FLD2008-07021, 1314 MISSOURI AVE S - September 16, 2008
FLD2008-07021
1314 S MISSOURI AVE
FLORIDA PAIN MANAGEMENT
PLANNER OF RECORD: R T
ATLAS # 306A
ZONING: C
LAND USE: CG
RECEIVED: 07/02/2008
INCOMPLETE:
COMPLETE:
MAPS:
PHOTOS:
STAFF REPORT:
DRC:
CDB:
CLWCoverSheet
CDB Meeting Date:
Case Number:
Agenda Item:
Owner:
Applicant:
Representative:
Address:
September 16, 2008
FLD2008-07021
E.2.
George C. Harrison Realty Co.
Dr. Kazi Hassan
Dillon Alderman, The Waterfield Design Group, Inc.
1314 South Missouri Avenue
CITY OF CLEARWATER
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
GENERAL INFORMATION:
REQUEST:
Flexible Development approval for a medical clinic within the
Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 48,320 square feet, a lot width
of 512 feet, a building height of 25 feet, front (east) setbacks of 9.58 feet
(to building) and 11 feet (to parking), side (north) setbacks of 149 feet
(to building) and 10 feet (to parking), side (south) setbacks of 116 feet
(to building) and 5.99 feet (to parking), rear (west) setbacks of 4.47 feet
(to building) and 2.5 feet (to parking), with 47 off-street parking spaces
as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project as per Community
Development Code Section 2-704.C.
CURRENT ZONING:
CURRENT FUTURE
LAND USE CATEGORY:
Commercial (C) District
Commercial General (CG)
PROPERTY USE:
Former Use: Retail Sales and Services
Proposed Use: Medical Clinic
EXISTING
SURROUNDING
ZONING AND USES:
North: Commercial (C) District
Retail Sales & Services
South: Commercial (C) District
Offices
East: Pinellas County Zoning C-2
Offices, Retail Sales & Services, Vehicle Sales
West: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) and Medium
Density Residential (MDR)
Detached Dwellings
Community Development Board - September 16,2008
FLD2008-0702l - Page 1
ANALYSIS:
Site Location and Existing Conditions:
The 1. I-acre subject property is located on the west side of Missouri Avenue, approximately 200 feet south
of Lakeview Road. The property is zoned Commercial (C) District with an underlying Future Land Use
Plan designation of Commercial General (CG). The property presently consists of a vacant 25,569 square
foot building that was most recently occupied by Thomasville Furniture, a 25-space off-street parking lot on
the south side of the building, six (6) parking spaces at the southeast comer of the building that back-out on
to Missouri Avenue, and substantial excess asphalt between the building and Missouri Avenue.
It is noted that both the existing building and the off-street parking lot are nonconforming with regard to
setbacks. Additionally, the off-street parking lot does not meet current design standards (i.e. minimum
drive-aisle and parking spaces dimensions) and the back-out parking is not permissible with commercial
uses.
Development Proposal:
On July 2, 2008, a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project application was submitted for the
subject property. Under the development proposal a 9,195 square foot portion of the existing building
will be demolished to make way for a 22-space off-street parking lot at the north end of the property. In
addition, the existing 25-space off-street parking lot at the south end of the property will be reconfigured
to meet current design standards, and the existing back-out parking and excess pavement along the east
side of the building will be replaced by landscaping.
The request had been made as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project as the proposed Medical
Clinic use is only specifically authorized within the Commercial (C) District as a Flexible Standard
Development (FLS) use with no flexibility in required setbacks and reduced setbacks to the building and
pavement have been requested.
Thp rlpup]rw"."pnt ...rA...AC.,l'c ('Am...]i.,.,,('p ",ith thP ".,nAllC rlp"plAnrrlpnt d~nrl~rrl" of t],p rOrrlmllnitv
..LJ.J.v ~""'l''''''J.'-'1-'J...I.J.'''''''''.I.'' PJ.'-'t''-'U_.1. .., .....""'.I........t'.I..I.-..I................ .............. "'............ ._............_-.J --.-..........t'........................ ~..._......__...._oJ ......... .........- ................................-......wJ
Development Code (CDC) is discussed below.
Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.): Pursuant to CDC Section 2-701.1, within the CG Future Land Use Plan
category, the maximum allowable F.A.R. is 0.55; therefore the 1.1 I-acre parcel is permitted a maximum
of 26,576 square feet of gross floor area. The development proposal is for only 16,374 square feet (0.34
FAR); thus the proposal is in compliance with the above requirement.
Impervious Surface Ratio (I.S.R.): Pursuant to CDC Section 2-701.1, within the CG Future Land Use
Plan category, the maximum allowable I.S.R. is 0.95. As proposed, the development will have an I.S.R.
of 0.72 and therefore meets the above requirement.
Minimum Lot AreaIMinimum Lot Width: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-704, there is no applicable
minimum lot area or lot width for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects. However, as a Flexible
Standard Development (FLS) use, medical clinics are required a minimum lot area and lot width of
10,000 square feet and 100 feet, respectively. The subject property has a lot area of 48,320 square feet
and a lot width of 512 feet, which are both far in excess of those requirements.
Maximum Building Height: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-704, there is no applicable maximum building
height for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects. However, as a Flexible Standard Development
(FLS) use, medical clinics are permitted a height of 25 feet. The development proposes a building height
of 25 feet from the average existing grade, which meets the aforementioned standard for medical clinics.
Community Development Board - September 16, 2008
FLD2008-0702l - Page 2
Minimum Setbacks: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-704, within the C District, there are no applicable
minimum setbacks for Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Projects. However, the medical clinic use
has a minimum required front setback of 25 feet, a side setback of 10 feet and a rear setback of 20 feet,
which is typical for most development within the C District.
The existing building is generally not compliant with the above requirements. The building has only a
10-foot setback from the east (front) property line, a 4.24-foot setback from the north (side) property line
and 4.47-foot setback from the west (rear) property line. However the setback from the south (side)
property line is 116.56 feet, which is well in excess of requirements. This south setback will be retained
with the proposal as will the west setback. The east setback will be lessened slightly to 9.58 feet for a
revised covered entry, and the north setback will be increased to 149 feet as a result of demolishing a
large portion of the building.
With regard to setbacks to pavement/parking, the majority of the property as it exists has been paved
without the provision of any setback. The development proposal will modify this providing a setback
between 11 and 15 feet along the east property line, a lO-foot setback along the north property line, a
setback of just less than 6 feet along the south property line, and a 2.5-foot setback along the west
property line. While the west setback sounds insignificant, it must be understood that this distance is for
only a 72-foot segment of the total property, and that for the majority of the property pavement will be
set back at least 12 feet.
Minimum Off-Street Parking: Pursuant to CDC Section 2-704, Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Projects shall have their minimum off-street parking requirement determined by the Community
Development Coordinator based on the specific use and/or ITE Manual standards.
The development proposal would establish a total of 47 off-street parking spaces for the 16,374 square
foot medical clinic, which is a rate of 2.87 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Typically,
medical clinic uses v:ithin the C District are required to provide off-street parIring at a rate of three spac.es
per 1,000 square feet, which in this instance would be the provision of 49 off-street parking spaces - only
two more than presently proposed. In its most recent use as a retail sales and services business
(Thomasville Furniture), the subject property was substantially nonconforming with regard to the
provision of off-street parking. As it exists the building is 25,569 square feet, which at the required rate
of five spaces per 1,000 square feet, would require 128 off-street parking spaces. The site, as striped, has
31 parking spaces; however the overwhelming majority of these do not meet current design standards
with regard to dimensions or they back into the adjacent Missouri Avenue right-of-way. Thus, there is a
substantial nonconformity with regard to off-street parking for a retail sales and services use on the
subject property.
With this proposal this use of the property will be changed to a use with a less intense off-street parking
requirement, a considerable portion of the existing building (9,195 square feet) will be demolished, the
nonconforming back-out parking spaces will be eliminated, the existing 25-space off-street parking lot
(south side of property) will be brought into compliance with current design standards, and a new 23-
space off-street parking lot will be constructed on the north side of the property. This development
proposal represents a substantial improvement upon the properties current situation and is most likely the
best opportunity to obtain quality redevelopment of this property.
As noted previously, the development proposal is short two off-street parking spaces from achieving a
parking requirement of three spaces per 1,000 square feet. However, in order to provide these off-street
parking spaces enough of the building would have to be demolished that the parking spaces would no
Community Development Board - September 16, 2008
FLD2008-07021 - Page 3
longer be required. As such, and given the improvements already being proposed, it has been determined
that the development proposal meets is off-street parking requirement.
Utilities: Pursuant to CDC Section 3-911, all utilities, including individual distribution lines, shall be
installed underground unless such undergrounding is not practicable. It is attached as a condition of
approval that prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy all on-site utility facilities, whether they be
existing or proposed, are to be placed underground as part of the redevelopment of the site.
Code Enforcement Analysis:
There is no outstanding Code Enforcement Issue associated with the any of the individual subject
properties.
COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS AND CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the standards and criteria
as per CDC Section 2-704:
Standard Proposed Consistent Inconsistent
F .A.R. 0.55 0.34 X
I.S.R. 0.95 0.72 X
Minimum Lot Area N/A 48,320 SF (1.1 acres) X
Minimum N/A 512.18 feet X
Lot Width
Maximum N/A 25 feet X
Building Height
Minimum Setbacks Front (east): N/A 9.58 feet (to building) X
11 (to parking)
Side (north): N/A 149 feet (to building) X
10 feet (to parking)
Side (south): N/A 116 feet (to building) X
5.99 feet (to parking)
Rear (west): N/A 4.47 (to building) X
2.5 feet (to parking)
Minimum Determined by the Community Development 47 parking spaces X
Off-Street Parking Coordinator based on the specific use and/or (2.87/1,000 GFA)
ITE Manual standards
Community Development Board - September 16,2008
FLD2008-07021 - Page 4
COMPLIANCE WITH FLEXIBILITY CRITERIA:
The following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the Flexibility criteria as
per CDC Section 2-704.C (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project):
Consistent
X
Inconsistent
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 X
development and improvement of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed X
development
5. The proposed use shall otherwise be permitted by the underlying future land use X
category, be compatible with adjacent land uses, will not substantially alter the
essential use characteristics of the neighborhood; and shall demonstrate compliance
with one or more of the following objectives:
a. The proposed use is permitted in this zoning district as a minimum standard,
flexible 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.
X
6. Flexibility with regard to use, lot width, required setbacks, height and off-street X
parking are justified based on demonstrated compliance with all of the following
design objectives:
a. The proposed development will not impede the normal and orderly development
and improvement of the surrounding properties for uses permitted in this zoning
district;
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted
by the City;
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the
established or emerging character of an area;
d. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the
proposed development incorporates a substantial number of the following design
elements:
o Changes in horizontal building planes;
o Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses,
pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
o Variety in materials, colors and textures;
o Distinctive fenestration patterns;
o Building stepbacks; and
o Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape
design and anorooriate distances between buildings.
Community Development Board - September 16, 2008
FLD2008-07021 - Page 5
COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL STANDARDS FOR LEVEL TWO APPROVALS: The
following table depicts the consistency of the development proposal with the General Standards for Level
Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-913.A:
I. 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 olfacto and hours of 0 eration im acts on ad' acent TO erties.
Consistent
X
Inconsistent
X
X
X
X
X
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the application and supporting materials at its
meeting of August 7, 2008, and deemed the development proposal to be legally sufficient to move
forward to the Community Development Board (CDB).
Findings of Fact. The Planning Department, having reviewed all evidence submitted by the applicant and
requirements of the Community Development Code, finds that there is substantial competent evidence to
support the following findings of fact:
1. That the 1.11 acre subj ect property is located on the west side of Missouri Avenue, approximately 200
feet south of Lakeview Road;
2. That the subject property is located within the Commercial (C) District and the Commercial General
(CG) Future Land Use Plan category and will consist of a 16,374 square foot medical clinic and
associated off-street parking lots and solid waste facility;
3. That the existing building and off-street parking lot encroach into the required setbacks for the
Commercial (C) District, and the proposed modifications will substantially reduce these existing
nonconformities; and
4. That the prior retail sales and service use of the property did not meet the minimum off-street parking
requirement, and that the proposed modifications and change of use will bring the site into
compliance with off-street parking requirements.
Conclusions of Law. The Planning Department, having made the above findings of fact, reaches the
following conclusions of law:
1. That the development proposal has been found to be in compliance with the Maximum Development
Potential standards as per CDC Section 2-701.1;
2. That the development proposal has been found to be in compliance with the applicable Standards and
Criteria as per CDC Section 2-704;
3. That the development proposal has been found to be in compliance with the Flexibility criteria for a
Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project as per CDC Section 2-704.C; and
4. That the development proposal has been found to be in compliance with the General Standards for
Level Two Approvals as per CDC Section 3-913.A.
Community Development Board - September 16, 2008
FLD2008-07021 - Page 6
Based upon the above, the Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Flexible Development
application for a medical clinic within the Commercial (C) District with a lot area of 48,320 square feet,
a lot width of 512 feet, a building height of 25 feet, front (east) setbacks of 9.58 feet (to building) and 11
feet (to parking), side (north) setbacks of 149 feet (to building) and 10 feet (to parking), side (south)
setbacks of 116 feet (to building) and 5.99 feet (to parking), rear (west) setbacks of 4.47 feet (to building)
and 2.5 feet (to parking), with 47 off-street parking spaces as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment
Project as per Community Development Code Section 2-704.C with the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval:
1. That prior to the issuance of any building permits, any outstanding comments of the Engineering
Department shall be addressed;
2. That prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, all on-site utility facilities, whether they
be existing or proposed, are to be placed underground as part of the redevelopment of the site;
3. That any/all wireless communication facilities to be installed concurrent with or subsequent to the
construction of the subject development must be screened from view and/or painted to match the
building to which they are attached, as applicable;
4. That any/all future signage must meet the requirements of Code and be architecturally integrated
with the design of the building with regard to proportion, color, material and finish as part of a final
sign package submitted to and approved by Staff prior to the issuance of any permits which includes:
(a) All signs fully dimensioned and coordinated in terms of including the same color and font
style and size; and
(b) All signs be constructed of the highest quality materials which are coordinated with the
colors, materials and architectural style of the building; and
5. That the final design and color of the building shall be consistent with the architectural elevations
submitted to (or as modified by) the CDB, and be approved by Staff.
------) ._..- 'I
Prepared by Planning Department Staff:~ _l::ftt- ~Cr/7 v/fc
Robert G. Tefft, Development Review Manager
A TT ACHMENTS: Location Map; Aerial Map; Zoning Map; Existing Surrounding Uses Map; and- Photographs
S:\Planning DepartmentlC D BIFLEX (FLD)IPending cases I Up for the next CDBlMissouri Ave S 1314 Florida Pain Mgmt (C) 2008 09-16
RTlMissouri Ave S 1314 - Staff Report 2008 09-16.doc
Community Development Board - September 16, 2008
FLD2008-07021 - Page 7
Robert G. Tefft
100 South Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, Florida 33756
Phone: (727) 562-4539] Email: robert.tefft(a).mvclearwater.com
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
· Development Review Manager
City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida August 2008 to Present
Direct Development Review activities for the City. Supervise professional planners, land resource
specialists and administrative staff. Conduct performance reviews. Serve as staff to the Community
Development Board.
· Planner III
City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida June 2005 to August 2008
Duties include performing technical review of and preparation of staff reports for various land
development applications, the organization of data and its display in order to track information and
provide status reports, and making presentations to various City Boards and Committees.
· Planner II
City of Clearwater, Clearwater, Florida May 2005 to June 2005
Duties include performing technical review of and preparation of staff reports for various land
development applications, the organization of data and its display in order to track information and
provide status reports.
· Senior Planner
City of Delray Beach, De/ray Beach, Florida October 2003 to May 2005
Performed technical review of and prepared staff reports for land development applications such as,
but not limited to: site plans, conditional uses, rezonings, land use amendments, and text
amendments. Organized data and its display in order to track information and provide status reports.
Make presentations to various City Boards.
· Planner
City olDelray Beach, Delray Beach, Florida March 2001 to October 2003
Performed technical review of and prepared staff reports for land development applications such as,
but not limited to: site plans, conditional use and text amendments. Organization of data and its
display in order to track information and provide status reports. Provided in-depth training to the
Assistant Planner position with respect to essential job functions and continuous guidance.
· Assistant Planner
City olDelray Beach, Delray Beach, Florida October 1999 to March 2001
Performed technical review of and prepared staff reports for site plan development applications.
Performed reviews of building permit applications. Provided information on land use applications,
ordinances, land development regulations, codes, and related planning programs/services to other
professionals and the public.
EDUCATION
· Bachelor of Arts, Geography (Urban Studies), University of South Florida, 1999
ASSOCIATION MEMBERSIDP
· American Planning Association
Community Development Board - September 16, 2008
FLD2008-07021 - Page 8
Owner:
Site:
PIN:
?\~s
-----
~
Q
Tuskawilla
ill
>
<r:
0::
J
(j
Z
~
0::
ill
I
I-
~
-..J
Z
I-
0::
<r:
:2
ill
~
ill
~
SO UTH
<r:
(j
o
I-
z
o
I-
(j
Z
I
(f)
~
LAKEVIEW
w
~
w
>
<
PROJECT z
SITE <
(9
I
o
:2
(j)
o
<
:2
ST
I
QUEEN ST
(f)
~
:J
o
(JJ
(JJ
~
c-:":M"~~. ".-'~_
". '.' . . .... ~. . ".".1
r-:...:.:: ."".:...-:..'
f....... ,.
~)H i:: .:.\::~:.~il
I:' 1,::~rj
Oi)., ...:. ..,
'ti..,..:....:-;
I
(f)
:J
LOCATION MAP
George Harrison Realty Co.
1314 South Missouri Avenue
22-29-15-48978-005-0170
Case:
Property Size:
Atlas Page:
Z
-..J
o
o
Z
-..J
wn
~
w
>
<
c.9
z
~
o a
>- z
w
EASY n:::
u...
.--------.---j
W
FLD2008-07021
1 .14 acres
306A
~1I
i
I
w
>
<r:
ORIGINAL
. AltElVEO
DRC Review Comments !<'.1G 182008
~NWG~,...
Case Number: FLD2008-07021 - 1314 80uth Missouri Avenue CITY OF ct~NT
Location: 1314 80uth Missouri Avenue, Clearwater Florida 33756
Atlas Page:
306A
Zoning District:
C, Commercial
Proposed Use:
Medical Clinic
Please find below a response to the DRC plan review comments issued for the
DRC meeting of Thursday, August 7, 2008.
General Engineering:
1 Prior to review by the Community Development Board:
1. Please find the utilities plan sheet (8.8) which has been added to the plan
set. A 6" water line is proposed to serve the new fire hydrants. This new
water line will originate from a 6" line on Michigan A venue and run
though an existing public drainage and utilities easement to the project
site. We will provide a loop connection to avoid stagnation of the water as
directed by the City of Clearwater engineering department.
Prior to issuance of a building permit:
1. We will provide a copy of an approved FDOT for any work proposed
within the right of way.
2. Please find that the dumpster enclosure has been relocated the Northerly
parking lot and the standard City of Clearwater construction detail Index
#701 has been added to sheet 8.2. -.gO ^ t'~'..l .(0# ~.v.
3. The dumpster enclosure has been relocated to the northerly parking lot.
4. This comment has been noted as note 2 under the utilities notes on sheet
8.8.
5. A thirty feet turning radius has been incorporated into the northern most
drive entry for solid waste servicing of the dumpster enclosure. All other
entry and exit points have existing curb cuts.
6. The sanitary connection is shown on sheet 8.8. 8tandard detail Index #
305 can also be found on sheet 8.8.
7. This comment has been added as note 3 under the utilities notes on sheet
8.8.
8. This comment has been added as note 4 under the utilities notes on sheet
8.8.
Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy:
1. Please find this comment addressed in note 4 under general notes on sheet
S.2. There are notes on the plan sheet S.2 referencing this note where
applicable. The F.D.O.T. Index #304 can be found on sheet S.8.
2. Five sets of as-built drawings will be provided to the City at the
conclusion of development for review and inspection.
Environmental:
1. This comment has been added as note 5 under the general notes on sheet
S.2.
Fire:
1. Per our discussion at the DRC meeting, fire access will be from South
Missouri Avenue and access drive aisles will not be required on site.
2. This comment has been added as note 6 under the general notes on sheet S.2.
3. Please see sheet S.8 illustrating the proposed location of a new 6" water line
to service the proposed fire hydrants.
Land Resources:
1. The tree canopies have been added to all applicable plan sheets.
2. The dumpster has been relocated to the northerly parking lot.
Landscaping:
1. Per the Comprehensive Landscape application the landscape buffer has been
enhanced with a six-foot tall privacy fence with creeping fig planted at two-
feet on center to provide enhanced screening in lieu of hedges and 12 foot
buffer where landscape requirements cannot be met.
2. Code required landscape deficiencies have been addressed by enhanced
vegetation plantings per Comprehensive Landscape application.
3. Southerly buffer requirements have been enhanced with solid hedge plantings
over the entire buffer in lieu of the required width per Comprehensive
Landscape application.
4. Please see Sheet S.3, enhanced vegetative plantings have been provided to
alleviate buffer deficiencies per Comprehensive Landscape application.
5. Please fmd on Sheet S.3 that trees have been relocated and re-spaced to meet
the requirements of the code.
6. This requirement cannot be met because of existing site conditions that
overhead power lines run parallel to 84% of our site boundary - see
Comprehensive Landscape application.
7. Please find on Sheet S.3 that the southerly parking lot has been reconfigured
so that the deficiencies in the landscape island requirements are addressed per
the Comprehensive Landscape application.
8. Please find on Sheet S.3 that tree species have been redistributed to meet the
requirements with the exception of those trees that are accent plants.
9. Please find Comprehensive Landscape application previously submitted.
10. Please see Sheet S.3 for planting revisions.
11. Please find on Sheet S.2 and S.3 that the required curbing has been added to
the parking lot.
12. Please find on Sheet S.3 that the tree planting spacing has been revised.
Stormwater:
1. The following shall be addressed prior to issuance of building permit:
We are submitting a revised plan (sheet S.4) reflecting the reconfiguration of the
parking lot. These changes have negligible affect on the calculations previously
provided. We have submitted a permit application to SWFWMD and have
received review comments from them. Their comments and requests for
additional information were very similar to those in comment items 1 through 6.
We will provide this information and any other need documents with our permit
application.
Item 7:
Potential impacts to the adjacent properties were considered in the course of the design
for the infiltration pond. The pond was sized to ensure the peak elevation during the 24-
hour, 100-year storm ( 60.8') would be below the floor elevations of the adjacent
properties (min. FFE=61.5). This coupled with the rapid infiltration rate inherent to the on
site soils, an observed distance above Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT) elevation of
over 6' and the overall flat site topography will prevent migration of infiltrated stormwater
beyond the limits of the pond footprint.
Solid Waste:
1. Please fmd the dumpster enclosure location has been moved to the northerly
parking lot and the Index #701 details have been added to sheet S.2.
Traffic Engineering:
1. Please see sheets S.2 & S.3; the parallel parking spaces have been deleted.
2. The proposed driveway connections serve two parking areas at existing curb
cut locations. Each has a one-way entry and exit. These parking areas
represent a reconfiguration of and improvement to existing conditions. The
proposed parking entry and exit configuration on the southerly portion of the
site is very similar to the one-way entry and exit drive locations that currently
exist. However the current configuration also has drive surface area between
the lanes. The proposed design removes that drive surface for better
circulation control. The northerly parking entry and exit drives are an
improved controlled circulation configuration over the current condition. The
current parking condition on the northerly portion on the site requires some
cars and delivery trucks to back onto 80uth Missouri Avenue.
3. The driveway separation does not meet the 125 feet spacing because we are
utilizing the existing curb cut locations. These are preexisting conditions that
we are utilizing.
4. We will provide a copy of an approved FDOT for any work proposed within
the right of way.
5. This comment has been added as note 3 under the general notes on sheet 8.2.
6. Please find this detail on sheet 8.8.
7. Please find this detail on sheet 8.2.
General Notes:
1. This comment has been added as note 7 under the general notes on sheet 8.2
Planning:
1. Please find on sheet 8.2 that the southerly parking lot has been reconfigured
for compliance. The landscaping deficiencies are addressed in the
Comprehensive Landscape application
2. Please find a copy of the revised response attached.
3. This comment has been noted as note 5 under the utilities notes on sheet 8.8.
4. This comment has been addressed as note 2 under the general notes on sheet
8.2
5. Please find on sheet 8.2 that the dimension has been added to the plan.
6. Please fmd on sheet 8.2 that the walk has been reduced to 42" wide.
7. Resolved at DRC meeting.
8. Please find on sheet 8.6 the requested information. Please also find color and
awning material samples with the submittal package.
9. The existing adjacent grade is very close to the finish floor elevation. The
building height will not exceed the 25 feet height limit.
10. Please find on sheet 8.2 that both the northerly and southerly parking lots have
been reconfigured to accommodate the required separation.
11. The applicant proposes to operate this medical clinic the same as their current
Florida Pain Management facility located in St. Petersburg. It is not operated
like an office facility. There are no deliveries at the St Petersburg facility
made by any vehicle that would require a loading space. We request a
deviation from this requirement because it will not serve or support the
operation of this project.
12. The proposed driveway connections serve two parking areas at existing curb
cut locations. Each has a one-way entry and exit. These parking areas
represent a reconfiguration of and improvement to existing conditions. The
proposed parking entry and exit configuration on the southerly portion of the
site is very similar to the one-way entry and exit drive locations that currently
exist. However the current configuration also has drive surface area between
the lanes. The proposed design removes that drive surface for better
circulation control. The northerly parking entry and exit drives are an
improved controlled circulation configuration over the current condition. The
current parking condition on the northerly portion on the site requires some
cars and delivery trucks to back onto South Missouri Avenue.
If you have any questions please call: (813) 833-5161
Thank you,
Dillon John Alderman
The Waterfield Design Group, Inc.
o ~~:a~~::?~~
Planning Department
100 South Myrtle A venue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Telephone: 727-562-4567
Fax: 727-562-4865
CASE NUMBER:
1
; Clearwater
RECEIVED BY (Staff Initials):
DATE RECEIVED:
a SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
a SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION - Plans and
application are required to be collated, stapled and folded into sets
* NOTE: A TOTAL OF 15 SETS OF THIS APPLICATION AND ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED IN
CONJUNCTION WITH A COMPLETE LEVEL ONE OR LEVEL TWO APPLICATION.
COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM
(Revised 04/24/2007)
~PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT ~
APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
~J>>l. K.~! H AS"fAIJ I P-&~-'- ~J,r4B~~~----M)}Lpllj~~~l,.,!JJII-L/ol~_.._____._____
-'.Tll Sf rJ:! AlJtNI/E WDI'-TH J s-r.rt"1t/l.rtulLt:J F"/.oIll/)f\
2Z7J it! , =-.Tll / ______~_ FAX NUMBER: .-it.7~J.~ r -(2')'0 -=-~-~==::~~=~-=_=~~~:~_
u _ ----N;A _ EMAIL: _J.18l~l7:!_~__Ao.f.,.c,__QM_
_DoJ.l.A.J,.J2~_HPJ.21L1J'2.JJ (mP/!.! S'1'p~ N!~r; lO~LC._.H8f!j}..1 f"C!..~fY.Al.n'...cQ,-_______
APPLICANT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER:
PROPERTY OWNER(S):
list ALL owners on the deed
AGENT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER:
bll.J..p.JLa_kp.6~A~J-S.lllJl(f~~ r-Cl:>tJdN~l~J"'I_11/!l.JfjJEI1ELe Lp_-iL{f1~J!.q@!',H!J_JN(",__
LJl!1J? $_~rJ{t1Ij!!.I1_~_1[l~t-! _ AYEcJ.l.t!.!_,TM:UI!, t:wILJPA_'l3(U_
u_ .111::_812.:'._CS2p_9xlPJ__ FAX NUMBER: m8JJ_:8:l2~_~Z7_IL_
.__f(Kl,,::8.lZ-_~l.fl___u EMAIL: b/il.t!E~~~ewAtE.IJ.FJE.l!2Q1Jlt;/.!~ ~~f"I.
1. ARCHITECTURAL THEME:
a_ The landscaping in a Comprehensive Landscape 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
________f ~ ~ !JfJI1 B IT _ Ie \ 1\ T1 f...Q1J. () ___________________________________________ ___u___ _____u__ _____
OR
b. The design, character, location and/or materials of the landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program shall be
demonstrably more attractive than landscaping otherwise permitted on the parcel proposed for development under the minimum landscape
standards_
_________5 e E _ EK 1-11 II L__~~_.ATT Po c.. H l!!L___...__________________u____u____ ..__________u__._~________u_
C:llJocuments and SeltingslderekfergusonlDesktoplplanningforms_0707\Comprehensive Landscape Program 04-24-07_doc
Page 1 of 2
2. COMMUNITY CHARACTER:
"
The landscape treabnent proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will enhance the community character of the City of Clearwater.
... 5:.t.E_.cX/l/{JJI. <C.~BJJjl~jj#?_
3. PROPERTY VALUES:
The landscape treatment proposed in the Comprehensive Landscape Program will have a beneficial impact on the value of the property in the
immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development
.._._--....~ii.~x-H1Mi;-:r..-(cT-ATiAcH~p-_...._~-==~-=~~==~=~-==--=~=~==--=--===.:=======
4. SPECIAL AREA OR SCENIC CORRIDOR PLAN:
The landscape treabnent 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.
___~ 6)( H,e IT I C' AJ1Ac.1:~J2._________.___
.. ,
THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 3, DIVISION 12 MAY BE WAIVED OR MODIFIED AS A PART OF A LEVEL ONE OR LEVEL
TWO APPLICATION, AS THE CASE MAY BE, IF THE APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL INCLUDES A COMPREHENSIVE
LANDSCAPE PROGRAM, WHICH SATISFIES THE ABOVE CRITERIA. THE USE OF LANDSCAPE PLANS, SECTIONS / ELEVATIONS,
RENDERINGS AND PERSPECTIVES MAY BE NECESSARY TO SUPPLEMENT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WORKSHEET.
SIGNATURE:
I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made in
this application are true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and
photograph the property described in this application.
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 2....0 day of
su,-~ ,A.D. 20 Ot(d tomeand/orby
"D;1llX:).J ""Lf)'<:-f-~ ,who is personally known has
produced ~ll)'" I+-~"J\.c IC~~ L,"'j'-lIY'O
as identification.
/
~~fprope~oWner orrepreseniiitive
"l\I'I"A "-l
\ -=t- -z. ~"Vq
\
'MEl.JSSAIISHOP.
...,.,.... C1fAodda.
. c"r',";17t1lp1111.,l1. ..
vtunJ! ~.. ..DO,.,..
C:\Documents and Settingslderek.fergusonlDesktoplplanningforms_0707\Comprehensive Landscape Program 04-24-07.doc
Page 2 of 2
EXHffiIT C
COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM
1. Architectural theme:
The landscape design, character, location and materials are demonstrably more attractive that
landscaping otherwise permitted by the minimum landscape standards. There are more trees and shrubs,
of larger size than minimum requirements. The landscape program features many native and flowering
plants with a unified design theme.
2. Community Character:
The opening up of this site to extensive planting along South Missouri A venue will enhance the
community character by contributing to the attractive landscaped throughways within the city and by
expanding the green environment.
3. Property Values:
The redevelopment and landscaping of this site will have a beneficial impact on the properties within the
immediate vicinity of the project by providing a more open and attractive environment and by creating
planted buffers between adjacent properties.
4. Special area or scenic corridor plan:
This project will contribute to the landscaped treatment of a primary corridor roadway within the
community .
-.
. .
GULF COAST TESTING LABORATORY, INC.
5745 PARK BOULEV ARD
PINELLAS PARK, FL 33781
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ENGINEERING COUNCIL CERTIFIED
CERTlFlACTE of AUTHORIZATION # 000023 70
PHONE: (727) 544-4080
FAX: (727) 544-7532
LAB NO: 15262
DATE REPORTED: 6/26/08
CLIENT: Dr. Kazi Hassan
PROJECT: 1314 S Missouri Avenue, Clearwater, Florida
DATE TESTED: 6/25/08
LOCATION OF TEST: Test #1, 21' W x 3' N ofNE Comer of North Most Building Section
DEPTH TO EXISTING WATER TABLE: 9' 2" Below the Existing Ground Surface
ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH WATER LEVEL: 6':1: Below the Existing Ground Surface
REMARKS:
WATER TEMP: 82 deg. F WATER pH: 7.99
e= INNER RING READINGS
i 24.0 :
l2].Q_J
INCH
PER
HOUR
33.0
32.0
Depth
SOIL PROFILE
CLASSIFICA TION
(EXISTING SURFACE APPROX. ELEV.)
31.0
30.0
29.0
28.0
27.0
26.0
25.0
.5 2 3 4 5 6
Elapsed Time (Hours)
INFILTRATION RATE = 27.9 INCHES I HR.
Respectfully Submitted,
R. Gunasekaran, P.E.
Fla. License No. 20402
cc: Dr. Kazi Hassan 2
Waterfield Design Group 1
File 1
Gray SAND wi Glass, Metal &
Occasional Roots, lOYR 5/1
Li ht Gra SAND 10YR 7/1
Dark Yellowish Brown SAND wi
Trace Roots, 1 OYR 4/4
Very Pale Brown SAND,
2.5YR 7/3
White SAND wi Trace of Roots,
10YR 8/1
Black SAND wi Organic Stain &
Occasional Roots, lOYR 2/1
Hole Terminated at 120"
ring
..
--..- --
2-4"
...i
24" Outer ring
This report is the property of the Client listed and cannot be copied or reproduced without written permission of the Client or GCTL.
GULF COAST TESTING LABORATORY, INC.
5745 PARK BOULEVARD
PINELLAS PARK, FL 33781
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ENGINEERING COUNCIL CERTIFIED
CERTIFIACTE o/AUTHORIZATlON # 00002370
PHONE: (727) 544-4080
FAX: (727) 544-7532
LAB NO: 15262
DATE REPORTED: 6/27/08
CLIENT: Dr. Kazi Hassan
PROJECT: 1314 S Missouri Avenue, Clearwater, Florida
DATE TESTED: 6/27/08
LOCATION OF TEST: Test #2, 35' Ex 27' S ofNE Comer of North Most Building Section
DEPTH TO EXISTING WATER TABLE: 8' 1" Below the Existing Ground Surface
ESTIMATED SEASONAL HIGH WATER LEVEL: Approx. 5' 6" Below the Existing Ground Surface
REMARKS: This DRI test location is approximately 12" lower in elevation than DRY Test #1 location. As per Client's rep., this
DRI test location was moved to the east side of the existing loading dock area.
WATER TEMP: 81 deg. F WATER pH: 7.99
.= INNER RING READINGS
30.0
29.0
28.0
27.0
26.0
25.0
24.0
23.0
I 22.0
I 21.0
I
i 2Q,0
L
INCH
PER
HOUR
...... ..
.. . .....
.
.
.
.
.
.5 2 3 4 5 6
Elapsed Time (Hours)
INFILTRATION RATE = 23.4 INCHES/HR.
Respectfully Submitted,
R. Gunasekaran, P.E.
Fla. License No. 20402
cc: Dr. Kazi Hassan 2
Waterfield Design Group 1
File 1
I
N
F
I
L
T
R
A
T
I
o
N
Depth
in feet.
SOIL PROFILE
CLASSIFICATION
(EXISTING SURFACE APPROX. ELEV.)
As halt
Very Pal Brown SAND w/ Shell
Base, 10YR 7/3
Light Gray SAND, 10YR 7Il
Dark Brown SAND, 7.5YR 4/2
White SAND, IOYR 8/l
Light Brownish Gray SAND,
10YR 6/2
Black SAND, 10YR 2/l
Hole Terminated at 120"
.
__yn
2-4"
I
...!
24" Outer ring
This report is the property of the Client listed and cannot be copied or reproduced without written permission of the Client or GCTL.
Gulf Coast Testing Laboratory, Inc.
Lab #15262
6/25/08
1314 S Missouri Avenue, Clearwater, FL
DRI Test Locations
Line Items:
Payments:
Receipt #: 1200800000000005477
Date: (7/0212008
Ca.<;c No
Oescription
712/200g
12:09:40PM
Tran Code
Revenue Account No
Amollnt P.fid
FLD2008-07021
FLD2008-07021
04
(~jOOoo00341262000
(Xl 100000034250 I 000
Flexible Commercial
fire - Prelim Site Plan
Line Item Total:
Confirm No
Method
1.205.00
200.00
$1,405.00
Payer
How Received
Amount Paid
Initials
Check No
Check
FLORIDA PAIN MANAGEMENT adb
INC
1030
In Person
Payment Total:
THIS IS NeT A PERMIT.
This is a receipt for ar application for a permit.
This application will be reviewed and you will be notified as to the outcome of the application.
Pa~ I Ill" I
1,405.00
$1,405.00
CRtOu'::P!.lpl
Planning Department
100 South Myrtle Avenue
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Telephone: 727-562-4567
Fax: 727-562-4865
CASE #:
RECEIVED BY (staff initials):
DATE RECEIVED:
Clearwater
~-../~
~~
a SUBMIT ORIGINAL SIGNED AND NOTARIZED APPLICATION
..,gl SUBMIT 14 COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION - Plans and
application are required to be collated, stapled, and folded into sets
a SUBMIT FIRE PRELlMARY SITE PLAN: $200.00
a SUBMIT APPLICATION FEE $
* NOTE: 15 TOTAL SETS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED (APPLICATIONS PLUS SITE PLAN SETS)
FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Comprehensive InfilI Redevelopment Project
(Revised 07111/2008)
~PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT ~
A. APPLICANT, PROPERTY OWNER AND AGENT INFORMATION: (Code Section 4-202.A)
APPLICANT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER
PROPERTY OWNER(S):
List ALL owners on the deed
AGENT NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
PHONE NUMBER:
CELL NUMBER:
.1.:JO...l~~LJUJs.(M,L!lt~.l.!Il~N1'rE~OIY12lt1!ll/N_1!lANJl~!l1eJ.J1/_!N<.....
'l3."l.~i.{~AYl~~fAe. N().ItIt{rr~r/.MBUd E2t2!'LJ12.Ar.. 11.2121
_ZZl~S'i~-1J"J!_ FAX NUMBER: 1t]..sq~~'.f) .. ... _
. .. -.HLA.-- EMAIL: 1-L~[rzl_C!M2L._f:,_()r1.
. G.~?Me-nc"ii;iiii?iiiiiIiiA~ir-cQ~/-Ari~(i.!iiJCcii{l.e.....
(>1 Ut))l) -'UJlUti.A/lJj._fCf.i1rltl1(1__RIUNCII'?IJl"l TW E lAd1llJ,flE.LJ2.(2tsL(;N_~flCv(JIL
<J!40j"J>JJ1ll1-(AfJJl!\1fNl..... A'lfJjUe.IJ~AtE."'~ll!lt=a(Jt.
___CfJt.. 6;1'.. $]PJL ._._... FAX NUMBER: tJ.T- _'il'-_~>7.l1._______~_.__________
.___.l1J.~~JI- $J.(L _______ EMAIL: !.>Aj./lI!kf.f!l..!el1J~;tl.dltI..PPlll.AI..Ci!M..
B. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INFORMA nON:. (Code Section 4-202.A)
fl,IJILIPA PIIIII ,f,JANAIi6H~NT
PROJECT NAME: ~~lA~ItJ~; e(..__om cf ___~__ PROJECT VALUATION: __~ UIJJu.JOllll'L~_~______
STREET ADDRESS 1.1L"'- S"D1J1J/ HlrJ'()I!.4.1...M.um!I-.ct.~Allk8jJ&.J-&-'U D~ sf__.___.____~_
PARCEL NUMBER(S): ..27,/ ~:;UJ~ / ~ 0" l!fj.oor; I 01 Z(l-.--------------------~--------~!r--
PARCEL SIZE (acres): .-.---h./L~-~~---~---.-l---- PARCEL SIZE (square feet): _-1r-J_Z'?Q~LlRIll (!.~__
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: __2..~{'__~-.-Lf/ 1(l11'.__~______.________._____________ _________.__~_...._
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
Specifically identify the request
(include number of units or square
footage of non-residential use and all
requested code deviations; e.g.
reduction in required number of
parking spaces, specific use, etc.)
PROPOSED USErS):
. 8E_Q.l~I!?_-,?n2c..1.
__.r.e.l.__drl A~tI'I2__eX.H.lt.tr_.. _'c..'.____________.____.. _______________. ___ . ....__
C:\Documents and Seltings\derekJerguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07-11.doc
Page 1 of 8
DOES THIS APPLICATION INVOLVE THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (JD,.R) , A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANNED UNI
DEVELOPMENT, OR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED (CERTIFIED) SITE PLAN? YES _ NO x.. (if yes, attach a copy of the applicable documents)
C. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: (Code Section 4-202.A.5)
'Iii2 SUBMIT A COpy OF THE TITLE INSURANCE POLICY, DEED TO THE PROPERTY OR SIGN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING OWNERSHIP (see
page 7) A t:>
D. WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 3-913.A)
o Provide complete responses to the six (6) GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA - Explain how each criteria is achieved, in detail:
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.
..... ~.._r4~__€>!iflilr._~'t:>.-11_P.Tfi'J(,tl{(L_
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.
, ~
... ..... ...~..6.__.e!!111f.lr.._J2_"I...A71At.lifl).
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
.. _ _~~e_/!'JtJfJ8LT .'0-1' Al1AQJl.IL
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
. _ . .>:~~_~_'1t.YJ&lr12__l_. AlIflc:..ttiJ)_
5.
The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development.
, I
. ____...2U__1XJi1SlT _~L_lllI~~ttEJ:L_____.
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on
adjacent properties.
~___~ S EE_1'x'H /9/ r__lf2~j_~_tl_1T1A <..tL~__.._..____.__.____._____________________
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07 -11.doc
Page 2 of 8
WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project Criteria)
1.
Provide complete responses to the six (6) COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA - Explain how each criteria is
achieved, in detail:
The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or development standards set forth in this
zoning district.
, I
Se&~E)(JfJ<<lr ~~i2'"~..8T1rl~JleJ2 ..
D
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
~.~~KHlfJ.!,( :/2".ZJ. t;..1[J1 (.fI~P .
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties.
... S.lt....Ed./fllL'L ..~12~z.~.AJIllC:-.rt~Y2..
4. Adjoining properties will not su~er substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development.
~!~f . !X11.Ll1..,_IA-Z~t17lAC.~l:2.
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 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.
_.f~{..E.>{I1L8lr .tr:2~.e.\ ..Al'l"'it~l2.
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. In order to form a cohesive, visually interesting and attractive appearance, the proposed development incorporates a substantial number of
the following design elements:
D Changes in horizontal building planes;
D Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos, balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
D Variety in materials, colors and textures;
D Distinctive fenestration patterns;
D Building stepbacks; and
D Distinctive roofs forms.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and appropriate distances between buildings.
.._________.../--E!__6LkJB1L~"~~._il1I~tle.f)--.--_~_________._..._._._....__.____...~.___
C:\Documents and Settings\derekJerguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Inlill Project (FLD) 2008 07 -11.doc
Page 3 of 8
E. STORMWATER PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (City of Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria
Manual and 4-202.A.21)
)l A STORMWA TER NARRATIVE MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH ALL APPLICATIONS. All applications that involve addition
or modification of impervious surface, including buildings, must include a stormwater plan that demonstrates compliance with the City of
Clearwater Storm Drainage Design Criteria manual. A reduction in impervious surface area does not qualify as an exemption to this requirement.
o If a plan is not required, the narrative shall provide an explanation as to why the site is exempt.
o At a minimum, the STORMWATER PLAN shall include the following;
it Existing topography extending 50 feet beyond all property lines;
ji( Proposed grading including finished floor elevations of all structures;
'iii All adjacent streets and municipal storm systems;
'W1 Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
'B A narrative describing the proposed stormwater control plan including all calculations and data necessary to demonstrate compliance with
the City manual.
J1I Proposed stormwater detention/retention area including top of bank, toe of slope and outlet control structure;
III Signature and seal of Florida Registered Professional Engineer on all plans and calculations.
]il{ COPY OF PERMIT INQUIRY LETTER OR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SWFWMD) PERMIT
SUBMITTAL (SWFWMD approval is required prior to issuance of City Building Permit), if applicable
)f ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF STORMWATER PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Applicant must initial one of the following):
4~ Stormwater plan as noted above is included
Stormwater plan is not required and explanation narrative is attached. At a minimum, a grading plan and finished floor
elevations shall be provided.
CAUTION -IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A STORMWATER PLAN
AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY
MAY OCCUR.
If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-4750.
F. SUPPLEMENTAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Code Section 4-202.A)
'If
')d
SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY (including legal description of property) - One original and 14 copies;
TREE SURVEY (including existing trees on site and within 25' of the adjacent site, by species, size (DBH 4" or greater), and location,
including drip lines and indicating trees to be removed) - pfease design around the existing trees;
TREE INVENTORY; prepared by a "certified arborist", of all trees 4" DBH or greater, reflecting size, canopy (drip lines) and condition of
such trees;
o
N/~
'it
LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY;
o
N~
PARKING DEMAND STUDY in conjunction with a request to make deviations to the parking standards (ie. Reduce number of spaces).
Prior to the submittal of this application, the methodology of such study shall be approved by the Community Development Coordinator and
shall be in accordance with accepted traffic engineering principles. The findings of the study will be used in determining whether or not
deviations to the parking standards are approved;
M GRADING PLAN, as applicable;
Oe/~PRELlMINARY PLAT, as required (Note: Building permits will not be issued until evidence of recording a final plat is provided);
Cll COpy OF RECORDED PLAT, as applicable;
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07 -11.doc
Page 4 of 8
G. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A)
os SITE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"):
Index sheet referencing individual sheets included in package;
North arrow;
Engineering bar scale (minimum scale one inch equals 50 feet), and date prepared;
All dimensions;
Footprint and size of all EXISTING buildings and structures;
Footprint and size of all PROPOSED buildings and structures;
All required setbacks;
All existing and proposed points of access;
All required sight triangles;
Identification of environmentally unique areas, such as watercourses, wetlands, tree masses, and specimen trees, including
description and location of understory, ground cover vegetation and wildlife habitats, etc; Location of all public and private easements;
Location of all street rights-of-way within and adjacent to the site;
Location of existing public and private utilities, including fire hydrants, storm and sanitary sewer lines, manholes and lift stations, gas
and water lines;
All parking spaces, driveways, loading areas and vehicular use areas;
Depiction by shading or crosshatching of all required parking lot interior landscaped areas;
Location of all solid waste containers, recycling or trash handling areas and outside mechanical equipment and all required screening
{per Section 3-201 (D)(i) and Index#701};
Location of all landscape material;
Location of all onsite and offsite storm-water management facilities;
Location of all outdoor lighting fixtures;
Location of all existing and proposed sidewalks; and
Floor plan typicals of buildings for all Level Two approvals. A floor plan of each floor is required for any parking garage requiring a
level Two approval.
'j!{, SITE DATA TABLE for existing, required, and proposed development, in writtenltabular form:
EXISTING
REQUIRED
PROPOSED
Land area in square feet and acres;
Number of EXISTING dwelling units;
Number of PROPOSED dweHing units;
Gross floor area devoted to each use;
Parking spaces: total number, presented in tabular form with the
number of required spaces;
Total paved area, including all paved parking spaces & driveways,
expressed in square feet & percentage of the paved vehicular area;
Official records book and page numbers of all existing utility
easement;
Building and structure heights;
Impermeable surface ratio (I.S.R.); and
Floor area ratio (F.A.R.) for all nonresidential uses.
'So REDUCED COLOR SITE PLAN to scale (8 Y, X 11);
4I5l' FOR DEVELOPMENTS OVER ONE ACRE, provide the following additional information on site plan:
One-foot contours or spot elevations on site;
Offsite elevations if required to evaluate the proposed stormwater management for the parcel;
All open space areas;
Location of all earth or water retaining walls and earth berms;
Lot lines and building lines (dimensioned);
Streets and drives (dimensioned);
Building and structural setbacks (dimensioned);
Structural overhangs;
C:\Documents and Settings\derek.ferguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07 -11.doc
Page 5 of 8
H. LANDSCAPING PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-1102.A)
a1 LANDSCAPE PLAN with the following information (not to exceed 24" x 36"):
All existing and proposed structures;
Names of abutting streets;
Drainage and retention areas including swales, side slopes and bottom elevations;
Delineation and dimensions of all required perimeter landscape buffers;
Sight visibility triangles;
Delineation and dimensions of all parking areas induding landscaping islands and curbing;
Existing trees on-site and immediately adjacent to the site, by species, size and locations, induding driplines (as indicated on required
tree survey);
Location, size, and quantities of all existing and proposed landscape materials, indicated by a key relating to the plant
schedule;
Plant schedule with a key (symbol or label) indicating the size, description, specifications, quantities, and spacing requirements of all
existing and proposed landscape materials, induding botanical and common names;
Typical planting details for trees, palms, shrubs and ground cover plants induding instructions, soil mixes, backfilling, mulching and
protective measures;
Interior landscaping areas hatched and/or shaded and labeled and interior landscape coverage, expressing in both square feet and
percentage covered;
Conditions of a previous development approval (e.g. conditions imposed by the Community Development Board);
Irrigation notes.
.. REDUCED COLOR LANDSCAPE PLAN to scale (8 Yo X 11);
"'IS COMPREHENSIVE LANDSCAPE PROGRAM application, as applicable. Landscape associated with the Comprehensive Landscape
Program shall exceed minimum Code requirements to offset the areas where minimum Code will not be met.
I. BUILDING ELEVATION PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: (Section 4-202.A.23)
.. BUILDING ELEVATION DRAWINGS - with the following information:
All sides of all buildings
Dimensioned
Colors (provide one full sized set of colored elevations)
Materials
'S REDUCED BUILDING ELEVATIONS - same as above to scale on 8 Yo X 11
J. SIGNAGE: (Division 19. SIGNS I Section 3-1806)
}i!/
All EXISTING freestanding and attached signs; Provide photographs and dimensions (area, height, etc.), indicate whether they will be
removed or to remain.
'bI'
All PROPOSED freestanding and attached signs; Provide details induding location, size, height, colors, materials and drawing;
freestanding signs shall include the street address (numerals)
Comprehensive Sign Program application, as applicable (separate application and fee required).
~}>.
o
r-;l1t..
Reduced signage proposal (8 Yo X 11) (color), if submitting Comprehensive Sign Program application.
C:\Documents and Settings\derekJerguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07 -11.doc
Page 6 of 8
K. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: (Section 4-202.A.13 and 4-801.C)
o Include if required by the Traffic Operations Manager or hislher designee or if the proposed development:
Will degrade the acceptable level of service for any roadway as adopted in the Comprehensive Plan.
Will generate 100 or more new vehicle directional trips per hour and/or 1000 or more new vehicle trips per day.
Will affect a nearby roadway segment and/or intersection with five (5) reportable accidents within the prior twelve (12) month period or
that is on the City's annual list of most hazardous intersections.
Trip generation shall be based on the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip General Manual.
The Traffic Impact Study must be prepared in accordance with a "Scoping Meeting" held with the Traffic Operations Manager and the
Planning Departmenfs Development Review Manager or their designee (727-562-4750)
Refer to Section 4-801 C of the Community Development Code for exceptions to this requirement.
o Acknowledgement of traffic impact study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following):
Traffic Impact Study is included. The study must include a summary table of pre- and post-clevelopment levels of service for all
roadway legs and each turning movement at all intersections identified in the Scoping Meeting.
;i::/~~raffic Impact Study is not required.
CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT
STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE RESUBMITTED AND
SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR.
If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Public Works Administration Engineering Department at (727) 562-
4750.
L. FIRE FLOW CALCULA TIONSI WATER STUDY:
Provide Fire Flow Calculations. Water Study by a FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER to assure an adequate water supply is available and to determine if
any upgrades are required by the developer due to the impact of this 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 the water supply must be able to supply 150% of its rated capacity. Compliance with
the 2004 Florida Fire Prevention Code to include NFPA 13, MFPA 14, NFPA 20, NFPA 291, and MFPA 1142 (Annex H) is required.
o Acknowledgement of fire flow calculationstwater study requirements (Applicant must initial one of the following):
~____~_______ Fire Flow CalculationslWater Study is included.
~~~ire Flow CalculationslWater Study is not required.
CAUTION - IF APPLICATION REVIEW RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A FIRE FLOW
CALCULA TlONSI WATER STUDY AND NONE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, APPLICATION MUST BE
RESUBMITTED AND SIGNIFICANT DELAY MAY OCCUR.
If you have questions regarding these requirements, contact the City Fire Prevention Department at (727) 562-4334.
M. SIGNATURE:
I, the undersigned, acknowledge that all representations made
in this application are true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge and authorize City representatives to visit and
photograph the property described in this application.
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PINELLAS
Swom to and subscribed before me this _ day of
, A.D. 20_ to me and/or by
, who is personally known has
produced
as identification.
Signature of property owner or representative
Notarypublic, --------------~----~-----
My commission expires:
C:\Documents and Settings\derekJerguson\Desktop\planning dept forms 0708\Comprehensive Infill Project (FLD) 2008 07 -11.doc
Page 70f8
.M~ AmDA~Jr:'TO,AO:rKOfUZEAGeNT:
---,...........~_.~-,~~~------"-----.------_._...------.-
2. Thl1t{1 Qrnlweare)theovmeq&)~f)drepllfdtltle.t)oIQel'(a)of#leJ!)IIowing dCl$Olibed proparty (addl'eS&.Of general location):
~ lhls pnprl.y: constitutll$ ttle.pI'OpeI:ty forwhlchll re.qooaH(lI' a: (describe requElllt)
,_~_CE,:~:~-R~rA,J~ USI!. TfL.,}:A.IPJSAL.._JJ.$.,E -,.~-_. ~..
"" ....;",.>-,." ,_"",.".,;.",..,.,,,_--.,~..,,,;,..~",~~........,;...,..-...~,,..,"'<"';";'~""''''''~'';'''~''''''''''''';;''>.';''''''''''.iY''''',m'''v...V~'':''''.,i...=",..,~._;,"~.-,.,.<.,'':'___-",;..~....__~.,,_'._'''~-~_~'_'~~:'''''''''~- ",..,".~...-..,~..-"" ... '_""~~"':"'n_.~_"':'._.~...:...._,...._.~..._._,>
4. Thatthe ~ ~)~ppoIntedand,(9oeGldo~eppoint:
. 'bt"'.L4N._..:A~,rlQg:~_I.~L~ASr.;.f:.Bltt..;(elY,.J.,,'1/'( ~.JYA-r;IS.Elt ]",&.>..1) fs.:lI;;'N.fillPll ~ /fie.
..' .'.' '.,.'
._.,---,.,,..,.,....<"".""""~~".,,"',.._-~"'~..--._~_.--,-..,.----_....."'"'~-.,..~_.,~-..._-~-,-_."."'~-;._._~.....--....._-_.'-''"--,.-,-,,_.
all (~.!IlJ.nt(I) to.~ ltny~ C>>' ~doctJments OOce8I8IY to affeCt auch.pelltlon;
5, Thattl1l8aftll1a~luIabrlell~~~,th&~.otCl&Il~tfJf. Florida tollQl18ideranda(lt(ln the abo\iedescr1bed property;
6. That slkt YiaIIa to ,tt,e ~'lW! ~tlMV!W C<<y. ~tl1allve$1n ord&f to prOC9U thlIllj)plIcatIon and U:le owner authorizes City
~.toVilltt Illd~Proriertv~1ri th~appIIcatiOn;
..7. . Th'f(lNie).the~~..~. cer1ffylhatthefol:'egClinglatrue and correcl, "', <
. Js . .'. . .. ". ... .' "., '.' . .~.. "''''- .,.. .... ." ~ .::;.. . . .'
UI,.Ji. .~x!~;~.blkh:~~r{.e~f:\.L~'I!;,.,,~J~n.....d.\1J\(~.l~~Ll~.;t- J~~l~;:\"
'Property OWner
. STATE()F FLORIDA,
COUN'T'l' OF PlNetLAS
/.. .. .. - . ... .
~ rne~.~!allotlJtllr~~~by~I~Qfthl$t8leot~a,oottQ . day of
:~.t~_"aCQ% .' .... pe~.~t~~i~cO",~'-Q~~.c0?__._..._._ wtlohavitlg~llfiMdWy_om
~.al)(j.,....tJ\athf!(slle..fjlllJ\JllI.18l'!l~ltl8".~..(lf.Ihe.~V!tttlat.helshe..signed,
':. CHARlENEP.CiAWFORo
~ Nqtpry Publle . S~fe of FJortdo
fMy....c~~Nov5,2008
",".. .l...ommis$lon#DP3537H
Ik>nded. ~~A/IIn.
N(Jta!Y PUblIc Slgtlall.lre
~. CornI11ll.SklnExplf8s:
c:~ andsettirtgs~k;~U$(lll~. .... ,... nn~0701\Comp1Jilhensfve1nflllProject (FLD) 04-2+07.doc
Pami$QtlC
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRITION
A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE 15 EAST, PINELLAS
COUNTY, FLORIDA.
BLOCK IE', LOTS 17 THROUGH 24, AND BLOCK 3, LOT 24, AND THE EAST 1/2 OF THE VACATED
RIGHT OF WAY OF SOUTH STREET; ALL OF THE PLAT OF "LAKEVIEW HEIGHTS", AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE 5, IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PINELLAS COUNTY,
FLORIDA.
ALL OF THE ABOVE LESS THE EAST 10 FEET FOR RIGHT OF WAY FOR SOUTH MISSOURI
AVENUE.
EXHiBiT B
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
This project requests a change of use for the property located at 1314 South Missouri Avenue,
Clearwater, from retail use to medical use. The existing building and parking lot do not meet the Minimum
Development Standards for the Commercial District 'c' as described within the City of Clearwater Community
Development Code.
We request to retain the existing building (with modifications), retain the majority of the parking lot
located on the southerly portion of the site and redevelop the northerly portion of the site into additional parking
and a stormwater retention pond.
The building is currently encroaching on the standard building setbacks at the rear, front and north side.
To reduce the impact of the building within the standard front setback we propose to remove the existing
overhanging canopy and remove the mansard roof that overhangs the front covered entry. The building will
have an 18' front set back and the covered entry will have a 9'-8" front setback. All of the pervious surfaces
will be removed from between the building and right-of-way from the covered entry northward to provide a
landscape buffer. The rear of the building will remain unchanged with a 4.4' rear setback & landscape buffer.
To enhance the screening of the rear of the building from the adjoining properties to the west a 6 feet high wood
privacy fence will be constructed. The northerly portion of the existing building will be demolished to provide
the required additional onsite parking spaces. Removing the northerly portion of the building makes it
compliant with the side setback requirement.
The parking area on the southerly portion of the property will remain primarily intact. The current
configuration of the existing parking lot will not have the required amount of interior landscaping. To add
interior landscaping space we propose to remove the pervious surfaces from the existing islands, remove the
sidewalk along the building and remove the pavement between the entry and exit drive aisles. The sidewalk
running parallel to the front face of the building at the southeast comer will be shifted toward the Missouri
Avenue to provide a continuous planting bed adjacent to the building (the affected diagonal parking spaces will
be re-striped as parallel spaces). The southerly landscape buffer will remain approximately 3 feet wide and the
westerly landscape buffer will remain approximately 2 feet wide. To provide an increased buffing effect a 6 feet
high masonry wall will be constructed between the parking area and the properties to the west. No landscaping
buffer will be provided between the parallel parking spaces and the right of way.
..
EXHiuiT D-l
WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
GENERAL APPLICABILITY CRITERIA
1. The proposed development of the land will be in harmony with the scale, bulk, coverage, density and
character of adjacent properties in which it is located.
The development includes the reuse of an existing structure within a well-established commercial
district. The adjoining commercial buildings are of similar height, character and position to the street but
do not have the street front coverage of the structure on our site. The proposed development will
increase the harmony of the adjacent properties by reducing the overall bulk and street front coverage of
the building located on this site. The reduction in the size of the building will also lessen the visual
impact on the residential neighbors to the west.
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 development will have no effect on the appropriate development and use of adjacent land
and buildings. The proposed development will correct and/or mitigate zoning nonconformities on this
site. The change of use should make this development more harmonious with its surroundings. The
medical clinic will not operate during evening hours as a retail establishment does reducing activity and
noise adjacent to residential uses. The loading dock will be removed which will eliminate large delivery
trucks from the property. The construction of the privacy fences and walls will create better buffers
between the commercial property and the residential properties on the west. The proposed stormwater
retention pond and stormwater management system will divert stormwater runoff away from
neighboring lands. The drastically enhanced landscaping program is good for the esthetics of the
neighborhood and the environment. All these improvements should be beneficial to the value of adjacent
properties.
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working
in the neighborhood of the proposed use.
The proposed development should enhance the health and safety persons residing and working in the
neighborhood. The medical clinic will provide health services to the neighborhood and the City of
Clearwater in general. The elimination oflarge delivery trucks maneuvering in and out of the site will
enhance motor vehicle and pedestrian traffic in the area.
4. The proposed development is designed to minimize traffic congestion.
The proposed development minimizes traffic congestion by creating limited vehicle ingress and egress
points. The existing condition has unmarked parking spaces that require users and delivery trucks to
back onto Missouri Avenue.
5. The proposed development is consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the
parcel proposed for development.
The building on the project site is part of the COITl_1!luIlity character in its sLmilarities of scale and site
position to the other surrounding buildings. The proposed project will continue to operate as a
('nTnTnpr(,1~1 hn<:l1np<:l<:l 1n thp <:lnrrnnnr11no Tn1vpr1n<:lp ('nTnTnpr(,1~1 r11<:ltr1('t
6. The design of the proposed development minimizes adverse effects, including visual, acoustic and
olfactory and hours of operation impacts, on adjacent properties.
The proposed project design minimizes adverse effects visually by enhancing the fa~ade of the building
and reducing its mass and creating more green spaces, acoustically by providing walls, fences and
landscaping buffers between our site and our neighbors, olfactory by eliminating large diesel delivery
trucks from the site, operationally by eliminating evening retail operations, and adjacently by reducing
stormwater runoff impacts on our neighbors.
EXHiuiT JJ-2
WRITTEN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
COMPREHENSIVE INFILL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CRITERIA
1. The development or redevelopment is otherwise impractical without deviations from the use and/or
development standards set forth in this zoning district.
The existing building would have to be demolished to conform to current development standards.
Because of the unusual shape of the project site and the location of the building on the site the existing
parking spaces need to be retained. Reconfiguring the parking would make it impossible to meet the
current parking requirements and preserve a majority of the structure.
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 proposed development plan is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and this Zoning
District in that it continues the use of the site with an allowed use. The proposed plan complies with the
intent and basic planning objectives by complying explicitly with the code where practical and by
modifying the existing conditions to as closely resemble code objective where possible.
3. The development or redevelopment will not impede the normal and orderly development and
improvement of surrounding properties.
The redevelopment is complimentary in use, scale and character to existing surrounding development
and is contained in its operation to the site; therefore it will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvements of surrounding properties.
4. Adjoining properties will not suffer substantial detriment as a result of the proposed development.
Adjoining properties will benefit from the proposed development by a reduction in large delivery truck
activity, a reduction in stormwater runoff, a reduction in the scale of he building, the enhancement of
green space and landscaping, and the reduction of evening business hours.
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
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
ul~tprfrnnt l1~P
The proposed use is permitted under the Future Land Use Category. This project will diversify the
City's economic base by providing specialized medical job opportunities and will accommodate the
redevelopment of an existing economic contributor.
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;
See item 3 above.
b. The proposed development complies with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City;
The proposed development was designed in accordance with applicable design guidelines and with
consideration of input from City staff during the BPRC meeting and subsequent conversations.
c. The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports the established or emerging
character of an area;
The design, scale and intensity of the proposed development supports established character because
it is similar to the existing fabric of the surrounding commercial district and emerging character by
enhancing he landscaping and green space on the property and by creating a modem exterior
fayade.
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
The proposed elevation provides a variety of horizontal building planes.
. Use of architectural details such as columns, cornices, stringcourses, pilasters, porticos,
balconies, railings, awnings, etc.;
The proposed building elevations incorporate columns, cornices, pitched tiled accent
roofs, and awnings
. Variety in materials, colors and textures;
The proposed building elevations incorporate a variety of materials and trim color.
. Distinctive fenestration patterns;
The proposed building elevations demonstrate distinctive fenestration in the use of new
windows and column arrangements.
. Building setbacks; and
A variety of design elements have been introduced the building to break up the expanse
of the front facade and create of a variety of deoths on the facade
. Distinctive roof forms.
This project is distinctive in the design in that the elevations incorporate signature
elements and forms identifiable with Florida Pain Management.
e. The proposed development provides for appropriate buffers, enhanced landscape design and
appropriate distances between buildings.
The proposed development provides substantially enhanced buffers and landscape design. The
reduction in the size of the building provides greater distances between buildings which is more
compatible with the adjoining residential properties.
\"l-
f
r
l,=---
-
, [eo1633 f~Gf 1.21
3~'77~ 1\
~
'!!IaS LUSE _c!at.~. 1St:t:i d.~or' *7. A. 0.. lQ56,
BY UD B~ G-,1!GJ=; c.. ..6A'aaXSOm imd BEt.D If, JiAllHIS.OJl" .9r
C1.~t.aJ"". P!.naU,.. Count.~*P'1.or~d_.~e:ro.ln.,n.J" e.~1ed. t;be~
w:asOtca. ....4 nARRISON FtI~:l"URf:COMPAN~, . cOrpoMl ,.1 on 01"8--
&11*" .nd uc.rporat..4 un4ar t.~. 10",. or. the St..t;e Qr Florid..
.'It.b>lh pJ"'1ncS.'Pa1 p1aca 0;1' bu.ln.....t. C1'..rwat r. 21nel1u
Qount.:r. P1or.l4a. hereIn 0811.41;be LRSSU.
..'ITJh:..oSSE'T'l1. t.hat.1n conddoratlon or ~1itl eo"tman'ta
"hero1n cent_1ned. on nUl part; or the sa.t.d LF:SS,Mt to..'O& kept'
and perEor.aed. the ..Sd LESSOnS do bereby le... ~o ~ne .a1d
t.~E:E, t.be rol.l.ovlng de.=r.~;:u::::"~"./i:N. . ~)-\ .1"" -::H
Locat.ed at. 130a-16/M'H)~OUR /lVI'.NUb.,
C:..r.....Rit~T::.::. ,'LcTf.tt'lA, 'l\ore p.rt1cU:lar1.y
4.acr.l be~- a.:._.....
~"-'- :,- .'-""- ,,,,,, ......~.-...
LoTi 17';' H~'.-' 19. ZOr.n-:i 21-. toes. ,~hi
'l:.a.t t.en (lO)Vf'e_t 01' $old 'loCa, 1n
alack L or LAlfi.."V11." Hl-IGH't':; St1H~I "'t ~ T (IN,
OL!.AN..ATt"i. ?L.OPt'lA. acroi-ct! ng to' thl!
. ~p or ?l"t 't.het'':Qr ell rfloorded In Plat
Book 1), p..~t> S. Qr t.ho ;:ubl1c "'t:cor"'8
or i'l::i-.,L./,g CC'vN'fY....hO:PTlA. -,
i,..:A
c
:c u;. n,' ;,1: . I,t:~!) tl1CS" 'le !'or the ter',no.t. l<i '''0..1''8
ri-Cr'l t:t<' ,1.. t. "r,e p~'ILbc. iU'" roady (Qroc:u:u.pIU'lCY. ;J1I1 t n~ blu\l".-
ror allU"i eq,ua:l t.oSi.. or the f;ro~a annu.al. looln6 ot. utd CORPOn.ATr. .:.
lllUb ...,J.nl~U/ll ...)":nent of "'Ph, flh1U. j.N!; :<l,~:.n;.; (~I},Ot'O.OO) per
":/&1)r c::..rt,.ln. nl'i ""Ilnlmurn. p"YlTItnt '.0 b.,. rad.l 'n. tnO'lthlJ tna;tI)U-
~nt8 01' .::.ev:;;i n.]}i',,!;!) ,.l,.r'f. ,}....:.....,tl,... (;..7~J.OO) pe:,t' 1I\0nt.i, on 't.ho
..t.Lr'lt. dA,Y .of"....eb..nd ...:lit.~)' !tu:lO.t.h._d...u:.1n"..w...lL1-.t.CU!m.,...w.lt.h..~& ctr" t
pa,..ent l:>~ec""l. '!. ,h.e 1.4;'00 occupancy ",r -..ld proll\lees. ~.y.~.~':~.":l'.
THl'\ ,,<1 hlltf.l1llE'nt 'bu1:woen the "llnlnttl''1 psvml!nt Qt' ~!r ~,'n()ji;M.r:D
~,.;."...n5( ;'9,000.00) ;:>er ;1081' IInd .. oum c..t\,t.a:l to oC t.lit:! ,,:rOl'cltl
.nt1'.lal t,.1<."$ o!:' !:ald CO~ffli't.'.rr:.N 1'a to be cO'l\J:Hlt~d on b (lua%'-
t;erly I:H.:11.. d .t'.' t",c t...:nft of' ... \ d occunllncy f.nd pI'O"Hn' .'1 just..
l"IIe nt ":11'0 c...
,
':'nd t'n"e sald L,.:;;S!-~f. eovenllnt!l \otr't.h t.hc :;...1 d!.r:S:",,'~H
to tlU:i.J.l;t> nO :.1tllf,vfuJ.. Improper ~r orron:l1". use of the prct!l'1~aen:
::lot. to .a.1.:'n t .:~ h".88 or tu ouhlat any purt or l;" ...ld l'H'ol"lll !Iez
''''It.h~lt. the< wrl t.t-"'l Cc.nBent ot' t.1\f;: t.;f;5;,(:~; not. t.O U::I6 ...td
pr~ml:t',#l [(;.t. IIOJ' ot-Nor purpoBo than 'IB ,. WfU'f'h()U$C fH'ln 1;..1.f'arQOm.
and t:o quJ.t. and d",llve.r Uf) aaid premia... lit. l.he end -::.r ;"lel
t;,,~ L~ 'U o;<:;;odc.ondU 1 en' "l" t.hey. are. now to%:'d1oar:r .U~~l" ""Hi
4....c:",. fl.nl'fd~1JU" b~ t,tu~tll.(lmtlotBon1,y ncoptcc!J. And tf\~ !l tI 1 d
t.J.:SSk..l he.....'t-l' eo,'.n..ntt- and "g~.fU thnt. tt' ".i'Ault 8t1011. tHo
macle '1" toe' ~.T!"l"'lt ot: thel"'<PYlt 'S"sl\1"ore.a!d. OT" 1!' tho !lldd
t.S:SS~'t ahall "'~o1.ntp. any of' t^ne eO\'C'"4nt.nnr tl'>\r 106,'., f.I;H'n
.eldLeSS..;:: Shall bc~o"'e tenontatlil'L!'t"'cr.nC:fI. h.l"'ebvl<lA!v:n'
all. ,..l.-.ht of notle.... fond tr~o J..~SS::R:" tlhall '. c, antI tol;'" I. -'...,0- '
dIete).,. tc ,....-.n1:.er .,...d ~e-tl:l.ko po,ulesslon '0J: the." 'dem.l:iu4. -:>rnnl1t1ClI1i.
it '::0 alsc. un~lcu..tood llnd bp,:read thst, tnc L,:.t>On$, t"e
to 'Pay tt:lt! taxelll. ~..ecl...1"~III..Dmor,tn. Inaur.nco IH1d "~"'"..ral ...nn
ordtn.r.1"'~oc.c? end rcpa!~ oc sa1.d bu11.dtrlg.
...
. \
''t
o~_,___~...'<<"",-,
.. "
"".......
)U-~-
." ."
~ ~ ;;
~,.,....,~ ~ .,'
_ -~"'.._.~-'n'&"_'.,
-
"'liilf..J..'
'''t.
-
- ~ -, ~-
~,._~~.-
.""
6:1:~ ".:;,: t2Z
ftr-;:'IH;~S O'.l.r hand.. and ennls thl.s 18th_::."y or May,
j., l'},. j< } -:;56 .
51~nod. S6alod ~"d nel1vared
1.'" PrtJtJ'M'\e.. 01':
--~~
~/
/ ~
Q;.'C~
( SRIU..)
) /in,,":
_~M.~~~
./:./ .i /_
'J_C- M
'7
~.
~ [\<--::i..i.~>;yJ (:~ ~:~ L L '. .,.
wON J ~~c~~
J:~ ~,~',
;1l''tA " '.j ..~.J . ...; j ~ I t"7f
?
"
Hfdun SOf; :<',lmn ftlP-;;'
c::;
C)'>1.f~"-;.1 ffY.
nf_
-',....,..
..
.;.;)'CQ.&~
".. :r
~,,-,,r , .
:::s' . ....;:_~\,.-- ,. j
'\1' " \.q~' dr"......"
;':~f' e: !'<!' tlll"";,t .
.""'-"-",-,
<;i'.., v ..
:iT A 'f!~. t' f ~. LOft! nJ\. )
)
Gc,rWl"{ Ol !' HWLLAS )
~ 11;,;'
"''''.
.l.IlLRj<flY CSR1'JPY t;t-.ct on th\c dt<y ,'(,'r"cnml1y UPP(inrod
f.filCcr<o !rlU. tin or1"ico!" dn'l::r I'lutticrt..ed t.el tlrll'll.~nll!ltnr O{lt~~:. nhd
t.,d((. lie' il:IHI",l..dv.tnClnt~',
U50nOf' C. HAn~1;:tJN nnd il1:Ll':N ~~. H1<HH"~Ul
Ct. mCl well knewn to be th_ Pf:>:.t'uonll deaer1b~d 1n' tino whr.: e;>(nc,,~tod
U1tl :fc.re,gci OF.; 1... A':'E. aru1 they l!lc\rnowledged 'bet"Qre tnI'! t.l,ti t the;ll
67:0C\:~~ d t.he III Al'Il.4e J'cr tho purll,caOl! therc~n ClxprelliIlEH"i.
IN W.'l"NF,SS WHF.:rr,Op. 'i have bereuntc !'et my hfi.Tld and
fjl:f!'l~cc :"'ly- offlcl..1 Gent lilt {:!~c.Alti'iATbH~ li>.dtl :~OU,J.~:; find Stat..
t.r::!.. l-Bbh ctG7'c1" May. A. no'. JJ,IS'&. '
~;1 . ""1' .',', ",'
/ /1.4,/1...../ __" t "~':)':.11:./ ~~
Nota ry PuH.i-c .7
~/
i!f
My COtlll1'l.1I!D!. on E:1:';;:d..ros ':
-... ~~ '- .., ......w.. ... __
M. ~~. .-....,. :..MCr._ ,.-~ fV.o.
-...- tit- _rtcu... _.'" CoL 6f ,r,LY.
r--- ..-----
I...;' , .----... ,
~
--.........--
~ .._~-''r"'-:---~,.-'''-.._ ---.:....,_._ ~
~: ,L
'I .!:~
f ~ ~)
r~!~ ~~'
LE -,< ,.." :~
,.
" :'i "..~ !;
t t~
-=r
.'/', (O(."tl"'~'l
~....... \";-.0' Ot ,U,;,)
3- r,/", 1:.<19
-... ~,t"-I"'_i:...,~lJi~'~
~,;;, bC,It! rllLL '1._' '
RESOLUTION
No. 71 - 92
WHEREAS, it hat1 been requested by George C. Harrison R<.,alty
Comp.:l11,y i'wd Fra.nk Scboenwlssn<::r, the ownt:r of cert.,dn real prop<:.:rty
in Lake Vh.w Heights, in the City of Clea.rwatcl', Flol'ida, that the City
of Clcar\'i.l[!,t0J:, Florida, vacai~, a certain portion of dedicated right of v'tay
k110\\'n ;),8 South Strt'!et; and
WHIJ:REAS, J.;aid l'ight of way is not necessal'Y nor required and it
115 deCl'n(:d to be to 1.111.: b(':5t in1(::rc$t and advaniage of the: City and thtl g(~l'h~r.;:d.
public that the !>;;'!Tll.' he vacated;
.NOW l' THEREFORE, BE iT ,RESOLVED BY THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CLJ~^RV{ATERf F'LORIDA,
IN SESSION DULY AND REGULARLY ASSEMBLED, 1\5
FOLLOWS;
-
-~--
..
1. Tholt the fo.l1ov.ting:
~
.......
Thin portion of SQuth Street (fol'rnedy pht.tted as Lilkeview
DrivH! lying b':d,'\Vc('}1 Blocks "Ell a::1d "}ll and Eant of the
E.ud, right of way line of l\1ichigan A V('11m: as shown on the
P!;d 01 Lake View Height!'! as recorded in Plat Bool, 1'3, page
5 of the Public Rccords of Pino11a6 County, Flcn:ida, and
Wl:st or the WC15t right of way line of Mistiouri AYE:nut.::, as
l'dQ'il.ted and l'QC01'ded in o.n.. Book 1353, page 23, and
O.R. Br.lok 13':;.1, page 377, oi the Public RccoJ.'ds of Pindlas
County, Flol:iua,
o
....
';'J'
~-'--....
c:)
"')
i:i;:;
be and the ~i:i.rne is hereby vacated, closed and released, and the City of
Clearwater h,'xeby quit chims and X'Edcases all of its right, title and interest
llwrcto to th(~ persons, firms or corpol'ations entitled thereto by law.
excepting thaL the q~_!r <?f" Cle_ar~~<~tl~l:~~~r~by }'etains a twenty foot (20t)
drain-a.gc and tlti~itLe~tf.1CrIlc;l)tJ.Ylni ~c,;~.^,fc~J 11 Ol} 5~!J:<;~Lpjq~ 9f the"9~isfing
centerline of South Street for ~p~jnstaUatJqn and lnai!lienancc of all
publi~^utilitic,s .
Z. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to record this Resolution
in the Public Records of Pinellas County, Florida.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of Au
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE................. .................................................................................... ..1
SITE DESCRIPTION.........................................................................................1
EXISTING CONDITIONS................................................................................ ..2
PROPOSED DESIGN.................... ........................................... ............. ........... ..2
RATIONAL............. ................................... ... .._.................................. ......... ...3
CALCULATIONS............................................................... ................. .......... ...3
CONCLUSION......... ............................................................................ ......... ...3
EXISTING CONDITIONS SHEET................... .... ..................................... ........ ....5
PROPOSED CONDITIONS SHEET......................................................................6
HYDROCAD CALCULATIONS....................................... .............................. ..7 -38
APPENDIX
ZONE 6 RAINFALL IDF CURVES
F-2 OVERLAND FLOW VELOCITIES FOR VARIOUS LAND USE TYPES
PROJECT NARRATIVE
Purpose
The Applicant is proposing to redevelop approximately one-third of the existing site. The
Applicant is proposing to remove the northern one-third of the existing building and the loading
dock and replace them with proposed parking, landscaping, and a dry detention basin. The
purpose of this report is to model the exiting peak flows emanating from the limits of the
redeveloped area and compare these exiting peak flows to those calculated for the proposed
redevelopment to this same area.
Site Description
The project site is an approximately 48,3 I 9 SF lot bounded by South Missouri A venue to the east,
private commercial properties to the north and south, and private residential properties to the
west. The site is currently utilized as for commercial purposes. The site consists of an attached
19.5' and 13.0' high structure with a footprint of 25,568 SF, a parking lot to the south, a pavea
area to the east for access, and a paved loading dock to the north.
Infiltration rate of soils in the field were determined using a double ring infiltrometer. These tests
were conducted by Gulf Coast Testing Laboratory, Inc, 5745 Park Boulevard, Pinellas Park, FL
33781.
Test #1 located 21' west and 3' north of the existing northeast building corner revealed the
following:
0' 5"
2'4"
10'0"
Gray Sand
Gray Sand
Light Gray Sand
Dark Yellowish Brown Sand
Very Pale Brown Sand
White Sand
Black Sand
3'0"
3'5"
4'2"
9'3"
Existing water table: 9'2"
Estimated Seasonal High Water Level: 6':t
Infiltration Rate: 27.9 incheslhr.
Test #2 located 35' east and 27' south of the existing northeast building comer revealed the
following:
0' 3"
l' 4"
2'0"
2' 10"
4'5"
8'5"
9'2"
Asphalt
Very Pale Brown Sand
Light Gray Sand
Dark Brown Sand
Light Gray Sand
White Sand
Light Brownish Gray
10'0"
Black Sand
Existing water table: 8' 1"
Estimated Seasonal High Water Level: 5'6"
Infiltration Rate: 23.4 inches/he
Existing Conditions (See Existing Conditions Sheet)
The majority of the site slopes gently downward from southeast to northwest across the site and,
ultimately, to the westerly abutters' properties. There is an existing low spot in the southern
parking area where the majority of the flow from the southern portion of the property leaves the
site. The building storm drains currently exit to downspouts or through sheet flow at the rear of
the property and flow onto the westerly abutters' properties. The paved access way in front of the
site slopes onto South Missouri A venue. There is an existing state owned catch basin along
South Missouri A venue. This catch basin collects the overland flow from the existing paved
access area. The stormwater from the northern loading dock flows north and onto abutters'
properties.
There are no wetlands present on site. The site is not contributing to an existing flooding
problem.
Proposed Design (See Proposed Conditions Sheet)
The northern one-third of the existing building will be removed and replaced with parking,
landscaping and a dry detention pond. A strip of asphalt to the east of the existing building will
be replaced with landscaping. The southern parking area will remain predominately the same
with some paving being removed and replaced with landscaping. Because the modifications to
this area are so minor it was not considered in the redevelopment calculations.
Proposed drainage at the site will follow existing flow patterns in the southern portion and new
flow patterns in the northern portion. In the redeveloped northern portion, stormwater will be the
collected from proposed parking area and from the 13.0' high, 7,559 SF portion of the remaining
building. Although it is not necessary to retain the stormwater runoff from the existing building a
portion is proposed to be tied into the detention pond to help mitigate the overall runoff from the
site. These areas will flow into 1,937 cubic feet proposed dry detention pond. The detention
basin has been sized to accommodate flows associated with storm frequencies up to and including
the 25-year storm event as required in Section 1 of the City of Clearwater's Storm Drainage
Design Criteria (SDDC) for detention ponds with outfalls. Test #1' s infiltration rate was used in
the design of the detention pond as it was the closest to the proposed detention pond location.
Soil testing was not possible in the center of the proposed detention pond since the building
currently occupies that location.
The proposed parking area will be graded to flow towards the northwest comer of the site. The
stormwater from the parking area will enter the pond from a catch basin in the northwest comer
of the parking area. The stormwater will flow from the catch basin to the pond through a 10"
reinforced concrete pipe. The existing building downspouts will be connected to underground 4"
PVC pipe which will direct the flow to the detention pond. The outlet of both the catch basin
outlet and the storm drain outlet will flow through a pipe end flare and treatment. The storm water
2
retained in the pond will exit the site through ground infiltration and a 15" diameter RCP outfall
to the existing storm sewer along South Missouri A venue.
Rational
The runoff calculations use the Rational Method, with the Zone 6 Rainfall Intensity-Duration-
Frequency Curves to depict pre-development and post-development peak design flows as
recommended in Section 8 of the SDDC. Given the relatively small subcatchments on the site
and that the SDDC in Section 2 requires the use of the F-2 Overland Velocities for Various Land
Use Types chart with a minimum time of concentration of 15 minutes, a time of concentration of
15 minutes was assumed for most of the site.
Existing, pre-development runoff calculations used a Weighted Coefficient of Runoff of 1/2 the
actual C value as allowed by the City of Clearwater as defined on the table in Section 8 of the
SDDC for sites undergoing redevelopment and not contributing to an existing flooding problem.
The 25-year storm event was used for the design frequency to determine peak runoff flows as
required by the SDDC in Section I for channels and detention areas with outfalls. The
proposed detention area has a proposed outfall that connects to the existing storm sewer
under South Missouri A venue.
A minimum storm duration of 60 minutes is required according to SDDC Section 8. According
to the Zone 6 IDF curve chart the intensity for a 25 year storm using the Rational Method with a
Duration of 60 minutes is 3.70 in/hr.
Calculations
HydroCAD calculations are provided for the existing and proposed conditions on site. These
calculations demonstrate that the new flow patterns allow for less flow to leave the site in the
redeveloped areas during the 25-year storm than the existing conditions. The calculations also
show that through infiltration the dry detention pond will drain out within 24 hours or less of the
end of the 25-year storm event.
As can be seen in the proposed calculations, the dry detention pond has been modeled so that the
peak elevation for the 25-year storm event will reach 61.0 with the top of bank being 62.0,
therefore there will be 1.0' of freeboard during the 25-year storm event which is greater than the
6" of freeboard required in SDDC Section 8. This demonstrates that the detention pond can
handle the volume of runoff generated by 2S-year storm without increasing offsite runoff.
Separate HydroCAD calculations are provided for the treatment volume to demonstrate the
system's ability to detain the first half an inch of runoff from the portion of the site undergoing
redevelopment for the duration of the storm event as required by SDDC Section 8.
Conclusion
Using Weighted Coefficient of Runoff allowed by the SDDC for pre-development conditions,
redevelopment of the 48,3 I 9 SF lot will result in higher runoff concentration over the
predevelopment conditions. By using the proposed on-site dry detention area the presumed
additional flow generated from redevelopment will be mitigated on site during the 25-year storm.
Flow off-site from the redeveloped area is decreased in comparison to existing conditions through
3
the use of a dry detention pond with infiltration. The detention pond is designed to retain through
infiltration 0.80 cfs of the 1.48 cfs flow that enters the pond during the 25-year storm event. The
other 0.68 cfs exits the pond through the outfall control structure and connects to the existing
state storm sewer system. This is less than the 0.73 cfs that currently flows from the same areas
during existing conditions. Therefore, all new runoff from the proposed redevelopment will be
mitigated on site. This is shown in the HydroCAD calculations below.
A summary of flow rates for the entire property are as follows:
Note: Existing Condition and Proposed Southern Residential Properties flow rates were calculated using the SDDC
M d.fi d W . h d C ffi. fR ff
o I Ie elglte oe IClent 0 uno .
Existing Conditions
Peak Discharge Rates - ft'/sec
25- Year Storm
Investigation Point 1- Northern Residential Properties 0.42
Investigation Point 2- South Missouri A venue 0.21
Investigation Point 3- Southern Residential Properties 1.32
TOTALS 1.95
Post-development .
Peak Discharge Rates - fe/see
25- Y ear Storm
Investigation Point 1- South Missouri Avenue 0.78
Investigation Point 2- Southern Residential Properties 1.01
TOTALS 1.79
4
0'!1
<1>
!a
.
~
, ""
,
,
,
z
<
M
Vl
-i
~
6
z
"ll
o
Z
-i
,
,
\\ \ \
~
~
Vl
-i
r g
fTl
D D D C) 6
~ fTl z
Z "ll
0 0
Z
-i
}o- }o- }o- r'1 ..... ~
;u ;u ;u x ;;:: M
Vl
r'1 r'1 r'1 Vi r'1 -i
}o- }o- }o- ..... ~
0 0 0 z 0
;u ;u ;0 C) "Tl 6
}o- }o- }o- 0 () z
Z Z Z < 0 "ll
Z Z Z r'1 Z 0
C) C) C) ;0 () z
): r'1 -i
Z -t (/) Z
0 0 0 Z -t
;u C 0 ~
..... (/) ..... "Tl
:x: 0 :x: r (5
C 0
;u ..... ;0 ~ Z
r'1 :x: r'1
(/) (/) ~ "U
(5 ;:: (5 }o-
Vi -t
r'1 r'1 ..... :x:
z (/) z :x:
..... 0 .....
> c >
r :!l r
~
r'1
Z
C
r'1
Existing Conditions Sheet
Date Issued: 07..(}1-Qa
""'.: Dale: Revisioll
_THE W,,-n:l'lnEI..D DESIO'" Gl'louP. ....c.
.."..", ............_M....aN..~~.....
TAM"". h""".... 33""
_ONe, .. I ".3"~700
Project No. W-1382 - Scale: Not to Sca~
Florida Pain Management
1314 South Missouri Ave.
Clearwater, Fl 33756
Coo
:or
. CD
I\)~
z
<
M
u>
....
~
....
6
z
"U
o
Z
....
r
fTl
0 D 0 G)
~ fTl
Z
0
}> }> }> rTJ ::!
;;0 ;;0 ;;0 x ;::
rTJ rTJ fTl Vi fTl
}> }> }> .....
0 0 0 z 0
;;0 ;;0 ;;0 C) "
}> }> }> 0 (")
z z z < 0
z z Z fTl Z
C) C) C) ;;0 (")
): fTl
Z ..... lJ) z
0 0 0 z .....
;;0 c 0 ;;0
..... lJ) --i " ~
:r 0 :r r 6
c 0
;;0 --i ;;0 ~ Z
fTl :r fTl
lJ) lJ) "U "1)
(5 ;:: (5 }>
~ --i
rTJ Vi rTJ :r
z lJ) z :r
..... 0 .....
> c >
r ::!! r
~
fTl
Z
C
fTl
t
I
t
J
t
J
~
~
Proposed Conditions Sheet
Date Issued: 07-01-08
~.: Date: ReYision:
Project No. W-1382 . Scale: Not to Scale
_THE WATERnl;l..O O':;SIGN GROUP. ''''C.
.."".., ..,.....w ...._..~T_ ...~._..
T..__h....."..",...,
....0_'1113-.39-5'700
Florida Pain Management
1314 South Missouri Ave.
ClealWaler. Fl33756
;---\,
/ \
\Subcat)
\ /
"---J
;-0
\
/ 18 \
\U
Existing BUilding~....... I..................... I
Removed ~ ....J.~
( 2S; Private property
· ... (Investigation Point #1)
Existing East Pavement
& Canopy & Northern
Lawn to be Removed
(3S)
~
Existing Paving to Street
State Property
(Investigation Point #2)
<~s)
Existing Building to be
Remain 13' Height
(4S)~
.. ........... Private Property
Existing Building to be (Investigation Point #3)
Remain 16.5' Height
(ss)
Existing South,
Southeast, and
Southwest to Remain
I~;~ A
Drainage Diagram for Existing Conditions
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. 7/1/2008
HydroCAOO 7.00 sIn 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems
7
Existing Conditions FL -City of Clearwater 25- Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 2
HydroCAO@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Time span=0.00-2.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 201 points
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
Subcatchment 1 S: Existing Building to be Removed
Runoff Area=8,399 sf Runoff Oepth=1.78"
Tc=15.0 min C=OA8 Runoff=0.35 cfs 0.029 af
Subcatchment 2S: Existing East Pavement & Canopy & Northe Runoff Area=2,638 sf Runoff Oepth= 1.18"
Tc=15.0 min C=0.32 Runoff=0.07 cfs 0.006 af
Subcatchment 3S: Existing Paving to Street
Runoff Area=5, 180 sf Runoff Oepth=1.78"
Tc=15.0 min C=OA8 Runoff=0.21 cfs 0.018 af
Subcatchment 4S: Existing Building to be Remain 16.5' Height Runoff Area=9,611 sf Runoff Oepth=1.78"
Tc=15.0 min C=OA8 Runoff=OAO cfs 0.033 af
-
Subcatchment 5S: Existing South, Southeast, and Southwest Runoff Area=14,884 sf Runoff Oepth=1.78"
Tc=15.0 min C=OA8 Runoff=0.61 cfs 0.051 af
Subcatchment 6S: Existing Building to be Remain 13' Height Runoff Area=7,559 sf Runoff Oepth=1.78"
Tc=15.0 min C=OA8 Runoff=0.31 cfs 0.026 af
Reach 1 R: Private property (Investigation Point #1)
Inflow=OA2 cfs 0.035 af
Outflow=OA2 cfs 0.035 af
Reach 2R: State Property (Investigation Point #2)
Inflow=0.21 cfs 0.018 af
Outflow=0.21 cfs 0.018 af
Reach 3R: Private Property (Investigation Point #3)
Inflow=1.32 cfs 0.109 af
Outflow= 1.32 cfs 0.109 af
Total Runoff Area = 1.108 ac Runoff Volume = 0.161 af Average Runoff Depth = 1.74"
8
Existing Conditions FL -City of Clearwater 25- Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 3
HydroCAO@7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Subcatchment 1 S: Existing Building to be Removed
Runoff
0.35 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.029 af, Depth= 1.78"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/FaI1=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Area ( sf) C
8,399 0.48
Description
Existing Roof
Tc Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Roof Runoff
Subcatchment 1 S: Existing Building to be Removed
Hydrograph
0.38c
0.36~
0.34~
0.32:
0.3c
0.28
0.26.
0.24~
ti) 0.22:.
~ 0.2'
~ 0.18.
iL -
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.1-
0.08:
0.06~
0.04:
0.02.
o
o
0.35
I EI Runoff ~
FL...City of Clearwater 25-Y ear
Duration=60.min,
Inteh=3:70iri/hr
Runoff Area=8,399 sf
Runoff Volume=O.029 af
Runoff Depth=1.78"
Tc=15.0min
C:::0.48
1
Time (hours)
2
9
Existing Conditions FL -City of Clearwater 25- Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 4
HydroCAD@7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Subcatchment 2S: Existing East Pavement & Canopy & Northern Lawn to be Removed
Runoff
0.07 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.006 af, Depth= 1.18"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 inlhr
Area (sf)
1,506
1,132
2,638
C Description
0.48 Loading Dock and Aspalt in Front
0.10 Northern and Western Lawn
0.32 Weighted Average
Tc Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(fUft) (fUsee) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Paved
Subcatchment 2S: Existing E~st Pavement & Canopy & Northern Lawn to be Removed
Hydrograph
0.08~
0.075 0.07 cfs
0.07 '.
0.065"
0.06_
0.055
0.05:
Cil 0.045-:
:e
~ 0.04c.
0
u: 0.035':
0.03.:
0.025-:
0.02
0.015-
I El Runoff I
FL-City of Clearwater 25- Year
J:)uration::;;60 min,
Inten=3.70 in/hr
RUlloffArea=2,638sf
Runoff Volume=O.006 af
Runoff Depth=t.18"
Tc=t5.0min
C=O.32
1
Time (hours)
2
10
Existing Conditions FL-City of Clearwater 25- Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 5
HydroCAD@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Runoff
Subcatchment 3S: Existing Paving to Street
0.21 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.018 af, Depth= 1.78"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Area (sf)
5,180
T c Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
0.23:
0.22
0.21: .
0.2~
0.19-:
0.18,
0.17,
0.16; .
0.15
_ 0.14' ,
l/) ,
c:; 0.13 .
-; 0.12~ .
o 011'
u: 0.1:
0,09':
0.08. .
0.07 ;
0.06.
0.05'0
0.04-; .
0.03-;
0.02.
0.01:
0'
o
C Description
0.48 Canopy and Paved Area
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(ft/ft) (fUsee) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Paved
Subcatchment 3S: Existing Paving to Street
Hydrograph
0.21 cIs
1121 Runoff I
FL-Cityof Clearwater 25-Year
Duration=oOmin,
Inten=3;70 in/hr
Runoff Area=5,180 sf
RunoffVolumedLOI8af
Runoff Depth::l:78"
Tc=15~Omin
C=().48
1
Time (hours)
2
11
Existing Conditions FL -City of Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 inlhr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 6
HydroCAD@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Runoff
Subcatchment 4S: Existing Building to be Remain 16.5' Height
0.40 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.033 af, Depth= 1.78"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.011.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Area (sf)
9,611
T c Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
0.44
0.42: .
0.4
0.38" .
0.36
0.34-: ,
0.32-:
0.3~ "
0.28'
~ 0.26" ,
tIl "
~ 0.24'
;: 0.22,'
~ 0.2'
0.18-;
0.16
0,14, .
0.12.
0.1' .
0.08
0.06;
0.04-:
0.02:
0'
o
C Description
0.48 Existing Roof
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Roof Runoff
Subcatchment 4S: Existing Building to be Remain 16.5' Height
Hydrograph
I ill Runoff ,
DAD cfs
FL...City of Clearwater 25...Year
Duration=60 min,
IntEm=3.70 il1/hr
Runoff Area=9,611 sf
Runoff Volume=O.033af
Runoff Depth=1.78"
Tc=15.0 min
C=0.48
1
Time (hours)
2
12
Existing Conditions FL-City of Clearwater 25- Year Ouration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 7
HydroCAD@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Subcatchment 5S: Existing South, Southeast, and Southwest to Remain
Runoff
0.61 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.051 af, Depth= 1.78"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0J1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Area ( sf) C
14,884 0.48
Description
Parking spaces with planters
T c Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Parking with Planters
Subcatchment 5S: Existing South, Southeast, and Southwest to Remain
Hydrograph
0.65..
0.6
0.61 cfs
I 0 Runoff ~
0.5
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year
Ouration=60 min,
IntEm::::3.7()ln/hr
Runoff Area=14,884 sf
Runoff V()lume=O.051 af
RLJhoffOepth=1.78"
TC=15.0 hlin
C==0.48
0.55
0.45
_ 0.4-
CI)
'0
- 0.35-
;:
o
ii: 0.3~
0.25:
0.2
0.15
0.05
1
Time (hours)
2
13
Existing Conditions FL -City of Clearwater 25- Year Ouration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 8
HydroCAO@7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
5ubcatchment 65: Existing Building to be Remain 13' Height
Runoff
0.31 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.026 af, Depth= 1.78"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Area (sf) C
7,559 0.48
Description
Existing Roof
T c Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(ftlft) (ftlsec) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Roof Runoff
5ubcatchment 65: Existing Building to be Remain 13' Height
Hydrograph
0.34
0.32':
0.3. .
0.28'
0.26:
0.24,
0.22;
Ui' 0.2 ,
~ 0.18'
;: ,
.2 0.16:
lL
0.31 cfs
I Gl Runoff I
0.14:
0.12;
0.1:
0.08,
0.06"
0.04.
0.02:
o
o
Fl..City of Clearwater 25..Year
Duration=60 min,
Inten=3.70 in/hr
Runoff Area=7,559 sf
Runoff Volume:=O.026 af
Runoff Depth=1.18"
Tc=15.0 min
C=0.48
1
Time (hours)
2
14
Existing Conditions FL -City of Clearwater 25- Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 9
HydroCAD@7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Inflow Area =
Inflow
Outflow
Reach 1 R: Private property (Investigation Point #1)
0.253 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.63" for 25-Year event
0.42 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume= 0.035 af
0.42 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume= 0.035 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
0.46"
0.44,
0.42: ~
0.4, ~
0.38; ,
0.36,
Q.34: .
0.32,
0.3
0.28
~ 0.26~ '
o "
- 0.24
~ 0.22' ~
IT: 0.2:
0.18" .
0.16; ,
0.14 "
0.12; :
0.1~
0.08 .
0.06;
0.04;
0.02--'
o
o
Reach 1R: Private property (Investigation Point #1)
Hydrograph
Inflow.. Area=O.253 ac
1 2
Time (hours)
15
Existing Conditions FL -City of Clearwater 25- Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 10
HydroCAD@7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Reach 2R: State Property (Investigation Point #2)
Inflow Area =
Inflow
Outflow
0.119ac, Inflow Depth = 1.78" for 25-Yearevent
0.21 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume= 0.018 af
0.21 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume= 0.018 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Reach 2R: State Property (Investigation Point #2)
Hydrograph
0.23:
0.22~ ~
0.21,
0.2'
0.19-
0.18-;
0.17-'
0.16'
0.15"
~ 0.14'
Ul
<:; 0.13:
;- 0.12~ :
o 0.11.
ii: 0.1.:
0.09: .
0.08'; .
0.07e /
0.06" .
0.05'
0.04 '
0.03'
0.02'
001~
0,
o
Inflow Area=O.119 ac
1 2
Time (hours)
16
Existing Conditions FL-City af Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 11
HydroCAO@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Reach 3R: Private Property (Investigation Point #3)
I nflow Area =
Inflow
Outflow
0.736 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.78" for 25-Year event
1.32 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume= 0.109 af
1.32 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume= 0.109 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Reach 3R: Private Property (Investigation Point #3)
Hydrograph
1-
Inflow Area=O.736 ac
Iil
~
;:
o
ii:
o
o
,
1
Time (hours)
2
17
I~\
1....,/-\
( 68 \
\ /
~~~c__J
Portion of Existing
Building to Tie into
Pond
~
(SUbC~~
\. .. /
~
[>
~
<I
Roof Drain
[>
Landscaped Front of
Building to Street
State Property
(Investigation Point #1)
Existing BUildi~
Remain ~
(r::?\ p:ate Pmperty
\ 5$ / (Investigation Point #2)
'''----.J
Existing South,
Southeast, and
Southwest to Remain
~
Drainage Diagram for Proposed Conditions
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. 7/1/2008
HydroCAOO 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems
18
<I
Catch Basin
Proposed Parking and
Landscaping
Proposed Conditions FL-City af Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 2
HydroCAD@7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Time span=0.00-2.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 201 points
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0!1.0 xTc
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
Subcatchment 1S: Proposed Parking and Landscaping Runoff Area=13,311 sf Runoff Depth=2.81"
Tc=15.0 min C=0.76 Runoff=0.87 cfs 0.072 af
Subcatchment 3S: Landscaped Front of Building to Street Runoff Area=2,954 sf Runoff Depth=1.44"
T c= 15.0 min C=0.39 Runotf=0.10 cfs 0.008 af
Subcatchment 4S: Existing Building to Remain
Runoff Area=9,611 st Runoff Depth=1.78"
Tc=15.0 min C=0.48 Runoff=OAO cfs 0.033 af
Subcatchment 5S: Existing South, Southeast, and Southwest Runoff Area= 14,884 sf Runoff Depth= 1. 78"
Tc=15.0 min C=OA8 Runoff=0.61 cfs 0.051 af
-
Subcatchment 6S: Portion of Existing Building to Tie into Pon Runoff Area=7,559 sf Runoff Depth=3.51"
Tc=15.0 min C=0.95 Runoff=0.62 cfs 0.051 af
Reach 1R: State Property (Investigation Point #1)
Inflow=0.78 cfs 0.055 af
Outflow=0.78 cfs 0.055 at
Reach 2R: Private Property (Investigation Point #2)
Inflow=1.01 cfs 0.083 at
Outflow=1.01 cfs 0.083 af
Reach 3R: Roof Drain Peak Depth=0.19' Max Vel=12.1 fps Inflow=0.62 cfs 0.051 af
D=4.0" n=0.011 l=15.0' S=0.2000 'j' Capacity=1.01 cfs Outflow=0.62 cfs 0.051 af
Pond 1 P: Catch Basin Peak Elev=61.62' Inflow=0.87 cfs 0.072 af
10.0" x 4.0' Culvert Outflow=0.87 cfs 0.072 af
Pond 2P: Retention Pond (Prismodial) Peak Elev=60.95' Storage=510 cf Inflow=1A8 cfs 0.122 at
Discarded=0.80 cfs 0.075 at Primary=0.68 cts 0.047 af Outflow= 1.48 cfs 0.122 af
Total Runoff Area = 1.109 ac Runoff Volume = 0.214 af Average Runoff Depth = 2.31"
19
Proposed Conditions FL -City of Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 3
HydroCAD@7.00 sin 002870 @1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Subcatchment 1 S: Proposed Parking and Landscaping
Runoff
0.87 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.072 af, Depth= 2.81"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Area ( sf) C
8,464 0.95
1,632 0.20
1,375 1.00
368 0.20
1,472 0.20
13,311 0.76
Description
Parking and Concrete Walkway
Landscaping
Retention Pond
Landscaping
LandscapinQ
Weighted Average
T c Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Assumed from CL SDC
Subcatchment 1 S: Proposed Parking and Landscaping
Hydrograph
0.95
0.9:
0.85- .
0.8: .
0.75.
0.7e
0.65: .
0.6.
:PI 0.55
~ 0.5- /
~ 0.45': .
u: :
0.4:
0.35- .
0.3 ;
0.25'
0.2-,
0.15:
0.1
0.05'
o
o
IIElRunoff'
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year
Duration=60. min,
hiteli=3:70ililhr
Runoff Area=13,311 sf
Runoff Volume=O.072 af
Runoff Depth=2.81"
Tc=15.0 min
C::::O.76
1
Time (hours)
2
20
Proposed Conditions FL-City af Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 4
HydroCAO@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Subcatchment 3S: Landscaped Front of Building to Street
Runoff
0.10 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.008 af, Depth= 1.44"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Area (sf) C
2,199 0.20
75 0.95
680 0.95
2,954 0.39
Description
Landscaped Area to Street
Asphault
Canopy
Weighted Average
T c Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Landscaped Area
Subcatchment 3S: Landscaped Front of Building to Street
Hydrograph
0.11.
0.105
0.1"' _
0.095
0.090 -
0.085.
0.08-:'
0.075
0.07
~0.065'
II) . /
:e 0.06: "
~ 0.055' /
.2 0.05-
u. ,
0.045'
0.04 ~
0.035:
0.03~
0.025' .
0.02
0.015,
0.01 '
0.005,
o
o
O.10cfs
I II] Runoff ,
FL;'Cityof ClearWater 25;.Year
Duration:::60min,
Jllten:::3.70illlhr
Runoff Area:::2,954 sf
Runoff Volume:::O.008af
Runoff Depth:1.44"
Tc:::15.0min
C:::O~39
1 2
Time (hours)
21
Proposed Conditions FL-City of Clearwater 25- Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 5
HydroCAO@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Runoff
Subcatchment 4S: Existing Building to Remain
0.40 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.033 af, Depth= 1.78"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 inlhr
Area (sf) C
9,611 0.48
T c Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
0.44
0.42~ '
0.4'
0,38~
0,36
0.34"
- ,
0,32-,
0,3"
0,28"
_ 0,26- /
III ,
~ 0.24-
~ 0.22:'
if. 0,2'
0,18,
0,16'
0,14, '
0,12
0,1-: ,
0,08"
0,06"
0,04':
0,02
0-
o
Description
Existing Roof
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(fUft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Roof Runoff
Subcatchment 4S: Existing Building to Remain
Hydrograph
0.40 cis
I lEI RunOff'
FL..City of Clearwate~ 25..Year
Duration=60. min,
I hteri::3.701rilhr..
RunoflArea=9,611 sf
Runoff Volume=O.033 af
Runoff Depth=1.78"
Tc=15.0 min
C::O.48
1
Time (hours)
2
22
Proposed Conditions FL -City of Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 6
HydroCAD@7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Subcatchment 5S: Existing South, Southeast, and Southwest to Remain
Runoff
0.61 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.051 af, Depth= 1.78"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Area (sf) C
14,884 0.48
Description
Parking spaces with planters
T c Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(ft/ft) (fUsee) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Parking with Planters
Subcatchment 5S: Existing South, Southeast, and Southwest to Remain
Hydrograph
0.65~
0.6
I G! Runoff I
0.61 cIs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year
Duration=60 min,
IntEm=3.70 in/hr
Runoff Area=14,884 sf
Runoff Volume=O.051af
RlJn6ffDepth=1.78"
Tc=15~0rr1in
C::::O.48
0.55
0.5..
0.45.
_ 0.4
(/) ..
'0
~ 0.35-
;:
o
ii: 0.3
o .25~
0.2
0.15
0.05
1
Time (hours)
2
23
Proposed Conditions FL -City of Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 7
HydroCAD@7.00 sIn 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
5ubcatchment 65: Portion of Existing Building to Tie into Pond
Runoff
0.62 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.051 af, Depth= 3.51"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/FaI1=1.011.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year Duration=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Area (sf) C
7,559 0.95
Description
Existing Building Tying into Pond
Tc Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Roof Runoff
5ubcatchment 65: Portion of Existing Building to Tie into Pond
Hydrograph
0,65"
I Gl Runoff~
O.62cfs
FL-City of Clearwater 25-Year
Ouration=60 min,
Inten=3.70il1/hr
Runoff Area=7,559 sf
Runoff VoILJrne::O.051af
RUJloff Depth=3~51 "
Tc::::15.0 lTlih
C:::O:95
0.6-,
0.55'
0.5:
0.45-
lil 0.4-
'0
~ 0.35"
;;: ,
o
ii: 0.3
0.05
1
Time (hours)
2
24
Proposed Conditions FL -City af Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 8
HydroCAO@7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Reach 1 R: State Property (Investigation Point #1)
Inflow Area =
Inflow
Outflow
0.547 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.21" for 25-Year event
0.78 cfs @ 1.00 hrs, Volume= 0.055 af
0.78 cfs @ 1.00 hrs, Volume= 0.055 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Reach 1 R: State Property (Investigation Point #1)
Hydrograph
0_85:
0.8:
0.75-.
0.7-
0.65- -
0.6:
0.55
en 0.5-
~ 0.45
;: 0.4:
0
u:
0.35:
0.3
0.25
0.2:
0.15__
O_L
0_05:
0,
0 1 2
Time (hours)
25
Proposed Conditions FL -City af Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 9
HydroCAD@7.00 sIn 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Reach 2R: Private Property (Investigation Point #2)
I nflow Area =
Inflow
Outflow
0.562 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.78" for 25-Year event
1.01 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume= 0.083 af
1.01 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume= 0.083 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Reach 2R: Private Property (Investigation Point #2)
Hydrograph
~
o
u:
Inflow Area=O.562 ac
lil
~
o
o
,
1
Time (hours)
2
26
Proposed Conditions FL-City of Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 10
HydroCAO@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Reach 3R: Roof Drain
I nflow Area =
Inflow
Outflow
0.174 ac, Inflow Depth = 3.51" for 25-Year event
0.62 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume= 0.051 af
0.62 cfs @ 0.26 hrs, Volume= 0.051 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.6 min
Routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Max. Velocity= 12.1 fps, Min. Travel Time= 0.0 min
Avg. Velocity = 11.1 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 0.0 min
Peak Depth= 0.19' @ 0.26 hrs
Capacity at bank full= 1.01 cfs
Inlet Invert= 63.00', Outlet Invert= 60.00'
4.0" Diameter Pipe n= 0.011 Length= 15.0' Slope= 0.2000 'I'
Reach 3R: Roof Drain
Hydrograph
0.2
Inflow Area=0.174 ac
Peak Depth=0.19'
Max Vel=12.1fps
0=4.0"
n=O.011
L=15.0'
S:::O .2000'/,
Capacity=1.01 cfs
0.6S~ .
0.6':
055
0,5:
OAS'
Ii) OAc
'0 '
~ 0,35'
;: ,
o "
iL 0.3".
0.25'
0,15"
0.1-
0,05:
o
o
1
Time (hours)
2
27
Proposed Conditions FL -City af Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 11
HydroCAD@7.00 sIn 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Pond 1 P: Catch Basin
I nflow Area =
Inflow
Outflow
Primary
0.306 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.81"
0.87 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.87 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.87 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
for 25-Year event
0.072 af
0.072 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
0.072 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 61.62' @ 0.25 hrs
Flood Elev= 63.00'
Plug-Flow detention time= 0.0 min calculated for 0.072 af (100% of inflow)
Center-of-Mass del. time= 0.0 min ( 37.5 - 37.5 )
# Routing
1 Primary
Invert Outlet Devices
61.00' 10.0" x 4.0' long Culvert Ke= 1.000
Outlet Invert= 60.00' S= 0.2500 'f' n= 0.011 Cc= 0.900
Primary OutFlow Max=0.87 cfs @ 0.25 hrs HW=61.62'. (Free Discharge)
"L1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 0.87 cfs @ 2.0 fps)
Pond 1 P: Catch Basin
Hydrograph
0.95'
0.9'
0.85
0.8"
0.75.'
0.7':
0.65,
0.6~
~ 0.55:
- 0.5:
~ 0.45.'
u:: 0.4
0.35,
0.3
0.25-
0.2~
0.15'
0.1-
0.05
o
o
Inflow Area=O.306 ac
Peak Elev=61.62'
10.0" x 4.0'Culvert
1 2
Time (hours)
28
Proposed Conditions FL -City of Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watetield Design Group, Inc. Page 12
HydroCAD@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Inflow Area =
Inflow
Outflow
Discarded =
Primary
Pond 2P: Retention Pond (Prismodial)
0.479 ac, Inflow Depth = 3.07"
1.48 cfs @ 0.26 hrs, Volume=
1.48 cfs @ 1.00 hrs, Volume=
0.80 cfs @ 1.00 hrs, Volume=
0.68 cfs @ 1.00 hrs, Volume=
for 25-Year event
0.122 af
0.122 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 44.4 min
0.075 af
0.047 at
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 60.95' @ 1.00 hrs Surf.Area= 1,214 sf Storage= 510 ct
Plug-Flow detention time= 5.7 min calculated for 0.122 at (100% of inflow)
Center-of-Mass det. time= 5.7 min ( 43.3 - 37.5 )
#
1
Invert
60.00'
# RoutinQ
1 Primary
2 Discarded
Avail.StoraQe StoraQe Description
1,937 cf 2.00'W x 119.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=4.0
2,583 cf Overall x 75.0% Voids
Invert Outlet Devices
60.50' 15.0" x 90.0' long Culvert Ke= 1.000
Outlet Invert= 58.25' S= 0.0250 'j' n= 0.013 Cc= 0.900
0.00' 0.038750 fpm Exfiltration over entire Wetted area
Discarded OutFlow Max=0.80 cfs @ 1.00 hrs HW=60.95' (Free Discharge)
L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.80 cfs)
Primary OutFlow Max=0.68 cfs @ 1.00 hrs HW=60.95' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 0.68 cfs @ 1.7 fps)
29
Proposed Conditions FL-City of Clearwater 25- Year Duratian=60 min, Inten=3.70 in/hr
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. Page 13
HydroCAD@7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems 7/1/2008
Pond 2P: Retention Pond (Prismodial)
Hydrograph
;=
o
ii:
Ed Inflow
!iillOufflow
!1Iil Discarded
Ed Primary
Inflow Area=O.479 ac
Peak Elev=60.95'
Storage=5tO cf
1..
fi)
:e
D-
O
I
1
Time (hours)
2
30
Portion of Existing
Building to Tie into
Pond
Roof Drain
/ \
~ubc1
~
t>
~
Retention Pond
(Prismodial)
~
Proposed Parking and
Landscaping
Drainage Diagram for Proposed treatment of first half inch of rainfall
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc. 7/1/2008
HydroCAOO 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems
31
Catch Basin
Proposed treatment of first half inch of rainfall
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc.
HydroCAOO 7.00 sin 002S70 @ 19S6-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Rainfall Duration=60 min, Inten=O.50 in/hr
Page 2
7/1/2008
Time span=0.00-2.00 hrs, dt=O.01 hrs, 201 points
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.011.0 xTc
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
Subcatchment 1S: Proposed Parking and Landscaping Runoff Area=13,311 sf Runoff Depth=0.3S"
Tc=15.0 min C=0.76 Runoff=0.12 cfs 0.010 af
Subcatchment 6S: Portion of Existing Building to Tie into Pon Runoff Area=7,559 sf Runoff Depth=O.47"
Tc=15.0 min C=0.95 Runoff=O.OS cfs 0.007 af
Reach 3R: Roof Drain Peak Depth=O.OT Max Vel=6.0 fps Inflow=O.OS cfs 0.007 af
D=4.0" n=0.011 l=15.0' S=0.1333 'r Capacity=0.S2 cfs Outflow=O.OS cfs 0.007 af
Pond 1P: Catch Basin Peak Elev=62.20' Inflow=0.12 cfs 0.010 af
10.0" x 4.0' Culvert Outflow=0.12 cfs 0.010 af
Pond 2P: Retention Pond (Prismodial) Peak Elev=60.0T Storage=15 cf Inflow=0.20 cfs 0.017 af
Discarded=0.20 cfs 0.017 af Primary=O.OO cfs 0.000 af Outflow=0.20 cfs 0.017 af
Total Runoff Area = 0.479 ac Runoff Volume = 0.017 af Average Runoff Depth = 0.41"
32
Proposed treatment of first half inch of rainfall
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Rainfall Duration=60 min, Inten=O.50 in/hr
Page 3
7/1/2008
Subcatchment 1 S: Proposed Parking and Landscaping
Runoff
0.12 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.010 af, Depth= 0.38"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.011.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Rainfall Duration=60 min, Inten=0.50 in/hr
Area (sf) C
8,464 0.95
1,632 0.20
1,375 1.00
368 0.20
1,472 0.20
13,311 0.76
T c Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
0.13-
0.12S:
0.12: .
O.llSo
0.11-:
O.lOS: /
0.10
0.09S"
0.09: /
O.OSS~
O.OS' /
lilO.07S':
~ 0.07~ /
~ O.06S; /
.2 0.06.
u.. O.OSS~
O.OS:. /
0.04S~
0.04~ .
0.03S: /
0.03:
0.02S' /
0.02:
O.OlS" .
0.Q1 .
O.OOS
0"
o
Description
Parking and Concrete Walkway
Landscaping
Retention Pond
Landscaping
Landscaping
Weighted Average
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
jft/ft) (fUsee) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Assumed from CL SDC
Subcatchment 1 S: Proposed Parking and Landscaping
Hydrograph
Rainfall
Duration=60rnin,
Inten:::O.50 in/hr
Runoff Area=13,311 sf
unoff Volume=O~010af
Runoff Depth=O.38"
Tc=15.0min
C=O.76
1 2
Time (hours)
33
I iii Runoff i
Proposed treatment of first half inch of rainfall
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Rainfall Duration=60 min, Inten=O.50 in/hr
Page 4
711/2008
Runoff
5ubcatchment 65: Portion of Existing Building to Tie into Pond
0.08 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.007 af, Depth= 0.47"
Runoff by Rational method, Rise/Fall=1.0/1.0 xTc, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Rainfall Duration=60 min, Inten=0.50 in/hr
Area (sf)
7,559
T c Length
(min) (feet)
15.0
0.09~
0.085-
0.08~ .
0.075"
0.07,
0.065.
0.06',
~ 0.055' .
IJ) ,
:e 0.05
;: 0.045-
o
iL 0.04,-
0.035~
0.03-
0.025_
0.02::
0_015
0_01 '-
0.005
Oc,
o
C Description
0.95 Existing Building Tying into Pond
Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(n/H) (H/sec) (cfs)
Direct Entry, Roof Runoff
5ubcatchment 65: Portion of Existing Building to Tie into Pond
Hydrograph
Rainfall
Duration=60 min,
Inten=().S()in/hr
Runoff Area=7,559 sf
non Volume=O.OOTaf
RUnoff Depth=O.47"
Tc=15.0 min
C=O.95
1 2
Time (hours)
34
I IT! RunOtf~
Proposed treatment of first half inch of rainfall
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Rainfall Ouration=60 min, Inten=O.50 in/hr
Page 5
711/2008
Reach 3R: Roof Drain
Inflow Area =
Inflow
Outflow
0.174 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.47"
0.08 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.08 cfs @ 0.26 hrs, Volume=
0.007 af
0.007 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.6 min
Routing by Stor-Ind+ Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Max. Velocity= 6.0 fps, Min. Travel Time= 0.0 min
Avg. Velocity = 5.5 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 0.0 min
Peak Depth= 0.01' @ 0.26 hrs
Capacity at bank full= 0.82 cfs
Inlet Invert= 62.00', Outlet Invert= 60.00'
4.0" Diameter Pipe n= 0.011 Length= 15.0' Slope= 0.1333 'I'
Reach 3R: Roof Drain
0.09~
0_085~
- "
0,08"
0.075-'
0.07--
0.065"
0.06-~ - "
_ 0.055~
U) -
:3. 0.05-,'
;: 0.045-
o
u:: 0.04
0.035-
0.03
0.025-
0.02
0.015-'
0,01"
0,005--
0'.
o
Hydrograph
Il1fl()wArea=O.174 ac
Peak Depth:::O.07'
MaxVel=6~Ofps
0=4.0"
n=0.011
L=15.0'
5=0.1333 '/'
Capacity=0.82 cfs
1 2
Time (hours)
35
Proposed treatment of first half inch of rainfall
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Rainfall Ouration=60 min, Inten=O.50 in/hr
Page 6
711/2008
Pond 1 P: Catch Basin
I nflow Area =
Inflow
Outflow
Primary
0.306 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.38"
0.12 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.12 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.12 cfs @ 0.25 hrs, Volume=
0.010 af
0.010 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
0.010 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 62.20' @ 0.25 hrs
Flood Elev= 63.00'
Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated)
Center-of-Mass deL time= (not calculated)
# Routinq
1 Primary
Invert Outlet Devices
62.00' 10.0" x 4.0' long Culvert Ke= 1.000
Outlet Invert= 61.00' S= 0.2500 'I' n= 0.011 Cc= 0.900
Primary OutFlow Max=0.12 cfs @ 0.25 hrs HW=62.20' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 0.12 cfs @ 1.1 fps)
Pond 1 P: Catch Basin
Hydrograph
0.03:
Inflow Area=0~306ac
PeakElev=62.20'
10.0" x 4.0'. Culvert
0.13
0.12:
0.11
0.1"
0.09~
0.08
en
:e 0.07'
;:
o 0.06-
u::
0.05.
0.04
0.02-
0.01
o
o
1
Time (hours)
2
36
Proposed treatment of first half inch of rainfall
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc.
HydroCAD@ 7.00 sin 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Rainfall Ouration=60 min, Inten=O.50 in/hr
Page 7
711/2008
Inflow Area =
Inflow
Outflow
Discarded =
Primary
Pond 2P: Retention Pond (Prismodial)
0.479 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.41"
0.20 cfs @ 0.26 hrs, Volume=
0.20 cfs @ 1.00 hrs, Volume=
0.20 cfs @ 1.00 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume=
0.017 af
0.017 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 44.4 min
0.017 af
0.000 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-2.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 60.01' @ 1.00 hrs Surf.Area= 308 sf Storage= 15 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 1.0 min calculated for 0.016 af (100% of inflow)
Center-of-Mass det. time= 1.0 min ( 38.5 - 37.5 )
#
1
Invert
60.00'
# Routinq
1 Primary
2 Discarded
Avail.Storage Storage Description
1,937 cf 2.00'W x 119.00'L x 2.00'H Prismatoid Z=4.0
2,583 cf Overall x 75.0% Voids
Invert Outlet Devices
60.50' 15.0" x 90.0' long Culvert Ke= 1.000
Outlet Invert= 58.25' S= 0.0250 'I' n= 0.013 Cc= 0.900
0.00' 0.038750 fpm Exfiltration over entire Wetted area
Discarded OutFlow Max=0.20 cfs @ 1.00 hrs HW=60.01' (Free Discharge)
L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.20 cfs)
Primary OutFlow Max=O.OO cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=60.00' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Controls 0.00 cfs)
37
Proposed treatment of first half inch of rainfall
Prepared by Watefield Design Group, Inc.
HydroCAO@ 7.00 sIn 002870 @ 1986-2003 Applied Microcomputer Systems
Rainfall Duration=60 min, Inten=O.50 in/hr
Page 8
7/1/2008
0.22-:
0.21.
0.2 ~ .
0.19~
0.18~
0.1?'
0.16
O.lS~ ~
0.14 .
lii' 0.13c
~ 0.12c /
;: 0.11~
E 0.1" ~
u. :
0.09.
/ ~
0.08": /
0.07-: '
0.06":
0.05'
0.04..
0.03;
0.02~ /
Pond 2P: Retention Pond (Prismodial)
Hydrograph
Inflow Area=O.479ac
PeakEleV=60.07'
Storage=15 cf
ED Inflow
IilliOutflow
III Discarded
ED Primary
1
Time (hours)
2
38
TOPIC NO. 525-040-002-A
DRAINAGE MANUAL
APENDIX B-IDF CURVES
AUGUST 2001
If) ~ (J' ill ~ (J' ill r- '" If) ...- (Y) N
- I'- '" If) ...- ("') N -
-
...-
N
ISI
N
If)
-
ISI
a: -
a: a: a: a: a: <I
a: <I <I <I UJ
<I <I <I UJ UJ UJ >-
UJ UJ W >- >- >- tI)
>- >- >- ISI a:
(") If) ISI If) ISI ISI :J
N - If) - 0
I
lO
II
V /
v
1/
1/ (Y)
1/ z
0
/ -
l-
N <I
a:
:J
0
IS)-
"'l
ISI
If)
IS)
V
~ ISI
(Y)
Ul
W w
I I-
:J
Z Z
ISl_
e N:;E
N ~
II II ISI
-
I
lO ~(J'co co
I'- (0 If) ...- (Y) N ISI (J' co .... Ul lO v ("') N
- . .
-
C1nOH C13d S3HJNI NI ^ 11 SN31N I lll;;l..:lNII;;ICI
RAINFALL INTENSITY-DURATION-FREQUENCY CURVES
ZONE 6
B-7
Hydrology Handbook
January 2004
F-2 Overland Flow Velocities for Various Land Use Types
100
80
/
/
/ -
1/ --
-
I --
/ --
/ ./
/ ./
1/ ,/
I .~/
I /
I ./
I , .,.,
I /' ,."' ,_,-
I ", ,_It
I / ",
,
I / "
",
,,'
"
,/ ",
,/ ,
,
/ " ,
, , .....;..-
.-
f , , .--
I , .-
,
I # . ~'
, -'
I " .....
, . "".-' .. - ,-
~
. . ...-
, . ....' ~~~
, , ,/ ~ -
, '"
. ...- '"
. . '" '"
...- . .. ...-"
. ... . -
. ... ....-....-..
.' . , .-
/.' ; ....-........ ..
/ '" .,.'
, -'
/ , .,
. , It".
'" .
'" ..""
'" .. .'
.'
'" . ....
'"
"".'
.""
....'
90
Cll
+.
:J
of
L
L
Cll 70
a.
+-
(j)
Cll
l1..
>-
t::
u 60
o
..J
W
>
o
z
<(
..J
a:::
w 50
>
o
w
Cl
<(
D::
W
>
.0:
40
30
20
o
2
3
4
5
6
Paved
Municipal-Residential
Wooded-Low Storage
AVERAGE SLOPE OF TERRAIN (Percent)
- - Municipal-Highly Developed
- - - Rural-Cultivated
----- Wooded-High Storage
8-24
Soutll\\lest Florida
\Vater.k1anal:{enZel'lt District
. ..,,*'~-
~-.Ji-~---_:/,_
2379 Broad Street BrookSVille, Rodda 34604-6899
'(352l 796-7211 or 1-80().423.1476 (FL only)
SUNCOM 628-4150 TOD only 1-800-231-6103 (FL only)
On the Internet at; WaterManers.org
cc:
ELD DESIGN GROUP INC
MANHATTAN AVE
FL 33611-0000
cnUl
. l6
cn~
I j
i i r-
OD i
;0
Cl)
Q)
..,
m
Cl)
<
Q)
.-+
c)"
::J
fi
t~
BuDding elevations
O. THE W,",TERFlE:LD DE.ION GRDUP, INC.
. ......... .UC>:..~:~:I..:I~:;rr..U~
Date Issued: 06-30-00
No.:08le:'-~-.
~ .:.-~~~ ~N"~,~ ".~
;0
cO'
::r
.-+
m
CD
<
Q)
.-+
o.
::J
r
Cl)
;::l:!
m
CD
<
Q)
.-+
o.
::J
P~~._W..,382 - Scale: 1';10'~'
(1 5' 111 .- _u_m__"",
I.
-,
m
CD
<
Q)
.-+
o.
::J
6
Florida Pain Management
1314 South Missouri Ave.
Clearwater, FL 33756