Planning & Zoning Regular Meeting Agenda

CITY OF ANNA MARIA PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING February 20, 2026 9:00 A.M. P.O. Box 779, 10005 Gulf Drive, Anna Maria, FL 34216 Phone (941) 708-6130 Fax (941) 708-6134 THIS BOARD MEETING IS BEING HELD USING OPTIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS MEDIA TECHNOLOGY. Dial in using a telephone You may access the meeting from your phone by dialing 1 929 205 6099. When the Meeting ID is requested, enter 853 9200 0280 *OUT OF COURTESY TO OTHERS, PLEASE MUTE YOUR PHONE WHEN NOT SPEAKING* IF YOU WISH TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, PRESS *9 ON YOUR PHONE Pledge of Conduct: We may disagree, but we will be respectful of one another. We will direct all comments to the issues. We will avoid personal attacks. 1. CALL TO ORDER Call to order, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance and roll call. 2. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are considered routine in nature and should be considered in a single motion. Items which warrant individual discussion should be removed from this list prior to the motion to adopt. Such items will be discussed separately. a. Approval of Meeting Minutes: November 19, 2025 b. Approval of Meeting Minutes: January 21, 2026 3. VARIANCE: 853 NORTH SHORE DR A request for a variance to the 15-ft waterway setback requirement for the installation of a retaining wall along Tampa Bay, located at 853 North Shore Dr. 4. SIGHT VISIBILITY STUDY Presentation and discussion on a study the City conducted on intersection safety 5. WORKSHOP CHAPTER 110 WATERWAYS Workshop of Chapter 110 Waterways, Article III Shoreline Stabilization. 6. TEXT AMENDMENT: CHAPTER 110 SECS 110-73 AND 110-74 Public Hearing and Recommendation Regarding an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 110 Waterways Section 110-73 “Bulkheads and Seawalls” and Section 110-74 “Repair and replacement of bulkheads and seawalls”. 7. DISCUSSION: UTILITIES An open discussion of utility issues provided by third party governmental entities. 8. STAFF COMMENTS 9. CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS 10. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS 11. PRESS COMMENTS

12. NEXT MEETING a. March 18, 2026 13. ADJOURNMENT (FSS 286.26) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT AND FLORIDA STATE STATUTES, PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES NEEDING SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING SHOULD CONTACT THE CITY CLERK FOR ASSISTANCE AT LEAST THREE BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING (941) 708-6130. SHOULD ANY INTERESTED PARTY SEEK TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING, THEY WILL NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS BE MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.

Planning and Zoning Meeting November 19, 2025 9:00 a.m. B OARD MEMBERS PRESENT : Jeff Rodencal – Member Christine Aaron – Member David Johnson – Member Don Buswell-Charkow – Member S TAFF PRESENT : Becky Vose, City Attorney Barbara Jeffries, Executive Assistant Ashley Austin, City Planner Board Member Rodencal called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m., followed by the pledge of allegiance and Roll Call. 1. S ELECTION OF O FFICERS The board elected officers as follows: Jeff Rodencal -Chair Motion: Board Member Buswell-Charkow moved, and Board Member Aaron Seconded, and the motion carried 4-0 to elect Jeffrey Rodencal as Chair of the Planning and Zoning Board. Christine Aaron- Vice Chair Motion: Board Member Johnson moved, and Board Member Buswell-Charkow seconded, and the motion carried 4-0 to elect Christine Aaron as Vice-Chair of the Planning and Zoning Board. 2. Q UASI -JUDICIAL H EARING: A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE 15-FT WATERWAY SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A RETAINING WALL ALONG T AMPA B AY LOCATED AT 853 NORTH S HORE DR. This item was rescheduled for December 22, 2025, at 1:00 p.m. City Attorney Becky Vose provided an overview to the Board regarding quasi-judicial hearings and explained the proper procedures for moving through such proceedings. Board Member Aaron asked whether a board member would need to disclose if they had driven by and viewed a property prior to a hearing. City Attorney Becky Vose responded that while disclosure is not legally required, board members should disclose prior site visits before a quasi-judicial hearing if they have occurred.

Chair Rodencal asked how hardship applies in the context of quasi-judicial decisions. City Attorney Becky Vose explained that hardship varies from case to case, which is why the City has a board to review them. Each case is unique and requires careful consideration. If cases were strictly cut, a board review would not be necessary. Chair Rodencal then asked how the Board could notify the Commission of specific concerns or considerations related to a variance once it advances in the process. Motion: Board Member Aaron moved, Board Member Buswell-Charkow seconded, and the motion carried 4-0 to reschedule item 2 too the December 22, 2025 Planning and Zoning meeting. 3. Q UASI -J UDICIAL H EARING: A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PAID PARKING LOT AT 105 S PRING AVE . City Planner, Ashley Austin, explained that Items 3 and 4 are related; however, the Board must first consider the variance request. The applicant is requesting a variance to the buffer requirement related to fencing, in conjunction with a site plan application for a paid parking lot located at 105 Spring Avenue. The Board reviewed a variance request for the property at 105 Spring Avenue regarding fencing along the residential boundary and Spring Lane. The applicants sought to maintain an existing 4- foot vinyl fence along the northeast boundary adjacent to Manali’s residence, rather than installing the 6-foot wood fence typically required by code, and requested no fencing along the rear property line along Spring Lane. Board members discussed fencing requirements, confirming that code specifies height and buffer requirements but allows flexibility in materials. Applicants described proposed fencing and landscaping to delineate property lines and provide separation from neighboring properties. Adjacent property owners were notified, and no objections were received. The Board also noted that any future changes in property use would require site plan review and could prompt re- evaluation of fence requirements. After discussion, the Board approved the variance as requested: the existing 4-foot fence along the residential boundary will be maintained, 6-foot fence meeting code requirements will be installed along Spring Lane which is the rear property line. Motion: Board Member Johnson moved, Board Member Aaron seconded, and the motion carried 4-0 to A request for a variance to the buffer requirements for the development of a paid parking lot at 105 Spring Ave. 4. Q UASI -JUDICIAL H EARING: A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A PAID PARKING LOT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 105 S PRING AVE . Incorrectly advertised as Quasi-Judicial

City Planner, Ashley Austin, stated that the property consists of two commercially zoned lots that have historically been used as accessory parking for the Sandbar restaurant. The proposed site plan establishes paid parking as the primary use. Parking lots are permitted in the C-1 zoning district with site plan approval, and the proposal is consistent with the Future Land Use designation. Questions were raised regarding lot dimensions, boundary inconsistencies, and whether the use of a portion of one lot by an adjacent property created a legal issue. Staff and the City Attorney acknowledged the situation. They explained that while a replat or unity of title would be preferable, the site plan could be approved provided there is a recorded agreement between the commonly owned properties. This agreement would protect the City from future legal challenges if ownership changes. The Board agreed that approval should be conditioned on the execution and recording of an agreement acceptable to the City Attorney and City Planner. City Planner, Ashley Austin, confirmed that compacted sand/gravel meets the City’s permeability requirements, although gravel is preferred. Logan Reiber, Agent, stated that the proposed surface is safe and comparable to other parking lots in the area, and that parking rates will be set at market rates. The site plan was approved subject to the inclusion of corral-style fencing along the southeast property boundary. Motion: Board Member Johnson moved, Board Member Aaron seconded, and the motion carried 4-0 to approve a request for site plan approval for a paid parking lot with conditions for the property located at 105 Spring Ave. 5. B OARD MEMBER COMMENTS Chair Rodencal asked about the dumpsters being placed at the beach access. He asked if there was any alternative to them. CONSENT AGENDA: The following items are considered routine in nature and should be considered in a single motion. Items which warrant individual discussion should be removed from this list prior to the motion to adopt. Such items will be discussed separately. 1. Approval of Minutes: July 16, 2025 2. Approval of Minutes: August 20, 2025 Motion: Board Member Aaron moved, Board Member Johnson seconded, and the motion carried 4-0 to approve the Consent Agenda. NEXT MEETING December 22, 2025 Chair Rodencal Adjourned the meeting at 9:56 a.m.

Planning and Zoning Meeting January 21, 2026 9:00 a.m. B OARD MEMBERS PRESENT : Jeff Rodencal – Member Christine Aaron – Member David Johnson – Member Don Buswell-Charkow – Member via Zoom S TAFF PRESENT : Becky Vose, City Attorney Barbara Jeffries, Executive Assistant Ashley Austin, City Planner Chair Rodencal called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m., followed by the pledge of allegiance and Roll Call. 1. CONSENT AGENDA a. Approval of Minutes: November 19, 2025 Motion: Board Member Aaron moved, Board Member Johnson seconded, and the motion carried 4-0 to approve the consent agenda for January 21, 2026. 2. 519 PINE AVE. Site plan approval for an office expansion at 519 Pine Avenue, including relocation of an 836- square-foot cottage from 106 Willow Avenue and a special exception for off-site parking. City Planner Ashley Austin updated the board on the following: • The real estate office has operated at the location for approximately 20 years. • The proposal includes relocation of a 1920 cottage to the rear of the property. • The project meets zoning, setback, lot coverage, and development standards. • Six parking spaces are required; the applicant will continue leasing spaces from the Roser Church. • One ADA-compliant parking space will remain on-site. • A six-foot wood fence and landscape buffer will be installed adjacent to residential property. • The request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations. • Required public notice was provided. Board discussion included: • Parking arrangements confirmed as a continuation of the existing lease. • The relocation preserves a historic structure, though it is not formally designated historic. • Zoning clarified as ROR with an approved commercial use. • Lot coverage, drainage, foundation type, and flood elevation requirements were discussed. • Commercial buildings are permitted to meet Base Flood Elevation without full stilt elevation. Motion: Board Member Aaron moved, Board Member Johnson seconded, and the motion carried 4-0 to approve the site plan for an office expansion at 519 Pine Avenue, including

City of Anna Maria Planning and Zoning January 21, 2026 Page 2 of 2 relocation of an 836- square-foot cottage from 106 Willow Avenue and a special exception for off-site parking. 3. WORKSHOP C HAPTER 110 WATERWAYS Workshop Chapter 110 Waterways Secs. 110-73 “Bulkheads and seawalls” and 110-74 “Repair and replacement of bulkheads and seawalls”. City Planner Ashley Austin updated the board on the following:  Existing shoreline stabilization language is unclear and restrictive.  Proposed amendments would clarify that repairs or reinforcement of existing seawalls may extend no more than 12 inches waterward.  An emergency ordinance is currently in place while permanent amendments are developed. Board discussion included: • canal width impacts • riparian rights • terminology clarification (replace “adjacent” with “abutting”) and add reference to “riprap” Chair Rodencal made a recommendation to review the full shoreline stabilization section at a future workshop. 4. S TAFF COMMENTS None. 5. CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS None. 6. B OARD MEMBER COMMENTS Discussion included alternate member participation from the Historic Preservation Board for quorum purposes and improvements to Zoom access and meeting setup. 7. PRESS COMMENT None. 8. ADJOURNMENT Chair Rodencal adjourned the meeting at 10:05am

Presenter/Department: City Planner Ashley Austin 1. Title: (Z25-000030) A request for a variance to the 15-ft waterway setback requirement for the installation of a retaining wall along Tampa Bay located at 853 North Shore Dr. Staff Contact: City Planner Ashley Austin City of Anna Maria Agenda Meeting Date: 2/20/2026 Background Information: The subject property, located at 853 North Shore Dr, is comprised of two platted lots which were each developed with a single-family home. In 2024, both homes were demolished and the two (2) lots were joined via a Unity of Title to create a single lot for a new single-family home. The applicant, Icard Merrill, on behalf of the property owners, Andrew and Siubhan Clark, is requesting a variance to the setback requirements which would allow the property owners to construct a retaining wall along Tampa Bay within the 15ft waterfront setback of the new single-family home currently under construction. Applicable Code Provision: City of Anna Maria Code of Ordinances Sec. 114-422(b): Waterfront setbacks, on waterfront property the setback shall be measured from the mean high-water line or retaining wall, whichever is closer to the lot or parcel, and the closest building line. Authority: The planning and zoning board shall not recommend approval, nor shall the city commission approve a variance, unless the applicant shows by substantial competent evidence that it is entitled to a variance based on each of the following criteria: (1) There are substantial practical difficulties and hardships in carrying out the strict letter of the regulation, and these difficulties and hardships are due to existing special conditions and unique circumstances which are peculiar to the specific property involved and which are not generally applicable to other properties or structures in the same district; (2) The condition giving rise to the requested variance is due to unique circumstances not created by the applicant or any person presently having an interest in the property; (3) The variance request is not based exclusively upon a desire to reduce the cost of developing the site; (4) The proposed variance will not substantially increase congestion on surrounding public streets, the danger of fire, or other hazard to the public; (5) The proposed variance will not substantially diminish property values in, or alter the essential character of, the area surrounding the site; (6) The variance request is not based on the presence of nonconformities in the district or adjoining districts; (7) The proposed variance is the minimum modification of the regulation at issue that will afford viable relief; and (8) The effect of the proposed variance is in harmony with the general intent of the comprehensive plan, this chapter, and the specific intent of the subject area of the provision.

Attachments: Exhibit A: Response to Variance Criteria Exhibit B: Supplemental Materials and Visual Aids Exhibit C: Site Plan The applicant has submitted a response to the criteria above (Exhibit A) for the Planning and Zoning Board’s review and evaluation. Notice: Notice of this hearing has been provided as required by the City Code by mail, publication and posting of the subject property.

Exhibit A

1 Ashley Austin From: Katherine Andrews <kandrews@icardmerrill.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 2:33 PM To: Ashley Austin Subject: RE: Variance Supplement Package Z25-000030 Attachments: Clark Residence_Site Plan.pdf Hi Ashley, I was able to reach out to our architect for assistance. Please see the visual attached showing the setback from the retaining wall for perspective. Also, our architect has confirmed that the buildable lot area would be decreased from 4,785 square feet to 3,647 square feet if the setback must be measured from the retaining wall. I will include the attachment and the size decrease in our presentation as well. Also, I apologize for issuing a correction now, but there was a typo in the narrative we submitted initially. We cited code section 114-282(2)(a) on page 2 of the narrative, but the correct provision is actually 114- 222(3)(a). The regulation is the same in both provisions, so it does not change the content of our narrative, but I wanted to mention it to you as we will be referencing the correct code provision in our presentation and I wanted to prevent any confusion. I apologize for the mix-up. See you on Monday! Best, Katherine “Kate” Andrews, Esq. 8470 Enterprise Circle, Suite 201 Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202 P: 941.907.0006 | F: 941.552.0108 kandrews@icardmerrill.com icardmerrill.com Established 1953 _____________________________________________________ The information transmiĴed is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in this message. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, other use of, or taking action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in

City of Anna Maria Sight Triangle Study February 2026

Introduction The City of Anna Maria Planning and Zoning Board has requested a Sight Triangle Study (also known as Sight Distance) to be conducted within its limits. This study aims to assess stop- controlled intersections that pose hazardous conditions for vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians due to obstructions within the Sight Triangle. To identify whether an object obstructs visibility, it is essential to evaluate both the horizontal and vertical alignments of the roadways as depicted in Figure 1, along with the height and position of the object (AASHTO, Green Book). For passenger vehicles, the driver's eye level is typically estimated at 3.5 feet, while the height of an approaching vehicle is assumed to be 4.25 feet above the roadway surface. At the decision point illustrated in Figure 2, the driver's eye height serves as the measurement reference. Any object within the line of sight or “sight triangle” that obstructs the driver's view of an oncoming vehicle (measured at 4.25 feet) should be either removed or modified. Potential obstructions in these sight triangles may include buildings, vehicles, hedges, trees, bushes, tall crops, walls, fences, and similar structures. Figure 1: Heights Pertaining to Sight Triangles

Sight Triangles/Sight Distance Sight distance is the length of roadway visible to a driver. The three types of sight distance common in roadway design are intersection sight distance, stopping sight distance, and passing sight distance. This study will not discuss stopping and passing sight distances because it primarily occurs in hilly, rural settings and this study addresses low speed, two lane urban conditions. Intersection Sight Triangles The driver of a vehicle approaching or departing from an intersection should have an unobstructed view of the intersection, including any traffic control devices, and sufficient lengths along the intersecting roadway to permit the driver to anticipate and avoid potential collisions. These unobstructed views form triangular areas known as sight triangles. A typical intersection is divided into areas between each leg known as quadrants. There may be three quadrants, such as for a “T” intersection, or four, such as for a four-leg intersection. Sight triangles are the specified areas along an intersection’s approach legs and across the included corners (see Figure 2 for an illustration). These areas should be clear of obstructions that might block a driver’s view of conflicting vehicles or pedestrians. The two types of intersection sight triangles are approach sight triangles and departure sight triangles (AASHTO, Green Book, 2001). This study focuses on approach sight triangles. Figure 2: Approach Sight Triangles

Approach Sight Triangle Approach sight triangles provide the driver of a vehicle approaching an intersection unobstructed view of any conflicting vehicles or pedestrians. These triangular areas should be large enough that drivers can see approaching vehicles and pedestrians in sufficient time to slow or stop and avoid a crash. Approach sight triangles are illustrated in Figure 2. Vehicle crash reports were obtained from FDOT’s Signal 4 Analytics software which gathers crash information from State, County and local Municipalities. Crash data on Anna Maria was collected from January 1, 2023 thru August 8, 2025, to help provide insight into the causes of the crashes. There were no fatalities and only three 3 injuries among 21 crashes reported in the City however, 18 of the crashes resulted in property damage. A summary of the crashes can be found in Table 2 below. In addition to vehicles; motorcycles, bicyclists, and pedestrians were also provided in the reports. A crash report summary by type (Table 1) and location (Table 2) is also provided below. Table 1: Crash Report Summary by Type from 1/1/23 – 8/7/25

Table 2: Crash Report Summary by Location from 1/1/23 – 8/7/25 Below is a comprehensive list of the intersections identified by the study with potentially hazardous sight triangles. Crash Location Type of Crash North Bay Blvd Backing into moving vehicle on road Gulf Drive Side swipe with parked vehicle Gulf Drive Side swipe after crossing painted line Pine Avenue Backing into moving vehicle on road Magnolia Avenue Parked van door hit while car was passing Pine Avenue Golf cart rolled while turning left too fast Pine Avenue Backing into vehicle in parking lot Gulf Drive Police cruiser backing into pole Gulf Drive Side swipe trying to turn left around parked vehicle North Bay Blvd Backing into traffic from driveway Spring Avenue Backing out of parking space in lot Pine Avenue Backing into fire hydrant from lot South Bay Blvd Backing into traffic from Galati Marina Gulf Drive Vehicle left road striking sign pole Poinsettia Road Single vehicle golf cart rolled turning left North Shore Drive Vehicle left in reverse backed into parked car Willow Avenue Backing from driveway into parked vehicle Pine Avenue Commercial vehicle backing into fire hydrant Gulf Drive Rear end collision distracted Gulf Drive Sideswipe parked vehicle; hit and run Pine Avenue Careless driving into fence in parking lot Pine Avenue Sideswipe in parking lot; hit and run Pine Avenue Vehicle crashed into dumpsters and fled the scene Gulf Drive Vehicle backed into wooden fence in City Hall lot

Intersections # Intersection Location Page 1 North Shore Drive and North Bay Boulevard ....................................... 1 2 North Bay Boulevard and Jacaranda Road ........................................... 3 3 Jacaranda Road and Gladiolus Street .................................................... 5 4 North Shore Drive and Gladiolus Street ............................................... 7 5 North Shore Drive and Fern Street ....................................................... 9 6 Jacaranda Road and Alamanda Road/Poinsettia Road ......................... 11 7 North Bay Avenue and Poinsettia Road ............................................... 12 8 North Bay Avenue and Hibiscus Street/North Shore Drive.................. 14 9 South Bay Boulevard and Blue Heron Drive ....................................... 16 10 North Shore Drive and Palm Avenue ................................................... 18 11 South Bay Boulevard and Kumquat Drive ........................................... 20 12 South Bay Boulevard and Loquat Drive .............................................. 22 13 South Bay Boulevard and Magnolia Avenue ....................................... 24 14 South Bay Boulevard and Spring Avenue ............................................ 26 15 Holly Road and Iris Street .................................................................... 28 16 North Shore Drive and Cypress Avenue ............................................... 30 17 North Shore Drive and Coconut Avenue .............................................. 32 18 Gulf Drive and Sycamore Avenue ........................................................ 34 19 Magnolia Avenue and Tarpon Street .................................................... 36 20 Pine Avenue and North Shore Drive .................................................... 38 21 Pine Avenue and Crescent Drive .......................................................... 40 22 Pine Avenue and Tarpon Street ............................................................. 42 23 Gulf Drive and Spring Lane ................................................................. 44

24 Gulf Drive and Palmetto Avenue .......................................................... 46 25 Gulf Drive and Willow Avenue ............................................................ 48 26 Gulf Drive and Oak Avenue ................................................................. 50 27 Gulf Drive and Maple Avenue .............................................................. 52 28 Gulf Drive and Beach Avenue .............................................................. 54 29 Gulf Drive and Peppertree Lane ........................................................... 56 30 Gulf Drive and Archer Way .................................................................. 58

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 1 North Shore Drive and North Bay Boulevard Existing Roadway Characteristics • Three-leg intersection • Three-Way Stop Control • Beach access

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 2 North Bay Boulevard Westbound looking North Safety Issues • Palms and vegetation blocking Visibility Triangle Westbound looking North • No crosswalks for beach access Recommendations • Add crosswalks to North and South legs • Add pedestrian yield signs at Northeast and Southwest corners • Add Stop Ahead sign ahead of Southbound North Shore Drive

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 3 North Bay Boulevard and Jacaranda Roadr paragraph text Existing Roadway Characteristics • Four-leg intersection • Two-Way Stop Control

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 4 Jacaranda Road looking East Safety Issues • Stop bars on Jacaranda missing Recommendations • Add Stop Bars to Jacaranda Road • Add signage to existing stop signs identifying “Cross Traffic Does Not Stop”

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 5 Jacaranda Road and Gladiolus Street paragraph text Existing Roadway Characteristics • Four-leg intersection • Two-Way Stop Control

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 6 Gladiolus Street Northbound looking West Safety Issues • Stop bars on Gladiolus missing Recommendations • Add Stop Bars to Gladiolus Road • Add signage to existing stop signs identifying “Cross Traffic Does Not Stop” to Jacaranda Road

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 7 North Shore Drive and Gladiolus Street Existing Roadway Characteristics • Three-leg intersection • One-Way Stop Control

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 8 Gladiolus Westbound looking North Gladiolus Westbound looking South Safety Issues • Visibility Triangle reduced Northbound looking East/West Recommendations • Clear foliage at Northeast corner • Clear foliage at the Northwest corner • Remove CMV wall at Southeast corner

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 9 North Shore Drive and Fern Street Existing Roadway Characteristics • Three-leg intersection • One-Way Stop Control • Beach Access crossing North Shore Drive

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 10 Fern Street Westbound looking North Your paragraph text Safety Issues • Visibility Triangle reduced Westbound looking North/South Your paragraph text Recommendations • Clear foliage along Southeast/Northeast corners • Restripe pedestrian crossing for beach access • Restripe stop bar on Fern Street

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 11 Jacaranda Road and Alamanda Road/Poinsettia Road Existing Roadway Characteristics • Four-leg intersection • Two-Way Stop Control Safety Issues • No Stop Bars for stop control movements Recommendations paragraph text • Add Stop Bars to Alamanda and Poinsettia Roads Your paragraph text Your paragraph text

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 12 North Bay Avenue and Poinsettia Road Existing Roadway Characteristics • Four-leg intersection • Two-Way Stop Control Your paragraph text

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 13 Poinsettia Road Eastbound looking South Your paragraph text Safety Issues • Visibility Triangle reduced Eastbound looking South • No stop bars on Poinsettia Recommendations • Clear foliage along Southwest corner • Add Stop Bars on Poinsettia Eastbound and Westbound

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 14 North Bay Avenue and Hibiscus Street/North Shore Drive Existing Roadway Characteristics • Four-leg intersection • Two-Way Stop Control Your paragraph text

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 15 Westbound Hibiscus Street looking North Your paragraph text Safety Issues • Visibility Triangle reduced Westbound looking North and South • High volume intersection Recommendations • Relocate Stop Sign closer to North Bay • Add Stop Signs and Stop Bars to North Bay for traffic calming

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 16 South Bay Boulevard and Blue Heron Drive Existing Roadway Characteristics • Four-leg intersection • Two-Way Stop Control Your paragraph text

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 17 Blue Heron Drive Eastbound looking North Your paragraph text Safety Issues • Visibility Triangle reduced Eastbound looking North RecommendationsYour paragraph text • Clear foliage along Northwest corner

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 18 North Shore Drive and Palm Avenue Existing Roadway Characteristics • Four-leg intersection • Two-Way Stop Control Your paragraph text

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 19 North Shore Drive Southbound Your paragraph text Safety Issues • High volume intersection Recommendations text • Create Four-Way Stop adding Stop Signs to North Shore Drive • Add/Replace Stop Bars on all four legs

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 20 South Bay Boulevard and Kumquat Drive Existing Roadway Characteristics • Three-leg intersection • One-Way Stop Control paragraph text

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 21 Kumquat Drive Eastbound looking North Your paragraph text Safety Issues • Visibility Triangle reduced by fence Eastbound looking North Recommendations paragraph text • Reduce fence to 3 ft height

City of Anna Maria - Sight Triangle Study 22 South Bay Boulevard and Loquat Drive Existing Roadway Characteristics • Three-leg intersection • One-Way Stop Control Your paragraph text