp 7/12/2013 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY eneral Information Site Information nal st CC Intersection S. GULFVIEW BLVD /W enc /Co. DEUEL RIVEWAY Date Performed 7/15/2013 Jurisdiction CLEARWATER nal sis Time Period PM PEAK FUTURE nal sis Year 2017 Pro'ect Descri tion 2013-?53 East/West Street: S GULFVIEW BLVD North/South Street: WEST DRlVEWAY Intersection Orientation: East-West tud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 0 588 34 3 589 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 0 646 37 3 647 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- ? -- -- Median T pe Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 9 0 0 1 0 onfi uration TR LT U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 18 0 91 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.99 0.91 0.91 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 99 0 12 0 0 0 Percent Hea Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 onfi uration LR Dela , Queue Len th, and Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 3 31 (m) (vph) 915 230 /c 0.00 0.13 5% queue length 0.09 0.46 ontrol Delay 8.9 23.1 LOS A C pproach Delay -- -- 23.1 pproach LOS -- -- C HCS2000TM Copynght � 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 c file:///C:/LTsers/christopher/AppData/Local/Temp/u2k4FF8.tmp 7/18/2013 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nal st CC Intersection S. GULFVlEW BLVD /E enc /Co. DEUEL RIVEWAY Date Performed 7/15/2013 urisdiction CLEARWATER nal sis Time Period PM PEAK FUTURE nal sis Year 2017 Pro'ect Descri tion 2013-153 East/West Street: S GULFVIEW BLVD North/South Street: EAST DRIVEWAY Intersection Orientation: East-West Stud Period hrs : 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume 0 595 4 22 575 0 Peak-Hour Factor PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.99 0.91 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 0 653 4 24 631 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 — -- 1 -- -- Median Ty e Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 9 0 onfi uration TR LT U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume 17 0 91 0 0 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.91 0.99 0.91 0.91 0.99 0.99 Hourl Flow Rate, HFR 18 0 12 0 0 0 Percent Hea Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Confi uration LR Dela , Queue Len th, and Level of Service pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration LT LR (vph) 24 30 (m) (vph) 935 225 /c 0.03 0.13 5% queue length 0.08 0.45 Control Delay 9.0 23.4 LOS A C pproach Delay -- -- 23.4 pproach LOS -- -- C HCS2000T�`'i Copyright � 2000 University of Florida, All Righis Reserved Version 4.1c file:///C:/Llsers/christopher/AppDatalLocal/Temp/u2k6E8C.tmp 7/18/2013 Mayberry Tree Consulting LLC Tree Inventory/Wyndham Garden Hotel 691 South Gulfview Boulevard, Clearwater August 24, 2013 Prepared bv: Alan Mayberry, Consulting Arborist ISA Certified Arborist #SO-0305 Prepared for: Deuel and Associates The following report is submitted by Alan Mayberry, Consulting Arborist, and includes findings that I believe are accurate based on my education, experience and knowledge in the field of Arboriculture. My findings are clinical in nature and based on scientific research in the field of Arboriculture. In addition, my findings are based on personal observations of over 30 years of experience in the broad field of Arboriculture. I have no interest personally or financially in this property other than the preparation of this report and I believe my report is factual and unbiased. The purpose for this report is to conduct an assessment of trees at the subject property in respect to their health and structure and considerations for preservation potential. Tree Inventory and Site Overview The following tree inventory provides an overall condition rating for trees and palms defined as protected species by the provisions of City of Clearwater Code. The inventory also includes species that are identified as Category one or two invasive species in the Florida Exotic Pest Plant council's (FLEPPC) 2011 invasive species list. Protected trees with a trunk diameter of 4" and greater and palm species with a 10' clear trunk and greater are included in the tree inventory. This site is dominated by palm species including the native sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) and exotic palms species including Washington palm (Washingtonia robustaj, queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) and the date palm (Phoenix dactylifera). The sabal palms, particularly in the rear of the property are suffering from over-pruning. The tree inventory contains notes on proper palm pruning. The Washington palms are healthier as they have not been over pruned. Most of the queen palms are experiencing nutritional deficiencies and need to be fertilized. Palm fertilization is discussed in the tree inventory notes. The date palms are healthy, but should be fertilized per the site notes to avoid nutrient deficiencies. The overall condition rating reflects an assessment of a tree's health, structural integrity and to a lesser degree its aesthetic contribution. Tree Inventory Data section which follows the 1 tree inventory provides an explanation of the rating system and how individual trees are scored and evaluated. The methodology for conducting this tree assessment is defined in the arboricultural industry as a Visual Tree Assessment (VTA). Trees are assessed by visual observation of the foliage, major scaffold branches, secondary branches, the trunk and portions of the root system that are visible. NOTE: A tree inventory is typically valid for 3-5 years. However, eve��ts such as drought, lightning, mechanical root damage, freeze, improper maintenance and severe storms can downgrade the rated value of a tree. Conversely, remedial maintenance can upgrade the value. If you suspect that a tree has been adversely affected, have the tree inspected by a qualified International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist. NOTE: Whenever possible it is advised to adhere to inventory recommendations when selecting trees to be preserved. For example, trees or palms rated 4.0 and higher are strong candidates to be considered for preservation, while trees or palms rated 2.0 and lower should be removed unless otherwise noted in the inventory. Trees or palms rated 2.5 are generally recommended for removal unless remedial work is performed to upgrade them. Trees or palms rated 3.0 and 3.5 are average trees that have good potential and are worthy of preservation efforts. NOTE: Tree size references trunk diameter in inches for trees (measured at 4.5' above grade unless the tree forks below that point - then the diameter is measured at the narrowest area between grade and the fork. Palm species are measured in feet of clear trunk (the distance in feet from grade to where the first frond emanates from the trunk. NOTE: Any references in the following tree inventory recommending tree pruning should only be performed by International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborists skilled in pruning to the standards defined in the American National Standards Institute (ANS�) publication, ANSI-A300 Part 1: Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Maintenance — standards Practices, Pruning and the International Society of Arboriculture's companion publication: Best Management Practices, Tree Pruning (Revised 2008). NOTE: Any reference to future monitoring of trees or further inspections of trees should only be performed by ISA Certified Arborists who have verifiable proof that they have attended and received CEU's (continuing educational units) in ISA supported tree hazard risk assessment seminars. NOTE: Any recommendations for cabling and bracing of trees in this tree inventory should only be performed by ISA Certified Arborists skilled in this arboricultural practice and in conformance with the methodology as defined within the International Society of Arboriculture's publication: Best Management Practices, Tree Support Systems: Cabling, Bracing, Guying and Propping (Revised). 2 NOTE: Any recommendations in this tree inventory for structural pruning should only be performed by ISA Certified Arborists skilled in this type of pruning and in conformance with the methodology as defined within the International So�iety of Arboriculture's publication: Best Management Practices, Tree Pruning (Revised 2008). This tree inver,tory was conducted on August 24, 2013 The foliowing tree inventory starts with tree #1 and ends with tree #93. Tree Inventory Tree # Size Species Ratin� 1• 7",12" Japanese privet (Ligustrum japonicum) 2.p Comments: This tree forms a basal codominant with included bark 1" above grade. The 7" trunk forks 5' above grade and the southern fork of this trunk is dead and needs to be removed immediately if the tree is preserved. The 12" trunk forms 2 branches, one is 6" in diameter and the other is 8". The bark is starting crack and fissure and the crotch has fruiting bodies of a fungus present. The 6" branch is a large dead stub and needs to be removed. It is located over a table associated with the restaurant. The canopy has some dieback but is healthy for the most part. Although this tree has some aesthetic value and systemic health I recommend removal of this tree as it is in decline and this process will likely increase exponentiatly. If the tree is preserved the deadwood should be removed immediately. Recommend removal. SITE NOTES: Palm species dominate the landscape at this site. In the course of rating individual palms I will make recommendations for pruning and in some cases fertilizing. It should be noted that recommendation for pruning are restricted to the removal of dead fronds except in the rare instances where live fronds are recommended for removal for clearance issues. Healthy green fronds should be retained. Dead or dying fronds are recommended for removal. (See discourse in site overview). Palm pruning recommendations will include all of the following or a combination of all types: 1) Remove loose boots. Loose boots are the leaf bases that are still attached to the trunk after a frond is removed. They can become loose and cause a maintenance problem with litter, create a shabby appearance and in some cases cause injury when they fall. 2) Remove fruit. The word fruit refers to a palm's inflorescence which is typically an extended stalk that the flowers and fruit grow on. They can also cause litter and maintenance problems (leaving the fruit of some species leads to small palms popping up in landscape beds) and can cause injury by falling or by large seeds on 3 parking lots causing pedestrian slipping hazards. 3) Dead fronds. Dead fronds are recommended for removal as they harbor rodents etc., create an unhealthy appearance and species with spines or teeth can cause injury when they fall. Palm Prunin�: Remove dead fronds, fruit, loose boots and only remove live green fronds for clearance purposes. Semi-green fronds should also be retained until they are neariy dead. No live frond should be removed if the frond stem (petiole) emanates from the trunk a� a 45 degree angle or less measured perpendicular from the trunk. This is referred to a 9-3 pruning cut with the petioles resembling the hands on a clock at the 9 and 3 positions. The 9-3 pruning cut is considered to be acceptable in the industry but ideally, no green fronds should be removed, period. Palm fertilization: The sabal palm and the Washington palm typically grow well without fertilization. However, the Phoenix species and the queen palm are recommended for fertilization. Palms should be fertilized four times a year with a palm fertilizer with a ratio of 8N-2P-12-K-4Mg at the rate of 1.5 pounds of palm formula (not nitrogen) per 100 square feet of palm canopy. It is essential that the nitrogen, potassium and magnesium be in a slow release form. This formula was produced by the University of Florida's research team after years of testing. It is new and presently only manufactured by a few companies. It is available locally from John Deere landscaping. Be sure to get the kieserite based formula. Trunk restrictions: Trunk restrictions are areas where the trunks decrease in diameter. A severe trunk restriction could cause failure due to inadequate support; however, most trunk restrictions do not result in failure. Trunk restrictions can be caused by over-pruning, nutrient deficiencies, disease, weather events and other reasons. The best way to avoid trunk restrictions is to prune properly and fertilize when needed and plant species that grow well in the Tampa Bay area. I did not observe any severe trunk restrictions at this site but palms with minor or moderate trunk restrictions are noted. Ficus �rowin� out of trunk• A number of palms have ficus trees that have rooted within the trunks and are growing. The ficus species is (Ficus aurea), the strangler fig. This tree gets its name because it grows around the trunk and crown of the host tree and eventually strangles the tree. It should be removed as soon as possible before it establishes a widespread root system and woody stems. I also observed Brazilian pepper growing out of two palms. 2. 14' C.T. sabal palm (Saba/ palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove loose boots and fruit. Recommend preservation. 3. 15' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal pa/metto) 3.5 Comments: Remove loose boots. Recommend preservation. 4. 12' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.0 4 Comments: Remove dead fronds. Recommend preservation. 5• 35' C.T. date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) 3.5 Comments: Recommend fertilizing 4x a year with the 8-2-12-4 palm special fertilizer as described in SITE NOTES above. Trunk restriction. Recommend preservation. 6• 37' C.T. date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) 3.5 Comments: Recommend fertilizing 4x a year with the 5-2-12-4 palm special fertilizer as described in SITE NOTES above. Trunk restriction. Recommend preservation. 7. 15' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Trunk restriction. Over-pruned. Recommend preservation. g• 14' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Recommend preservation. 9. 15' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove fruit. Recommend preservation. 10. 16' C.T. sabal palm (Saba/ pa/metto) 3.0 Comments: Trunk restriction, remove fruit. Over-pruned. Recommend preservation. 11. 14' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal pa/metto) 3.0 Comments: Over-pruned. Recommend preservation. 12• 16' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.0 Comments: Trunk restriction. Over-pruned. Recommend preservation. 13. 13' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.0 Comments: Over-pruned. Recommend preservation. 5 14. 14' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove fruit. Over-pruned. Recommend preservation. 15. 14' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 2.5 Comments: Chlorc�tic foliage. May have too much fifl over roo� bail. Remove some of the fill, irrigate and fertilize to restore health. Could also be caused by over pruning. Recommend preservation. 16. 13' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal pa/metto) 3.0 Comments: Remove nicked frond. Recommend preservation. 17• 13' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.0 Comments: Remove nicked frond. Over-pruned. Recommend preservation. 1g• 15' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Over-pruned. Recommend preservation. 19• 18' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: This palm may be on the property line of just off the line. Determine ownership before pruning. 2�• 13' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.0 Comments: Remove fruit. Over-pruned. Recommend preservation. 21• 13' C.T. sabal palm (Saba/ pa/metto) 3.0 Comments: Over-pruned. 22• Multi-trunk Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) 1.0 Comments: This tree appears to originate off-site but grows into the subject property. Recommend removal of encroaching vegetation or total removal of this category one invasive exotic tree if on property. 23• 12' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 2.5 Comments: Moderate trunk restriction. Severely over-pruned. Recommend preservation. 6 24. 16' C.T. sabal palm (Saba/ palmetto) 3.5 Comrnents: Remove fruit. Recommend preservat�on. 25. . 12' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal perlmetto} 2.5 Comments: Remove fruit. Moderate trunk restriction. Over-pruned. Recommend preservation. 26. 15' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal pa/metto) 3.5 Comments: Remove fruit. Trunk restriction. Recommend preservation. 27. 12' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal pa/metto) 3.5 Comments: Remove fruit. Trunk restriction. Recommend preservation. 28. 13' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove fruit. Recommend preservation. 29. 5" Lakeview jasmine (Murraya paniculata) 3.5 Comments: Prune branches over grade and away from building. Recommend preservation. 30. 15' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove fruit. Recommend preservation. 31. 8", 10" Japanese privet (Ligustrum japonicum) 2.0 Comments: This tree has a codominant trunk with a root collar attachment. The trunk has decay and the canopy has dieback. In addition, there is a large dead stub. Although the tree has health in some areas of the canopy and has some aesthetic appeal, the tree is declining overall and has poor structure. Recommend removal. 32. 14" green buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus) 2.5 Comments: The trunk of this tree forms a severely included unequal codominant 5.5' above grade. This tree should be structurally pruned to take weight off the south codominant (approximately one-third of the canopy) and also, take some weight off the large north codominant to reduce stress on the included area. In addition, remove deadwood. It has good systemic health and form. Recommend preservation. 7 33. 5" pittosporum (Pittosporum tobira) 2.5 Comments: This "shrub" is actualiy a small tree. It has good structure and sufficient health. Recommend preservation. 34. 4", 6" pittospor�;m (Pittosporum tobira) 2.� Comments: Recommend removal due to overall poor health and decay. Recommend removal. 35. 25' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal pa/metto) 3.5 Comments: Remove ficus from trunk and fruit in canopy. Recommend preservation. 36. 20' C.T. sabal paim (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove fruit and ficus growing on trunk. Recommend preservation. 37. 17' C.T. sabal palm �Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove fruit. Recommend preservation. 38. 22' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove ficus from trunk and fruit in the crown. Recommend preservation. 39. 16' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Trunk restriction. Remove fruit. Recommend preservation. 40. 14' C.T. sabal palm (Saba/ palmetto) 3.0 Comments: Remove fruit. Recommend preservation. 41. 13' C.T. sabal palm (Saba/ pa/metto) 3.0 Comments: Trunk restriction. Remove fruit. Recommend preservation. 42. 14' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal pa/metto) 3.0 Comments: Moderate trunk restriction. Remove fruit. Recommend preservation. 43. 12' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 : Comments: Remove loose boots on trunk and ficus growing on trunk. Recommend preservation. 44. 12' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove loose boots and Brazilian pepper tree growing in trunk. Recommend preservation. _ 45. 11' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove loose boots and fruit. Recommend preservation. NOTE: Tree# 46, 47 & 48 are off-site trees but are included in the tree inventory as required by Clearwater Code for trees located within 25, of the site property line. *46. 10' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.0 Comments: Recommend preservation. Off-site tree see note above. *47• 12' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Recommend preservation. Off-site tree see note above. *48• 12' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Recommend preservation. Off-site tree see note above. 49• 16' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 � Comments: Recommend preservation. 50. 14' C.T. sabal palm (Saba/ pa/mettoj 3.0 Comments: Moderate trunk restriction. Recommend preservation. 51. 15' C.T. sabal palm (Saba/ pa/metto) 3.0 Comments: Moderate trunk restriction. Recommend preservation. 52• multi-stem Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) 1.0 Comments: Remove category one invasive exotic. Recommend removal. 53. 17' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 9 Comments: Remove loose boots, dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 54. 12' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 Comments: Raise over parking lot and remove dead fronds. Recommend preservation. 55. 15' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 Comments: Remove loose boots and fruit. Recommend preservation. 56. 17' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 3.5 Comments: Remove loose boots, dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 57. 19' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 Comments: Remove loose boots and dead fronds. Recommend preservation. 58. 19' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 Comments: Remove dead fronds. Recommend preservation. *59. 18' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 4.0 Comments: Off-site tree see note above. 60. 14' C.T. queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) 2.5 Comments: Potassium deficiency. Chlorotic foliage. Fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8-2-12-4 (4 is magnesiumj. Recommend preservation. 61. 12' C.T. queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) 3.0 Comments: Fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8-2-12-4 (4 is magnesium). Remove dead fronds. Recommend preservation. 62. 12' C.T. queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) 3.0 Comments: Fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8-2-12-4 (4 is magnesium). 63. 12' C.T. queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffrana) 3.0 10 Comments: Fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8-2-12-4 (4 is magnesium). Remove seed pods. Recommend preservation. 64. 12' C.T, queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) 2.5 Comments: Potassium deficiency. Fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8-2- 12-4 (4 is magnesium). Recommend preservation. 65. 11' C.T. queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) 2.5 Comments: Nutrient deficiency. Fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8-2-12- 4(4 is magnesium). Remove dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 66. 20' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 3.5 Comments: Remove loose boots, dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 67. 11' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 3.5 Comments: Remove loose boots and prune from light. Recommend preservation. 68. multi-stem Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifoliusj 1.0 Comments: Remove category one invasive exotic. Recommend removal. 69. 14' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove fruit and ficus from trunk. Recommend preservation. 70. 12' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 3.5 Comments: Remove dead fronds. Recommend preservation. 71. 11' C.T. queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) 2.5 Comments: Potassium deficiency. Fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8-2- 12-4 (4 is magnesium). Recommend preservation. 72. 15' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 Comments: Remove loose boots, dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 11 73. 19' C.T. queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) 2,S Comments: Remove dead fronds and fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8- 2-12-4 (4 is magnesium). Recommend preservation. 74• 16' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 3.5 Comments: Prune away from light. Remove dead fronds. Recommend preservation. 75. 21' C.T. queen palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) 2,5 Comments: Remove dead fronds. Fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8-2- 12-4 (4 is magnesium). Recommend preservation. 76• multi-stem Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) 1.0 Comments: Remove category one invasive exotic. Recommend removal. 77. 11' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal pplmetto) 4.0 Comments: Remove fruit. Recommend preservation. 78. 14' C.T. sabal palm (Sabal palmetto) 4.0 Comments: Remove fruit. Recommend preservation. 79. 13' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 3.5 Comments: Remove dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 80. 13' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 Comments: Remove loose boots. Recommend preservation. 81. 15' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 Comments: Remove dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 82. 11' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusra) 3.5 Comments: Remove dead fronds. Recommend preservation. 83. 4,5,5,6,6 lapanese privet (Ligustrum japonicum) 2.0 12 � Comments: This tree has 5 codominant trunks with decay in some of the basal connections. This tree is located in a very small planter connected to the building. The crown of the tree is growing away from the building and due to the wall; the tree has been unable to develop tension roots. �fhe crown is healthy overall but due to the poor structure and location I recommend removal. 84. 30' C.T. date palm (Phoenix dactylifera� 4.0 Comments: Remove dead fronds and fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of S- 2-12-4 (4 is magnesium). Recommend preservation. 85. 27' C.T. date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) 4.5 Comments: Remove dead fronds and fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8- 2-12-4 (4 is magnesium). Recommend preservation. 86. 30' C.T. date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) 4.0 Comments: Remove ficus from trunk. Fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8- 2-12-4 (4 is magnesium). Recommend preservation. 87• 25' C.T. date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) 4.0 Comments: Remove ficus from trunk. Fertilize 4 times a year with a palm special formula of 8- 2-12-4 (4 is magnesium). Recommend preservation. 88. 24' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 Comments: Remove loose boots, dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 89. 23' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 Comments: Remove loose boots, dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 90• 23' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 3.5 Comments: Remove loose boots, dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 91. 22' �•T• Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 Comments: Remove fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 92. 24' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.0 13 Comments: Remove loose boots, dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. 93. 24' C.T. Washington palm (Washingtonia robusta) 4.5 Comments: Remove loose boots, dead fronds and fruit. Recommend preservation. This concludes the tree inventory. The following is an explanation of the tree inventory rating system. Tree Inventory Data A tree inventory is a written record of a tree's condition at the time of inspection. It is a valuable tool to prioritize tree maintenance and remove trees with problems that could lead to failure and cause personal injury or property damage. The tree inventory lists four codes, tree#, trunk diameter, tree species, and overall condition rating. It also includes a comment section with specific supportive data for the rating. The following is an explanation of the data used in the inventory: Tree# - location - Each tree is assigned a number for reference in the inventory that corresponds with a number on the site plan or a number on a tree tag that identifies the location of the tree in the field. Size — Tree size is a measure of the tree's trunk diameter measured at 4.5' above grade. If the trunk forks at 4.5' above grade the diameter is measured at the narrowest trunk diameter below the fork. Palm species are measured in feet of clear trunk (C.T.). Species — Each tree is listed by its common and botanical name the first time it is listed in the inventory. For simplicity, the tree is listed by its common name thereafter. Condition Rating — The condition rating is an assessment of the tree's overall structure and systemic health. Elements of structure include: 1) the presence of cavities, decayed wood, split, cracked, rubbing branches etc., 2) branch arrangements and attachments, i,e., well- spaced scaffold branches vs. several branches emanating from the same area on the trunk, codominant stems vs. single leader trunk, and presence of a branch bark ridge vs. included bark. Elements of systemic health relate to the tree's overall energy system measured by net photosynthesis (food made) vs. respiration (food used). A tree with good systemic health will have a vascular system that moves water, nutrients and photosynthate within the tree as needed. Indicators of a healthy systemic system used in the overall condition rating include: 1) live crown ratio (the percentage live crown a tree has relative to its height, 2) crown density (density of the foliage), 3) tip growth (foliated branch tips and shoot elongation) 14 The overall condition rating also takes into consideration the species, appearance and any unique features. The rating scale is 0-6 with 0 being a dead tree and 6 a specimen. Increments of 0.5 are used to increase accuracy. Examples of the tree rating system are as foliows: 0- A dead tree 1- A tree that is dying, severely declining, hazardous, harboring a communicable disease or a tree designated by the State of Florida's Exotic Pest Plant Council as a category #1 ecological pest e.g., Brazilian pepper tree (Schinus rerebinthifolius). A tree with a rating of 1 should be removed as it is beyond treatment and is a threat to cause personal injury or property damage or is an invasive species. 2— A tree exhibiting serious structural defects such as codominant stems with included bark at or near the base, large cavities, large areas of decayed wood, crown dieback, cracked/split scaffold branches etc. In addition, a tree with health issues such as low energy, low live crown ratio, serious disease or insect problems, nutritional deficiencies or soil pH problems. A tree with a rating of #2 should be removed unless the problem(s) can be treated. A tree with a#2 condition rating will typically require a considerable amount of maintenance to qualify for an upgrade of the condition rating. 3- A tree with average structure and systemic health and with problems that can be corrected with moderate maintenance. A tree with a codominant stem not in the basal area that will be subordinated or cabled and braced or a codominant stem that will soon have included bark can be included as a#3. A tree with a rating of #3 has average appearance, crown density and live crown ratio and should be preserved if possible. 4- A tree with a rating of 4 has good structure and systemic health with minor problems that can be easily corrected. The tree should have an attractive appearance and be essentially free of any debilitating disease or insect problem. The tree should also have above average crown density and live crown ratio. Mature trees exhibiting scars, old wounds, small cavities or other problems that are not debilitating can be included in this group particularly if they possess unique form or other aesthetic amenities relating to their age. A tree with a rating of 4 is valuable to the property and should be preserved. 5— A tree with live crown ratio of at least 65%, very good crown density, exceptional structure and systemic health and virtually free of debilitating insect or disease problems or nutritional deficiencies. A tree in this category should have a balanced crown with exceptional aesthetic amenities. A tree in this category should be of a species that possesses characteristics inherent to longevity and withstanding construction impacts. A tree with a#5 rating lends considerable value to the site and should be incorporated into the site design. A tree with a#5 rating is worthy of significant site plan modification to ensure its preservation. 6— A specimen tree. A specimen tree is a tree that possesses a combination of superior qualities in regards to systemic health, structural strength, crown density, live crown ratio, 15 form (balanced crown), overall aesthetic appeal, size, species, age and uniqueness. A great effort should be made to preserve a specimen tree including shifting structures that would adversely impact the tree. In addition, a specimen tree should have an undisturbed rooting area equal to its dri�line (equai to the branch spread) to grow in. Only an experienced and competent International Society of Arboriculture (I.S.A.) Certified Arborist should be allowed to perform maintenance on a specimen tree. Comments: The comment section serves to note observations relative to the tree but not covered in the inventory data or expands on information in the inventory data. It may include maintenance recommendations to improve the tree's overall condition rating. It may also have recommendations on whether to remove or preserve a tree. 16 � DEUEL & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS * LAND SURVEYORS * LAND PLANNERS CORPORATE OFFICE BRANCH OFFICE 565 South Hercules Avenue Clearwater, FL 33764 Zephyrhills, FL 33541 Office (727) 822-4151 Office (813) 782-6717 Faac (727) 821-7255 PLEASE REPLY TO CLEARWATER OFFICE October 10, 2013 City of Clearwater Planning & Development Department P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, Florida 33756 RE: Enchantment LLC 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. FLD2013-08028 In response to the City of Clearwater's comments for the Flexible Development application for a 202- room overnight accommodation, we offer the following responses: Engineering Review Prior to Building Permit: 1. As per Community Development Code Section 3-1907B, Sidewalks/Bicycle paths and City Construction Standard Index No. 109 for Sidewalks, Applicant shall bring all sub-standard sidewalks and sidewalk ramps adjacent to or a part of the project up to standard, including A.D.A. standards (raised detectable tactile surfaces or truncated domes per FDOT Index #304 and 310). Please ensure that the existing slopes of the sidewalk meets FY 2012/13 standards. � Response: This will be addressed prior to Building permits 2. As per Clearwater Code of Ordinances, Article IX., Reclaimed Water System, Section 32.376, Use of potable water for irrigation is prohibited, no person shall use potable water for irrigation through a new or existing lawn meter on property where reclaimed water distribution facilities are available. If potable water is currently used for irrigation, then a connection to the reclaimed water line in Gulfview Boulevard shall be established. � Response: This will be addressed prior to Building permits 3. Please provide the following notes to the demolition sheet of the plans: --All utilities shall be cut and capped prior to demolition. The Wastewater Supervisor shall be notified. --All existing utilities shall be protected during demolition. --Demolition shall not cause any service interruptions for other utility customers. --Water meters, double-detector checks and backflow preventers are owned by the City of Clearwater. The City shall remove and retain these items. Enchantment LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 2 � Response: These notes have been added to the plans General Note: 1. DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review. Additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. � Response: Notea� 2. Only Sheets 2, 3, and 5 were reviewed. � Response: Notea� Environmental Review Prior to issuance of Building Permit: 1. An Asbestos Survey is usually required prior to conducting any demolition or renovations. Contact Pinellas County Air Quality (727/464-4422) for more information. � Response: Noted, will comply. 2. No light shall be visible or extend in areas identified as Sea Turtle Nesting Areas during the nesting season (May 1 to October 31). Those areas where security and public safety require lighting, alternative light management approaches shall be applied. Provide evidence of sea turtle-friendly lighting in accordance with City code and state laws prior to the issuance of building permits. � Response: Acknowledged: full "Sea Turtle Friendly" lighting will be addressed and design submitted with building permit application. 3. Provide stormwater vault specifications showing the vault provides water quality benefits and provide a vault maintenance schedule that has been signed and accepted by the owner. � Response: This will be addressed prior to Building permits 4. Provide erosion control measures on plans sheet and provide notes detailing erosion control methods � Response: . This will be addressed prior to Building permits General Note(s): 1. DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. � Response: Noted 2. Offsite discharge of produced groundwater from dewatering shall comply with dewatering guidelines from Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), F.A.C. 62-621(2). Enchantment LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 3 � Response: This will be addressed prior to Building permits 3. Additional permits from State agencies, such as the Southwest Florida Water Management District or Florida Department of Environmental Protection, may be required. Approval does not relieve the applicant from the requirements to obtain all other required permits and authorizations. � Response: This will be addressed prior to Building permits Fire Review 1) Must Comply with Ordinance No. 7617-06 Radio System Regulations for buildings, install 911 Radio Repeater Antenna Booster System. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO C.D.B. � Response: Acknowledgec� 2) This building is determined to meet the criteria of a High Rise Building as defined by the Florida Fire Prevention Code, 2010 Edition, therefore the requirements of a High Rise structure must be met. These requirements include, but are not limited to Fire Code items such as Fire Pump and generator if pump is electric,above base flood elevation100psi at roof is required, sprinkler system throughout with control valve and water flow device on each floor, Class I Standpipe System, Fire Alarm using voice/alarm communication, Central Fire Control Station, firefighter phone system, Emergency lighting, and Standby Power as per NFPA 70, Pressurized Stairwells, Stairwell marking and Elevator Lobbies. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO C.D.B. � Response: Acknowledgec� 3) Where underground water mains and hydrants are to be installed, they shall be installed, completed, and in service prior to construction as per NFPA-241. All underground fire lines and hydrants must be installed by a contractor with a class I,II or V license. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO C.D.B. � Response: Acknowledgea� 4) Sheet 5 of 9 shows the relocation of the existing double check valve, note that Clearances of seven and one half feet in front of and to the sides of the fire hydrant, with a 4 foot clearance to the rear of the hydrant are required to be maintained as per NFPA-1. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO C.D.B. � Response: Acknowledged The proposed BFPD is now shown to be a minimum of 7. S feet f�om the fire hydranz 5) Provide Fire Flow Calculations Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply is available and to determine if any upgrades are required by the Enchanhnent LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 4 developer due to the impact of this project. Calculations Water Study due PRIOR TO D.O. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO C.D.B. � Response: Acknowledgec� 6) Must meet the requirements of NFPA 1 Fire Code 2009 Edition 16.3.5 Standpipes. In all new buildings in which standpipes are required or where standpipes exist in buildings being altered or demolished, such standpipes shall be maintained in conformity with the progress of building construction in such a manner that they are always ready for use. 241:7.6 ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO C.D.B. � Response: Acknowledgea� 7) Must meet the requirements of NFPA-241 Standard for Safeguarding Construction, Alteration, and Demolition Operations 2004 Edition 7.5.6 Stairs. 7.5.6.1 In all buildings over one story in height, at least one stairway shall be provided that is in usable condition at all times and that meets the requirements of NFPA 101, Life Safety Code. 7.5.6.2 This stairway shall be extended upward as each floor is installed in new construction and maintained for each floor still remaining during demolition. 7.5.6.3 The stairway shall be lighted. 7.5.6.4 During construction, the stairway shall be enclosed where the building exterior walls are in place. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO C.D.B. � Response: Acknowledged 8) Note: This is a D.R.C. approval only. Other issues may develop and will be addressed at building permit stage. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO C.D.B. � Response: Acknowledged 9) Plan shows the exits going into a swale will a side walk be provided, note NFPA 7.2.3.5 Discharge. Every smoke proof enclosure shall discharge into a public way, into a yard or court having direct access to a public way, or into an exit passageway. Such exit passageways shall be without openings, other than the entrance to the smoke proof enclosure and the door to the outside yard, court, or public way. The exit passageway shall be separated from the remainder of the building by a 2-hour fire resistance rating. Provide proper door swing in all means of egress. Stair A does not exit to the outside this will need to be addressed ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO C.D.B. � Response: Acknowledged A 5 foot side walk will be provided prior to Building permits Land Resource Review Land Resource Review: Prior to CDB: 1. Clarify if you will be root pruning any of the Palms that you show tree barricades around on your demo/ tree preservation plan. A note will suffice for clarification purposes. Enchantment LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 5 � Response: No root pruning is anticipated for the existing trees on site which are to remain. A note has been added to the plans Prior to Building Permit: Provide a spread sheet expressing the total number of trees to be removed, calculating the DBH of all trees being removed with a rating of 3 and above and the total proposed inches. Note: palm trees with 10' of clear trunk receive a 1" deficit if removed and a 1" credit if proposed and accent trees receive a 2" deficit if removed and a 2" credit if proposed. � Response: Will be provided prior to BCP. 2. You will be required to apply for a Clearing and Grubbing permit. � Response: Acknowledged, will comply. 3. You will be required to apply for a Tree Removal permit. � Response: Acknowledged, will comply. 4. All tree preservation must be installed and inspected prior to issuance of building permit. � Response: Acknowledged, will comply. General Notes: DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review, prior to issuance of a building permit any and all perFormance based erosion and sedimentation control measures must be approved by Environmental and or Stormwater Engineering, be installed properly, and inspected. � Response: Acknowledged, will comply. Parks and Recreation Review Open space/recreation impact fees are due prior to the issuance of building permits or final plat (if applicable) whichever occurs first. These fees could be substantial and it is recommended that you contact Debbie Reid at 727-562-4818 to calculate the assessment. � Response: Acknowledged, will comply. We will contact Debbie Reic� Planning Review GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA: 19. Criterion 1- Provide the request for previous proposals for a similar project on the vacant land to the east. Clarify if they were approved; Enchantment LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 6 � Response: To the best of our knowledge there are no active approvals in place, nor have there been any proposals or applications submitted to the City, for the property directly to the east of this proposal, all previous proposals have lapsea� 20. Criterion 2- states the goal of Beach by Design is to provide luxury resort hotels; however the hotel density reserve was established to attract other types of hotels to provide a variety of tourist facilities. To facilitate the restoration of those lost mid-size, mid-priced hotels or limited-service hotels. Clarify how this hotel meets the intention of the hotel density reserve; � Response: This hotel is planned as a"Limited-Service Facility" As per code, the accessory uses shall not exceed IS% of the building area. 21. Criterion 3 no comment 22.. Criterion 4 no comment 23.. Criterion 5 no comment 24. Criterion 6 no comment Comp Infill Criteria: 25.Criterion 1 the owner is requesting rooms from the hotel density reserve not the destination resort density pool. � Response: Noted This was a typo. 26. Provide the specific goals, objectives, and policies that support this project in the future land use plan in the Comprehensive Plan; � Response: The project is in the Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design which contemplates high rise condominiums, resort hotels and tourists and retail uses Beach by Design further contemplates this area to be an area of strategic revitalization and renovation to improving conditions on the balance of Clearwater Beach. As such the proposed hotel fits in perfectly as envisioned by Beach by Design. 27. Criterion 3 no comment 28. Criterion 4 no comment 29. Criterion 5 no comment 30. Criterion 6- no comment Beach by Design: 31. Height; submit the proximity map of 500 feet and 800 feet submitted with HDA application to demonstrate the distance between buildings; � Response: Please see sheet AS 3 Enchanhnent LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/1012013 Page 7 32. Please provide statement/narrative that discusses the architectural style and design elements in depth added to the building such as a prominent entrance, artwork and landscaping on parking garage and in design mass and scale section; � Response: For this development we are proposing a Contemporary Coastal architectural style that is consistent with and complements the tropical vernacular style envisioned in Beach by Design. The primary massing of the building consists of a five-story parking base, with a"C" shaped hotel portion up to 100' height, and a five-story hotel tower over the eastern leg of the "C" up to the 1 SO' heigh� Capping the garage, the sixth floor is the primary guest amenity level with a pool, exercise room, and some meeting space. Above the parking levels, the massing of the building elements is arranged to provide maximum separation from the neighboring Continental Towers residential building. The facades of the building are articulated and stepped to comply with the Beach by Design criteria for ma�imum wall length, horizontal and vertical stepping, stepbacks, wall material and color articulation and for window and door opening size and design variety. The building steps in on the sixth floor, above the parking structure on all sides To the north there is a 1 S foot stepback providing the opportunity for a balcony for sonze smaller meeting rooms and on the south the step forms the guest amenity and pool area. On the east face the central fa�ade of the building is stepped back to provide articulation between the stair towers The stair tower and portions of the wall are designed as structural shear walls, and as such, need to be continuous from grade to roof. Additionally, the corners of the building, both at the tower element and at the garage, have been pulled back to further articulate the building facades To cap the building we proposed thin, planar, wing-like roof elements These elements articulate and break up otherwise long expanses of balconies The balconies are differentiated with varying railing types; solid, rail, and glass, as well as varying projection from the building wal� The design of the building walls and windows and doors are differentiated in similar manner to the balconies For example we are proposing a glass fa�ade for the center portion of the building between the two towers 33. C. 5 provide a response to how the height and mass of the building will corelate to the dimensional aspects of the property and adjacnr spaces such as streets; � Response: As mentioned above, the building is broken, vertically, with stepbacks and fenestration, material, and color changes on all four facades The 5 story garage facade is shielded and treated as an art elemen� The garage portion of the building mass is "picture" framed The view of the garage openings are shielded with a projected decorative screen; a combination living green wall and colored glass screening. At the base of the building the entry and lobby areas are treated as a grand portico, by opening the view of the inner entry fa�ade out to the streez To the South, water side, in response to our Continental Towers neighbors, our proposed building maintains the current hotel's water setback line, and the massing of the new building is designed such that the main 100 foot and 1 SO foot blocks of the building are pulled away from Continental towers The portion of our building closest to Continental Towers is the five story garage that is covered by the open pool and amenity decl� The 100 foot tall portion of the building is pulled to the north, away from the main mass of Continental Towers and overlooks the Continental Towers Enchanhnent LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 8 parking loz We placed the 1 SO foot tall portion of the proposed building to the east side of the property, this allows for a 148 foot separation between the Continental towers and the ISO foot portion of the proposed building. 34. E- expand upon the statement provided for the street level facade. How is it in relation to the sidewalk and pedestrian friendly from ground level to 12 feet in height. What will the pedestrian see? describe artwork or landscaping that appeals to stret level facade; � Response: The S story garage facade is shielded and treated as an art element with the use of a color pictured mail building fa�ade as well as a combination living green wall and decorative colored screening. At the base of the building the entry and lobby areas are treated as a grand portico, by opening the view to the inner fa�ade to the stree� The main pedestrian entrance is defined by a wide decorative entry walk and flanking landscaping. While the pedestrian and vehicular accesses cross, we are proposing that all is wide open to view and treated as a large, tall porte-cochere with varied paving materials, good lighting (this is on the side of the building facing away from the beach, thereby not impacting the turtle nesting areas), and wide open expanses of the building wal� 35. E.3 describe how the entrance is inviting and easily identified from the garage openings; � Response: At the base of the building the enhy and lobby areas are treated as a grand portico, by opening the inner fa�ade to the stree� The main pedestrian entrance is defined by a wide decorative entry walk and flanking landscaping. While the pedestrian and vehicular accesses cross, we are proposing that all is wide open to view and treated as a large, tall porte-cochere with varied paving materials, good lighting (this is on the side of the building facing away froin the beach, thereby not impacting the turtle nesting areas.), and wide open expanses of the building wal� 36. Street furniture - any proposed locations for the street furniture and how will it contibute to street facade; � Response: The majority of the building, along South Gulfview Boulevard, is visually open to the street, in effect engaging and including the street and sidewalk into the grand entrance of the hote� Not merely portals in a wall, but a grand porte cochere. As the designs progress we will be creating seating and landscaping nodes along South Gulfview Blvd 37. Add a discussion about the setbacks and at what level stepbacks are provided and call out any other architectural feature that should be known. � Response: P[ease see responses above that address the setbacks and stepbacks. Enchanrinent LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 9 38. Will the lookout deck on the 10th level be open to all guests? � Response: The IOth level lookout deck will be open to all hotel guests and their visitors 38. Provide the actual names of the proposed soft colors of the building. � Response: We are proposing using a STO stucco system. STO does not have color names, only number designations 39. Provide the number of new jobs the hotel will create. � Response: The current hotel employs approximately 80 personnel, the new facility is e�pected to require approximately 125 to I50 employees 40. Any valet parking? � Response: No valet parking is plannec� The hotel garage provides the 1.2 spaces per key required by code. The garage is planned for guest self-parking. 41. Irrigation sytem required and that all irrigation systems be connected to the City reclaimed water system where available per Clearwater Code of Ordinances. � Response: Acknowledged and will be provided prior to BCP Planning Review Planning Review: Prior to CDB: 1. The HDA2013-08001 case shall be approved by the City Council prior to the FLD case being recommended as sufficient to be considered by the Community Development Board; � Response: Noted 2. The submitted site plan shows no structure in the setbacks shown which are a front (north) setback of 15.02 feet (to building), a side (east) setback of 15 feet (to building), a side (west) setback of 15.17 feet (to building), a rear (south) setback of 20 feet (to building). clarify that there is no proposed structure in the approved setbacks later at building permits; � Response: There are no additional structures planned to be placed in the building setbacks. 3. Sheet A2 11 shows balconies protruding into the side (west) and side (east) proposed setback of 15.feet and 15.02 feet, respectively. The site plan does not show the balconies. The balconies need to be shown on site plan that include the setback dimension from the property to the balcony: Enchanhnent LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 10 � Response: The majority of the building balconies fall behind the garage portion of the building. There are trvo locations, one each on the east and west, where decorative, feature, balconies are planned, but no balcony shall extend more than 24 inches into any required building setbacl� The balconies are now shown on the plans. 4. As set forth in Section 3-907.D.1, balconies are allowed to extend into required setback 24 inches. Provide the width dimension for the balconies that extend into setback; � Response: Please see noted building plan sheets. 5. The Index of drawing on the cover page does not match the index of sheets on Sheet 2. The individual sheet numbers do not match the sheet index on sheet 2. Revise; � Response: This has been revised 6. Provide the setback to balconies within the Site Data Table on Sheet 3 of site plans; � Response: This is now shown. 7. A Comprehensive Landscape Program application was submitted with application materials. What flexibility in landscape standards is the form/request asking?; � Response: Not required — will withdraw 8. On Sheet A2 11 in the tabulation table, break down the 22,255 square footage of accessory uses by including in the table the actual square footage for each interior space to be an accessory use which includes the meeting rooms, lounge area, Kid's play area, gym, restaurant, and retail space on the first and sixth levels. Accessory uses are limited to 15 percent of the gross floor area excluding parking garage, stairwells and elevator shafts. parking spaces is required if accessory uses exceed the 15 percent; � Response: Please see revised tabulations 9. On floorplans sheets, in the southeast comer of the buildable area shows a fluctuation of a roof eave or the first level outside terrace that touches the 20 foot rear setback line in some details but not in others. Clarify discrepancy: � Response: plans have been coordinated 10. Sheet 3 of site plans show the proposed ISR for T District at 0.695 percent and for the entire parcel as 0.60 percent. Page 3 of application has proposed ISR at .709. Clarify and correct discrepancy: � Response: The Site Plan is correcz The proposed ISR is 0. 68 or 68%. Enchanhnent LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/] 0/2013 Page 11 11. Provide the dimension from the flat roof to top of elevator shaft on all building elevations. Please remember that an additional 16 feet may be provided for elevator shaft; � Response: Please see elevation sheets. 12. It is not clear how hotel will be serviced, provide a response. Clarify and dimension the loading space; � Response: Please see Civil and Architectural ground floor plan sheets 13. Clarify if signage is proposed at this time. Signage will have to meet code requirements; � Response: Signage will be needed and will be applied for under a separate application. All signage shall be designed per current code. 14. Exhibit A.1.f and G asks for a zero foot front setback to driveway and a zero feet to privacy fence on west side. Clarify request. Is the fence proposed or existing; � Response: The driveway is necessary for access to the garage and building. There is an existing fence along the property line with Continental Towers. 15. Exhibit A states that parking for guests and employees will be in three story garage, Floor plans show that parking within the first six levels. Clarify; � Response: The garage is designed as one ground level and five elevated levels for a total of six levels. ExhibitA was incorrec� 16. Any outdoor amplified/live music proposed for pool terrace area: � Response: Live outdoor music is planned and the hours of operation shall be as required for other businesses on the beach. 17. Provide the number of rooms with water views; � Response: We are proposing approxi`rtately 110 water view rooms. That number may change on further design developmen� � 18. Clarify that all utilities serving the site will be located underground. � Response: Yes, utilities will be located underground Solid Waste Review I do not see any solid waste details or drawings. � Response: The trash is contained within the trash/service portion of the building at the North West corner of the street fa�ade. Enchanrinent LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 12 Stormwater Review Prior to CDB: Please acknowledge in writing the following will be provided and/or addressed at the building permit application time: 1. Recovery of vault shall be based on the double ring infiltrometer test performed at the proposed depth of vault elevation. Please note, the entire volume shall draw down within 24 hours, not just the water quality volume. � Response: This will be provided prior to BCP. 2. Please provide seasonal high water table at the location of proposed vault. � Response: This will be provided prior to BCP. 3. Please provide detail and cross section of underground vault. � Response: This will be provided prior to BCP. 4. Please be advised that an open bottom vault shall have a minimum 6" vertical clearance befinreen vault bottom and SHWT. � Response: This will be provided prior to BCP. 5. Provide stormwater sheet flow direction for entire site. � Response: This will be provided prior to BCP. 6. Finished work at the existing driveway and any areas within the City's r-o-w shall not result in ponding issues. Temporary flooding of the restored area within the r-o-w may be needed for thorough inspection. � Response: This will be provided prior to BCP. 7. Please provide cross section of swales on east and west of site. � Response: This will be provided prior to BCP. 8. Please provide on drainage calculations the weir calculations and show on the plans the control structure detail. � Response: This will be provided prior to BCP. 9. Proposed V inlet shall have galvanized grate. � Response: This will be provided prior to BCP. Enchantment LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 13 10. Provide trench drain at entrance to capture runoff and route to vault. � Response: This will be provided prior to BCP. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy 1. A copy of the approved SWFWMD permit shall be provided. � Response: This will be provided prior to CO. 2. Prior to scheduling the final Stormwater Inspection, the Contractor shall submit a signed and sealed as-builts certifying by the engineer of record that the stormwater system was built per design and meets all regulations. � Response: This will be provided prior to CO. 3. Engineer of record shall review the density test results for the work within the City's R-O-W for compliance with City standards. Engineer to certify this in his/her certification letter. � Response: This will be provided prior to CO. General Comments 1. Please cloud any/all changes on the plans before returning them for re- review. � Response: This has been dohe. 2. All resubmittals shall be accompanied with a response letter addressing how each department condition has been met. � Response: This will be done. 3. DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application � Response: Notec� Traffic Eng ReviewPrior to CDB: 1. Provide turning template for a scaled passenger vehicle entering the garage, then exiting. � Response: This is now shown on the plans 2. The minimum clear height throughout the garage shall be seven feet zero inches and shall be eight feet two inches for van-accessible handicapped parking spaces including ingress and egress drive aisles to these spaces. Enchanhnent LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 14 � Response: We are proposing two van accessible handicapped parking, a minimum of eight foot two inches high on the ground floor of the building, 3. Pedestrian - vehicular conflicts shall be avoided whenever possible. Where unavoidable, active warning devices such as traffic signals or flashing warning signs/devices and/or physical barriers such as vehicular actuated gates shall be provided to warn the pedestrian and slow vehicular traffic. � Response: Note� 4. Lighting levels in parking garages having public access shall meet or exceed the current minimum Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) standards. � Response: Acknowledgea� 5. All electrical conduits, pipes, downspouts, columns or other features that could be subject to impact from vehicular traffic shall be protected from impact damage with pipe guards or similar measures. Measures used for protection shall not encroach into any parking space. � Response: Acknowledgea� 6. Architectural plans needed for review and further comments. � Response: Acknowledged Please see resubmitted plans with modifications and clarifications noted General Note(s): 1. Applicant shall comply with the current Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and fee schedule and paid prior to a Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.). The TIF amount for the new hotel is $147,568.00. � Response: Acknowledged 2. DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional comments may be forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. ➢ Response: Noted Enchantment LLC FLD2013-08028 691 Gulfview Blvd. S. 10/10/2013 Page 15 If you have any questions, or need additional information, please call me at (727) 822-4151 x203. Sincerely, DEUEL & ASSOCIATES ,,,,,,�o�l Brian Barker, P.E. Principal Engineer T t CIEARWATER PASS ��_ -� -��- � �� ' �� _ I ' a�r� 9 I � _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - , __________________ I I _____—_ —__--- � souni cu�Ew eoui.evnao � � FIRST' �OOR PIAN _ — _ �� _ _ � — _ � aeaECTnoarH � N l.,. �. 1 .a��..�.r�n'+o.w.> ' A J � LL i= U ma L.L� � m W� W W W ;3 2L ~ �' W r O c�0 U en��c.m. �LELE13.01 �pLEVEL t �w 2013.08.01 A2 1 0 1 # 1 I d ( � � � I I I I I � I � I I � i i I � I �I � : I �1 �� I ( _ I I i � i � i I I i 1 � i � � I I � � � , � � � � � I ' � � L_ i CIEARWRTER PASS � � �� ' � � �� mrtrwrwn ' _ — � � �� _ � � _ � � :� ( _ — at•F — ____"_ ��"__� _�________ __'___ __— ' _ — — — — xoarmw�wm �eaav I I i ❑ ffi �� '� � 1 .A. � a� mr av �� aa „ x+ s: r� I env.�oea. � 1 .€ O , b .. ... . . .�� O � � i 1 I ' i v� � � ........., r.....� , . ................................................................._.. : : _ . . ... .................._....... . I ".,..... § .,�,. ___________ I gY �E A � � e�»�wc � �� I xa ieo � " s ...._ ..............__ .. _____________...,.,.....,_________............ . � . _. I I � p -- � .� �� . , , � O; � I O � � a�.,o. � ;€ � � � , � .......-"—_..—� � �i �,a i _. „ o p Oib q _. - - � r-_.; -- ; i ; 3 a i � " ' � ' � �..� � : � � I _.._. � �___� �� __, �, _ _ , . , ,., . ... ... ........._..�.____...W�. � � i l � ��° __'_ ' _'_ I _ _ a��-""_""' "'__-- _ I � � � �� 1 �� — 1 -----------------�,oun�cui=�yeou� -neo _�_-- �— � SECOND�FLOOR PLAN ��' - �— _ _ �� PflQIECTNORTH � N ......_ ................ . .. x ; r I.,. � ._ . ' ^ J VJ LL > >x � U pJp < W �m W� W W ;� 2 ~ NW � O �U e-� �LELE13.01 LEVEL 2 �� 2013.08.01 A2 2 PR91hW�RYDBIGN � 1 1 � 1 q I 1 I 1 � 1 �. 1 � � g. �� $� I I � I � � � � � I I CLEARWATEFi PASS � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ; v �+sn..n^ I xm�u ___'_'ya__ _—� —srF__ ___ ______ _-- � ______— � ____— I �� 1 ❑ � m� � 1 .roy � m m oa �� mo k v m: on ( e1mr�a�r � 1 1 �a�rco�oa. I� � � r : ' § � i � � � '�^ � I � � .�. �f �..� ' � ' : �.. � ❑ � 3 �z ' t � 1 .......... .....> ... ... . _. . . � . . ... . � ............................... � .__.._. � § .,�... ._-_----_ � g� �� ,�,� I $ ................ ... . .: . : � . ; I �� I � i G] I .> gx � = = i ' ;':, p : ! � O � � a�.a, € : O I - € . � ....___.........__....... __. .__._ ._ � .__..'� �—�1 _...... � i I ... . ___ d ; q �O ? �� mq a e i c..-.� ;..W < ; - a'm.°::::.':. � I ; Ct _ ; �_: __. ; �-- ---- � § _._.....__ , _�� ; .�,. - - ��. I _ � � ` . f '�-� � ' ' - 4----�- -� o: �____ � �--� � - � i i - - - '� ? ; ! � , �� ' � � ' 1 L_ ; ; 1 , ---- , � - -------,,,.�.,� ------- � 4 h e ____— 1 � = -,--- ------_a - _ _ _ _ ,�, _—__-- , ------� : _ -----_--_ , __ -------_J souni cu�cv�Erveou�evrusp _ THIRD FLOOR PLAN —' � — _ � PRQIECTNORTH � N � � Z ' A J � LL °>x U m¢ W �m W� W W w ;� = O "� I— x � � �-� , LELE13.01 LEVEL 3 �dJ2013.08.01 A2 3 PRBIMMARY DBIGN 1 1 � 1 q I r i i � i I ' i i � i i � I I 1 I � i i i I , i �1 ? " I i �� I I I I I � i � i I I i I � � CLEARWATER PASS �� .�. �� _� � � �� —�� i � - y�iew+� ______��____, I —T•�__ — �� _� ' �_�� ' I � i � �■�■ . •• � s Y I � � e�.,� I a iorr i _.._ i . t � �� mLC.:.', _. I.. . _ .. . -' �, ...______.._ �__. .____. _ .. __.. � , _..._......---- � � . ........ § � � ; M�' f i i � w ar o p .w R. nz .n I 1 1 3� } � j I� i OO i: � � � ; ' l7 I �1 _ .................. � [7 i � � � � i ,rt,- i w 4 . _______....... i � ;8 � I � i i , i'=. p. 4 � ;.___..___._. _.._- --_.� e - -- — , I _._' s i. � �� €'s _.. � i ' ;_....._ ; O t [] O I< t? t7 mm ' ` E i Q:::::::�::m� I � 4 __._ __ , �� , � �____ I i � rj � � [•{# d . i i 3 I � � e € 1 . . , { .. � � � ��i 1 L__ � I . I _____'___.'__'_'^' -:1 � _________________ I _� ,,.�,,.,� -------� ----_�_ � ------ �� , _ _--- --------.- � : _ -- - J soun� cu�rnew eou�vnao _ � FOURT�H �FLOOR PLAN_ - "�-- - _ � PROJECTNORTH � N x :, "; � _ � !. ' A J uJ LL > )i � U ma W �m W � W W w ;3 = O `� W � = o� �n � �� LELE13.01 LEVEL 4 ��*2013.08.01 A2 4 CLEARWATERPASS ��'�� '� _ �"�• ' �' �� '� 1 i L__ �-� u � u � -_--_ _-_ '_ '.._'__'_"""_'�„_- _� ,9� -------- soun�cuis,��.,e�.._._ _ _ _ _ _ 1 I ; •_- J � FIFTH PLOOR PLAN �� — — � — — � PRQIECT NORTN � 4 v>i > w / J W � � O :� J � °>x mW �m w� �¢ �� C9 � h� J t�0 U Aa�_ � �LELE13.01 LEVEL 5 ��*2013.08.01 A2 5 C � � G 1 q I f I I i i I I i i i � I �1 i � �I �� I � � � CLEARWATER PASS ' � �� '��• i 1PS�vu I __________ va I -r-r-____� __'____ __ __- � i _...-...-_'�-...�. ..._... ... � � ... .._.... ........ _.__ ........ . ._._I I - 1 1 � � � „w I .o«,� � �ag �e ;��"p �....r�r. � � � , ______ , r �, �-i �' i i I I � ; � ��, , ,ms —i � .� �� ,� �� i i ,m. p i I '� � � r-------------� i w, .�� no /-- �°� =a �; �� ■ a � `, , . � I� - r___ _ �___ _ I i i r-- I___ _ __ __ __ _ _ ' ' ' J ��',.1 I . � L__ �'.� � � _—_'__— � ,, _'_'—,— i L : -- -------------- 3 � - ,,.�,,,� ---------- e ; _ --- ____— .E,� _ -__— _--- � � _ _ --__.— . ---___. � ---------J soun� cuu�new eou�EVUm _ , � SIXTH FLOOR PLAN � � � — _ �� PRQIECTNORTH � N Z. /. � � � L � . .._, � ' ^ J � LL i= U W mQ �m W� W W W �� 2 ~ �' W � O �U Ad�— — �� lELE13.01 LEVEL6 ��*2013.08.01 A2 6 PRflIM1WARY DBIGN L-_ CLEARWATER PASS M��'�� _� � � � � � � � � � � I � � � � � � � � m � � ->�-Ti� ___________________ i I _________ ___ I 1 -...-...�. �...� .� _ �. ... .. � � ... ....... ...... . ........ ......{ I � � � � 1 ❑ � I 1 � � � ' � f �� I � � � I , -,J soun� cu�c�new eou�evnrm _ �1 SEVENTH - NINTH FLOOR PLAN � - � - _ � PRQIECTNORTM � N V/ � W / J w � � O !., J � � _ m W �m W� �Q �� N Q J �U As_ LELE13.01 LEVEIS 7-9 �wT2013.08.01 A2 7 1 I I [' I � I I ; CLEARWATER PASS ��_��—� �� -�' � i a�r� '__'_____, I u m m.r —_—_________�_—________ I 1 ______— I �..—.- ______ 1 . ........ . I I ... ......... ......... ....__ ......... _....... ._.� 1 I � w � ❑ � ......... ... . .. I naa�a � „�� 4 � roneaav J __ _. _::..I I I � 1 � vr�o I 1 1 a °"' � � I ,� „RS � �a I � , �m. -----�� _ i �� '� i Ii i i ' ��, i i i ,�. � ,� �., a ..E i � I� � � I �me �. 4. � I I � � I � , , �� , .� ,�o � I , , � ,�� , � � � i I � �. _'�__' _____'_ .... ... .. .... � 1 �� _ � I __ - � ------- ----------� _ -__. - --- - M , -- __-__ ----� � -- - J _ ---_,_ souni cuicwew eou�vaeo � � � 1 L_ �--- ��ENT H- aLOOR PLAN - - — - - � ' � �- - - �� rnwECTNOan� � N � / i w� �o ;� X. : 7 X. J � J = U ma �m W� �� _� � �W J t�0 U e=�` LELE73.01� LEVEL 10 ��r2013.08.01 /"�G � CLEARWATER PA3$ __��' �__��'�__� __-�_��'��-�� -� - I ELEVENTH-FOURTEENTH FLOOR PLAN � � �-- � � � ,�r.,a vno.rtcrxonrx � h ,..; ✓.�as.a� x,�•;,.p;;. ,'�� Et •: fs: v/ � W / J W � � O J � i= U roW �m W� J Q � � � v� a W J � U LELE13.01 LEVELS 11-14 ��w 2013.08.01 A2 9 PRELWINARY DBIGN I I °'�� 1' ' 0�� 0i�i v 0i� B�m�� _ 0ii.n �� 0a-p 0�a 0iis 0`za 0`��`a° --�.�I- Q`p o � Q�o 0 00�o i om I ��A � �__ North Elevalion Easf Elevalion . SCALE'. I/16"= I'-0" SCAIE�. I/16"= I'�tl' 3� t: IiT�$� SCNIE�. I I -.. �.. I � % . � aif � w ll�i � � � LL � � 2 00 Q W �m � W� w J J Q W �� _ � � Q �ug H 2 �� ,° — �, m.', --- o . --_ o- -- - o_ _ � _ n- _ - � __ __ �_ n n Pp�E�LELH 3.01 ELEVATIONS �� *2013.08.01 A5 1