FLD2014-11031i �*
� � �ea����.��r
- - --,�_�
J�__--_ �� �--. - .. ! �'`.+_,...._�•+
`ti_t _ �r'��``��/''�`'*✓•�-,'.v...'"
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
CASE:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
January 20, 2015
E.1.
FLD2014-11031
STAFF REPORT
REQUEST• Flexible Development approval to permit a 208-room overnight accommodation
� use and a 74-unit Resort Attached Dwelling (RAD) use (including 13 dwelling
units previously approved and transfened under TDR2005-01017 with 10 units
from 41 Devon Drive and three units from 500 Mandalay Avenue) in the Tourist
(T) District with a lot area of 5.31 acres (4.38 acres zoned T District and 0.93
acres zoned Open Space/Recreation District), a lot width of 600 feet, a front
(north) setback of 23 feet (to building) and six feet (to paving), a front (east)
setback of 69 feet (to building) and zero feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback
of 20 feet (to building) and a side (south) setback of 60 feet (to building) and 50
feet (to pavement), a building height of 150 feet above Base Flood Elevation to
top of roof deck and a minimum of 361 parking spaces at 1.2 parking spaces per
hotel room and 1.5 spaces per RAD unit, as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of CDC Section 2-803.D; and to
allow the floor plate of the building above 100 feet to be up to 11,000 square feet
where the maximum area is 10,000 square feet as provided by Section VII.B.3 of
Beach by Design; and a two-year Development Order under the provisions of
GENERAL DATA:
Agen ts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Applicant/ Owner ... ..........
Location . .. .. . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . ...
Property Size ..............
Future Land Use Plan.
Zoning. .. ... . .. . .. ... . .. . . . .. .
Special Area Plan.
Adjacent Zoning
North
South
East:
West:
Existtng Land Use...........
Proposed Land Use ... ... .
CDC Section 4-407.
Katherine E. Cole and E.D. Armstrong, III; Hill Ward Henderson
Marquesas, LLC
715 South Gulfview
Boulevard; southwest corner
of South Gulfview Boulevard
and Gulf Boulevard
5.31 acres (4.38 acres Tourist
District; 0.938 acres Open
Space/Recreation District)
Resort Facilities High (RFH)
and Water
Tourist (T) and Open
Space/Recreation (OS/R)
Districts
Beach by Design (South
Beach/Clearwater Pass District)
Tourist (T) District
Preservation (P) District
Tourist (T) District
Tourist (T) District
Vacant
Overnight Accommodations (208 units) with associated accessory uses including
restaurant, meeting space and gym and Resort Attached Dwellings (74 units).
r
a ViL�I 1'►�t1-1 Level II Flexible Development Application Review
. ... ,�'�u .:.:'., ` ..
ANALYSIS:
Location and Existing Conditions:
The 531-acre subject property is located at the
southwest corner of South Gulfview Boulevard
and Gulf Boulevard with 600 feet of frontage
along South Gulfview Boulevard, 400 feet of
frontage along Gulf Boulevard and 700 feet of
frontage along the water. The property spans
two zoning districts including Tourist (T) and
Open Space/Recreation (OS/R) and two
corresponding Future Land Use Plan (FLUP)
classifications; Resort Facilities High (RFH)
and Preservation (P), respectively. The portion
of the site within the T District is 4.38 acres.
The remainder of the site is 0.93 acres. It
should be noted that only the portion of the site
within the T District is considered with regard to
development potential such as Impervious
Surface ratio (ISR), Gross Floor Area (GFA)
and density (residential and overnight
accommodation units). The subject property is
also located within the South Beach/Clearwater
Pass District of Beach by Design.
The property is largely vacant with the
exception of an unoccupied sales building.
The immediate area is characterized by a variety
of uses including overnight accommodation,
retail, outdoor recreation and entertainment,
restaurant and attached dwelling uses with
heights ranging from one to 15 stories. The
property directly west of this property is
developed with an overnight accommodation
use. The City's Beach Walk project has been
constructed transforming South Gulfview
Boulevard to the north of this site into a winding
beachside promenade with lush landscaping,
artistic touches and clear views to Clearwater's
award-winning beach and the water beyond.
Site History:
➢ On April 19, 2005, the Community
Development Board (CDB) approved, with
10 conditions, Case Nos. FLD2005-
01016/TDR2005-01017/PLT2005-00002 for
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
, �o - �; �� _BAYWAYBCVp -
�S�` � .. �` . x :r . : `��.°�."^°� n-wa.vs. v;..v; . .
Glj��� �O � 5 G`��,�:
e �'B�VQ �� ° n� ^ o
� ��� �� �
�„ .� : • ...................�
_ •.
�_ : ^ .� �''•., $
\���
P
cLERRWgTF�P
�'S
so RETAiL
" V/ ".b
� r �B�V
0
�
HOTEL
CL�-�R�
ZONING MAP
�* �; �,--
��� :
so� RETATL �
:�,
— .I 8A�!►NAY 4VQ.-
w..
o �
� N�$B-
TTACNED
W ELLiNG
:�
�.
0
N
VACANT
551
EXISTING SURROUNDING USES MAP
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 1
° p��tiT + f. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
� C bN�i 1'1'aLel Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPMENT REV�W DIVISION
��a� ���;�.
the (1) Termination of Status of Nonconformity for density for the existing 105-room hotel
tower, located on 2.383 acres (density to be converted to 78 dwelling units); (2) Flexible
Development approval to permit attached dwellings with reductions to the front (north along
S. Gulfview Blvd.) setback from 15 feet to 11.88 feet (to security guard house) and from 15
feet to 6.42 feet (to pavement), a reduction to the front (east along Gulf Blvd.) setback from
15 feet to zero feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (west) setback from 10 feet to 4.29
feet (to pavement), a reduction to the side (south) setback from 10 feet to zero feet (to
boardwalk), an increase of building height from 35 feet to 150 feet (to roof deck) with an
additional 11 to 21 feet for decorative mansard architectural embellishments and a deviation
to allow a building within visibility triangles, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project, under the provisions of Section 2-803.C; (3) Transfer of Development Rights of 10
units from 41 Devon Drive and three units from the Sandpearl project located generally at
500 Mandalay Avenue, under the provisions of Section 4-1402 (TDR2005-01017); and (4)
Preliminary Plat for one lot (PLT2005-00002).
➢ On February 20, 2014, the City Council approved the allocation of up to 93 units from the
Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design (Case No. HDA2013-12008) and adopted a
resolution to the same effect (Res. No. 14-OS). The owners proposed to develop the site with
two primary buildings including a 74-unit resort attached dwelling building and a 208-unit
overnight accommodations building with associated accessory uses including a restaurant,
bar, fitness facility and the like.
While the site plan approval component of the approval associated with case FLD2005-01016,
above, has 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/was required however, the method (or means) of using
that density has expired and must be resubmitted for approval hence submittal of this application.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property.
Development Proposal:
The proposal is to construct three new buildings on the site including a hotel with 208 overnight
accommodation units, a Resort Attached Dwelling (RAD) with 74 residential units and a small
restaurant as accessory to the hotel. The proposal will also include a variety of accessory uses
such as the aforementioned restaurant as well as meeting space and a gym. The existing
structure on site will be removed with the proposal. The primary component of the application
request is a height of 150 feet along with requests for setback reductions to pavement.
The proposed hotel includes a contemporary tropical design that will make it an attractive
landmark at this location. The hotel will be located on the west side of the site, the RAD on the
east side of the site and a one-story restaurant approximately 8,000 square feet in area and 17 feet
in height will be located between the hotel and RAD buildings effectively bifurcating the site
The hotel and RAD buildings will be 150 feet in height. A pool and patio area will be centrally
located along the south side of the site behind the restaurant.
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-1 1031 — Page 2
� Cl�.lil /'t{4L1.1 Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
P pP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
" � ���t ��� _ �
Parking will be accommodated via a mixture of surface (89 spaces) and structured parking (291
spaces) totaling 380 spaces. Structured parking (251 spaces) will be accommodated within a
seven-story parking garage attached to the west side of the hotel building. An additional 40
spaces are totally contained within the RAD building on the first floor. Surface parking will be
located to the north and east of the proposed buildings along South Gulfview Boulevard.
The first floor of the hotel building will include the lobby, lounge, meeting rooms and
administration and assorted back-of-house services. The second floor includes hotel rooms, a
dining room and a small gym. Floors three through 15 will consist entirely of hotel rooms and
assorted service uses such as laundry and storage. The building located on the west side of the
site is totally RAD and includes, as noted, 40 parking spaces on the first floor with totally RAD
units on the remaining 14 floors.
As noted, the proposal includes a certain amount of amenity space (work out room, restaurant,
dining and meeting space) which amounts to 11,659 square feet constituting approximately
seven percent of the gross floor area of the hotel building.
The site is designed with two driveways on South Gulfview Boulevard. The western driveway
will be a two-way driveway primarily providing access to the hotel component of the site. The
eastern driveway will be limited to right in-/right out-only movements. The garage component
of the hotel will be accessed from on-site as will the structured paxking spaces of the RAD.
A loading area which will serve the hotel component is located at the northwest side of the hotel
where the hotel and parking garage components join. The loading area will be well-buffered
with plant material. A solid waste component consisting of a dumpster and trash compactor will
be located within the loading area within the building. Solid waste for the residential component
is addressed with two external dumpsters located at the southeast quadrant of the site. Solid
waste for the restaurant component is addressed with dumpsters which will be stored inside the
restaurant service area adjacent to the kitchen and then wheeled out in front of the restaurant for
servicing.
The applicant anticipates the proposal will create approximately 100 new jobs.
The site will include extensive landscaping along all sides of site as well as along the front (north
and east) fa�ades of the building through the provision of a variety of plant material including
specimen date palms, live oak, sabal palm, oleander, sea grape and shell ginger. Sabal palms,
live oaks and a variety of groundcovers will be located at least partially within the South
Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way.
The site is designed to be pedestrian-friendly with the provision of a sidewalk between five and
eight feet wide along South Gulfview Boulevard. The sidewalk will connect to and match the
existing sidewalk to either side of the site (eight feet to the west and five feet to the east) with
regard to materials, fit and finish. Brick pavers, stamped paving or some other like technique
will be used where the sidewalk crosses a driveway however, the applicant has not determined
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 3
: ClearwaterLevel II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
P PP DEVELOPMENT REVI&W DIVISION
� a�,..� � .
the exact methodology to be used yet and will coordinate with Staff at time of building permit to
finalize those details..
The proposed site plan and elevations are consistent with those conceptual site plans and
elevations as submitted to and approved by City Council as part of HDA2013-12008.
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.
Special Area Plan:
Beach bv Design: 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, resort hotels, 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:
Beach by Design provides that the implementation of the document involves more than
community redevelopment initiatives, it also involves private development and redevelopment
that conforms to design objectives and principles established in Beach by Design. These
objectives and principles will help the City promote safety, encourage cleanliness, and provide a
comfortable environment. It should be noted that any issue not addressed in the Design
Guidelines shall be governed by the requirements of the CDC. Furthermore, the Design
Guidelines are intended to be administered in a flexible manner to achieve the highest quality
built environment for Clearwater Beach.
Section A specifically addresses the issue of density. In short, Beach by Design supports an
increase in density through Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) and/or allocation of units
from the Hotel Density Reserve. The proposal includes 208 overnight accommodation units
including 93 units allocated from the Reserve and 74 RAD units including 12 units transferred to
the site through a previously approved TDR. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this
provision
Section B specifically addresses height and is delineated in three subsections.
Section B.1 provides that a height of up to 150 feet may be permitted where additional
density is allocated to the development either by TDRs, or via the Destination Resort Density
Pool pursuant to the CRD designation, or via the Hotel Density Reserve where the subject
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 4
� C1L(l� tl'LiL�l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
P pp DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
" � �r�x e�� . ,
property is located between South Gulfview Boulevard and the Gulf of Mexico or on the
west side of Coronado Drive. Otherwise, height is governed by the specific Beach by Design
district or, lacking such direction, the CDC. The proposal provides for two buildings 150
feet in height. Density, as discussed previously in this document, has been augmented
through the use a TDR, units allocated from the Reserve and the subject property is located
between South Gulfview Boulevard and the Gulf of Mexico. Therefore, the proposal is
consistent with this provision.
Section B.2 requires that portions of any structures which exceed 100 feet are spaced at least
100 feet apart. 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 proposal provides for two buildings which exceeds 100 feet in height. The applicant has
demonstrated that there are no more than two structures which exceed 100 feet within 500
feet thereby fulfilling the requirements of Option 2, above. In addition, the applicant has
shown that no portions of any structures over 100 feet in height are closer than 100 feet to
each other. The distance to the proposed (as yet un-permitted and un-built) neighboring
building to the west is over 100 feet and the distance between the applicable portions of the
hotel and the RAD buildings is approximately 128 feet. Therefore, the proposal is consistent
with this provision.
Section B.3 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 maximum
building envelop allowance above 45 feet as described in Section C. 1.4 of the Design
Guidelines.
The hotel floor plate between 45 feet and 100 feet is 12,184 square feet and 10,728
square feet above 100 feet. The RAD is 10,974 square feet above 45 feet. The
exceedances are minimal at less than 1,000 square feet for each building and are
mitigated by the fact that approximately 36 percent of the theoretical building envelope
will be occupied by buildings where the maximum amount is 60 percent. Therefore, this
section is supported by the proposal.
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 of the hotel is 31,347 square feet and the RAD will be 19,394 square feet.
The applicant has provided (Hotel Sheets A2.11 through A3.80, RAD Sheets A2.10 through
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 5
� Cle�i 1�►�lel Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVEI.OPMENT
p PP DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION
� ���.� .��°-;�_;�
A3.70 and Grill Sheets A2.00 through A3.30) that no two building dimensions are equal in
length. Therefore, this provision is supported by the proposal.
Section C.2 requires no plane or elevation to continue uninterrupted for greater than 100 feet
without an offset of more than five feet. No portion of any building fa�ade continues for
more than 100 feet in length with the single longest fa�ade extending 97 feet. Therefore, this
provision is supported by the proposal.
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, balconies and architectural
details including decorative grilles, stucco reveals and similar detailing on all facades.
Coverage ranges between 61 and 95 percent of any given fa�ade. Therefore, this provision is
supported by the proposal.
Section C.4 provides that no more than 60 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 masses between 45 and 150 feet constitutes
approximately 36 percent of the theoretical maximum building envelope for the site as a
whole. Therefore, this provision is supported by the proposal.
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) adj acent public spaces
such as streets and parks. The adjacent South Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way is 70 feet in
width. The closest point of the hotel building 150 feet in height to the north (front} property
line is 100 feet. The shorter portion of the hotel (the seven-story garage) is 23 feet from this
property line. The RAD building is 69 feet from the Gulf Boulevard right-of-way and nearly
100 feet from the edge of the roadway/bridge. On that note it should be mentioned that at
this point Gulf Boulevard does become an elevated road way; the Sand Key Bridge.
Therefore, this provision is supported by the proposal.
Section C.6 permits buildings to be designed for a vertical or horizontal mix of permitted
uses. The proposal includes two uses; overnight accommodations (with assorted accessory
uses) and a resort attached dwelling. Therefore, this provision is supported by the proposal.
Section D addresses the issues of sidewalk widths, setbacks and stepbacks. These topics are
quantified in three parts as follows:
Section D.1 provides that the distances from structures to the edge of the right-of-way should
be 15 feet along arterials, and 12 feet along local streets. While the prescribed distances are
optimal, a 10 foot pedestrian path is seen as key to establishing a pedestrian-friendly place in
the nonresidential environment. As such, building setbacks less than that as suggested are
contemplated in that arcades may be constructed in the public space, but may not narrow the
pedestrian path to less than 10 feet. In addition, decorative awnings and arcades and public
balconies may extend into the public space and even into the right-of-way (provided they do
not obstruct vehicular traffic). Outdoor cafe tables are also permitted in the public space,
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 6
' Vl�.ttl yl'�ll.l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLAr�rrwG&nEVELOrMENr
� �,.�.��..� �� _ _ .. _.
P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
��...-, �.�-.�-.�
subject to the requirements in Section H, Sidewalks. The proposal provides a building
setback of between 23 and 100 feet along South Gulfview Boulevard and between 69 and 87
feet along Gulf Boulevard. The proposal includes maintaining the existing sidewalk along
South Gulfview Boulevard which is between five and eight feet in width. The sidewalk will
be repaired and replaced as needed and will tie into and match the existing sidewalks to the
west and east of the site with regard to size, fit, finish and materials. Therefore, this
Guideline is met by this proposal.
Section D.2 provides that except for the side and rear setbacks set forth elsewhere in Beach
by Design, no side or rear setback lines are recommended, except as may be required to
comply with the City's Fire Code. The proposal includes side (west and south) setbacks of
between 20 and 60 feet (to building). Therefore, this Guideline is met by this proposal.
Section D.3 addresses setbacks and stepbacks along Coronado and Hamden Drives. The
proposal is not located along Coronado Drive or Hamden Drive. Therefore this guideline is
not applicable to the proposal.
Section E addresses issues of street-level facades and the incorporation of human-scale features
into the facades of buildings in three parts.
Section E.1 requires that at least 60 percent of the street level facades (the portion of the
building within 12 feet of grade) of buildings used for nonresidential purposes which abut a
public street or pedestrian access way, will include windows or doors that allow pedestrians
to see into the building, or landscaped or hardscaped courtyard or plazas, where street level
facades are set back at least 15 feet from the edge of the sidewalk and the area between the
sidewalk and the facade is a landscaped or hardscaped courtyard or plaza. In addition
parking structures should utilize architectural details and design elements such as false
recessed windows, arches, planter boxes, metal grillwork, etc. instead of transparent
alternatives. When a parking garage abuts a public road or other public place, it will be
designed such that the function of the building is not readily apparent except at points of
ingress and egress.
The proposed buildings provide for a modern, streamlined building design with an extensive
use of glass and balconies which mitigates the bulk of the building. In addition, the site plan
includes an extensive use of landscaping directly along the proposed sidewalk along South
Gulfview Boulevard. The parking structure component of the hotel building will include the
use of the same materials as the hotel building and will echo the pattern of balconies and
openings of the hotel. Therefore, this Guideline is met by this proposal.
Section E.2 provides that window coverings, and other opaque materials may cover no more
than 10 percent of the area of any street-level window in a nonresidential building that fronts
on a public right-of-way. While this is more of an operationally-related requirement, the
applicant has committed to meet this provision. Therefore, this Guideline is met by this
proposal.
Section E.3 requires that building entrances should be aesthetically inviting and easily
identified. The entrances to the buildings are generous in size, well-detailed and easily
identified. Therefore, this Guideline is met by this proposal.
Community Development Board -lanuary 20, 2015
FLD2014-1 ] 031 — Page 7
o p��r� + 4� PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
� C\.i11 ►1[tL�l Level II Flexible Development Application Review DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
- � ��4
Section E.4 recommends the use of awnings and other structures that offer pedestrians cover
from the elements especially at entryways. The proposal does not lend itself to over-street
awnings however the entrance to the hotel is distinguished by a large porte cochere providing
ample protection from the elements. Therefore, this Guideline is met by this proposal.
Section F addresses issues related to parking areas. Parking is addressed via a seven-story
garage component attached to the west side of the hotel, surface parking along the north and east
sides of the site and parking located on the first floor of the RAD building. The hotel parking
garage structure is completely integrated into the design of the building via the use of openings
which mimic the pattern of windows and balconies of the hotel component. The structured
parking associated with the RAD is integrated into the design of that building as part of that
buildings base. Vehicular access and direction of flow will be clearly marked with the western
driveway a two way driveway primarily providing access to the hotel component of the site and
the eastern driveway limited to right-in/right-out only movements. Therefore, this Guideline is
met by this proposal.
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.
The proposal includes a sidewalk between five and eight feet in width along South Gulfview
Boulevard. The sidewalk will tie into the existing sidewalks to the west (eight feet in width) and
east (five feet in width) of the site matching the existing sidewalk with regard to fit, finish and
materials. Therefore, this Guideline is met by this proposal.
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, the applicant will
coordinate with City Staff with regard to the placement and installation methodology for any
street furniture which may be proposed at time of permit submittal. Therefore, this Guideline is
not applicable to this proposal.
Section J addresses issues related to street lighting. Street lighting is not proposed with this
development. Therefore, this section is not applicable to the proposal.
Section K addresses issues related to fountains. Fountains and/or other water features are
proposed as decorative components of the drop-off areas of both the hotel and RAD buildings.
Section L addresses issues related to materials and colors. Finish materials and building colors
are required to reflect Florida or coastal vernacular themes. The proposed hotel building has a
distinctive contemporary design that will make it an attractive landmark at this location. The
buildings will be painted pale yellow and brown, accented by white. The window mullions,
railings and decorative grills and louvers will be bone white. Window and balcony railing glass
will be "Evergreen" by Viracon. Decorative dry stack stone veneer will be Eldorado Stone
"Mesquite Cliffstone". Other colors proposed include "Ibis White", "Sole" and "Baguette".
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 8
��iL(41 1'T�L�1 Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION
,.. �., "�_"��.,��..."& �;: �>' . .
While the applicant may adjust the color scheme any such adjustment would require Staff review
and approval and must meet the requirements of this portion of the Design Guidelines. The
proposed color scheme and material schedule as submitted meets the requirements of this
section.
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 City'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 hu�ricane 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 properry within the City of Clearwater
shall meet all landscape requirements of the Community Development Code.
The proposal, as discussed, meets the requirements of the CDC by providing foundation planting
along the east fa�ade of the building and perimeter landscaping along the north, south and east
sides of the site and supports this Policy.
Goal A.S - The city of Clearwater shall identify and utilize a citywide Design structure
comprised of a hierarchy of places and linkages. The citywide design structure will serve as a
guide to development and land use decisions while protecting those elements that make the city
uniquely Clearrvater.
Objective A.5.1— Establish the Hierarchy of Places as shown on Map A-14.
Policy A.5.1.1 - Identify Activity Centers: high intensity, high-density multi-use areas designated
as appropriate for intensive growth and routinely provide service to a significant number of
citizens of more than one county. Activiry centers are proximate and accessible to interstate or
major arterial roadways, and are composed of multiple destination points, landmarks and
neighborhood centers and character features.
The subject site is located within an Activity Center identified on Map A-14 in the FLUE of the
City's Comprehensive Plan where the proposal includes a high-intensity, high density multi-use
development. Therefore, the proposal will support this Goal, Objective and Policy.
Objective A.S.S - Promote high quality design standards that support Clearrvater's image and
contribute to its identity.
The proposal includes the redevelopment of a currently largely vacant lot. The prior use of the
site was overnight accommodations. The proposal includes three new attractive buildings. The
proposed buildings meet the requirements of the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design, are
supported by the vision of the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District and support this Objective.
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 9
° Clearwater Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNITIG & DEVELOPMENT
P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
�����„�t �•.+�.s.
Policy A.S.5.1 Development should be designed to maintain and support the existing or
envisioned character of the neighborhood.
As mentioned above, the proposal is consistent with the vision of Beach by Design, the South
Beach/Clearwater Pass District and the Design Guidelines and supports this Policy.
Objective A.6.1 - The redevelopment of blighted, substandard, inefficient 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, city 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 (perhaps even exceeded) in many areas of the Beach. The South Beach/Clearwater
Pass District is one area that has seen a great deal of redevelopment activity. The proposed hotel
should be seen as an important component in anchoring the south end of the South
Beach/Clearwater Pass District and one more step in the revitalization of the Beach and supports
this Objective.
Policy A.6.1.2 - Renewal of the beach tourist district shall be encouraged through the
establishment of distinct districts within Clearwater Beach, the establishment of a limited density
pool of additional hotel rooms to be used in specified geographic areas of Clearwater Beach,
enhancement of public rights-of-way, the vacation of public rights-of-way when appropriate,
transportation improvements, inter-beach and intra-beach transit, transfer of development rights
and the use of design guidelines, pursuant to Beach by Design: A Preliminary Design for
Cleanvater Beach and Design Guidelines.
As explored previously in this document, the site was the subject of a Termination of Status of
Nonconformity, Transfer of Development Rights and an allocation of hotel units from the
Reserve which allows for a total of 208 hotel units and 74 residential units. The redevelopment
of this parcel with a hotel will play an important role in the renewal and revitalization of the
Beach. Therefore, the proposal supports this Policy.
Objective A.6.6 - Tourism is a substantial element of the Ciry's economic base and as such the
City shall continue to support the maintenance and enhancement of this important economic
sector.
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 and resort attached
dwelling which will serve tourists and locals alike contributing to a vibrant successful resort
destination and supports this Objective and Policy.
Policy A.6.8.3 - Where appropriate, development shall provide a sense of pedestrian scale on
streets through minimal fi•ont setbacks, similar building heights, street trees and proportionality
of building heights to street widths.
The proposal includes a significant overnight accommodation use and resort attached dwelling
with an overall height of 150 feet. However, this height is mitigated in several ways:
1. The bulk of the buildings are setback between 70 and 100 feet from any front property line;
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-1 1031 — Page 10
' C��.[�l �AL�l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
p PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
� ����.
2. Lush landscaping will be provided along the fa�ade of the buildings facing South Gulfview
Boulevard as well as along all property lines; and
3. A sidewalk between five and eight feet in width with street tree plantings will be located
along South Gulfview Boulevard.
The overall effect of the proposal will pedestrian-scale consistent with the goals and vision of
Beach by Design and the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District and supports this Policy.
Community Development Code:
The proposal is supported by the general purpose, intent and basic planning objectives of this
Code as follows:
Section 1-103.B.1. Allowing property owners to enhance the value of their property through
innovative and creative redevelopment.
The property owner will redevelop an underutilized property with three new attractive buildings,
a vibrant use (a RAD and overnight accommodations with accessory amenities including a
restaurant) and will contribute to the public space with lush landscaping and a sidewalk between
five and eight feet in width along South Gulfview Boulevard to match the existing sidewalks to
the west and east of the site. The development is considered innovative by the incorporation of
the two uses on the same site and the use of additional density through a previously-approved
TDRs, Termination of Status of Nonconformity and unit allocation from the Reserve. Therefore,
the proposal supports this CDC Section.
Section 1-103.B.2. Ensuring that development and redevelopment will not have a negative
impact on the value of surrounding properties and wherever practicable promoting development
and redevelopment which will enhance the value of suNrounding properties.
Surrounding properties are generally developed with a myriad of uses indicative of a tourist
destination including overnight accommodations, retail sales and services, bars, nightclubs,
outdoor recreation and entertainment, restaurants and attached dwellings. The proposed hotel
and RAD will constitute an appropriate use for the neighborhood and are targeted desired uses
within the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design. Surrounding properties
will be enhanced through the addition of uses which will contribute to an active and vibrant
street life. Therefore, the proposal supports this CDC Section.
Section 1-103.B.3. Strengthening the city's economy and increasing its tax base as a whole.
The proposal includes the redevelopment of what is essentially a vacant parcel in one of the more
valuable areas of the City vis-a-vis tourism. The new hotel is expected to create approximately
100 new jobs and will positively contributing to the City's economy and its tax base. Therefore,
the proposal supports this CDC Section.
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 three new attractive buildings characterized by a modern style and crisp,
clean lines. In addition, this proposal meets the required minimum five-foot wide building
foundation landscape area along South Gulfview Boulevard and Gulf Boulevard. The applicant
has provided perimeter plantings along a11 sides of the site. The landscape design incorporates
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 11
� C1l.Ltl 1'1'�L�1 Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
P PP DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION
u �c����t,�€�:=ri', u. : '
plant material that is native and/or naturalized and salt tolerant, while providing visual interest.
Street trees consisting of live oaks and sabal, Washingtonian and foxtail palms are proposed along
the front (north and east) 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. Therefore, the proposal supports this CDC Section.
Section 1-103. E. S. Preserve the natural resources and aesthetic character of the communiry 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 and RAD
and a sidewalk along South Gulfview Boulevard between five and eight feet in width. 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. Therefore, the proposal supports this CDC Section.
Section 2-401.1 Intent 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, maa�imum
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 Land Use 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 developed with a hotel and RAD which are uses permitted by the RFH
FLUP classification.
Development Parameters:
Densitv:
Pursuant to the Countywide Future Land Use Plan and CDC Section 2-801.1, the maximum
density for properties with a designation of Resort Facilities High is 50 overnight
accommodation units per acre or 30 dwelling units per acre. Only 4.38 acres of the 5.31-acre site
is within the T district and, as such, only that portion is used to determine intensity of use.
On April 19, 2005 the Community Development Board (CDB) approved a TDR of 10 units from
41 Devon Drive and three units from the Sand Pearl project located generally at 500 Mandalay
Avenue (13 dwelling units total), under the provisions of Section 4-1402 (TDR2005-01017) as
associated with applications FLD2005-01016 and PLT2005-00002.
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 12
� Cl\.t�l t'►�Ll.l Level II Flexible Development Application Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
The development is considered a mixed use project due to the mix of residential and non-
residential units. The intensity of use for mixed use projects is determined by calculating the
amount of land area needed for one of the uses and the applying the remaining land area to the
second use. In the case of the subject development the development potential was determined by
first calculating the amount of land needed to support 62 dwelling units. In this case, 2.067 acres
is need to support 62 dwelling units given density of 30 units per acre.
2.067 x 30 = 62 dwelling units
Because the amount of dwelling units which may used as part of a TDR is limited to 20 percent
of the otherwise permitted number of dwelling units the applicant is using only 12 of these
dwelling units as part of the 74 proposed dwelling units.
62 x 20% = 12 dwelling units
62 + 12 = 74 dwelling units
For the purposes of determining the overall intensity of use for the site, only 62 of the 74
proposed dwelling units are used because the additional 12 units are in addition to the otherwise
permitted density due to the TDR.
74 -12 = 62 dwelling units
The area needed to support 62 dwelling units is subtracted from the overall size of the site.
4.38 - 2.067 = 2.313 acres
This remaining area is then multiplied by 50 (the otherwise permitted number of hotel units
permitted per acre) which yields 115 units.
2.313 x 50 = 115 hotel units
This acreage is also multiplied by 90 (the maximum density for properties greater than 2.5 acres
pursuant to Beach by Design) which yields 208 units to determine the maximum number of
overnight accommodation units permitted on the site.
2.313 x 90 = 208 hotel units
Subtracting these two iigures yields 93 which was the number of units allocated from the
Reserve by the City Council as part of HDA2013-12008 and Resolution 14-05.
208 - 115 = 93 hotel units
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 13
'�i�.tLl r1�L�1 Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
_ DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
++ . ,. ..z � � �? ?,-:�^• . .. .
Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR�
Pursuant to the Countywide Future Land Use Plan and CDC Section 2-801.1, the m�imum
allowable ISR is 0.95. The overall proposed ISR is 0.62, which is consistent with the Plan and
this Code provision.
Minimum Lot Area and Width:
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 2-802
the minimum lot area for Mixed Uses is between 5,000 and 10,000 square feet. The subject
property is 190,793 square feet in area (zoned T District). Pursuant to the same Table, the
minimum lot width for Mixed Uses can range between 50 and 100 feet. The lot width of this site
along South Gulfview Boulevard is 600 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-
802, the minimum front setback for Mixed Uses can range between zero and 15 feet, minimum
side setback between zero and 10 feet and minimum rear setback between 10 and 20 feet.
In addition, CDC Section 3-903 provides that parking lots shall be set back from front property
lines a distance of 15 feet, and shall be set back from all other property lines a distance that is
consistent with the required perimeter landscape buffer width. For properties within the Tourist
(T) District, the setback for parking lots shall be based a dimension consistent with the
existing/proposed building setback, or at a dimension consistent with setbacks required or
otherwise established by Beach by Design, whichever is less. Section F of the Design
Guidelines within Beach by Design provides that all parking areas axe to be separated from
public rights-of-way by a landscaped decorative wall, fence or other opaque landscape treatment
of not less than three feet and not more than 3.5 feet in height. Surface parking areas that are
visible from public streets or other public places must be landscaped such that the parking areas
are defined more by their landscaping materials than their paved areas when viewed from
adjacent properties.
The proposal includes a front (north) setback of 23 feet (to building), six feet (to paving), a front
(east) setback of 69 feet (to building) an zero feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback of 20 feet
(to building) and a side (south) setback of 79 feet (to building) and 50 feet (to pavement). The
proposal is consistent with the setback requirements of CDC Table 2-802 for Mixed Uses.
Maximum Buildin�Hei�ht.-._
Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there is no m�imum height for a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project. However, for a point of comparison, pursuant to CDC Table 2-802, the
maximum allowable height for Mixed Uses can range between 35 and 50 feet. CDC Table 2-803
permits Mixed Uses at a height of up to 100 feet. Please note that height is measured from the
point from which minimum floor elevations in flood prone areas have been established by law to
the highest finished roof surface in the case of a building with a flat roof. As examined in detail
elsewhere in this report, Beach by Design provides further clarification as to the circumstances
under which height may be increased to 150 feet. The proposed building heights of 150 feet is
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-1 ] 031 — Page 14
' C�l.(41 �l4L�l Level II Flexible Devel ment A lication Review FLANMNG & DEVELOPMENT
� pp DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
. . .. . . ...�",`se�s z . .. � .
generally permitted as the site received density via a TDR and the Reserve and the building
meets all applicable portions of the Design Guidelines. This site is located within the South
Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design, which is indicated as a distinctive area of
mixed use, including high-rise condominiums and resort hotels. The applicant has submitted
documentation indicating compliance with the Beach by Design criteria relating to minimum
distanced between structures which exceed 100 feet in height and the number of buildings which
exceed 100 feet in height within given distances of each other. The proposal also complies with
the Code requirements under the definition of "Height, Building or Structure" for elevator and
stair overruns and mechanical rooms, which are permitted to extend a maximum of 16 feet above
the otherwise permitted height. Since both portions of the roof ineet the maximum height
limitations of the Code and Beach by Design, the definition of "Height, Building or Structure"
does not allow rooftop occupancy by the public or guests. Approval of this request should be
conditioned prohibiting such rooftop use. It should be noted that the accessory restaurant
building height is 17 feet as measured from BFE.
Minimum Off-street Parkin�:
Pursuant to CDC Table 2-803, there is no minimum off-street parking requirement for
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects. However, as a point of reference, pursuant to
Tables 2-802 parking for a Mixed Use is based on the specific uses. Overnight Accommodations
require 1.2 spaces per unit (250 spaces) and RADs require 1.5 spaces per units (111 spaces) for a
total of 361 required spaces. Parking will be accommodated via a mixture of surface (89 spaces)
and structured parking (291 spaces) totaling 380 spaces. A seven-story parking garage (with
open-air parking on the roo� will be attached to the west side of the hotel building and will
include 251 spaces. An additional 40 spaces will be totally contained with the RAD on the first
floor. All the surface parking will be located to the north and east of the proposed buildings.
The parking garage must comply with the Building Code and have a vertical clear height for all
parking garage levels of not less than seven feet including the entrance and exit. This clear
height includes any structural beams, fire sprinkler pipes and heads, electrical conduits and
lighting, drainage pipes and any other building elements. The proposal is therefore consistent
with the Code provisions of Article 2 Division 8 and Beach by Design.
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. The equipment on the roof
area 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.
Sight Visibilit� les:
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-904.A, to minimize hazards at the intersection of streets andlor
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 propose 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
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 —Page IS
' C�Lt�1�tiL��Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
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 adj acent to the site. All utilities that will serve the site will be placed
underground.
Landscapin�
Pursuant to CDC Section 3-1202.D, there are no perimeter buffers required in the Tourist District
for this site. The proposal also includes perimeter landscape buffers at least partially within the
South Gulfview Boulevard and Gulf Boulevard rights-of-way. The proposal includes 49,958
square feet of vehicular use are requiring 4,996 square feet of interior landscape area where 5,050
square feet is proposed. This proposal meets the required minimum five-foot wide foundation
planting along the sides of the buildings facing public rights-of-way. The landscape design
incorporates plant material that is native and/or naturalized and salt tolerant, while providing visual
interest. The pedestrian scale along South Gulfview Boulevard will be enhanced with accent
shrubs and dense groundcover beds as well as street tree plantings.
Solid Waste:
The proposal will utilize hotel housekeeping staff to remove trash from units and transport the
trash to the trash compactor located within the hotel building. A staging area will be located
adjacent to the trash compactor in the service area. The dumpster is serviced from this service
area. The restaurant will provide address solid waste with dumpsters which will be stored inside
the restaurant service area adjacent to the kitchen and then wheeled out in front of the restaurant
for servicing. The RAD component of the site includes a dumpster enclosure at the southeast
quadrant of the site. The proposal has been found to be acceptable by the City's Solid Waste
Department.
Si n�age:
The proposal does not include a freestanding sign at this time. However, any future freestanding
sign must be designed as a monument-style sign, maintain a setback of five feet, match the
exterior materials and color of the building and be a maximum height of six feet. Attached
signage is not proposed at this time but must also 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.
Compliance with General Applicability Standards:
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, density and character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
The proposal includes a 208-unit hotel and a 74-unit RAD within two 15-story buildings. The
proposed buildings include a contemporary design that will make it an attractive landmark at this
location. The subject site is surrounded by a myriad of uses indicative of a tourist destination
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 16
'_ C�1..�1 �(i ll.l Level II Flexibie Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
p pp DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
� :���.° �4.
including overnight accommodations, retail sales and services, bars, nightclubs, outdoor
recreation and entertainment, restaurants and attached dwellings. The proposed mixed use
development consisting of a hotel and RAD 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. The immediate vicinity is typified by
buildings between two and 15 floors. Therefore, the proposal supports this Code section.
Section 3-914.A.2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage development and
use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the value thereof.
The proposal is, 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 and the Design Guidelines. The applicant has shown through
substantial competent evidence that the proposal is similar in nature vis-a-vis form and function
to adjacent and nearby properties. The proposal will not impair the value of adjacent properties
nor prevent or discourage their redevelopment. 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 208-unit hotel and 74-unit RAD will increase the amount of traffic in the area.
However, this expected increase in traffic has been mitigated with ample space for vehicle
stacking on site and separated driveways which can independently serve the hotel and RAD
components of the proposal. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section.
Section 3-914.A. S. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the
immediate viciniry.
As previously discussed, the community character consists primarily of a variety of uses
including attached dwellings, outdoor recreation and entertainment, retail sales and service,
hotels and motels and restaurants within multi-story attached dwellings between two and 15
stories. 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 buildings will be
situated between 23 and 100 feet from any street right-of-way. The primary active use areas of
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-1 1031 — Page 17
' C��.[al �'1'�iL�l Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
p PP DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION
���,::.-� .
the proposal will be the pool and patio area located behind the restaurant in the center of the site.
Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section.
Compliance with Flexibility Criteria:
The proposal supports the specific Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criteria pursuant
to CDC Section 2-803.D as follows:
1. The development or redevelopment is othenvise impractical without deviations from the use
and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district.
The site has largely sat vacant for approximately eight years. In order for the proposal to
effectively compete in the marketplace, the full approved complement of 208 hotel units and
74 dwelling units must be used on site. In fact, one of the strategies of Beach by Design is to
"optimize project densities" on the Beach. The number of units directly affects the form of
the building vis-a-vis height, setbacks and area of floorplate. In order to create a viable hotel
the requested level of flexibility is needed. As such, the proposal is a reasonably expected
design solution consistent with established and approved uses on adjacent properties. It
follows that a reasonable conclusion is that the redevelopment of the site is otherwise
impractical without deviations from the development standards as otherwise provided in the
T District. Therefore, 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 destination resort
uses including overnight accommodations, restaurants, recreation, retail and attached
dwellings between two- and 15-stories. The proposal should have no impact on the ability of
adjacent properties to redevelop or otherwise be improved in accordance with the
requirements and limitations of Beach by Design. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with
this CDC Section.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed
development.
As discussed in detail, the proposal is similar to and will support adjacent uses. The
proposed height is similar to the buildings adjacent to the south and comparable to other
buildings in the area. It should be noted that two adjacent uses include Clearwater Pass
(south) and the Clearwater Pass Bridge (east). In addition, a hotel similar in scale and scope
has been approved immediately adjacent to the west. Therefore, the proposal is consistent
with this CDC Section.
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-1 1031 — Page 18
� Cll.itil �RLt�l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
P PP DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION
L � wR
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 ciry's economic
base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
As mentioned previously, the T District permits mixed uses including overnight
accommodations and RADs as a flexible standard development uses and the proposed use
would reestablish a hotel on a site that has been effectively vacant since 2006.
Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street parking are
justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development and
improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning district.
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 mixed use will support and
complement surrounding uses with regard to form and function. The proposal will have
no effect on the ability of surrounding properties to be redeveloped or otherwise
improved. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section.
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the
city.
As discussed in detail in this document, the proposal is fully compliant with all applicable
portions of the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design. Therefore, this CDC Section is
not applicable to the proposal.
c. The design, scale and intensiry of the proposed development supports the established or
emerging character of an area.
The proposal provides for a use similar in scale and scope as other developments both
built and approved in the area and, as discussed in detail, is supported by the vision of the
South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach by Design. The proposed components of
the mixed use (hotel and resort attached dwellings) are desired uses on the Beach and will
support surrounding uses such as retail, restaurants and outdoor recreation and
entertainment. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with this CDC Section.
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed
development incorporates a substantial number of the following design elements:
■ Changes in horizontal building planes;
■ Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters,
porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
■ Variety in materials, colors and textures;
■ Distinctive fenestration patterns;
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 19
a Vlearwater Level II Flexib�e Develo ment A lication Review PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
P pp DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
■ Building stepbacks; and
■ Distinctive roofs forms.
The architecture of the buildings provides for substantial articulation of the fenestration
through the use balconies, railings, windows and building offset. The buildings and site
design have been explored in detail as part of the discussion addressed compliance with
the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design. Therefore, 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 provides setbacks of between 23 and 100 feet from adjacent streets. The
two primary buildings are separated from each other by over 100 feet. The hotel building
is separated from the proposed building to the west also by over 100 feet. Extensive, lush
landscaping that exceeds the intent of the CDC is provided along all sides of the site and
around all sides of all the buildings on the site. 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 is entitled to the approval requested as required by CDC Section 4-
206.D.4.
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 Consistentl Inconsistent
Density 50 overnight 208 overnight accommodation X
accommodation units units/74 dwelling units (see the
per acre (219 section addressing density for details)
units)/30 dwelling
units per acre (131
units)
Impervious Surface Ratio 0.95 0.62 X
Minimum Lot Area N/A 190,793 sf (T District) X
40,859 sf (OS/R District - submerged)
Minimum Lot Width N/A 600 feet X
Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A North: 23 feet (to building) X
6 feet (to paving)
East: 69 feet (to building)
0 feet (to pavement)
Side: N/A West: 20 feet (to building) X
South: 60 feet (to building) X
50 feet (to pavement)
Maximum Height N/A 150 feet X
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 20
° Clearwater Level II Flexible Development Application Review
u ... �:�`^.,"."t'';; �r' �. . �
PLANMNG & DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
Minimum Determined by the 380 spaces X
Off-Street Parking community
development
coordinator for all
other uses based on
the specific use
and/or ITE Manual
standards
1 See analysis in Staff Report
Compliance with General Applicability Standards:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General
Standards for Level One and 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 olfactory and hours of operation impacts on adiacent nronerties.
� See ana[ysis in staff report.
Consistent' I Inconsistent
X �—
X
X
X
X
X
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):
1. 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
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed
development.
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 21
Consistent' � Inconsistent
X
X
X
X
' l��btbl ►ti�Ll.� Level II Flexible Development Application Review
u;� s'>. . � .
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. T'he 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
pazking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses
permitted in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines
adopted by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance,
the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the
following design elements:
❑ Changes in horizontal building planes;
❑ Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
❑ Variety in materials, colors and textures;
❑ Distinctive fenestration patterns;
❑ Building stepbacks; and
❑ Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape desiQn and avpronriate distances between buildin�s.
� See analysis in Staff Report.
Compliance with Beach by Design Design Guidelines:
l. Section A: Density.
2. Section B: Height.
3. Section C: Design, Scale and Mass of Buildings.
4. Section D: Setbacks.
5. Section: 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.
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 22
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
Il
�
Consistent� � Inconsistent
X
X
X
X
X
X
N/A
X
N/A
N/A
N/A
'. Clbtil 1`��L�1 Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DMSION
12. Section L: Materials and Colors.
1 See analysis in Staff Report.
Consistent' � Inconsistent
X
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of December 4, 2014, and deemed the development proposal to be legally
sufficient to move forward to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the
following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact:
The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence submitted by the
applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that there is substantial
competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:
1. The 5.31 total acres (4.38 acres zoned Tourist District; 0.93 acres zoned Open
Space/Recreation District) is located at the southwest corner of South Gulfview Boulevard
and Gulf Boulevard;
2. On April 19, 2005, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved Case Nos.
FLD2005-01016, TDR2005-01017 and PLT2005-00002;
3. On February 20, 2014, the City Council approved the allocation of up to 93 units from the
Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design (Case No. HDA2013-12008) and adopted a
resolution to the same effect (Res. No. 14-OS);
4. The property is currently largely vacant;
5. The nonconforming status of the prior hotel density (105 hotel units or 78 dwelling units) has
been determined to still be valid, even though the hotel was demolished, due to the status of
the approval of Case Nos. FLD2005-01016 and TDR2005-01017;
6. That the subject property is located within the Tourist (T) and Open Space/Recreation
(O/SR) Districts and the corresponding Resort Facilities High (RFH) and Preservation Future
Land Use Plan categories;
7. That the subject property is located in the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach by
Design;
8. The subject property is comprised of one parcel with approximately 600 feet of frontage
along South Gulfview Boulevard, 400 feet of frontage along Gulf Boulevard and 700 of
frontage along the water;
9. The proposal is to construct a new hotel building on the property consisting of 208 overnight
accommodation units, a restaurant as accessory to the hotel and a 74-unit resort attached
dwelling building;
10. The proposal includes 380 parking spaces with 89 surface spaces, 251 spaces within a seven-
story parking structure attached to the west side of the hotel building and 40 spaces on the
ground floor of the RAD building where a total of 361 spaces are required;
11. The proposed hotel and RAD building heights are 150 feet;
12. The proposed restaurant building height is 17 feet.
13. The proposal includes a front (north) setback of 23 feet (to building), six feet (to paving), a
front (east) setback of 69 feet (to building) an zero feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback
of 20 feet (to building) and a side (south) setback of 60 feet (to building) and 50 feet (to
pavement);
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD20l 4-1 ] 031 — Page 23
: C�bRl 1'1KLt�1 Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
- , �F � .
14. The proposal includes a request for a permitted deviation to Beach by Design guidelines
which require the floorplate of any building exceeding 45 feet in height be limited to a
maximum of 25,000 square feet between 45 and 100 feet and a ma�cimum of 10,000 square
feet between 100 and 150 feet because both the hotel and RAD buildings include floor plates
of approximately 11,000 between 100 and 150 feet;
15. That the proposal is otherwise fully in compliance with a11 applicable portions of the Beach
by Design guidelines; and
16. There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property.
Conclusions of Law:
The Planning and Development Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the
following conclusions of law:
1. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards pursuant to CDC Tables 2-
801.1 and 2-803;
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria pursuant to CDC
Section 2-803.D;
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level One and
Two Approvals pursuant to CDC Section 3-914.A;
4. That the development is consistent with the General Purposes of the CDC pursuant to CDC
Section 1-103;
5. That the development is consistent with applicable components of the City's Comprehensive
Plan; ,
6. That the application is consistent with the requirement for the submittal of substantial
competent evidence pursuant to CDC Section 4-206.D.4;
7. That the development is consistent with the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach
by Design; and
8. That the development proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design.
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of
the Flexible Development approval to permit a 208-room overnight accommodation use and a
74-unit Resort Attached Dwelling (RAD) use (including 13 dwelling units previously approved
and transferred under TDR2005-01017 with 10 units from 41 Devon Drive and three units from
500 Mandalay Avenue) in the Tourist (T) District with a lot area of 5.31 acres (4.38 acres zoned
T District and 0.93 acres zoned Open Space/Recreation District), a lot width of 600 feet, a front
(north) setback of 23 feet (to building) and six feet (to paving), a front (east) setback of 69 feet
(to building) and zero feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback of 20 feet (to building) and a side
(south) setback of 60 feet (to building) and 50 feet (to pavement), a building height of 150 feet
above Base Flood Elevation to top of roof deck and a minimum of 361 parking spaces at 1.2
parking spaces per hotel room and 1.5 spaces per RAD unit, as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of CDC Section 2-803.D; and to allow the floor
plate of the building above 100 feet to be up to 11,000 square feet where the maximum area is
10,000 square feet as provided by Section VII.B.3 of Beach by Design; and a two-year
Development Order under the provisions of CDC Section 4-407 subject to the following
conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
General/Miscellaneous Conditions
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 24
' V��l 1'1�L�� Level II Flexible Development Application Review
�.�� .. �
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
■ Building stepbacks; and
■ Distinctive roofs forms.
The architecture of the buildings provides for substantial articulation of the fenestration
through the use balconies, railings, windows and building offset. The buildings and site
design have been explored in detail as part of the discussion addressed compliance with
the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design. Therefore, 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 provides setbacks of between 23 and 100 feet from adjacent streets. The
two primary buildings are separated from each other by over 100 feet. The hotel building
is separated from the proposed building to the west also by over 100 feet. Extensive, lush
landscaping that exceeds the intent of the CDC is provided along all sides of the site and
around all sides of all the buildings on the site. 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
substantial competent evidence that he is entitled to the approval requested.
The applicant has adequately demonstrated through the submittal of substantial
evidence that the request is entitled to the approval requested as required by CDC
206.D.4.
to show by
competent
Section 4-
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 50 overnight 208 overnight accommodation X
accommodation units units/74 dwelling units (see the
per acre (219 section addressing density for details)
units)/30 dweliing
units per acre (131
units)
Impervious Surface Ratio 0.95 0.62 }{
Minimum Lot Area N/A 190,793 sf (T District) X
40,859 sf (OS/R District - submerged)
Minimum Lot Width N/A 600 feet }�
Minimum Setbacks Front: N/A North: 23 feet (to building) X
6 feet (to paving)
East: 69 feet (to building)
0 feet (to pavement)
Side: N/A West: 20 feet (to building) X
South: 60 feet (to building) X
50 feet (to pavement)
Maximum Height N/A 150 feet X
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014- I 1031 — Page 20
° Clearwater Levei II Flexible Development Application Review
u.m.�+ e... .. � .
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
Minimum Determined by the 380 spaces X
Off-Street Parking community
development
coordinator for all
other uses based on
the specific use
and/or ITE Manual
standards
1 See analysis in Sta„�'Report
Compliance with General Applicability Standards:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General
Standards for Level One and 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 oneration imnacts on adiacent nronerties_
i
See analysis in staff report.
Consistent' I Inconsistent
X
X
X
X
X
X
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):
1. 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
the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed
development.
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-1 1031 — Page 21
Consistent� � Inconsistent
X
X
X
X
' lill.�tl ►1 ALI.� Level II Flexible Development Application Review
. °� �s=�;;.� �s: ^� . . . . .
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially aiter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the City's
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment
of an existing economic contributor;
d. The proposed use provides for the provision of affordable housing;
e. The proposed use provides for development or redevelopment in an area
that is characterized by other similar development and where a land use plan
amendment and rezoning would result in a spot land use or zoning
designation; or
f. The proposed use provides for the development of a new and/or
preservation of a working waterfront use.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses
permitted in this zoning district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines
adopted by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. ln order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance,
the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the
following design elements:
❑ Changes in horizontal building planes;
❑ Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
❑ Variety in materials, colors and textures;
❑ Distinctive fenestration patterns;
❑ Building stepbacks; and
❑ Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
� See analysis in Sta.('f'Report.
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: 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.
I 1. Section K: Fountains.
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 22
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT REV�W DMSION
�
X
Consistent� � Inconsistent
X
X
X
X
X
X
N/A
X
N/A
N/A
N/A
' 41�.(41 ►'titLl.l Level II Flexible DevelopmentApplication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
�. s,`�, • , . . . .
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
12. Section L: Materials and Colors.
� See analysis in Sta�'f'Report.
Consistent' � Inconsistent
F:�
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials
at its meeting of December 4, 2014, and deemed the development proposal to be legally
sufficient to move forwaxd to the Community Development Board (CDB), based upon the
following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
Findings of Fact:
The Planning and Development Department, having reviewed all evidence submitted by the
applicant and requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that there is substantial
competent evidence to support the following findings of fact:
1. The 5.31 total acres (4.38 acres zoned Tourist District; 0.93 acres zoned Open
Space/Recreation District) is located at the southwest corner of South Gulfview Boulevard
and Gulf Boulevard;
2. On April 19, 2005, the Community Development Board (CDB) approved Case Nos.
FLD2005-01016, TDR2005-01017 and PLT2005-00002;
3. On February 20, 2014, the City Council approved the allocation of up to 93 units from the
Hotel Density Reserve under Beach by Design (Case No. HDA2013-12008) and adopted a
resolution to the same effect (Res. No. 14-OS);
4. The property is currently largely vacant;
5. The nonconforming status of the prior hotel density (105 hotel units or 78 dwelling units) has
been determined to still be valid, even though the hotel was demolished, due to the status of
the approval of Case Nos. FLD2005-01016 and TDR2005-01017;
6. That the subject property is located within the Tourist (T) and Open Space/Recreation
(O/SR) Districts and the corresponding Resort Facilities High (RFH) and Preservation Future
Land Use Plan categories;
7. That the subject property is located in the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach by
Design;
8. The subject property is comprised of one parcel with approximately 600 feet of frontage
along South Gulfview Boulevard, 400 feet of frontage along Gulf Boulevard and 700 of
frontage along the water;
9. The proposal is to construct a new hotel building on the property consisting of 208 overnight
accommodation units, a restaurant as accessory to the hotel and a 74-unit resort attached
dwelling building;
10. The proposal includes 380 parking spaces with 89 surface spaces, 251 spaces within a seven-
story parking structure attached to the west side of the hotel building and 40 spaces on the
ground floor of the RAD building where a total of 361 spaces are required;
11. The proposed hotel and RAD building heights are 150 feet;
12. The proposed restaurant building height is 17 feet.
13. The proposal includes a front (north) setback of 23 feet (to building), six feet (to paving), a
front (east) setback of 69 feet (to building) an zero feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback
of 20 feet (to building) and a side (south) setback of 60 feet (to building) and 50 feet (to
pavement);
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-1 ]031 — Page 23
� CitiNl 1't�t�l Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT
P PP DEVELOPMENTREVffiWDIVISION
.���,•�
14. The proposal includes a request for a permitted deviation to Beach by Design guidelines
which require the floorplate of any building exceeding 45 feet in height be limited to a
maximum of 25,000 square feet between 45 and 100 feet and a maximum of 10,000 square
feet between 100 and 150 feet because both the hotel and RAD buildings include floor plates
of approximately 11,000 between 100 and 150 feet;
15. That the proposal is otherwise fully in compliance with all applicable portions of the Beach
by Design guidelines; and
16. There are no active Code Compliance cases for the subject property.
Conclusions of Law:
The Planning and Development Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the
following conclusions of law:
l. That the development proposal is consistent with the Standards pursuant to CDC Tables 2-
801.1 and 2-803;
2. That the development proposal is consistent with the Flexibility criteria pursuant to CDC
Section 2-803.D;
3. That the development proposal is consistent with the General Standards for Level One and
Two Approvals pursuant to CDC Section 3-914.A;
4. That the development is consistent with the General Purposes of the CDC pursuant to CDC
Section 1-103;
5. That the development is consistent with applicable components of the City's Comprehensive
Plan;
6. That the application is consistent with the requirement for the submittal of substantial
competent evidence pursuant to CDC Section 4-206.D.4;
7. That the development is consistent with the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District of Beach
by Design; and
8. That the development proposal is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Beach by Design.
Based upon the above, the Planning and Development Department recommends APPROVAL of
the Flexible Development approval to permit a 208-room overnight accommodation use and a
74-unit Resort Attached Dwelling (RAD) use (including 13 dwelling units previously approved
and transferred under TDR2005-01017 with 10 units from 41 Devon Drive and three units from
500 Mandalay Avenue) in the Tourist (T) District with a lot area of 5.31 acres (4.38 acres zoned
T District and 0.93 acres zoned Open Space/Recreation District), a lot width of 600 feet, a front
(north) setback of 23 feet (to building) and six feet (to paving), a front (east) setback of 69 feet
(to building) and zero feet (to pavement), a side (west) setback of 20 feet (to building) and a side
(south) setback of 60 feet (to building) and 50 feet (to pavement), a building height of 150 feet
above Base Flood Elevation to top of roof deck and a minimum of 361 parking spaces at 1.2
parking spaces per hotel room and 1.5 spaces per RAD unit, as a Comprehensive Infill
Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of CDC Section 2-803.D; and to allow the floor
plate of the building above 100 feet to be up to 11,000 square feet where the maximum area is
10,000 square feet as provided by Section VII.B.3 of Beach by Design; and a two-year
Development Order under the provisions of CDC Section 4-407 subject to the following
conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
General/Miscellaneous Conditions
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 24
� Cll.t�l �1�L�1 Level II Flexible Develo mentA lication Review PLnr�vING�DEV�LOPMErrr
P PP DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
y '&Y �.'o:�.., xv ^ . .. . .
1. That any future freestanding sign(s) be a monument-style sign and that all signs be designed
to match the exterior materials and color of the building;
2. 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 South Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way;
3. That application for a building permit be submitted no later than January 20, 2017, unless
time extensions are granted pursuant to CDC Section 4-407;
4. That roof-top occupation andlor activities be prohibited;
Timin� Conditions - Prior to Issuance of Permit
5. That, prior to the issuance of any buildings except for clearing and grubbing or the provision
of fill, all applicable requirements of Chapter 39 of the Building Code be met;
6. That, prior to the issuance of any buildings except for clearing and grubbing or the provision
of fill, a site plan which indicates that where sidewalks cross driveways treatments such as
pavers or stamped paving are used and that the details of that treatment including but not
limited to pattern, type and installation methodology be approved by Staff;
7. That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, except for clearing and grubbing or the
provision of fill, sea-turtle friendly light fixtures be employed with the site design, with
compliance demonstrated on plans acceptable to the Environmental Engineering Division;
8. That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, except for clearing and grubbing or the
provision of fill, a turning template for the parking garage shall be provided to and approved
by Staff;
9. That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, except for clearing and grubbing or the
provision of fill, 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 shown to 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 permits, except for clearing and grubbing or the
provision of fill, any applicable Parks and Recreation impact fees be paid;
11. That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, except for clearing and grubbing or the
provision of fill, 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 percent of its rated capacity;
12. That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, except for clearing and grubbing or the
provision of fill, evidence be submitted to and approved by Staff which indicates that the
proposed solid waste facility will meet the requirements of NFPA-1, 2009 edition by
providing a one-hour separation and a fire sprinkler system for the protection of the structure.
Such evidence will be required to have been designed by a fire protection engineer in
addition to the architect of record detailing the one hour rating of the area in question;
13. That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, except for clearing and grubbing or the
provision of fill, all sub-standard sidewalks and sidewalk ramps adjacent to or a part of the
project shall be shown on plans to be improved to meet the requirement of Local, State
and/or Federal standards including A.D.A. requirements (truncated domes per FDOT Index
#304);
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 25
� Cl�.t��ul��l Level II Flexible Develo ment A lication Review PLAM�IING & DEVELOPMENT
P PP DEVELOPMENTREVIEWDIVISION
� e<���,.,.:�. > ,
14. That, prior to the issuance of any building permits, except for clearing and grubbing or the
provision of fill, a site plan, accompanied by a stormwater vault maintenance schedule,
signed and accepted by the owner, which provides stormwater vault specifications indicating
that the vault provides water quality benefits is submitted to and approved by City Staff;
15. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, a grading and drainage plan is submitted
to City staff which provides acceptable levels of stormwater attenuation and meets water
quality standards.;
16. That prior to the issuance of any permits a Hurricane Evacuation Plan be submitted to and
approved by the City.
Timing Conditions - Prior to Issuance of Certificate of OccupancX
17. That, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the sidewalk and any associated
sidewalk amenities be installed to the satisfaction of City Staff along South Gulfview
Boulevard;
18. That, prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, all service lines onto the property
shall be installed underground;
Sidewalk Conditions
19. That the final location of the sidewalk along South Gulfview Boulevard be generally
consistent with the plans approved by the CDB; and
20. That the fit, finish, materials, 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.
f�
Prepared by Planning and Development Department Stafi /'� --� "�: ~
Mark T. Parry, AICP, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS: Photographs
Community Development Board — January 20, 2015
FLD2014-11031 — Page 26
,,..
s„
� �. -
l..
V I��� IUI�hIII� �
; �. ��
� °. , ,�
F �
g��i
T n � 16a � � ��.: iFi1�. .
�;;, ��
�'�' t
��
r
� ��� � _ y� .�,
— � �•.� _
�`Y"��'�i � k�`' � ;�, .r:�:
�
�t1�C ' � 6 2013
\� I�AA iui�hili_ �`1A ii, .i. .ulv.�. �iiull� I��. iil� �i
��, ;
"bafr �
. a� k��°�� .
�'I�V� Illllhill:! ���.
r
y
i��
�� � �� ::i�y ._'S'C:a._.._` ��
, j `• , ' � ----}-
- , ,�� ; ;
��
��: -_ ,, J �� ��,� , ^ � ��
�, _ - .� � - °i�
_ �,-. ����
� x�. SM!L - ,
. ,; , ,�:.,k Y � �,r,y r �;ti
a
tz�� ... io- ��,
�:� 1t,�1�. x;f �l.;:J: i9�,
v ic�� luuhin�, L, aluu�
;.Zh"�i:'�d�'Cy�'n�i's�iA:� ' : ,
y, .,a���i q�
_� "�,
a
�
715 SOUTH GULFVIEW BOULEVARD
FLD2014-11031
r'�k`�e;' � ,t".�
MARK T. PARRY
1655 Linwood Drive Tel: (727) 742.2461
Clearwater, FL 33755 E-mail: mparry@tampabay.rr.com
SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS
A dedicated, AICP certified professional Planner focused on contributing to the field of Urban Planning
experienced in public and private sector planning. An excellent communicator, able to effectively interact
with clients, local government officials and business professionals at all levels. Experienced in various
aspects of urban design and planning, zoning regulations and permitting.
OBJECTIVE
To secure a Planning position which will allow me to continue improving the built environment and my
community through sound and innovative planning and design principals.
EDUCATION
COOK COLLEGE, RUTGERS UNIVERSITY, New Brunswick, NJ
B.S. Landscape Architecture Major, Urban Planning Certification
B.S. Environmental Planning and Design
Certificate Urban Planning
Golden Key National Honor Society; Sigma Lambda A/pha
American Planning Association (Florida Chapter); member
A/CP #020597
40-hour OSHA (Hazwoper) Training
P�ANNER III PLANNING DEPARTMENT, CITY OF CLEARWATER 04/12 - Present
08/98 — 04/05
• Responsible for nonresidential and single/multi-family site plan review and permitting.
• Assist in the implementation and subsequent review of the Community Development Code.
• Responsible for assessing and writing Community Development Code amendments.
. Land Development Code development, interpretation and application.
• Provide, inspect and direct landscape review/design.
. Acting Development Review Manager 9/99 — 11/99 and 01/05 — 03/05.
• Manage and direct Associate Planners.
• Review, process and present variance/conditional use, land use/zoning atlas amendment and annexation
applications at in-house and public review meetings.
• Principal Planner in creating and implementing Clearwater's Downtown Design Guidelines.
Assisted in the implementation and application of the Clearwater powntown Redevelopment Plan.
SENIOR PLANNER DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, CARDNO TBE 04/05 — 04/12
• Planner of record for Cities of Indian Rocks Beach, Seminole and Clearwater and Town of Belleair.
• Responsible for nonresidential and single/multi-family site plan review and permitting.
. Perform site design and inspections.
• Provide technical planning support for engineering department.
• Provide support for Zoning Code, Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Land Use Plan amendments.
• Research and write Evaluation and Appraisal Reports.
• Create and update Special Area Plans/Form-based Codes.
• Provide CADD support.
• Assist with creating redevelopment marketing material.
• Pertorm technical environmental services including soil and groundwater sampling.
Designer/Owner GREENSCAPES-GLD, MARLBORO, NJ 9/92 - 6/98
• Founded and established a local garden and landscape business.
• Plan and oversee installation of commercial and residential landscaping projects utilizing a variety of CADD
and photo-manipulation programs.
• Develop and implement advertising programs, brochures and graphics.
• Estimate, bid and negotiate jobs.
• Source and negotiate purchase of materials and equipment.
• Manage, train and schedule installation crews.
Program Supervisor LONGSTREET FARM, MONMOUTH COUNTY PARK SYSTEM,
HOLMDEL, NJ
• Assisted in formulating and running children's summer program ("Hayseed").
• Created and coordinated daily programs and schedules for 6-9 year old groups.
• Supervised several other programs throughout the year.
• Created a demand which was twice the program's capacity after the first year.
COMPUTER SKILLS
6/87 - 8/93
Access, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Works, ClarisWorks, MS Word, Land Designer Pro, Permit Plan,
Excel, Cornerstone, AutoCADD, PowerPoint, Publisher
° learwat r
�C e
�
Planning & Development Department
Flexible Development Application
Attached Dwellings, Mixed-Uses or Non-Residential Uses
IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT COMPLETE AND CORRER INFORMATION. ANY MISLEADING, DECEPTIVE,
INCOMPLETE OR INCORRECT INFORMATION MAY INVALIDATE YOUR APPIJCATION.
ALL APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE FILLED OUT COMPLETELY AND CORRECTLY, AND SUBMITTED IN PERSON (NO FAX OR DELIVERIES)
TO THE PLANNIN6 & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY N�ON ON THE SCHEDULED DEADLINE DATE.
A TOTAL OF 11 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL AND 10 COPIES) AS REQUIRED WITHIN
ARE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW BY THE DEVELOPMfNT REVIEW COMMITTEE. SUBSEQUENT SUBMITTAL FOR THE
COMMUNITY DfVELOPMENT BOARD WILL REQUIRE 15 COMPLETE SETS OF PLANS AND APPLICATION MATERIALS (1 ORIGINAL
AND 14 COPIES). PLANS AND APPLICATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE COLLATED, STAPLED AND FOLDED INTO SETS.
THE APPLIfANT, BY FILING THIS APPLICATION, AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE.
FIRE DEPT PRELIMARY SITE PLAN REVIEW FEE: $200
APPLICATION FEE: $1,205
PROPERTY OWNER (PER DEED): Marquesas, LLC
MAILING ADDRESS: 2201 4th St�eet North, #200, St. Petersburg, FL 33704
PHONE NUMBER:
EMAIL:
AGENT OR REPRESENTATIVE: E.D. Armstrong III / Katherine E. Cole / Hill Ward Henderson
MAILING ADDRE55: 311 Park Place Blvd., Suite 240, Clearvvater, FL 33759-4904
PHONE NUMBER: 727-7243900
EMAIL: ed.armstrong�hwhiaw.com / kabe.cole@hwhlaw.com
ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: ��5, 721, 727 S. GulNiew Blvd., Clearwater, FL
PARCEL NUMBER(Sj: 17-29-15-05076-004-0010
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached Exhibit A
PROPOSED USE(S): Mixed Use of Overnight Accommodations, Resort Attached Dwellings and accessory uses
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: See attached Exhibit B
Spec�colly identijy the request
(include all requested code �lexibitity,.
e.g., reduction in required number of
parking spocrs, height setbacks, lot
size, lot width, specifc u�, etc.�:
Planning � Development Departrnent,100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tei: 727:i62�4567; Fax: 727-562-4865
Page 1 of 8 Revised 01/12
:.
° 1 rwater
��ea
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 RESUIT IN YOUR APPLICATION BEING FOUND INCOMPLETE AND POSSIBLY DEFERRED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING
APPUCATION CY0.E.
• � I S
FUTURE IAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION:
Tou�st(T)
Resort Faalities High (RFH)
EXISTING USE (currently existing on site): Fomter 216 Room Hotel
PROPOSED USE (new use, if any; plus existing, if to remain): Hotel, RAD and aCcessory uses
SITE AREA: 231,424 sy. ft.
GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage of all buiidings):
Existing: 2,811 sq. ft.
Proposed: 54,398 sq. ft.
Maximum Allowable: N�A sq. ft.
5.31 acres total (4.38 ac. uplands)
GROSS FLOOR AREA (total square footage devoted to each use, ff there wili be muhiple uses):
First use: NJA sq. ft. Resort Attached Dwellings
second use: N/A sq. ft. Ovemight Accommodations
Tt,ird use: N/A sq. tt. Accessory Restaurant
FIOOR AREA RATIO (tMal square footage of all buildings divided by the total square footage of entire site):
Existing: N/A
Proposed: N/A
Maximum Allowable: N/A
BUIIDING COVERAGE/FOOTPRINT (1�` floor square footage of all buiidings):
Existing: 2+8� � sq. ft. ( �•2� % of site)
Proposed: 54,398 sq. ft. ( 23.5 % of site)
Maximum Permitted: sq. ft. ( 100 % of site)
GREEN SPACE WITHIN VEHiCULAR USE AREA (green space within the parking lot and interior of site; not perimeter buffer):
Existing: 0 sq. ft. ( 0 % of site)
Proposed: 5,050 sq. ft. ( 10.1 % of site)
VEHICULAR USE AREA (parking spaces, drive aisles, loading area):
Existing: 13,939 sq. ft. ( 6 % of site)
Proposed: 4'9�9� sq. ft. ( 22 % of site)
Planning 8� Development Departrnent,100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-662�567; Fa�c 727�62-4865
Page 2 of 8 Revised 01H2
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO (total square footage of impervious areas divided by the total square footage of entire site):
Existing: 20,413
Proposed: 143,014
Maximum Permitted: 219,852
DENSITY (units, rooms or beds per ac�e): BUILDING HEIGHT:
Existing: 0 Existing: N/A
Proposed: 208 OA (inc. HDR) & 74 (inc. TDR) Proposed: 150�-0'�
Maximum Permitted: 219 OA Ot' 128 RAD Maximum Permitted: 150'
50 u/a OA or 30 u/a RAD with HDR u�its 150 u/a
OFF-STREET PARKING:
Existing: 0
Proposed: 380
Minimum Required: ��
�
WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED TOTAL VAIUE OF THE PROJECT UPON COMPLETION? $ 97,000,000.00
ZONING DISTRICTS F�2 ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY:
North: Tourist
south: Water
East: Tou�st
west: Rictht of Wav (Bridqe)
I, the un ' ned,
rep�esentations ma
accurate to the best of
City representatives to
property described in this
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS
acknowledge that all Sworn to and subscribed before me this
this application are true and
p
�
.
day of
knowledge and authorize
. to me and/or by
visi d photograph the . who is personally known has
applicatio produced as identification.
Signature of property owner or representative
Se � ne x�
Notary public,
My commission expires:
Pla�►ning 8 DevelopmeM Depar6nent,100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwaber, FL 33756, Tel: 727�'i62�4567; Fax: 727�562-4865
Page 3 of 8 Revised 01/72
0
(MPE S SURFACE RATIO (total square footage of impervious areas divided by the total square
Existing: 9%
Proposed: 62%
Maximum Permitt : 5%
DENSITY (units, rooms or beds cre): BUILDING HEI .
Existing: 0 Existing: N/A
Proposed: 2p8 174 (inC. HDR) Pro . 150'-0"
Maximum Permitted: 148 ximum Permitted: 150'
OFF-STREET PARKING:
Existing: 0
Proposed: 388
Minimum Required: 361
WHAT IS THE ESTIMA�
ZONING
Narth:
South J
AL VALUE OF THE PROJECT UPON COMPLETION?
FOR ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY:
Water
Tourist
Riqht of Way Bridqe)
ir
site):
See t�l
$ h�e C
�
111 11
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS
I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all Sworn to and subscribed before me this ��r�- day of
representations made in this application are true and ��� �e����E,�,-- �, L I . to me and/or by
accurate to the best af my knowledge and authorize ``
City representatives to visit and photograph the �'�f�' {..t�-E.. �.��; � , who is personally known has
property described in this application. produced as identification.
�
C`���st� I�i 1�� I.� �� ��t1-f l.��i;---�-
of property owne r representativ� U Notary pulllic,
My commission eupires:
ROBYN A MOEHRING
Bonded ThN Notary Public Underwritea
Planning 8 Development Depar6nent,100 S. Myrtle Av�ue, Cl�rwaber. FL 33T56, Tel: 727�62-d567; Fax: 727-662-4865
Page 3 of 8 Revised 01/12
o Planning & Development Department
� C earwater Flexible Develo ment A lication
P PP
� Site Plan Submittal Package Check list
IN ADDITION TO THE COMPLETED FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT (FLD) APPLICATION, ALL FLD APPLICATIONS SHALL INCLUDE A SITE
PLAN SUBMI7TAl PACKAGE THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION AND/OR PLANS:
C� 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 Flexibie Devetopment 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 Application
Generai Applicability Criteria sheet shall be used to provide these responses.
[� A signed and sealed survey of the p�operty prepared by a registered land surveyor including the location of the property,
dimensions, acreage, location of all current structures/improvements, location of ail public and private easements including
official records book and page numbers and street right(s)-of-way within and adjacent to the site.
C� If the application would resuit 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 Sedion 4-202.A.5.
LXt If this application is being submitted for the purpose of a boatlift, catwalk, davit, dock, marina, pier, seawall or o#her si milar
marine stn.�cture, then the application must provide detailed plans and specifications prepared by a Florida professional
engineer, bearing the seal and signature of the engineer, except signed and sealed plans shall not be required for the repair
or replacement of decking, stringers, railing, lower landings, tie piles, or the patching or rei�forcing of existing piling on
private and commercial docks.
C� A site plan prepared by a professional architect, engineer or landscape architect drawn to a minimum scale of one inch equals
50 feet on a sheet size not to exceed 24 inches by 36 inches that includes the following information:
L� Index sheet of the same size shall be included with individual sheet numbers referenced thereon.
L� North arrow, scale, location map and date prepared.
C� Identification of the boundaries of phases, if development is proposed to be construded in phases.
fiS Location of the Coastal Co�struction Control Line (CCCL), whether the property is located within a Special Flood Hazard
Area, and the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of the property, as applicable.
� 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 access.
Lf location of all existing and proposed sidewalks, curbs, water lines, sanitary sewer lines, storm drains, fire hydrants and
seawalls and any proposed utility easements.
f2� 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 demonst�ate compliance with the City of
Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual may be required at time of building construction permit.
d9 Location of solid waste collection facilities, required screening and provisions for accessibility for collection.
I� Location of off-street loading area, if required by Section 3-1406.
t� All adjacent right(s)-of-way, with indication of centerline and width, paved width, existing median cuts and i�tersections
and bus shelters.
� Dimensions of existing and proposed lot lines, streets, drives, building lines, setbacks, structural overhangs and building
sepa�ations.
t� Building or structure elevation drawings that depict the proposed building height a�d building materials.
Planning 8 Devebpmeat Depar6nent,100 S. Myrtle Av�ue, Clearwaber, FL 33756, Tel: 727-662-4567; Fax: 727-662-4865
Page 4 of 8 Revised 01/12
L� Typical floor plans, including floor plans for each floor of any parking garage.
C� Demolitio� plan.
� Identification and description of watercourses, wetiands, tree masses, specimen trees, and other environmentaily
sensitive areas.
� If a deviation from the parking standards is requested that is greater than 5096 (excluding those standards where the
difference between the top and bottom of the range is one parking space), then a parking demand study wili 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.
f?�1 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.
Q� 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 ar more new trips per day; or
■ Anticipated new trip generation degrades the level of service as adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan to
unacceptable leveis; or
■ The study area contains a segment of roadway and/or intersection with five reportable accidents within a prior twelve
month period, or the segment and/or intersection exists on the City's annual list of most hazardous locations, provided
by the City of Clearwater Police Department; or
■ The Traffic Operations Manager or their designee deems it necessary to require such assessment in the plan review
process. Examples inciude developments that are expected to negatively impact a constrained roadway or developments
with unknown trip generation and/or other unknown factors.
� A landscape plan shall be provided for any project where there is a new use or a change of use; or an existing use is improved
or remodeled in a value of 25% or more of the valuation of the principal structure as reflected on the property appraiser's
current records, or if an amendment is required to an existing approved site plan; or a parking lot requires additional
landscaping pursuant to the provisions of Article 3, Division 14. The landscape plan shall include the following information, if
not otherwise required in conjunction with the application for development approval:
L� Location, size, description, specifications and quantities of ail existing and proposed landscape materials, including
botanicai and common names.
� Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and location, including drip line.
L� 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, including but not limited to sidewalks, walls, fences,
pools, patios, dumpster pads, pad mounted transformers, fire hydrants, overhead obstructions, curbs, water lines,
sanitary sewer lines, storm drains, seawalls, utility easements, treatment of all ground surfaces, and any other features
that may influence the proposed landscape.
f� Location of parking areas and other vehicular use areas, including parking spaces, circulation aisles, interior landscape
islands and curbing.
L� Drainage and retention areas, including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations.
C� Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscaped buffers including sight triangles, if any.
Planning 8 Development Depar�nent, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 7Z7d,62�567; Fax: 727�fiG62-4865
Page 5 of 8 Revised 01H2
° 1 er
� C earwat
Planning & Development Department
Flexible Development Application
� General Applicability Criteria
PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE SIX (6) GENERAL APPUCABILITY CRITERIA IXPLAINING HOW, IN DETAII, THE
CRITERION IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and character of adjacent
properties in which it is located.
See attached Exhibit B
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and buildings
or significantly impair the value thereof.
See attached Exhibit B
3. The proposed devebpment will not adversely affect the heatth or safety or persons residing or working in the neighborhood
of the proposed use.
See attached Exhibit B
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
See attached Exhibit B
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel propased for
development.
See attac:hed Exhibit B
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfadory and hours of
operation impacts, on adjacent properties.
See attached Exhibit B
Pianning 8 Development Departrnent, 100 S. Myrtle Av�ue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-662-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865
Page 6 of 8 Revised 01N2
LL
o Planning & Development Department
} earwater Flexible Development Application
�
� Flexibility Criteria
PROVIDE COMPIETE RESPONSES TO THE APPLICABLE FLEXIBIUTY CRITERIA FOR THE SPECIFIC USE(S) BEING REQUESTED AS SET
FORTH IN THE ZONING DISTRICT(5) IN WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED. EXPLAIN HOW, IN DETAII, EACH CRITERION
IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL (USE SEPARATE SHEETS AS NECESSARIn.
i. See attached Exhibit B
2. See attached Exhibit B
3. See attached Exhibit B
4. See attached Exhibit B
5• See attached Exhibit B
6. See attached Exhibit B
7. See attached Exhibit B
8• See attached Exhibit B
Planning 8� Developmerrt Department,100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwaber, FL 33756, Tel: 727-662-4567; Fau: 727�:'i62-4865
Page 7 of 8 Revised 01h2
° �learwater
�
Planning & Development Department
Flexible Development Application
� Affidavit to Authorize Agent/Representative
1. Provide names of all property owners on deed — PRINT fuli names:
Marquesas, LLC
2. That (I am/we are) the owner(s) and record title holder(s) of the foilowing described property:
715, 721, 727 S. Gulfview Blvd., Clearwater, FL
3. That this property constitutes the property for which a request for (describe request):
Flexible Development Approval
4. That the undersigned (has/have) appointed and (does/do) appoint:
E.D. Armstrong III / Katherine E. Cole / Hill Ward Henderson
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. the un ersi ed a rit , hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct.
Mark Walsh, Property Owner Property Owner
Manager
Property Owner
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS
Property Owner
BEFORE ME THE UNDERSIGNED, AN OFFICER DULY COMMISSIONED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ON
_.----_____. _
THIS � DAY OF ��� C% ��� 2014 , PERSONALLY APPE�/IRED
Mark Walsh `�- -
WHO HAVING BEEN FIRST DULY SWORN
DEPOSED AND SAYS THAT HE/SHE FULLY UNDERSTA DS THE CO TENTS O THE AFFIDAVIT THAT HE/SHE SIGNED.
�..�i
����; pN..,,� DEBORAH NOWMD �
s = Not�ry PuDlic - St�e oFflorid�
�• •� My Comm. Exp'aes JW 31. 2017
_"� �:- Commi:si�n � FF 208l6 Notary Public Signature
%,',;ora�;:•
,,,�u•• Bonded Throupfi Niti0n�1 NoCuy Assn. �-7
N My Commission Expires: ���j �/� � �/
Planning & Development Department, 700 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865
Page 8 of 8 Revised 01/72
EXHIBIT "A"
Tract No. 1
That part of Block D, BAYSIDE SHORES, as recorded in Plat Book 58, Pages 12 and 13, of the Public Records of
Pinellas County, Florida, and adjacent land to the South described as follows:
Beginning at the Northwesterly corner of said Block D, and run thence S 77° 46'02" E, 373.04 feet; thence along a
curve to the right whose chord bears S 36° 31'O1" E, 362.64 feet; arc is 395.97 feet and radius is 275.00 feet for a
Point of Beginning; thence N 77° 37'32" W, 167.56 feet; thence S 12° 22'28" W, 219.28 feet; thence S 54° 52' 17" E,
173.50 feet; thence N 12° 22'28" E, 249.81 feet; thence S 77° 37'32" E, 10.0 feet; thence along a curve to the left
whose chord bears N 08° 33'13" E, 36.65 feet, arc is 36.68 feet and radius is 275.00 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Tract No. 2
That part of Block D, BAYSIDE SHORES, as recorded in Plat Book 58, Pages 12 and 13, of the Public Records of
Pinellas County, Florida, and adjacent land to the South described as follows:
Beginning at the Northwesterly corner of said Block D, and run thence S 77° 46'02" E, 373.04 feet; thence along a
curve to the right whose chord bears S 36 ° 31'O1" E, 362.64 feet; arc is 395.97 feet and radius is 275.00 feet for a
Point of Beginning; thence N 77° 37'32" W, 167.56 feet; thence S 12° 22'28" W, 219.28 feet; thence N 54° 52'17" W,
108.06 feet; thence N 45 ° 00'00" W, 79.0 feet; thence along a curve to the left whose chord bears N 53° 29'S3" W,
157.04 feet, arc is 157.61 feet and radius is 531.33 feet; thence N 61° 59'46" W, 177.08 feet; thence N 12° 40'00" E,
along the Westerly line of said Block D, and its Southerly extension 260.51 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Tracts 1 and 2 above described comprise of all Lots 1 and 2, Block D, BAYSIDE SHORES, as recorded in Plat
Book 58, Pages 12 and 13, of the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida, plus adjacent lands lying to the South
of said Lots 1 and 2.
ALL THE ABOVE BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT l; THENCE S 12° 40'00" W, 260.51 FEET;
THENCE S 61° 59'46" E, 177.08 TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO
THE RIGHT RADIUS 53133 FEET, ARC 157.61 FEET, CHORD BEARING S 53° 29'S3" E, 157.04 FEET TO A
POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S 45° 00'00" E, 79.00 FEET; THENCE S 54° 52'17" E, 281.56 FEET TO A
POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF CLEARWATER PASS AVENUE; THENCE N 12° 22'28" E,
ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY 249.81 FEET; THENCE S 77° 37'32" E, 10.00 FEET TO A POINT ON A
CURVE; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT CONCAVED TO THE WEST, RADIUS
275.00 FEET, ARC 432.65 FEET, CHORD BEARING N 32° 41'47" W, 389.39 FEET TO A POINT OF
TANGENCY ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SOUTH GULFVIEW BLVD.; THENCE N 77°
46'02" W, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY 373.04 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
City of Clearwater
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Comprehensive Infill Application
Marquesas, LLC
EXHIBIT B— DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
Description of Request:
The Applicant requests approval of a comprehensive infill development a 74 unit resort
attached dwelling and a 208 room hotel which will share certain common elements and amenities
including a designated surface parking area and pool. Due to the siting of two different uses on
the same property which are being requested to be approved by the same development
application, the Applicant is submitting a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Application for
mixed uses which looks at the site as a whole rather than each use; however, in an effort to give
more specifics, the site data table provides dimensional standards for each project. The property
is 4.38 acres of upland property located at the terminus of the Clearwater Pass Bridge on South
Gulfview Blvd. for a total of 5.31 acres (upland plus submerged land). The site was formerly the
216 room Holiday Inn Sunspree. The upland has a Tourist (T) zoning and the submerged lands
have a OS/R zoning; the Properiy has a land use of Resort Facilities High (RFH).
On February 20, 2014, the Clearwater City Council approved a Development Agreement
between Marquesas, LLC and the City of Cleaxwater granting hotel density reserve units to the
property for the purpose of increasing the density to 208 overnight accommodation units and 74
resort-attached dwellings, which includes 12 units previously transferred to the property through
an approved transfer of density. The site plan is proposed and submitted consistent with Section
6.1.3.1 of the Development Agreement within the time period prescribed by the Agreement.
The proposed density, as approved by the City Council previously, is calculated as: 74 Resort
Attached Dwelling units [12 Units used from previously transferred development rights to the
site (see deeds attached to the application) and 62 units (2.066 acres x 30 u/a)] and 208
Overnight Accommodation Units [93 units — Hotel Density Reserve, plus 115 units (2.313 acres
x 50 u/a)].
The
North
South
East
West
in� uses are as follows:
Land Use/Zoning
RFH/T
R/OS/OS/R
Clearwater Pass Bri
RFH/T
Existing Use
Commercial reta.il center
Beach and onen water
Clearwater Pass Bri
Existine Hotel
Specifically, the applicant requests comprehensive infill redevelopment approval to permit a
horizontal mixed use development of 208 overnight accommodation units and 74 Resort
Attached Dwelling (RAD) units in the Tourist (T) District, with
a. a Lot Area (zoned T) of 438 acres or 190,793 sq. feet;
b. a Lot Width of 635 feet;
5992736v1
c. a maximum height of 150 feet above minimum floor elevation;
d. a front (north) setback of 23.6' feet to building (garage) and 6.50' feet
to pavement;
e. a side (east) setback of 69.4' feet to building (RAD) and 1.50' feet to
pavement;
f. a side (west) setback of 20.4' feet to building (Overnight
Accommodations) and 20.4' feet to pavement;
g. a rear (south) setback of 61.1 feet to building (OA) and zero ft. to
pavement (parking area near RAD);
h. 380 parking spaces;
i. Direct access to an arterial road; and
j. approval of a two year development order;
as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Section 2-
803.0 of the Code; and
General Apalicability Criteria
The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale bulk
coverage density and character of adjacent properties on which it is located.
The property is the site of the former Holiday Inn Sunspree which was approved previously as a
condominium project. In Spring 2014, the City Council approved a designation of Hotel Density
Reserve Units on the site that will provide for a Resort Attached Dwelling Unit building and an
Overnight Accommodations building. The properly is located on South Gulfview Boulevard in
the Clearwater Pass District of Beach By Design. It is surrounded by other tourist-zoned
property. Immediately to the west is an existing hotel. To the east is the Clearwater Pass bridge.
Across the street is commercial retail area. The proposed use as overnight accommodations and
resort-atta.ched dwellings is consistent with Beach By Design and in harmony with the
surrounding properties. The property received units from the hotel density reserve, at which
point an exhibit was provided that includes a massing of the building and the height of the
building as compared to other surrounding properties. An updated Massing Study is included in
the architectural plans submitted with this application and the compliance with Beach by Design
is more thoroughly discussed in the Design Guidelines responses herein. The location of the
property will serve as the anchor to the South Gulfview Boulevard — either the first new
development upon arriving at the Beach via the Clearwater Pass Bridge, or the last property prior
to leaving Clearwater Beach via the Clearwater Pass Bridge.
2
2. The proposed development will not hinder or discourage the appropriate
development and use of adjacent land and buildings or significantly impair the
value thereof.
The proposed mixed use as overnight accommodations and resort-atta.ched dwellings with
accessory uses including a grill, pool area, and event lawn does not negatively impact or
discourage the adjacent land and buildings or impair the value of those buildings; rather, this
property has sat vacant for several yeazs and the development of the property will instead
create an end-cap of development and high-end construction on South Clearwater Beach. The
Clearwater Pass District in Beach by Design is a mix of commercial and smaller overnight
accommodation properties. Along S. Gulfview Blvd., the hotels are greater in size and
provide additional options to tourists. It will further enhance the beach through superior
architectural design and lush landscaping; an inviting area for pedestrians; increased property
values through the construction of a$57,000,000 project on a vacant parcel; a hotel operated
by Ocean Properties, Ltd., a well-known and reputa.ble company, will attract additional
tourists; and hotel guests are potential clientele of nearby restaurants and other beach
businesses.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety or
persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
There is no adverse impact to the health or safety of persons in the neighborhood; rather, new
sidewalks, landscaping and development will have a positive impact on those who live and work
on South Clearwater Beach.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion. The
development is situated adjacent to the access to the Clearwater Pass bridge.
The entrance to the development is located sufficient distance from the access to the bridge and
the design and geometry of the parcel creates ample area for cars to circulate within the
development. The property design includes access management controls, a parking garage,
parking close to the entrances of the uses, and places for the delivery of supplies to the project.
A traffic study was previously provided in conju.nction with the approved Development
Agreement.
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
The proposed overnight accommodations is one of several new hotels constructed on South
Gulfview Boulevard, and the addition of the resort-attached dwelling facility on the same parcel
creates a unique project that provides for long-term and short-term sta.ys in the tourist district of
Clearwater Pass. The height of the buildings is consistent with the balance of the community.
Immediately to the west of the project, a proposed project is approved at 150 feet tall.
The property is located within and at the southern end of the "Clearwater Pass District" of
Clearwater Beach giving it a very visible location at the south end "Beach Walk." 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 west is the Gulf of Mexico and the paxcel to the north is the
bridge, commercial area, and additional hotels.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse impacts, including
visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent
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
gaxage design will keep vehicles off of S. Gulfview as sufficient stacking and parking is provided
on site.
The property is situated between an existing hotel and the Clearwater Pass bridge. The proposed
parking garage is adjacent to the existing hotel to minimize any impact of the operation of the
hotel and resort-attached dwellings on the site. Otherwise, only those on boats will have a visual
impact to see the property and its landscaping, pool area and rear of the two buildings. To the
south, the property is bordered by South Gulfview Boulevard, and across the street from various
commercial and retail facilities.
Response to Criteria - Comprehensive infill redevelopment projects.
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations
from the use and/or development standards set forth in this zoning district;
The proposed deviations from Code, which are discussed herein, are necessary and minimal
deviations to Code to accommodate the proposed mix of uses. 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 into a hotel use is highly visible from the
Clearwater Pass Bridge and is an integral part of the City's vision of Clearwater Beach as set
forth in Beach by Design.
The setbacks to pavement proposed are less than what would otherwise be required by the
Tourist zoning district for either a Resort Attached Dwelling or Overnight Accommodation Use.
The geometry of the site creates a long from setback along the north and east boundaries of the
site but as the east side is adjacent to undeveloped right of way, the site data table identifies the
front setback as only the area along S. Gulfview Blvd and the east boundary of the site as a side
setback adjacent to the city's undeveloped right of way adjacent to and under the Clearwater
Pass Bridge.
�
It is noted that the setback to the seawall is required to be 18 ft. consistent with the Pinellas
County Coast Construction Code. The applicant acknowledges that either improvements to
the seawall must be made or that the Flood Board of Adjustment must grant relief for
improvements within this 18 ft. in addition to the approvals granted as a result of this
application.
Hei�ht. The increased height was granted as part of the development agreement process and
consistent with the approved Development Agreement and Beach by Design due to the grant of
units from the hotel density reserve and is appropriate as to the RAD building due to the transfer
of density of various units (this application includes the use of twelve units previously
transferred to the site). The building height for both the Resort Condominiuxn and the Hotel is
150 feet from minimum flood elevation to the top of roofline, and the distances between
buildings (both on and off site) meet all separation requirements for the portions of the buildings
over 100 feet in height, as allowed by Beach by Design. The impact of the height is mitigated by
the significant setback of the tallest part of the hotel which has affront setback of 79.9 ft.
The applicant is not requesting any deviation to lot size, lot width or other dimensional standard
except as referenced herein. However, direct access to an arterial road is required and requested,
as identified in Beach by Design, due to the location of the property along S. Gulfview Blvd.
The fire truck turnaround is proposed to be located within the City's right of way. A prior
approval on this site included a similar turnarou.nd with preliminary approval of an easement to
accommodate this turnaround. Any approval by the City will require an easement or other
agreement to provide access in this area of the right of way.
While there is a grill proposed on the property, it is accessory to both this resort-attached
dwelling, as well as the overnight accommodations use. It is separate from the property, and yet
is still less than 15% of the site. The parking was calculated using the Code minimum of 1.2 for
overnight accommodation and 1.5 of Resort Attached Dwellings resulting in required parking of
361 spaces and 38$ provided.
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 development or redevelopment will be consistent witb the goals and policies
of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as with the general purpose, intent and basic
planning objectives of this Code, and with the intent and purpose of this zoning
district;
The proposed development is consistent with the City's Community Development Code
(Tourist District), Comprehensive Plan (Resort Facilities High land use), and Beach by
Design. It provides overnight accommodation units on the main commercial area of
Clearwater Beach as well as units that can be used for full-time residents, time shares, or
transient stays based on the Code's definition of Resort Attached Dwelling. Specific
Comprehensive Plan policies which support the project include:
E
Marquesas is designated as the Resort Facilities High plan classification on the Future Land Use
Map and the proposed development is consistent with the intent, uses, density and intensity of
that plan category as outlined in Future Land Use Element Goal A.2, Objective A.2.2 and Policy
A.2.2.1 and its Table of Plan Classifications.
All public utilities and services are available to the site and the project is concurrent with regard
to the provision of public utilities and services as required by Future Land Use Element Goa1
A.4, Objective A.4.1 and Policv A.4.1.1.
Marquesas is located on Clearwater Beach which is designated as an "Activity Center" pursuant
to Future Land Use Element Goal A.S, Objective A.5.1 and Policv A.5.1.1. "Activity Centers"
are defined as "high intensity, high- density multi-use areas designated as appropriate for
intensive growth..." and the Marquesas mixed use project with a combination of an Overnight
Accommodations and Resort Attached Dwellings is consistent with the purpose of the Activity
Center.
Additionally, Marquesas is located within the geographic area governed by Beach By Design: A
Preliminary Design for Clearwater Beach and Design Guidelines and the project is consistent
with Future Land Use Element Goal A.6, Objective A.6.1 and Policy A.6.1.3. Further, Beach by
Design established a Hotel Density Reserve through which the Marquesas received an allocation
of hotel rooms by the Clearwater City Council in February, 2014. This Flexible Development
Application is consistent with the approval of the additional hotel rooms and with the specific
requirements of the Density Reserve as stated in Beach by Design.
The site of Marquesas was previously developed with an outdated hotel and the redevelopment
of the site as a mixed use project is consistent with Future Land Use Goal A.6. Objective A.6.1
and Policies A.6.1.1 and A.6.1.2 through the use of innovative planning tools including the
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project use, the density bonus for additional hotel rooms,
the use of transfer of development rights and compliance with Beach by Design's Design
Guidelines.
The redevelopment of Marquesas will make a substantial contribution to the tourist economy of
Clearwater Beach by increasing the supply of overnight accommodation rooms and introducing
one of the first developments to include Resort Attached Dwellings, demonstrating compliance
with Future Land Use Goal A.6, Objective A.6.6 and Policies A.6.6.1 and A.6.6.2.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding properties;
The property was formerly a large hotel which was demolished in anticipation of a
condominium redevelopment. This proposal fits with the tourist-nature of the beach and the
location as the entrance to the residential area of Sand Key and the azea south of Clearwater
Pass Bridge. The development of this property is consistent with the redevelopment of other
hotels along S. Gulfview Blvd. The site has a linear shape with a significant amount of
�
frontage along S. Gulfview, unlike the balance of the properties in the Cleawrater Pass
character district which have a more box-like shape; therefore, the typicallarge, boxy structure
on top of a parking garage approved on many of the S. Gulfview properties is an undesirable
design on this site. The design pairs two similar buildings with a sma11, modern grill
accessory to the hotel between the two structures and in close proximity to the shared
amenities such as the pool, cabanas, and event lawn.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the
proposed development;
The property is situated at the base of S. Gulfview Blvd. and creates an endcap for the
redevelopment of the Clearwater Pass and Beach Walk character districts. It is surrounded by
a commercial mix of properties as follows:
West. Another hotel is planned for the property to the west that was approved through the
City's Hotel Density Reserve process. An existing hotel operates on the site.
North. To the north is S. Gulfview Boulevard and across the right of way is a commercial mix
of uses including a drug store, restaurant/bar, retail.
South. The property is bounded by the Gulf of Mexico and Clearwater Pass.
East. The Clearwater Pass Bridge and city right of way is to the east of the property. East of
the bridge is a commercial parcel and predominantly residential uses, making the siting of the
RAD on this portion of the property a natural transition to the residential areas.
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate
compliance with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum
standard, flexible standard or flexible development use;
b. The proposed use would be a significant economic contributor to the city's
economic base by diversifying the local economy or by creating jobs;
c. The development proposal accommodates the expansion or redevelopment
of an existing economic contri6utor;
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.
The proposed mixed use meets several of these criteria. Overnight accommodations are
permitted by the "Resort Facilities High" land use category and in the "Tourist" zoning district as
a minimum standard, flexible standard and flexible use. Redevelapment of Clearwater Beach is
7
a significant economic contributor to the City. For over ten years, the property has not
contributed to the economy as it was closed to guests while the chain of owners worked with the
City to permit a feasible project. 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 by providing a significant
construction project and then operationally, the hotel and RAD will require over 100 full time
and part time employees for its continued operation. As previously discussed in General
Applicability Criteria 1 and Comprehensive Infill Criteria 4 the proposed project is compatible
with the surrounding uses.
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses
permitted in this zoning district;
The proposed mixed use development hotel and resort accommodation buildings are
consistent with the surrounding properties and will not impact the redevelopment of those
properties. The property to the east has already been approved with a 150 ft. hotel structure
consistent with the Beach by Design. The proposed use is a use permitted in the Tourist
zoning district without this approval. Across S. Gulfview is a commercial strip center that will
benefit from additional guests and patrons.
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines
adopted by the city;
The proposed development complies with the applicable design guidelines, as demonstrated in
the responses to the design criteria, below. The project layout preserves some view corridors of
the neighbors to the east (across the rights of way) and places the pool/recreational area in the
center of the project site to reduce noise transmission and visua.l distraction to the adjacent
properties. The location of the units on the site provides a11 units in the project with water views
and provides easy access for all guests to the public right of way 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. A further explanation of compliance with the design guidelines is outlined
below.
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
The design is consistent with the hotels on the water side of S. Gulfview Blvd as well as
visually when you look across the Clearwater Pass Bridge with the condominiums located on
Sand Key.
8
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, 6alconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
• Variety in materials, colors and textures;
• Distinctive fenestration patterns;
• Building stepbacks; and
• Distinctive roofs forms.
There are a number of balconies, building undulations, stepbacks and roof features as shown
on the architectural forms that make this building look unique to the other buildings on the
beach. The more modern design of these two buildings and the grill create an interesting
building with visual appeal. There are stepbacks along the building planes as well as balcony
areas that extend from the building plane. These features are replicated by the parking garage
lower levels and elevator bays. A greater explanation of the design guidelines is outlined
below.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced
landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
The landscape plan included herewith shows significant plantings and landscaping that buffer the
development from adjacent rights of way. With so much frontage along right of way, the
landscape architect created specific entry points that will provide a visually appealing property
for pedestrians and vehicular passengers on S. Gulfview Blvd. The project also proposes
landscaping and plantings within the City's right of way adjacent to the Clearwater Pass Bridge
in an area which is currently unmaintainted. After approval of the project, the applicant will
work with the City to develop a suitable landscape plan that will benefit the area and both
parties.
Beach bv Desi� VII, B
Hei�ht and Tower Se arp ation
The project consists of a two towers which are 150ft. tall measured from minimum floor
elevation to the top of the main roof deck and a smaller parking garage structure (74 ft.) that is
part of the overnight accommodation tower located next to the only other developed adjacent
property. Per Beach by Design VII B:
"... the height may be increased, however to one hundred fifry feet (I50 ) if":
• Additional density is allocated to the development by transferred development rights as
discussed previously (See Item 1 page 6) (as to the Resort Attached Dwelling Building) and
the receipt of units from the Hotel Density Reserve (as to the Overnight Accommodations
building).
�
• B.2 (a) Tower separation: No `portions of the building structures which exceed
one hundred feet (100 )(in height) are spaced at Zeast 100' apart." The nearest
structure to the east is separated from the 100' plus portion of the proposed Overnight
Accommodation by the west setback, parking garage and common areas of the hotel
which total more than is approximately 180 ft from the existing, adjacent hotel (proposed
to be more than 100 ft.) and the proposed tower. However, the only structures actually
around the area that are greater than 100 ft. are those two proposed as part of this project
since the adjacent property is not yet constructed. See exhibits in Architectural plans
sheets A0.01, .02, and .03
•"500' rule": Further, the project meets option 1 of B2 as "...no more than two (2)
structures which exceed one hundred feet (100 ) are within five hundred (500')... " for
this project. Both of the structures over 100 ft. located on this property, although within
500 ft. of one another, do not create a noncompliance with this section as to any other
property or development. See sheet A0.03
B.3. b 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 1 SO ; 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 maximum
building envelope allowance above 45' as described in Section C.1.4.
Included with the architectural plans is a massing study that shows compliance with this section.
As the property is so long and uniquely shaped, the m�imum building envelope is significant.
Less than the permitted percentage is included as demonstrated on sheets A3/O5, .06, .07, and
.08. The Hotel floor plate between 100 and 150 feet is 10,728.8 sq. ft.; the RAD floor plate is
10,974.9 sq. ft. Due to the linear nature of the site, and the distance between the towers required
by Beach by Design, the buildings are narrow from the ground, up with the hotel having an"L"
shape of the garage and tower.
Beach by Design VII C
Desi�n. Scale and Mass of Buildin�s
The concept of the building design is generated by the site and the opportunity to maximize
waterfront views to all the guestrooms and the common areas. The buildings' shape is a ta11, thin
structure reminiscent of some of the condominiums on Sand Key. The materials and color of the
building will support the streamline language of the architecture and its natural surroundings.
10
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. Despite the ground level parking on the site, the landscaping is designed to meet the
Beach by Design goal of a pedestrian oriented beach community.
The quantifiable aspects of the architectural vocabulary are as follows per Beach by Design:
• Buildings with a footprint of gr•eater than S, 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
dn length.
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. In addition to these overall
dimensions, the building's modulated massing provides considerable dimensional variation.
There are three buildings on the site that collectively and independently meet this
requirement.
The proposed building footprint of the Hotel is 31,347.00 square feet, the RAD is 19,394.00
square feet, and the Grill is 3,739.00 square feet for a total building footprint of 54,480.00
square feet. The applicant has provided Hotel Sheets A2.11 — A3.80; RAD Sheets A2.10 —
A3.70; and Grill Sheets A2.00 — A3.30.
Overall dimensions: Hotel:
East fa�ade — 84'-8"
North fa�ade — 316'-6"
Height —164'-0"
RAD:
East fa�ade —197'-4"
North fa�ade —103'-8"
Height —167'-8"
In addition to these dimensions the buildings modulated massing provides considerable
dimensional variation. The inclusion of deep recessed and projecting balconies, particularly at
building corners, greatly supports this provision.
No plane (or elevation) of the project "...continue(s) uninterrupted for greater than one
hundred (100 ).
The two towers include significant balconies, undulations, different aspects to create an
interesting facade and a break in the horizontal plane. No portion of any of the buildings
facades continue for more than 100' in length with the single longest facades extending: Hotel —
96'-6", RAD — 71'-9", Grill — 26'-0". Even the hotel's garage, which, while part of the hotel,
appears to have an independent fa�ade, is less than linear feet (93'6").
At least sixty percent (60%) of any elevation will be covered with windows or archztectural
decoration.
11
All of the elevations are provided with large windows or architectural decoration including:
Windows, Doors, Balcony Railing, Stucco Reveals, Extended Slab Edges, Decorative Grills
and Louvers, Accent Colors, and Drystack Stone Veneer. The percentages of decoration on
each of the exterior elevations are as follows, all exceed the minimum requirement of 60%:
Hotel North Fa�ade: 78.5%
Hotel South Fa�ade: 69%
Hotel East Fa�ade: 89%
Hotel West Fa�ade: 95%
RAD North Fa�ade: 61%
RAD South Fa�ade: 61 %
RAD East Fa�ade: 71 %
RAD West Fa�ade: 66%
No more than sixty percent (60%) of the theoretical maximum building envelope located
above 45' will be occupied by a building.
The theoretical building envelope is difficult to calculate for three different structures so the
applicant has provided the calculation for the two main structures independent of one
another. Using the site as a whole, the buildings clearly do not fi1160 percent of the available
area. The exhibits are included in the architectural plans. This is significantly less than the
60% maximum allowed building envelope. The overall building mass for the Hotel is 50%
and for the R.AD is 52%.
• 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 tallest structures are set back from the public right of way and there is
significant landscaping and plantings between the public spaces and the buildings. From the
street, the site will appear park-like due to the lush landscaping. This area of S. Gulfview is
approximately 70 ft. wide and is the point where several vehicular patterns emerge — those
vehicles going northeast to the Bayside, to the residential area, south over the Clearwater
Pass Bridge, or west toward Beach Walk. The site is a"dogleg" shaped and therefore the
three buildings fits proportionally (two tall buildings and one smaller building in center) to
the site and still provides significant open space.
• The site includes a horizontal mix of uses and includes RAD, a grill/resta.urant accessory to
the hotel and RAD, pool and cabana areas, overnight accommodations/Hotel, and a
parking gazage component of the hotel.
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 other approved projects and the south end of
Clearwater Beach. 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
12
"contemporary coastal architecture" compliments the tropical vernacular envisioned in Beach by
Design. The Clearwater Pass character district (within which this property is located) is
described as a"distinctive area of mixed use" and therefore the proposed project which includes
both RAD and Overnight Accommodations fits perfectly in this district. Beach by Design
contemplates that the district is one of strategic revitalization and renovation as evidenced by the
development of this property which has otherwise sat vacant for over ten years.
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.
Many of these elements have been incorporated into the design as discussed in detail in response
to Criteria 6.b. above. There are changes in the horizontal building planes and significant use of
architectural details such as railings and balconies.
The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design
and appropriate distances between buildings.
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
not required as the proposed landscape plan meets or exceeds Code requirements. All sight
triangles have been indicated and will only contain low shrubs or groundcover. There is
landscaping planned in the right of way next to the bridge that will require a maintenance and
license agreement with the City. But, in an effort to create the resort atmosphere contemplated
by Beach by Design, the applicant feels that the proposed landscaping creates an inviting,
pedestrian-friendly environment for the betterment of the beach and the public.
Distances between Buildin�s. The distances between buildings have been discussed in response
to Beach by Design guidelines as set forth in Criteria 6.b and included on the exhibit with the
architectural plans.
Design Criteria E
The proposed buildings provides a modern, streamlined design with an extensive use of glass
and balconies to modulate the overall mass of the building facades. Additional use of stucco
reveals, decorative grills, dry stack stone veneer, various shapes and colors adds depth and
dimension to the building mass. The inclusion of deep recessed and projecting balconies,
particularly at building corners, greatly supports this provision. The building entrances are
marked with a porte-cochere area and landscaping.
13
Design Criteria F
The hotel parking garage is completely integrated into the building and site via the use of
openings with decorative railings and grills, stucco reveals and decorative dry stack stone veneer.
The structured parking located on the first floor of the RAD building is also completely
integrated into the design of both the building and site via the use of a glass and aluminum entry
feature, stucco reveals and decorative dry stack stone veneer. The balance of the parking is
surface parking and is separated from the pedestrian areas by landscaped buffers as shown on the
landscape plans.
Design Criteria -Signage (G) — the applicant will apply for signage separate from this approval.
Design Criteria Sidewalks (H) — the applicant proposed sidewalks consistent with the eight-foot
sidewalks which are currently along S. Gulfview Blvd. in this area.
Design Criteria l(street furniture) — no street furniture is proposed at this time.
Design Criteria J(street lighting) — no change in street lighting is proposed at this time.
Design Criteria K(fountains) — a fountain is proposed as shown on the landscape plans.
Design Criteria l(materials and colors) - The building will be painted Sherwin Williams "Ibis
White" accented by "Sole"' and "Baguette". The window mullions, railings, decorative grills
and louvers will be finished in azchitectural bone white. Window and balcony railing glass will
be "Evergreen" by Viracon. Decorative dry stack stone veneer will be Eldorado Stone
"Mesquite Cliffstone". A specific color palette sample is included in the application.
********************
�n
5992579v3
Drainage Report Narrative
General Overview:
The proposed site is (ocated on a 5.31 acre within the City of Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida
(Section 17, Township 29 south, Range I S east). The site is located at the southern end of Clearwater
Beach, and is bordered by Clearwater Pass on the south, Gulf Boulevard and the Sand Key Bridge to the
north and east respectively. The site had previously received site plan approval as Marquesas
Condominiums (f.k.a. Sunspree) consisting of 149 residential units and associated parking garage,
however that approval has since expired, prior to that the site was being utilized as a Holiday Inn Hotel.
The proposed site will now consists of a 208 room hotel and associated parking garage, a restaurant
(accessory use to the hotel) and a 74 unit resort attached dwelling. Parking for the resort attached
dwellings will be provided by onsite parking and first floor parking garage within resort attached
dwelling building.
Soil Survey Information:
According to the SCS Soil Survey of Pinelias County, Florida, the soil found onsite is Made Land (Ma).
Flood Zone Information:
According to FEMA Flood Information Rate Map number 12103C0104G, the project is located within
zone AE (NAVD 88 elevation 11).
Existing Conditions:
The site is currently being utilized as a sales center with a one-story building and associated parking,
prior to that the site conta.ined a Holiday Inn Hotet, with one 10 story building and one 2 story building.
The previous hotel consists of five drainage basins, of which three basins drain to the City's storm sewer
system (by sheet-flow out to Gulfview Boulevard or pipes). The site previously discharges 8.9 cfs of
stormwater runoff to the City's stormwater system, for the 25 year/24 hour storm event. The remaining
two basins discharge into Clearwater Pass (by sheet-flow and pipes).
Proposed Conditions;
The proposed site wi(l divided into four drainage basins. Two of the basins will direct runoff to
underground vaults, one basin will utilize a stormwater pond and one basin (pool area) will direct runoff
to a filter bed system. Roof runoff will be directed to either the underground vaults or the stormwater
pond. Stormwater inlets will collect the runoff in paved areas, while yard drains will collect runoff
around the pool. Each of these basins will provide treatment for the first 3/," of runoff. The underground
vaults, stormwater pond and the filter bed will utilize etiluent filtration (filter drains). The filter drain
systems will be sized to treat the required volume of runoff and meet the City of Clearwater's drawdown
requirement of 24 hours. Greases and oiis will be addressed by skimmers in the proposed pond and
vaults. A 25-year, 24 haur storm will be routed through all the stormwater facilities. The proposed
vaults and the pool filter system will discharge directly to Clearwater Pass through pipes. No regulated
discharge to Clearwater Pass is required. The proposed stormwater pond will discharge to the City's
stormwater system. Discharge from this pond will be regulated to a.n amount that is less than the pre-
developed dischazge, 8.9 cfs (for the 25 year/24 hour storm event).
Operation and Maintenance:
The owner of the property will be responsible for operating and maintaining the proposed stormwater
system.
Marquesas Color and Material Palette
Glass: Viracon VRE8-54 "Evergreen"
Paint, Primary: Sherwin Williams
SW7000 "Ibis White"
Paint, Accent: Sherwin Williams
SW6896 "Sole"'
Paint, Accent: Sherwin Williams
SW6123 "Baguette"
Dry Stacked Stone Veneer: Eldorado
Stone "Mesquite Cliffstone"
Curts Gaines Hall Jones Architects, Inc.
CITY OF CLEARWATER
Response to Comments — Marquesas, LLC
FLD2014-11031 -- 715 S. Gulfview Blvd.
Engineerin� Review Prior to Buildin Permit:
1. Please provide the following notes on the demolition sheet:
- All utilities sha11 be cut and capped prior to demolition. The Wastewater
Supervisor shall be notified.
Response: Acknowledged. Note has been added to the Demolition Plan (Sheet 4 of 12)
that all existing utilities shall be protected during demolition.
Water meters, double-detector checks and backflow preventers are owned by the
City of Clearwater. The City shall remove and retain these items. **SEE PAGE
40 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. Note has been added to the Demolition Plan (Sheet 4 of 12).
En ineering Review General Comments:
1. If the proposed project necessitates infrastructure modifications to satisfy site-specific
water capacity and pressure requirements and/or wastewater capacity requirements, the
modifications shall be completed by the applicant and at their expense. If underground
water mains and hydrants are to be installed, the installation shall be completed and in
service prior to construction in accordance with Fire Department requirements. ** SEE
PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged.
En ineering Review Prior to Community Development Board:
The existing ingress/egress easement generally running along the southern property line
and the drainage easement are not shown on the plans. Please show them on the plans. As
per Section 3-1909, Easements, Section D, no permanent structures, including masonry
or block fences, shall be located in an easement. Should the applicant desire to have these
easements vacated, please contact Chuck Lane at Charles.Lane@myclearwater.com or at
727-727-562-4754. ** SEE PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Both easements are on the Boundary Survey and are now shown also
on Sheets 5, 6 and 7 of the Civil Plans. Based on conversations at DRC, the applicant will apply
for the vacation of the drainage easement as it is no longer used by the City and the proposed
RAD parking area impacts the defined easement area. The southern easement for access to the
beach area is not impacted as the easement is for the 50 ft. seaward of the seawall and there are
no improvements contemplated seaward of the seawall at this time.
En ing eerin� Review Prior to Buildin P�:
1. 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 properiy where reclaimed
water distribution facilities are available. If potable water is currently used for irrigation,
then a connection to the reclairned water line in Gulfview Boulevard shall be esta.blished.
**SEE PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. A note has been added to the Utilities Plan (Sheet 7 of 12).
En ing; eering Review Prior to Buildin Pg ermit:
1. As per Community Development Code Section 3-1202, D.2 Perimeter Buffers, front
slopes of stormwater retention areas may comprise up to 50 percent of any required
landscape buffer width, provided that the slope is 4:1 or flatter and all required shrub
plantings are not more than six inches below the top of the bank and provided that the
buffer width is at least five feet in width. **SEE PAGE 147 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. See Landscape Plans.
En in��? Review Prior to Certificate of OccupancX:
1. If any easements are vacated, they shall be vacated prior to Certificate of Occupancy.
** SEE PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. The Applicant will apply to vacate the drainage easement
prior to Certificate of occupancy.
Environmental Review General Notes:
1. DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additiona.l comments may be
forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application.
Response: Acknowledged.
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).
Response: Acknowledged.
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. **SEE PAGE 37 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged
Environmental Review
Provide erosion control measures on plan sheet and provide notes detailing erosion control
methods. **SEE PAGE 40 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Please see erosion/turbidity control, clearing and site preparation and de-watering
notes on Sheet 2 of 12.
Environmental Review
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. ** SEE
PAGE 42 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. This will be documented prior to building permit.
Fire Review
Must 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, 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, Pressurized Stairwells, Stairwell marking and
Elevator Lobbies. Please acknowledge PRIOR TO CDB. **SEE PAGE 43 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged.
Fire Review
Must meet the requirements of NFPA 241 Standard for Safeguarding Construction, Alteration,
and Demolition Operations 2004 Edition. NFPA 241 deals with construction site safety and
requires that infrastructure such as water supply and FD access are provided at all times. Also
requires that a usable stair go up as the building progresses and that at least 1 of the standpipes or
a temporary standpipe go up as the building rises floor by floor. Please acknowledge. PLEASE
ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO CDB **SEE PAGE 43 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged
Fire Review
Must Comply with Ordinance No. 47.053 Radio System Regulations for buildings, insta11911
Radio Repeater / Antenna Booster System ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO CDB. **SEE PAGE
43 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged
Fire Review
All Fire Department Connections shall be identified by a sign that states No Parking, Fire
Department Connection will need to identify which building it supplies and sha11 be designed in
accordance with Florida Department of Transportation standards for information signage and be
maintained with a clearance of 7 1/2 feet in front of and to the sides of appliance as per Florida
Fire Prevention Code 2010 edition. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO CDB. ** SEE PAGE 43 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged
Fire Review
Knox Boxes and Knox Locking Caps for F.D.C.(s) Will be required for all the buildings. You
can order on line at WWW.KnoxBox.Com ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO CDB. **SEE PAGE
43 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged.
Fire Review
Fire Hydrant Assembly must be located on an unrestricted water main and must connect prior to
BFP. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO C.D.B. **SEE PAGE 43 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged.
Fire Review
Must meet the requirement of NFPA 1 2009 edition section 18.2.3.4.4 Dead Ends. Emergency
Vehicle Turnaround must be no less than 48 feet in length and no less than 20 feet in width.
Dimensions not shown on plan. PROVIDE DETAILS. ACKNOWLEDGE PRIOR TO C.D.B.
**SEE PAGE 43 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Please see dimensions added to Site Plan (Sheet 5 of 12) and Paving, Grading and
Drainage Plan (Sheet 6 of 12).
Land Resource Review
Provide a tree preservation plan for any palms on site to be retained, as well as for any adjacent
palms or trees which may be impacted. The adjacent palms on the north property line must be
protected. **SEE PAGE 39 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. There are no trees remaining onsite.
Land Resource Review
Provide a ta.ble of the inches to be removed on the site, and a table of proposed inches to be
planted. ** SEE PAGE 147 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. See additional note on landscape plans sheet; there less than 6
viable palm trees on the property and a11 will be removed.
Land Resource Review
There is a lot of landscaping and other improvements in the public Right of Way. Clarify how
this is being coordinated. **SEE PAGE 147 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: The applicant has proposed landscaping in the right of way and is willing to work
with the city to enter into a right of way permit to install and maintain such landscaping as a
benefit to the City and the project. The applicant acknowledges that the CDB will not approve
this landscaping at this time.
Parks Review
Correct site data table to reflect what was previously on property (hotel/motel, # of units, etc.).
Response: Land Use Data (cover sheet) has been revised to show this information.
Open space/recreation impact fees are due prior to 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. **SEE PAGE 37 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged.
Planning Review
Application (page 3 of 8): The number of residential units is listed as 174 when it should be just
74. Please revise. It seems to be correct everywhere else, though. ** SEE PAGE 3 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. See revised application.
Planning Review
Gen. App. Criterion 1- Please provide a massing study for the resort atta.ched dwelling. Maybe
include a brief discussion as to the vision of the South Beach/Clearwater Pass District and the
pattern and types of development in the surrounding area. **SEE PAGE 27 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Per DRC, the massing study was previously provided and again for review. See
response above regarding massing study and the architectural plans sheet A3.70, A3.80 (Hotel)
and A3.80, A4.10 (RAD).
Planning Review
Gen. App. Criteria 2 through 6- No comments. **SEE PAGE 27 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged.
Planning Review
CIRP Criterion 1- First, make sure that we refer to the proposed use of the site as a mixed use
(the specific uses which make up the mixed use are overnight accommodations and resort
attached dwellings). Second, I'm not sure that the proposed setbacks to building and/or pavement
are inconsistent with Level I Flexible Standard parameters. I think that the trigger is height. With
that said, it's not accurate to provide that the applicant is not requesting any deviation to any
dimensional standards - you are asking for flexibility with regaxd to height. I would not state that
the proposal complies with Beach by Design to the fullest extent possible - it either complies or
there is a problem. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the proposal complies with all
applicable portions of Beach by Design. In fact, it really needs to. Add the front (north) setback
to the hotel building itself. It is important to note that the eight-story garage is at 23 feet but
equally important to note that the 15-story hotel is about 100 feet back. The grill is not separate
from the property - it is, as I understand on the same property unless there is a lot split going on
that we need to know about. **SEE PAGE 29 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. See revised narrative included as Exhibit B to application.
Planning Review
CIRP Criterion 2- Please provide any evidence that the proposal is consistent with applicable
Goals, Objectives and Policies from the Comprehensive Plan. **SEE PAGE 30 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. See revised narrative included as Exhibit B to application.
Planning Review
CIRP Criterion 3- Clarify in what way the property is "odd-shaped". While not a perfect
rectangle it is generally rectangular in shape and, more importantly, it is large. I think that, to
address this criterion, you will want to focus more on how adjacent properties have been
developed or, as appropriate, how they are proposed to be developed and then also reference the
vision of Beach by Design with regard to the specific character district. **SEE PAGE 30 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. See revised narrative included as Exhibit B to application. The
property bends along the right of way and the seawall that creates the practical rear of the
property bends as well making a crescent shape that has frontage along S. Gulfview Blvd. and
the Clearwater Pass Bridge right of way. The only "square" side is the west side adjacent to
another hotel.
Planning Review
CIRP Criterion 4- It may be worthwhile to mention what effect the proposal will have on
surrounding uses such as retail and restaurant as opposed to the effect that the current conditions
may have (ie. probably positive). You should also provide a few additional details. For example,
you mention that another hotel is planned for the property to the west. Maybe you should link the
scale and scope of that hotel to this proposal. **SEE PAGE 30 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. See revised narrative included as Exhibit B to application.
Plannin� Review
CIRP Criterion 5- Again, the use of the site is mixed use. The individual components which
make up the proposed mixed use are overnight accommodations and resort attached dwelling. In
addition, there are no Minimum Standard uses in the T district. Generally speaking, be more
specific in your response. You mention that the proposed use "meets several of these criteria". It
really should be "objectives" and probably you want to focus on objectives a, b and possibly c.
Please revise your response accordingly. Clarify how many new jobs are expected to be created
by the proposal. **SEE PAGE 31 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. See revised narrative included as Exhibit B to application.
Planning Review
CIRP Criterion 6- Again, the use is a mixed use. In subsection 6a you reference a tall hotel
structure approved on property to the east. You probably mean to the west and you should
reference the approved height on that building. In subsection 6b you reference compliance with
the design guidelines. There should be a separate narrative that provides a full discussion of the
guidelines and you can just reference that here. In subsection 6c you should include a brief
reference to the vision of the South Beach district and how the proposal supports that vision and
you could reference proposed and built developments in the area. For subsection 6d you could
probably also reference the narrative to the Design Guidelines which should have been submitted
in addition to what you provided here. For subsection 6e you could also consider adding a brief
discussion which talks about setbacks from property lines and from other buildings (both on and
off site) and distances between buildings (both existing and proposed). Since you aze basing a
good deal of your response to this criterion on landscaping within the public right-of-way is it
sa% to assume that you've already discussed this with Engineering? ** SEE PAGE 31 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. See revised narrative included as Exhibit B to application.
Planning Review
BBD: Provide a section-by-section narrative addressing each part of the Design Guidelines
Section A through L. If a particular section is not applicable, for example Section K Fountains,
because a fountain is not proposed, then this would simply be addressed as not applicable
because fountains are not proposed with the development. The only bit that was included was
subsections B and C. **SEE PAGE 33 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. See revised Exhibit B to application.
Plannin.� Review
BBD: Provide a clear graphic depiction that indicates that the proposal complies with Section B
of the Design Guidelines with regazd to the 100 foot minimum separation between any portions
of building which exceed 100 feet in height and either Option 1 or 2. I do see that one of the
CIRP criteria provides that a massing study is included with the architectural plans but I didn't
see it. **SEE PAGE 33 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: See response above regarding massing study and the architectural plans sheet A3.70,
A3.80 (Hotel) and A3.80, A4.10 (RAD).
Plannin�; Review General:
Clarify if any fencing or wa11s are proposed and if so please provide deta.ils such as height, color
and materials. **SEE PAGE 36 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: There are no specific fences or walls proposed in the project except for screening
materials and those will be consistent with the architectural features of the project. Per the
architectural plans, the equipment near the Grill is screened with nnetal panels consistent with the
architectural deta.ils on the building.
Planning Review General:
Clarify if valet parking will be provided for any component of the project. **SEE PAGE 36 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: The site plan provides sufficient parking for guests to self-park. Operationally, the
hotel may choose to offer some level of valet parking in the future. There are parking places
located near the entrance to the hotel for check-in and internal and external access to the parking
garage, as needed.
Planning Review General:
Clarify how mechanical equipment will be located and screened from view. ** SEE PAGE 36
ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Mechanical Equipment will be located as close to the center of the roof as possible
and employ architectural elements (parapets, stair towers, elevator penthouses, etc.) to conceal it
from view per Development Code Standards, Section 3-903.1 Mechanical Equipment. The Grill
Building employs additional metal screen panels as this is a one story building.
Please refer to Roof Plan and Elevation sheets for clarification of equipment location and
position and heights of parapets, sta.ir towers and elevator penthouses. Refer to Sheets A2.80,
A3.10, A3.20, A3.30 and A3.40 Hotel, A2.50, A3.10, A3.20, A3.30 and A3.40 RAD building,
A2.20, A3.10, A3.20, A3.30, for the Grill building.
Planning Review General:
Do you have an estimate on how many jobs may be created with the proposal? **SEE PAGE 36
ON DOCUMENT.
Response: There is a significant economic impact from the construction of the project and the
continued operation of the hotel and RAD upon completion. More than 100 full and part time
jobs will be created for the continued operation of the project.
Plannin��Review General:
Clarify if there are any rooftop activity spaces proposed. I didn't notice any but I thought I'd
double check. **SEE PAGE 36 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: No rooftop activities are proposed; however, there is parking on the top deck of the
parking garage.
Planning Review General:
I didn't see mention of it so I am assuming that the request is for a one-year Development Order
rather than a two-year. Just confirming you are only asking for a one-year DO. **SEE PAGE 36
ON DOCUMENT.
Response: The request has been revised for a two-year development order. See revised
application Exhibit B.
Plannin� Review Site Plan Sheet 1/12:
The heights have been left out of the site data. table (just the foot and inches symbols are
provided). **SEE PAGE 37 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Heights of each proposed building have been added to Land Use Data on cover sheet
(1 of 12).
Planning; Review Site Plan Sheet 5/12:
Clarify the width of the proposed sidewalk along Gulfview. ** SEE PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Widths of sidewalk are now shown to match existing sidewalk width of 8' (existing
sidewalk east of the proposed right-in/right-out entrance is 5').
Plannin�? Review Site Plan Sheet 5/12:
Clarify why a setback dimension is shown from the front (north) property line to what is shown
to be interior landscaping on the north side of the parking garage. On that note, all that area does
not count as interior vehicular use area landscaping - just the portion adjacent to the parking lot
would count so I'll need that area backed out of the interior landscape calculation. **SEE PAGE
41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Setback and some interior vehicular use area landscaping has been removed.
Planning Review Site Plan Sheet 5/12:
Clarify if any special materials will be used where the sidewalk crosses the driveways. **SEE
PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Currently the intention is to use "special materials" (stamped concrete, etc.) where
the sidewalk crosses the pavement, however, that decision will be made, and details provided to
City sta.ff, at time of Building Permit.
Planning Review Site Plan Sheet 5/12:
Clarify how solid waste is handled for the restaurant. ** SEE PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Solid waste dumpster will be rolled out to the staging area shown on Sheet 5 of 12.
Planning Review Site Plan Sheet 5/12:
Clarify how solid waste will be sta.ged for the hotel. **SEE PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Solid waste at the hotel will be via a compactor. The compactor area, and dimension
available for pick up, have been noted on Sheet 5 of 12.
Plannin� Review Site Plan Sheet 5/12:
Please put some dimensions on the width of the spaces in the round-about to the east of the RAD
- I want to make sure that we're at least nine feet in width. Also show the drive aisle dimension
behind those spaces. **SEE PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Dimensions have been added to Sheet 5 of 12. All spaces have minimum width of 9
feet.
Plannin� Review Site Plan Sheet 5/12:
Clarify the directions of the two driveways. I assume that the west driveway is intended to be
free access ingress/egress and the east driveway is limited access right-in/right-out. **SEE
PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Directional arrows for the right in /right out driveway have been added to Sheets 5 of
12 and 6 of 12. Also, a"right turn only" sign has been added. The western entrance is "free
access".
Planning Review Elevation Sheet A3.40:
Please provide an overall dimension on the height of the parking garage component of the hotel
building. **SEE PAGE 81 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: See revised plans.
Planning Review Elevation Sheet A3-.40:
Is the eight floor of the parking garage open or covered? ** SEE PAGE 81 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: The eighth floor of the parking garage is open.
Planning; Review Sheet L3.00:
I see that there is a lot of landscape material proposed to be located within the r-o-w. This needs
to be cleared with Engineering and will need some sort of agreement of maintenance. **SEE
PAGE 147 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: As stated above, the applicant anticipates entering into an agreement with the City in
the future for the installation and maintenance of landscaping xnaterials in the right of way
adjacent to the Clearwater Pass Bridge.
Plannin� Review
Please note that additional comments may be generated at or subsequent to the DRC meeting
based on responses to DRC comments.
Response: Acknowledged.
Please carefully review the listed request. It is ultimately the responsibly of the applicant to
ensure that the request reflects what is wanted.
Response: Acknowledged.
In order to be reviewed by the CDB on January 20, 2015, 15 sets (revised as needed) must be
submitted no later than noon December 12, 2104. **SEE PAGE 214 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged. Per DRC and the printed schedule online, the deadline is December
15, 2014.
Planning Review BBD B.2:
In the response you mention that the only structures around the area greater than 100 feet are the
proposed as part of the project. You probably want to define what "around" means. In other
words, may something along the lines of that other than the approved project to the west
(proposed at over 100 feet from the hotel building) the nearest other existing building over 100
feet in height is XX feet from the site and the two buildings proposed as part of this project are
XX feet from each other. **SEE PAGE 33 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Please see revised narrative to application, Earhibit B. Due to the width of the site,
the property meets the BBD compliance within itself; despite the fact that there is a proposed
tower on the adjacent property.
Planning Review BBD C:
We really need some massing studies. I think the way to address the theoretically maximum
building envelope above 45 feet is to simply provide a section elevation parallel to Gulfview -
show both buildings should be difficult and the restaurant building shouldn't enter into it since
no portion of that building is over 45 feet. We can't leave it with just a blanket statement that the
building clearly does not fill 60 percent of the available area - it isn't clear without the massing
study. With regard to correlation of height to adjacent public spaces, the response that "the
height and mass of the building are correlated to the parcel and adjacent public spaces as
described above" doesn't actually address the criterion as much as repeat it. I think that a brief
discussion of the r-o-w width and setback distances and heights should be made. For example,
you might mention that the adjacent South Gulfview Boulevard right-of-way is 70 feet in width.
The closest point of the hotel building 150 feet in height to the north (front) property line is 100
feet. The shorter portion of the hotel (the eight-story garage) is 23 feet from this property line.
The RAD building is 69 feet from the Gulf Boulevard right-of-way and nearly 100 feet from the
edge of the roadway/bridge. On that note it should be mentioned that at this point Gulf
Boulevard does become an elevated road way; the Sand Key Bridge. With regard to the guideline
concerning mixed use, the project itself is a mixed use (a combination of residential and non-
residential) so not only is the guidelines applicable the project is supported by it. For some
reason you've incorporated Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project criterion 6d (as 6b)
here. **SEE PAGE 35 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: A massing study was provided and is again included in the submittal. Additionally,
the applicant has created updated exhibits that show distances from the roadways and property
boundaries more cleazly to show compliance with Beach by Design.
Planning Review Site Plan Sheet 5/12:
Clarify what the features are in the islands at the drop off area at the hotel and the round-about at
the RAD. If they are fountains then you can mention that in your Design Guidelines discussion.
** SEE PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Please see revised exhibit B and landscape plans.
Plannin� Review Site Plan Sheet 5/12:
What are the boxes shown along the west side of the RAD? I assume they are cabanas or
something like that. Same thing on what I assume to be a pergola or arbor at the south end of the
RAD. **SEE PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Yes. The boxes shown are cabana areas adjacent to the deck of the RAD. The area
on the south end of the RAD is a pergola and additional patio axea.
Planning; Review Sheet L3.00:
Please turn on (grayed out) the underground utility layer on the landscape sheet. I just want to
make sure that there aren't any trees proposed over anything. **SEE PAGE 147 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged.
Planning Review Elevation A3.10 RAD:
Clarify the height please. One dimension shows a height of 150 feet. Another shows a height of
152 feet. Another shows a 16 foot overrun for mechanical/stair tower at 168 feet. A 16 foot
overrun should go to 166 feet. I'm sure that a11 this has to do with the difference between BFE
and freeboard distances. I think to simplify things, we need to just measure height just as it is
defined in the CDC -"Where minimum floor elevations in flood prone areas have been
established by law, the building height may be measured as though the required minimum floor
elevations constitute existing grade.". Let's just mark the point at which minimuxn floor
elevations has been establish by law as zero feet and go from there. ** SEE PAGE 98 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: See revised sheet A3.40 which shows the height from minimum floor elevation.
Planning Review Elevation A3.10 RAD:
Are the colors for this building the same as the hotel building? ** SEE PAGE 98 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: Yes the colors are the same. Please refer to Color Elevations Sheets A3.10 — A3.30
Planning Review Sheet 0.00:
I count a total of 388 spaces and this is the same number provided elsewhere in the application
and supporting packet. I count 89 surface spaces where this sheet says 88 spaces and 259 spaces
in the hotel garage where this sheet says 257. Please clarify/correct. **SEE PAGE 152 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: There are 89 surface spaces, 40 spaces on ground floor of the R.AD and 251 spaces
in the parking garage (see clarification on Cover Sheet - 1 of 12). Total number of spaces is now
3 80.
Planning Review Sheet L3.00:
This sheet provides that there is 55,350 square feet of vehicular use area where page two of the
application provides for 49,958 square feet. Please clarify and correct. **SEE PAGE 147 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: There is 49,95$ SF of vehicular use area.
Solid Waste Review
The location of turn around needs to be back east away from dead-end to give enough room for
our 36 foot truck to turn around. Also enclosure also needs to shift 3 parking spaces in the same
direction to line it up with the turn around. Enclosure needs to be built to code using index 701
for design requirements for a double enclosure.
Response: It is our understanding that this issue has been resolved and the layout shown on the
Site Plan is accepta.ble to City staff.
Stormwater Review
Show on and off-site proposed spot elevations ** SEE PAGE 42 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Additional elevations (existing and proposed) have been added to the Paving,
Grading and Drainage Plan (Sheet 6 of 12).
Stormwater Review
Ponds require 6-inches of freeboard from the top of control structure to top of bank. There shall
be 6-inches of freeboard from SHWT to bottom of pond. ** SEE PAGE 42 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: This is a wet pond with 6" of freeboard from the top of the control structure to the
top of bank. Detailed computations will be provided with the Building Permit Application.
Stormwater Review
DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review. Additional comments may be
forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. **SEE PAGE 42 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged.
Stormwater Review
Consider access point for maintenance of stormwater vault ** SEE PAGE 42 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Access points for stormwater vaults are shown on the Paving, Grading and Drainage
Plan (Sheet 6 of 12).
Traffic Review 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 for the new hotel
with credit from demolished structure is $263,056.00.
Response:
It is acknowledged that the Transportation Impact Fees shall be paid prior to the
Certificate of Occupancy. However, our calculation of the fees and credits for the former
hotel and proposed new development are as follows:
CREDITS FEES NETAMOUNT DUE
For Existin Use For New Construction New Fees less Credits
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES
$ 696,136 $ 772,344 $76,208
(217 Resort Hotel rooms x
$3,208/ room) (208 Resort Hotel rooms x
$3,208/ room = $ 667,264
+ 74 Multifamily Residential
units x $1,420/ unit =
$105,080)
Notes•
1. Existing Use was the Holiday Inn Sunspree, a Resort Hotel with 217 rooms.
2. Proposed Use is based on the Flexible Development Application currently under review.
3. Fees and Credits based on Pinellas County Land Development Code, Chapter 150, Article
II, Transportation Impact Fees.
2. DRC review is a prerequisite for Building Permit Review; additional comments may be
forthcoming upon submittal of a Building Permit Application. **SEE PAGE 2 ON
DOCUMENT.
Response: Acknowledged.
Tr�c Review Prior to CDB:
Provide turning template for a scaled 19' long passenger vehicle maneuvering around the
bends, turning vehicle shall not encroach onto opposing lanes or hit any objects.
Response: The Parking Garage meets all codes for sta11 width & depth and aisle width.
Lighting levels in parking garages having public access sha11 meet or exceed the current
minimum Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) standards.
2. The minimum clear height throughout the garage shall be seven feet zero inches and shall
be eight feet two inches for van-accessible parking spaces including ingress and egress
drive aisles to these spaces.
Response: Acknowledged. See revised Architectural Plans.
3. Pedestrian - vehicular conflicts shall be avoided whenever possible. Where unavoidable,
active warning devices such as traffic signals or flashing warning signs/devices andlor
physical barriers such as vehicular actuated gates shall be provided to warn the pedestrian
and slow vehicular traffic.
Response: Acknowledged.
4. Lighting levels in parking garages having public access sha11 meet or exceed the current
minimum Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) standards.
Response: Acknowledged.
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: Acknowledged.
6. Wheel stops shall not be used in parking garages.
Response: Acknowledged. Wheel Stops have been removed.
7. Whenever access control equipment or barrier gates are used at the entrance to a parking
garage, a minimum stacking distance of 40 feet sha11 be provided from the back of
sidewalk to the equipment or barrier gate.
Response: Acknowledged.
8. Show slope of ramps. Maximum speed ramp slope shall not exceed 12 percent. A ten-
foot long transition ramp with a slope equal to one-half of the change in slopes shall be
provided at the bottom and top of all speed ramps with a slope of ten percent or greater.
Response: Acknowledged. Slope is shown on architectural plans.
9. When parking spaces are provided on a ramp, the slope shall be less than 6-percent.
Response: Acknowledged.
* All the above is from Section 3-1402 City's Community Development Code.
10. Strategically place convex mirrors for parking spaces that have vehicles backing out due
to sight visibility obstructions (i.e. elevator walls, shear walls, etc.).
Response: Acknowledged.
11. Submit an updated Traffic Impact Study. **SEE PAGE 53 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: A Traffic Impact Study was provided for the HDA approval this spring and
pursuant to conversations with staff, an updated study is unnecessary. For your information, a
copy of the 2014 study is included with this resubmittal.
Tr�c Review Prior to CDB:
12. Provide an accessible route from public sidewalk to the building's accessible entrance.
Response: See Site Plan (Sheet 5 of 12) and Paving, Grading, Drainage Plan (Sheet 6 of
12) for accessible route.
13. Provide 20' x 20' sight visibility triangles at the driveway(s). There shall be no objects in
the sight triangle over the City's acceptable vertical height criteria at a level between 30
inches above grade and eight feet above grade. (City's Community Development Code,
Section 3-904).
Response: Site visibility triangles have been added to the Site Plan (Sheet 5 of 12).
14. Show vehicle stacking along loading/unloading area under the porte cohere (use scaled
19' long SOV with 2' gap between vehicles). ** SEE PAGE 41 ON DOCUMENT.
Response: Stacking area has been added to the Site Plan (Sheet 5 of 12).
6163693v1
TR.AFFIC IMPACT STUDY
FUR
MARQUESAS
#715 S. GULFVlEW BLVD.
CLEARWATER, FL�I2rDA
PREPARED FOR:
MARQUESAS, LLC
PREPARED BY:
GULF COAST CONSULTING, INC.
JANUARY 2014
PROJECT # 14-001
%,.-�� �``t �,;
t���V�"' "
Robert Pergolizzi, P/PTP
AICP #9023 / PTP # 133
�. nv�ROnucr�o�r
The appticant zs proposing to redevela� thei�� property on Clearwater Beac�. with a
208 raon� resort hotel and 74 �igh x�se resort condominiuni units. (See Fi�ure I}
Tl�e 5.38 acre site is located at # 71S S. Gulfi�iei� Bouievard immediately ad�acent
to the Sand Key Bridg�. The devela�ment flf the property is the subject of a
Developinent Agreen�en# utilizing units frorn the hotel density reserve in the
Tourist "T" ZOT11D� C1kS�CFCf. This applicarion requires an assessment of the #raffic
impacts o€ de��elopxnent. Prior ta cQnipleting tlus �nalysis a methodalog5r was
established with the Ciry af Clean�ater staff.
II. EXISTING TRAFFIC �CUNDITIONS
. The rropert3= has. frontage on S. Gutf��iew,. Bovlevard . Driv� �ast. 4� Ba��way. .
BOUI{,.1'a.TC�.. Sa�zth Gtia]fview Boule�-ard was reeonstn�cted as a two-lane callector
roadway w�th an-street parking running along Clearvvater Beach. Co�xonado Drive
�vas rec;onstructed as a fhr�-lane cQllector raadway wifih on-steeet parku�g except
for a short seg�nent between Devon Drive a��d S. Gulfview Boulevard which is 4-
lanes undivided. Ha�nde� Arive intersects with S. Gulf��iew Bo�evard at a
signalzzed intersection. The segment of S. Cralfi�iew Boulevard hetween Hamden
DzYVe and tJie Clea�-v��a#er Pass Bridge is three lanes, with a srball partion being
four-lanes between Hamden Drive and B�.y�vay Boulevr�rd. Pec the approved
rnetl�octoto�gy tt�f�fic counts tlzat were conduc#ec� on Jzuae 21, 2012 at ihe fallov��in;
intersections during the weekday PM peak period of 46 PM were used as a basis
for tl�is study:
8. Gulfiliew Blvd. ! Hamden Drive
S. Gulfifiew Bh�d. / Coronado Drive
Coronada D�ive / Hamc�en Drive
Al� trai=fic caunts were con��erted to arynnal avera�e equivatents using FDOT
seasonai adjustment factors. Existing i�affic voiume� are shown in Figure 2.
Existing intersections were analyzed using the HCS�- �►nd S�'NCHIZO safii�are.
TI�e ca�urt dat�, �-iCS+ and S'�'NC�IR4 printouts are includetl in Appex�dix A.
Pzesently the szgnalized intersection at S. Gulfview Bou[evard / Goronado Diive
operaxes at LOS A�t�ith a�rerage detay being 6.6 seconds per vehLCle and an
in#ersectian capacity utilization (�CtJ} of �2_S%.
Presently #�ie signalized intersecfiion at S. Culfview Boulevard / Hamden Drive
opexat�s at LCIS A vt�ith average delay beivag 5.7 seeonds per ve�iicle v►�ith ICU of
41.8%.
,
�
�
�
�
�
un�r_u-rv�e�rr_n nv
732 b'Pr; TWO-NWAY
(355 N6. 377 SBi
-,, A�j BLVll
• = TRAfFiC SIGNAL
PROJECT SrTE # 715
EX�STING T'EAK H�li R TRAFFIC
DA7E:
Gil.l� CO� CO!]SL1��D.�� IIIC.
�t�, -" r.�a n�t��t co�s� 1� 201 4
�= nw�.rmmvc nu�oAr�xcox n,erx�c r�m�n�rc
138251COT BLVD., SUIT£ 605
Cleanvater. Flonda ?3760 DR.AWN BY:
Plwnc (i27)52f-I818 Fax ("37} 524•6096
�..g�o����.�m G J S
I
N
PRO)ECT NO�
14-001
FIGURE:
__ �
At �the intersection of IIamden Drive / Coronado 17ri�•e the p;imary moveme�ts
are easibound-to-southbound and norihbau�nd-ta-��es�bound, v��hereas the
southt�ound approach (Hamden Dri�sTe} is stop controll�d. The 1�CS+ aaal�Jsis
shows tlie primary rn.avements aperate at LOS A with detay of 8,2 seconds per
vehicle and the southbound stop-controlled movem�ents operate at L�S C with
delay of 1d.6 seconds per vel�icle.
Sr�utli G�ilfiview Boulev�.rd functaoi�s as collectar roadway and accorciing to
�DC}T 2d09 QLaS I�and3�ook capaci#y tabies has a LOS D capacity of i,440
vehictes per laour on the undi��ided segment. The se�ment of Gulfview Boulevard
east of I�arnden. llrive az�d Coronado Dzive are both ttuee-Ia��e eollector roads
wit6 a LOS D capacit}�T of I,S20 velxicies pe� hour and 2175 veh�cIes per hflur an
the 4-lane portions.. Thc existxn� PM peak haur LOS for areas roadway se�.enEs
is shown belaw:
�E�STING R4ADWAI' CONDITI�NS (20l 3} � �
PM Peatc L4S D
Raadwav Seg�nent Lanes V�lume Capac� LOS
S. Gulfi��iew (E. of Bayway} 3-lanes 878 1520 B
S. Gulf-��iewJ (Byury-Hmdn} 4-laues 1080 2175 C
S. Gu�vie��� {Hamdsn -Sii') 2LU 493 1�40 B
S. C�nlfview (Sth - Caronado)2LU 61 l �440 B
Comizado {Hamden-- 5`�) 2LD 650 1520 B
Coronado (Devon Dr - S. CTuliview) 4LU 967 2175 C
Coronado {Guifview ta Roundaboui) 4LD I556 2900 C
Hamd�n (S. Gulfvie�-Caronado) 2LD 732 1 �2� B
Hamden {N o£ Coronado) 2LU 9b 1{}44 B
�'zesentiy all roadvt�a.}� segnients aperate at LOS C or better.
�I. FUTURE TitAI'FiC CU1vDITIUNS
Existin� t�•ai�c was adjusted by a 2% annual gro��� rate #o the expectecl build-out
yrear �of 2017 to account for background tra�c from other nearby redevelopnnent
prajects_ In addition, �c &om se��era1 appra�s�ed developrnents was added as
backgt�oitnd tra�c; these include the prap�secl Cleart�rater Resor# hotel,the
proposed Harnptan Inii at #55S Gulfiriew, th.e proposed Clearwatex Beach lteso3rt
hote� ai tl3e corrier of S. Cx�ilfview and Cvronado, lhe Sea Captain redevelopment
at #4Q Devon Dri�Je, the proposed Gu�fview Hatel at #625 S. Gutfiriev��, and the
proposed Entxa.da Hotel at #�21 S. Guifi�ie�v Bot�leva3d. Bac�cgrflund traff'ic
volurnes are shawn in Fzgure 3.
The site v��ill be developecl as a 208 xoom r�sort hotel and 74 unit �iah-rise resort
candorninium with associated parking and amenities, Using Ias#iiute of
2
BACKGT�C�U:�1D PEAK HO�JI� r�'�.��FIC: (2417} 114,E001.
��,
CTll� �.'085� L,'QiLS11Tt1II� II1C.
r� ne�aopmmt co�Y
�ewc nur�sroKre�c n�rm�c ecuarnNc
133231C07' SI.VD., SUiTE 605
Clearwiwrr, fiorida 33760
PMme: (72'}524-ISIS Fax (737)534-6090
W W W.gi1�C08StCOnSlllYlIIgjIIC.CO�
DATE:
1 /2014
DRANr'N BY�
GJS
FIGURE•
Transportation Engineers (FTE) Trip Generatio�, 9u' �dition rates, th� ataaauni of
new trips was calcuIsied and estim.ates are sl�ow� below:
TRY�' GENERATI�N ESTIMATES
�and iJse �,mQ�i�� �ai4y '�rips PM Peak Tri,ps _
Resort Hotei xUS Rooms i 699 102 {44/5$)
High-Rise CondominiuFn 74 units 309 2$-l171_1-l�_.
TOTAL 20U& l34 (61Jb9)
The veluc�zlar access will be taken from S. Gi�lfvie�= Boulevaxd via twa
drivevvays. Project traf�c ��clas distribl3led to the roadways based on tl�,e follov��ing
percentages, and is shoK�n in Figule 4.
Gd°/Q to / fram the north {7&}
. . . 44%� to� / fionl the sou� (52} . . . . .
. ... ... . ...
PROJECT IMPAC'1 CALCULATIONS
Froject
Road See�nent Lanes Project Trips Ca,pacitv Percent
S. Gulfvie�v (E. of— Site ) 3-]aues 5� 1520 3.42"�0
S. Gulfview {Site- $ayv�ay) 3-lanes 78 i52p S.I;°:o
S. GW fviw {Bayway-I�arndet�} 4I�U 78 2l 75 3.59%
Coronado {Har.nden — Devon Drw) ?Lll 46 lS2U 3.02°,'0
Coronado(Devon—S.Cnalfiiew) 4LU 46 2175 2.1i%
Coronada {Guifview — Roundabout) 4LD 78 29(14 2.fi9%
Hamden (Guiiview — Coronado) 2LD 46 i 520 3.02°�0
Projeet iraffic in3pacts �ri�i be pri.ma��i�y to S. Gulfview Boulevard, Coronado
Drive aa�d Hamden Drive. All i�tersections, roadwa}� se�nents and project
drive��ays were analyzed for firture canditions. �i�re traffic volumes are showr�
i�i Figure 5, and�the SYl�(CHRO and HCS+ printouts are in�luded in Appenciix B_
'1'�3e si��talized intersection at S. Gulfview Boulevard ! Coronado Drive wouid
cc�z�tinue to operate at LOS A��vitti average delay of 7.4 seconds per vehicle a�d
an intersection capacity utilizatian {ICU} of 55.9%.
The si�atized iniersection at S. Crulf��iew Baulevard / Hauzden Dxive / Drive B
(�TB ap}noach) would operate at LOS B with average delay being 12.2 seca�ds
�err vehicia with ICU o� Sb.8%.
At the interseation af Hamden. Drive ! Coranado Drive, i}te HCS analysis shav�rs
the pri�ary z�zovernents operate at LOS A wit12 delay af 8.7 seconds per vehicle
and the southbound stop-cont�olled movements operate at L4� D u�ith delay af
32.3 seconcls per vehicle.
3
1---1
�
�/�/�
W
�
w
>
�
�
t�
�
��N
�, i
��
�� 1
� N
�� `
„—� �
N
f:�l
�
�
0
0
¢
z
0
x
0
U
�1
n
w
>
a
Q
z
w
�
1��
�.Lr
22�
� �
rt
N N
rv �
--- 17 � L— 2 a
-- t 7
�5--
DEVON DRIVE
..' 4 S_
37y
��
N
BAYWAY BLVD.
/� •� � z� �
! • 20 a 4
� ���
26 � : � {+ , t � : � ��_ d&
■ ¢■ \
� M ■ i
■ W ■
tL� � � �
■ � ■ �
°� c� 3
; S�TE ; �f �
� 30 PM iRIPS � I Q
(61 �N/68 OUT} � (S.'�
..�
V
PROJECT TRAFFI(; D�STRIBU�'ION
DATE:
�f COaS'C COilStllilAg, �ILC.
r.,�a n�op�t co�,�ang 1/ 2 014
�^ II16II� TIA�fA170N TIANI�VC P@�HIII�G
�s
1382i (COT BLVU , SUII'E 605
Cleanvaca, florida 33766 DRAlVTf $Y:
Plwnc (727) 3?4-1818 iu (727) 5?d-fi090
www.gulfcoastconsultinginc.com Ci J cJ
PRO.ILC7 NU:
14-001
FiGURI�:
,
W
�
0
�
�
�
�
Q
O..
�
�
�
O
�
�� �
�
rt
�
C7
Q' �
/ �
�4'•1
c� a
M)'p
-- 396 � +
3�3-� � �
302--; o�
i i �'� M
�
DEVON DR.
�53s vp� 7W'6-WAY
(835 N8. 70n 5�)--�
2ND ST.
?tti) ti l .
srx
m
�
�
C]
c
Q
a
z
0
�
0
J
ST.
u
>
�
�
�wGii�rw�TrR t»z.
z
w
a
� �
� a BAYStDE DR.
� � f
O p9 �� "'
s �,�
� `� �
a
a92 \
� � � -- '097 VPH TtvO-WAY
� 3pt n, o: oo (530 NB, 5"07 SB)
N� ,O �p
O
3�8�` `I , � �-.. a67 ��.��ja[+�`i BLVI)
�- zeo
285 � � � �'z' S36 ` 605
rn v >9q � ""� � 2Q
658-- �
■
6�8a 26 � ■ �'i �
■ �]M�?
t�1 W
■�
� = TRAf��C Sr�t�lqt � �
• �
TOTAL PEAK HQUR TRAFFIC (20 � "�)
DA1'E
Gulf Coast Consulting, inc.
�a n�„�o�,�e c�g 1/ 201 4
r�' •, II rVf�tRIG TRAN6MlTA7WV lLATA�iC 1'SI[ITIIVG
138?5 IC'OT BL1'D.. SUTTL• GOi
Ckanvxer, Fbrida 33760 � DAAWN BY:
Phone (927)524.1818 Far: (7?7)524.6090
.�..�..�.����,����..� G J S
�
N
°6t5
r 4 �
t
3 ---�r
t t --� � � � 6�S
■Q°� �
��
i�
■ �
■ Q
• pRO�cr No:
14-001
r• 1GUKE�
At ihe eastein project cii7veway to S. Guifview Boulevard (Drive A} the
v►.festbound left turns eniering the site ���auld operate ai LOS A with. avei�age delay
of 4.1 seconds �er vehicle, and the �aorthbound approacb exiting the site would
operate at LOS D with airerage delay af 21.7 seconds per �rehicle.
At the western prajeci driveway ta S_ Gutfi�iew Boulevard (�7rive B} the
westbound left turns enter�i�g the site would aperate at LOS � with average deiay
of 9.3 seconds per vehicie, and the northbaund agproach exitiz�g the. site wfluld
o�erate at LOS D w�ith avera�e delay of 33.8 seconds per vehicle.
Future roadwa.}� seginent conclitions w�ith the �roject impacts are shown beiow:
PUTURE ROADWAY CONDITIONS Vi''iTH PROJiCT
PM Peal� LOS D
Roadway Ses�ax�ent Lanes �roiur►ie Ca,�acitv LOS
�. Gulfview (� of Site) 3-�anes i29� i520 C
S. �.rulfview (Site -�3ay��vay) 3-ianes I320 1520 C
S. Gulfview (Byv�y— Hmdn} 4LiJ I�21 2175 C
S. Gulview (Hamden -S'�} 2LU 629 14�t0 B
S. Grutfvier�v (Sth -- Coranada) ZLU 7b9 1440 B
Coroaado (Hamden — 5�') 2LD 929 1524 C
Coranac�o (Dev�n. - Guifview) 4LU 1539 2I 75 C
Coronado (Gulfview� to Roundabout� 4LD 2286 29Q0 D
HamcEen (S. Gulfview-Coronada) 2LD 1 �97 1524 C
Haa3den {N. of Coranado} 2LU 1 S2 1(}40 B
I'�'. CONCLUSIt?N
This analysis r��as conducted in accordance �jit%e a specific methadology
�established with City of Clearwater staff. The pxaject will generate 2008 daily
trips and 130 PM peak hour trips. This analysis demonstra.tes traffic operations at
�ueaab3� intexsec�ions ar�d on adjaceut roadwa3�s would continue at acceptable
levels of service with or withoui the project impacts.
�
J � • � , . A
Robert Perg�lizzi
Frorr�: Robert Pergolizzi
Serrt: Monday, January 06, 2014 4:38 PM
To: himar�shu.patni@MyClearwater.cam
Cr. Katie Cale {kcoie@hwhlaw.com)
Subject: fv�Arquesas
Himanshu -- I got the notice to proceed with the Tra�Ffc Study #or the Marquesas proje�t a# 715 5. Gulfview. The new
project will cantain 208 resort hote) rooms + 7d high-rise conda units with access to S. Gulfview near the 5and �Cey
8ridge.
As we have done many tisnes in the past, and as discussed today, we wil# use previously conducted caunts at the
fotiowing intersections to estabtish base conditions:
S. G�ifview E3tvd / Namden �r.
�S. Gu#fview B1ud. / Cora�ado Dr. . ... . . . ..
Coronado Dr/ Hamden Dr.
FuturQ conditions anaRysis will �onsider as background traffic the total tra�c from ihe En#rada Hatel T1S {#521 S.
Gulfiriew} we recently completed in �ctaber 2013. There#are, all appro�ed pro�ects to date wi11 be cons�dered as
backgraund traffic.
Project tr.affic for Marquesas will be based on !TE Trip Generation, 9t" Edition. We catculated 2QQ8 daily trips of which
7.30 would be PM pealc fiour. Project traffic will be added to backgrflund traffic and these intersections will be
reanalyzed. The project dri�eways wi�l also be anaiyzed. Roadway segfnent conditions will be anaiyzed far S. Gulfview
from �oronada ta the Sand key Bridge, Coronacio wiil be anatyzed from Hamden to the roundabout, and liamden Drive
wif# also be anaiyzed. This is exactiy what was done for ihe recently completed studies.
I trusf this reflects our conve►�sation. Piease let me knc�w ifyou need anything efse.
Robert Pergalizzi, AICP R"fP
Gulf Coast Cansutting, inc.
238251C0T Boulevard, Suite 6flr
Cfearwater, F!. �3760
Phone: 727-524-1818
Fax: 727-5246090
Cell: 727-544-269�
Email: aer�aCu?gulfcoastconsultin�inc.com
n
YPe of peak hour ba��g repo�ted: ln3�rs�ecfion Ase3c
LOCAT[ON: Caronado Dr — S Gulfview �31vd
�� �
�a a�
at� aas o
�+ i t.
SS9 M 275 .i t, 0 4 0
o a o.97 a o
zsfi r �s � r o•� a
+y 4 t�
0 5C8 0
�$ 4
aso soe
� � �
17 � .�
�:; :,• � �'I'f4
�
.�
� � �
...,.-..-I � ; �
NA
� 6 �.
a t�; a
NA •P � � hiA
�. -� { �p
ti s �
�
� 4 *
Ps�lod
A:15 PM 8 S29
4;30 piJl 4 i t9
.: ` a:4s ppa ::: ; ., o.: �oe
: �,s:o6't�M:': ,�.o� ��t�a
,::.5:�5�1Uk.:? 'r". d''t 122
Method for d�ertnlning p�k hour. %tsa Entering Volume
t�C JQB #: 9 077850'E
Paak-Hot1r: 4:Q5 i'M1fi -- 5:45 PM
Peak 1�-Min: S:3(i PM -- 5:45 PM
f�uat.i� Caunt�
-c,;�r.a�sn-�r�o^� na-�
C�:L£s."f�?+: ! b: n;:�y
��at�
�
"';
�
i I �
0.9 7.0
J� ¢�
t.P 0.2 6A
� � �
S.B (� 2.8 � L 6.0 �b 0.D
o.o ¢ "� a o.o
za ¢ ao �: � 4 rr n.a � o.a
0,0 D2 OD
�a 4
0.2 7.2
0 0 9
�+ i�' 4
0 .t � t o
0 # �Ux �� +d 6
,,�,.
0 3 r a
....�,�_ r . � . . .
0 2 0�
t�A
A
.+ a a
J t.
NA �► w p NA
'i r F
�, s �
� �{ �
R' =
onado Dr Coronado Dr S Gulfvie�►81vd 3 GuEfview 81vd
thboan oi.Rhbotmd I stbo+md (Weatboun 1'otel �
I tJ ft Tbre Ri hf U lr' I Leit Ti� R t Th Ri t U R'
91 9 0 76 D � 0 0 0
9 P � 0 94 68 0 0 Si Q i 0 U D 0 0 D 0 34S
0 0 0 0 107 82 U 0 71 D 0 0 0 0 fl 0 0 0 3T9
,.0;'.;:0�::..:.• 0' �• 0.'.��7'l�; .' 72',.:�0.:'..:� tf:� . 8D':�.:�..8�.�.�:�.�•, .:0:- ���.4'. t;:..0•r�::,;:•0=';..�:.D':�': O:, ,.;D`: .:380•: :
. ., �• �r, . �.. . .
0` 0: 0' �D`� .Q3• ':8&" 0, fl 1'40. `¢: �0'�=:• �0� '1:: � �4,i i:�O:;.Ai'0:,':;•4'•?�i,�0: ;35p;,
;. • i.
. ... � . . �O��i� ' 0� ' D`.� ��0 '414ii
'o' ;o.: , a: . '.Q. ='1�7` �82 : �a . ..c� 9i; ,. "a.�:: .2::. o . .: t:� ._:o::�,:�_ , . r.�.� �. ��
0 111 U D
�i"'r= �.4�
��3
���
2� 9�
1! --� � �
° sE3
Ho�vy Tnroks 0 0 D
pedea6ieuis 18
Btayc�es a t o
Rairoad
Bittas
COANt7en�s:
Report gen2rated on 6128f204212:06 PM
D 0 4 � 4 0 0 I 0 0 0
0 92 E 104
D� 0 0 0 U 0. f 0 0 6
Totsl
�
B
j9Q
1
SbURCE: Qua�ity Counfs, LLC (htEpJiwmw.qualitycflur�Es.ne!} 4-877-58q-2242
0
ype of peatc hour being reported: Infer�ection Peak
�.00AiION: S Hamdan Dr — S Guifiriew Bhai
:.�x aer
�� ¢�
20 0 332
.J S t.
228 .Y 59 .f` t�s 4� St4
ZZB �P 0.94 �d 2�`'.r
a.�; •r o s e' o�a �
+f 4 i'
0 0 0
� 0' !
0 0
.._,..,....! � �
iY
. . ..�f � .f:JSi�S,'x' .�. O
A.
�
� 71 �
�a *�
Nn
� t v
a } �t �
raa a �- �• Na
v 7 �� r e
h ! r'
NA
�: 4
Meffwd Tor tfetemZining peak hour: Total F�terirtg Volume
QC JOB �: 90T7860�
Pea�-Hoar. 5:00 PM -- 6:i}0 PM
Pealt 45-nAln: 5:16 P�tf -� 6:30 PM
�uaii� Ca���s
�rh;�l±f^i,'K � �ilO�S aw � u
G�?_��Y:t`�?�; ::FVK'::�
. . ... � �.�..
�
--•
�
�
�
�
o.Q o.s
�� ¢�
QD 0.0 0.9
�7 6 E►
22 Q■ O.Q .f �. t. 0.8 fi 1.<
22 H � F 24
&:�
�.o .� o.a i : �.0 O i.a
�► 4 s►
o,n o.a o.a
�� 4
a,u o.a
U 0 7
� � �
0 J ��.. 4. G
t •a �G'T�J' a �
. . .. 0 � ��' 0 . ..
� � fi j�'�"'�
�a o al
kn
r� � 4
$ � ��
Nn +� � �• w�.
� `3 t i' F
� � �
Poriod No�bound} Sonffibaun Eaat6ound asttioan To#al HO�y
�innln At e Thru R ht U R` i R• Lsft Thru ht R' R ' � Tofats
4;00 8 4 9 0 0 S 0 0 0 4 0
4:i5 PdR 8 8 0 D 0 92 0 6 0 9 iQ 59 0 0 0 0 39 53 D 26 279
4:30 PM 0 0 4 0 0 Bt 0 3 0 Q 10 45 0 4 0 4 71 5B 0. 35 309
d•dK PW[ a o 0 0 0 82 0 9 � 3 10 Sa 0 0 0 0 43 36 fl 29 2T 914'Z
�4� `p•�� p;' D,� '0
-' 4' . 0'-'c'O � ".4 � ' 0
S�: t.a�
�-° 33�
3��
h �
Z�� ���
�---
za[�
Heavy 3ru�cs a �o a
psdactdana 100
stc�yaes a a a
rZearoad .
5topaeil8tr�s
Comments:
Repart genereted un fi/2612012 1206 PM
`.Q.'; ..�_
�.'ri : :�': s .
e o 0
B6
0 0 D
�
D 9 0 0 8 4
2D 0
a 0 0 0 0 0
Totef
t J
�
2,'}b
0'
S41iRC�: {�ualtty CauMs, LLC {httpJMM�+x.quaGtyoounts.net)1-877-58Q-22'E2
of peak hotN being reported: infer�ction Peak
�ATfO�E: S Hamden pr — Carunada Or
31 63
�4 ¢�
3 D $B
,% 8 c.
�a a � s t, � a �sa
.� �, o.� v �,
aaa �s o'� P a� 9sa
� � �
u a o
�a $
a o
Perixi
� � �
0 ��`�}i �
j:.
:�, d i8
\ ✓
Y. ....
r
� �� �
�a :�
NA
.� d� 4
a � ��:.. � m
N,q } � �• 4 NA
sp '�. C M
'� 4 e'
�; � t �
A#ethod for
Psak-Hvur: 4:00 PM -- 6;dQ PM
Pe2k'E5-Alflrt: 4:'!5 PAif --4:30 PM
�u�Li�r �a��t�s
-:,ar�-P��-s.riG't :,s�-r
C�+�S"wi'•+S�ti :^�'1'�'¢3
. � � Y
=�
�--►
�
�:��
aic hoir� Totat E�dng Volume
Qc �aa �: To77s�
a.z �.e
J� ��
ao o.a 3.6
.�' 8 {►
2a � a.o j ,,� e i.7 a 2a
ts��a z.a
�.z rv o.o � ''� r e.o w i.a
�► 4 w
an ao ao
�8 t
Q4 OA
0 0 0
� � �
o s �„ e. a
7 .P � is 4
,� ..
. . o '� � .� .. � �'' o . .
jo 0 0l
l
�
✓ • 4
J t
NA 4 �� i+ NR
l i'
'4 4 t'
� NA �
Totai i HQ�
...4;80 PMk:� .�,0:'.�;..0" : Q-: ; 0 � : 0. �;.?�.:' F3.: • •D�'<•!` 0:`: :� a. ;':T.':�'.•78.:�:;:•'.0� �.:,;'i0:•:,�:�.O�i ��4.�t:":.97: i�'ES: �. U'���•.�:0�� �.�ta�r " .•r..'.
• 4•45 Pl1i:-. . p : °° U�' �0 . : �' ';7.:: '•:'0 �' 2 :�6`::�:•:•.:0', • .,1•":: 80`: :•=p'..i�•,� 0'h�:'i:��0:�'� :4�.t.57'�%:�55'.'.''•d`
. 5:00 PH! 8 0, fl� 8 0 7 0. 4 fl 0 0 74 0 0 0 8 6B 13 0 0� 167 T73
5:95 PM 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 Q 0' 3 8B 0 0 0 0 i4 i1 Q 0 i84 749
5:30 PM 0 0 4 8 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 83 0 0 0 0 87 9 o R 465 702
5:45 PM Q 0 0 4 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 78 6 0 0 a 73 11 0 D 1G8 748
�y,'Fs t,at
�' Zg
� ��
�
3�`+��f
� �G1
! 29g !
Hes}+yTtvcks Q 0 D 4 0 9
Pedes,Yi�lls 28 20
aicyct�s o a a o o a
Railmad
S d Buses
Gommants:
Reporf ger�atad on 6l26fL01212:06 PF,�[
0 8 0
0
o a o
ft I t�� U t2" 7ofal
n a o o i96"
D 24 4 �.0
ZD BB
0 0 2 2
SOURG�: Qua{ity Counis, Ll.0 (htt{�:!lwva�,v.Guafityaounis.ne� t-87%580-22i2
�ane�, Volumes, Timin�s
3: �n�2a�a
�' � "'� �i : �
. ......... .........:....... : ::: : .... ..:......... . . . .. . ...
�.aiteGrouA.'.>:�::�<:': ..: �.:.�<:E�L���::::E�.�.::�..NBL�::::.NBT:.::SBT:��:�SBR:;:..: .:�.:::.::.:�;::.:;:'.:::.::.�:i.:�.:.�.::.::�.,:.:.:';.:�:_...:;:;::::::':;:
Lane Con�igurations 'i� �'S '�"�` �
Volume (vph} 278 31 0 593 443 322
ldea! Flow (vphpt} 9900 19Q0 9900 1900 194U 1904
Storage Length (ft) 500 5Q0 3UQ Q
Storage Lanes 1 U a 1
7aper Length (f�} 25 2�
Lane U�I. Factor 0.97 0,95 D.95 0.95 0.95 1.00
Ped Bike Factor Q.97 fl.95
�r� Q.994 0.85U
Flt Protected 0.954
Satd. Ffow (prot) 3427 Q 0 3539 �539 9583
Flt Perrttitted 0.9b4
Satd. Ffotv {perm} 3322 0 4 3539 3539 9542
Righi Tum on Red Na Yes
SaM. Flow.{RTORj . .. . �
t�nk Speed (mph) Z{1 25 25 .. .
link Distar+ce {ft) 331 260 354
Travel Time {s} 11.3 7.1 9.5
Confl. Peds. {#fir} 17 33 97
Peak Hour Fador Q.91 0.99 0.91 0.91 0.9! 0.91
Ad�, Flow {vph) 305 12 0 564 487 394
Si�ared Lane Traffic (°fo)
Lane Group Flow {vph) 397 4 0 564 487 35�
Enfer Blociced intersection No No No No No No.
Lane Alignment Left Right l.eit Left Lefi Right
Median Widih(it) 24 0 0
Link OfFset�ftj 0 0 0
Crosswatk Wid4fi(ft) 96 96 16
Two way �eft Tum [_ane
Headway faclar 9.00 1.00 1,Q4 1.04 1.00 9.00
7uming Spe�d (mph) 15 9 15 9
Number af De�ectars 1 1 2 2 i
Detector'femplate Lefl Lett Thru Thru Right
Leading Detec#or (ft) 20 20 100 100 2U
Trailing Delecfor (ft) 0 0 0 0 0
Detector 1 Posi6on(R} D 0 0 0 0
Detecbr 1 Size(ftj 20 2U 6 6 20
Detector 11'ype CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ez
betector 1 Channel
Detector 1�xtend (s) 0.4 0.0 0.0 OA O.D
Dececlor 1 Ck�eue (s) 4A fl.0 0.0 0.� 4.0
Deiec#or 7 Defay (s} 0.0 U.0 QA 0.� 0.4
De�ecior 2 Posi4on(ft} 94 94
Detectar 2 Size(�} 6 &
Detectar 2 Type Ci+Fx C(+Ex
i}etector 2 Channel
f}etectar 2 �xtend (s) d.0 0.0
i urn Type PEA Perm NA NA Perm
Profected Pttases 4 2 6
Gulfiriew Coranado Exisfing 2013 9fI12d14 EX�SiiiVG - PM PF�11C HOUR Synchro 8 Repori
Rp Page 1
Lanes, Volumes, Trmings
3: 117/2014
. . � � �� � �
�` '� '�, '� � �
::.: ��r; : �:;:�:: � �.:,. ;. , se : .:
: :.:: sEBE: � �� �: ES � :: <�: ;NSl: N . SB . . R `.
Laiie Gtoiip'�._.:.: ;.` :.:.: ..::: : ..:.:� R
Permiited Phases 2 6
Det�or Phase 4 2 2 6 $
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial �s} 4.0 4.0 4.� 4.0 4.0
i1�IRITfiliRl ��t {S� 2�.� 2d.� �i.Q 2a.a �.Q
To�al Spli# (s) 2b.0 35.0 35.0 35.Q 35.0
Tofal Splk {°%) Q9.7°la 58.3% 58.3�0 58.3°Jo 58.3°r'o
Ma�dmum Green (s) 21.Q 3�,fl 3�.0 39.0 31.0
Ye�ow Time �s) 3.Q 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
All-R�i Time (s} '!.0 i.b 4.0 1.0 1.0
Las# 7fine Adjust {s} 0.0 0.0 fl.0 4.0
Totaf Lost iima (s) 4.0 4.4 4.0 4.0
Leac�Lag
Lead-Lag Optlmize?
Vehis(e Extension {s) 3.� 3.d 3:0 3.0 3.0
. . ... . . . . . ... . . .. ..
RecaU Mode None Max PAax Max Max
Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.Q 5.0 5,0 5.0
Flash Dant Walk (s} 91.Q 11A 11.0 99.0 11.0
Pedeshian Ca�ls (#fir� D 0 0 0 U
Act E#fct Green (s} �.9 32.6 32.6 32.6
Actuat�d glG Ratio 0.20 0.65 0.65 0.65
vlp RaK�Eio U.47 0.25 0.21 0.32
Control Dslay 20.0 4.4 4.3 1.5
Qaeue Delay 4A 4.fl 0.0 0.0
i'otaf De1ay 2p.0 4,4 4.3 1.5
LOS B A A A
Approach Deiay Z0.0 4.4 3.3
Apptoac�t LOS B A A
�rtter'sec6on `Su�mmar� : .�. : : �.: ��. :':: � ,. , : . .. .:
Ares Type: Other
Cyde Lengi�: 80
Aduated Cycle Length: 5(l.5
NaturaE Cycle:40
ConfiraE iype: Serr� Act Uncaord
Maximum vlc Ratfo: 0.�7 �-~��
InfersecEbn Signal dela : 6,f �,�, _, Interse ' LC}S: A;
Intersecfion Capacity tJ6lizat�o�'42�.5 ,°k; ICl1 �eve1 of �'en�"rice A
ARalysis Period {min)15
Guifiriew Gaonado Existing 2Q13 117/2014 EXiSTING - PPA PEAK MOIiR Synchro 8 Repat
Rp Page 2
La�es, Volumes, Timir�gs
3: 117J24i 4
.�' � 'r` �. � .�
:.:..::; �:;:�...::.. :.� . : - ... ::..... .. :: . ..... .::......:....... :.....:...:..... .. .......:.........:.. ....:.... .. .: :::..::. .:........... : .::. : . .... .... .�
::EBI:: :>:�E9T ' WBT:.:�:UUBR':::::��L.~. SBR'�:.,'.:, ., . ' ' �
1-ane:craup.: . : �. . .
. ... .
... . ...
�aoe Configurations �'4 '� i� '�'Y'
Vokrme {vph} 39 228 206 313 335 20
Edeal Ftow (vphpl) 1900 19Q0 1900 990� 1900 190U
�ane Util. Factor U.95 0.95 1.OU 1.00 0.97 0.95
Ped Bike Factor 0.99 0.$d 1.Ot3
Frt 0.850 0.992
FIt Pro�ect�d 0.993 4.955
Satd. Ffow (praf) 0 3514 786:i 9583 34i5 0
�it permitbed 0.897 0.955
Sabd. �low (perm) 0 3129 �863 9273 3415 4
Right Turn on Red Yes Yes
Satd. Flaw {RTOR) 339 86
Link Speed (mph) 25 25 25
Link Distance (ft} 300 50t3 300
.. Travel Time.(sj . . 8,2. . 13.6 . 8.2
... ... .. . ...
Confl. f'eds. {#lhrj 82 82 91
Peak Fiour �actar 0.94 0.94 0,94 0.94 0.94 0.94
Adj. Flvw (vph) 49 243 219 331 35fi 21
Shared Lane Traff+c (%)
Lane Group Flow {vph} 4 284 219 331 377 0
Enier Blocked Int�sectiwi �lo No No No 1Vo No
Lane Alignment Left LeR Left �ight Left Wght
Med€an V1fid#h�ft) Q 0 24
Li�k Offset(ffJ 0 0 0
Crosswaik Width(ft} 16 16 i6
iwo way Left Tt�m Lane
Headway Factor 1.04 i.OD 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.40
Tuming 3peed (mph) 15 9 13 9
Number oi Deteci�rs 1 2 2 i �
Refiecfor Template Left Thru ihru #�igl�f Lefi
�eading Deiector {ft) 20 i(f0 10Q 20 2U
7raiting Detsctor tft) 0 Q a 0 0
Detector 1 Pasition{f#j 0 0 0 0 U
betector 9 Size{fty 20 6 6 2{} 2{}
Defsctor'1 Type C1+Ex G}Ex Ci+Ex Ck��c CI+Ex
Defectp� 1 Chanrtel
Dele�w 1 Exfesxi (s) 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 Q.0
Detector 1 Queue (s) O.0 OA 0.0 0.0 O,Q
�t��tor ��tay �s} o.o o.o o.o a.o o.o
Detector 2 Position(itj 94 94
De6ecior 2 Size(ftj 6 6
Qete�tor 2 Ty�e CE+Ex CIfEx
Dete�ar 2 Ch�n�l
iletector 2 Extend (sj 0.0 0.0
Tum Type pm+pt iVA NA Perm NA
Proiected �ases 7 4 8 6
Permlt�ed Phases 4 8
Detector Phase 7 4 8 8 &
S1�ritch Phase
Guliview Harnden �xisting 2013 1/7/2014 EXfSTING PM PEA� HQUR
RP
Synchro 8 Report
Page 9
Lanes, Voiurr�es, Timings
3: 1/7/2014
� �,,, 'F` '�„ �► .�
_ ... ....... ..::. ..: �:.. >.,.,.... . ... .. . ....... ... ... ............._. .. ... .. . . ..... .,....... ...
I;aneGroUp� ....::.... ..... ..:. .::��EB.��:::; �EBT.�.:� :WBi' �YVBR::::.:::58L.��� SBR...::.:. .:::-.�.::; :.. . , .::':.�.�.:�:�_:�:�::..:..; .,::�.:.. :.�.�.:
Minirnum tniqaf (s) 4A 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minirnum Sp1it (s) 8.5 2(}.0 20A 20.0 20.0
Totai Split {sj 15A 35.0 2Q.0 20A 35.0
Total Split (90' } 21.4°!a 30A°k 28.6°/0 28.895 50.0°l0
Maximum Green {s} i0.5 3i.0 16.4 16.0 31.0
Yellow Time {s} 3.5 3.0 3.D 3.0 3.Q
AIl-Red Tims {s) 1.0 1.4 1.0 3.0 i.0
i_ost Tirr�e A�jusi (s} 0.0 0.0 U.0 0.0
Tata1 Lost Time (sj 4.Q 4.0 4.0 4.0
l.ead/Lag Lead Lag I_ag
Lead-Lag Apiimize? Yes Yes Yes
Vehide Extension �s) 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recail Mode iVone Min P+�n Min None
Walk Time tsj 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0
. . .. Flash Dont Walk (sj .. 19.Q. .. 11.0 . 11.0. 91.0 . .
. ... . ... . ...
Pe�estrian Caqs {#ihr) Q 0 4 0
Acf Effct Green (sj 40.4 14.4 10.4 7.9
Actuated gJC Ra6Q 0.39 a.3S 0.39 0.30
v!c Rado 0.23 0.30 0.47 0.35
Conttol Detay �.0 6.9 3.4 6.8
Quecie f}elay 4.Q 0.0 OA 0.0
Toiai Defay &.Q fi.9 3.4 6.8
LOS A A A A
Approach De1ay 6.� 4.8 6.8
Approach LOS A A A
: .... : .... .... . . .. . ..
Jriterseation� S'iurt�nary � .. . :.
Area �'ype: O�Iter
CycEe Lengfh: 70�
AciuBted Cycle Lengih: 26.4
Naturaf Cyde: 50
ConkroE Type: Setni Act Uncoord
Ma�amum vlc Ra�o: 0.47
Intersection Signal Dela � 5.7! Intersecti OS: A,
Intersection Capacity U�liza ' 41.8° ICU Levet of Se A
Analysis Period (rnin} 15
3:
Gulfview Hamden Existing 2013 117I2014 �(ISTIf�6 �A PEAK HOUR Synchro 8 Report
RP Page 2
TwaV4�ay Stop Conirol Page 1 of 1
TW4 WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
eneral In#ormatian ite Infonna#ion
naE st P ntersectipn �RONADO DR/NAMDFN
/Co. GCC R
ate Performed q/�/�4 urisdic#ion GLE�4RW�4TER
al sis Time Periad Peak �$ �ear DC(STING
ra'ect Destx� 'on
astNVest St�eet: CDRONADO DR orthlSauth Street HAMDFN DRIVE
ntersection Orisntation; East-Wesf iud Per'sad hrs : Q 25
ek�ic�e Volc�mes and Ad ustments
or Street Eastbou.nd Westbound
l�avemer�t 7 2 3 4 5 6
L 3 R L T R
olum2 vehlh 4 349 294 61
eak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.91 a.91 D.91 0.97 O.S9 0.91
ottriy Flow Ra'te, FIFR 4 383 D l! 323 67
vehlh
Petce�t �lea Vehicles. . . 9 . . . ... —. . . . .. p. . . .. -- . . .. _. ...
edian T e Two Wa Leff Turn Lane
R7' Channelized 0 0
ries 4 2 Q 0 9 0
onfi ration LT T T%t
stream Si nat 0 0
inor Stree# Northbound Southbound
ovement 7 8 9 10 71 92
L T R L T R
olume vehlh 28 3
eak Haur Factor, PM F 0.91 0.97 0.91 4. 97 0.9? 0.9 9
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 0 30 3
vel�lh
�ercent Hea Vehicles 1 0 9 0 9 1
erc�nt Grade (°k) 0 0
lared proach N N
Storage 0 0
T Chartnelized 0 0
nes o 0 0 0 1 0
Ca�nff uration TR
�eia 4ueue f..en and i.ev�l of Service
roac�r Easibound Westbound Norihbovnd Southbound
AAnvemer�t 1 � 7 8 9 3 Q 19 'I 2
ane Gan�iguration LT TR
(veh/h) 4 33
(m {�eh/h) � 937 343
IC 0.00 4.10
5°r6 queue length 0.32
ontrol Delay (slveh) 82 �� 16.8
i.OS � A "� �1 C
pproach Uela (slveh} — 76.6
pr�ach Los -- — l ����,r;
CopytigYtt d9 2007 tlniVefSity of FNJfida, AII filghtS f�eSBrvCd HCS+T� Version 5.3 G tetl:�t1712014 9:00 AM
file:///C:/Users!rpergolizzi/AppData/X..ocal/Temp/u2k9677.tm� I /7/20l 4
TAB LE 4 Generalizec! Peak Hour Two-Way Volumes for Florida's
Urbanized Areas'
STATE SIGNALIZED A�dTERIALS
CIass I(>U.00 to 1.95 signalized intersec�ons per aile}
L,a�,e< M;,d�az, R C D E
2 Undivided 930 1,500 1,600 "�*
4 llivided 2,840 3,440 3,560 '"*�'
5 Aivided 4,370 5,200 5,360 """'"
s Di��ided 5,900 6,970 7,160 �`**
ci.RS9 p'I..l� �n�iP.:�i ew `� `�°% �'-'"a � � 4��t}.
�,qS Z�-.�� CIasSII(2.00to4�J�5'ignalize3:r�e�Fsectio�s�er�'s�lc)
GS ��, B c D E
2 Undavide3 ** 1,020 1,480 I,�70
a Dis�ded ** 2,420 � 3,400
6 Divide� ** 3,790 4,880 5,150
fl Divided . ** 5:150 6,530 6,880
� L� �.'o rt�nwo (,t? . q o") Z��`� Z9 t� �
Class IIIIIV {�ore than 4.50 sign:s�i�i intecsa:uun� �+c� niie)
� i_�-: � Mediar B C fi) ' E
2 Undivided ** 500 J,ISO 1,4�0
1 4 Divided ** 1,220 2,730 3,100
6 Divide3 *`" 1,910 4�24� 4,680
� s Dividec� ** 2,620 �,770 6,280
Cu� vn c� tlt� ��,,r o�.r. G�� � l 4nIL'7l...
Non-State 3ignalized Roarlway Adjustments
(AYtcr corrzsncmding state vohaaes by�thc indicated pacect,)
Major CityiCounty Roadways - 10% �"''��''� `'�
Other Signalized �way �Mc...a ��
�
Stx��,�.. a.� G o, �� t d 4 c7
e &�on-State Signalized Roadway Adjustments
( Aitcr corresponding szte vol•.mus by the indicated parcent.}
Dividedl[Individed & Tum Lane Adjus#ments
Facclusive Exciesive Adjustmem
Lanes :14edias! i.e$ Lanes Rig,hi Lznes F
2 Dividec Yes No +5°
� Undivided No No -20%
Mczfi Undivided Yes No -�%
Mulx Jr.divided No No -2S%
- - - �'e5 T �%
FT2EEWAYS
Lsnncs A C D
� 4,000 5,500 b,�70
s 6,000 8,320 10,150
g 8,Q00 11,050 13,480
tc 10,000 13,960 16,930
l2 13:730 18,600 21,950
Freeway Adj ustments
Avxil�azq Ramp
Lanes Mecering
� i,aoo + s�io
_ _ ____ __ _
±014/10
E
7,340
11,29t1
15,270
19,250
23,230
TJ1��I.AiTF.RRUPTED FLOW HiGHWAYS
Lanes Median $ C ll E
2 Undivided 73d 1,454 2,030 2,620
a u;�i��a 3,220 4,66U 6,040 6,840
6 nividect 4,840 6,990 9,060 10,280
Uninterrupted �low Hi�hway Adjustments
I..aucs Median Exclusiva leti lanas .'�jusunenc f2c%tors
2 i7ivided Yes �5%
Multi UAdivided Yes -5°/a
M.ul� ur.divided No -25%
BICYCLE MOD�Z
(Multipty moturized velvcio volu:n:s shrn�+n txtow by nu�ba of dir�uoaal
roedv+ay Ixaes to detecmine tvuo-way mzximeav se� vice voii:mes.}
Paved Shotilder/ Dicyde I.ane
Caverage B C b E
p.ag� ** 310 1,1$0 >1,180
50-84°!0 240 360 >36Q **"
85-16�°ib 62U >620 *** **'�
PEDESTRLAN MODEZ
(Iviultip?y motorized vehicle vot,maes shown below 6y nuatbcr o: direc�onal
roadway lanes to dstc:mine iwo-way maximurn service veluzes. )
Sidewalk Coverage
4-09%
50-SE%
85-� 00%
B C
�* ,��
�� �►�
x* 1,100
D E
4so 1,3go
1,100 1,820
i,sao >i,sao
One-Wa Facili Ad'ustment BUS MOnE (Scheduled FiYed Ronte)3
Y tY J (Buses iti peak hoiu in pe�1c dveaaan)
lv�ultipty the coaespouding two-directional volumes in this tabie 6y U.6. Sidcwak Coverzge B C D E
0-84% >5 >4 >3 >Z
85-:00% >4 ?3 ?2 ?1
� Yal�xs shwra are proseaced as houfry two-wey volumes for levels of snrvica and acc fvr t5e tutomobile/ttucic modes untms speci3catly stated Aithc,:gh �xe.aenced ns peak itaur two-
way volvmes, t6cy acNnDy repmsent pealc haur peak direcdon cand:�oec wixh rs applicabla D factar epplied Tbis ub1- dces not tonstimte e standazd and saould be use3 ouly for
goaeral plr.nmo8 aPE'Geations. llx computc madels �am wssicL dus tebla is derived chould ba ised For more specific PlauainB ap�icarione. 1Le pblc wd dorivuig cocip:Nes medels
shrnild not 6e usad fot coaidor or eatersa-tion �esfgq wfiere more mfiaed tecl�iques exisc Celculacaas are bascd oa pL�ming applications of the iiighway Capaoi:y Maaua4. Bscyela
LOS Mode4 s''e�saia� LOS Model and Trsrsk Capaeiry rnd Qnaliry of Service Meauet, scsp Ytively for the automobileiuuck, bicycle, pedestrizn aad b-as modcs.
' E,eve1 of smiac f� the bicycla aud podescian aedes in chis tahk is 6aud oa n�6er of aotarittd vebictts, not aamber of
biryclisu or pedeshiacs tni� tbe facility.
� Biaesp�rhaur sUoav are onty tor the pe� Lour ia t3x eiogle d'aesdaa oi the }riyn� tzffic tfow. � Source:
„ �t � �y��y� � mb� �,,,�,x ��,��. Flerida Depar�eent of Transportation
.<: Not a�plicabk fo; tl�a: lavel of scrvicc lxber grede. For the aumaobile mark, voluaes grcaur thaa !evel nf service A Sj'SteIDS pleitIIing 0$ICe
become F bacavse iamzsection wpacitie: have be:a reachnd. Fac the b�cic mode, tho lsvel of se¢vice lettcr grasYe (inciuding 605 Suwanaee Street, MS 19
F) is �t ac6iovablo because there u no **•*:�*�^^ �ehiole volume duestwld using tabie inpia value de&ulu. "j'g]jg1jy55Ce� FL 32399-0450
w�vw dot state fl�1�lanxti�,e/�vstemsls os/aefaul�shtm 2�7Q9 FD�T QUAIIIY/LEVEL OF SERVICE NANOBOOK
0
H��h��ase Res�der�t��l Gond�rn�n�unr�11"ov�r�hause
4232}
Average 1lehicle Trip Ends vs: auvelling Units
tJn a: Weekday
Number of Sfiudies: 4
Avg. Num�er o# Qweiiin� Units: 543
Directional Disiribution: 50% entering, 50°/a exiting
Trip Generafion per Dwelf�ng Unit
Average Rate Rar�ge of Rates Standard Qeviaiion
d. i R 3.91 - 4.93 2.0$
Data l�iot and Equa
0
r,oao
s,000
�
s,000
:s
c
W
[1.
.�
� 4,000
m
v
�
m
}
m
� 3,D00
m
>
¢
at
�
2,OD6
5,006
0
.. C'at�#ion - Use�t�refulfy- Sma�l Sainpfe Siza '
10Q 200 300 40Q 500 800 700 8Q0 900 1000 1100 120D 1300 1dOQ 'I500
X= Number of Dweillng l3nits
X Actual Data Pohrts Rited Ctave ------ qverege Rttte
F'rEted Curve Et�uaiion: i- 3.TT(7(j + 2x3.86 R2 =1.Od
Tdp GeneratiAn, 9iFt �ditian o institute of Transportation Engineers
427
H�gh�R��e R�s�den��a� �+�ndtameniu�fTovvnh�u��
� (232}
Average Yehicfe Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Uni�s
4n a: We�kday,
Peak Hour of Adj�cent Street Traffic,
Qne Hou� Between �# and fi p.m.
Number of Studies: 5
Avg. Number af Dwelling Units: 444
Directional Distribuiion: 62% entering, 3$% exiting
Tri� Generation per i3weliing Uni�
Average Rate Range of� Rates Sfandard Deviation
a.38 fl.34 - 0.48 0.62
� ��� Da#a Plot a�d
n
600
504
w
� 40Q
1l.1
Q
H
m
8
7 �
N
�
>
¢
�� ?W
�
�W
Ca�rtian - Use' Canefct?!y - Smal! SaMple Size
: : : , : ; : ; : : : ; : '; �
: : : ; ; : : : ; : : ; : ,.
-• ;--•--, ---. ... ... ....;_.._ __. :.....:.... ....:... ...�� .. ..
, . . . , . , . , . . �. . .
; : : . : : ; : : : : �' :
' : : , : : , . : ' ,� ' ; :
. , . . . . . , . . . . .
-- -._ � ... � ... � --- --- -.. � .. � ... � ... � ..'t . ... � ... � --
. , . ' . ,' -. � . , ;
. , , . . . . , . �. . . , .
. , : . . . . : � . . : ' ;
. . , � : : . � .' . , , . . ,
.�
: : ; . . . :,� . , ; ; : , .
. . . . . � . . . , . . .
. . . � . .�� � . , � � . . .
. . . . . ,. , . . . , . . .
. . . . . �, , . , . , . . .
'".5._""_._."'..••.•• _".""."f"" __'�.._�..�'i"._�...�...�..
� . x � . . . . . . . � � . .
. . ��r � . . . � � � � i � •
" . " " " _ A ..� . . . . � . . . . � _ " " _' _ ' _ � • . � � . . . � "•. . _ _ _ •_ . . . . . . . . . . _ � ... . . . . . . �
• /� • • r � � � � • � • •
� Y � • � • . � � � � � � • •
� /. . � • i � i � . . •
��ic . . . . . : ; : ; . : . .
��" : : : ; ; , : � ; : ' : :
a. . . . . . . . . . .
0
�oa aoo aoo �a 5vo 6ao �oa soo soo l000 »aa �aoo �soo �4aa isoo
X a f�Eurnber of f�weNing ilnifs
X Acival aata Poinis Fitted Curve ------ Avera9e Rate
Pittecl Curve Equation: T � Q.34(}C) + rt5.47 R� � 0.99
7dp Generatlon, 9ff� �dition • lnstitute of Transportation EngPneers
C�7
a
0
!t f����
{310}
Average Veh[cEe Trtp Ends �s: Rooms
On a: Wee�cday
T'rip Gen.eration
Number o€ Studies:
Avsrage Number flf Raoms:
Directional Distribuiion:
Rate
Roont
Data Plo�t and Equa�ion
�n.
�
C
W
b.
1=
m
0
a�i
>
�
�
i
d
Q
p
F
0
,s,00a
17,OUQ
i6,Q00
t5,000
t4,Q00
i3,400
zz,aoa
Tt,OtlO
10,OOi1
8,000
B4OQO
7.��
6,000
5,OOQ
4,000
3,000
2,000
i,oao
0
3
1Q
476
50% entering, 50% exiting
of Rates
- 9.58
Standard Deviation
, , . , . . : _: : . . . : . . . . X
. . . . . . . , , . . , . . . , .
• - - - - - � - � - 1 - - - - - � - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . - -
� , . . , . . , , . . . � . . , ,
.. . -- . -•-. -. ,_._ , .. , .. , - � •- --- . -- . -- • . : .. . .. . .. . .. .
•-......._._.. .._...... ..- • ..:... ........ ..............' �--, -••;-- --���-
...:....r...:.. ..:.........:.....•--•:.._.:........ :...._:_._.:. -.s�.._.---• •-
.. � .. � -- � -- . -- s •- -• -- ' -- � •• � • � -- -- � - ' -- � •
. . � . . � . . � � Ji' . � . .
. . . , . . , . . . � • • • • • r - - - � . . , - • . • • . • - r • . - � : - - • � - - r - - - . - - . - -
...:....:....:..•-.....:...:....'-•-•----•----: �'�'_...:....�---.:...:....:...
. , � . . . , . �r' . � . . . .
. . . , . . . . . ,. . . . . . .
•-. .. . ------ -- -- --- .. .::. -•---�-- -- -- --• -- ..
. : : ; : . . : ��. : : ; ' : .
_..:....:.---�--..,.__.:...�....a.-- ���----------._�...:... : ...:...;....�._
. , , . . . . �,� . . . . . . . . .
. � � . . . J� . . . . � . . . .
_. .. . .. .. _ .. �� .. .. . .. .. .. ._ . -' "
. . � � . . � . . . : . � . � � .
i�
.. , .. , .. i ---�-•- . • �/• . -• . •' . -• . • . '• . . -' . •-'r . ."' . '-
. . . ,s , . . . . . , .
. . , , . . . . , . . . . . . . ,
: X,� : : : : : ; ; ; : ' : : ; : �
-- ->' , .. .. .. .. .- , • , -- ,--. _. _. . .. .. . .. ..
yc..%� . , . , . . , , . . . . .
Ii� . � . � .. � .. � .. .. . . . .. � .. � .. � .. � .. i". • .. . _ . ". ..
i00 200 300 400 50Q 600 70Q 8p0 9p0 1000 1100 i20Q 73Q0 9400 1500 4606 f700 i80Q i90d
X = �Fumber of Rooms
X Actusl Qata Painta Fiited Curve --�--- Avelage RatB
Fiited Curve EquatiarF: i= 8.95(3� - 373.i 6
R2 = 0.98
r� c�►era�or,, 9ih Edf�on • Insiitute of Transporistion Engineers
813
F��sori Hv�el
�33�}
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Occupied Rooms
On a: Weekday,
Peak Haur of Adjacent Sireet Traf�c,
8ne Hour Be�nreen 4 and 6 p.m.
. Number of Sfudies: 10
Average Number of Occupied Rooms: 429 •
Directianal Distribu�ion: 43% entering, 57% exiting
Trip Get�e�ation pe� Qccup9;ed �ioom .
�� Avera�e Rate
Data P'lot and Equ<
0�
soo
aoo
N
�
C
w
a
� 300
ro
�
�
m
>
m
�
N 200
Q
p
F—
i00
0
100 200
X Aciva! UafB Points
FEtted Carve Equatfcn: Not G
Range af Rafes
az� - a.��
Standard Deviafion
b.70
0
3R0 40Q 500 600 7Q4 8p0 gp0
X= idumber of Occupied Rooms
------ Average Rabe
ivc�[1 �2 � ,�••
680 7i1p Ger►eration, 8th Edition • Institute of 7ranaportation Engineers
G
0
Lanes, Valumes, Timings
3: �nrzo�4
-� � � # � �
..
. .. .. ..:... .. .. . _ ... ... .. . ... ... . .: : .:
;::�::;'E �....' ;� �BL::�.�:�:{�B�`::;:.::SBT<:��.::�::SSf�z��:::;::�;::::�::`::`:'>;�:::.;.:::'::�:�::�:�t�.':�.;:�::�:�:�:;:;`:.::�::`;.:::�::°:::�.:::;::`:`::;::
Larie�GrouF.:::.;.`:::� : :`::.�:: . �:`?��.::EBL BR � �!
Lane Configura6ons �� �'�` '�`'�` �
Volume (vph) 362 11 0 835 &93 396
Ideal �iow {vphply 19Q0 1940 190� 9900 190U 1900
Starage L.ength (ff} 500 500 500 b
Sforage Lanes 1 0 0 1
Taper Length (fi) 25 25
Lane il�l. Factor Q.97 Q.95 0.95 U.95 0.95 1.U0
Ped Bike Factor 0.97 0.95
Fr# 0.99fi 0.850
flf Protected �.954
Satd. Flaw �prot) 3434 a 4 3539 3539 9583
�it Pe�mifted 0.954
5atd. Fbw {perm} 3327 0 0 3539 3535 1502
Right Tum on R�d No Yes
. . . .. Safd. Flow.{RTOR} . . ... . . .. ��
. .. . ... . ... . ...
linic Speed (mph} ZO 25 28
Unk Qistance {ftj 331 260 350
7ravel Time (s) 91.3 7.1 9.5
Confl. Peds. �#If�r) � 7 33 17
Peafc Fbur Facmr U.91 0.99 0.91 0.91 Q.89 Q.9�
qdj. Flow (vph) 398 12 4 918 7$2 435
Shared Lane ?ra�'rc (%}
Lane Group Flow (vpC�} 41U 0 0 918 762 435
E�ter BEaciced Intersection Na A(o No No Pfo No
lane Al�grimenf � Left Right Left l.ei# l.eft Right
Me�an Wid�h(�} 24 0 0
Lir3k Offset{ft) 4 0 0
Crosswalk Width�ft} �8 96 16
Two way Leit 7um Lane
#ieadway Fact�r 1.00 1A0 1.00 1.00 'E.UO 1.00
Tuming Speed (mph) 15 � 15 9
Idumher of t3e#�ctors 1 9 2 2 1
Detector Te�nplate Left Left Thru Thru Right
Leading Detector (�t) 20 20 100 'i0Q 20
Tra€ling petectar (t#) Q 0 4 0 0
Detector 1 Position(�j 0 0 0 0 0
Qetectvt 'f Size(ft) 20 20 6 6 20
Qeiector 1 Type G+Ex CI+Ex CI�F�c Ci+Ex G+Ex
Detedor 1 Channel
Detedor 1 Extend {s} Q.0 q.0 0.0 0.0 O.Q
Qetector 9 Queus (s} 0.0 0.0 O.Q 0.0 0.0
Detedor � Delay (s) 0.0 �A 0.0 0.0 4.0
petector 2 Posikon(ft} 94 94
Uetectw 2 Size(ft) 6 6
Deiector 2 Type CI+Ex C[+Ex
Detector 2 Channel
Detector 2 ExFend (s) 0.0 0.0
Tum Type NA Pecm NA I�lA P�rm
Pratecied Phases 4 2 6
Gulfview Caronad� Fuiure 2017 1R120i4 FiJTURE WITH PROJEC7 Syncttro 8 Report
RP Page 1
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
3: �nr2o�a
1 � � 1 1 �
Lauei��auP ; �- =��BL E8R ' �38t. N87 ;�f ;<SBR � t _ �:���K
Permitted Phases 2 6
Detector Phase 4 2 2 6 6
Swritch Phase
Minimum IniGal (s} 4.0 4.D 4.0 4.0 4.0
N�nimum Split (s} 20.Q 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
Total Split (s) 25.0 35.0 35.0 35,0 35.0
Total Spiit (9oj 41.7°% 58.3°� 58.396 58.396 58.39�
Maximum Green (s) 21.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0
Yelbw Time (s� 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Ali-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Lost Time {s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
leadllag
Lead-Lag Optirnize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Recall Mode None Max Max Max Max
Wa�C Time (s) 5.0 5.4 5.0 5.0 5.0
Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.d 11.0 11.0
Pedestrian Galls (#Ihr) 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effct Green (s) 11.1 31.4 31,4 31.4
Aadiated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.62 0.62 0.62
vtc Rat�o 0,54 0.42 0.35 0.40
Control Delay 20.1 6.0 5.5 1.9
Queue Delay O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 20.1 6.0 5.5 1.9
LOS C A A A
Approac� Delay 20.1 6.D 4.2
Approach LOS C A A
�"�l��tl't.manl "� � � s� F �` ?
Area Type: Other
Cycie Length: 60
Actuat�l Cycle Length: 50.6
Nat�al Cycle: 40
Control Type: Semi Aci-Uncoord
Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.54
lntersection Signal Delay. 7.4 Intersec6orr LOS: A
Intersection Capacity UWizatan 55.9% ICU Level ofi Servioe 8
Analysis Period (min} 15
Gu{fview Coronado Futu�e 2017 1fT/2014 FUTURE WITH PROJECT Synchro 8 Report
RP Page 2
Lanes, Volumes, T�mings
3. �nrza�a
.� -. -� �- f' �- �, ? � �► 1 �
. . . . .. ... :.: ..... . .. ... . ::.: .. ..: _ ._..... _: � .:: . . ..: . : . . . . . .. . ..... . ... . . _ . . . ... . ...... . ... . . _. . .. .. .._:...,... . . ...
►::�neGroup�:::::::�: :..�:::. �. :..�...::fBL�: :::�:EBT.;::,.�BR:.:iW6L�. : W�T�:'::::WB�t��:. �NSL-'�:�:�.:�iB7�_:::: NBR�:: �'�:S�L<:::<:.SBT:`.::::SBR
Lane Gonfigura6ons �"� � � � � �'
Vdume �vph} 43 285 � Q 26U 467 19 14 0 509 '� 1 22
Idea� Flo�v{v�hpl) 19Q0 48QU 190a 1900 1900 190() �900 190U 19U0 �90fl 1900 �190Q
Lane Ut7. Fact�r �.95 0.95 0.95 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.OQ 0.95 0.95 1.QQ
Ped 8ike Factar 4.99 0.80 1.U0
F� 0.850 0.988
Flt Pratected 0.993 0.972 0.950 Q.958
Satd. Flow (praf} 0 3514 0 Q 1863 'f 583 0 i 811 0 1689 9 669 0
F{t permi#tecl 0.889 0.972 0.950 0.958
Satd. �Iow �perm) 0 3i92 a Q ig63 1273 0 1819 4 1689 1669 0
Righ# Tum ori Red Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sa#d. flow {RiORj 497 6
Link Speed �mph) 25 25 30 25
L�nk Distance (ft) 300 50Q 415 300
iravel Tme.{sj . . ... . 8,2. .. . ... 13.6 . . . . . 9.4 . ... 8.2. ..
Con�. peds. (#!�r) 82 82 i 4
Peak Haur Factor 0.94 0.94 a.92 0.92 0.94 0.94 0.94 4.94 0:94 0.94 0.92 0.94
Adj'. Flaw �vph} 46 303 0 4 277 497 20 15 0 541 12 23
Shared Lane iraiftc (�O) 47%
Lane Group FEow (v�h} 0 349 0 0 277 497 U 35 0 287 289 �
�ter Blocked fn#ersectian No No iVo No No No No No No No Na No
Lar�e Alignment l.eft Leit Right Le� Left Righi teft Lef# Right Lef# Left Right
Madian Width(ft} 0 4 i2 12
Llnk Qifset(it) Q U 0 0
Crpsswalk Width(ft) 16 1G �6 16
7wa way Let# Tum l.arte
Headway �actor 9.OQ 1.00 1.(i4 1.00 4.OQ 1.Q0 1.0� 1.00 1.Q0 1.00 1.00 1.90
Tuming Speed (mphj 15 9 15 9 �5 9 95 9
iVumber of Detecfors 1 2 1 2 i 1 2 i 2
Detector Template Left Thru Left Thru Right teft 7hru teft �'ltru
Leading Deiecior {ft) 20 �Oq 24 140 2Q 20 100 20 900
'frailing Detector �fl) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D
Detectw 1 Posi�on(ft) 0 0 0 U d 0 4 0 0
Detector �1 Size(ft} 2(l 6 20 fi 20 2(1 6 ZO 8
Detector 1 Type CI+Ex Ci+Ex CI�Ex CI+Ex Cl�x Cl+Ex Ci�-Ex G+Ex CI+Ex
Deiector 1 ChanneE
Detector 1 Fxtend (s} OA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.0 0.0 0.� 0.0
petectc�r 1 flueue (s) Q.0 0.0 0.0 O.Q 0.4 O.Q 0.0 Q.0 fl.0
E�iedar 1 Delay (s} 4.0 0.0 Q.0 O.Q 0.0 , 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0
De�ecroc 2 PosiGbn(ft} 94 94 94 94
I?e�ctor 2 Size(ft) 6 6 6 6
Defector 2 Type CI+Ex C1+Ex C1fEx Cl+�x
Defec#or 2 Channel
Detect�r2 Extend {s) 4.Q 0.0 0.0 0.6
Tum Type pm+pt NA Pemy NA Perm Sp�It NA Spl9t tdA
Profected Phases 7 4 8 2 2 6 6
Permitted Phases 4 $ 8
Detector Phase 7 4 8 8 8 2 � 6 6
Swifch Phase
Gul(view Hamden Fu#ure 'iRl2{1t4 FU'tURE WITM PRQ3ECT Synchro 8 Report
RR Page 1
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
3: 1/7/2014
� -► � � '- �- � t r� `► 1 �
._, . � ���. � z . �r ��; wB� ��� v��r .��;��. r�.� �,f��ax �;� �_ �;w�,r��,
Ct�e c.-�� �. ss�
AMnimum initi� (s) �.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (s) 8.5 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 10.0 10.0 20.0 20.0
Total Spfit (s) 15.0 35.0 20.4 20.0 20.0 15.0 15.0 20.0 20.0
Total Split (96) 21.496 50.0°/0 28.6% 28.6% 28.6°% 21.4% 21.4% 28.6% 28.fi°k
Maxinwm Gteen (s) 10.5 31.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 11.0 11.0 16.0 16.0
Yeilow Time (s) 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
A�I-Red Turte (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.0
Lost Time Adjust (s} 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total lost Time (s} 4A 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.4 4.0
LeadlLag Lead Lag Lag Lag
lead-tag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Vahicie Extension (sj 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
RecaN M+ode None Min Min Min Min None None None None
Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Flastt Qoltt WaAt (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Pedes�ian Caf1s (#mrj 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Act Effd Green (s} 12.8 12.8 12.8 6.9 12.9 12.9
Actuated gIC Ratlo 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.18 0.34 0.34
v� Ratio 0.33 0.44 0.66 0.11 0.50 0.50
Controt Delay 12.1 14.4 6.7 18.6 15.7 15.5
Queue �ay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0
Tota) Detay 12.1 14.4 6.7 9 8.6 15.7 15.5
(.pg B B A B B B
Approach Delay 12.1 9.5 98.6 15.6
Approach LOS B A B 6
N�.��,��' `^��,�''�„ ri.. �,� #ag��..,��a+` rE#¢`����.:. �'"� i ,�.x ; ,.�'^ f� { ix,<e��:` �a� ���'�:��# ��i�, ��R � s.��. �`
Af21 T�: �tEf
cy� �en�m: 70
AcWated Cycle Length: 37.9
Natural Cycte: 60
Contro! Type: Semi Act-Uncoard
Maximum v!c Ratio: 0.66
Intersection Signal Delay:12.2 ; Intersection LOS� B
{ntersecfwn Cap�ity UtiGzation 56.8°!o ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min)15
Gulfview Harnden Future 1(7I2014 FUTURE WITH PROJECT Synchro 8 Rep��t
RP Page 2
"T�vo-Way Stop Cantrol Page l of 1
Copyright � 2007 University ot Fbrida, All Rights Reserved NCS+�� Version 5.3 Generated: al7/2014 i �:03 AM
fi le:///C:/Users/rpergol izzi/AppData/Local/Temp/u2kBC5l .tmp 1 /7/2014
Two-u'a}� Sto� Control Page 1 of i
TWQ-WAY STOP GONTROL SUMNIARY
enerai Information Site [nfor�ation
n� � p M���{o� S. GUL�VIEWIDRlVEW�4Y
en /Co. GCC urisdiction CLEARWATER
#e Performed i/7/14 a sis Year FUTUR� WITN PRQJECT
sis Time Period M P�AK
Pro ed Descri tfon
astlWest Street: S. GULFVlEW BL.VD No►�thlSouth Sfreet: aRIVE A FAS
irrtersec4ion Orisntaiior�: East West d Period hrs : 0.28
ehicle Voiumes and Ad"ustments
or Strget �astbound Westbound
pveittent 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R !. T f2
olume veh/f� 663 49 4 615
eak Hour Facior, PHF �.(JD Q.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.Q0
ourly Fiaw Ra#e, H�'R 0 792 19 4 861 0
veh/h
erc�ria ki�a Vehides a . __ _� 2 . _.
ian T Und"rv�ded
T Channelized 0� 0
nes 0 2 0 0 1 D
uration T 774 Li
eam Si nal 0 0
inar Street Northbaund Southbound
ovemeM 7 8 S 10 11 'E 2
L 7 F2 L T R
olume veltTh iD 12
eak Haur Factor, PiiF 0.�3 1.00 Q.93 9.00 9.W 1.00
ourly Flow Rate, HFR. ?D 0 12 d 0 0
vehih
erc,enf Neavy Vehides 2 0 2 0 0 0
eraent Grade (°lo) 0 0
ared Appro2ch N N
Storage 0 0
T Channel'�ted 0 0
nes 0 0 D 0 0 0
on ciraEian LR
!a Qaeue Len th, and Leve1 of Service
roach Eastbaund Westbound �forihbound 5outhbound
o�ement '� � 7 8 9 10 19 12
ne Configurativn LT L.R
v (veh/h) 4 22
C (m) (vehlh) 876 237
/c 0.00 0.09
5% queue length � . .0.01 0.30
ntrol Delay (s/veh) 9.1 21.7
os �-:: . a c
roach Delay (slve�,) -- — z9.7
pproach �OS — -- �.. C
Copyrighi 02007 Wllve�siry of Florida, Alt WgMs Resened y�}T� ����;3 Ger�erated: ifll2Ut4 11:34 Ai�A
file:///C:lils�rs!r�er�olizzi/1�ppDatarL.oca�C1'e�Z�p/u2kDC �O.tn�{.� l /7/2Q 14
Two-Way Stop Controi Page 1 of 1
TINO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
eneral information ifie informatian
,Anai st RP ntersection � r� � . GULFVlEW / DRIVEWAY
" e /Co. GCC urisdicction CLEARWATER
ate Pertormed 1/7/14 al sis Year U711RE WITH PROJECT
al sis Time Period PEAK
'ect Descri tion
ast/West Street: S. GULFVIEW BLVD South Sfreet: DR/VE B ST
ntersection Orientation: East-West tud Period hrs : 0.25
ehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments
r Street Eastbound Westbound
ovemer�t 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
dume vehlh 658 28 20 B05
eak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.00
ourly Fiow Rate, HFR 0 707 27 21 850 Q
vehlh
ercent Heav Vehictes 0 -- — 2 -- --
edian T Undivided
T Channelized Q 0
es 0 2 0 0 1 0
onfi ration T TR LT
m Si nal 0 0
inor Street Nc�thbound Southbound
ovement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
olume veh/h 31 96
eak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.93 1.00 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00
t.�ly Flow Rate, HFR 33 0 17 0 0 0
ueh/h
�cent Hea Vehides 2 0 2 0 0 0
erc�er►t Grade (96) 0 0
Flared Approach N 1V
Slorage 0 0
T Channelized 0 0
nes 0 0 0 0 0 0
urateon LR
la Queue Len th and Leve! of Service
ro�fi Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
ov�nent 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
ane Configuration �T LR
(veh/h) 21 50
(mj (veh/ti) 867 974
�� 0.02 o.2s
96 queue {ength 0.07 1.13
orrtrol Delay (s/veh) 9.3 33.8
OS A D
proach De(ay (slveh) -- — 33.8
proach LOS — — D
Copyright 6� 2007 University of Florida, Ait R�his Reserved HCS+T"' Versan 5.3 Generated: 117/2014 11:32 AM
file:///C:lUsers/rpergolizzi/AppData/LocallTenip/u2k4C7F.trnp 1 /7/2014
° � : ��ter
k Ftanning & Development Department
> �:�
� Cam�gr�hensive �.ands�aPiIIg APPIic��on
t7` tS �tN�tlBENfi Ut�N[ TtiE APPLicAMf Tt! SUBMiT t�NtPtEI� MtC) �RR�CT M:IMFQRMATKft�i, ANY MISkEAtIING, DEGEP'�FVE,
�11GtlIMIp�LEi'E Ott iNCt)RitKf INFORMA'ft�N MAY IMiN.tDA'�'E YOUR Ai�PlICATit�N.
ALLyPI�L{CATlOI�SAitE TO BE FILLE� OtlT COMPt,ETEIY` AND CORfFEGiEY, AND SU81NfFi'�� tN PERS�N (NO FAX OR DEttVERlES}
m��nr� a� o�u���rr a�ar��n� �rx r� or� tH� sa�uc�o o�anun�� va�.
A�ara� � a:a� co� �s c� �s �wo a�rucanav �►�rEUS �i a���a�. an�a �,o cc�€ES� as R�uur��u wrr�ruv
A�E 'Tti BE '3UBM1'i'TH'� fOR REVtEW BY THE DEVH.tii�MENT itElttEN1 CQMMIITEE. SU&S�UQU7' SUBM1'�TAt �R T}iE
��� ���rii��� � �r ..i� ���i � � .��- xJ�� ���� �. �� � �Q ����:�
�►�s (�. �+a�u. �� co��.sy. �u+E.s rw� �urana� a� ��nr�o To eE c�u►�u, sra�a a�rs �oc�u
r�s�.
�,�p�r, �nt �tu� �rttis ,�ur.xnoN, x+���s ro eo�r�,�r wEni au n�ar�t� REquf�EM�rs o� rt��
+t�iuNt�r ��.�e+n' �.
�r vwt��t t� o�v�: Trinity' Ptesbyterian Ghur!cttr a_�tarida citan�fit tx�tporatian
t�tut� �ES�: 2001 Raint�aw U�ive, Cleannra#e�� Ft 3376�
PHON� NUMBER: 72?-�4+46�G�2'iii
EMA1t; infL�Cdx�"1111 ,t�e8►l�rater',�t ,
,�rv�t �e�saaramn�: i+Cat�: E. Crrte� Esq.t H� Ward Eiend�sc:n, P:�l.
n+�►tt�� Aon�ESS: 31 'i Pari� PI�e, . Suite 24C}. GieaEV+r�iteir, F! 33759
a��u� r�u�as�a: 727 '72439t1t3
E�Af�: katie �hwhtaw c�m
�DUR�SS���atEtt'�ROPER't1*: Z008 Gu�to 8ay BCvd., Clean�tat+�', FE.
�ES�RiP7iQNA�RE4UE5T: S�EX�itbl��`/04"
Sl�ec3�a� �de�t' tHe request
li�ude dl reqcrested mde�itY:
e.g., redtretfon % reQui�d ntnn6er of
parking spaae� �reig�rL ,setbark� fai
s3z�c, krt widti4 spe"�' rE+u� etcJ:
SfATE OF H:4RttfA. E�INiY OF t�INEW►S
1, the urcitiersig�ed, acknowtedge that aMl tu arni wbscdbed befare me this ����`� day of
reprreseretatio�s r»ade � this appl`�cation are tnie and
ep
acaurate bo the best af my knowledge a�A autttorize .� (�1���.. ! �� tomeandlorby
GtY representatives io visit and pfiotc�aph the t� ���.t ti� .�.�� rF' _ wfta is persona{ly knavan has
property de�ribed itt tF�is apptication. ��� ..._._.. _. as i..
dentificati�n.
�f``�,��..��� r �.�,�� ��
� � "�t-��.�..' �.._..
Signature of p�+operty owner or �epreseertative
� ,
��t�. �� �
Natary Pu�
My commission expire5:
� �Develo�xr�w� Oeparbne+�Y, taa s. RAy�le arre�e, �ie�watier. Fl.. 33'rss, Te� �' �'19�t�+s^"�� �f .
.+...... �..
° � � # ��rwater
��
U
Planning & Development Department
Comprehensive Landscaping Application
Flexibility Criteria
PROVIDE COMPLETE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE FIVE (5) FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA EXPLAINING HOW, IN DETAIL, THE CRITERION
IS BEING COMPLIED WITH PER THIS COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPING PROPOSAL.
1. Architectural Theme:
a. The landscaping in a Comprehensive Landscaping program shall be designed as a part of the architectural theme of the
principal buildings proposed or developed on the parcel proposed for the development.
OR
b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscaping
program shall be demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for
development under the minimum landscape standards.
See Exhibit "A" for Responses 1-5
2 Lighting. Any lighting proposed as a part of a Comprehensive Landscaping program is automatically controlled so that the
lighting is turned off when the business is closed.
3. Community Character. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the
community character of the City of Clearwater.
4. Property Values. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscaping program will have a beneficial impact
on the value of the property in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
5. Special Area or Scenic Corridor Plan. The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program is
consistent with any special area or scenic corridor plan which the City of Clearwater has prepared and adopted for the area in
which the parcel proposed for development is located.
Planning 8 Development Department, 100 S. Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756, Tel: 727-562-4567; Fax: 727-562-4865
Page 2 of 2 Revised 01/12
Exhibit "A" to Comprehensive Landscaping Application
for Flexible Development Application #FLD2014-11032
Culvers Restaurant at 2008 Gulf to Bay Blvd., Clearwater, FL
1. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment proposed for the
restaurant through the Comprehensive Landscaping Program ("CLP") are demonstrably more
attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted or required on the parcel. The CLP is
proposed under the provisions of CDC Section 3-1202.G, and is being submitted to reduce
the number of required perimeter trees from 23 trees to 20 trees because of FDOT and City
of Clearwater sight triangles and a required minimum 5' setback from the storm chambers
and the sand filter, increase the number of parking spaces in a row from 10 spaces to 11
spaces and eliminate the required foundation plantings along the front (west) fagade of the
proposed building.
Extensive landscape buffers utilizing a tiered effect along with massing and clustering of
trees will be provided around the perimeter of the project. Specifically, 10 foot landscape
buffers are proposed along the western, eastern and northern boundaries including ground
cover, planting beds and continuous hedges with a variety of shade and accent trees. The
northern buffer also consists of a 6 foot high decorative masonry wall lined by a continuous
row of shrubs, and includes cathedral live oak trees. The southern buffer fronting Gulf to
Bay is 15 feet wide and includes masses of ornamental grasses, flowering ground cover,
dwarf shrubs and clustering of shade and understory trees. The provided Interior Greenspace
Areas exceeds the minimum requirements and have been heavily planted with ground cover
to reduce maintenance and provide a pleasing pedestrian experience. Further, the overall
landscape plan provides 55 trees, where only 46 trees are required. The specified trees are
primarily native species and are a combination of evergreen and deciduous types that will
provide seasonal color.
2. The proposed landscape lighting will be on an automatic timer that turns off when the
restaurant is closed.
3. The landscape treatment proposed in the CLP will enhance the community character of the
City of Clearwater, and additionally further the redevelopment along Gulf to Bay Boulevard
by providing similar and/or enhanced landscaping that fits the emerging development pattern
in the area.
4. The landscape treatment proposed in the CLP together with the new restaurant will have a
beneficial impact on the value of the property in the immediate vicinity. The redevelopment
will have a more positive impact on adjacent property values than the existing vacant retail
store. To the west is a medical offce, Checkers and KFC, and the east is 7-11, all of which
have access to Gulf to Bay and minimal landscape buffers compared to what is proposed for
the restaurant as part of the CLP.
5. The proposed development is not located within any special area or scenic corridor plan area.
Gulf to Bay is designated as primary scenic corridor, but a scenic corridor plan has not been
adopted for Gulf to Bay. However, the generous landscape buffers provided and no
vehicular access to Gulf to Bay will promote screening of vehicles in the parking lot and
beautify this segment of Gulf to Bay.
5414833v1