The URL can be used to link to this page

DRB96014 b~"?) 96014 N Myrtle Ave Winn Dixie Plaza TO FROM COPIES SUBJECT DATE ~ ~... City of Clearwater J n terdepartmen tal Corrcspondence Sheet Scott Shuford, DIrector of Central PCUTIltt1l1g RIchard Baler, CIty Cnglnecl A)/ Kathy R1ce, Deputy CIty rvra:d:/? Bob Keller, Assistant Clt)' Manllger Bob Perk1l1s, CIvil Eng1l1eer II Don .tv1cCarty, AssoClatc Planner Proposed Wmn Dr\le May 6, 1997 Thank you for supplymg me with the \\hnn DIxIe sIte plan, dated April 16, 1997 I have reviewed the plan with staff and find that the plan ~tlllll1dlGltes a retention area to be con~tructed along the \Vest Side of the site ThIs area of site has the hlghcst elevation and may reqUIre some e'\tenslve gradmg Smce thIs comment and thosc subsequent have been sent to CNHS, I bnng these comments up so as not to mterrupt the deyeloper's e:-.pedltlouS revIew cycle Also, there are ~ome oth(.1 areas of concern wlllC.h c.an be addresscd dunng a formal DRC submIttal, as follO\ys The Sidewalk along Cleveland Street (lppear,> to be on pnvatc property and would reqUire that an easement be dedIcated to the ClI:y 2 All propo!:>ed and e:-'Istmg utlhtles must be shO\vn on the plan 3 Slde\valks need to <;how ADA ramps m conformance WIth CIty detail!:> and speclficatlOll'> at all '> treet and dnve\v<lY mterscctlons 4 Dramage calculations should be prOVIded to ensure that retentIon areas are capable of handhng a 50-year storm event 5 Dumpster/Compactor locatIons \\<lth approprlatc screenll1g must be shown on the plans 6 Contours or 50 foot penmeter elevatIOns need to be shown on plans to mdlcate affect of dramage to adjacent sItes 7 Parkmg space and alsle dlmenS10ll'> need to conform to the Land Developmen t Code As chscussed, of these comments have been transmItted to CNHS Please let me know If 1 can be of any furthe'i- asslstanCelll1 ~\.pCdltlllg our ~ ! iJ f ~I l-,.. '\""" approval of the plans for thIS development', I'" ' - " ~. " '/, 1 RJB/bp --1 J ,~u .f, ~ 12t:~ f.~] I'!' ',',! ~~- \VUln dl"{te memo '-- _J 'Ie ~~~~I'_':~G t.:~ r- $ ~\"':..-~ ';f- \.~~""'i, ...- "II ~, ('? -{j '" ~. <<" .1!t11~" , ) ..... f-j ,,$ th, G~~ ~' Mr." 09 'IS U tin' Of ClEAtW.JI\lER FEES FOR WINN-DIX.IE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTu 1 Water Meter, 1 ~ In. $ 2400 2 Sewer Impact Fee $ 4500 t"7'\ 3 TransportatIon Impact Fee $ 105,922 27~ 4 BwldlOg Penruts Fee {project Value $1470 MIlhon & 54,500 SF)$6781 (Based on $247210MIl Value, Southern Bwldmg Code) .s Site Plan RevIew Fee 6 Re-plat Fee 7 Development Fee 8 Plan RevIew Fee 9 Radon Gas 10 Tree Penrut Fee $ 250 + S50/acre $ 890 + $ 25not re-platted $ 5500 $ 3260 $ 545 TBD U Costs are based on preliminal") information provided b)' the dc\'e1oper and tbat available on the concept plan. These figures, therefore, are approximate and subject to change. WDDwf-.A.... @ Less o..v..'j ~ft\,'c.~l..... ey-',sf \$ bid,} . Crt~: \::s Cov'"" fdVIO \I) ,,)L- e+- Best Copy Avai~able ~~ 1 e!eo,V/atll -~~~.&~ Interoffice Correspondence Sheet From: Design Review Board Members Scott Shuford. Control Pormlttlng D"octorr:g' Sue Diana, Assistant City Clerk Leslie Dougall-Sides. Asst. City Attorney Don McCarty. Design Planner Gwen legters. Board Reporter Carne Huntley, Community Outreach Manager Doreen Brett, Staff Assistant III To: CC: RE: October 22, 1996 Meeting/Back-Up Materials DATE' October 15, 1996 Our next Design Review Board meetmg IS scheduled for Tuesday, October 22. 1996 at 3 00 p.m In the City CommisSIon Chambers at City Hall We look forward to an Informative, productive meeting We Will have a major downtown proposed project for DRB review. Please make every effort to attend If you have any questIons, contact us at 562-4567 Please make note of our new phone number and address at 100 S Myrtle Avenue, City MUnicipal Services BUIlding, Second Floor, Room #210 SS/DMllb drbl02296 City of Clearwater Design Review Board AGENDA October 22 1996 3:00 p.m. A. CALL TO ORDER & INTRODUCTIONS B. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING - October 8, 1996 C. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSAlS FOR DESIGN REVIEW 1. DRB 96-014 MID-TOWN PLAZA, WINN DIXIE/NHS PROPOSAL, Mudano ASSOCIates Architects - NE Comer/Cleveland Street and Myrtle Avenue D. CHAIRMAN'S ITEMS E. DIRECfOR'S COMMENTS F. BOARD AND STAFF ITEMS 1. APPROVAL OF 1997 MEETING SCHEDULE G. ADJOURNMENT AI02296 DRB 'J'd3\O 018 r-18 ~ AVE ~ ~ I D-l OSCEOLA AVE] ~D~D D~D 0 b~~ J: fT HARRISON AVE S R 595 Q D~[7 LJ ODD WATTERSOO= ~D ~ ~ iO DID GDN D;[ia!D~~ - ~== ~ ~ -0 r 'ID 0 0 0 QYRTLE' Q~D~ :-~D D"D Fh~DgD~D~D I'~ 0 I \\\ .;~ ~ w~ P:OSPEC: j;l AVE ~ JD~VlDNE ~D;9ADVE> \ o ~ i [?Y ~~D~ rOOTH fE I ~ ~ ~ %~ o ~ ~ I [mNG AVE I 0 ~D~D~DID D~D~~~~ ;r GREENWOOD !f1lDDJlIIIlIllllnrmmnmm I tj ~roD I ) \ J In~ 1 I i a !~! ~r9i'NGi 0 \\J WASHINGTOO~ AVE I ~ MADISON AVE )~t, 1 10 I ~~D~I r r~ I M~S:: IZ:: a AVE SR 651 , 'I ~) I ~ ,0 IUN~~tJ ADID ul (o~ D ffitJ I ::~N I AVE ~ J- ~ 0 :::o~ ~ D 0 UllcOLN AVE I ! ~ ~ ~ AVANDA ~~ rng ~ENWOO{) I PRESCOTT AVE i5 ~ -\"\'is "'", ~ I I I / '; EHY A P Iimo~!r' LA I I~ _ ~~3t-'iN'- LJnmm,mJj -J ~ ~'ifM "UFRE[QI1!IJIlmlmmlllllE AVE ~Ei 0 ~ ~I I I 1 ~ ~ I"l LADY MARY DR I Dll-Fl -~~ AVE Q r>'1 :;; .. I ~ J o ::v c 5 "U Z I"l ::u o -- lh -l City of Clearwater Design Review Board October 22, 1996 Meeting SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS FOR DESIGN REVIEW STAFF REPORT BACKGROUND INFORMATION DRB/9$:o14'/~;rOWNP~~WiDD~" hie If i..teveir'iheut~$al '/">b' / "~'c' "~it}.",, ""%~" ". .'" II,' '<',M!, u "',, !\l{!!1f omtt or ~8ud Stteef'.7f!.zM rtJj)b:.edlle' ",<" '" "",",,' }j%,~ m"b'" , ;JtfpM"" /, This project is a major redevelopment proposal planned for the N E comer of Cleveland Street and N Myrtle Avenue This proposed development, If approved, wtll have a major Impact toward the reVItalization of downtown Clearwater In addition to the econonuc development benefits, the proJect, as shown, Will make a sigruficant neighborhood statement along Its frontage on Cleveland Street In accordance With the City's adopted design gUldelmes, staffW1l1 evaluate thts project relating to the aspects of site development, landscape and streetscape design, parkmg and property access, buddmg onentation, bUlldmg design elements, and overall design commuruty Impact, as shown on page 3 1 of the design guidehnes A Site Development. This project does a commendable job of site onentatlOn given the nature of the major tenant It is especially sensitive to pedestnan relatedlonented features along both Cleveland Street the first block ofN Myrtle Avenue The proposed plan also includes the introduction of new site amerutles, such as an outdoor cafe, pedestnan gathering and seating areas, landscaping, benches, outdoor displays and a water feature B Landscape and Streetscape Design. The project site currently is approXimately 90% hard surface and pavement, therefore It contains VIrtually no existlOg landscaping The proposed plan calls for numerous new trees, planters, low-level screerung walls, seatlOg areas, textured concrete sidewalks and plazas, new pedestrian style lighting and a landscape buffer around the balance of the pen meter of the site C Parking and Property Access. The access to the site has been modified from the eXlstmg access pOints to the best pOSSible for thts level of serYIce No requests for access from Cleveland Street (which Include clOSing up of the existing access) are proposed The location of the mam entrances at perpendicular points at Laura Street, both on the east and west side of the property will proVide optimum traffic control The parkmg will have the majority of spaces in front of the supermarket, which IS an essential reqUirement for grocery store operations However, all parking will be behind tbe new shops and the pedestrian oriented plaza on Cleveland Street. No parking will be within 60 feet of Cleveland Street. Landscaped Islands are mcluded In the parking areas as well as adjacent penmeter OeM/1m City of Clearwater Design Review Board October 22, J 996 Meeting landscape buffers The location of the parktng areas also make good use of shared parking as advocated in the guidelines D Building Orientation. The main view comdors are along Cleveland Street and Myrtle Avenue Staff feels that this site plan is senSItive to the site/View onentation Since trus development is one of the first new projects in trus neighborhood, it hopefully wtIl set a tone for future features along Cleveland Street Its proximlty to the Flonda Power office budding and use of compatIble materials wIll proVIde a complementary neighboring development style E Building Design Elements. The masslOg, scale and proportions of the shops along Cleveland Street are 10 keeping for this zone classification The building matenals, firushes, colors, lighting (both pedestnan and bUlldmg IIghtmg), proposed sign age and bUilding identification are uniform and In scale to the development Even the massive wall surfaces of the supermarket have been broken IOto a pattern of smaller spaces and sections to help with an overall reduction of scale The "towers" emphasis at each end of the shops with their standing seam metal roofs, the proposed clock feature and pedestnan gathenng spaces are extremely nice and wIll be a welcome addition to the downtown Clearwater environment F Overall Design Community Impact. As stated preVIously, this project wIll have numerous economic development impacts by Job creation, by significant new busmess actiVity in the downtown commuruty, and by the emphaSIS of a multi-use/function site Architecturally, the shops, pedestnan onented actlvltles, and the settmg of the supermarket are all pOSitive factors In the redevelopment of this site In conclUSion, staff feels that thts project as proposed will have a positive Impact on downtown Clearwater (which hopefully Wlll encourage other redevelopment activities) and, therefore, recommends approval of this project OeM/1m N(OT A.PPROV1ElD DESIGN REVIEW BOARD CITY OF CLEARWATER October 8, 1996 Present. Kathy Milam Robert Herbench Mark Cagnl Alex Pllsko Howard Hamilton Leslie Dougall.Sldes Don McCarty Gwen Legters Wilham McCann MacArthur "Mac" Boykins Vice Chair Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Assistant City Attorney Design Planner Board Reporter Chair Board Member Absent. To provide continuity for research, the items are listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. The meeting was called to order by the Vice ChaIr at 3 00 pm In City Hall Minutes Approval - September 24, 1996 Member Pliska moved to approve the minutes according to copies submitted In wntmg to each member by the Board Reporter. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously Proposals for Design Review 1. DRB96-011 Burnmg Bridges Design Studio -- Mr. HiramBerry 700 Court Street Mr. McCarty said the applJcant was not ready to make a presentation and had requested a continuance to the meeting of October 22, 1996 2. ORB 96-012 -- Surf West Clearwater Beach n Steve Fowler 309 South Gulfview Boulevard Mr. McCarty presented background mformatlOn and staff recommendatIOns, stating the applicant proposes two bUildings Within a new retail development complex on Clearwater beach Standing-seam metal roofs, colorful tile panels, stucco walls, covered walkways and tropical landscapmg are designed to correspond to the Tropical Seascape theme wanted for Clearwater beach Staff has suggested additional wall and column treatments, such as tile Inserts or three dImensIOnal stucco Variations, to help break up the large expanses of glass and wall Mr. McCarty noted the proposal IS located wlthm the design gUidelines area of Clearwater beach, but desIgn gUidelines have not been adopted Steve Fowler, a{chltect representing the applicant. referred to a sIte plan, elevation drawings, a landscapmg plan, and a color graphic, detailing the proposal, designed to be mdrblOa 96 1 10108/96 NOlT APPJR.OVJED part of a new retail facIlity. To create a more pedestrian ambIance, Mr. Fowler proposed to onent the bUilding north and south, providing minor parking along Gulf view Boulevard, wIth the balance of parking In the rear, along Coronado Drive. The Site IS not being developed to the maximum allowable density and the owners have gone above and beyond the call of duty to provIde aesthetic features Roof turrets Will house mechanical eqUipment to prevent It being seen from surrounding hotel balconies. The large glass panels of the retail shops facing Gulfvlew Boulevard Will be canted slightly downward to reflect streetscape colors and activities, cut down on glare, and better enable view of merchandise inside Mr. McCarty thanked the group for coming forward, due to the cntlcal nature of the project and the Importance of aesthetic deSign on Clearwater beach He agreed the proposed bUilding Orientation lends Itself to a more pedestnan fnendly environment Staff felt conditions support the request and recommended approval as conSistent with the proposed deSign gUidelines under conSideration for Clearwater beach In response to questions, Mr Fowler said the storefront glass Will be untlnted, With ultraviolet screening Commercial structures are not required to be elevated, but the bUilding will be flood proofed In accordance With FEMA regulations DISCUSSIOn ensued regarding effectiveness of flood proofing, the rear parking plan, and bUilding slgnage. Due to the d ua I street fr 0 nta ge, M r F ow I e r sa,d the bUll ding s were not cre a ted With "bac k " Sides, but fewer pedestnan accesses were prOVided along the north and south Sides abutting the nelghbonng properties Although slgnage IS not part of thiS presentation, he said one sign on each on Coronado and GUlfVI8W will conform to the sign code Lengthy diSCUSSion ensued, With board members expresSing concern the deSign does not appear to follow the Tropical Seascape theme Concerns were expressed metal roofs do not lend enough of a tropical feel to overcome the boxlike appearance It was felt the large expanses of Windows make the structure look sterile and unappealing, not unlike commercial structures commonly found along US 1 9 Mr McCarty explained those are the reasons staff suggested breaking up the stucco and glass by introdUCing details to give a more three-dimenSional look Some feared a large proliferation of Window Slgnage could occur, Similar to the situation at the Wings establishment Mr Fowler explained they have tned to create a serene environment where VISitors can look out over the water He said they have no mtentlon of obstructing thiS view With neon or other retail slgnage Mr Fowler discussed the proposed color scheme, stating the off-white background Will be bnghtened by strong burnt red ceramiC tiles and umber accents. He Wished to aVOid the appearance of pastel bathroom tile He responded to further questions, statmg the Miami property owners have SIX locations on Clearwater beach, two m MISSISSippi, and one In Las Vegas. One reason they did not take a softer approach to the deSign, was to get as much retail store frontage as pOSSible Without developing the site to ItS potential He noted green space reqUirements are met and the north/south Orientation prevents the "US 19 look". He felt creatmg a Single-story retail budding With 22 foot high ceilings lends to the ambiance The smaller retail/restaurant bUlldmg IS two stories, and the total proposed square footage In the complex IS 12,900. A questIOn was raised regarding whether 29 parkmg spaces are suffiCient for a development of thiS size Mr Fowler detalled code parkmg reqUirements, statmg a variance for two parking spaces was granted A question was raised whether Mr Fowler conSiders thiS proposal responSive to the Tropical Seascape theme, gIven hiS heavy Involvement In development of the Clearwater Beach Blue Ribbon Task Force. Mr. Fowler stated It IS responsive, because of the mdrb10a 96 2 10/08/96 NOT APPROVED pedestrian onentatlon, and recognition of the Clearwater beach building scale by breakmg the proposal mto two smaller structures. In response to a question regardmg hiS opinion of the Wmgs deSign, Mr. Fowler he stated their bUilding could comply with the deSign gUIdelines, except for the excessive Slgnage, mappropnate colors and nonexistent landscaping. Mr. McCarty understood the Surf West development IS not gOIng to have wmdow advertiSing with neon, or hanging banners, etc. Board members felt Hyde Park and Pelican Walk are more representative of what local people prefer In terms of nice retail. Mr. Fowler stated the Intent IS to Incorporate art work Into the merchandise displays, creating the kind of high-tech ambiance that eXists at Danlelle's In Pelican Walk Board members expressed concern they are unable to make a recommendation Without adopted deSign gUidelines. Mr. McCarty stated the applIcant came forward voluntanly, asking for mput In the absence of a recommendatIOn, the floor was opened for suggestIons Members suggested softenmg the appearance With pastel colors, and prOViding more visual Interest by lowenng the tile bands. Mr McCarty reiterated agam hiS suggestIOn to Incorporate some three-dimensIOnal deSign features to make walls and massing less uniform The Chair thanked Mr Fowler for hiS presentation 3 ORB 96-013 n Pier 60 Park, Concessions Building Signage Pier 60 Drive, Clearwater beach Mr McCarty presented background Information and staff recommendations Refernng to caples of supplemental draWings prOVided by the applicant, he said thiS slgnage package IS proposed by the Pier 60 concessions operator to reflect the Clearwater beach redevelopment theme and Will Identify the buddmg that prOVides concession services Staff has met With the faCIlity operators to work out preferred locations for their three Q signs. He noted thiS IS not their anginal sign proposal, but has been modifIed to better reflect some of the deSign elements at the project Staff supported the slgnage package as being In keeping With the deSign gUldelmes and recommended approval Lisa Chandler and Richard Gnst addressed the board, statm9 the logo was deSIgned to duplicate the timberline architectural feature and font used on the City's Pier 60 IdentificatIon signs. The City's Signs have a gray background With blue IndiVidually lighted channel letters Ms Chandler saId she deSigned her Sign With the Pier 60 name In yellow, backed With four different bnght colors on a white background, and her bUSiness name "Pier 60 ConceSSIOns, Retail and Rental." Member Hamilton moved for approval There was no second. Ms Dougall-Sides reiterated formal board approval IS not reqUired because deSign gUidelines have not been adopted for the subject property, but board members may gIve suggestions to the applicant. Several members expressed concern With the applrcant chOOSing to use a corporation logo Instead of creatmg conSistent Slgnage to complement the eXisting Slgnage throughout the area Ms Chandler reiterated she Incorporated the Pier 60 logo Into her deSign, but added colors to brrghten It DISCUSSIon ensued regarding the proposed colors and whether the applicants have the authOrity to deViate from the established colors In use at the proJect. Mr McCarty stated. as the selected firm to operate the Pier 60 conceSSIOn, they are entitled to Slgnage He did not believe It was part of the RFP to restnct slgnage to the eXisting features. As the proposed Slgnage IS responSive to the name and architectural features and does not exceed the square footage allowance, he felt It IS appropnate mdrb10a 96 3 10/08/96 NOT APPROVED In response to a question regarding the business name, Ms. Chandler said It summanzes the bUilding, ItS purpose and use, and the colors were part of the bid packet as an example of their logo She objected to the expressed concerns, stating she was not aware the City could dictate one's freedom of expression. She questioned. other than changmg the colors to reflect the board members' personal preference rather than hers. how the proposed Sign differs from the eXisting Pier 60 slgnage. She offered to let the City put up a gray sign If they wanted to pay for It. She reiterated she designed the Sign to be as Simplistic as pOSSible, Identically matching the timberline structure and font One member stated the colors do not bother him, but questioned the shape of the sign, stating It does not lend Itself to any of the bUilding's features. It was indicated the shape was created to fit Into the upper area of the facade, but the location was lowered at staff's suggestion Mr. McCarty affirmed It covered some of the distinctive architectural features m its anginal proposed location He and Mr Gnst discussed the rationale of the proposed Slgnage placement. One member was under the Impression the sign was a flat panel and cutting off the top to leave a basically rectangular shape Mr. Grist said that would reqUire refabncatlng the entire Sign because It IS an Illummated box With a smgle plastiC face. The suggestion to cut off the top was Withdrawn Ms Dougall-Sides questioned whether the lease prOVISions reqUire ORB approval for Slgnage. Mr McCarty Will Investigate and bring thiS Item back to the board If It IS found ORB approval IS needed under the terms of the lease He thanked board members for their Input. Board and Staff Discussion Staff was requested to bring future sign proposals forward before the Signs are manufactured Mr McCarty stated he has expenenced limited success In his attempts to encourage Citizens to follow a design theme, and/or to bnng their designs forward for design review. Mr. McCarty dlstnbuted a memo from Central Permitting Director Scott Shuford requesting ORB conSideration and Input concernmg two upcoming proJects' standardization of "sandWich board" Signs and the appropriateness of outdoor merchandise display In view of the City's aesthetiC goals In response to a question, Ms Dougall-Sides said she has not been Involved beyond hearing discussion of certain eXlstmg cases Consensus of the board was they are Willing to review and prOVide Input regardIng these two Issues. Questions were raised and diSCUSSion ensued regarding code limitations of sandWich board signs in terms of size and placement Within City flght-of-way. Staff was requested to obtain Information regarding what IS being done In other communities Mr McCarty reported the Clty's RFP (Request for Proposal) for a deSign gUldelmes consultant Yielded two respondents. As both proposals were responsive to the RFP requirements, a suggestion was made to see If a portion of the contract could be negotIated With each of the 2 firms Both respondents have Indtcated Willingness to do that He stated an Important part of the InterView process IS to have the applicants appear before the ORB for mput Into the deSign gUidelines The two firms are Harvard, Jolly, Cleese, and Toppe, and Wade Tnm and ASSOCiates, In conjunction With Steve Fowler One member observed one firm had slicker graphiCS presentations, while the other had better background and a more substantive presentation Mr. McCarty hoped to prOVide more information regarding negotiations at the next meeting mdrb 1 Oa.96 4 1 0/08/96 NOT APPROVlED Mr. McCarty reported the City's State Histone grant application will be heard November 19 In Tallahassee While he was confident the applicatIon wIll be given serious consideration, he cautioned there are no assurances the City will receive the grant. Mr. McCarty distributed caples of proposed meeting dates for 1997, asking board members to review the schedule for approval at the next meeting. Member Milam was troubled by the deCISion to place a lighted fluorescent sIgn on the beach despIte the board's concern. She questioned If It IS possible to recommend to the City CommiSSIon for the ORB to revIew Signs on City property Within the board's JUriSdIction, so when City property IS leased out. the City can maintain control of the SIgns for consistency With a deSign theme. Ms Dougall.Sldes recommended addreSSing those comments In a memo to the City CommiSSion or the City Manager, who negotiates With City property lessees. She and Mr McCarty agreed It seems loglcat to be senSItive to the board's concern that the City have more control over lessors' Slgnage, espeCially Since It may be some time before deSign gUidelines are adopted Staff Will convey to management the need to took Into thiS Issue Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 4 10 p m Chalf DeSign ReView Board Attest. Board Reporter mdrb10a 96 5 10/08/96 ...,..... ... J / l.. Mud Assoc' ^... h' I " II .A. ~ ana lates /\I C Itects, nc, J . ~.... 4625 East Bay Dr., SUIte 221, Clearwater, FL 34624-6819 ...... FL Reg AA C000012 (813) 539-8737 FAX (813) 536-0964 PROJECT Mid-Town Plaza COMM NO 96-07 FILE' chrono TO: Central Permlttmg City of Clearwater DATE: October 23, 1996 Attn Don McCarty WE TRANSMIT (If enclosures are not as noted, please mform us Immediately) . herewith 0 under separate cover via o m accordance with your request THE FOLLOWING o DraWings o Specifications o Change Order o Certificate for Payment o Samples . As IndICated Below COPI ES DESCRIPTION DATE SPrints 24 x 36 Slte/Landscapmg Plan ACTION: o approval o revIew & comment . use & mformatlon o distribution to parties o record o for signature o forwardmg as noted o return to this offIce o no actlon required o mall o pick-up . Hand Deliver REMARKS COPI ES TO o BY' ~~L!>o.~3X.~~t,,~~~~; ~T ~ .. ~ ":- ~:;,"__~~~j;h~:: ~t-; ~ City of Clearwater~ Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet TO ~ ' :::::: ::;::;;~:i:~:~~~~ iTer Ellzabeth'M . D~Ptula, 'CIty :Ja;er < " , Scott Shuford, Director of Central Permitting Alan Fern; Economlc'Development Director -. , FROM; " COPIES .. ~ I ~ to...-.. 'j ~ - SUBJECT Proposed Wlnn Dixie Site Plat '" " , , DATE November 5, 1996 .,' 'After a cursory reView, I offer the ,followIng · The City of Clearwater has adequate 'utilities to prOVide water, sanrtary sewer and gas to serve the proposed W,nn DIxIe · Storm pipes are overloaded on Myrtle Avenue and are on a very flat grade The ponds should be sized for a 50-year storm as If there were not an outfall pipe (City Engineer's call) The outlet control structure and pipe should be tied Into the 1Sn RCP at the NW corner of the site thiS site should not be considered for payment In lIeu of storm water detention · There IS some localized street f100clng on Cleveland Street and shops may be required to have a floor elevation more than one foot above the crown of the road Hlstonc flood elevations should be checked to see If there IS any documented hIgh water marks of bUSinesses on the'south Side of Cleveland, as the old site on thiS property was bUilt several feet above the crown of the road when It was deSigned to be a car dealership · It does not seem feaSible that the storm water detention pond along the north property line can be done The site IS at elevation 30 at the NE corner and flows overland toward the SW corner (elevation 24) The best location for the retentIon IS along Myrtle on eIther Side of the driveway where Laura Street IS proposed to be vacated · The E-W Sn sanitary sewer IS to be relocated In an easement around the bUilding to the north (no closer than 10 feet to the north of the truck ramp) Elevations have to be checked to venfy that thiS IS feaSIble · There is an eXisting 12" storm line and 4n gas main on Laura Street, and after being vacated, the CIty Will reqUire a drainage and utility easement. It 1$ recommended that no trees be planted in this easement . to] ~ ". .,.....~~, :5..L~td~t~rt'~'*~A>1-;".\.r:...f.~ ..~.. ,~ Proposed Winn DIxie Site Plat November 5, 1996 Page 2 . The site plan should not address future expansion unless all reqUired parking IS shown with the required Increase in retention pond size. . The City should Investigate the condItion of the eXisting 12" storm line on Laura Street before a new base and pavement IS placed over the pipe. This would be the time to rework any dilapidated storm pipe. . Sidewalks Will be required adjacent to all City right of ways As discussed, these comments should not be considered all Inclusive and complete since the plan was extremely conceptual If you should have any further questions, please do not heSitate to call me at extension 4780 RJB/ns --- ~o o ~~ ! ~- t ) ~ ij ... l----~YR-ii.E- --, w i --- AV Vi v. ~: I '" al I---n---\- : -=>0 i I !~-lfo---~- II ~ _ ;lI\ I Q, I ," P.L!1 ~ 'iii if!O I , I 1'tJ I~ <J, - PROSPECT Vl ... 4 " PE (06/94) ~._., I 1 I , , , , \ I _--' :L " o~ fAV------- --:-0 ","'-'ctO "I \ \ ~ 0'0" (OJJn21 \ \ \1 \'01 _ ~.l L.............. GREENWOOD J -- -~~---~~~~ ,,- L- --- -_/ I WASHINGTON ,~ ~ ,L, 1 1/4" PE (9/89) MADISON AV ,26 r I , I I I, 5 ~ Vl ... , , I ~I ZI ~, ", o '" I no ALEXANDER It: , Vl' -I: I i I : , , : I J , , MISSOURI '6 :---- - ----< ___ ___J Z'GV ..I d ll~ ," , I l r d II AV I~ " I i:: (/l rfl I; .' d i I j 2"j AV _~_ __--.J 5 ~---,t -1[- , I \ \ I I , I , \ \ \ \ J./ li ............ / " ,~ /' "'" / / " "'- / , :::i d \ ~ ---- Best Copy Available L~l J 'L N ~ - M;;;- ~ ---;;- 1";0 I '~6"81 'I > I ~ ~ 1".1> .' N " IS!' ~ -~~,J ~R~CT l ~ ~ IJO ~- . ~~- ~n I ___----~~~'. --\- -- ~I~:' I -, _ ___~.. _I-- A V - J I ""- 50 ' l I- I : 1_ _ __~______ __..J - -, .J 1 - --- -- i 1 1/4"GV !~ ~ 1'" -- ~I I~ - 1 'I"'"GV 00 · ~ 53 o ;il I "N ~ I ~N "".:)-0' ...", o ~ I"l ~ 2- ~i t ..... ... " i j "'I .::; AV ~ l 4"0 10 Ul -I I' r -; I 1 I I L___ I <AI i~ , I II I" UI ....; : N MISSOURI ----' ~ - i---t-- 1 1 1_____ __ I I '('J